Using Chips to Augment Memory

I read about the Hyland team and their arrest for allegedly using beads; for anyone who doesn't know, that happened some time ago, though I just read about it. This gave me some pause, and I had a discussion with my friend about it. And I would like to get some input here. Hopefully, the Wizard can express his view if he has any knowledge on the issue.

We both agree that a casino has the legitimate power to get you thrown in jail, at least temporarily, for using any foreign object to aid you in counting. The result may be that you win, but let's not dwell on that. The focus is chips--that is where our discussion split.

He takes the position that technically it is a device if you are using it to aid you in counting. But no one has ever been prosecuted this, and it would be very difficult to prove. I counter that chips are required at the table, and someone could think it is legal and inadvertently confess, making it extremely easy to prove. I add that using this logic, everything is potentially a device, including hands (twitches, bent fingers, etc.), with the only exception being strictly the brain.

I take the position chips are not a device. Chips could be used for a secondary count, which could not, by itself give you an advantage over the game (Hyland was accused of using beads for ace location, which could give an advantage by itself). Chips could be used for shuffle tracking, which by itself (without counting mentally), would be utterly useless--in addition, it is often recommended (online--credibility issue?) to use chips to mimic the dealer's shuffle. As already mentioned, you cannot play without chips--they are not a foreign object, nor are they concealed. He counters that you would have constructed a measuring device or abacus.

What do you think?

I like that idea! but how easy/hard will it be for the dealer/pit to catch on?

I really don't think chips counts as a device under the interpretation of the law. Even if it did, it would be very difficult for them to argue you were using them as such unless you were meticulous about it. Much easier for them to just boot you if they see you counting and carefully using the chips to keep the count.

I recommend it for starting counters when they get distracted by something, but not as an ongoing thing. Also, this is not a recommendation to potentially commit a felony, nothing that I'm almost positive its not illegal.

Quote: dwheatley

I really don't think chips counts as a device under the interpretation of the law. Even if it did, it would be very difficult for them to argue you were using them as such unless you were meticulous about it. Much easier for them to just boot you if they see you counting and carefully using the chips to keep the count.

I recommend it for starting counters when they get distracted by something, but not as an ongoing thing. Also, this is not a recommendation to potentially commit a felony, nothing that I'm almost positive its not illegal.

I highly doubt they were using beads to count cards. That sounds crazy that he would have anyone working for him that needed to use beads to count anything having to do with the cards. This dose not pass the smell test. They may have been using them to keep track of other things. Money, time, as a signal, how much someone should bet? I don't know, but that seems strange. I think they would've been screwed if they found them using chipies to count.


Maybe not in NV, other states have arrested guys for using chips as a counting device. I don't know the outcome of the case. What I dont like is the fact that the casino will allow you a pencil and paper on one game but call the cops if your using chips on a different game. Perhaps someone can search and find the exact law that covers this.

Chipies? Axel that's a tell, You have been hanging with juicie J. haven't you. :)

Who needs chips to keep track of info. I once knew a guy who had a jeweler make him three custom silver bracelets with various
symbols on them. They could be squeezed tight on the wrist so they didn't move on there own. You just turned them like dials, you could keep track of whatever you wanted.

Quote: AxelWolf

I highly doubt they were using beads to count cards. That sounds crazy that he would have anyone working for him that needed to use beads to count anything having to do with the cards. This dose not pass the smell test. They may have been using them to keep track of other things. Money, time, as a signal, how much someone should bet? I don't know, but that seems strange. I think they would've been screwed if they found them using chipies to count.


Maybe not in NV, other states have arrested guys for using chips as a counting device. I don't know the outcome of the case. What I dont like is the fact that the casino will allow you a pencil and paper on one game but call the cops if your using chips on a different game. Perhaps someone can search and find the exact law that covers this.

They were arrested and tried for using beads to locate aces, and to count. These allegations proved false. This left the question open as to whether it would have been illegal if they had been (although sequencing aces with beads doesn't make sense).

My friend said 'he knows a guy who knows a guy' who was arrested for using chips for shuffle tracking. The outcome also appears to be unknown. How do you they were arrested, but not know the outcome (how do you know this is not a myth, like X casino got caught removing aces)? I am not really questioning the naivety of the police, or the potential anger of casino management at the wrong store. Obviously, there would be risk of inconvenience involved, as there is with counting in general. But is it unlawful?

