Thread: Grab The Gold Shoes

Just wondering if 1) anyone looked at the 6 shoes he sent and played them with there own method. If so how did you fare? and 2) did anyone look over the bet betting recovery method and have any comments?

Oh, I don't recall if the first 3 shoes demonstrated were actual or made up.

Archer

Archer, I downloaded them, but have been so busy with work, that I have had time to look at them fully, nor have I searched for the "clues" of repeating hands that was shared. I will look at all of it, the first chance I have, and will take about 2 hours to look at it all, and then let you know what I observe and find.

Originally Posted by littogage

Archer, I downloaded them, but have been so busy with work, that I have had time to look at them fully, nor have I searched for the "clues" of repeating hands that was shared. I will look at all of it, the first chance I have, and will take about 2 hours to look at it all, and then let you know what I observe and find.

Thanks for the reply. One thing about this game. It takes a lot of time looking at, analyzing, researching, experimenting. No rush.

A

I have downloaded 3 files. I seemed the author using DBL bet selection and switched to ODBL after 2 losses. If we are lucky, we may win with this stop loss and humble stop win. GL

Originally Posted by giabao

I have downloaded 3 files. I seemed the author using DBL bet selection and switched to ODBL after 2 losses. If we are lucky, we may win with this stop loss and humble stop win. GL

Nope, that wasn't a consistent placement in those shoes. In the first shoe from SNO that was not the case.

A

I read this "I searched for the "clues" of repeating hands that was shared" but can not find this information. Please help me to find out about clues fo repeating hands.Thanks.

Can anyone share the idea of GTG bet selection? It seems to be a nice one, if we can win 1 in 4 hands. Thank in advance.
GB

Originally Posted by giabao

Can anyone share the idea of GTG bet selection? It seems to be a nice one, if we can win 1 in 4 hands. Thank in advance.
GB

Does sound nice, huh. Here is one I just made up this second. Judge whether you are in a chop or streaky shoe (last patterns). If streaky then bet follow for the next 5 hands but don't follow further than it has ever gone on a side. So, if P has only gone streak of 3 then only follow streak of 3 on P - like that. Also, if in this "Grid" you hit a run of 1 then stop and wait for a run of 2 to continue your bet placement.

For a choppy shoe look back at the last 5 decisions and bet 5 times (if losing) that the previous series won't repeat.

LOL, that's all I got off the top of my head.

A

I try to reverse engineer GTG bet selection and apply mild neg MM. Hope to figure out his bet section. I believe he has somethings special to give. GB

Great commentary Garnabby!

Allow me to weigh-in here, everything you commented on is VERY close to what I am doing. What you need to do is think of EACH CHANGE from either "PLAYER" or "BANKER" as MODE change, NOT a "Hand Change." When you make a Bet Selection by installing a SEQUENCE, then once one of those BET PLACEMENTS WIN, then STAY in THAT MODE. Thus, if a portion of your sequence is following a (2) hand streak and your FOLLOW bet continues the STREAK, then STAY FOLLOW until it loses, then INSTALL a Mathermatical Probablity SEQUENCE that will CATCH at LEAST (1) Win in the next (4-5) plays and continue again in whatever MODE you achieved the WIN in.

So, you ask, what is a SEQUENCE? A sequence will look like this:
(O)pposite the LAST RESULT
(F)ollow the LAST RESULT

Thus, you might have a sequence that looks like this based on having seen this ... P-B-B-B-B

Your REACTION SEQUENCE might be ... F-O-O-F-O

You are HEDGING that BANK may continue, then EMPLOY some MATH on the ODDS of repeating hands in case it doesn't!

Now then, based on changes occurring in so many hands you will employ a GRID that contains a FIXED set of SEQUENCES that may favor hands NOT changing too frequently or possibly the other way around. The MATH still applies, but by doing that you are favoring one expectation for deviation over another based on what you seen, that's all.

