Casinos' Attitude of Skilled Winners of Tables Games

deleted

Quote: Jimbo

I think it should have been assumed--and particularly in the quote from the reported case with which I agree--that what is meant by "skill" is legal activity as opposed to illegal activity (such as marking cards, etc.).

You and I will simply have to respectfully agree to disagree on our different attitudes in how we approach to the game.

Sure, that's all right, we if all saw eye-to-eye on everything, there would be more log-rolling than debate.

I view counting, and dealer flashing as legal but against the house rules, a house offense.

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

You have to quit using the cinema/casino analogy. They have two totally different business models.

1. No, they are both for-profit entertainment businesses, - and have known and established income-generating mechanisms.
2. Do you expect the casinos to have all 0% HE games, and cinemas to have free snacks and admissions?
3. The analogy is irksome because it shows both businesses' known and established income-generating mechanisms.

I see it as: Violating the house procedures to nullify the house edge on a game, is akin to stiffing the house on its proper income generating mechanism. That is how the house makes its money, and is how it is supposed to make its money.

Quote: Paigowdan

I view counting...as legal but against the house rules, a house offense.

It is well established that counting is legal.

I do not believe that counting is unethical or a scam (to use your terms). For you to now describe it as a "house offense" may be semantics so as to avoid a less accusatory term such as "unethical." That's O.K. if you want--still does not change how I look at it. Again, I am being respectful in that we disagree.

I view counting as an activity that casinos do not like and which casinos are within their right to compete through adaption to the game such as less deck penetration, CSM, imposition of flat betting or other less favorable player rules.

And it is within the right of players not to play at those casinos where they view the rules as unfavorable.

deleted

Quote: Jimbo

It is well established that counting is legal.

I do not believe that counting is unethical or a scam (to use your terms). For you to now describe it as a "house offense" may be semantics so as to avoid a less accusatory term such as "unethical." That's O.K. if you want--still does not change how I look at it. Again, I am being respectful in that we disagree.

For me, I view the house edge of a table game of slot machine as a mandatory and immutable mechanism that must be in place, and work properly in a protected fashion, for a gaming operation to recieve its rightful income for offering the service. Everything from the floor supervision salary to the lights are paid in this way, to make it possible for you and me to walk in and be able to gamble.

In this way, it is the admissions charge that covers the operation and its costs, and allows it to exist as a business; trying to circumvent or evade it through methods and mechanisms that are disallowed is indeed a bit of a scam, in my opinion. Strangely, I am not the only one who feels this way, though many disagree.

The casino does not make its money by magic, it makes its money through the house edge, and it deserves to do so, unless of course someone believe it should be 0%, or player positive, - and let others pay for it (who may be viewed as either "honest to pay for it," or "stupid not to evade it." Again, both views are held.)

Games are purposely designed with house edges to it (here's an example of public postings of the games house edges and designs) - and in the support and upkeep for the casino operators that offer the game. Quite often (all too often in my view), games are either mis-designed with trap doors or other weaknesses that can be (and are) exploited - as a problem issue for both the casino operator and the game's distributor, who should be supported in their work. Here's a link on which common casino games are exploitable, and how they are exploitable. All of this is my work in both designing and reviewing casino table games. If the games are easily fraudable, they get fixed or are not distributed.

Games generally have house edges of 0.5% to 3% on main bets, and slightly more on high-payout side bets. They should hold between 8% to 33% of the drop, (and generally do), with lower edges and hold percentages on high volume/high drop games like Blackjack and Baccarat, and higher edges on lower volume games. Table statistics are reported monthly, with some months having "negative holds" (a euphemism for losses) on some games, where the operators are stuck for it, often due to team play and advantage play. While some delight in this, I do not like to see it.

Quote: Jimbo

I view counting as an activity that casinos do not like and which casinos are within their right to compete through adaption to the game such as less deck penetration, CSM, imposition of flat betting or other less favorable player rules.

Casinos do impose low deck penetration, CSMs, flat betting or even expulsion/tresspassing, - some of which are "after the fact game protection" - and they do not like the need to do this at times. Games like Pai Gow Poker, and many other poker-type games, are inherently robust in terms of game protection, though some of these games are vulnerable to hole carding (Three Card Poker) and/or Collusion. Shoe games can have count-based vulnerabilities, with both the main game and side bets on BJ vulnerable, and some side bets on Baccarat vulnerable.

Quote: Jimbo

And it is within the right of players not to play at those casinos where they view the rules as unfavorable.

Absolutely. Depending on the casino's volume, clientele type, etc., casinos have some discretionary leeway as to their tolerance level.

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

I agree they are both "for profit" but one has a price before entering, a "seat fee" if you will. Casinos have no admission aside from a very few places. And the way I and many others see it, how I bet my money and play my cards is none of your business nor does it affect you. If it does, change occupations.

Really?
1. Commercial Games designers control how the game and its procedures are spec'd to be played by its players, dealt by its dealers, along with input concerning betting limits and ratios. We describe in detail to the gaming authorities and casino operators how the game is both played and bet, and we do this to protect both the operator and the gaming public, to keep the games safe and fair for the players and operators. This is fully our business.
2. Within these limits, you may bet whatever you like, and set or hit your hand however you like, and we're fine with that.
3. On all games, even on public domain games, such as the base games on Blackjack, Baccarat, Roulette, and Craps, casino personnel enforce the rules of play, and may tell you what you can bet and how you may play your cards, - and that it involves them, too. Doesn't matter how you see it, if there's any problem, they may tell you.
4. I decide which jobs I apply for, and when and where I retire. Perhaps the only other people who may have any input into my career decisions are my family.

Quote: MonkeyMonkey

This strikes me as ridiculous. If someone doesn't understand some facet of the game there are any number of avenues of recourse. Ask a dealer. Ask a floor supervisor. Pick up one of the little pamphlets that explain the game. Use the internet. That some people will sit down at a game, put money on the table and then once cards are out confess that they don't know how to play the game can not be the fault of the house.



You might want to try some of those avenues of recourse I listed above.

I chose my example carefully. It has nothing to do with the game. It has to do with how the player is paid at the end of the game. And how casinos choose to deliberately use confusing wording.

So your advice is to consult A dealer for instruction on the proper way to play? IF you poll the membership if they have seen anyone given, or have been given terrible advice from a dealer themselves it may prompt you to reconsider this advice. I appreciate you giving it to me but i"m going to have to turn it down.

Casinos know most players don"t have the time or aptitude to figure out how to best play a game. So in good faith they add a bunch of confusing wordage amongst other things to help them out. :)

I don't think I will try any of the avenues you listed above they don't seem to be in my best interest.

Quote: rainman

they add a bunch of confusing wordage amongst other things to help them out. :)

I Don't believe casinos intentionally do that 99.99% of the time they want the rules and game understanding to be simple and easily understood.

DAN, If casinos don't want card counters why not just POST IT LOUD AND CLEAR ? (big signs) Why not just make it next to impossible?
What I think is Way more unethical and should be against the rules/law and possibly is under some obscure bate and switch or false advertising law. In reality they invite card counters and AP to come TRY to count they encourage and help perpetuate everything other then illegal cheating. they love you encourage you Until you are found to be to smart, to good or possibility up to much for them. Example: details are some what fuzzy. Years ago Terrible's Hotel & Casino had their grand opening or anniversary or something like that. They had 3 to 1 on Blackjack on some tables. other tables had first hand of a new shoe was a NO lose bet up to $500 I cant remember exactly when the free bet occurred but close enough it was Very Very good. Anyways The travel channel , A&E or learning channel were there doing a story on Blackjack possibility AP or something about good rules. everyone was there early and management could not be happier they encouraged everyone. Normally when something like this is about to start smart AP don't go asking pit bosses to many blatant questions, however since they were open and friendly and all seemed to know this was going to be a slaughter fest specific questions were asked inducing "is it on all tables?" . Once the promotion started they said 3 to 1 only was good on Shoes no big deal some people were prepared for this and got proper seating. Longer story short once filming stopped top Management showed up with the goons and got rude and hostile, stopped the promotion early, asked some people to cash out and even 86'ed a few people.

I don't know why we need to go through this every month or couple of months. Dan is an industry insider, who has made a living by this indusrty for quite some time and as such is extremely loyal to the industry. I have no problem with that. I am not sure why he needs to share periodically. I think we are all aware of that.

What is disturbing to me, as a card counter is his catorgorizing of card counters as 'evil'. At times when he gets particularly riled up, he stops just short of calling them criminal. Maybe didn't even stop short a couple times. lol When he is on his best behavior he uses code words, like "clean", designed to portray the card counter as 'dirty'.

I have no problem for this line of thinking as far as cheaters, and even hole carders, which while not technically cheating is certainly a grey area. Card counters do nothing illegal. And nothing 'dirty'. We think. As much as Dan would like to outlaw such behavior, THIS IS AMERICA. Thinking is allowed. And creativity is actually encouraged here.

I guess the most disturbing part of dan's thought process, is that while, he wants to lump card counters and thinking in with criminal activity, he turns a blind eye to the industries many 'dirty' little policies designed to prey on vulnerable people. Policies such as cashing paychecks, before a hard working blue collar guy can even get home to buy groceries and pay the rent. The casino wants every penny of that check, not just what should be the entertainment portion after living expenses are paid. They can't even risk him getting home with that money, so they intice him with some sort of free play bonus to stop at the casino FIRST. Same policies for folks cashing tax refund and other government checks. I mean what portion of the population gets tax refunds? It is disproportionately the poor, the low income workers, who because of their low income status, do not owe the money they have paid in based on the current tax laws, so the government gives it back, trying to improve their quality of life. But, no, the casino thinks they are entitled to that money and will come up with all sorts of policies designed to get that check cashed right at the casino. (please do me the honor of not hijacking this thought by responses about current tax laws and code....save that for another thread)

Continuing, senior citizens: The industry has preyed on them for years. Also encoraging cashing of social security checks with incentives right up until last month when the last of the paper social security checks went out. To those seniors that don't have bank acounts and now unable to receive paper checks, I am sure the industry is working on or has in place ways to extract the funds from the debit cards that have replaced paper checks for those with no bank accounts.

And finally...free drinks. It isn't enough that all these folks that the casino indusrty preys on, will make poor decisions on their own. The indusrty has to stack the deck even further by filling them with alcohol to insure that their decision making process is impaired.
Don't give me any crap about entertainment and such. Anyone who visits casinos with any kind of regularity sees over-served patrons far too frequently. They are NEVER a problem that the casino is doing anything about like cutting them off, until of course they are out of money.

So, nothing dirty about these policies of the great and mighty casino industry. But thinking...yes that's dirty. Lock those bas*ards up!

Shame on you Dan. Your views on these topics were the first case of your hypocracy, justifying the bad behavior of the hand that feeds you. But now your hypocracy has gone even further as you have engaged in the very practices you rail about when it benefitted you. Oh, but that's ok. "I was drinking". "I didn't know what I was doing". "It was like I was watching someone else". "I couldn't beleive what I was doing". Bulls*it. You engaged in the very activity that you rail against when you had the chance to benefit by it and that's the ultimate hypocracy. Playing it off as a joke, or fun is just nonsense. You have proved yourself a hypocrat big time on several fronts associated with your views.

