Nugget Loses Unshuffled Card Case
Thread Rating:
Quote: KeyserThe casino considers using your brain as an act of cheating, if you win too much.
Believe me, I have first hand knowledge of this!!! They back you off in unethical ways too..... I've seen where they suspect a player is counting, but since he's down a few thousands dollars, they let him continue to play. However, when he makes the swing back the other way and within a hundred dollars or so of being even, that's when the goons tap him on the shoulder.
Quote: doubleluckBelieve me, I have first hand knowledge of this!!! They back you off in unethical ways too..... I've seen where they suspect a player is counting, but since he's down a few thousands dollars, they let him continue to play. However, when he makes the swing back the other way and within a hundred dollars or so of being even, that's when the goons tap him on the shoulder.
...would you prefer they boot him while he's down a few thousand? Most likely they just wanted to be sure - if they know he's counting, why would they want to give him a chance to come back to even?
Quote: mbg45200I just cannot get over how they didnt stop the game and shuffle the cards! Come on if this was BJ and they went from a min bet to a max bet, and the cards were coming out in a "pattern" you know for sure they would of shuffled. This is so foolish on their part. Where is the fine that the Taj got for doing this? Did anyone lose their jobs for being so stupid?
I still think we are not being told what really happened.
Quote: pacomartinI still think we are not being told what really happened.
It was an inside job. The gunner was in the grassy knoll. That was one magic bullet. The birth certificate is a fake.
Did I leave anything out?
That could be, but we seem to have discovered enough to realize that the GN staff were more likely to be idiots than co-conspirators and that the ten dollar bettors who suddenly became 5,000 dollar bettors were apparently not sufficiently well-organized to each have that much money with them, so its unlikely that they were conspirators.Quote: pacomartinI still think we are not being told what really happened.
I think it is just what it seems.
A shoe that was supposedly pre-shuffled had a substantially lengthy slug that was in a determinable order. These ten dollar No Tickee No Shirtee bettors were baccarat mavens enough that they tipped to the sequence and took advantage of it in a manner that while suggestive of lack of conspiracy does not exclude it from the real of possibility. No one will ever accuse the GN staff of not being alert to what was happening, they simply seemed to not know what to do.
Looking at the GN's reactions during and after the event, there is amazing incompetence. Looking at the players reactions they seem to have been friends and acquaintances with similar hobbies. Obsessive Mini-Bacc players at low limits, though at least one man had five grand to lend to the others so I would describe them as "regulars" who hang out at the casino together, but not conspirators.
This "unshuffled, but not card pip sequence" must have been recognized by one of the players. The advantage of most if not all of them being solely Chinese speaking is that they can clearly communicate without the dealer hearing "Hey, I've figured out a definite pattern".
I always thought that the casinos could stack the deck agaisnt the player only to have people say "no they wouldnt risk losing their gaming license over that" well all they really would have to do is to get the card manufactor do it and when a big player comes in have those decks in play. Makes you really wonder what they can get away with, all they have to do is blame someone else like they always do and no one would know any thing was up.
Quote: mbg45200Seriously. Come on. What is wrong with shuffling the cards anyway isnt that what they hire the dealer for?
.
Yeah I still don't get the point in buying preshuffled cards. How do you know that all the cards are there if you're not checking them. How do you know the cards don't have a mark on them, if you're not checking them? And why are you trying to save yourself ten minutes worth of play. It hardly seems worth the risk. Obviously the Golden Nugget realizes that now..
Quote: ewjones080And why are you trying to save yourself ten minutes worth of play. It hardly seems worth the risk.
Since you asked, take a look.
Cost of Time
Quote: EvenBob
Thank god.
How big is Gameco? Is this a fluke or the death knell for them?
Casinos are more likely to be alert to shuffling procedures now so will they invest time and effort in doing in-house shuffles or will they continue to save time by buying pre-shuffled decks and merely run the risk of an occasional headline making lapse?
Quote: mbg45200If they didnt want to pay them they should of closed the game when they thought something was suspious with it.