Quote: Neutrino

I like that idea! but how easy/hard will it be for the dealer/pit to catch on?

It would be fairly easy if aces are involved. But regardless of whether they catch you or not, such an activity is either legal or illegal. I am curious as to which. I would have automatically assumed legal, but that bead thing I read raised some questions. Was this just trumped up BS that the casinos knew had no hope of success?

Quote: Neutrino

I like that idea! but how easy/hard will it be for the dealer/pit to catch on?

The pit caught on years ago just like they always do. Use your feet instead. Point your toes as positions on a clock.

Quote: 1BB

The pit caught on years ago just like they always do. Use your feet instead. Point your toes as positions on a clock.

What happens when the count reaches 6? If I don't break my ankle, then I need an exorcist.

Quote: Sonuvabish

He takes the position that technically it is a device if you are using it to aid you in counting. But no one has ever been prosecuted this, and it would be very difficult to prove.

To the best of my knowledge, counting "per se" is not illegal. You are never prosecuted, but the casino can refuse to serve you under the basic law that says no business is required to serve anyone (as long as you are not using race, gender, or orientation for not serving someone).

As counting is useless unless you can change your bet amount, I don't see how to hide that, unless you are Wonging.

Now bringing an electronic device into a casino and using it to assist you in gambling is illegal.

Quote: pacomartin

To the best of my knowledge, counting "per se" is not illegal. You are never prosecuted, but the casino can refuse to serve you under the basic law that says no business is required to serve anyone (as long as you are not using race, gender, or orientation for not serving someone).

As counting is useless unless you can change your bet amount, I don't see how to hide that, unless you are Wonging.

Now bringing an electronic device into a casino and using it to assist you in gambling is illegal.

I think you misunderstood. Not using your chips to place bets. Using your hands to move the chips into different positions on the table that enhance your ability to remember the count.
And to add to anyone who reads this, wouldn't your hands/fingers be devices as well? What if you counted out loud because you had a hard time remembering? Would your voice be a device? There's a fine line...but where is it?

Quote: Sonuvabish

I think you misunderstood. Not using your chips to place bets. Using your hands to move the chips into different positions on the table that enhance your ability to remember the count.
And to add to anyone who reads this, wouldn't your hands/fingers be devices as well? What if you counted out loud because you had a hard time remembering? Would your voice be a device? There's a fine line...but where is it?

The main nevada regulation against devices actually only covers computerized, electronic or mechanical devices. It would be a real stretch in NV to argue that chips were a mechanical device. I vote no.

Quote: Sonuvabish

They were arrested and tried for using beads to locate aces, and to count. These allegations proved false. This left the question open as to whether it would have been illegal if they had been (although sequencing aces with beads doesn't make sense).

Is that true? My understanding was that this happened at a casino in Windsor, Canada, and the charges were dropped because there were no laws against using devices in Canada (at least at that time).

Quote: dwheatley

The main nevada regulation against devices actually only covers computerized, electronic or mechanical devices. It would be a real stretch in NV to argue that chips were a mechanical device. I vote no.

I have read that same reg. The bead incident occurred in Canada; at the time, there was no law against using devices in their jurisdiction. They classified it as cheating. Technically, using a device is distinguishable from cheating in Nevada because they are separate offenses.

I would have always said no. I still lean towards no, but now it's hazy. Where's input from the Wizard of Legalities? And Tomspur, the surveillance guru who turns off cameras in exchange for drugs j/k.

Quote: AxiomOfChoice

Is that true? My understanding was that this happened at a casino in Windsor, Canada, and the charges were dropped because there were no laws against using devices in Canada (at least at that time).

Yeah. They weren't dropped. They thought they were going to drop them, but it went ahead to trial anyway...even after the prosecution made stipulations that seemingly made their case impossible to win. The court had to render an opinion.

My understanding of the use of the beads was they used them to tell when they had accurately sequenced an ace, as a portion of their compensation was based on their accuracy. Technically your brain is a sort of device, obviously not cheating to use it,although some joints act like it is. The way some of these cheating statutes are written, such as the crap borgata is trying to pull with Ivey, are so generic and nonspecific that they are wide open to subjective interpretation. Basically written to protect the casino and allow them to be shot-takers, which is what it appears borgata is doing.