Quote: AxelWolf

I Don't believe casinos intentionally do that 99.99% of the time they want the rules and game understanding to be simple and easily understood.

DAN, If casinos don't want card counters why not just POST IT LOUD AND CLEAR ? (big signs) Why not just make it next to impossible?

Casinos do not post signs regarding ANYTHING of that nature: No signs are posted on card-counting, nor marking cards, or on hole carding, on past posting, or what have you. They also do not post signs about not sticking light-wands or coat hangers into slot machines, or using counterfeit money; all sorts of things are tried in casinos regardless or not of signs. There are no signs in restaurants about "not being a walk-out," etc. NO business does this, aside from some signs at dollar stores about "shoplifters will be prosecuted."
People who come to play straight up, and wouldn't AP, don't need signs, and those who would do such things don't need them either, and would pay heed to them. What would be the point of the signs and how effective would they be? All who know card counting well know the position on it, and also know why their camoflage and concealment plays are done: to conceal what they're doing precisely because it is disallowed, not because it is an endorsed practice.

Quote: Axelwolf

What I think is Way more unethical and should be against the rules/law and possibly is under some obscure bate and switch or false advertising law. In reality they invite card counters and AP to come TRY to count they encourage and help perpetuate everything other then illegal cheating. they love you encourage you Until you are found to be to smart, to good or possibility up to much for them. Example: details are some what fuzzy. Years ago Terrible's Hotel & Casino had their grand opening or anniversary or something like that. They had 3 to 1 on Blackjack on some tables. other tables had first hand of a new shoe was a NO lose bet up to $500 I cant remember exactly when the free bet occurred but close enough it was Very Very good. Anyways The travel channel , A&E or learning channel were there doing a story on Blackjack possibility AP or something about good rules. everyone was there early and management could not be happier they encouraged everyone. Normally when something like this is about to start smart AP don't go asking pit bosses to many blatant questions, however since they were open and friendly and all seemed to know this was going to be a slaughter fest specific questions were asked inducing "is it on all tables?" Once the promotion started they said 3 to 1 only was good on Shoes no big deal some people were prepared for this and got proper seating. Longer story short once filming stopped top Management showed up with the goons and got rude and hostile, stopped the promotion early, asked some people to cash out and even 86'ed a few people.

And these people were professional table games management and marketing people - and they are human. They, as we all, can be fail-able and incompetent and miss the mark at times with the very best of intentions. No one plans for a fiasco, but they do materialize whenever we fail to properly and thoroughly plan for a successful result, taking great care to spot ALL the "unknown unknowns." I helped plan a promotion a while ago (something like three in a row of 20 hands [first two cards] wins a set amount, something like $20, not a super easy thing to win even with a high count), and we calculated and knew how much the promotion would cost for x number of tables jammed up for the y hours of the promotion going into it. It worked well because we knew what the risk and the costs were going in, and we didn't sweat the money and 86 a bunch of people to kill the good will generated by the promotion. There can be people with fine intentions who can whip up an eager "I've got it!!! All backjacks pay 5:1, - and every 19 or better hand, hit or first two, is a winner!" kind of thing and have it crash and kill us if allowed to happen. And it happens. Some promo's can hemorrhage us, and other promo's or new offerings can bomb. Remember Guaranteed Play Slots? Millions of dollars were behind that. Casino execs can be very human.

And as I have said earlier, I am against the "bait & switch" card counter lures, which can turn into a "you'll either hang yourself - or we'll 86 you!" kind of thing in the end.

Quote: kewlj

I don't know why we need to go through this every month or couple of months. Dan is an industry insider, who has made a living by this indusrty for quite some time and as such is extremely loyal to the industry. I have no problem with that. I am not sure why he needs to share periodically. I think we are all aware of that.

What is disturbing to me, as a card counter is his catorgorizing of card counters as 'evil'. At times when he gets particularly riled up, he stops just short of calling them criminal. Maybe didn't even stop short a couple times. lol When he is on his best behavior he uses code words, like "clean", designed to portray the card counter as 'dirty'.

So much is spent on it, and a LOT of new games that otherwise would have been good are killed off by AP play or teams to great loss because of a lack of design consideration on GP.
We cannot offer games with a game protection problem on a "gentleman's agreement" basis, nor should we have a "bait and switch" policy on fraudible games

Quote: kewlj

I have no problem for this line of thinking as far as cheaters, and even hole carders, which while not technically cheating is certainly a grey area. Card counters do nothing illegal.

Legal/illegal is not the issue. Good and equitable for players and casinos alike is a goal. And bait & switch policy may be a questionable action.

Quote: kewlj

And nothing 'dirty'. We think.

Some things are disallowed or "dirty" play. And sometimes we think "What was I thinking?" when we thought that we had thought, on both sides of the table. In the end, it is our actions that are the issue, not thinking. You don't get backed off for thinking. Ever.

Quote: kewlj

As much as Dan would like to outlaw such behavior, THIS IS AMERICA. Thinking is allowed. And creativity is actually encouraged here.

Yes, this is all good.
Thinking isn't the issue! But the Concrete Actions stemming from our 'thinking' is the issue, and sometimes some actions stemming from our fantastic thinking are problematical, improper, and disallowed. This is different. People don't get backed off from thinking about doing something, they get backed off from actually doing something, whether or not it looked like a good idea. Spreading 10x isn't a thought, it's an action detectable by floor supervision and surveillance. Thinking about spreading 10x while flat betting is just thinking about it.