I think that this question is the most significant one. When you see a player making thousands of dollars in loans to casual acquaintances so that they can all go to max bet, you shut down the game and investigate at your leisure.
A secondary question is if you are buying pre shuffled cards as a cost saving maneuver, you would think at the very least they would pull out a couple of random decks from each box and check them. I refuse to believe that no one in surveillance couldn't think of the possibility that the cards might not come in a total random order.
A third question is that if visual surveillance is sophisticated enough that it can recognize faces, surely you can program the cameras to recognize cards and look for something out of order: missing cards, repeat slugs, etc.
A fourth question is regarding electronic baccarat shoes which would easily recognize patterns in the order of the cards. Are these devices so expensive that a casino would risk a million dollar scam?
I'd suggest investigate immediately but not shut down without reason. The lack of sufficient funds indicates the lack of a pre-existing conspiracy but the overt loans to virtual strangers might just be evidence of a conspiracy starting. About a year ago a South Carolina money manager playing Blackjack at Caesar's Palace started placing five grand behind all the BJ bets of the other players. And was winning them all.Quote: pacomartinI think that this question is the most significant one. When you see a player making thousands of dollars in loans to casual acquaintances so that they can all go to max bet, you shut down the game and investigate at your leisure.
It seems the first half of this shoe would have passed every test imaginable since only the last half of the shoe was in some sort of discernible order.Quote: pacomartinA secondary question is if you are buying pre shuffled cards as a cost saving maneuver, you would think at the very least they would pull out a couple of random decks from each box and check them.
To surveillance, its random unless someone in surveillance can decode the sequence of the cards. 2-A sequence would have stopped the game.Quote: pacomartinI refuse to believe that no one in surveillance couldn't think of the possibility that the cards might not come in a total random order.
Yes. This might be too late but it provide comfort.Quote: pacomartinA third question is that if visual surveillance is sophisticated enough that it can recognize faces, surely you can program the cameras to recognize cards and look for something out of order: missing cards, repeat slugs, etc.
What are their features? Would players distrust them?Quote: pacomartinA fourth question is regarding electronic baccarat shoes which would easily recognize patterns in the order of the cards. Are these devices so expensive that a casino would risk a million dollar scam?
Have we ever seen a reliable report of exactly what kind of "unshuffled" sequence the cards came out in?
Quote: foxnews.comThe cards did not come out of the chute in numerical order, such as 2-3-4-5. Rather, they came out in a predetermined pattern that the manufacturer lists as a proprietary secret, the attorneys said.
Source: Atlantic City casino ordered to pay Chinese gamblers
Quote: FleaStiffWhat are their features? Would players distrust them?
If the electronic shoes are scaring away your baccarat players, at least they would provide you an easy way to randomly test some of the decks of cards in a shipping package. As the Wizard's post pointed out, the cards were delivered in a proprietary order. You could easily test for a rigged shipping container.
I still have my doubts if the players were "innocent", but I think that Tilman will have an easier time fighting a single lawsuit against the card manufacturer.
No. I think not. You would have to test almost the whole shoe.Quote: pacomartincould easily test for a rigged shipping container.
They would have had to have know the rigged shoe was enroute from Kansas City, had arrived at the GN, had gone through whatever post arrival procedures there are, ... and had been used that day. Sort of like predicting when a certain roll of duct tape would be on the shelves in a local store or when a certain typewriter ribbon would be installed in a specific machine or a certain ink jet would be installed in one specific computer out of an entire office full of printers.Quote: pacomartinI still have my doubts if the players were "innocent",
Asians are the largest group of gamblers there is these days, they are generally considered inveterate gamblers so finding them in the casino is not surprising but how would you have them at every Mini-Bacc table much less every Blackjack table as well. The team would have had to have "end to end" communication... and if so, they would have had sufficient money to go to maximum betting for each team member and they would have each had lawyers waiting in the wings without that translator center obtaining counsel on their behalf.
Quote: FleaStiffNo. I think not. You would have to test almost the whole shoe.
