lilredrooster
lilredrooster
Joined: May 8, 2015
  • Threads: 130
  • Posts: 1737
July 10th, 2018 at 4:35:59 AM permalink
I realize that just about all of the claims of casino cheating are bogus
this poster on bjtf claims the El Cortez is cheating at BJ in that their ASM is ordering the cards in a particular way
unlike most claims of cheating this one appears to be more thoughtful
unlike almost all claims of cheating the veteran APs of bjtf did not reject the claim automatically. some thought it feasible
I posted this hoping the Wizard would comment and possibly look into it further and of course hear other knowledgeable APs comment
here is the post verbatim, I had no ethical problem re-posting it since it is already public
also, in this thread on bjtf there was talk of "oppositional " wagering
that is a thinly discussed subject that I would be interested in hearing more about - specifically whether or not it has value
I'm really hoping ZK does not respond to this post because I regard his claims of cheating as having zero credibility
here is the re-post:




"This will sound like a conspiracy theory the likes that a former member here posts at several other sites through the community. And BTW, I am not that former member. And I fear Norm will deleagte this to the disadvantage forum. But I urge you to read the entire post and then play and see for yourself.

First a little background. I have played El Cortez regularly for years, meaning multiple times per week. Hundreds of sessions per year. Unlike other players who find El Cortez unplayable because of the sweatiness that that are known for, I have found a way using a form of opposition betting to play regularly at EC with minimal heat. I combine this form of opposition betting with short sessions and showing bet spread but a couple times per session. And my results have been that every year, EC has been among my best individual casinos, usually top 2. Combined for the last 8 years, EC is my number 1 money maker.

This year started out the same for me, doing quite well at EC. And then things changed about 3 months ago. At this point I want to describe the layout, so those familiar with EC will know what tables I am tabling about. As you enter from the corner of 6th and Fremont, the first 'pit' or group of tables is usually not open. These tables are only in operation during busier times, weekends and holidays. The next 'pit' or group of tables is always in use. And there are 2 double deck tables, one on each side of pit. These tables still remain the typical EC tables. My results are excellent and heat is typical of EC. They sweat even small stakes and small spreads. Opposition wagering seems to confuse them though, even at the green level. Tip: keep your wagers green, even when betting up to $200.

Now at the end of this second pit, there are two new (in the last couple months) double deck games. They are the final two games (end games) of this second pit, before you hit the third pit. One of the games is next to a roulette game, for reference. Now these are the two games that I have had unusual results and have done some pretty significant research (trial size) on.

These are $5 minimum games during the week, maybe $10 on weekends, with newer model ASMs. The kind that can be programmed by entering a code. Not only by my results but my observation of several hundred times through the shuffle of these machines, I believe these machines are in what you may have heard a former member refer to as "beast mode" Basically there is a clump of high cards somewhere in play. A significant clump. This results in every shoe or time through the 2 decks (until shuffle point) at some point reaching a TC of +4 or -4 EVERY single time through the cards.

One of 3 scenarios. 1.) high card clump comes out at the beginning, resulting in a very negative count immediately, that remains, slowly moving back towards zero throughout the remaining cards. 2.) high card clump comes out later, either in the middle or end of cards that are played. This results in a rising count that always reaches TC+4, often more and then the high card clump comes out and the count returns close to zero before the shuffle. You might think this is a card counters dream but it is not. You are at a disadvantage for several rounds when low cards are coming out, and then push 20's when the high card clump comes out. If you are playing with several other players you will notice a round that almost everyone including dealer has 20's. 3,) is that the high card clump is after the shuffle, in which case the count rises throughout the played cards, the counter raising his bets with the rising count and the high value cards never come out (after the shuffle point).

The machine, in this mode that I refer to as "beast mode" makes the high card clump. The player cutting determines the placement of the clump, meaning which of the 3 scenarios above will occur. And all 3 favor the house to varying degrees.

So in my play of these two tables over the past few months, the first thing I noticed was my results, losing results, which I have never had at EC. As continued to play while I suspected what was going on, I noticed something else. There is no heat at these games. Those that play EC regularly know that you frequently see other card counters, usually very low level, small spread and often questionable skill. And you have probably witnessed other counters backed off and likely been backed off yourself. Well at these two tables, card counters spread blatantly and receive no heat. AND they lose!

Over the last month, even though I strongly suspected what was going on, I have continued to play this game, 4-5 times a week, flat betting table minimum, just so I could have a reasonable sample size before I made such accusations, which I am sure sound like a conspiracy theory.

So, for those that play El Cortez, I just wanted to post a heads up.....BEWARE. For those that doubt what I am saying or want to take a look for yourself, I urge you to. Go in and flat bet these two specific tables. You will witness a high card clump with one of the three scenarios stated above....every single time through the cards. TC of +4 or more or -4 or I guess lower (since dealing with a negative). And spread if you want, you will notice the lack of usual EC heat at these two tables."
"𝕀 𝕛𝕦𝕤𝕥 𝕕𝕣𝕠𝕡𝕡𝕖𝕕 𝕚𝕟 𝕥𝕠 𝕤𝕖𝕖 𝕨𝕙𝕒𝕥 𝕔𝕠𝕟𝕕𝕚𝕥𝕚𝕠𝕟 𝕞𝕪 𝕔𝕠𝕟𝕕𝕚𝕥𝕚𝕠𝕟 𝕨𝕒𝕤 𝕚𝕟"
Romes
Romes
Joined: Jul 22, 2014
  • Threads: 26
  • Posts: 5237
July 10th, 2018 at 7:40:23 AM permalink
I figure his post wasn't immediately thrown to the wolves because he brings factual and statistical mentions to it. While still not bringing hard facts, the poster shows that he has a large sampling size with EC, enough to possibly see a change.