Quote: kewlj

I guess the most disturbing part of dan's thought process, is that while, he wants to lump card counters and thinking in with criminal activity, he turns a blind eye to the industries many 'dirty' little policies designed to prey on vulnerable players. Policies such as cashing paychecks, before a hard working blue collar guy can even get home to buy groceries and pay the rent. The casino wants every penny of that check, not just what should be the entertainment portion after living expenses are paid. They can't even risk him getting home with that money, so they intice him with some sort of free play bonus to stop at the casino FIRST. Same policies for folks cashing tax refund and other government checks. I mean what portion of the population gets tax refunds? It is disproportionately the poor, the low income workers, who because of their low income status, do not owe the money they have paid in based on the current tax laws, so the government gives it back, trying to improve their quality of life. But, no, the casino thinks they are entitled to that maney and will come up with all sorts of policies designed to get that check cashed right at the casino. (please do me the honor of not hijacking this though by responses about current tax laws and code....save that for another thread)

This is not about criminal activity, it is about playing in compliance with a casino's table game rules.
Anyone can do what he wants with his paycheck. All are free to cash checks anywhere they can be cashed. I've cashed paychecks at casinos and went home, and stayed at other times, along with depositing them in the bank. You or anyone can propose a state law proposition on this.

Quote: kewlj

Continuing, senior citizens: The industry has preyed on them for years. Also encoraging cashing of social security checks with incentives right up until last month when the last of the papoer social security checks went out. To those seniors that don't have bank acounts and now unable to receive paper checks, I am sure the industry is working on or has in place ways to extract the funds from the debit cards that have replaced paper checks for those with no bank accounts.

I have never seen this as an issue.

Quote: kewlj

And finally...free drinks. It isn't enough that all these folks that the casino indusrty preys on, will make poor decisions on their own. The indusrty has to stack the deck even further by filling them with alcohol to insure that their decision making process is impaired.
Don't give me any crap about entertainment and such. Anyone who visits casinos with any kind of regularity sees over-served patrons far too frequently. They are NEVER a problem that the casino is doing anything about like cutting them off, until of course they are out of money.

Beverage service is a customer courtesy, nothing diabolical with it, it is expected in an entertainment venue such as a casino.
1. If the drinks are free, it's a conspiracy to fleece.
2. If the drinks cost a fee, then the casinos are cheap bastards for making them pay - for what should be a complimentary beverage service!
3. If there is no liquor beverage service, then what kind of a cheap ass casino is this, giving us this horrible inconvenience as they can't pay to stock booze for the players who may want it!
And there is no other scenario.
I believe that no matter what a casino operator does on this, they're the ones being called evil, if we are going to take a look at who is calling who evil.

Quote: kewlj

Shame on you Dan. Your views on these topics were the first case of your hypocracy, justifying the bad behavior of the hand that feeds you. But now your hypocracy has gone even further as you have engaged in the very practices you rail about when it benefitted you. Oh, but that's ok. "I was drinking". "I didn't know what I was doing". "It was like I was watching someone else". "I couldn't beleive what I was doing". Bulls*it. You engaged in the very activity that you rail against when you had the chance to benefit by it and that's the ultimate hypocracy. Playing it off as a joke, or fun is just nonsense. You have proved yourself a hypocrat big time on several fronts associated with your views.

1. My views are reasonable. Consider the house rules.
2. I just found out how impossible it is to NOT follow the count once you CAN follow the count; I was saying the skill is permanent - very much like riding a bike, and really doesn't turn off.

deleted

Do you find the action enjoyable?

Dan, I don't have any issue with the idea that counting will reduce the HE and therefore casinos want to/should try to prevent it. However, the idea that playing a game skillfully is somehow unethical is something I cannot rationalize. There was a time before basic strategy. Playing BL using any of the strategies of the day would have resulted in higher HE than what we enjoy today by using BS. Was it unethical to try to figure out the best set of rules to use to play a given hand? I don't see how counting is not an extension of that. Is it unethical to study a batter's weakness so that it can be exploited during a game? Of course not, because it is not against the rules. Again, no argument with the fact that it is affecting the business in a way that it was not designed to, but it's just the categorizing skillful play as unethical where I feel you are missing the mark.

deleted

kewlj

Let me be the first one to say great post! The corporations that run the casinos , they don't think of doing anything they can to get the money out of everyones pocket that walks through their doors, nothing is beyond them. Gambling is not entertainment like they would want you to believe. They set the games up in their favor and if you can beat them they will run you out of there doors as fast as they can.

The people that come into these casinos one or two times a year don't see anything wrong with them, but the ones that live in a city like Vegas gets to see people that will lose everything they worked for their whole life, because they don't know when to stop.

The first time I went to AC I wanted to puke, watching all the old retired players that they were busing in from NY City. Here I though that Vegas was bad but there was no comparison between the two of them. Casinos never look at you when you are losing, but if you get lucky they will run you off as fast as they can, using anything they can to get you out of their casino, and here all this time I thought that both the casinos and the players were gambling, far from the truth. The only ones that are gambling is the suckers they get to try their luck!

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

Sleep is enjoyable but that isn't entertainment either. I do what I do to make money. If I want to play a losing game, I'll do it at home for free.

With all due respect, but if your goal is to earn money, why not focus on your day job, or even start a second "after hours" for-profit business?