They would have had to have know the rigged shoe was enroute from Kansas City, had arrived at the GN, had gone through whatever post arrival procedures there are, ... and had been used that day. Sort of like predicting when a certain roll of duct tape would be on the shelves in a local store or when a certain typewriter ribbon would be installed in a specific machine or a certain ink jet would be installed in one specific computer out of an entire office full of printers.
I am not sure why this idea is so difficult to believe. If the casino receives a shipment from the factory every three days, and a colleague at the factory alerts them as to when the box is due to arrive. Even if the players had to play low stakes for a day or two waiting for their box of cards, it would be worth it for a $1.5 million. It would also give them time to memorize the sequence and be able to bet appropriately. Possibly someone who works in shipping at GN received $10K to call a burner phone when a package with a given serial number arrives.
It seems much more believable than that a bunch of unrelated players memorized a complex sequence of cards in a repeating pattern, and had time to exploit it before the casino operators figured out the sequence was repeating itself.
I find the first scenario far more plausible than the second.
Quote: pacomartinI am not sure why this idea is so difficult to believe. If the casino receives a shipment from the factory every three days, and a colleague at the factory alerts them as to when the box is due to arrive. Even if the players had to play low stakes for a day or two waiting for their box of cards, it would be worth it for a $1.5 million. It would also give them time to memorize the sequence and be able to bet appropriately. Possibly someone who works in shipping at GN received $10K to call a burner phone when a package with a given serial number arrives.
It seems much more believable than that a bunch of unrelated players memorized a complex sequence of cards in a repeating pattern, and had time to exploit it before the casino operators figured out the sequence was repeating itself.
I find the first scenario far more plausible than the second.
In that case, someone from inside the casino is complicit. GN needs to go after them first.
A similar scenario with lottery tickets:
Quote:Ginther was once a university professor. She holds a Ph.D. in statistics from Stanford University. Rich found ways that Ginther could have used publicly available information to look for patterns that could lead her to figuring out the pseudo-random computer algorithm that determines when and where the winning tickets in each packet would arrive.
"Once she discovered a pattern, Ginther would have had to wait until a winning ticket was scheduled to show up in a sparsely populated region--the less competition for that winning ticket, the better. It would be crucial to pick a place that she had reason to visit, such as Bishop and the surrounding towns. It would also be helpful if the store owner held the tickets for her."
Source
In this case, she figured out the distribution pattern (brains) but then had someone hold blocks of tickets for her (fraud?) One is legal and the other isn't.
Perhaps we need to look at the "inventory flow". How many such shoes are received by the GN. How many tables are "candidate tables"? Who makes the decision of "Box with the 'X'" goes to MB-7. How do the team members have ALL seats covered and know the day and the shift to be there?
Quote: pacomartinIt seems much more believable than that a bunch of unrelated players memorized a complex sequence of cards in a repeating pattern, and had time to exploit it before the casino operators figured out the sequence was repeating itself.
"Memorized?" Plenty of mini-baccarat tables provide pencil and paper. (Plenty of Asian players use them.)
The attorneys for Gemaco insist it was a mistake, not deliberately done by a Gemaco employee. Perhaps the attorneys are lying, but if it was done by a rogue Gemaco employee, wouldn't the company fire and/or sue the employee for sabotaging their product?
Quote: renoDoes anyone know how the details of this case are different than the details of the Trump Taj Mahal case? After these 2 incidents, I can't imagine why any casino would risk outsourcing the shuffling.
In one the deck was presumed to be preshuffled by an outside source. In the other, someone forgot to turn on the automatic shuffler in-house.
Quote: reno"Memorized?" Plenty of mini-baccarat tables provide pencil and paper. (Plenty of Asian players use them.)
The attorneys for Gemaco insist it was a mistake, not deliberately done by a Gemaco employee. Perhaps the attorneys are lying, but if it was done by a rogue Gemaco employee, wouldn't the company fire and/or sue the employee for sabotaging their product?
Once again, I doubt player write down every card played. It is not clear if 41 hands is enough to pick up a pattern and win that much money. They have to be able to recognize the pattern, and tell each other about it, so they can all bet the maximum. Even in another language it is usually possible to pick up what people are talking about because they gesture with their hands and eyes. I also imagine there is probably one person who speaks Chinese in the employ of most casinos.
