The Zengrifter / ExhibitCAA Reputation Debate

[Pelerus]

A major problem I have with ZenZone is that the page gives Zengrifter an undeserved credibility boost on the BJ pages of bjinfo.com.

Perhaps unlike you, I began visiting this site well before the advent of the ZZone. And Zengrifter's reputation, both as a knowledgeable player and as a quirky character from the blackjack world, quickly became known to me through 1) the "Zengrifter Interview"; 2) "You've Got Heat" by Barfarkel; 3) the many references to him which other posters on this board made; and 4) most importantly, his numerous quality replies to my own questions and to those of others. In my eyes, he soon became established as, if not the resident expert, then at least one of them. And a damn funny fellow to boot. Nothing to do with the Zen Zone. I repeat - nothing.

New participants--and even some old ones--don't know who's who. So their reasoning will be: "Ken Smith has a reputation as a stand-up guy who is serious about blackjack, and if Ken Smith's serious site would give Zengrifter his own page, then Zengrifter probably knows about blackjack, too, and he's probably a stand-up guy like Ken Smith is."

And how do you know that he's not a "stand-up guy"? More importantly, just what the hell does his being or not being a "stand-up guy" have to do with his participation on an internet message board? Does one need to be a "stand-up guy" to give advice on the game of blackjack? - or to engage in political discussions? Based on your personal attack, I would guess that you yourself are most likely not a "stand-up guy," but that doesn't mean I wouldn't listen if you had something relevant to say about the game.

[zengrifter]

Perhaps unlike you [ExhibitCAA], I began visiting this site well before the advent of the ZZone. And Zengrifter's reputation, both as a knowledgeable player and as a quirky character from the blackjack world, quickly became known to me through 1) the "Zengrifter Interview"; 2) "You've Got Heat" by Barfarkel; 3) the many references to him which other posters on this board made; and 4) most importantly, his numerous quality replies to my own questions and to those of others. In my eyes, he soon became established as, if not the resident expert, then at least one of them. And a damn funny fellow to boot. Nothing to do with the Zen Zone. I repeat - nothing.

And how do you know that he's not a "stand-up guy"? More importantly, just what the hell does his being or not being a "stand-up guy" have to do with his participation on an internet message board? Does one need to be a "stand-up guy" to give advice on the game of blackjack? - or to engage in political discussions? Based on your personal attack, I would guess that you yourself are most likely not a "stand-up guy," but that doesn't mean I wouldn't listen if you had something relevant to say about the game.

Thank you Pelerus. In case you didn't know - ExCAA MAY be the author of the new book that bears the same name. One of foremost AP luminaries of our generation. Actually I think that that ECAA's ID is a 'cutout' for the author, meaning that it is being maintained by proxy with help from one or more others. zg

[ExhibitCAA]

Pelerus says: "And how do you know that he's not a "stand-up guy"?

1. He has repeatedly LIED on these boards by claiming some credit/involvement in my legal cases, involving the criminal component and subsequent civil components. For the record, we never solicited his advice, received his advice, nor acted on any of this phantom advice. All statements ZG has made suggesting otherwise (and he has repeatedly done so) are lies, and I'm tired of having to repeatedly correct the record.

2. He similarly exaggerates his hole-card experience/ability, especially to newbies.

I could add additional items, but that's sufficient.

Pelerus says: " More importantly, just what the hell does his being or not being a "stand-up guy" have to do with his participation on an internet message board? Does one need to be a "stand-up guy" to give advice on the game of blackjack?"

OK, Pelerus, are you incapable of following the logic of my argument? I will slow it down for you. ZG . . . is . . . free to express . . . his opinions and advice . . . but it doesn't mean . . . KenSmith . . . should set ZG up . . . with his own page.

ZG can express whatever opinion he wants. For KenSmith to somewhat legitimize that opinion on bjinfo is what I am criticizing. Get it? You are proof of how gullible and easily mislead newbies can be. You make an opinion based on things like Barfarkel's book? Barfarkel? OK, enough said.

KenSmith giving ZG a page here is obviously of comparable weight to Barfarkel writing up ZG stories, especially due to KenSmith's considerable reputation.

Maybe, as you claim, ZenZone didn't affect YOUR personal opinion of ZG, but you are just one person. I guarantee it has an influence on some people, and "some" is too many. Somewhere, there is the marginal consumer. Do you know what the "marginal consumer" is? If not, go learn something.

