Cheating Casino?
Poll
 | 1 vote (7.69%) | ||
| | 4 votes (30.76%) | ||
| | 8 votes (61.53%) |
13 members have voted
July 10th, 2012 at 3:04:53 PM
permalink
I was playing a six deck shoe, using KO count (initial running count at -20). The first shoe I played,
the running count reached +14 when the cut card came out. The cards were collected and put into an
automatic shuffler. Lets call this shoe A.
Shoe B was played.
When shoe A was played a second time, the count was +17 when the cut card came out.
Shoe B was played.
When shoe A was played a third time, the count was +13 when the cut card came out.
These are extremely high counts. For those unfamiliar, a count of -4 (key count) is when the player
will generally have the advantage. A count of +4 (pivot point) will call for a max bet.
I can't help but wonder if a bunch of high cards were missing and replaced with small cards.
I'm 99% sure my count was accurate. The cut card was placed at 1.5 decks.
This occurred at a midwestern casino located at a race track.
Comments?
the running count reached +14 when the cut card came out. The cards were collected and put into an
automatic shuffler. Lets call this shoe A.
Shoe B was played.
When shoe A was played a second time, the count was +17 when the cut card came out.
Shoe B was played.
When shoe A was played a third time, the count was +13 when the cut card came out.
These are extremely high counts. For those unfamiliar, a count of -4 (key count) is when the player
will generally have the advantage. A count of +4 (pivot point) will call for a max bet.
I can't help but wonder if a bunch of high cards were missing and replaced with small cards.
I'm 99% sure my count was accurate. The cut card was placed at 1.5 decks.
This occurred at a midwestern casino located at a race track.
Comments?
July 10th, 2012 at 4:20:55 PM
permalink
I fail to see anything that would indicate any cheating. Why did you ? 3 SHOES ? Talk about Paranoia !.
July 10th, 2012 at 4:35:17 PM
permalink
Quote: buzzpaffI fail to see anything that would indicate any cheating. Why did you ? 3 SHOES ? Talk about Paranoia !.
According to CVCX (simulation):
Running count +13 frequency is 0.13%.
Running count +14 frequency is 0.10%.
Running count +17 frequency is 0.03%.
Now, I'm no math *** but I'd say the chances of reaching those counts
in three consecutive shoes (75% pen) is pretty damn rare?
There are people here a lot smarter than my fat ass; hopefully they
can tell me what it all means???
July 10th, 2012 at 5:33:03 PM
permalink
Another way to look at it:
<= +13 frequency 99.70%
<= +14 frequency 99.80%
<= +17 frequency 99.95%
<= +13 frequency 99.70%
<= +14 frequency 99.80%
<= +17 frequency 99.95%
July 10th, 2012 at 5:51:06 PM
permalink
It means you had 3 hot shoes in a row. The bigger question is, did you win any MONEY ??
July 10th, 2012 at 5:57:00 PM
permalink
Quote: buzzpaffIt means you had 3 hot shoes in a row. The bigger question is, did you win any MONEY ??
No, I was destroyed! The high cards never came out; just a steady stream of low cards to the end.
The double-downs really killed me since I had max bets out a good percentage of the time.
July 10th, 2012 at 6:43:37 PM
permalink
i don't see why 3 shoes are paranoia.
if the figure he quotes is correct, then the chances of this happening is .0013 * .001 * .0003 and that is pretty remote
By comparison, if you bet the number on roulette and hit 3 times in a row, you will probably got sacked immediately. The casino doesn't need 300 trials to "collect evidence"
if the figure he quotes is correct, then the chances of this happening is .0013 * .001 * .0003 and that is pretty remote
By comparison, if you bet the number on roulette and hit 3 times in a row, you will probably got sacked immediately. The casino doesn't need 300 trials to "collect evidence"
July 10th, 2012 at 6:59:55 PM
permalink
Gee, then I guess all those photos of numbers coming in 3 , 4 , even 5 times in a row are just not true.
Go figure overall and remember those other 4 shoes. The one before after and in the middle of those three shoes.
Sort of like saying the number 6 hit 3 times in a row if you don't count the 12 and 19 that came in between the 6's
LOL
Go figure overall and remember those other 4 shoes. The one before after and in the middle of those three shoes.
Sort of like saying the number 6 hit 3 times in a row if you don't count the 12 and 19 that came in between the 6's
LOL
July 10th, 2012 at 7:05:30 PM
permalink
Quote: buzzpaffGo figure overall and remember those other 4 shoes. The one before after and in the middle of those three shoes.
The shoes in-between were not the same pack of cards.
Shoe A in play when shoe B is being shuffled.
July 10th, 2012 at 7:15:00 PM
permalink
Just like the numbers in between the 6's, get real. You pick out 3 shoes and ignore the others ???
And now with that math I am supposed to believe you can actually count ??
And now with that math I am supposed to believe you can actually count ??
July 10th, 2012 at 7:17:54 PM
permalink
seeing ANY number coming up 3 times in a row is quite different from betting and winning on a SPECIFIC number 3 times in a row.
plus, with the figure quoted above, it's more like hitting it 6 times in a row. call that luck.
plus, with the figure quoted above, it's more like hitting it 6 times in a row. call that luck.
July 10th, 2012 at 7:18:04 PM
permalink
Buzz-
You are missing the point. I only played shoe A (same pack of cards) three times.
Shoe B did not consist of the same cards.
Have you been reading any of this or are you just trolling now?
You are missing the point. I only played shoe A (same pack of cards) three times.
Shoe B did not consist of the same cards.
Have you been reading any of this or are you just trolling now?
July 10th, 2012 at 7:20:31 PM
permalink
Lets call this shoe A.
Shoe B was played.
When shoe A was played a second time, the count was +17 when the cut card came out.
Shoe B was played.
When shoe A was played a third time, the count was +13 when the cut card came out.
The defense rests.
Shoe B was played.
When shoe A was played a second time, the count was +17 when the cut card came out.
Shoe B was played.
When shoe A was played a third time, the count was +13 when the cut card came out.
The defense rests.
July 10th, 2012 at 7:24:19 PM
permalink
Buzz-
You are clueless. And now you are BLOCKED!
You are clueless. And now you are BLOCKED!
July 10th, 2012 at 7:27:11 PM
permalink
AW, I just printed what he posted. Now he is somebody else's problem LOL
July 10th, 2012 at 7:31:34 PM
permalink
how about if i say its about 180 times more difficult than winning the 6/49.
to be fair, you can't say it's definitely a cheat. after all, somebody wins the lottery every week. but it's definitely worth a look.
to be fair, you can't say it's definitely a cheat. after all, somebody wins the lottery every week. but it's definitely worth a look.
July 11th, 2012 at 11:18:30 PM
permalink
anyone wants to comment on this or verify the math?
July 12th, 2012 at 12:47:24 AM
permalink
It looks sketchy but 3 shoes is too small to be sure. Since you suspect this casino now, if you choose to play there again, I would try to sit down at the beginning of a shift change when they bring out the new decks and wash them. Then you can verify that all the cards are there.
People often suggest this and I find it impractical, as I rarely see this happen myself. Maybe I'm just not playing at the right times, but it seems like a highly unrealistic thing to do all or even most of the time you play blackjack. But, if you already suspect they might be short-shoeing you of the high cards, it's probably worth the effort.
Of course, if some devious pit boss really is doing this, if they see you (or anyone else) watching they obviously won't go through with it. So in that case, you're now playing a fair game, but you don't have any proof of the previous cheating.
People often suggest this and I find it impractical, as I rarely see this happen myself. Maybe I'm just not playing at the right times, but it seems like a highly unrealistic thing to do all or even most of the time you play blackjack. But, if you already suspect they might be short-shoeing you of the high cards, it's probably worth the effort.
Of course, if some devious pit boss really is doing this, if they see you (or anyone else) watching they obviously won't go through with it. So in that case, you're now playing a fair game, but you don't have any proof of the previous cheating.
"So drink gamble eat f***, because one day you will be dust." -ontariodealer
July 12th, 2012 at 12:48:55 AM
permalink
Quote: buzzpaffLets call this shoe A.
Shoe B was played.
When shoe A was played a second time, the count was +17 when the cut card came out.
Shoe B was played.
When shoe A was played a third time, the count was +13 when the cut card came out.
The defense rests.
Buzz I still don't think you're getting it. This was at a table with an automatic shuffle (not a CSM). So Shoe A always consisted of the same pack of cards...shoe ends, cards are put in the automatic shuffle and the cards for shoe B come out.
His observations are consistent with the pack of cards used for shoe A being artificially depleted of high cards. I'm not saying that is what happened, but it is the right question to ask.
"So drink gamble eat f***, because one day you will be dust." -ontariodealer
July 12th, 2012 at 4:10:35 AM
permalink
AcesAndEights- Thanks.
If I could do it over again, I would not have used the word CHEATING.
I really don't think they (the casino) were intentionally cheating. It just
wouldn't make sense.
I've played there many times, and I will play there in the future.
With that said, I really think THAT PACK OF CARDS was compromised.
A rouge dealer? Pit Boss? I don't know. I have no knowledge of card
manufacturing, or card handling procedures to guess how this
could have happened.
If I could do it over again, I would not have used the word CHEATING.
I really don't think they (the casino) were intentionally cheating. It just
wouldn't make sense.
I've played there many times, and I will play there in the future.
With that said, I really think THAT PACK OF CARDS was compromised.
A rouge dealer? Pit Boss? I don't know. I have no knowledge of card
manufacturing, or card handling procedures to guess how this
could have happened.
July 12th, 2012 at 5:35:38 AM
permalink
Quote: RoundManWith that said, I really think THAT PACK OF CARDS was compromised. A rouge dealer? Pit Boss? I don't know. I have no knowledge of card manufacturing, or card handling procedures to guess how this could have happened.
There was another thread that got very heated very quickly over a similar issue regarding a joker in the deck...