Quote: Sonuvabish

Yeah. They weren't dropped. They thought they were going to drop them, but it went ahead to trial anyway...even after the prosecution made stipulations that seemingly made their case impossible to win. The court had to render an opinion.

That opinion is near the bottom of this fascinating read starring Arnold Snyder:

http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/content/Card_Counting_in_the_Courts.htm

The summary is the case did go to trial, but the trial judge found that no cheating or fraud occurred, and dismissed the case. Province did not appeal.

So, in Ontario: using beads to count cards or ace-track is not illegal, neither is participating in an AP team under disguise in order to try to win money at the casinos by using said beads.

When I set down to play blackjack I place my chips into three stacks. The first stack is the one I play from. The second stack tracks the positive count and the third stack tracks the count when it goes negitive. I can count pretty fast but I have a hard time keeping up with the count while interacting with the dealer and other players between hands.

I find something on the chip face to represent the hand on a clock. I then turn it to the position where the hand on a clock would be for the count. If it's positive then the top chip in my second stack tells me the count at just a glance. If it's negitive then the top chip of the third stack tells me the negitive count.

I hope this makes since and you can understand what I'm saying. I play with my chips between hands so that moving them doesn't look abnormal. So far I haven't had any issues doing this and I can't see anyway the casino could ever prove that you where using chips to count this way.

Quote: Mikey75

When I set down to play blackjack I place my chips into three stacks. The first stack is the one I play from. The second stack tracks the positive count and the third stack tracks the count when it goes negitive. I can count pretty fast but I have a hard time keeping up with the count while interacting with the dealer and other players between hands.

I find something on the chip face to represent the hand on a clock. I then turn it to the position where the hand on a clock would be for the count. If it's positive then the top chip in my second stack tells me the count at just a glance. If it's negitive then the top chip of the third stack tells me the negitive count.

I hope this makes since and you can understand what I'm saying. I play with my chips between hands so that moving them doesn't look abnormal. So far I haven't had any issues doing this and I can't see anyway the casino could ever prove that you where using chips to count this way.

I understand. I once did something similar as an experiment. But proof is not the issue that concerns me.

Quote: dwheatley

That opinion is near the bottom of this fascinating read starring Arnold Snyder:

http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/content/Card_Counting_in_the_Courts.htm

The summary is the case did go to trial, but the trial judge found that no cheating or fraud occurred, and dismissed the case. Province did not appeal.

So, in Ontario: using beads to count cards or ace-track is not illegal, neither is participating in an AP team under disguise in order to try to win money at the casinos by using said beads.

The court did not conclude that using beads is not cheating. It set no precedent whatsoever. The facts were that they were not using beads to obtain an advantage, and the defense won on that basis.

Quote: Mikey75

When I set down to play blackjack I place my chips into three stacks. The first stack is the one I play from. The second stack tracks the positive count and the third stack tracks the count when it goes negitive. I can count pretty fast but I have a hard time keeping up with the count while interacting with the dealer and other players between hands.

I find something on the chip face to represent the hand on a clock. I then turn it to the position where the hand on a clock would be for the count. If it's positive then the top chip in my second stack tells me the count at just a glance. If it's negitive then the top chip of the third stack tells me the negitive count.

So without regard to the specifics (number of stacks, hands on the clock, whatever...) are chips in front of you, in and of themselves, a "device?" Would there not need to be some kind of correlation that they could relate back to the count in order for it not to be just random acts? Everyone plays with their chips. Someone (not me, of course) might use four or five white chips, ostensibly kept to use as tips to the waitress, as a subtle reminder of the running count, mixing them, so it might seem, randomly, in amongst his other chips. Would the prosecution not have to demonstrate that whenever the count was "X", the chips were always stacked consistently in sequence "Y"?

And given the "right" of the casino to simply turn away your business so long as it wasn't for any reason that they can't use, why bother? Varying your bet, and doing so when the count they can keep themselves (using, I'm sure, whatever "devices" they can bring to bear) is positive, would be sufficient, no?

Unless they wanted to make an example by having someone arrested?

Quote: rhodyBob

Would the prosecution not have to demonstrate that whenever the count was "X", the chips were always stacked consistently in sequence "Y"?