Casino gambling is a rough way to try to make some money.

deleted

I'm trying to envision casino offerings 10 years from now, 20 years from now, and 50 years from now.
There are certain things I believe now:
1. Counting - right now - is NOT as viable as it was 30 years ago, 20 years ago, and even 5 years ago. Developments from 6:5 BJ, electronic tables, CSMs, 2 to 1 Blackjack are coming into the casinos, and as an AP choice, it is no longer the top. As a career or business choice it is questionable. As an entertainment choice, counting is also questionable; it is work. Some can do it, not many. Fleecing fraudable games is not my career choice, designing and ensuring non-fraudable games is.
2. Commercial game designers and distributors are becoming more aware of game protection. New games that are AP-able, or need special surveillance and floor supervision babysitting them in order not to dump, are a problem for operators and distributors who wish to offer fraudable games.
3. "Reactive" or "after the fact" game protection (flat betting, 86-ing, back offs) are fraught with losses, bad PR for the casino, lawsuits, and the like. If a game is AP-able, then babysitting a game just to make a call on an AP player after the act that resulted in a loss was already done, is an inefficient and reactive posture, not a pro-active posture, in game protection.

Quote: gts4ever

Dan, I don't have any issue with the idea that counting will reduce the HE and therefore casinos want to/should try to prevent it. However, the idea that playing a game skillfully is somehow unethical is something I cannot rationalize.

Skills, thinking, and Intelligence were discussed. It isn't being skillful or intelligent or "a thinking player," it is a question of ACTIONS that are carried out on the table that either fall inside or outside of the allowable procedures and parameters of a casino house. This is regardless of the skills, intelligence or "thinking" that got you there to the point of an action that was flagged by the pit boss and casino as unacceptable. The fact that someone was thinking about doing it, and thought it was intelligent to do, doesn't always make it intelligent, and is immaterial when an out-of-bounds action is flagged as unacceptable.

Quote: gts4ever

There was a time before basic strategy. Playing BL using any of the strategies of the day would have resulted in higher HE than what we enjoy today by using BS. Was it unethical to try to figure out the best set of rules to use to play a given hand?

No. This is because perfect Basic Strategy can never get BJ games below it's nominal and required house edge to not operate profitably. Card Counting can, and even bring it to positive player EV/house loss EV. For that matter, perfect strategy play on other games such as PGP cannot get it below 2.4% HE, and Perfect strategy on UTH cannot get it below 2.185% of the ANTE bet.

Quote: gts4ever

I don't see how counting is not an extension of that.

I know, not at all meaning to be snide. It is hard to see. Counting, as a deliberate, separate, and detectable procedure to defeat a Blackjack game, is not an extention of adhering to Basic Strategy alone, as the house edge is NOT jeopardized by BS, - but is with CC. The house knows that a game's house edge pays the bills, and using disallowed procedures to expressly, - with intent and purpose to defeat the house edge and turn a BJ table into a personal ATM is unnacceptable and disallowed by the casino. They - BS and card counting - in use are two very different procedures: one acceptable, and one disallowed.

Quote: gts4ever

Is it unethical to study a batter's weakness so that it can be exploited during a game? Of course not, because it is not against the rules. Again, no argument with the fact that it is affecting the business in a way that it was not designed to, but it's just the categorizing skillful play as unethical where I feel you are missing the mark.

You are supposed to and expected to study a batter's weaknesses if you're a pitcher, just as you are fully expected to study opponent tells and weaknesses in play styles in poker. However, in poker, the room takes a rake as the house edge percentage regardless of who wins the pot; your only opponents are of non-casino banked money. Now if you stiffed the casino on the rake, THEN there'd be a problem. In baseball, studying an opposing batter's weaknesses is not a business issue for the stadium, and a positive business practice for your ball club.

Quote: superrick

...and here all this time I thought that both the casinos and the players were gambling, far from the truth. The only ones that are gambling is the suckers they get to try their luck!

By Jove, I think he's got it!

If you ever thought that, you were wrong. A casino's not there to gamble and never has been. It's there to facilitate gambling for money. The house handles the money and divvies it up between the winners and the losers, but their share doesn't go on the line. This is explicit in poker, bingo, sports and race book, type II slots, and chemin de fer. More often instead they spread out the games, letting overwhelming combined odds guarantee their cut rather than taking it directly, but the arrangement is still the same - the lucky players' winnings come from others' losses, and the house gets its cut. But either way, it's you doing the gambling, not them.

Interesting point 24 Bingo brings up: the casino facilitates gambling for money. True.
In all cases where there is only player-banked action and the house takes a cut, is not gambling: race book, sports books, poker rooms, and player-funded progressives.
In the table games pit, the casino IS putting it's money directly up against the players, and assumes a larger volume and distribution to smooth out individual table variances (most tables win, some lose), and comes close to what the house edge would indicate in their hold.

A Five-table gambling hall of house banked games (BJ, PGP, Roulette, craps) takes a risk, - pit money IS on the line - and they see some losing months, hopefully balanced by other operations. High Stakes BJ players like Don Johnson gave some black eyes. The larger the table games pit, the safer it is.

Good way to look at it: most casino operations are not gambling, and the table games pit is "heavily blunted" gambling protected by volume.

Quote: Paigowdan

Good way to look at it: most casino operations are not gambling.

I keep saying this over and over: Thats why banks give
casinos the big loans. Casinos aren't gambling. If they
can keep people coming thru the door, its a sure thing. Thats
why Steve Wynn says his only job is getting new customers,
the rest is already set in place.

Quote: Paigowdan

A Five-table gambling hall of house banked games (BJ, PGP, Roulette, craps) takes a risk, - pit money IS on the line - and they see some losing months, hopefully balanced by other operations. High Stakes BJ players like Don Johnson gave some black eyes. The larger the table games pit, the safer it is.

Good way to look at it: most casino operations are not gambling, and the table games pit is "heavily blunted" gambling protected by volume.

By that logic, they're gambling in their other operations as well. Money is always on the line - too little action and it's a loser. All ventures have risk; it only becomes gambling when the risk is central to the venture, and for that to be the case it would have to be greater than it should be for a cautious manager.

