If The Wizard Found a Winning Method

Here's a question. If the Wizard found a winning method that won consistantly, would he share it with the casinos, or would he make as much as he possibly could and take the casinos for all he could? The casinos would never forgive this, of course, and his relationship with them would be forever ruined. So which would it be?

Quote: BigCheese

Here's a question. If the Wizard found a winning method that won consistantly, would he share it with the casinos, or would he make as much as he possibly could and take the casinos for all he could? The casinos would never forgive this, of course, and his relationship with them would be forever ruined. So which would it be?

I dunno, not sure the casinos would have a grudge. They arent stupid, and would see they were really paying out and do something [it would have to be the small edge thing anyway].

As for the other part of your question, he has admitted he loves to gamble. It would be right up his alley.

IMO the risk of being painted as a bad guy rests more with his emphasis on and advocacy of avoiding all the sucker stuff they really rely on. Putting such in print and on the web.

First off, I would think that casinos hire the Wiz, or guys like him, to evaluate new games BEFORE putting it on the floor.

The chance that he'd find a game or stategy with a player advantage is probably zero.

If I was the Wiz, and found such a strategy, or 'sucker' bet with a flaw resulting in a player advantage, I'd keep it to myself, unless I was working for a casino evaluating the game in question.

If it was an independent discovery, i.e. not part of a job to evaluate a game, then I'd play it for all I could - at a casino that was NOT on my client list!

I'd take as much money as I possibly could. It has happened several times already. Unfortunately, such opportunities never last long. It doesn't help if a casino sees me winning all the time, and then Googles my name. For that reason, I wish I had adopted a pen name, like Bob Dancer and Stanford Wong did.

Just a few notes on this thread:

1) Even though the Wizard advices strongly, and with full informational backup, against sucker bets, many of his readers readily admit to playing the sucker bets anyway, and more argue ingeniously about using them as a hedge (despite the Wizard's commandment not to hedge).

2) Hypothetical: could a very, very clever math genius devise a complex game which would have one, and only one, bet with player advantage which was hidden even from other lesser math geniuses who analyze the game? I envision something along the lines of craps, which is simple but has some rather complicated bets. I really dont' think it's possible, but it would be an interesting basis for a gambling novel, or an episode of CSI Vegas.

3) Everyone makes mistakes, and even within multiple layers of checks and security some may slip through. So from time to time you'll find flawed games with a player advantage. However, once players begin to take the game for a ride, the flaw becomes obvious and, I presume, it is quickly shut down.

4) Nareed's New Law Of Gambling: Given enough time, today's carnival games will be tomorrow's classics. (Just thought I'd try it).

1. I can only lead a horse to water, but I can't make it drink.

2. I would like to think I've done that with my Three Card Second Chance (a.k.a. Mulligan Poker) game. Every time I demonstrate the game the first question is always, "I don't see where the house gets its advantage."

3. Yup. There are a lot of good mathematicians consulting for game inventors, so it is unlikely that will happen. In the 9 years I've lived in Vegas I have yet to see a table game with a player advantage without card counting or hole carding. The good opportunties tend to be on promotions, like paying double for royals in video poker, or 2-1 on blackjacks.

4. I agree. Pai gow poker is a good example.

2) something to do with median hand values and having to put up additional money when you need to draw. and only getting paid on one unit on your initial good 3card hands.

Quote: Wizard

1. I can only lead a horse to water, but I can't make it drink.

Agreed. I mean the casinos probably don't mind these kinds of sites, because most people will still go for the sucker bets and the big payoff.

Quote: Wizard

2. I would like to think I've done that with my Three Card Second Chance (a.k.a. Mulligan Poker) game. Every time I demonstrate the game the first question is always, "I don't see where the house gets its advantage."

I'll definitely look it up. The idea, in a story, would be for the genius mathematician to put the game on the market, then have confederates bleed a casino white. In CSI Vegas this would get someone murdered (though they did something similar once already), not necessarily the math genius.

Quote: Wizard

4. I agree. Pai gow poker is a good example.

Think of Pai Gow Poker as a means of taking an old, classic game to the masses.