I assume they could for the sake of argument.

Quote: rhodyBob

So without regard to the specifics (number of stacks, hands on the clock, whatever...) are chips in front of you, in and of themselves, a "device?" Would there not need to be some kind of correlation that they could relate back to the count in order for it not to be just random acts? Everyone plays with their chips. Someone (not me, of course) might use four or five white chips, ostensibly kept to use as tips to the waitress, as a subtle reminder of the running count, mixing them, so it might seem, randomly, in amongst his other chips. Would the prosecution not have to demonstrate that whenever the count was "X", the chips were always stacked consistently in sequence "Y"?

And given the "right" of the casino to simply turn away your business so long as it wasn't for any reason that they can't use, why bother? Varying your bet, and doing so when the count they can keep themselves (using, I'm sure, whatever "devices" they can bring to bear) is positive, would be sufficient, no?

Unless they wanted to make an example by having someone arrested?

I personally don't think there is anyway they could make charges like that stick and I highly doubt they would even try. To attempt to turn chips that they gave you at the table into a "gaming device" would be hard to do in my opinion.

Quote: Mikey75

I personally don't think there is anyway they could make charges like that stick and I highly doubt they would even try. To attempt to turn chips that they gave you at the table into a "gaming device" would be hard to do in my opinion.

That is my thought as well. But I am hearing people have been arrested for this, at least in connection with shuffle tracking or signaling. I don't know if these rumors are true, what the outcomes were, nor if solo counting is distinguishable. I would like to think that even if the police could arrest you, a jury would never convict because at least one of nine people would refuse to believe the casino gave you a device, or that you could mentally construct a physical device.

My 2 cents...

It can be argued that you can construct a device using chips -- an abacus. On the other hand, that argument goes out the door if you aren't using the chips as an abacus.

It's probably best to create a memory system instead of using chips. From remembering the count as a number (or multiple numbers) to using toes & fingers (for side counting) imagine a ring around a finger or toe. Or use objects in your living room. The shelf in the corner is a 1, the table next to it is a 2, the TV is 3, the speakers is a 4, the dog bed is a 5, lamp is 6....etc. Every time you see an Ace, you imagine the room and move one object over. Viola! Of course this takes time to learn and practice. But is far better than using chips, IMO, since it's all mental and you don't have to keep moving chips (which is also bad because it's on camera).

I've used chips to side count aces, keep the count during a fill (or something that delays the game like a buy in), counting the table next to me (only done a few times), as well as signal the count to another player. But not all at the same time....and usually don't even use chips (since I don't side count aces anymore, difficult to count the table nearby since it's usually busy when I play, etc.).

Quote: RS

My 2 cents...

It can be argued that you can construct a device using chips -- an abacus. On the other hand, that argument goes out the door if you aren't using the chips as an abacus.

It's probably best to create a memory system instead of using chips. From remembering the count as a number (or multiple numbers) to using toes & fingers (for side counting) imagine a ring around a finger or toe. Or use objects in your living room. The shelf in the corner is a 1, the table next to it is a 2, the TV is 3, the speakers is a 4, the dog bed is a 5, lamp is 6....etc. Every time you see an Ace, you imagine the room and move one object over. Viola! Of course this takes time to learn and practice. But is far better than using chips, IMO, since it's all mental and you don't have to keep moving chips (which is also bad because it's on camera).

I've used chips to side count aces, keep the count during a fill (or something that delays the game like a buy in), counting the table next to me (only done a few times), as well as signal the count to another player. But not all at the same time....and usually don't even use chips (since I don't side count aces anymore, difficult to count the table nearby since it's usually busy when I play, etc.).

You can't really construct an abacus, I don't think, because that would take some carpentry skills. You can argue that it's comparable to an abacus. How would you use chips in a way that is not like an abacus? Do you mean like I can have a computer strapped to my chest, as long as I don't use it? It would be ridiculous if someone got in trouble for this. On the other hand, the casino could make the argument. Seems there is no resolution to the issue. I think they'd have to let you go in the end because the law does not clearly prohibit it like it does an electronic device. They always say ignorance of the law is no excuse. In this case, you cannot look up the law to determine whether or not chips is a device, you must rely on common sense. So how would they prove beyond a reasonable doubt you used a device and had the requisite scienter?