BJ CC Griffin mentality
For some reason the MIT Blackjack team was included even though they say a few times they did legal AP
So they interview Barbara Griffin of the newly reopened Griffin Agency and here is her view on why the MIT team actually were cheating.
Paraphrasing: "It was long ago determined that card counting at Blackjack is not illegal as long as the person counting is using their brains and no exterior help. The MIT team crossed over into cheating when they had one person doing the counting and someone else who they signalled to come wager. That person who wagered was not using their brains to determine the count and was relying on the exterior source of the other guy. He was being given information not available to him because he was not seated at the table prior to his large wagers"
WTF?
I’ll take a look at his book when I get home to see if that’s correct.
Quote: gamerfreakI may be remembering incorrectly, but I believe Bob N. has said that signaling is a gray area and does not recommend it.
I’ll take a look at his book when I get home to see if that’s correct.
If I remember Bobs book myself the white side of the grey area is signalling there is a high count does not affect the cards or gameplay
The dark side would be signalling another player in a hole card situation obtained by sitting at another table or seat for example. In that situation the other player can decide his play based on passed info of the exact card in play
The edge is quite clear. A hole carder receiving info knows WHEN to wager to avoid losing. The CC only knows the table is overall favorable and can still lose mightily. He is not using the info to affect any outcomes. He just has a favorable moment
Most casinos IMO have an extremely difficult time seeing the difference in grey areas. Its all B&W to them. If its grey its cheating!
Is signaling cheating? Depending on the situation it could or it could not.
In a legal signaling situation casinos, at least in Nevada and many other jurisdictions, have the right not to allow those players to play blackjack.
I would not have anyone arrested, I would just tell them they can't play blackjack anymore. End of issue.
Quote: FCBLComishIs signaling cheating?
Almost certainly in the case of live Poker.
Quote: darkozJust watched a doc on cheats and grifters included on the Oceans 13 Bluray
For some reason the MIT Blackjack team was included even though they say a few times they did legal AP
So they interview Barbara Griffin of the newly reopened Griffin Agency and here is her view on why the MIT team actually were cheating.
Paraphrasing: "It was long ago determined that card counting at Blackjack is not illegal as long as the person counting is using their brains and no exterior help. The MIT team crossed over into cheating when they had one person doing the counting and someone else who they signalled to come wager. That person who wagered was not using their brains to determine the count and was relying on the exterior source of the other guy. He was being given information not available to him because he was not seated at the table prior to his large wagers"
WTF?
I can sort of see the logic and transgression in what she said.
However, where do you draw the line? People walk up to a table all the time and say, "winning?" Or "how's it going?" etc. And make a decision whether to sit down based on the answer they get.
If the answer is a preset key phrase that the spotter says in response, well, prove it. If the cue is non-verbal, well, prove it.
As to whether you're physically sitting at the table, what's that have to do with anything? People stand behind a table and watch all the time. They're not all backcounters or counting at all.
But they do have the laws about outside devices or other electronic methods, so you're at least in part getting info from an outside source. Again, prove it. Show where the law is clearly prohibiting any communication among players about the table trend.
The No Mid Shoe Entry rule was designed to stop this. So was the lousy penetration, flat-betting, and their right to make arbitrary decisions about who they will deal to. That has to be enough. They shouldn't be prosecuting on claiming it's illegal.
Quote: billryanSignaling will certainly get you tossed from a casino.
That’s why I just yell.. “Come play here, The Count is high. “
We need 20 dollars in the pot to hit a high hand 500.00 bonus
There was a pair on the board and I bet
One bettor was willing to call my bet if I had a high hand
He signaled me and I shook my head because I did not have a high hand
The dealer told us any signaling to increase the pot for a high hand bonus will be invalidated
Quote: terapinedmy poker room is really cracking down on signaling
We need 20 dollars in the pot to hit a high hand 500.00 bonus
There was a pair on the board and I bet
One bettor was willing to call my bet if I had a high hand
He signaled me and I shook my head because I did not have a high hand
The dealer told us any signaling to increase the pot for a high hand bonus will be invalidated
That sounds like a flaw in the promotion more than anything else.
Quote: gamerfreakAre there any laws against collusion in online poker?
Isn't that akin to asking if there are laws about how pure the cocaine you buy is?
Quote: billryanIsn't that akin to asking if there are laws about how pure the cocaine you buy is?
It’s no longer illegal.
Further, it’s been legal in certain jurisdictions for quite some time.
Quote: gamerfreakIt’s no longer illegal.
