Casinos don't cheat.....prove it.

Quote: Calder

"Lunch is three ninety-nine"

What's the big deal?

I thought of that as well, but for some reason I don't think that is the proper usage.

Quote: SanchoPanza

Is that small as well as high-value checks?

All the way down to $5.

Quote: cclub79

I pity you're students.

Perhaps, but they will leave my class knowing how to spell and how to parse a sentence. That will serve them well later on.

Quote: Headlock

I thought of that as well, but for some reason I don't think that is the proper usage.

Lunch: $3.99
Lunch is $3.99
Lunch special! $3.99
$3.99 Lunch
$5 Lunch--$1.01 discount for carbon-based life forms

Well, now that I've wasted an hour or so of my life reading most of this meandering thread (no blame implied, no one's fault but my own), I feel I've earned the right to post my opinion.

Math can only take us so far. We can say a coin flip is 50/50 and we would expect 50% heads and 50% tails in X number of trials, but that's on average, over the long-term, whatever that means. If we want, we can use the statistics to calculate the probability of an exact 50/50 distribution over Y number of trials, but that's as close as we can get.

The fact is no one can prove cheating based on personal experience because ANY number of trials less than infinity is at least somewhat insufficient. The bell curve goes on forever in either direction. A million, billion, or trillion pass line wins or losses in a row is possible, though extremely unlikely. Of course, if it actually happened it would almost certainly have to be some kind of scam, but the upshot of that concept is that it takes a long time to get into the "long term." How many trials would we need to get within 1 standard deviation of the mean at, say, a 95% confidence level on the coin flip? Someone who's better at statistics than me could answer precisely, but I bet it's more than you think, and there would still be a 5% chance of an outlying result. And that's only with 2 possible outcomes.

So when people say, "I've lost 20 sessions in a row, they must be cheating!" or claim they've seen "impossible" runs of hot or cold dice, chances are the sample size they're considering is insufficient.

Personally, the longest "hot roll" I think I've seen was maybe an hour and a half. How many rolls was that? Could they get in a roll every 30 seconds? Doubtful, especially once the place bets and sucker bets start piling up due to the hot shooter. Assume they could, even then you're only talking about 180 rolls, max.

As for gaming control in its various forms, I don't believe I've ever personally witnessed someone from an oversight entity (NGC, etc.) on the floor checking dice or cards, and I've never seen anyone spin a die for balance, except on TV. I've seen dealers fan out cards face up and check for each card on new or re-used decks, and I've seen dealers remove cards with any tiny defect whatsoever from play. I've seen pit bosses remove dice from play that have been damaged in any way whatsoever, and remove dice from play that have left the table at the player's request (only to be re-used later I'm sure).

I'm confident that 99% of dealers are honest people who just want to do their job and go home, just like most people everywhere. I'm also confident that there are dealers who have cheated players/colluded/cheated the house/cheated their co-workers out of tips. I don't buy that such activity is as rampant as some in this thread have suggested. It wouldn't be all that hard for an investigative reporter to bug someone to record the alleged admissions of guilt that occur at breaks as some have suggested, and others have mentioned that there would likely have been a whistle-blower by now if such activity was truly out of control. Dealers don't make great money in most parts of the country, and the opportunity to expose their employer and possibly earn the aforementioned TV appearances/book deals/whatever would be great incentive.

I cannot prove that casinos don't cheat, and no one else here has proven that they do, as far as I'm concerned. We simply have no evidence. If someone digs up an article or an NGC report that indicates a casino or employee was knowingly involved in a scam to steal from patrons, I'd be very interested to see it. I'd also be interested to see a documented case where an employee was caught colluding with another player. If such documents don't exist then I might be more suspect of the oversight agencies, as I'm sure some dealers have not been able to resist the temptation. The question, as originally posed by OP, is are the oversight agencies doing enough?

Quote: scudder

Math can only take us so far. We can say a coin flip is 50/50 and we would expect 50% heads and 50% tails in X number of trials, but that's on average, over the long-term, whatever that means. If we want, we can use the statistics to calculate the probability of an exact 50/50 distribution over Y number of trials, but that's as close as we can get.

The fact is no one can prove cheating based on personal experience because ANY number of trials less than infinity is at least somewhat insufficient.

If I lost 600 hands of blackjack in a row, that would not be absolute evidence that I had been cheated--I COULD have simply been very, very, very, very, very, very, very unlucky. If I flip a coin and it comes up "heads" fifty times in a row, there isn't anything NECESSARILY wrong with the coin.

Since we rarely have ironclad proof of cheating (in my own personal experience, I have observed blatant cheating right in front of me, but I lacked a recording device, so such experience only constitutes evidence for myself), we have to rely on empirical and inferential evidence. You bring up the "insufficient sample size" argument, which is both somewhat tired and somewhat patronizing, as it implies that the person who suspects that he has been cheated is merely misinterpreting random negative fluctuations. Well, at some point before we go broke, our cumulative suspicions MUST acquire enough weight so that we allow them the practical equivalence to direct evidence. I lost ten hands in a row. Was I cheated? Probably not. Twenty? Possibly. Fifty? A real possibility. Six hundred? A near-certainty.

