Wizard
Administrator
Wizard 
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1337
  • Posts: 22057
Thanks for this post from:
RS
March 26th, 2018 at 2:24:42 PM permalink
Quote: ZenKinG

NRS 465.015 Definitions. As used in this chapter:

“Cheat” means to alter the elements of chance, method of selection or criteria which determine:
(a) The result of a game;

(b) The amount or frequency of payment in a game;

(c) The value of a wagering instrument; or

(d) The value of a wagering credit.



Thanks. If your motive in this is to set a precedent, I applaud that. However, I would recommend you cool down and not fight this as angry casino-hating hot head. If it would help to have an expert witness to show the casino benefit to a preferential shuffle, I'll do so if this gets to a hearing level.

I'm sure the casino will argue they didn't shuffle because they knew the count, they did it because you raised your bet. You can take advantage of this by increasing your bet in a negative count, ensuring you play only in positive and neutral counts.

I would lay long odds you'll lose, but sometimes you have to fight something on principle.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
boymimbo
boymimbo
Joined: Nov 12, 2009
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 5994
March 26th, 2018 at 2:39:33 PM permalink
Quote: SM777

ZenKing crying in another post? Wow, didn't see that coming.



Given that there is no law in place concerning when a casino can shuffle a deck or burn/not burn a card, they aren't cheating. Of course when a deck reverts to a new shoe the cards in the deck the odds are changed. However, it is very unlikely that a casino will be found guilty of cheating when they are doing counting counter-measures.

Likely other casinos in the MGM family and their lawyers will cite many examples where they take this measure against suspected counters. It's a widespread practice.

And yes, of course, they can prevent you from playing blackjack for any reason not amounting to discrimination based on creed/sex/sexuality etc.
----- You want the truth! You can't handle the truth!
Ibeatyouraces
Ibeatyouraces
Joined: Jan 12, 2010
  • Threads: 68
  • Posts: 11933
March 26th, 2018 at 2:40:15 PM permalink
What would counters do if casinos didn't use cut cards on shoe games and the dealers just shuffled any time they wanted?
DUHHIIIIIIIII HEARD THAT!
FleaStiff
FleaStiff
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
  • Threads: 265
  • Posts: 14463
March 26th, 2018 at 2:54:34 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard

I would lay long odds you'll lose, but sometimes you have to fight something on principle.

Lawyers charge double for that.
gamerfreak
gamerfreak
Joined: Dec 28, 2014
  • Threads: 48
  • Posts: 3092
March 26th, 2018 at 6:11:05 PM permalink
Quote: boymimbo

Given that there is no law in place concerning when a casino can shuffle a deck or burn/not burn a card, they aren't cheating. Of course when a deck reverts to a new shoe the cards in the deck the odds are changed. However, it is very unlikely that a casino will be found guilty of cheating when they are doing counting counter-measures.


If someone in the sky counted every shoe, and signaled to the floor to reshuffle whenever the count got favorable to the player, would that be cheating in your opinion?
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard 
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1337
  • Posts: 22057
Thanks for this post from:
Romes
March 26th, 2018 at 7:00:25 PM permalink
Quote: gamerfreak

If someone in the sky counted every shoe, and signaled to the floor to reshuffle whenever the count got favorable to the player, would that be cheating in your opinion?



It would be in mine. However, I think if it is one on one, player against dealer, it is more of a fair fight.

If ZK wins this case, and dealers must have a predetermined point of shuffling, then every game will be on a continuous shuffler, which will only hurt the players. Better for both sides to let the cat and mouse game stay the same.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
RS
RS
Joined: Feb 11, 2014
  • Threads: 62
  • Posts: 8623
March 26th, 2018 at 7:02:46 PM permalink
Quote: boymimbo

Likely other casinos in the MGM family and their lawyers will cite many examples where they take this measure against suspected counters. It's a widespread practice.


MGM doesn't own Stratosphere, but in any case -- this is NOT what the casino would want to do. That would be an admission of guilt.

I don't think making this thread was a good idea, but I support ZK in this endeavor.

A few things stick out to me.

1. I am assuming what he said is true that the Stratosphere dealers don't burn a card when entering the table.
2. They told him (I'm assuming, he wasn't explicit IIRC) they were shuffling because they didn't burn a card.
3. This completely contradicts the, "We're shuffling because you have a big bet, but we don't know anything about the count."
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard 
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1337
  • Posts: 22057
March 26th, 2018 at 7:19:27 PM permalink
I am surprised this is the first time ZK has been early-shuffled on, if that is the case. Somehow I sense there is a story behind the story.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
MrBo
MrBo
Joined: Dec 30, 2017
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 79
March 26th, 2018 at 7:46:00 PM permalink
Preferential shuffling has been going on forever in Nevada. It is nothing new. It is clearly cheating. Just think about it in terms of gamerfreak's post. The odds in blackjack are not 'set' for every round as they are in other games. In blackjack it is a flow, based on cards played and cards remaining. Sometimes the remaining cards favor the house, sometimes the remaining cards favor the player. The accumulation of that makes up the house advantage.

Now if you remove or shuffle away those times that the remaining cards favor the player and only play the rounds that favor the house, you are without a doubt, illegally changing the odds of the game, increasing the house advantage. Robert Nersesian has voiced his opinion on this many times.

That said, it would be very difficult to win any kind of court proceedings involving preferential shuffling. The case would hinge on getting deep into the math and that's where you would lose the interest of many judges and jurors. Any kind of legal proceedings that gets too technical has this problem.

And if someone were to win a case like this or one of the other cases Zenking has recently been talking about like challenging Nevada's casinos right to ban players, the results would be exactly what occurred in Atlantic City when Ken Uston 'won' his case, the casino's would then just offer worse games. As I said in another post recently, of these two models, players should want this Nevada model over the New Jersey model.

So while, preferential shuffling is illegal, best case scenario is what Wizard said. It becomes part of the cat and mouse game. Rather than pursue legal challenges that if you were to win, would result in worse conditions, you are better off learning to play this cat and mouse game better.
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard 
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1337
  • Posts: 22057
March 26th, 2018 at 8:10:29 PM permalink
Quote: MrBo

Preferential shuffling has been going on forever in Nevada....



Excellent post. Thank you. Could have never said it better myself.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.

  • Jump to: