Cipher- The Wizard of BJ

[Stanford]

Cipher claims there must be two sides and quotes Mr. Race Track. Then he goes on to prove there isn't two sides. He doesn't say how he will pay back the person he scammed and he continues to market a worthless system with false claims. He continues to prey on desparate and uninformed people.

I am not sure we should wait for the victom to act. I am not so sure that we should not solicit mutliple complaints to the FBI from all concerned members of the gaming community.

This Cipher guy is a real piece of ..... work.

Stanford.

[mitch]

It's too bad nobody ever tried to expose Cipher as a system scammer. It's too bad nobody ever made posts on an internet online gambling related messageboard summarizing Cipher's ludicrous claims related to online BJ, trying to show people that he's obviously a fraud.

<sigh>

I thought I would return to the Forum for a while just to add to the debate on this issue.

If you look through my previous posts you will see that I challenged Cipher many times about his so called 'strands'. I said then and I repeat now, he is a snakeoil salesman.

You will not get a straight answer from him because he is a con man.

Don't bother asking about his 'system' or anything else just try and get him to answer the one question which exposes him as a total BSer. If you had only asked yourself this question you probably would not be in this situation now.

If he has a sucessful system why would he ask for other peoples money? He is a mega multi miilionaire after all, as I would be if I could generate even a 1% advantage over the casinos.

He won't answer this question because he can't!

Westland Bowl, I am afraid you have little chance of seeing any of your money again. If Cipher was a straightforward con artist he might have some money hidden somewhere but we know he has been gambling and quite often at high stakes. You have just been feeding his gambling addiction and his ego. Your money now is with the casino owners!

It may have been that at one time Cipher actually believed his 'strands' worked. He was running an obvious negative progression system which normally means lots of winning sessions followed by the inevitable catastrophic session where it all goes. Cipher I am sure has no illusions by now about his 'system', he will have suffered this pattern many times now. Perhaps he is still deluding himself that the casinos have cheated during these bad sessions by 'pulling a switch' on him, he used to refer to this.

So what should you do? Unfortunately I have no indepth knowledge of American law.
You should certainly see a lawyer and it would be in your best interests if you could make contact with as many of Ciphers other 'clients' to check out their experiences with Cipher. (probably not good)

If you can get any money from him, (doubtful!) no matter how small, take it but with the proviso that you make it clear that you are accepting without prejudice to any further action.

Whatever you do, and I understand the frustration and temptation, do not make any threats of violence, this would play into Cipher's hands.

You have at least got the satisfaction of having exposed Cipher for what he is and may have prevented some other poor souls losing their money in this fashion.

However, continuing to conduct the debate over the net is probably not a good idea either if you intend to follow up with legal action.

Good luck with this affair. (unfortunately I think you are going to need it)

Mitch

[Stanford]

I thought I would return to the Forum for a while just to add to the debate on this issue.

If you look through my previous posts you will see that I challenged Cipher many times about his so called 'strands'. I said then and I repeat now, he is a snakeoil salesman.


....He was running an obvious negative progression system which normally means lots of winning sessions followed by the inevitable catastrophic session where it all goes.....

Mitch,

Good on you. I should have said the same. I just never took Cipher seriously and didn't realize till recently that he was scamming anyone but himself. Thanks for speaking out early on.

Stanford.

[mgibson99]

......If your claim is legitimate......you had better come up with a way for you to prove each and every element of every charge......

This post reminds me of some of the crime shows I like to watch (Law and Order, CSI, etc). You know the ones I'm talking about.....everyone knows the suspect is guilty, and the suspect doesn't deny anything, but he just looks at the cops straight in the eye and with a sarcastic smile says "PROVE IT".

The good news for WB is that the cops in these shows almost always do "prove it".

[jerrylee]

If your claim is real, just tell us one thing. Why would you post:
http://www.onlineplayersunion.com/fo...44/index5.html

Cipher, I don't care anymore whether I get the money from you or not, I don't care whether I win a case against you or not, I don't care how much it costs me, I'm pursuing all avenues I can possibly find to bring legal and governmental attention to your theft of my and others' money. So long, Cipher. The curtain as been torn off and burned.

It's as if your main purpose is to defame him and you're not interested in the money...hmmm? Well posting in several forums, you've met your objective on that one.

[Westland Bowl]

You have at least got the satisfaction of having exposed Cipher for what he is and may have prevented some other poor souls losing their money in this fashion.

Now THAT is exactly what this is all about. When I posted the first post in this thread, I knew the possibility that I would get the money back was virtually nil. But that wasn't my reason for posting but rather, just as you said, to expose Cipher and prevent further people from giving him money for "investing."

However, continuing to conduct the debate over the net is probably not a good idea either if you intend to follow up with legal action.

As I posted over in OPU, I'm done with trying to reason with Cipher. He calls it "lame talk"....well, it was really "I'm trying to save your ass" talk before I continue on with the legal action.

Good luck with this affair. (unfortunately I think you are going to need it) Mitch

Good luck or bad luck, let it come. Thanks.

[jerrylee]

Also interesting...has anyone noticed... Bryan, CM has not elected to comment in this thread, perhaps not wishing to get entangled?

[Stanford]

If your claim is real, just tell us one thing. Why would you post:
http://www.onlineplayersunion.com/fo...44/index5.html



It's as if your main purpose is to defame him and you're not interested in the money...hmmm? Well posting in several forums, you've met your objective on that one.

I think you see some bluster born of frustration. The man got conned out of 20 grand.

And you can't "defame" Cipher. He is what he is - a crook, a scam artist, a snake oil salesman. He finds desperate people and preys on them. He depends on their shame to keep his secret much as a pedophile depends on the shame of his victims not to talk to the authorities.

We should thank Westland for pulling back the curtain. Maybe it will help others in our community. Don't you think that is a good thing?

Stanford.

[Stanford]

Also interesting...has anyone noticed... Bryan, CM has not elected to comment in this thread, perhaps not wishing to get entangled?

I noticed. And I spoke to it. This isn't a casino issue. This isn't about being a casino watchdog. If you go to forums run by gaming experts you will find they do speak out about it. People that understand odds and expectation here have spoke out about it.

Bryan is a great watchdog. He isn't Michael Shackleford. If I want to know about betting systems I will go to the Wizard of Odds. If I want help with a rogue casino, I am calling on the Casinomeister.

Speaking of the Wizard, don't you know that Michael just turns over in his website every time Cipher and "Wizard" (as in Wizard of Blackjack) are mentioned in the same sentence.

Stanford.

[Westland Bowl]

If your claim is real, just tell us one thing. Why would you post:
http://www.onlineplayersunion.com/fo...44/index5.html

It's as if your main purpose is to defame him and you're not interested in the money...hmmm? Well posting in several forums, you've met your objective on that one.

Of course, I do want the money back. But there has been a number of people who think that it is unlikely that I'll get the money from him, court case or not. Some people think that email isn't allowable in court, some do. So being pulled back and forth as to whether I got a case or not, I just decided "heck, whatever, I don't care, I'm just going forth with legal action and find out if I do or not." So I had to prepare myself for the possibility that I didn't have a case. I just have to "let it be" whatever the outcome is. Maybe it's a wrong choice of words.

My original post only relates MY experience with dealing with Cipher. There is nothing baseless that I've posted that I can't prove with documentation and correspondence though it's email. As long as I stick to the facts, it's not defamation per legal counsel.