Dan or anyone else who works for casinos. If casinos are so worried about card counters, why not just use continuous shuffling machines at the blackjack tables. That would solve the problem once and for all.

deleted

If the regular players are not card counters, why would they care? If they are card counters then the casino does not want their business anyway. I play and prefer the regular BJ game, but since I really don't bother counting cards(I might observe a rash of high or low cards coming out), it doesn't really bother me.

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

Because they alienate a lot of the regular players also and they'd lose even more money.

And they're wicked expensive.

Although I tentatively disagree with "lose even more money". Time is such an unbelievably huge factor and the money generated by time saved, all other things being equal, far eclipses that of the cost of the machine.

How much CSMs deter gamers is the variable. In my joint, CSMs seem inarguably positive for cash flow. Other places may differ.

Quote: hook3670

If the regular players are not card counters, why would they care? If they are card counters then the casino does not want their business anyway. I play and prefer the regular BJ game, but since I really don't bother counting cards(I might observe a rash of high or low cards coming out), it doesn't really bother me.

Mostly this is done: reasonably deep penetration to avoid the expense of more frequent shuffle-ups, and for the convenience of more hands per hour, with monitoring the tables for wide bet spread action.

Most players are regular players, but not all.

I have to say, in all my years of gambling I have never once had casino management imply that my play was not welcome....

Quote: 24Bingo

By Jove, I think he's got it!

If you ever thought that, you were wrong. A casino's not there to gamble and never has been. It's there to facilitate gambling for money. The house handles the money and divvies it up between the winners and the losers, but their share doesn't go on the line. This is explicit in poker, bingo, sports and race book, type II slots, and chemin de fer. More often instead they spread out the games, letting overwhelming combined odds guarantee their cut rather than taking it directly, but the arrangement is still the same - the lucky players' winnings come from others' losses, and the house gets its cut. But either way, it's you doing the gambling, not them.

If you look purely at the income from games, it's not much of a gamble. But there is exposure on a craps table from a lucky player like Archie Karas.

However, from the whole, each and every casino operation on the whole gambles! This is clearly evidenced by the fact that the long term trends of casino stocks that are publicly have market caps that go up, AND they go down.

There are lot of things that cost the casino money to operate besides losing to a lucky player.

And lucky gamblers can and do negatively affect the bottom line to the extent that it can hurt the longer term efficacy of the business.

So the house is in fact gambling too if you pull up to a high enough perspective to realize there are lots of working parts to running a casino. Table game revenue and even slot machine revenue, are just a slice of a bigger pie. Just because they are rarely if ever negative when viewed on a 12-month timeline doesn't mean the ups and downs don't affect the risks of the business.

Quote: Mosca

I have to say, in all my years of gambling I have never once had casino management imply that my play was not welcome....

I'm so embarrassed for you, it must have been hard
to admit publicly..

Quote:

24Bingo
By Jove, I think he's got it!

If you ever thought that, you were wrong. A casino's not there to gamble and never has been. It's there to facilitate gambling for money. The house handles the money and divvies it up between the winners and the losers, but their share doesn't go on the line. This is explicit in poker, bingo, sports and race book, type II slots, and chemin de fer. More often instead they spread out the games, letting overwhelming combined odds guarantee their cut rather than taking it directly, but the arrangement is still the same - the lucky players' winnings come from others' losses, and the house gets its cut. But either way, it's you doing the gambling, not them.

I got it before I ever set foot in a casino, the problem is most players never will get it! Casinos are a money making machine, that you get nothing for your money, if anybody here thinks that your getting entrainment when you are losing your money , I feel for you but just can't reach you, we need players like you to keep the doors open.

One of the first things I did when I moved to Vegas was to go out and buy a slot machine, so my wife could see that you couldn't beat them. It worked like a charm, she doesn't go into the casinos. She knows that she would just be throwing her money away, if she played them!

Most players think its fun to lose their money, they will tell you that's its entertainment and when they come to Vegas for a weekend they have so much to lose. They never say that they are going to win, so much money and then quit. Most never even tried to figure out the games they are going to play beforehand,.. they will take the words of a dealer to tell them how to play the game. You just got to love it when they are making all those two way bets, that they don't even know why they are getting paid. I know the dealers love the suckers that they get to make that bet!

If you are going to gamble do some reading before you make your first bet. Then don't just read one book, find one or two more that have different view points on how the games are played! On a craps table the first thing you need to learn, is where a dealer is placing your bets! Don't take anything for granted, practice your betting at home, you can find plenty of free sites, that you can play free games on, you don't have to bet any of your money!

The only reason there are casinos is so they can take your money, nobody on the other side of that table is your friend, they will talk about you as soon as you walk away from the table if there is nobody around that can hear them.

Quote: superrick

Most never even tried to figure out the games they are going to play beforehand,.

Watch people play roulette and you'll often see
people betting all three dozens or columns at
the same time are delighted when they win on
every spin. The dealer never says a word and I
don't wise up chumps anymore.

Quote: EvenBob

I'm so embarrassed for you, it must have been hard
to admit publicly..

Where's that high-five emoti when you need it?

Dan,

If I track the cards while a hand of Rubber Bridge is being played for money, am I cheating? If I remember what cards are discarded while playing Gin Rummy for money, am I cheating?

Then why would I be cheating if I tracked the count at blackjack?

Quote: Mosca

Dan,

If I track the cards while a hand of Rubber Bridge is being played for money, am I cheating? If I remember what cards are discarded while playing Gin Rummy for money, am I cheating?