As a practical matter, we would (and should) all stop playing long before a losing streak becomes so prolonged that it almost certainly is NOT just bad luck. In any case, such a cheating tactic would both be too obvious, and unnecessary. Winning three out of every five hands would do nicely to book a big win for the house, and would not arouse any suspicion at all.

Quote: mkl654321

If I lost 600 hands of blackjack in a row, that would not be absolute evidence that I had been cheated--I COULD have simply been very, very, very, very, very, very, very unlucky. If I flip a coin and it comes up "heads" fifty times in a row, there isn't anything NECESSARILY wrong with the coin.

[...]

I lost ten hands in a row. Was I cheated? Probably not. Twenty? Possibly. Fifty? A real possibility. Six hundred? A near-certainty.

As a practical matter, we would (and should) all stop playing long before a losing streak becomes so prolonged that it almost certainly is NOT just bad luck. In any case, such a cheating tactic would both be too obvious, and unnecessary. Winning three out of every five hands would do nicely to book a big win for the house, and would not arouse any suspicion at all.

Exactly. All I was saying was that there is often a big difference between the statistical probability of something happening and the actual outcomes that we experience as gamblers. Many, many people cite this as evidence of cheating, either through a misunderstanding of the underlying probabilities or the limitations of probability in predicting actual results.

scudder

Well try this one on for size, then look up Mr Taylor he got 10 years for his part. There is a big list of casino workers that have cheated with players! What do you think everybody that works for the casinos are angels; give us all a break with that assumption!

http://www.norwichbulletin.com/casinos/x1526468119/N-Y-man-accused-of-being-a-part-of-craps-scheme-at-Foxwoods

Just go on-line and look up cheating in casinos, most of the time it’s players, but the temptation is just to strong, some times for the casino personal! I would like to think that on-body would cheat in life, but then again I am not that naïve!

Then go back and waste some more of your time, rereading this thread, there are links to the gaming boards, about cheating. You got one thing right 95% of all the dealers are honest people, and just trying to make a living.

People in all walks of life cheat everyday, which goes with every kind of business there is, right down to the preachers, and let’s not forget the politicians. We do not live in a perfect world! There might not be anyone in the Nevada government that would want to see the casinos get busted for cheating, just about all our taxes come from gaming.

Most players will never stay at a table long enough to know if they were cheated, because they would be out of money. The other thing is on a craps table the guy standing next to you couldn’t tell you what the last seven out was, let alone all the sevens that were made in the last few hours. All they know is the lost, and now they are out of money, time for them to move on!

If you lose 50 pass line bets in a row there is something wrong, and if this happens every time you walk into the same casino, you have a problem! Let’s get real here, you are going to have players that lose every time they walk into a casino, they don’t have a clue as to what they are doing. I want to thank them all; they keep the game going, without them I couldn’t play craps. If there was just winners there would be no games to play.

The difference is when you have a table full of players that know about the game, and is losing every time they play, there just might be a problem! I have seen this happened, and they all gave up on the game. Five years ago there were 6 guys that would play everyday in a local casino. They all had years of playing craps, and were winning , not all the times but enough to keep them playing! They all started to lose about the same time, and got to the point where they had to give the game up because they didn’t want to go to a different casino. None of them could win any more.

I know that they were getting up there in years, but it didn’t have anything to do with that as there was a few that were younger. I still see a few of them from time to time, when we go out to eat in that casino, and every time they tell me the same thing. They lose every time they play there!

Damn a five-year losing streak, I think I will loan them some books on the game of craps, or better yet just give them a map, on how to get to a different casino!

amended

Quote: scudder

Quote: mkl654321

If I lost 600 hands of blackjack in a row, that would not be absolute evidence that I had been cheated--I COULD have simply been very, very, very, very, very, very, very unlucky. If I flip a coin and it comes up "heads" fifty times in a row, there isn't anything NECESSARILY wrong with the coin.

[...]

I lost ten hands in a row. Was I cheated? Probably not. Twenty? Possibly. Fifty? A real possibility. Six hundred? A near-certainty.

As a practical matter, we would (and should) all stop playing long before a losing streak becomes so prolonged that it almost certainly is NOT just bad luck. In any case, such a cheating tactic would both be too obvious, and unnecessary. Winning three out of every five hands would do nicely to book a big win for the house, and would not arouse any suspicion at all.

Exactly. All I was saying was that there is often a big difference between the statistical probability of something happening and the actual outcomes that we experience as gamblers. Many, many people cite this as evidence of cheating, either through a misunderstanding of the underlying probabilities or the limitations of probability in predicting actual results.

I think the problem is how frequently you could reasonably expect these abnormal events to occur.