It has taken many years to arrive at the conclusion that the GRIDS I have developed were the ONLY way I could succeed on a regular basis playing this crazy game, but they work, and that's always the bottom-line isn't it!

Just an FYI!

I think GTG's system is the best so far. His sharing is genuine and you guys should spend time to figure his method. I feel very appreciated to read this posts after many years reading at GG, LTW, etc. I start tesing with my scorecards. Thanks GB

Excellent sharing here. And I do thank everyone that does. In playing baccarat for 20 years, I am at the same observations in my development of learning and understanding as to what is being shared here. I find it VERY interesting what Grad The Gold is sharing, as it seems to be the answer I have been searching for. I do hope in doing the "detective" work he has shared, I will be able to understand, and learn, and give due credit to whom it is due.. And I do so appreciate everyone that shares knowledgeable, intelligent, practical, honest, and positive sharing. Gentleman, I consider it a privledge and joy to "amongst" you.

Yes. Our forum is genuine. People put out ideas and the others thank and encourage the poster and there is no hidden agenda. People helping people. Not trying to make up results and sell something. User

Hello folks, okay, first I would like to extend my sincere appreciation for all the nice comments below with reference to my efforts on this Forum, it's always nice to hear that my commentaries are being well received!

Secondly, I have been getting some Email from folks who are on the correct track and some from you who still have questions, thus again, without revealing my GRIDS I will make a commentary for those of you who are still having problems trying to formulate a sequence of plays that you must put into place to achieve that all important (1) WIN out of (4-5) hands.

We all know from my previous commentaries that you STAY in a MODE if it is winning, that takes care of staying in a WINNING Mode until it stops, again MODE meaning a series of CHOPS or a SERIES of STREAKS of the same hand. When you LOSE, you have arrived at a DECISION POINT (DP), and must now assess how to place a series of PLAYS or BET SELECTIONS based upon the ODDS of CONTINUATION of the MODE you just experienced.

Thus, if you see:

A STREAK of (2), from a previous series of (5) continuous CHOPS, then you would place a strategy in that may continue the STREAK backed with some plays that would CATCH another MODE change.

A STREAK of (4), from a previous STREAK of (3) would indicate that you might favor a deviation (another GRID) that favors the probability of STREAKS continuing through the next five hands with a slight probability that they may not, hence, a sequence that may favor that situation. Or vice versa, a STREAK of (3) CHOPS, a DOUBLE, then a STREAK of (4) CHOPS, then you would install a set of sequences based on probability with a deviation that favors on average MORE "CHOP" modes than "STREAKS" of continuous hands. All the while accounting for a possible CHANGE in the "Favored" deviation in order to pickup that all important needed WIN out of (4-5) hands.

So here's the LOGIC; would it not stand to reason that if you just saw, let's say (4) BANKS interupted by (1) PLAYER (the loss, the DP), AND the shoe as seen thus far has been evenly dispursed with CHOPS and STREAKS of (2's) and (3's) and maybe (1) streak of (4) at the DP point in the shoe; that within the NEXT (3) hands you might see a CHANGE again? Thus, we have seen EVENLY dispursed or (Mathematically correct) display of hand distributions, so now we INSTALL a SEQUENCE that MAY have an above average chance to CATCH a WIN, thus we may install something like this:

O-O-O-F-O

Meaning we will go OPPOSITE the last result (3) TIMES, FOLLOW (1) time, then go OPPOSITE for the last play in the sequence? That's how it works! Can't give any better clues than that!

Remember, you only INSTALL a SEQUENCE upon the FIRST loss incurred from the MODE you were in.

Now, we all know, and have all seen shoes that DEVIATE from the normal Mathematical Probability, thus we DESIGN BET Placement GRIDS that favor either a predominantly "CHOPPY" shoe, "STREAKY" shoe, or an "EVEN" shoe; basically GRIDS that DEVIATE on either side of the CENTER of the Mathematical Probabilities.

