Originally Posted by
Dan Druff
There's also the problem his claim of 21 player bets hitting in a row in baccarat.
Since the ties don't matter (you get your money refunded), let's throw those out, and look at the odds of hitting player 21 consecutive times without a loss.
The player wins 44.62% of the time, and the banker wins 45.85% of the time. Ties come the other 9.53% of the time. This means that when there's not a tie, the player wins 49.32% of those, while the banker wins 50.68%.
So basically we are looking at what the odds are of 21 consecutive of those 49.32% shots hitting without a loss. That would be approximately 1-in-2.8 million.
Even if you want to say that player bets hit a whole lot, and that we're only looking for 20 consecutive decisions following which are also player bets, the odds of that happening is still 1-in-1.38 million.
So either Christopher Mitchell saw a 1-in-1.38-million event while betting on player, or he's lying.
I'll let you guys guess which was most likely.
Druff, it looks like he did in fact hit 21 players in a row. If you look at the snapshot in post #134, you can see the 21 straight player wins on the computer monitor to the right of his head. (The blue dots that form the elongated "L" shape on the screen.) Of course, it's also possible that he just found a dead table with that result sitting there from whenever the table was last open and he decided he would use that monitor as a prop to shoot his video, which I haven't bothered to watch.
This doesn't change J-Gilbs' point that the profit amount he claims is impossible at those table limits using his "system."
What a slimeball...
For Jeff and Dustin, I think what's needed is a sustained, coordinated attack from multiple sources on his comments section. Keep them coming so quickly that he can't keep up with the deletions. Even 24 hours of that greatly increases the chances that his sucker followers will be exposed to them at some point. You guys are doing great work and I'm really looking forward to radio this weekend.