Whatever happened to AP Wonging Protocol

[Freightman]

This seems to suggest that you have an exit trigger in order to "control'" won/loss sessions. Except from heat (and maybe the presence of a meathead at your table), how do you manage this and to what extent?

First to clarify - meathead does not refer to someone at the table, rather to categories of certain forum members to which of course are various levels. At some point, I may be tempted to both explain and grade said categories to their respective level of meathead.

Second as regards to exit point. There’s a significant benefit to a strong bankroll as it provides numerous options. Notwithstanding certain restraints exercised pertaining to proximity from my personal domicile, I will answer based on my main game of 6 deck min $25 - With time approaching 2 hours at the table in town and loss approaching 2k and a negative count or positive poor QTC, let the house book its win. With good QTC, play onwards. With good QTC and within approaching 2k, I’ll finish the shoe, though I may slow down my bets. Close to Home, put the brakes on and try to limit win to 2k, though not always successful. Beyond’s locale, let the chips fall where they may. I’ll take the bigger win and for that matter, risk the bigger loss.

Out of town, I’ll play a lot of min $50 games with no real exit point though I will take into account the factor of fatigue. I’ll also play min $10 games which allow for tremendous flexibility, and for that matter, huge amounts of artistry. One thing to consider when playing various min max games is the issue if variance. Two points on this. First, there may be short term havoc, but it all works out in the end. Second, the advantage of high win rate buffers the variance.

[Freightman]

Think I’ll add one last item pertaining to last post. I’ve suggested that I will beat the crap out if sims, though I don’t think I’ve explained it very well - so, I’ll take another stab at it. Perhaps some meatheads can weigh in with their respective thoughts - or if someone else has a relate to question, I’d be pleased to further answer.

I’ll speak in terms of standard ramp. The robotic (competent) counter will bet optimally with the though of EV maximization. Various components of his/her rule set, bankroll, tolerance to risk are fed into the simulation and out spits various optimal ramos based on various spreads. I’ve spoken before of dual ramp, but I think I’ll speak in terms iof single ramp with upper and lower limits per true count based in QTC. Explaining further, a true 3 good QTC will elevate the bet to a poor true 4 QTC, and for that matter, a poor true 3 QTC will degrade to a higher level true 2 bet.

Now unfortunately, I have no real way of determining actual percentage of high v low QtTC hands. I use the following guidelines (gut feel). First, like any off the top bet, I have no way of knowing if I’m in a positive or negative situation situation. Second, with the cut card at 4-5-5.0, I arbrutarilly assign a value of 67% poor QTC and 33% good QTC.

Second, if you can wrap your head around this, a standard sim accounts for the entire bucket as a whole. I do things differently. I’ll take the overall win factor, Multiply 67% by .9 and 33% by 1.1. I leave it to you to calculate effect on on overall EV.

Ladt but not least, while writing this, I notice my 8th unhelpful on this thread, which is pretty much in line with prior threads I get involved in. Thus, I’m persuaded to explain the highest level of meathead - that being the shithead.

A couple of my most ardent admirers, thread after thread will utilize the the tiniest justification to thumbs down. Clearly, these douchebags cannot see the forest for the trees and are unable to propagate any outside the box thoughts for themselves. Probably 2, a maximum of 3. I’d be willing to wager that none of 5hese individuals have provided any thumbs up for my efforts. I know it’s noticeable others - onwards it goes without respite.

[Norm]

"Meatheads", "shitheads", "douchebags". Post after post of insults aimed at other members and you wonder why you get thumb down votes. Stop the name calling now. Last warning.

[21forme]

"Meatheads", "shitheads", "douchebags". Post after post of insults aimed at other members and you wonder why you get thumb down votes. Stop the name calling now. Last warning.

You are being a bit harsh, considering the idiots you allow to post without recourse.
P.S. Commas and periods belong inside quotes.

[BJGenius007]

Think I’ll add one last item pertaining to last post. I’ve suggested that I will beat the crap out if sims, though I don’t think I’ve explained it very well - so, I’ll take another stab at it. Perhaps some meatheads can weigh in with their respective thoughts - or if someone else has a relate to question, I’d be pleased to further answer.

I’ll speak in terms of standard ramp. The robotic (competent) counter will bet optimally with the though of EV maximization. Various components of his/her rule set, bankroll, tolerance to risk are fed into the simulation and out spits various optimal ramos based on various spreads. I’ve spoken before of dual ramp, but I think I’ll speak in terms iof single ramp with upper and lower limits per true count based in QTC. Explaining further, a true 3 good QTC will elevate the bet to a poor true 4 QTC, and for that matter, a poor true 3 QTC will degrade to a higher level true 2 bet.