Okay folks, time now to break out the "Slide Rules", the "Calculators", design a a computer "Program" that gives you the BEST chance at designing sequences based on the changes as outlined above ... the ANSWER you seek is in the CHANGES of MODES and the TYPES and QUANTITIES of hands seen at the "DP!"

If you aren't a "Programmer", then there are many of them around to assist, some on this Forum who have offered. Be assured, the answer is there, the (3) GRIDS will assist you in making all the necessary changes while the shoe is in progress. Examine every (10) hands or so to see if the amount of changes warrant using a different GRID! Design a SCORECARD that will track all the necessary information i.e. SEQUENCE, SEGMENTS of the SEQUENCE which are in play, the BET amount, your RUNNING Balance, SERIES LOSS Accrual, TTL Bet, and finally the R.O.W.

GRID and SEQUENCE design time!

Grab the Gold

Grab The Gold.
Thank you so much for your sharing. You are almost giving all the information of your system. However, I would like to ask you to give some more Demo Shoes which you encountered the hard times where you may lose more than 5 hands.
Can you give the illustration of this info just for clarification?
"A STREAK of (2), from a previous series of (5) continuous CHOPS": eg. PBPBPBB or is that right or what?
"A STREAK of (4), from a previous STREAK of (3) " : eg. BPPPBBBBP right? or what?
"a STREAK of (3) CHOPS, a DOUBLE, then a STREAK of (4) CHOPS" eg: BPPPBBPPPPB is that right? or what?
Sorry for my English. I just want to know exactly what it means for sure. Have Great time!

Many thanks, GB

Thanks for the acknowledgment, but again it's NOT a "System", my methods are "Strategies", a "System" implies a guaranteed result ... I guarantee ZIP, I take my chances just like the rest of you! But if it is any comfort, employ my methods and I will say this, "You will WIN at an unbelievable ratio vs. losing!"

I will try and look in my database for "losing" shoes, but they will indeed be difficult to find because it doesn't happen with any degree of frequency. My methods used with ENTRY and EXIT parameters will make you a winner most of the time!

Originally Posted by giabao

Grab The Gold.

Can you give the illustration of this info just for clarification?

1. "A STREAK of (2), from a previous series of (5) continuous CHOPS": eg. PBPBPBB or is that right or what?
2. "A STREAK of (4), from a previous STREAK of (3) " : eg. BPPPBBBBP right? or what?
3. "a STREAK of (3) CHOPS, a DOUBLE, then a STREAK of (4) CHOPS" eg: BPPPBBPPPPB is that right? or what?

Many thanks, GB

I think you are asking me to illustrate? If so, here is what you described:

1. P-B-P-B-P-P ... {The last "P" is your DP because you lost, the CHOP Sequence was broken there when "P" doubled}
2. B-B-B-P ...... P {The last "P" is your DP because you lost, assuming you were winning through the small BANK streak} and now the streak of (3) more (P's) continue for a total of (4), thus you need to design a RESPONSE SEQUENCE that will catch one of the last (3) "P's" What you just saw looked like this: B-B-B-P-P-P-P Now you need to a RESPONSE sequence to catch one of those final (3) "P's"
3. B-P-B-B ...... {The second BANK is your DP because again it discontinued the CHOP series, NOW let's say that AFTER that second BANK you see another series of (4) CHOPS} Thus, the actual entire hitory of hands looks like this: B-P-B-B-P-B-P-B {Now, you need to install a RESPONSE Sequence that will CATCH one of those hands displayed in RED!}

I hope that explains it!

Allow me to chime in, For every 5 hands look for changes, For every 10 hands look for the total amount of changes. Here it is : First 5 hands lets say PBBPB P-B-B-P-B that's 3 changes if you count backwards so the next 5 hands you would play like this B-B-P-B-P or B-B-B-P-B hoping you will catch 1 in 4. When you're done with 10 hands count back and look for the amount of changes total. For 3 or less changes you look play a different "grid" for 4 or more you play another grid/strategy.