I'd be interested in observing these tables, simply because it should be very, very easy to observe what the OP is claiming. Go watch 10 deals, and you should see a giant rise or fall of the count nearly every time, with situation #2 yielding a round of all large cards for the table. So I think that's another reason the OP isn't immediately discredited, because he provides his theory in a very, very easy to test way. I would love it if we could get a couple locals to just go watch (not even bet) like 5-10 shuffles each. If we got a few people to do that we could get a bit of a better picture of the OP's theory as immediately even with a smaller sampling size of something like 20 shuffles we should see the scenarios above happening, and we should notice the "high card clump."

I'd be curious of the legalities of said shuffle... "assuming" this is happening (yes a decent sized assumption right now) since the players cut the cards and move the clump "randomly" would it violate any laws/restrictions on keeping the game random? The cards might be random-ish, but the outcome would favor the house more, so not random?
Playing it correctly means you've already won.
OnceDear
Administrator
OnceDear
Joined: Jun 1, 2014
  • Threads: 40
  • Posts: 3329
July 10th, 2018 at 7:43:02 AM permalink
Quote: Romes

... and we should notice the "high card clump."

And wouldn't it be sweet irony if it was then possible to exploit it !!!
If you are enjoying the game, you're already winning.
Romes
Romes
Joined: Jul 22, 2014
  • Threads: 26
  • Posts: 5237
July 10th, 2018 at 8:05:23 AM permalink
Quote: OnceDear

And wouldn't it be sweet irony if it was then possible to exploit it !!!

I didn't even want to mention... ;-).
Playing it correctly means you've already won.
ZenKinG
ZenKinG
Joined: May 3, 2016
  • Threads: 46
  • Posts: 1243
July 10th, 2018 at 8:10:01 AM permalink
Quote: Romes

I figure his post wasn't immediately thrown to the wolves because he brings factual and statistical mentions to it. While still not bringing hard facts, the poster shows that he has a large sampling size with EC, enough to possibly see a change.

I'd be interested in observing these tables, simply because it should be very, very easy to observe what the OP is claiming. Go watch 10 deals, and you should see a giant rise or fall of the count nearly every time, with situation #2 yielding a round of all large cards for the table. So I think that's another reason the OP isn't immediately discredited, because he provides his theory in a very, very easy to test way. I would love it if we could get a couple locals to just go watch (not even bet) like 5-10 shuffles each. If we got a few people to do that we could get a bit of a better picture of the OP's theory as immediately even with a smaller sampling size of something like 20 shuffles we should see the scenarios above happening, and we should notice the "high card clump."

I'd be curious of the legalities of said shuffle... "assuming" this is happening (yes a decent sized assumption right now) since the players cut the cards and move the clump "randomly" would it violate any laws/restrictions on keeping the game random? The cards might be random-ish, but the outcome would favor the house more, so not random?



I already observed it, but in another casino. Planet Hollywood, every single 8 deck shoe rises to a TC of +2 using Halves within the first 2.5 decks or so.

Im still in utter disbelief but it looks like my instincts were right ever since I got to Vegas. There are casinos in this town doing some shady shit and thats the unfortunate truth. It honestly makes me not want to play ever again because whats honestly the point if any casino can cheat at will at any point in time.
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." ----- Thomas Jefferson
Mission146
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 116
  • Posts: 11453
July 10th, 2018 at 8:13:01 AM permalink
Quote: ZenKinG

It honestly makes me not want to play ever again because whats honestly the point if any casino can cheat at will at any point in time.



If you really believe theyíre all cheating, just keep reading that sentence I quoted over and over again (which should have actually ended with a question mark) until you donít want to play anymore.
Vultures can't be choosers.
DRich
DRich
Joined: Jul 6, 2012
  • Threads: 67
  • Posts: 3992
Thanks for this post from:
Mission146
July 10th, 2018 at 8:17:18 AM permalink
Quote: ZenKinG

I already observed it, but in another casino. Planet Hollywood, every single 8 deck shoe rises to a TC of +2 using Halves within the first 2.5 decks or so.



How often should you see a +2 count within 2.5 decks of an 8 deck shoe? It seems like that scenario would be very common in a fair game.
Living longer does not always infer +EV
OnceDear
Administrator
OnceDear
Joined: Jun 1, 2014
  • Threads: 40
  • Posts: 3329
Thanks for this post from:
Mission146
July 10th, 2018 at 8:24:04 AM permalink
Quote: DRich

How often should you see a +2 count within 2.5 decks of an 8 deck shoe? It seems like that scenario would be very common in a fair game.

Yeah, but to then go on to lose a hand is unthinkable. For it to happen twice is absolute proof of cheating...
... not
If you are enjoying the game, you're already winning.
Mission146
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 116
  • Posts: 11453
July 10th, 2018 at 8:27:37 AM permalink
I want to know how this is always happening when, at least as of a few months ago, they were taking tens OUT of their pre-shuffled Chinese decks.

Which is it? Iím fine with either claim. Pulling tens? Manipulating the order of the cards coming out? Just pick one.
Vultures can't be choosers.
michael99000
michael99000
Joined: Jul 10, 2010
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 1010
July 10th, 2018 at 8:59:27 AM permalink
Are the aces included in the high card clump? And Are these tables no mid shoe entry? If not then couldnít you wait around until a shoe where the clump is not seen through the first bunch of rounds and then jump in

  • Jump to: