Opinions of BJA members only forum and videos

[Norm]

I don't focus only on card counting. Card counting is clearly still viable. Numerous people that have been straight counters for decades continue to ply their trade successfully, including some of the most famous counters from early days. Obviously there are other methodologies (most of which are an extension of counting requiring that you first learn to count). And my software supports many of them. You can talk to other methodologies without denigrating those that extract money via counting alone. Certainly without displaying links in your YouTube video to 888, an online casino that has used disgusting techniques like violating my trademark. I have turned down their numerous requests to pay me money to support them. I wish everyone would.

[Eliot]

I don't focus only on card counting. Card counting is clearly still viable. Numerous people that have been straight counters for decades continue to ply their trade successfully, including some of the most famous counters from early days. Obviously there are other methodologies (most of which are an extension of counting requiring that you first learn to count). And my software supports many of them. You can talk to other methodologies without denigrating those that extract money via counting alone. Certainly without displaying links in your YouTube video to 888, an online casino that has used disgusting techniques like violating my trademark. I have turned down their numerous requests to pay me money to support them. I wish everyone would.

Thank you Norm. I have great respect for you -- and I've been on the other side of the tables, seeing who surveillance is watching, who are the people winning 10x or 100x what card counters win. So, yes, card counting works, but straight card counting is not a viable path to the kingdom, and that's where we disagree. I know straight card counters & card counting teams, but none of them earn at a rate anywhere near that which the top AP teams attain.

Sorry about the 888 reference if that's what they did to you. They've been very good to me.

[Member Name Hidden]

Thank you Norm. I have great respect for you -- and I've been on the other side of the tables, seeing who surveillance is watching, who are the people winning 10x or 100x what card counters win. So, yes, card counting works, but straight card counting is not a viable path to the kingdom, and that's where we disagree. I know straight card counters & card counting teams, but none of them earn at a rate anywhere near that which the top AP teams attain.

Sorry about the 888 reference if that's what they did to you. They've been very good to me.

At 300/hr, solo play, I don’t view that as bad.

[Eliot]

At 300/hr, solo play, I don’t view that as bad.

And I am very happy for you that you are earning a decent living wage. I never said it was "bad," just that it was 10x (more!) less than the pros. $300/hr is a very small number compared to what the big boys are winning. And I think you know what I'm talking about.

[BoSox]

Existential doubt goes for the present site as well, and any other BJ site that focuses myopically on card counting. Norm, you know all this, no disrespect intended. But I do wonder about those who spend their lives endlessly explaining the nuances of what is at-best a third-rate system for beating the house.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1U-LQDUCf0

Thank you Norm. I have great respect for you -- and I've been on the other side of the tables, seeing who surveillance is watching, who are the people winning 10x or 100x what card counters win. So, yes, card counting works, but straight card counting is not a viable path to the kingdom, and that's where we disagree.

Eliot, I would hate to see just how you react to someone that you don't have great respect for. Fourteen minutes and fifty five seconds into your video you mention how Norm has helped you with simulations and then you come and post on this site about all the doubt you have about the site itself, says to me that there is a lot of insulting going on there on your part. You sir are one narrow-minded arrogant son of a b----.