Further, it’s been legal in certain jurisdictions for quite some time.
Cocaine is legal?
Or collusion in Poker?
Or both?
The only cocaine I know is legal are coca cola bottles with peppermint candy canes stuck in them.
Coke Canes.
Quote: darkozCocaine is legal?
Or collusion in Poker?
Or both?
The only cocaine I know is legal are coca cola bottles with peppermint candy canes stuck in them.
Coke Canes.
Bill was saying it was a dumb question, alluding that online poker is illegal thus not regulated.
However it has been legal in many areas for years.
Quote: gamerfreakAlmost certainly in the case of live Poker.
Absolutely!
I count but I'm not aggressive about it. If I were playing at a table with an aggressive card counter, and the dealer re-shuffles the deck way too early as a result, I'll just leave and play at another table, because I refuse to play a BJ game where the the hands dealt are all count 0 or negative. This is one reason I prefer to play heads-up (the other being that I get more penetration when there's only one player). Unfortunately it's hard to find a table with no one else there.
Quote: KevinAAAt the casino where I work, we employ the following strategy for stopping card counters -- if you increase your bet by a lot because the count is +, we "break the deck" (i.e. re-shuffle). The result is that the player only plays zero or negative counts. It's even more effective than barring, because who would want to play there?
I count but I'm not aggressive about it. If I were playing at a table with an aggressive card counter, and the dealer re-shuffles the deck way too early as a result, I'll just leave and play at another table, because I refuse to play a BJ game where the the hands dealt are all count 0 or negative. This is one reason I prefer to play heads-up (the other being that I get more penetration when there's only one player). Unfortunately it's hard to find a table with no one else there.
Ever consider that the counter will just fake a large bet on a negative situation to force a shuffle?
Quote: FCBLComishEver consider that the counter will just fake a large bet on a negative situation to force a shuffle?
Haha... genius...
Somebody should run the numbers on that to see how the math works out.
Quote: TigerWuHaha... genius...
Somebody should run the numbers on that to see how the math works out.
It's not a secret and if done effectively it cost nothing because the dealer will shuffle and you pull back your bet. You slowly train your dealers. Put out a tip for him when the count is high and its time to shuffle. Pull the tip if he shuffles instead of dealing. He'll get the idea after a few times and if he doesn't play ball, move and find a dealer who will.
Quote: FCBLComishEver consider that the counter will just fake a large bet on a negative situation to force a shuffle?
I wrote "because the count is +" not just that someone suddenly makes a large bet. Some people randomly make large bets. We don't care about that. It's when surveillance and/or the pit boss is counting along and knows why the player makes a large bet that I re-shuffle.
Quote: KevinAAI wrote "because the count is +" not just that someone suddenly makes a large bet. Some people randomly make large bets. We don't care about that. It's when surveillance and/or the pit boss is counting along and knows why the player makes a large bet that I re-shuffle.
It has still been taken advantage of.
Gotta find the article but there was a casino that got hit HUGE doing that
Everytime the player had a +ev high count he put a large bet in which caused a card shuffle because the house had a CC person or device themselves.
The only time they allowed a few large bets to play was immediately after the shuffle when the count was neutral or when the count was negative (like you said)
The guy was blasting them for tens of thousands and then after a few days hundreds of thousands. Im not sure how much he cleaned up. Gotta read the article again
Basically he was a CC who mastered ace tracking and clumps and everytime he saw the aces and tens in a clump he purposely threw out a large bet so the house tracking him would reshuffle. He followed the clump, stuck the cut card so the clump was near the top and threw out large bets early in the negative/neutral count
Casinos will never overcome smart AP's lol.
Is the house legally allowed to use 'devices' to count cards? Shouldn't they be subject to the same rules as the player as far as 'counting devices' are concerned?Quote: darkoz...the house had a CC person or device themselves.
Quote: JoemanIs the house legally allowed to use 'devices' to count cards? Shouldn't they be subject to the same rules as the player as far as 'counting devices' are concerned?
It has been challenged in court successfully. But to my knowledge there are no regs or laws against it. Not 100% on thst though
Quote: JoemanIs the house legally allowed to use 'devices' to count cards? Shouldn't they be subject to the same rules as the player as far as 'counting devices' are concerned?
Why would they need a device
I was at the El Cortez
The pit boss was suspicious of a bettor. She simply went through the discard pile to see what the count was
I am going to assume whatever laws apply to a B&M casino applies to their online games as well.Quote: gamerfreakAre there any laws against collusion in online poker?
