 | Bovada is the only Internet casino endorsed by the Wizard. Here are my reasons why and my promise of support. |
Is the Casino Responsible...
| February 9th, 2012 at 4:08:13 PM permalink | |
| Paigowdan Member since: Apr 28, 2010 Threads: 54 Posts: 2115 |
Dealers and table supervisors don't spew their bullshit to you because they might not want to talk to you. Do you think they say, "Oh look, another gambler! I have never seen one before, I must chat him up to listen to the fascinating things he may have to say!! - Oh, look, there's BBVK, he seems like a great guy!!" The ones drinking and jabbering are the ones on the players' side of the table. Granted, we greet people, and assume they're decent and chattable unless proven otherwise, but we're not particularly fascinated by, or interested in gamblers, unless we know by experience that they're decent and well-behaved, - or if Brad Pitt strolls in with Angelina Jolie... As for the house edge, that's no different than any cost of "pay to play" anywhere for any recreation or action. This is also a known aspect of casino gambling, and if you have a problem with it, I suggest you spend more time at a bookstore or movie house. Last night I took a wedding party of eight to Battista's Italian restaurant, and it was $400. We were four dice dealers with our wives (one a blushing bride), and we were the most quiet and non-drinking ones in the place. This is because we know how people can look when drinking and acting at a table.
So does safe-cracking, or doing a good job at corporate embezzlement. Anything and EVERYTHING that may generate income takes work, without regard to its ethics. The fact money is involved and it may be lucrative does not make particular "work" ethical on that basis alone, now does it? Gambling doesn't build character, it reveals..no character. But a lot of characters. |
| February 9th, 2012 at 5:05:07 PM permalink | |
| bbvk05 Member since: Jan 12, 2011 Threads: 2 Posts: 82 | "Card counting takes work"
You are just arguing against yourself. You are the one that said the casino's edge is fine because they work for it. |
| February 9th, 2012 at 5:11:53 PM permalink | |
| bbvk05 Member since: Jan 12, 2011 Threads: 2 Posts: 82 |
I don't agree that everybody knows that casinos generally will ban people for card counting. Significant numbers of people don't even know what it is. Also, it isn't unethical until you are actually, not constructively (your method), on notice that the casino doesn't want you there if you are card counting. That isn't something I agree to when I walk into a casino. Efforts to impose that on me can't be effectual until I am actually notified. I am glad that you are at least limiting your insipidly stupid ethical system to varying bet sizes. Since I can achieve an advantage in card craps purely by counting, flat betting and choosing to bet odds or not bet odds (the same level of decision as not hitting on 555A), then you agree that this advantage play is ethical? |
| February 9th, 2012 at 5:12:57 PM permalink | |
| Paigowdan Member since: Apr 28, 2010 Threads: 54 Posts: 2115 |
No - what I said was that the house edge is expected and reasonable to be there - as no one works for free, and all must "pay to play," no matter what the recreation, and is totally ethical on that basis. (I mean, do you walk into a restaurant, show, or movie house saying it is somehow unethical to be charged for getting the service?) Ethics = is the business, action or "money action" being proper, - or improper - in nature. Not "legal," not "approved or disapproved by church x," but by certain standards. (approved house or ground rules to do or commit where you are going into, fair or agreed on from both parties POVs or from all POVs on the situation, ethical debate and analysis and argument, etc.)
Those who don't even know what card counting is do not do it. Those who do it know exactly what it is, and what they're doing, to include knowing that it is indeed a casino/gambling hall infraction from the get-go, or lying to all concerned (including themselves) that it is just fine and dandy.
Fine, they [the casino] may help you unwalk from the casino as a result; being 86-ed is an undeniable and know risk. Cannot say otherwise or play innocent. Gotta give me that.
The pit boss and/or a security guard might notify you, in case you have somehow (and accidentally) overstayed your welcome.
1. Ad hominen attack is a sign of weakness. We are all guilty at times when our passions get the best of us. 2. Always limited myself as well as the proper casino definition of card counting as signaling its presence by bet size varying in parallel with the true count.
Yes, if it is okay with BOTH you and the pit boss as ground rules of play, not one POV or the other. Gambling doesn't build character, it reveals..no character. But a lot of characters. |
| February 9th, 2012 at 5:19:44 PM permalink | |
| bbvk05 Member since: Jan 12, 2011 Threads: 2 Posts: 82 | Paigowdan, you keep justifying the house edge as a fair price. I agree. Blackjack is a pretty fair game even without counting. The entertainment value is generally worth the minor expected loss. It is not unethical for the casino to take an edge... ANY edge... it wants as long as it never misrepresents the game rules. If casinos were to place a "You Lose!" table (-100%EV) in the casino from the Jane Austen's Mafia movie, I would be totally fine with that. I am simply stating that using the information the casino freely provides you as a part of the rules of the game to make decisions is not unethical. You've developed an ethical scheme that is essentially "it is unethical to do anything that the individual casino would expel you for. It doesn't matter that your actions are completely within the game rules and table limits, it becomes unethical when the casino does not like it beyond a certain point." The entire notion is still absurd. The casino can require flat bets. They don't. They can cap max bets. They don't. They can increase pen. They don't. I am not going to tell them what to do with their game, and I am not going to let them tell me what to do with my brain. It isn't unethical to play the game optimally, the casino just doesn't like it. |
| February 9th, 2012 at 5:21:34 PM permalink | |
| bbvk05 Member since: Jan 12, 2011 Threads: 2 Posts: 82 |
To contradict the idea that casinos get free money you said:
But earlier you said card counting is free money, which is untrue. Both of your statements argue against your original statement that AP is going for free money. I also don't agree with your definition of ethics. Ethics is simply a system of right and wrong. You can have differing ethical systems, which we clearly do. Mine is caveat emptor and that each has to look after his own interests but owes all truthful representation of facts if they are offered. Yours isn't even internally consistent but revolves around whatever a casinos wants is right and whatever it does not want is wrong. |
| February 9th, 2012 at 5:32:51 PM permalink | |
| bbvk05 Member since: Jan 12, 2011 Threads: 2 Posts: 82 |
1. If you are 86'd I agree that it is unethical to stay or return (if permanent). Just like trespassing. 2. There is no ethical difference between my card craps AP play and my blackjack AP play. I simply make the best betting and play decisions I can with the information the casino provides me. 3. I won't hold your lack of understanding of the term against you, but ad hominem attacks are against the person. I attacked your "casino's wishes= ethics rules" system as insipidly stupid. It is. I didn't say anything about you. You seem otherwise pretty intelligent with a clear distaste for policing a game you freely offer against people who make optimal decisions inside it. |
| February 9th, 2012 at 5:47:18 PM permalink | |
| Paigowdan Member since: Apr 28, 2010 Threads: 54 Posts: 2115 |
Exactly, - as it is with craps, Baccarat, Roulette, etc.
