How exactly do you conclude that you figured something out, when you refuse to accept any kind of test of your theory? (either a wager on actual play, or a computer simulation?)
The way it was disproved that the world was flat was to *test* the theory that it was round. Each side can argue their position until they’re blue in the face, but providing proof ends the argument.
Incidentally, there’s been about *40 years of proof* already, as blackjack strategy has been studied exhaustively for decades by some of the best minds around. (And yes, that includes two-handed play as well as single-handed play.)
As far your jab at “the Wizard’s gang”, I remind you for the umpteenth time, the advice to stand on 10,10 vs. 6 (regardless of the number of hands) doesn’t come just from the Wizard, it’s universally agreed upon by every blackjack expert on the face of the planet. I know it’s easier for you if you can try to marginalize the Wizard, but you need to realize (and acknowledge) that you’re not arguing against just him, me, and Nolan, you’re arguing against EVERY SINGLE LAST EXPERT ON BLACKJACK WHO HAS EVER LIVED. You, alone, a non-mathematician and a non-pro blackjack player, are claiming that the rest of the world is wrong. And anyone making such a bold claim should be expected to provide some proof. But you’ve steadfastly refused to submit your theory to any kind of test.
See, there you go again, trying to marginalize the Wizard by saying that his position is the minority view. In fact it’s the opposite: The Wizard’s position is the UNANIMOUS position among the experts, who are all in 100% agreement. You alone believe otherwise. You’re the one who’s alone in his position, not the Wizard.
Really, you don’t have any clue at all? The fact that the proper strategy has been repeatedly proven by test, while Nick777 refuses to submit his idea to a test, doesn’t give you any clue at all? That’s scary.