No, not all all. In Bridge - which is a different game than Casino Blackjack - you're supposed to track discards. I certainly do so when I play Bridge for money (at 10c - $1 a point). Furthermore in bridge, you are not playing a casino banked game, you're playing a player banked game, which is a quite different business scenario for a money game.

Quote: Mosca

Then why would I be cheating if I tracked the count at blackjack?

All right.....
Firstly, this is because in the history of Casino blackjack. The game came into wide Casino use with the belief that it was unfraudable outside of marked cards, and this was generally believed to be the case until the 1960's or so.
When Edward O. Thorpe studied the game, he discovered a heretofore unknown "trap door" in the game that was never anticipated, - via the use of spreading your betting amounts by tracking this discards (and the counts) of the high cards and the low cards. But by then, since the game was entrenced, in order to keep Casino blackjack as a viable product for the vast majority of [non-counting Basic Strategy] players, they had to impliment policies of barring the "counting" or "AP" players, - in order to be able to offer the game profitably to non-counting, non-AP players. This is why counters are flat-betted and even backed off or 86-ed. In Blackjack, you're forbidden to track cards to make betting spread actions that parallel the count. This is the first thing.

Secondly, the required house edge of blackjack is not breached by perfect strategy play, which is needed by the casino to offer the game. However, the house edge is indeed breached, and even reversed to the player's advantage, when counting and bet adjustment are combined. Card counting is a separate, deliberate, and detectable AP procedure, and is distinct from pure basic strategy play without performing bet spreading that parallels the count.

Since card counting is both a separate and deliberate procedure from basic strategy, and it destroys the house edge that the casino depends on to be profitable and offer the game, it is restricted, so the game is offered to you on condition that you don't count down the game.

Quote: Paigowdan

When Edward O. Thorpe studied the game, he discovered a heretofore unknown "trap door" .

Thorp did not discover card counting! It was around for decades
before he was ever interested in it. He interviewed lots of counters
for his book and some of them begged him not to write it. All Thorp
did was prove the math with a computer, and put it in a book.

Quote: EvenBob

Thorp did not discover card counting! It was around for decades
before he was ever interested in it. He interviewed lots of counters
for his book and some of them begged him not to write it. All Thorp
did was prove the math with a computer, and put it in a book.

Sure, maybe so, probably so. Counters would not have wanted Ed Thorpe to let the cat out of the bag.

But Ed Thorpe not only studied counting, he codified it, he documented it, he published his results, and for use by the masses.

The rest is HISTORY.

Quote: Paigowdan

Sure, maybe so, probably so. Counters would not have wanted Ed Thorpe to let the cat out of the bag.
.

There was a famous local Vegas counter who predicted
Thorp would ruin BJ forever within 5 years of publishing
the book and he was right. He retired from the game
when the book came out.

Quote: Paigowdan

No, not all all. In Bridge - which is a different game than Casino Blackjack - you're supposed to track discards. I certainly do so when I play Bridge for money (at 10c - $1 a point). Furthermore in bridge, you are not playing a casino banked game, you're playing a player banked game, which is a quite different business scenario for a money game.



All right.....
Firstly, this is because in the history of Casino blackjack. The game came into wide Casino use with the belief that it was unfraudable outside of marked cards, and this was generally believed to be the case until the 1960's or so.
When Edward O. Thorpe studied the game, he discovered a heretofore unknown "trap door" in the game that was never anticipated, - via the use of spreading your betting amounts by tracking this discards (and the counts) of the high cards and the low cards. But by then, since the game was entrenced, in order to keep Casino blackjack as a viable product for the vast majority of [non-counting Basic Strategy] players, they had to impliment policies of barring the "counting" or "AP" players, - in order to be able to offer the game profitably to non-counting, non-AP players. This is why counters are flat-betted and even backed off or 86-ed. In Blackjack, you're forbidden to track cards to make betting spread actions that parallel the count. This is the first thing.

Secondly, the required house edge of blackjack is not breached by perfect strategy play, which is needed by the casino to offer the game. However, the house edge is indeed breached, and even reversed to the player's advantage, when counting and bet adjustment are combined. Card counting is a separate, deliberate, and detectable AP procedure, and is distinct from pure basic strategy play without performing bet spreading that parallels the count.

Since card counting is both a separate and deliberate procedure from basic strategy, and it destroys the house edge that the casino depends on to be profitable and offer the game, it is restricted, so the game is offered to you on condition that you don't count down the game.

I understand your point of view. I think it has found its social equilibrium in that area where it is not cheating, but also not allowed. If it were cheating, it would be punishable, but it is not; it is simply not allowed. It is a third thing, legal, but not part of the rules. Or you could say that it is part of the rules in that if a player is suspected of counting, he is invited to try one of the other games... all legally. The player is allowed to attempt counting, and the casino is allowed to stop it.

But if it were cheating, it would be legally actionable, and it is not. Therefore it is not cheating.

deleted

If there was a sign on the table that said. "Players decisions must be based on the point value of the player's and dealer's hand only" I think Dan would have a lot more supporters.

Also Dan, what are your thoughts on the Wizard? Does the fact that he hosts a website where side bets are sought out, analyzed and strategies discussed in order to be able to flip the intended HE over in the player's favor make him a cheater, con artist, and general unethical human being?

Quote: gts4ever

If there was a sign on the table that said. "Players decisions must be based on the point value of the player's and dealer's hand only" I think Dan would have a lot more supporters.

True. I "see" the sign there. Anyone using camouflage or concealment plays sees the sign there. Casinos are not the most forthcoming group of executives when it comes to open discussions on their game protection protocols with the gambling public because it is both very unseemly and puts in jeopardy game protection methods. A sign would be redundant because it is so widely known, and assumed by all who would know about this.
But...any table with a CSM is pretty much has this sign.