I feel that > 5% on a flat bet is usurious.
I would be furious as a game designer, shouting and pointing out, "now that's a REAL shitty product and deal you're offering there - LOSE it now!"
Depends on how you obtained the information; if you used a semi-illicit process to track, then convert, (and at personal effort for personal gain), the historical discard data - when the assumption is to NOT do this, - and that it is work, a deliberate process an illicit process by the ground rules.
Yeah, pretty much. Behave and play by the house rules, and you're a-okay. Somebody's got to run the place and is regulated. Do I think the typical gambler would run a casino better or more ethically? Hmm....
Yes - it does indeed matter! that is EXACTLY the issue at hand, - being within the game rules and table limits, etc..
Now THAT notion is absurd, I agree 100%. If a player wins the progressive on a Pai Gow game - for cleanly drawing a 7-card straight flush, he MUST be paid, as per agreement and the ground rules that the house agreed to. For a casino house or gambling Hall to renege on a clean and honest winner who played by the rules is despicable.
No, they can and often do. This is obvious, I've seen them do it a million times when warranted.
No, they can and often do. ditto: This is obvious, I've seen them do it a million times when warranted.
Yes they do! Penetration varies and changes constantly, corresponding to the threat level against a BJ game. They have, and will do so time and time again, as conditions warrant.
You can't - unless you own and run a casino.
Nobody's "messing with your brain," there's no Ray-guns pointed at your head, and no, there is no extra oxygen pumped into casino. they are watching your actual actions, and verifying as to whether or not is in accordance with the house rules, to include ALL advantage actions: past-posting, marking cards, pinching and capping bets. Threats are simply dealt with as threats, and are dealt with according to its severity and appropriate response.
Yes, it fully is, when in accordance to the house and game-play rules
Doesn't matter what the casino likes, they too have to follow ground rules. Any cheating, or just breaking the ground rules of play, etc., is "free money" in the sense that it is "easier money." Granted, it might cost a safe-cracker $2,000 worth of time and effort to take $500,000, for a $498,000 profit, but yes, you are right, it is not totally free. There's the labor and energy involved, the risk of jail, legal defense, etc., it is not totally free, just easier and illicit money, money not by the rules. Again, the concept of "I worked hard for that booty, so it is not free - but it is well-deserved for ME!" I do find questionable. And there is an element of that kind of justification in ALL "against-the-rules AP play, etc. This is very hard to see, I grant you, but I see it. Gambling doesn't build character, it reveals..no character. But a lot of characters. |
| February 9th, 2012 at 6:08:09 PM permalink | |
| weaselman Member since: Jul 11, 2010 Threads: 17 Posts: 1922 |
This is not true, and you know it. The casino does not have a rule against card counting, because ... guess what? ... they only don't like it when you are winning. Keep loosing, and they will let you count all you want, and comp you like crazy. And when you are told that the casino can require flat bets, but they don't ... your response "yes, they do!" is also not true, and you also know it. The issue is that, if they indeed did not want card counters at the table, like you suggest, they have plenty of ways to enforce that rule - like requiring flat bets (for everybody, not just for a guy who happens to be winning) or installing a CSM or choosing from a whole bunch of other well known ways. But they don't do that, because in the end of the day they (correctly) believe that they make more money on theoretically countable games than they lose. What you are advocating is akin to a casino offering a game of chess (the winner is paid even money), but "did not like" the player to think more than one move ahead. "When two people always agree one of them is unnecessary" |
| February 9th, 2012 at 6:09:56 PM permalink | |
| bbvk05 Member since: Jan 12, 2011 Threads: 2 Posts: 82 | My rule notes (pen, max bet limts, etc) are based on the typical table. Sometimes the limits those things. That is fine, but it is not the general rule. If the game is offered without them it is not unethical to play inside the offering. I do, and make pretty good money doing it. Nobody has ever told my I cannot vary my bet size at my favorite spot. In fact, the known rules seem to indicate otherwise (min=5, max=500). The rest of your discussion above is either circular or a red herring, and doesn't warrant a serious response. |
| Bovada is the only Internet casino endorsed by the Wizard. Here are my reasons why and my promise of support. |