Arnold and Silverking, would you post a video of your "N" work, please?

No, not even remotely interested.

If you're just trying to stir the pot, it's too lame to even consider.........although I did respond

@ronfour

I'm sorry sir, but I don't know who you are.

Arnold, ronfour has been kicking around "The Spot" for as long as you and I have been.

I get from his post that we've said something he doesn't believe, and that his method of offering up a challenge involves asking for "proof" of ability or technique......presumably in the form of a video.

I simply don't care about the optics of my posts such that I would ever feel the need to prove anything to anybody

(BTW, ronfour does know of what he speaks......he just enjoys rocking the boat more than riding in it.)

OK Silverking

Sorry ronfour, no offense was intended.

Silverking:

>How many cards do you think you can control?

It depend how the work is done. With works done in a classic manner, I would say, you can, in theory, control two halves of the deck, but does it mean you can control the whole deck? Good question.
With notches made at different points, you can control more group of cards (more than the two halves), but know I'm thinking about your question, I realize that answering by an exact number is hard.

>Other than in some sort of demo, why would you ever deal out four of a kind, even one time?

Ok, I used four of a kind as an example, what I wanted to mean is "how many time can you deal the same hand"
You can varie this "same hand" a little, but I think it's limited.

Arnold:

>Hi young man! I see no disrespect here, don't worry

Cool, but, reading the last post on this BB, I have to take some precaution.

>You talk about a predetermined number of cards as a flaw but it's not! Just NS 7 Clubs and pull out a Straight in Clubs when you need it

What is the advantage of this technique versus a simple culling technique?

>In Hold'em, you just need a good pair as hole cards in many situations

Hmmm... This can be debated...


>There are easier ways

Agree on that, I will add: easier and SAFER ways

@jack

With 7-8 Clubs I could pull out up to 56 different Straights. It's done quite fast. Just pull out 5 NSed cards (out of 7/8), bring them to the top and stack them. Or bring them to the bottom and bottom deal, etc. Culling cards from scratch is more difficult! You have to play with the deck a bit more. Frankly it's better to get the cards from the discard or from 1-2 partners signaling.

You can't cull and stack at the same time. I'm talking for myself here, personal opinion. I mean, even in my amateur games, 4-5 riffles is a limit not to go beyond. That's why, in the past, I was a bit sarcastic about videos where guys play with the deck like for 1', 10 riffles, lifting the corners very high, slow pace, no final cut... OK, I don't play in casinos or in $50K buy-in games but even in amateur games, you can't do everything and nothing.

At the final table, when just 2-3 players left, I assure you a strong pair in the hole is not bad...

Oops, I was going to correct an obvious mistake. My bad.

Weird that no one has picked it up yet, guess not a lot of people really play poker.

Arnold:

>Just pull out 5 NSed cards (out of 7/8), bring them to the top and stack them

Said like that, it looks so easy! I know you are pretty good at stacking, but, it's not my case...


>Or bring them to the bottom and bottom deal

It look easier than stacking, but I've heard bottom dealing was for magician only.


When I say culling, I mean you can simply put the interesting cards from the showdown, the board and your hand on the top of the deck and do the same things that you will do with NS cards.

@jack

As a permanent dealer plus one accomplice or two... The Magic begins lol.

Bottom dealing is not easy nowadays, yes. Cut cards... .

@splice

My dear friend, what absolutely incredible and unforgivable mistake (implying surely I know nothing ) have I done again? C(8,5) = 56. And, with 2 or 3 players left, a strong pair as hole cards provides a tremendous advantage. The proverbial AA vs KK (2 players) is 82.36% favorite. AA vs KK vv QQ (3 players, another silly example) is still 66.36% favorite. In my games, 4 or 5 riffles are OK and, as a permanent dealer, toying (very discreetly) with the discarded cards is even possible (you have to be cautious though, it's better to use the wash for that). So, where did I screw up?

You keep saying straight when you mean flush. I never said it was unforgivable or anything like that either, no need to exaggerate.

I'm sure you have an excuse given that you likely play games in french, but I would have expected someone else to pick up on it. As a poker player, it was immediately obvious to me.

Good point. Obviously I meant Flush! 5-6 times the same Straight during the same evening would be everything but discreet...

I play games in English, 99%. Sometimes we have to add Spanish or French. Even a tiny bit of Italian. Pun: to me, I need to add many English languages as well; here, they have one different accent every 5 miles.

I have no excuse, I was not concentrated enough while writing. But you mention a good point, in my mind I think in French, not in English. I use 3 languages minimum everyday, it's a bit confusing .

Thanks for fixing my mistake.

The mistake itself isn't important, I just thought it funny to see people discussing the best way to use strippers in a poker game and no one picks up on the difference between a straight and a flush... Like I said, you have an excuse, but I would have expected someone else to wake up, especially when discussing poker strategy.

