I would like to comment to the imputation made by Mathprof below. First let me explain the whole situation.

Two and half years ago I was contacted by Geoff Hall, a teacher of mathematics and also a blackjack player, concerning simulating a new game called BJ switch which he had designed. If my information is correct, Geoff Hall founded the "Casino Games" company. I think that BJ Switch was the main reason for existence of this company. I agreed to create a custom version of Statistical Blackjack Analyzer (www.sba21.com) to simulate this very special variation of blackjack.

All my business proposals are related to Casino Games. I have no affiliation, nor do I work for or consult for, the company named Playtech. At some point I indirectly learned about its existence in the sense that it is related to offering BJ Switch on the Internet, but in fact never even paid much attention to its existence.

By no means do I have any affiliation or do any consulting work for any casino. Furthermore, I really do not see any potential of conflict of interests with my presence as a blackjack players and counters affiliate. In fact, I can just see the potential of extra benefit of developing a new game for advantage players, in case the game turns out to be beatable.

I would like to stress that I have no affiliation to casinos and it is not in my interest to inform any casino if I potentially learn on these or other pages about strategies how to beat BJ Switch. Thus, there is not even a potential of a conflict of interests hurting blackjack players. The one potential conflict of interests would be to provide the customized version of SBA to all players, even though the company Casino Games, ltd., has its interests in the development. I can potentially do so at some point in the future if I get a permission to do so.

My involvement in the development of the new game BJ Switch has never been a secret, and I even mentioned this some time ago in a discussion on bj21. It never even occurred to me that somebody could consider my involvement to be a potential threat to privacy or security of other BJ players. That is the reason why I forgot to explicitly mention my BJ Switch affiliation when joining the group of BJ masters, although I repeat that it was nothing hidden. I consider this omitting to be an error on my part.

Nevertheless, I strongly refuse any accusations of making an error in judgment by participating in the development of the new game BJ Switch. There is absolutely nothing wrong with my participation. I assume that these accusations can appear only as a result of a deep misunderstanding of the situation.

Below are some specific comments to Mathprof?s post:
I am referring to the relationship between Karel and PlayTech. They are a company which is marketing the game Blackjack Switch to casinos. Their promotional materials list Karel as their Mathematical Consultant.
To repeat, I have no direct relationship with PlayTech. The www.blackjackswitch.com site has been the site of Casino Games ltd. I think that, for marketing purposes, it is reasonable that I am listed there for ?software & mathematical analysis?, but I have already asked Geoff Hall not to be listed as ?mathematical consultant?.

Your promotional material on this Web site states clearly

"What's more, our resident experts are committed to dedicating their time and efforts almost exclusively to Don's Domain."

To many of us, consulting for companies like this does not seem consistent with a "commitment" to work "almost exclusively" for the membership.
This probably does not even deserve a comment. Firstly, I do not do ?consulting for companies like this?. But mainly, twisting a somewhat ambiguous statement in the sense above is rather ridiculous. It is very surprising to see such an intentional or unintentional manipulation of words and meanings to come from a person like Mathprof.

Sincerely,

Karel Janecek