Now unfortunately, I have no real way of determining actual percentage of high v low QtTC hands. I use the following guidelines (gut feel). First, like any off the top bet, I have no way of knowing if I’m in a positive or negative situation situation. Second, with the cut card at 4-5-5.0, I arbrutarilly assign a value of 67% poor QTC and 33% good QTC.

Second, if you can wrap your head around this, a standard sim accounts for the entire bucket as a whole. I do things differently. I’ll take the overall win factor, Multiply 67% by .9 and 33% by 1.1. I leave it to you to calculate effect on on overall EV.

Ladt but not least, while writing this, I notice my 8th unhelpful on this thread, which is pretty much in line with prior threads I get involved in. Thus, I’m persuaded to explain the highest level of meathead - that being the shithead.

A couple of my most ardent admirers, thread after thread will utilize the the tiniest justification to thumbs down. Clearly, these douchebags cannot see the forest for the trees and are unable to propagate any outside the box thoughts for themselves. Probably 2, a maximum of 3. I’d be willing to wager that none of 5hese individuals have provided any thumbs up for my efforts. I know it’s noticeable others - onwards it goes without respite.

Do you have the SCORE for 6D Blackjack under PA rules, 5D/6D penetration?

[Freightman]

"Meatheads", "shitheads", "douchebags". Post after post of insults aimed at other members and you wonder why you get thumb down votes. Stop the name calling now. Last warning.

To clarify
Comments indicated are directed to a very select few - my bad.
To further clarify
21forme is right on the mark - because you don’t - you allow the scenarios to develop. Since you don’t act, I prefer to stand up for myself. It’s unfortunate that the issues exacerbate themselves.

In any event your point is made, as is mine.

[Norm]

The rule, which I have explained innumerable times over years, is that name-calling is not allowed. Being wrong is allowed. Freightman is the worst offender by far. Presumably this is why, when he first appeared, I was warned about him by another site admin. Frankly, I think he is probably also wrong about his strategy on some levels. His posts sound like so many I have seen before. I know my system works because it makes money.

As for being harsh, quite the opposite. His insulting behavior has become nearly constant.

[Freightman]

Do you have the SCORE for 6D Blackjack under PA rules, 5D/6D penetration?

Never played PA.In a future trip to US, that would be a consideration - mind you that would require a transfer flight which is not to my liking.

Now, my understanding of PA rules would suggest to me that 5/6 is beatable with 1-8, produce SCORES well in excess of 50 with 1-12. Simple CVCX would tell you. Further, if I’m not mistaken, S17 with LS would oribably put house edge (much) better than .4 - a killer game. Questions, what’s tolerance like, are heads up or close to heads up readily available. It would drive me nuts playing a crowded table.

[Norm]

you allow the scenarios to develop. Since you don’t act

You're correct. The situation has developed because I failed to act. I failed to block you long ago.

The last person I failed to act quickly enough in such a circumstance was suspended six times at WoV last year for insults, six times the year before, and already twice this year. And I still keep getting blasted for dumping him.

[Freightman]

You're correct. The situation has developed because I failed to act. I failed to block you long ago.

Seems to me we have differing versions of historical fact. No matter.

Your pre edited post contained a pretty cheap shot. Now, you’ve resisted the FBM concept consistently for a long time. if you can’t agree to at least some extent that there’s something to this, then I would say you’re stuck with inside the box thinking, and I’m wasting my time.

FBM is dead.

[21forme]

Being wrong is allowed.

Perhaps you should change the forum's name to BeastModeAcesideMathProgressionsWorkTheForum.

And shame on you for dredging up KJ after all this time. For ha guy who cliams he doesn't have time for this, how do you have time to follow him around the internet?

[Norm]

Your pre edited post contained a pretty cheap shot.

That's a flat out false statement. I added the second paragraph in the edit. I changed nothing in the first paragraph.

[Norm]

Perhaps you should change the forum's name to BeastModeAcesideMathProgressionsWorkTheForum.

And shame on you for dredging up KJ after all this time.

Unlike WoV, beast mode and progression posts are busted or moved and you know it. Many AceSide posts are criticized by many, including me, as well they should be. Pointing out poor thinking is of value to the majority of readers who only lurk.

What do you mean all this time? His last suspension for insults was nine days ago; not the distant past. He is still at it on many forums accusing people of crimes. And he uses my full, real name for Google. I am the only person in the country with that name. I didn't even use his id here -- you did. You supported him and Freightman while attacking a forum member who is remarkably pleasant despite the name-calling against him. We were all new at one time. You don't evict someone from a classroom for being wrong, only for being disruptive.