Quote: gts4ever

Also Dan, what are your thoughts on the Wizard? Does the fact that he hosts a website where side bets are sought out, analyzed and strategies discussed in order to be able to flip the intended HE over in the player's favor make him a cheater, con artist, and general unethical human being?

I think Mike Shackleford is great; what he has done is given the world full access to all game odds, procedures and mechanisms on games to all sides through his main Gaming industry site, as well as discussion and debate on it all at this forum, and in the most complete and comprehensive fashion possible. In his defense, he puts ALL the information on gaming out there in a reasonably neutral and unbiased manner, without excess "advocacy of the nefarious" for both sides and all sides, aside from his occasional selection of which side in the debate is a "white hat" and a "black hat." Occasional sticking points or friction points with me was when he did get into some "excessively useful technical detail" on hole-carding three card poker, and another was when he published a paper by the esteemed Eliot Jacobson on counting methods for a commercially available Baccarat side bet, which the product's fine distributor had to play a bit of catch-up on, and understandably felt a bit side-swiped by. In my book it is okay to contact a distributor here before release of a potential "Yikes" with a "Uhm, listen, I found something of interest here...." call to a distributor. Really, it is actually more about feelings and POV and feeling chagrined because game protection errors are going to be discovered sooner rather than later, and yeah, Mr. Game designer really should have thought about that area when the game was up on the drawing board. [hint: Call CRM today!]

I'm confused.

The basic strategy charts that are published are based on the mathematically best plays based on the available cards on a fresh shoe.

Why is it frowned upon if I adjust the basic strategy charts based on the effects of card removal? Call it advanced strategy? And adjust my bet accordingly.

The casino has offered me rules under the following conditions: n decks, bets between x and y, come and go whenever I want. There is no rule that says, if you know you have a mathematical edge on the house greater than basic strategy, then you must flat bet.

The game of blackjack is a game of skill. The casino operator is fine with NOT imparting the best way to play to the player. Therefore, why is it wrong to use your head and your bankroll to get to a point of advantage?

Quote: boymimbo

I'm confused.

It isn't hard. Give it a minute....hear it out.

Quote: boymimbo

The basic strategy charts that are published are based on the mathematically best plays based on the available cards on a fresh shoe.

Yes - and from a static point of view of a fresh shoe, - as in a fresh "off the top" deal. Think: "First deal of a fresh shoe: Count is 0."
When you are tracking the count, and are well into the shoe, you are no longer always using this 'fresh shoe' strategy, or first bet amount size, are you? This is the point. You have deviated from this 'fresh shoe first deal' basic strategy, and deviated from your first bet amount.

So these adjustments are now based on an adjusted "deck compositional point of view" that is now deep in the shoe, and it had deviated a long way from the 'fresh shoe' composition you started with. All this was gleaned by calculating the count by a tracking a huge number of discards throught the shoe, and...making bet size adjustment or strategy changes based on the running count, - and NOT on the 'fresh shoe'/infinite deck strategy and first bet amount.

Quote: boymimbo

Why is it frowned upon if I adjust the basic strategy charts based on the effects of card removal? Call it advanced strategy? And adjust my bet accordingly.

Because it is not basic strategy, it is card counting procedures being implimented based on the effects of card removal ("eor"). If the adjustments to basic strategy and bet amount size follow the running count, it is not only using deliberate and tangible card counting procedures that are disallowed, but that they are detectable, noticeable by floor supervision and surveillance.

Quote: boymimbo

The casino has offered me rules under the following conditions: n decks, bets between x and y, come and go whenever I want. There is no rule that says, if you know you have a mathematical edge on the house greater than basic strategy, then you must flat bet.

Oh yes there is such a rule, and it is implemented often enough.
This is why card counters at a table are often told: "Sir, all your subsequent bets on this deal WILL be the same size as your FIRST bet. Or leave." This happens and has happened. Why want this scenario? [Answer: for the money.]

Quote: boymimbo

The game of blackjack is a game of skill. The casino operator is fine with NOT imparting the best way to play to the player. Therefore, why is it wrong to use your head and your bankroll to get to a point of advantage?

1. It IS a game of skill. The skills are flat 'fresh deck' Basic Strategy - which is allowed, and skills of making modifications to your bet amount (or "the unit spread based on the count"), or variations of Basic Strategy based on the count ("Count Dependent Variations to Basic Strategy") - which are disallowed.
2. Best way in who's point of view? It is not wrong to think, but it may be wrong to implement certain concrete actions or procedures from this thinking, to achieve some disallowed advantages on a live money casino game.

Let me just give one variation of "advanced strategy" in a different area: I once took a taxi from the McCarran airport arrival gate to the Wild Wild West casino on Tropicana Ave (This was eight years ago), and I asked the cab driver to "use basic strategy" and exit the airport from the Tropicana & Swenson exit, and make a left to get there, less than a mile. Nice and short, with a lower fare. But then, the cab driver whipped out some advanced strategy on my ass, and he took I-215 to I-15, and exited on Las Vegas Blvd and I paid three times the fare. Why want this scenario? [Answer: for the money.] (see: Audit Vegas cabbies.) Everyone AP's in this town. Damn cabbies doing AP moves now.....

deleted

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

Plain and simple, casinos hate winners. I'll never buy into the bullsh!t that they do.

Minor correction: they hate people who take their money by winning.

You can win a bet against another player on the same table (EG: in craps) and the casino couldn't care less!!!

I made $250 today and the casino was happy to pay me because they took a don'ts money who had much more bet against me than what they had to pay me.

Casinos are fools to sweat the money, and they really don't hate clean winners, not the smart ones, anyway.

You either trust the math, or you trust superstition.

deleted