And yes, I make lots of personal attacks--on phonies, posers, scammers, liars, sleazebags, etc. Ask Beverly Griffin if I make personal attacks.

[Pelerus]

1. He has repeatedly LIED on these boards by claiming some credit/involvement in my legal cases, involving the criminal component and subsequent civil components. For the record, we never solicited his advice, received his advice, nor acted on any of this phantom advice. All statements ZG has made suggesting otherwise (and he has repeatedly done so) are lies, and I'm tired of having to repeatedly correct the record.

Fair enough. This has no relevance to me or most other members here, nor was I aware of your claim.

ZG can express whatever opinion he wants. For KenSmith to somewhat legitimize that opinion on bjinfo is what I am criticizing. Get it? You are proof of how gullible and easily mislead newbies can be. You make an opinion based on things like Barfarkel's book? Barfarkel? OK, enough said.

Well, I suppose not every author can meet your high standards. Just because they aren't Wong or Schlesinger doesn't mean their contributions are totally devoid of value. Besides, my opinion drawn from Barfarkel's work, among other sources, was simply that ZG is a knowledgeable and quirky character from the blackjack world. I think that most here would agree with that assessment, newbies or not. Would you like to set up a poll?

Maybe, as you claim, ZenZone didn't affect YOUR personal opinion of ZG, but you are just one person. I guarantee it has an influence on some people, and "some" is too many. Somewhere, there is the marginal consumer. Do you know what the "marginal consumer" is? If not, go learn something.

Marginal consumer? Hmm, I am certainly familiar with the macro-economic concept of "marginal propensity to consume", and at this point my marginal propensity to consume your bullshit is approaching zero.

And yes, I make lots of personal attacks--on phonies, posers, scammers, liars, sleazebags, etc.

Really? How beneficent of you. Maybe you should start with internet ghostwriters posing as respected authors. Oh, wait. That was just another of ZG's quirky claims. Comment retracted.

[zengrifter]

Pelerus says: "And how do you know that he's not a "stand-up guy"?

1. He has repeatedly LIED on these boards by claiming some credit/involvement in my legal cases, involving the criminal component and subsequent civil components. For the record, we never solicited his advice, received his advice, nor acted on any of this phantom advice. All statements ZG has made suggesting otherwise (and he has repeatedly done so) are lies, and I'm tired of having to repeatedly correct the record.

ZG Facts -

1. In Spring of 2000 Stalker contacted me in a panic, his 'partner' was just jailed for cheating at Caesars. He wanted an LV-based gambling-rights attorney because their attorney was not admitted to the LV BAR.

2. I brainstormed with Stalker what was truly relevant: That what was needed was NOT another gambling attorney, Bob Loew or whomever it was would suffice on that front - what was needed was a kickass criminal trial attorney.

3. I discussed via phone, email, AND in person, with Stalker - the OBVIOUS strategy that when the cheating charge fell apart that a world class civil complaint would emerge.

4. I specifically recommended Bill Terry, whom I knew to be good by reputation and was previously Oscar Goodman's partner when I first met him in '83.

5. A year later, upon reading BJF I learned that Stalker's 'partner' in jail was non other than Grosjean, that Bill Terry had been retained, and that the perfect civil litigation opportunity had emerged as predicted.

6. Shortly after my revelation from reading BJF I ran into Stalker at Casino Royale and said, 'Hey, it was Grosjean!' and Stalker chuckled, 'Ya thats right.'

7. I dropped Grosjean a line more than once via email and/or BJF Greenbelt to his VanillaAce ID, just to say "howdy, small world" etc. but he never replied, which struck me as odd. Especially odd seeing as how my RICO case had not been revealed yet to the BJ universe and Stalker and I were still on good terms.

Now IF those 1-7 above are facts, did my penchant toward bravado and hyperbole imply something more than the above, or otherwise what were the 'LIES'? Enquiring minds want to know. zg

Ps - We may need to allow Stalker back on this "WBPITTW", as he called it, to set the record straight on this... or we could, anyway, if we believed Stalker to be a Stand Up Guy.

[creeping panther]

ZG Facts -

1. In Spring of 2000 Stalker contacted me in a panic, his 'partner' was in jail for cheating at Caesars. He wanted an LV-based gambling attorney.

2. I brainstormed with Stalker what was truly relevant: That what was needed was not another gambling attorney, Bob Loew or whomever it was would suffice on that front - what was needed was a kickass criminal trial attorney.