If the shoe is streaking let's say B-P-P-P-P then you would play P-P-P-B-P hoping to catch the streak with the B in there as 'insurance". If the shoe is choppy for 10 hands B-P-B-P-B-P-P-B-P-B then next 10 hands will play like this BBBBBBBBBB, hoping you will catch the shoe alternating thus hitting the wins. If the shoe is evenly dispursed ex: P-B-B-P-P-B-B-P-P-B then next series would go like this P-B-P-B-B or something like that. Hopefully this is what GTG has but if not then it might be pretty close or i just made a fool of myself, doesn't matter though we're here to learn.

You are sort of on the right track, don't play the hands, play the MODES i.e. OPPOSITE or FOLLOW to try and catch the win.

Thanks GTG, I know that i also have to account for changes in the sequence and for when the shoe "turns" i also have to adapt. I know that i'm on the right track and that i'll be looking for mode changes. A grid of 10-14 sequences for each type of shoe(3 types). I noticed that there is a sequence of 4 that does really well against the shoes you presented but it can't overcome all shoes but it's my "standby" mode.

I was doing this on your semi-flat bet method you showed earlier, the 10,15,25,50 lose 3 out of 4 method and move up. I like that one because it's more conservative but the downside? less profit per shoe 7-14 units average, you say 5-10 and stay under 50 hands but i went to 60-65 hands. This 2nd method averages 15+ units but the units progress faster, both excellent methods. These 2 methods are the best I have seen so far and will be testing further before hitting the tables.

I won't PM you or ask you for more hints because it's all in the posts and you have given us enough already(your in-box is probably flooded for people "mining" for more). Two good methods. Thank You is the least i can say. I have to do a little more research but i feel that i'm on the right track.

Originally Posted by Grab The Gold

You are sort of on the right track, don't play the hands, play the MODES i.e. OPPOSITE or FOLLOW to try and catch the win.

Somehow playing the hands is easier to think about then playing the modes. How to relate O(LD) and F(LD) to the 5 and 10 previous hand sequence has me stuck. But since you are counting previous patterns as mode changes and not hand changes then we have to begin to read hand wins as mode wins. Not easy to wrap your head around.

A

Originally Posted by Grab The Gold

Thus, if you see:

A STREAK of (2), from a previous series of (5) continuous CHOPS, then you would place a strategy in that may continue the STREAK backed with some plays that would CATCH another MODE change.

A STREAK of (2) (FF) from a previous series of (5) continuous CHOPS, (OOOOO). W now have FFOOOOO and we need a strategy that may continue the streak (our primary Grid sequence) backed with some plays that would catch another mode change (our hedge). ?? We don't have a DP because we haven't identified a loss so our Grid sequence must(?) begin with O to continue the streak but when lose must have a back up hedge to get our win 1 out of 4. So if we lose the first O bet we have to implement a Grid. Evidently we have to look back at our change "count" and make a determination (guess) what sequence of O's and F's will

based on probability with a deviation that favors on average MORE "CHOP" modes than "STREAKS"

or vice versa?

Archer's in blue.
So here's the LOGIC; would it not stand to reason that if you just saw, let's say (4) BANKS (SSSS) interupted by (1) PLAYER (the loss, the DP) (O), AND the shoe as seen thus far has been evenly dispursed with CHOPS (O's) and STREAKS (F's)of (2's) and (3's) and maybe (1) streak (F) of (4) at the DP point in the shoe; that within the NEXT (3) hands you might see a CHANGE again? Thus, we have seen EVENLY dispursed or (Mathematically correct) display of hand distributions, so now we INSTALL a SEQUENCE that MAY have an above average chance to CATCH a WIN, thus we may install something like this: (SSSS-O-) So the last O is our DP and we have seen evenly dispersed O's and maybe 1 F. O-O-O-F-O

Perhaps we could get folks to look at the above example and make some comments? Opinions? Natural Nine, what do you think?

