Casinos should have the right to bar perceived advantage players from playing

Quote: JerryLogan

I assume most of the players who play these things are skilled as you call it, yet it is very uncommon for any of them to get backed off or banned from playing them. (and basically none if you ask to see the proof from those who CLAIM to have been 86'd).

Why the difference?

You can't add player advantage to VP beyond using correct strategy. You can't count cards in VP because the virtual deck is randomized for every play. Besides players usually make a fixed bet (max coins, usually, for the more experienced players).

Now, a FPDW will have a negative HA only if played well. Even epxerienced players amke mistakes, and the less experienced ones probably give the casino a positive HA. It's like the Mohegan Sun triple down promo that was widely discussed and reported on recently.

I voted yes on this poll. My thought is that the casino is a business and you are engaging in a service on their property. While you are on their property you are subject to the laws of the United States, which means that you have your Bill of Rights and Constitutional Rights at hand. A casino cannot ban you based on those protected groups identified. Nowhere in the constitution does the word "mentally gifted" or "rain man" come up. Therefore, the casinos have the right to ban advantage players (or anyone for that matter), as it is not a form of discrimination as crafted in US law.

Come to think of it, casinos can ban players who are drunk, drugged, disorderly, cheats, naked, carrying a computer, operating a cell phone, taking photographs, and many other reasons. As long as it it not discrimintation as defined in a law somewhere, then the casino can do what they want.

Quote: Nareed

You can't add player advantage to VP beyond using correct strategy. You can't count cards in VP because the virtual deck is randomized for every play. Besides players usually make a fixed bet (max coins, usually, for the more experienced players).

Now, a FPDW will have a negative HA only if played well. Even epxerienced players amke mistakes, and the less experienced ones probably give the casino a positive HA. It's like the Mohegan Sun triple down promo that was widely discussed and reported on recently.

I believe you'd find a lot of disagreement to the first sentence on any vp forum. It used to be the way you described for vp AP's on <100% games, but they've cleverly evolved into adding in all that cash back and other slot club benefits that we vp players cannot live without, to create a house disadvantage. I myself do it when I can.

Quote: boymimbo

I voted yes on this poll. My thought is that the casino is a business and you are engaging in a service on their property. While you are on their property you are subject to the laws of the United States, which means that you have your Bill of Rights and Constitutional Rights at hand. A casino cannot ban you based on those protected groups identified. Nowhere in the constitution does the word "mentally gifted" or "rain man" come up. Therefore, the casinos have the right to ban advantage players (or anyone for that matter), as it is not a form of discrimination as crafted in US law.

Come to think of it, casinos can ban players who are drunk, drugged, disorderly, cheats, naked, carrying a computer, operating a cell phone, taking photographs, and many other reasons. As long as it it not discrimintation as defined in a law somewhere, then the casino can do what they want.

Everyone can and has their opinion.

Here is a summary of what happened in Atlantic City:
sourse

Uston v. Resorts International Hotel, Inc.
444 A.2d 370 (N.J.1982)
Author: Jim

Facts: The defendant excluded plaintiff from the blackjack tables in its casino because the plaintiff is an expert card counter.

Issue: Can the defendant exclude the plaintiff from its casino just because the plaintiff is an expert card counter?

Holding: No

Rationale: When property owners open their premises to the general public in the pursuit of their property interests, they have no right to exclude people unreasonably. Such owners do have the right and duty to exclude those who disrupt the ‘regular and essential’ operations of the premises. The plaintiff in this case does not fit that category. He was not disruptive in the casino and no way interfered with the regular functioning of the casino. Therefore, the plaintiff possesses the usual right of reasonable access to the defendant’s casino.

This was and is the ruling for the state of New Jersey. Other states can do as they wish unless the Feds step up.

Quote: 7craps

Everyone can and has their opinion.

