[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

General Forum

Baccarat vs touting

Posted By: John May
Date: 24 Aug 01, 12:24 pm

In Response To: Guess you can't read (Don Schlesinger)

I gave meticulous details. You decided not to believe them. For example, you give me details on the millions you've won betting the tie in baccarat. I say you're full of shit. You say, "screw you; I'm telling the truth." Round and round we go.

I said "details at RGE". No detail was or is available at RGE. You seem nervous about wising up the suckers.

So far as baccarat goes I have provided:

a) a set of calculations to evaluate your exact expectation from any non-linear baccarat system. Gordon has provided no similar means of assessment or estimation.

b) Independent simulation data verifying my claims from the M'hall report. Gordon has provided no independent verification of his record.

c) My own simulation data and the accompanying source code. Its difficult to do this with sports but Gordon has not explained his power ratings system/philosophy whatever publicly.

d) Theoretical justification supporting my baccarat methods spanning several books worth of material. I see nothing from Gordon except "Bet Oakland because their offense is on fire" crap I've heard in sports bars across the States.

e) References from every published offering on baccarat ever written still in existence. Gordon's references could fill a sheet of A4 with space left over.

f) Explained the bankroll requirements for a baccarat to a very high degree of precision. Gordon's betting advice is somewhat vague at best.

The baccarat issue is settled. Anyone can do the calculations for themselves or look at the simulation data-leaving only the sycophants who follow your every word in the opposing camp. You are welcome to produce simulation data of your own contradicting my evidence but it is patently beyond you to do this even if it were in fact possible-I've demanded you do this a hundred times or so.

When all is said and done even if the methods didn't work then the interested reader might be out of pocket to the tune of a dozen dollars-not the $1250 they will be if they sign up with Gordon.

Password:

Messages In This Thread

a question -- Arthur -- 21 Aug 01, 5:11 pm
answers -- Stanford Wong -- 21 Aug 01, 7:05 pm
Virtually all attainable -- Don Schlesinger -- 21 Aug 01, 7:36 pm
More data is required -- John May -- 22 Aug 01, 11:03 am
More data will come -- Stanford Wong -- 22 Aug 01, 1:39 pm
Highly doubtful -- Don Schlesinger -- 22 Aug 01, 7:02 pm
Don, you are one lovable smartass! (nt) -- Compador -- 22 Aug 01, 8:01 pm
Chunk Bet -- Fezzik -- 22 Aug 01, 10:40 pm
Wong +500 looks resonable -- Math Boy -- 23 Aug 01, 8:22 am
I'm impressed -- Don Schlesinger -- 23 Aug 01, 9:33 am
not that great an estimate -- Math Boy -- 23 Aug 01, 3:47 pm
Spoilsport -- John May -- 23 Aug 01, 4:09 pm
DonS is running the wrong way! -- fezzik's chunk bet -- 23 Aug 01, 11:15 pm
Eye of the beholder -- Don Schlesinger -- 24 Aug 01, 8:36 am
you're not as smart as i thought you were -- docriver -- 24 Aug 01, 10:06 am
Strange thought processes -- Don Schlesinger -- 24 Aug 01, 5:13 pm
you believe because you know him...but what about us? -- docriver -- 24 Aug 01, 5:28 pm
Honest answers -- Don Schlesinger -- 24 Aug 01, 6:36 pm
Four years -- docriver -- 24 Aug 01, 5:30 pm
219/391 -- Don Schlesinger -- 24 Aug 01, 6:40 pm
a little math question -- docriver -- 24 Aug 01, 6:43 pm
Math question -- Colin Caster -- 24 Aug 01, 8:06 pm
Suggestion: List those 391 picks -- Stanford Wong -- 24 Aug 01, 8:34 pm
Just asking -- Don Schlesinger -- 24 Aug 01, 9:07 pm
Don, isn't this two-faced? -- Fezzik -- 25 Aug 01, 12:20 am
No new picks with old prices, please -- Stanford Wong -- 25 Aug 01, 7:14 am
Always boils down to the same thing -- Don Schlesinger -- 25 Aug 01, 8:54 am
Classic DonS Deflection Post -- Fezzik -- 24 Aug 01, 8:56 pm
Too serious -- Don Schlesinger -- 25 Aug 01, 8:45 am
I think you touched some nerves Don -- DowntownMan -- 25 Aug 01, 1:26 pm
I don't expect an answer . . . -- Don Schlesinger -- 25 Aug 01, 5:56 pm
Good post! -- Fezzik -- 25 Aug 01, 9:01 pm
Question re: " correction to the Gordon sample". -- samo666 -- 23 Aug 01, 2:43 am
You need to look at the total number of touts tested -- John May -- 23 Aug 01, 3:07 am
Asinine analysis -- Don Schlesinger -- 23 Aug 01, 9:36 am
Er...why? -- John May -- 23 Aug 01, 1:13 pm
Guess you can't read -- Don Schlesinger -- 23 Aug 01, 4:34 pm
Corrections & Honest Touts -- Bob Fisher -- 23 Aug 01, 5:29 pm
Quite misguided analysis -- Don Schlesinger -- 23 Aug 01, 8:53 pm
Baccarat vs touting -- John May -- 24 Aug 01, 12:24 pm
I thank God every day -- Don Schlesinger -- 24 Aug 01, 5:28 pm
What makes Stanford Wong an authority on football wagering? -- Colin Caster -- 21 Aug 01, 11:10 pm
Wong has established -- John May -- 22 Aug 01, 4:39 am

 

Post Response
Your Name:
Your E-Mail Address:
Subject:
Message:

If you'd like to include a link to another page with your message,
please provide both the URL address and the title of the page:

Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:

If you'd like to have the option of deleting your post later,
please provide a password (CASE SENSITIVE!):

Password:

If you'd like e-mail notification of responses, please check this box:

 

 

[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

General Forum is maintained by Pi Yee Press