Archer

Hi! GTG,
As you mention your GRIDs involved 10 to 14 hands, so in some cases, you may play for 10 to 14 hands to stop or you just stop after 5 hands and wait for a while.
So you come to the table and ask some question about before last shoe, then you can anticipate the character of the shoe, so you will apply the GRID accordingly to your plan. Is that right?
I believe your strategy is similar to capture concept taught by Dozenbettor at GG few years ago.
Again, thank for your sharing.
GB

I don't know who that person is {Dozenbettor?}, I have developed these methods over the last seven years with heavy analysis with my programming and literally "Millions" of RUNS through the Databases I have developed for TESTING.

I read the below threads, ARCHER, you are making this MORE difficult than it really is.

Start like this, just look at the last five hands; if the hands came like this ... P-P-B-P-P and somewhere in the first (3) hands you achieved a WIN or it could be your VERY first WIN in the shoe and the last two hands went DOUBLE and you now have gotten "OUT of SYNC" with that last "P", you INSTALL a RESPONSE Sequence that MAY Hedge the "P" continuing, OR, if this occurred later in the shoe, say by Hand No. 26 and thus far the shoe has been CHOPPY, you MAY instal a RESPONSE Sequence that anticipates CHOP AGAIN for two hands.

Thus, if I were going to anticipate the "P" continuing I might INSTALL this:

F-O-F-O-O

So what we have here is an initial (F) in hopes that the PLAYER will continue, backed with an OPPOSITE of whatever comes next if the initial (F) doesn't hit, backed with a FOLLOW of whatever comes next looking for a DOUBLE of the last hand, the (2) OPPOSITES to hopefully CATCH the thrird and fourth hand if the (3) previous didn't hit.

ALWAYS look at the "MACRO" view first (The last FIVE hands), then every (10) hands look at what the shoe is doing and assess which GRID is best utilized for those last (10) hands and continue... okay? On average you will change a GRID maybe two to three times during a shoe.

Folks, it isn't as COMPLEX as it looks, you are merely making MINOR adjustments as the shoe unfolds. The reason these methods work is because nobody knows how a shoe will unfold right? We all know this! Thus, when looking back (5) hands, you'll have an opportunity to RESPOND with a HIGH DEGREE of success to what is happening. My methods give you an opportunity to JUMP into CONTINUING CHOPS, and stay in STREAKS of SAME hands, all the while allowing you a SERIES of PLAYS to INSTALL as possible RESPONSES when those CONTINUING SERIES of either of those types STOP! These methods are DESIGNED on PURPOSE to anticipate the UNPREDICTABILITY of ANY SHOE, that's the REAL BEAUTY about them.

Look, if you just RODE a STREAK of BANKS for (7) hands and then a PLAYER came (your DP), you look at (7) BANKS and think ... "Okay, will I see a series of PLAYERS now, or will it CHOP for (1) MORE hand and then go back to PLAYER?" Well, if I have seen many streaks of (2-5) hands previously, I would INSTALL a response like this: F-F-O-F-O hoping to catch a STREAK of something in the NEXT (2) hands, then a possible SWITCH, then FOLLOW whatever comes next, then SWITCH again if all the previous (4) responses failed! Tempering all of that with the "Mathematical Probability" of REPEATING or NON-REPEATING hands! The SECRET is analyzing the DEGREE OR Frequency at which the hands are CHANGING!

An average person could play (2-3) shoes a day with $25 Units and make a VERY comfortable living if they wanted to, averaging 40-55 units a Day, it can be done; it's being done my clients everyday but at much higher stakes (usually $2000 or more unit sizes!)

I hope now, everyone understands why I am not giving my RECIPES (GRIDS) away, too much RESEARCH and EFFORT ... WAY TOO MUCH EFFORT! But again, be assured the answers are in these POSTS I have made. You have all the INGREDIENTS to make the MEAL ... START COOKING!

