Does this imply you are now, or have been, a casino employee in or around surveillance?Originally Posted by spiderman
It does not. I though I made that clear that my knowledge comes from close friends employed in that field.
No offense to you sir, but this is not a conversation I wish to continue in public, other than to re-state that 2 or 3 players playing together at the same tables isn't going to last long at the top casinos in U.S. Maybe once per casino, but even that, as I originally stated, data travels faster than players do to the next casino, or location.
Personally, I assumed ZMF was referring to locations outside the United States. I just wanted to weigh in and say that from what I know, that approach would be pretty easily detected and wouldn't last long at most places I know and play.
Stealth is a powerful resource, although it is possible to miss his sarcasm
a la the quote above. In spite of spiderman's assertion, I have NEVER been
86'd when playing as a mini-team.
The arachnid-person does NOT know what he is talking about if he cannot
see the multi-level cover.
ZMF, your avatar of Felix the cat fits you well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2YJduDyFA4
I guess my question is why?And that is not a question just about this particular claim. Throughout your existence on this forum, you have been a strong proponent of what you call (post #33 this thread) a "complex" approach. Multi-level counts with side counts, large number of play deviation, and now a 3 player team employing different counts, with "coded" communications.
And what has all this complexity gotten you? An average of 30k a year in profits for the last 20 years.No offense to you, but most of us professional players (I am in my 15th year) average several times that amount annually employing the complete opposite approach, simplicity.
I think your entire approach is "counter counter-productive" if your goal is to maximize profits, which is my goal. Perhaps your goal is different? Maybe to convince people how special you are (myth/legend)?
A couple examples I would point to just from this discussion / thread: Again, going back to post #33, you talk about one of the players works at "card eating".No offense, but if I am in a situation where it is beneficial to eat cards to minimize losses, I am not even playing. I am off to my next +EV situation, rather than minimizing losses during -EV situations. Second example is 'cover', which you just mentioned in defense of this approach. Cover is trying to trick pit/surveillance in an effort to hide what you are doing to gain some longevity. In this day and age, cover is less and less effective. The best cover is short sessions, which is to say, don't even show enough information.
The host of this forum, Norm has said things like "there is more than one way to skin a cat" and this is very true. So I am not against, you playing the way you like and you find works for you. I do however, have a continuing problem with the way you seem to be misleading players and members that this "complex approach" is necessary to have success, when so many of us, have enjoyed more success by numbers, using an approach just about opposite of what you constantly promote, simplicity.
There is a poster on this site, really smart guy, you may be familiar with, Three. In post #46 in this thread, he posted the best information I have ever seen him post, "Simple systems get the money. They have strengths and weaknesses just like every other system" I would pay particular interest to those first 5 words.
Spidy, dont forget - you're in a market where quality is somewhat suspect, but quantity abounds, therefore, you have the luxury of finding a new game with a hop skip and jump. I'll give flash the benefit regarding 30k per year as reduced revenue fi the past few years due to health concerns. As far as a hi opt ass pounding, he is what he is.I guess my question is why?
And what has all this complexity gotten you? An average of 30k a year in profits for the last 20 years.
I think your entire approach is "counter counter-productive" if your goal is to maximize profits, which is my goal. Perhaps your goal is different? Maybe to convince people how special you are (myth/legend)?
A couple examples I would point to just from this discussion / thread: Again, going back to post #33, you talk about one of the players works at "card eating".
The host of this forum, Norm has said things like "there is more than one way to skin a cat" and this is very true. So I am not against, you playing the way you like and you find works for you. I do however, have a continuing problem with the way you seem to be misleading players and members that this "complex approach" is necessary to have success, when so many of us, have enjoyed more success by numbers, using an approach just about opposite of what you constantly promote, simplicity.
There is a poster on this site, really smart guy, you may be familiar with, Three. In post #46 in this thread, he posted the best information I have ever seen him post, "Simple systems get the money. They have strengths and weaknesses just like every other system" I would pay particular interest to those first 5 words.
I do like a certain amount if complexity - I recognize what it gives me, especially with my play all approach. I also recognize the ability of getting the money with simpler 1 level systems. At the end if the day, would you not agree that overall judgement would be the biggst factor of all.
Everyone gets caught eventually anyway as something gives them up. In ZMF example it was probably something like they had the pit boss talking to himself for 90 minutes totally bewildered thinking I know something is wrong. Then it hits him all at once there are three guys sitting at one table all wearing the same color suspenders. More than likely for extra protection while carrying heavy money belts.
I can’t speak for Flash but have you ever considered that he has purposely understated his earnings to not encourage people to become an AP. This is what I do when the people ask me what I make from playing bj. I usually way understate my earnings. Why? Because the last thing I want is more counters playing at my local stores. Casinos will only tolerate so much loss before they will change their game or back off more people. It’s in our interest to not encourage more to people to pick up this game. That’s why even if Joe724 was accurate in saying he made $400,000 in his first year, I’d have never done that. What good did this do? All it did is encourage a lot of young kids (and adults) who think this game is a road to quick riches start playing it. What do you think the MIT and BJA crowd have done claiming to have made millions playing Bj? This is probably why I’ve seen more young counters lately floating through my local hangouts.And what has all this complexity gotten you? An average of 30k a year in profits for the last 20 years.
I know Freightman also likes to brag about how much he makes playing bj, once having a standoff with me saying his is bigger than mine. I agreed with him and moved on. I really don’t care how much anybody on this site or any of my friends think I make from bj. This doesn’t define me.
I like Don’s approach. He’s made what he’s made from blackjack and it’s nobodies business.
It's better to state your EV per hour rather than what you take in a given time if pressed on the matter imo. But really it's no one's business apart from your own.
That said, what do we gain, more specifically, what does ZMF gain, from teaching a "legion of acolytes" about our art? How is that conducive for healthy conditions for those who aren't retired? I get wanting to give back and teach a new generation about APing, but at the end of the day the more successful APs there are around the worse game conditions will get and the faster the burn-out will occur. Wouldn't it be better to just mentor a select few to a very high standard rather than any Tom, Dick and Harry who shows a slight degree of competence?
These concessions "I make mistakes" and "simple systems get the money" are nice, a little late as they are, but really doesn't do a whole lot of good for someone who might have been banned and had his reputation dragged through the mud, based on these "mistaken claims" does it?
I mean really, is this enough? Misleading statements that lead to the complete blow up of this site and all that followed and "I make mistakes" covers it?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks