holecarders, edge sorters, spookers vindicated in court
in Australian court
while playing pontoon - also known as Spanish blackjack
the court found that their aggressive methods of advantage play were not illegal and did not constitute cheating
.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-08-...game/101331000
.
this is what caused me to think it was spooking -
from the article:
"The judgement said, during the Pontoon games that triggered the exclusion notice, Mr Grant was sitting close to the dealer but not playing, using hand gestures to indicate to Mr Anderson which cards to play."
I'm assuming his hand gestures were based on his seeing the hole card - he was not playing - he was signaling another player - so in my view he wasn't as GMan stated "on the game"
in any event, when I counted back in the day - I did not employ these techniques - I only knew about them - so my use of language may not have been 100% correct
.
.
These players were not hole-carding. The decks being used had minor defects in some of the card backs that allowed a careful observer to make a good guess about the rank of the cards. Not all cards had the defect. Not all guesses were correct.Quote: lilredrooster__________
this is what caused me to think it was spooking -
from the article:
"The judgement said, during the Pontoon games that triggered the exclusion notice, Mr Grant was sitting close to the dealer but not playing, using hand gestures to indicate to Mr Anderson which cards to play."
I'm assuming his hand gestures were based on his seeing the hole card - he was not playing - he was signaling another player - so in my view he wasn't as GMan stated "on the game"
.
link to original post
This was not edge sorting because no action was taken to modify the orientation of the cards. And it certainly wasn't hole-carding. It was simply observing an imperfect design on the back of some cards.
In my opinion, the judge absolutely made the right call here in favor of the players.
Quote: teliotThese players were not hole-carding. The decks being used had minor defects in some of the card backs that allowed a careful observer to make a good guess about the rank of the cards. Not all cards had the defect. Not all guesses were correct.Quote: lilredrooster__________
this is what caused me to think it was spooking -
from the article:
"The judgement said, during the Pontoon games that triggered the exclusion notice, Mr Grant was sitting close to the dealer but not playing, using hand gestures to indicate to Mr Anderson which cards to play."
I'm assuming his hand gestures were based on his seeing the hole card - he was not playing - he was signaling another player - so in my view he wasn't as GMan stated "on the game"
.
link to original post
This was not edge sorting because no action was taken to modify the orientation of the cards. And it certainly wasn't hole-carding. It was simply observing an imperfect design on the back of some cards.
link to original post
Okay, I surrender - my description was not good - I read the article very quickly and made some wrong assumptions - apologies
hope the info was useful or interesting to some
.
Quote: lilredroosterQuote: teliotThese players were not hole-carding. The decks being used had minor defects in some of the card backs that allowed a careful observer to make a good guess about the rank of the cards. Not all cards had the defect. Not all guesses were correct.Quote: lilredrooster__________
this is what caused me to think it was spooking -
from the article:
"The judgement said, during the Pontoon games that triggered the exclusion notice, Mr Grant was sitting close to the dealer but not playing, using hand gestures to indicate to Mr Anderson which cards to play."
I'm assuming his hand gestures were based on his seeing the hole card - he was not playing - he was signaling another player - so in my view he wasn't as GMan stated "on the game"
.
link to original post
This was not edge sorting because no action was taken to modify the orientation of the cards. And it certainly wasn't hole-carding. It was simply observing an imperfect design on the back of some cards.
link to original post
Okay, I surrender - my description was not good - I read the article very quickly and made some wrong assumptions - apologies
hope the info was useful or interesting to some
.
link to original post
The article was very useful and thanks for the link.
Everyone is guilty occasionally of doing a cursory read and a misunderstanding. It has happened to me too. People will jump on you for it. It's no biggie.
Quote: lilredrooster
Okay, I surrender - my description was not good - I read the article very quickly and made some wrong assumptions - apologies
hope the info was useful or interesting to some
.
link to original post
I thought the article was interesting.
Needed more lemur antics and explosions, but a good read anyway.
https://www.queenslandjudgments.com.au/caselaw/qcat/2022/289
The big big "mistake" the casino made, was that they criminalised the whole issue and gave the patrons an official ban.
The judge was very right in saying that you cannot do that based on what is public available information. The players did not deceit the casino. Star knew or at least should have known what they were doing. If Star were to have issues with it, they should have protected themselves better. Not wait till they lost. Now that these guys won this administrative decision, they should take Star to court for not having allowed them to participate in a game that they could beat and ask for compensation.
Pontoon used to be my favorite game at the Star Gold Coast (formerly Jupiters').
FYI: They took the game off the floor some time near the beginning of 2021, I think.
Holecarding is not illegalQuote: acesideI would find these two guilty based on collusion and hole carding though.
link to original post
Quote: HunterhillHolecarding is not illegalQuote: acesideI would find these two guilty based on collusion and hole carding though.
link to original post
link to original post
Not only that but there wasn't even any collusion.
There was no help from the dealer. Two guys playing together making decisions what to wager isn't collusion. Otherwise a lot of husband and wives are colluding every day.
Quote: acesideThese two are professional advantage players in the first place. They surely had won a lot of money from this casino. Even with so much posted information here, I still cannot figure out how they gained an edge from the game of pontoon. This is a wild game and is probably very hard to beat by card counting. How does edge sorting help with this game?
link to original post
For one example, if you had a bustable total that would normally be hit, but you knew the next card was a ten, then you wouldn't hit. Depending on how the game is dealt, you can also vary your bets if you know what the first card out will be and you are seated in first position.