I REALLY want all of you to find GREAT SUCCESS and be CONSISTENT WINNERS!

Originally Posted by NaturalNines

I was doing this on your semi-flat bet method you showed earlier, the 10,15,25,50 lose 3 out of 4 method and move up. I like that one because it's more conservative but the downside? less profit per shoe 7-14 units average, you say 5-10 and stay under 50 hands but i went to 60-65 hands. This 2nd method averages 15+ units but the units progress faster, both excellent methods. These 2 methods are the best I have seen so far and will be testing further before hitting the tables.

I am happy you have made this analysis, you are definitely on the right track, and yes, a MORE CONSERVATIVE Betting Method yields less units; less RISK, less PROFIT unfortunately that is the rule for not just Baccarat, but GAMBLING in general; that is why I play for example 10-10-25-50-75 because I am VERY confident that I will achieve a WIN somewhere in there based on my RESEARCH. It is EXTREMELY seldom that I will lose two sets of (5) Plays and corresponding Bets ... very rare!

Originally Posted by giabao

Hi! GTG,
As you mention your GRIDs involved 10 to 14 hands, so in some cases, you may play for 10 to 14 hands to stop or you just stop after 5 hands and wait for a while.

So you come to the table and ask some question about before last shoe, then you can anticipate the character of the shoe, so you will apply the GRID accordingly to your plan. Is that right?

I believe your strategy is similar to capture concept taught by Dozenbettor at GG few years ago.

Again, thank for your sharing.
GB

To your first question, the GRIDS contain RESPONSE Sequences to ANTICIPATE the shoe possibly going one direction or the other; and yes, I usually allow a GRID to stay working for at least (10) hands BEFORE looking to make a change.

To answer you second question; YES, I ask those questions to players whom have been at the table for awhile and the dealer if need be. If, after looking at the card for a shoe that played earlier which I am now ready to play, and I see lots of SINGLES, DOUBLES, and TRIPLES and know that the shoe has been in action for over six hours which is equivalent to about (2-3) shuffles, the two GRIDS I may have handy are the one that favors more CHOP and one for a shoe that may have an even distribution of "Mathematically CORRECT" hands.

Your third question I answered in a previous thread!

Dear GTG, Thank for your clarification. Great post!!. GB

Originally Posted by Grab The Gold

I will try and look in my database for "losing" shoes, but they will indeed be difficult to find because it doesn't happen with any degree of frequency. !

GTG,
Hello again. After reading through some of the requests to "see" a few of your losing shoes, I'm thinking there may be some confusion as to what they are asking for.

It appeared to me that the request was just for any shoe in the collection that showed a loss, not necessarily a sequence to be dredged from your database, but merely a scan of a losing shoe.

As most players keep all of their actual shoes, one wouldn't think this would be a problem and that may be where the argument came from.

Here's hoping this clears things up in the "losing shoe" quandry!!

AD

You know this is getting to be really TOO much Garnabby ... my methods are NOT clones of anyone's ... the research has been all mine for seven years, it's all ORIGINAL be assured of that, please STOP this nonsense of continually "Ragging" my methods okay? It's getting REAL redundant! Instead, why don't you take this unbridled energy you have for criticizing others and making wild accusations, and use that to either show us all what YOU have so we can all take POT SHOTS at you, or, TRY and DESIGN some GRIDS; you claim to have the Mathematical expertise ... then GO for it! ARCHER has already shown me the path he is on and he's getting there quickly, thus, if you have the inclination like ARCHER does, and others, you of all of us should be able to derive and design something that makes sense.

Thus, start posting something of significance here relative to a "Method" and quit rehashing and analyzing OLD "SYSTEMS" of what seem to be methods originated by others.