3. I specifically recommended Bill Terry, whom I knew to be good by reputation and was previously Oscar Goodman's partner when I first met him in '83.

4. I discussed via phone, email, AND in person, at length with Stalker - the OBVIOUS strategy that when the cheating charge fell apart that a world class civil complaint would emerge.

5. A year later, upon reading BJF I learned that Stalker's 'partner' in jail was non other than Grosjean, that Bill Terry had been retained, and that the perfect civil litigation opportunity had emerged as predicted.

6. Shortly after my revelation from reading BJF I ran into Stalker at Casino Royale and said, 'Hey, it was Grosjean!' and Stalker chuckled, 'Ya thats right.'

7. I dropped Grosjean a line more than once via email and/or BJF Greenbelt to his VanillaAce ID, just to say "small world" etc. but he never replied, which struck me as odd. Especially odd seeing as how my RICO case had not been revealed yet to the BJ universe and Stalker and I were still on good terms.

Now IF those 1-7 above are facts, did my penchant toward bravado and hyperbole imply something more than the above, or otherwise what were the 'LIES'? Enquiring minds want to know. zg

That was a load of info on your part, amazing. I would have never guessed.

I stood up for JSTAT when he was getting his ass kicked around from almost everyone, and I will stand up for you, everyone needs a second chance, some of us a third. I personally don't give a flyin F### how skilled of a hole card player you are, or how skilled of a tracker etc. you are.

I am at the same time very happy to have JG on this site to teach and correct, as he did me on a wrong assumption just recently, and I wish that these set to's are done in private...let the other sites savage each other in public...i hope it does not continue here.

CP

[zengrifter]

2. He similarly exaggerates his hole-card experience/ability, especially to newbies.

Fact #8 - Never on this board have I ever implied an overstatement of my holecarding abilities. It is true that of the relative small number of flashing dealers I've played (compared to full time pros), especially, a large percentage of them were because I first spotted the holecarder, either in play or in route to play and I followed him - I am not very good at identifying the flashers myself. zg

[ExhibitCAA]

ZG Facts -

"1. In Spring of 2000 Stalker contacted me in a panic, his 'partner' was just jailed for cheating at Caesars."

blahblah. You can stop right there, or you can keep digging yourself into a hole. Stalker? In a panic? Stalker was not my partner in that play! DO YOU HAVE A CLUE????? Stalker was not at Caesars, had no involvement in the play, the chop, bailing me out, etc. You apparently do not even know who stalker is, who my partner was, who I am, or anything else.

Whatever conversation you may or may not have had with stalker (who also says your claims are ridiculous) is irrelevant anyway, since he had no involvement whatsoever in our successful legal exploits. As for Bill Terry, he was/is a well-known attorney with whom we have personal contacts going back over 20 years, and he was not my attorney, and he and Mr. Wright had nothing to do with the dropping of criminal charges nor the subsequent civil action. In fact, the criminal attorneys advised against our taking civil action.

Along with others, you spouted online the advice to get our case into federal court, as we would supposedly not get a fair shake in Nevada courts. Well, I think we did just fine in county court in Nevada. You actually stated online once that you "successfully crafted the legal strategy" that we used to win our cases. This is nonsense. I think my attorneys, Bob and Thea, do not even know you. None of us have ever spoken to you or listened to any of the garbage you posted regarding our case.

There is no point going into detail. I know what went on with my legal situation--I was there. The emergence and success of the civil situation was due to the 100% commitment my partner (not stalker) and I had to pursue the issue to the end, at any cost, personal or financial, and the hard work and doggedness of Bob Nersesian and Thea Sankiewicz, and the character of Bill Zender, and the bitterness of Bob Griffin, and the fairness of Judge Gates, and the openmindedness of two civilian juries. You had nothing to do with it.

Pelerus, no, "marginal propensity to consume" isn't quite the same thing, but nice try. Second, if you think there is any validity to ZG's conjecture regarding the identity of the ExhibitCAA handle, then, how shall I put this nicely? Well, you need to get a clue.

No, I don't need a poll to confirm that ZG is a "quirky character" in the BJ world. And if newbies want to get their advice from quirky characters who are nothing more than posers,* that is their right, but I don't think KenSmith should support that.

* Another example of ZG being a poser: ZG has claimed to have taught the great DP how to count. Please.

