http://upnpress.com/forum/posts/list/96.page JForum - http://www.jforum.net Anyone know why Patrick played blackjack in last night's episode? It didn't seem a very logical choice at first to me, due to the small percent advantage. I'm no expert, but according to everything I could find, even the best card-counting schemes only give maybe a 5% advantage. With that rate, I don't know how he could turn $100 into $250k.When he explained that he was memorizing the cards, that only confused me more. Wouldn't that become worthless everytime the cards were shuffled?I know next to nothing about blackjack, but it seems to me that poker would be a better choice, given the increased interaction with other players, all of whom Patrick could easily read. Even then, though, he would still have to be a good card player and bettor to capitalize on the other players' strengths and weaknesses. However, that just makes him more interesting, in my opinion. Any thoughts?

]]> http://upnpress.com/forum/posts/preList/26159/364402.page http://upnpress.com/forum/posts/preList/26159/364402.page GMT Remove

]]> http://upnpress.com/forum/posts/preList/26159/364489.page http://upnpress.com/forum/posts/preList/26159/364489.page GMT He did all this in the time it took the casino to notice? This guy is even more amazing than I thought. Seriously, though, any ideas about what he could have done in the time he had?

]]> http://upnpress.com/forum/posts/preList/26159/364508.page http://upnpress.com/forum/posts/preList/26159/364508.page GMT Remove

]]> http://upnpress.com/forum/posts/preList/26159/364592.page http://upnpress.com/forum/posts/preList/26159/364592.page GMT *googles "exponential betting"*I agree, that could explain the increase in money, but it still does not explain his strategy of "memorizing the cards". I guess that could be one of those "leaps of faith," but it annoys me when shows do that.

]]> http://upnpress.com/forum/posts/preList/26159/364606.page http://upnpress.com/forum/posts/preList/26159/364606.page GMT I don't know if Jane made all his money at that one table -- we saw him go to other tables; perhaps some of them had games that were more conducive to mentalist skills.That said, he did not pick that table at random. He knew that the number 43 was significant, so he attended to table 43. Maybe the fact that he'd figured out the dealer's scheme helped him win. Certain aspects of the game that would normally be random were not, since she was feeding her collaborator cards.

]]> http://upnpress.com/forum/posts/preList/26159/365303.page http://upnpress.com/forum/posts/preList/26159/365303.page GMT Aha! Some logic! I like this theory, although my personal one is more fun. Here it is: he pulled the broken glass trick on a couple of the dealers, then filched all their chips and ran to another table. Repeat a few times, and voila! $250,000 in a few short minutes!

]]> http://upnpress.com/forum/posts/preList/26159/365727.page http://upnpress.com/forum/posts/preList/26159/365727.page GMT Well, he said that he hadn't cheated to win the money. I don't think he would lie to VanPelt about that, given how easily he later admitted that he had cheated in the last game. However, it is possible that Jane's definition of "cheating" might be a bit more flexible than most Maybe he targeted tables with female dealers and just gave them that dazzling smile, and while they were distracted . . .

]]> http://upnpress.com/forum/posts/preList/26159/367857.page http://upnpress.com/forum/posts/preList/26159/367857.page GMT I love your theory, Joie! There are some great ones here. However, I'll be my normal boring self and suggest..."Well, anything can happen on TV. The question is, where have you seen it done in real life?" ~JaneEmma Leigh

]]> http://upnpress.com/forum/posts/preList/26159/368303.page http://upnpress.com/forum/posts/preList/26159/368303.page GMT blackjack ~ red john

]]> http://upnpress.com/forum/posts/preList/26159/368829.page http://upnpress.com/forum/posts/preList/26159/368829.page GMT