Here is a summary of what happened in Atlantic City:
sourse

Uston v. Resorts International Hotel, Inc.
444 A.2d 370 (N.J.1982)
Author: Jim

Facts: The defendant excluded plaintiff from the blackjack tables in its casino because the plaintiff is an expert card counter.

Issue: Can the defendant exclude the plaintiff from its casino just because the plaintiff is an expert card counter?

Holding: No

Rationale: When property owners open their premises to the general public in the pursuit of their property interests, they have no right to exclude people unreasonably. Such owners do have the right and duty to exclude those who disrupt the ‘regular and essential’ operations of the premises. The plaintiff in this case does not fit that category. He was not disruptive in the casino and no way interfered with the regular functioning of the casino. Therefore, the plaintiff possesses the usual right of reasonable access to the defendant’s casino.

This was and is the ruling for the state of New Jersey. Other states can do as they wish unless the Feds step up.

Interesting summary, horrible decision. Most legal scholars would agree that this trampled on property rights and f---ed things up for years for New Jersey. Actually, it made things worse for advantage players in New Jersey because if they can't kick you out, they just half-deck you or preferential shuffle. You lose your advantage, and the casinos loses time/revenue, so both parties are losers.

Quote: JerryLogan

I believe you'd find a lot of disagreement to the first sentence on any vp forum. It used to be the way you described for vp AP's on <100% games, but they've cleverly evolved into adding in all that cash back and other slot club benefits that we vp players cannot live without, to create a house disadvantage. I myself do it when I can.

People are entitled to their delusions.

Sure, cash back, comps, etc can be counted as a return on gambling, and perhaps should be, but they don't add to the player advantage, if any, as far as the game itself is concerned. All you can do in VP is play the right strategy.

Not a delusion. If I play a 9/6 JOB machine (99.54% return) at a casino that has a slot club cashback rate of .25% on a 3x points day, I would consider that game a 100.29% payback machine on that day. That's a player advantage. Sure, the machine is not positive in and of itself, but you can't ignore the cash back rate.

Quote: teddys

Not a delusion. If I play a 9/6 JOB machine (99.54% return) at a casino that has a slot club cashback rate of .25% on a 3x points day, I would consider that game a 100.29% payback machine on that day. That's a player advantage. Sure, the machine is not positive in and of itself, but you can't ignore the cash back rate.

Agreed.

But the additional payback you get from the slot club, in special multiple points day or otherwise, is the same for the best VP player that ever lived as it is for the yutz who doesn't know what to do with 4 aces, so long as they both bet the same amount of money.

My point is that beyond good strategy you can't squeeze more advantgae from the game itself. This is as opposed to BJ, where a card counter can get a positive player advantage, vs a superb basic strategy player who can only minimize the HA.

Quote: teddys

Not a delusion. If I play a 9/6 JOB machine (99.54% return) at a casino that has a slot club cashback rate of .25% on a 3x points day, I would consider that game a 100.29% payback machine on that day. That's a player advantage. Sure, the machine is not positive in and of itself, but you can't ignore the cash back rate.

I totally agree. Anyone who says cash back and other slot club benefits/offers should not be added into the play is just jealous of all the benefits video poker players can get that table players can only dream about. For every card-counting/Expert Basic Strategy BJ player struggling just to make a few thousand a month, there'a 10 times that many vp players taking advantage of opportunities because of the slot club benefits, & making 5-10 times what the table players do on a consistent basis.

If I ran a casino....

I'd have a blackjack pit with a HUGE sign... "CARD COUNTERS WELCOME HERE!!!!"
Tables in that pit would just have a lower MAX bet compared to the minumum - something like 25 - 100, limiting the spread to 1-4.
I'd be willing to bet that that pit would make WAY more money from all the people who thought they could count, but can't, than it would lose to the few that came in and actually played with an advantage. Plus, think of all the positive PR such a move would make. I'm still shocked nobody has tried to pursue this avenue. If anybody wants the idea, feel free. I'm generous that way. :-)