Just a small, silly thing anyway. Don't really have an opinion on strippers in hold'em, I don't use them and don't plan to.

I don't use them either. I tried a couple of times it's too difficult, especially if you use "invisible" work. Besides, decks are changed, air is sometimes dry, sometimes damp... But it's just me, my opinion. I know they are used in other places. Again, I'm an amateur, not a pro, and I don't want to be one.

Here's an interesting little piece from Genii Mar 1940:

"Mickey McDougall was called to decide on a court case in which it is claimed that marked cards were used in a card game and the victim calling in the police. After Mickey looked at the pack he told the judge that the pack was a cleverly made pack on the hump stripper style. In other words it was a Billy O'Connor "Instanto Pack" but cut so very fine that the ordinary person could not notice anything wrong. I saw the pack myself and unless you riffle the pack lightly and then cut near the ends you won't find a thing wrong. The Instanto pack is where you are able to locate any named card by just cutting the pack, or you may cut any number of cards named by audience. No wonder the gamblers used this deck as they could cut the pack at any card they wished. Anyway the result, the judge sentenced the defendants as common card sharks."

It's funny that the author believed that the cheats were using a deck fashioned after a magician's trick deck because the author only had as his reference the work that had been repackaged and marketed by a magician as the "Instanto Pack".

But as a side, Mickey McDougall's books are excellent and have been mentioned quite a few times already by Cag. Very enjoyable reads.

I don’t think MacDougall referred to the deck as the “Instanto Pack” in the courtroom. He probably described it as “humps” or “bellies.”

The author of the Genii article you are quoting is a magician and it appears it is his description of the deck as the Instanto Pack, not MacDougall's, at least that is my interpretation of the article.

Congratulations Arnold. We finally have at least one of the card table cognoscenti herein making an objective observation about this work. All the “invisible,” "87 way pull combos," "used by top pros in the big games on the other side of the moon, and the "I know a guy who knew a guy whose grandmother could pull something so light that even a micrometer could not measure the cut" and so on all “come a cropper” when confronted by real world application and all the demo BS and $5,000 plus machines get smacked strongly in the head.

The reason why the pros I have seen who actually used “cutters” in the real world and know what they are doing, used one combination and did not bother with “notch” work was to keep it SIMPLE. Pros, even the very capable and skillful, always keep things as simple as humanly possible in a game. It is their cleverness of application that prevails, not any “pie-in-the-sky” esoterica. It is only the demonstrators that come from left field with the most bizarre and outlandish concepts imaginable, and incredibly think they are valid.

Of course, I am not denigrating demonstrators or magicians on this as such, so don't take this the wrong way guys. What the magis say and do in their performances is within legitimate “show-biz” criteria. What they talk about often and describe is really show biz “smaltz.” The problem for me is that many of them actually think that what they are oftentimes saying is valid and not a product of their conclusions based upon their “make-believe” performance world concepts.

Try applying some of this bizarre nonsense in a tough game over time, (I’m not talking about trying some occasional BS move when no one is looking in a small game to fool yourself), and see what happens. All the complicated, esoteric stuff will go out the window so fast the “breeze" will knock you over.

The reason I sometimes write about some of the things in the way I do is not to "knock" magicians and demonstrators in any way. The reason is there no doubt are one or two who will catch on as to what is really being said and may benefit therein. For the rest, go back to telling and believing all the wet-your-pants stories. It is much more fun than reality. But then again, nobody said magic was reality.

***. Where did I put my heart medication.

Hi Cag,
Re: the Genii article:
That is my interpretation as well. MacDougall most certainly referred to the deck in the proper terms.
The author of the article on the other hand could only relate in magician terms and it looks like the only frame of reference he had for strippers was a marketed effect based on them.
He had the cart leading the horse.

Cag, it's likely you already know this, but there are NO hustlers or professional cheaters on this forum.
There was once maybe one or two.....but they're long gone.

The only people you're ever talking to here are magicians, demonstrators, authors, and students.

Rest assured, I (and presumably everybody else) get that you feel most of what's discussed here is a bunch of inaccurate information propagated by dummies.......almost every one of your posts repeats the point that none of us here know anything about hustling or cheating.

OK?.......your message is loud and clear.

I love your posts Cag, and I respect the fact that you're coming from a lifetime in the gambling business......but we here in the Gambling Spot already know we don't know anything about this topic from an insiders point of view.......it would be great if you could cut back on the somewhat overt put-downs?

Maybe I'm overly sensitive, but the repeated negativity gets me down

Card table cognoscenti... I'd like to possess your commandment of English. I think I'm gonna make it my signature from now on.

That said, why do you publicly advertise the games on the other side of the moon! It's supposed no to be divulged to the vulgus pecum...