The attorneys may or may not be lying. They may not know what exactly happened. In either case what else would the attorneys claim? It's not exactly like admitting that they were duped would let them off the hook. In fact there may ultimately be a firing or a criminal investigation of a Gemaco employee. But having the employee admit that he took a $10,000 bribe would not excuse the company. GN can still claim they had faulty security and it cost them money.
Quote: pacomartinOnce again, I doubt player write down every card played. It is not clear if 41 hands is enough to pick up a pattern and win that much money. They have to be able to recognize the pattern, and tell each other about it, so they can all bet the maximum. Even in another language it is usually possible to pick up what people are talking about because they gesture with their hands and eyes. I also imagine there is probably one person who speaks Chinese in the employ of most casinos.
The attorneys may or may not be lying. They may not know what exactly happened. In either case what else would the attorneys claim? It's not exactly like admitting that they were duped would let them off the hook. In fact there may ultimately be a firing or a criminal investigation of a Gemaco employee. But having the employee admit that he took a $10,000 bribe would not excuse the company. GN can still claim they had faulty security and it cost them money.
I thought betting tends to Follow the Leader in baccarat. Only one had to pick up the pattern and the rest could take the cue from his or her actions.
But if someone in the factory made sure those cards ended up at GN, and someone at GN made sure those players were at the table when those cards were, THEN they have a case. Otherwise, it was just a very expensive screw-up.
Quote: FarFromVegas
But if someone in the factory made sure those cards ended up at GN, and someone at GN made sure those players were at the table when those cards were, THEN they have a case.
That only happens in the movies, like Oceans 13 with them
making the dice in Mexico and having control over them till
they got into the dealers hands. In real life its logistically
impossible.
Quote: EvenBobIn real life its logistically impossible.
I respectfully disagree with you.
Here is an article from two years ago:
Using Pre-Shuffled Playing Cards in Blackjack and Baccarat by Bill Zender - June 1, 2010
In it the author discusses the market and motivation for pre-shuffled cards.
Quote: Bill Zender is a former Nevada Gaming Control agentCasino executives considering the use of pre-shuffled playing cards might wish to contact the card manufacturer and ask them to describe their pre-shuffling process. In many cases, the manufacturer will be more than happy to give executives from the casino a tour of their facility. That way the potential users can check out the procedure and the manufacturing safety features for themselves.
...
Manufacturer pre-shuffled cards have been used for a number of years without problems. Not one case of marked cards or arranged sequences has been noted.
...
These factors, safety and speed, make the decision to switch to pre-shuffled cards, whether manufacturer shuffle or in-house shuffled, one of the easiest decisions the casino executive will make.
While the conclusion may be wrong, it is clear that casino operators were acutely aware of the possibility of a scam 2 years ago. Even to the point that some executives were touring facilities.
Now someone may have figured out a way to bypass the security system.
Trust your fish supplier, trust your air conditioning water purifier, trust your long term employees, trust your supplier's safety record, ... but in all cases. Inspect and keep your insurance intact.
That was my thought also.what if all the cards were in the exact same order for 2 or 3 days in a row then the players finally noticed,so the cards might not have been in any discernable sequence but if every preshuffled 6deck box was in the same order it would be easy to exploit.Quote: IbeatyouracesIs it possible at all the the cards were just mispackaged?
Quote: HunterhillThat was my thought also.what if all the cards were in the exact same order for 2 or 3 days in a row then the players finally noticed,so the cards might not have been in any discernable sequence but if every preshuffled 6deck box was in the same order it would be easy to exploit.
There is no a priori way to prove it wasn't a simple screw-up.
I presume the manufacturer prints the deck out of proprietary sequence which is different than the sequential one shown in the uncut sheet of playing cards. Then they gather up the cards so that they are always in the same sequence (but not an immediately recognized one). The next step is to shuffle the decks so that each deck is unique. The second step could have been skipped by accident.