I am trying to stay REAL POSITIVE on this Forum, but it becomes tiresome when you make comments like my methods have been "Cloned" from others ... that is so untrue and unfair because of I have seven years of research in notes, formulas and data ... show me some of your stuff, and NOT all that (TBL) and (OTBL) nonsense ... if you are looking to get me off this Forum, then I am now currently headed that direction!

Originally Posted by garnabby

Look man, you're becoming a lot better at the real nonsense than anything else. If you wish to leave because you can't back up any of what you're saying, even where that would not give up any of your system but instead help the rest of us better understand it... then "don't let the door hit you on the way out". Anyone is allowed to ask anything one wants. And nowhere have i 'accused' you of anything. (I guess you didn't believe me when i told you a long time ago, "This is not my forum, i'm just an other member.")

NO, you look MAN! You are totally out of control here! You ACT like this is your board; anybody who reads your POSTS can easily SEE THAT! And what is all this stuff about a "Blame" card ... you are totally NUTS! Nobody is running away here? I have POSTED RESULTS that I have played, if you don't believe them, then that is YOUR problem! I have provided tons of POSTS on how to DESIGN some methods, because I am NOT giving away my final GRIDS, thus, STOP trying to shame them out of me, that simply won't work! I don't need help figuring anything out, you're the person that needs help, this is evident and apparent to all who POST, READ, and see these comments you are adding here! You claim to be the "Mathematician" with all these supposed "Credentials", you should have made some headway by now and seen the "Light" with all those "Math" skills, but no, it's just easier for you to claim that my methods are dubious with NO proof to make YOUR claims against them!

And, I have NEVER bribed anyone, the fact is my friend, it is clear that you have NOT tried to even put together any grids of the "MGM", this is clear to everyone who is reading all these POSTS, your energy and hallmark is geared toward criticism, probably spending more time trying to figure out what else, or whom you can criticize next.

And calling me a "PUNK", now that is REAL CLASS! Oh yes, your're a REAL CLASS ACT, YOU just showed everyone on this Forum that when someone "corners" you, and "calls you out", you result to name calling, I have to chuckle, you are the one that belongs with people like "Ellis" not me!. You're a real class act, real classy! Yeah right, why don't you start acting like a "Grown up person" with some sense of decorum. As far as I am concerned, you have NO credentials at all, none that I can see. I have REALLY tried to stay positive on this Forum and sidestep any negative commentaries aimed at me or others; I've even defended others who were being battered by some other members of this Forum; I have always believed that "Forums" should be a FREE and EASY exchange of ideas, NOT a pit you fall into for others to take unfounded "Pot Shots!" But I guess folks like you can't get along on that premise, you need that feeling of "Supremacy" and "Authority" to garner your EGO strokes.

This can be settled REAL EASY for me!

A Challenge: Anytime after 2010, I'll meet YOU in Las Vegas, let's say the "Green Valley Ranch Hotel and Casino" (a Beautiful Resort), we'll both start with the same amount of money, let's say a $5000.00 bankroll, hand in our strategies to a third independent party in sealed envelopes to be checked after the challenge, play (3) shoes with NO deviations from those strategies, both the PLAYING and BETTING Strategies ... then we'll see who the REAL, what did you say ... "PUNK" is? The person who wins this challenge is the one who has the most money at the end, SIMPLE! C'mon, do have the "NERVE?" Probably not. But I am ready and poised to meet that challenge, in Las Vegas! Put your MONEY UP or SHUT-UP, pretty easy! We'll see VERY QUICKLY who really knows what their talking about and if those "Tales of Success" are real or not! I'll await your response to the "Challenge!" Your "Kiddie" game stops here, welcome to the "Big Time" where REAL Gambler's live!

And I invite any and all members of thiis Forum to come and witness the challenge! I think afterwards you will have to start a Forum of your own, because no one here will have credence for anything further you'll have to offer this board, I could be wrong, but I don't think so!

So just continue calling me and others names, from this point on I really am ambivolent to what you say, your credibility just "vaporized" with your comments in the last thread!