[ExhibitCAA]

Regarding "fact #8":

The phrase "never on this board" is obvious semantic nonsense. Your Internet persona extends beyond just the posts on this board. There are the other boards which overlap (bj21, etc.), and there are the chat rooms, and there are your confederates in posing (it's always good to have an agent). I have had to stomach Barfarkel's tales of whacking an HC at the Western with you on more than one occasion, and your argumentative statements in chats that, contrary to my advice, you have "gotten away with" splitting Tens plenty of times. I'm sure you have. I'm sure there are people who have gotten away with playing Russian Roulette.

But splitting Tens is a rookie move committed generally by rookies who get giddy with excitement over seeing their first hole card. Just like rookies are usually the ones who hit their hard 19, and I've seen rookies "get away with it." Do you think those rookies took more off the game than we did, even though we eschew hitting hard 19?

You also stated in a chat how easy it was to find games by following known players around. This aspect of the game I include as part of your claim of holecarding skill, since the art of holecarding includes much more than just seeing the card (do you realize that?) No, it's not easy. There are crews that find the bulk of their games that way, but only because they are lazy, not because they don't have the skill to see a game themselves. Those crews do not get nearly as many games as those of us who pound the pavement every day. How many games have you "found" by following a known HCer around? 1? 2? 4? How many have you found by following ME around (since I may be the most prolific HCer of the past decade)? Once you answer that question, then answer: How many HC games do you think I've played in my career?

But, I'm sitting there in a chat listening to you basically boasting that it's easy to find games, all you have to do is follow the known HCers around, and that those HCers are obvious and easily identified. That's nonsense. I've played on at least three occasions with card counters AT MY TABLE; I've played on at least two occasions with a pit or shift boss sitting AT MY TABLE; I've played on many other occasions with APs at the adjacent table. I've played with thousands of civilians watching every hand. Apparently, our activities are not so obvious as you say.

I read and listen to every word about HCing that appears on these boards. You have exaggerated your HC knowledge; perhaps you did so unknowingly, because you don't realize how much you don't know.

[zengrifter]

ZG Facts -

"1. In Spring of 2000 Stalker contacted me in a panic, his 'partner' was just jailed for cheating at Caesars."

blahblah. You can stop right there, or you can keep digging yourself into a hole. Stalker? In a panic? Stalker was not my partner in that play! DO YOU HAVE A CLUE????? Stalker was not at Caesars, had no involvement in the play, the chop, bailing me out, etc. You apparently do not even know who stalker is, who my partner was, who I am, or anything else.

I described how Stalker framed the communication when he reached out to me - "One of my partners," or there abouts, and yes he was in a sweat if not panic. "We need a Las vegas based players rights attorney". Of course I read the BJF, no mention of **, and I didn't pry when I saw him again.

Talk about losing the plot - never did I ever suggest any strategy on discussion boards during the unfolding of the case - not me - "federal court instead of Nevada?" Not the guy. Do old holecarders typically lose it like this? Early onset perhaps?

I also finally learned from you at that chatroom encounter recently that Terry didn't stay in for the duration. Ok. Now if you want me to understand also that the selection of Bill Terry was a coincidence... ok. Now I know. You could have set me straight years ago - it was all a coincidence.

I never made out my 'advice and referral' to Stalker (at his request for you) to be the winning end-all. More along the lines of describing just how amateur you guys and your whole network of famished casino haunting vampires actually are, or were at that time at least.

Some of us are having some trouble fully embracing the ECAA ID with the author James Grosjean because you come across with such vexation.

Certainly I am personally disappointed that after all of these years you decide to land on THIS board and cast such aspersions and denigrate local smalltimers, like Barfarkel at the same time. BJINFO is kinda THE community for "Barfarkels" from all walks. Perhaps these words and your desire to sell books will keep your disdain in check.

The 'lies' on the other boards, Fight Club where I cannot speak in defense for being barred... (barred from Fight Club?) - the outrageous allegations that Ken Smith is in cahoots with Norm and ZG to tout and sell worthless products, and all the while ZG ripping of newbies.

Yes, that was Stalker, not you, but you sure sound alot alike on this thread. And you sound like several other holecarders who have passed through WBPITTW on occasion.

I hope you are not just here for selling your book. If you are running out of games (or just game?) you can always sign on with the Zender tour and sell game protection workshops for casino execs, like Aponte. zg