My only problem with that scenario is that the card manufacturer would be extremely aware of the consequences of such an error. Management would be careful to institute procedures to make sure it didn't happen by accident. I still think the more likely scenario is that a crooked employee intervened and deliberately made sure that the decks bypassed the shuffle step. Then he made sure these cards were all placed in a single shipping container bound for a known casino.
Quote: DocWill a lot of players start playing at low stakes, recording the cards as usual, and trying to identify "proprietary secret" patterns? It seems as if the judge says that is just fine and that they may then bet the deciphered pattern at whatever level they like.
I presume the proprietary secret is just the order in which the uncut cards are printed. Normally, they have to go through a second step where they are machine shuffled so that each deck is different.
Quote: pacomartin
I presume the manufacturer prints the deck out of proprietary sequence which is different than the sequential one shown in the uncut sheet of playing cards.
Not necessarily.
If you cut the sheet shown, and pick the cards up one column at a time, you'll get the standard new deck sequence, and will notice that pattern fairly quickly.
However, if you pick them up one row at a time, the cards do not look like they are in any particular sequence. This *could* be the - ahem - proprietary sequence they're talking about.
Quote: DJTeddyBearHowever, if you pick them up one row at a time, the cards do not look like they are in any particular sequence. This *could* be the - ahem - proprietary sequence they're talking about.
Anything is possible. For normal deck of cards, the first thing a dealer would check is if any cards were missing. Having them in consecutive order would minimize the time necessary to see if a card was missing or doubled.
But your comment does suggest a good test. Note that removing the jokers will alter the pattern somewhat, sometimes a row would have 7 cards and sometimes 8 cards.
Find a volunteer that and play poker or baccarat. Tell him before you begin that the cards are coming in a predetermined order. Play with fake money. See how long it will take him to figure out the pattern so that he can make reliable bets. Alter the number of players once in a while so that he has to make adjustments. It's my guess that even a good player will take multiple hands.
Since the Nugget offer was conditioned on settling the tort claims for assault, false imprisonment, etc. it seems that those with the highest dollar value tort claims decided to double down and some of those who were seized by security but never gambled and therefore have only their tort claims have also decided to double down.
9 defendants have decided to reject the settlement and therefore the Nugget has withdrawn the offer and its going to be Lawyers and Press Releases at twenty paces.
Over a dozen media links are available for different reports of this latest situation.
Perhaps GN should ask that salesman just how much money is being saved by outsourcing the window washing?
Quote: FleaStiffThe GN is really going to lose as far as public relations goes and it is obvious they are going to lose on the fundamental gambling question even if the appeal is successful.
"Ping Lin, of Atlantic City, Sheng Xia, of Forest Hills, N.Y., and Hua Shi, of Brooklyn, N.Y. — all represented by Dash Farrow of Philadelphia — allege in a countersuit that the casino treated them like “cheaters, swindlers and schemers.” Shi was taken into custody for more than eight hours without explanation, and denied food, water and an interpreter, according to the claim, which states the gamblers played by the rules." --acpress
Wow!!! Do "the boys" know about this? Where in the world is the DGE?
Quote: bigpete88... unless the attorneys are on a contingent fee.
Almost a certainty with them being ten dollar bettors. Anyone in Atlantic City who can afford the usual billing rates for lawyers in the area would probably not be at a ten dollar table and would not have to borrow money to plunk down five grand for one bet.
Quote: FleaStiffOkay, I guess this incident at the GN is a dead horse by now but I just want to add that we've mentioned several times the casino's cause of action against GameCo, the supplier of the "pre-shuffled deck that wasn't". Maybe, I found the wrong corporate entity but from what I can find out it seems the company supplying the cards, Gameco, of Missouri probably is not large enough to even carry a policy much less one that covers a claim this large. The GN may wind up with a judgment but what are they going to do, seize a few used obsolete video games and auction them off for a couple of hundred dollars?
I believe it's Gemaco out of Kansas City.
Quote: 1BBI believe it's Gemaco out of Kansas City.
You must mean the geniuses who produced this catalogue. Check out page 10 for their now world famous "gempak® certifi ed pre-shuffl ed multidecks."
I don't know how many they processed correctly, this one incident cost the GN 1.5MM so far.