Unless you were playing at a California casino or some Indian casinos, chances are the decks are a-ok. Nearly all states offering casino gambling have very strict rules about what is allowed and would face a hefty fine if the deck composition was compromised. Simply put, it wouldn't be worth it for a dealer, pit boss or anybody involved to "change the decks."
I agree with AcesandEights... if you think you're being cheated, insist on playing at tables where you saw the decks fanned out. My biggest concern is you say you will play there in the future. I hate to be blunt, but if you really suspect that there is a problem, WHY IN THE HECK WOULD YOU CONSIDER GIVING THEM ANY MORE BUSINESS?????????? Even if it is just a rogue dealer or pit boss, THAT'S A MAJOR PROBLEM!
I'm sorry, but I never feel any sympathy for people who continue to play games where they suspect something is wrong...
"One out of every four people are [morons]"- Kyle, South Park
July 12th, 2012 at 5:55:20 AM
permalink
Quote: TiltpoulThere was another thread that got very heated very quickly over a similar issue regarding a joker in the deck...
Unless you were playing at a California casino or some Indian casinos, chances are the decks are a-ok. Nearly all states offering casino gambling have very strict rules about what is allowed and would face a hefty fine if the deck composition was compromised. Simply put, it wouldn't be worth it for a dealer, pit boss or anybody involved to "change the decks."
I agree with AcesandEights... if you think you're being cheated, insist on playing at tables where you saw the decks fanned out. My biggest concern is you say you will play there in the future. I hate to be blunt, but if you really suspect that there is a problem, WHY IN THE HECK WOULD YOU CONSIDER GIVING THEM ANY MORE BUSINESS?????????? Even if it is just a rogue dealer or pit boss, THAT'S A MAJOR PROBLEM!
I'm sorry, but I never feel any sympathy for people who continue to play games where they suspect something is wrong...
Yeah, I will play there again. I make money playing there.
I'm sure you've played there (I remember some of your old posts).
It will be weeks before I'm there next time. The questionable pack of cards will be long since retired.
I don't think another similar pack will appear. But, you can bet I'll be counting.
July 12th, 2012 at 6:03:21 AM
permalink
Quote: RoundManYeah, I will play there again. I make money playing there.
I'm sure you've played there (I remember some of your old posts).
It will be weeks before I'm there next time. The questionable pack of cards will be long since retired.
I don't think another similar pack will appear. But, you can bet I'll be counting.
But you've indicated that you feel there was a problem before... if it's somewhere I've played, chances are there was nothing wrong with the decks, since I rarely play in Indian casinos (I've been through Oklahoma one time, and hit the NY casinos once. I USED to play in the western Iowa Indian casinos, but it's been a long time).
Just be sure to be there when they are fanning out the cards. Then you should have no reason to suspect anything.
"One out of every four people are [morons]"- Kyle, South Park
July 12th, 2012 at 8:17:16 AM
permalink
Of course there was nothing wrong with the decks. That is obvious !
July 12th, 2012 at 9:02:22 AM
permalink
I see stuff like this all the time, every day in fact, and I'm just one dealer at one table in one casino. Hardly a day goes by that some player doesn't have what they think is some kind of miraculously bad luck and they think that something must be rigged because this kind of thing "never happens!" Sorry, the bad news is that it happens all the time, you're just not usually at the table or the one it's happening to.
Try this experiment: Sit down with 6 decks of cards and deal 7 player hands and 1 dealer hand and play them out for 8 hours. Record the results. If you don't see "weird" runs of luck (both good and bad) then I'd say you have found the anomaly. But 1 of the players busting every single hand of a shoe while following BS? Happens all the time. Dealer got 5 BJ's in a row? Check. Dealer draws to 21 8 times in a row? Every day.
Try this experiment: Sit down with 6 decks of cards and deal 7 player hands and 1 dealer hand and play them out for 8 hours. Record the results. If you don't see "weird" runs of luck (both good and bad) then I'd say you have found the anomaly. But 1 of the players busting every single hand of a shoe while following BS? Happens all the time. Dealer got 5 BJ's in a row? Check. Dealer draws to 21 8 times in a row? Every day.
May 26th, 2014 at 10:29:05 PM
permalink
You should have known better two years ago this wouldn't be tolerated two years later. I just say game over man-it's chapter 4 in my smooth insults book.Quote: RoundManBuzz-
You are clueless. And now you are BLOCKED!
I am a robot.
May 26th, 2014 at 11:28:43 PM
permalink
I should block you for drudging up this this old post, of course I didn't look at the dates and read everything.Quote: onenickelmiracleYou should have known better two years ago this wouldn't be tolerated two years later. I just say game over man-it's chapter 4 in my smooth insults book.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
May 27th, 2014 at 5:22:02 AM
permalink
Quote: AxelWolfI should block you for drudging up this this old post, of course I didn't look at the dates and read everything.
damn it, I read to yours and then realized it was 2012. F-me
Expect the worst and you will never be disappointed.
I AM NOT PART OF GWAE RADIO SHOW
