Gaming Commission Comedy of Errors …

Found these documents on the link below available under the Open Records Act concerning 2 Gaming Commission cases with Biased unbalanced dice:

Quote:

These real documents read like a bad Hollywood script of "Comedy of Errors" - see how many technical snafus made by the supposedly independent Casino Control Commission you can find ... Is this a perfunctory investigation by amateurs in a manner that is incomplete, incompetent, lacking of analytical abilities, unprofessional and can only be described as an inadequate, negligent performance of government administrative, fiduciary and enforcement responsibilities or maybe is just an orchestrated cover-up of the actual facts of unbalanced dice in live casino play. This dice inspection is being supervised and directed by an attorney (Assistant General Counsel) so either is possible -- you decide.

Some dates have been highlighted to let you decide what took so long to occur behind closed doors – Also note that the original case was marked CLOSED in the field at the Casino after reviewing the dice, surveillance video, talking to the Boxman that tested the dice and the Gaming Agent made a recommendation that the case be closed. HOWEVER, this case was REVERSED at the Headquarters Ohio Casino Control Commission:

1. Without even interviewing the Boxman or patron and
2. Ignoring the overwhelming surveillance video and
3. Ignoring the biased results of the dice on the table and then
4. Ignoring the actions of the Casino to remove the dice from play and
5. NEVER “officially” testing the evidence themselves with a dice balancing caliper and
6. Without "officially" meeting with the lead field Agent. Even though this case took over 52 days to settle, the headquarters division conveniently never "officially" met with the original on-site Gaming Agent that wrote the Initial Report and did the initial investigation and recommended this case Closed in this following Initial Report

Link

I cannot do the linked article justice because of the highlighting missing here that is in the original, but here is the initial complaint and Gaming Agent findings:

___________________________________________________________________

OCCC ACISS Case Management System: Initial Report Report Inquiry (XX-1093)


Initial Report Report: XX-1093

Primary Information

Report Number: XX-1093
Case Number: XX-1093
Case Status: CLOSED
Case Lead LEO: Chapman, Kyle
Type Of Report: Initial Report
Report Date/Time: 09/13/20XX 0:00
Description: Player Dispute
Reporting LEO: Chapman, Kyle (Cincinnati / Ohio Casino Control Commission)
Occurred From: 09/13/20 XXXX 6:15
Occurred To: 09/13/20xx 9:10
Source Of Info: XXXX
Source Reliability:XXXX
Dissemination: SYSTEM WIDE
Approved By: Koeppe, Stu (Cincinnati / Ohio Casino Control Commission)
Approved Date/Time:XXXX
Approval Status: Approved
Expense Status: Not Posted

Synopsis

On 09-13-XXXX (wrong year is typed in this Report) a patron playing at craps Table 306 disputed that the dice in play were out of balance and requested them to be changed. A new set was brought in and calibrated/checked on the table in front of the patron. He claimed the new set was out of balance and asked for another set. (To clarify, the Casino Boxman determined that all these sticks of dice were unbalanced by properly using the caliper, not the patron.) The third set was also found to be out of balance (by the Casino Boxman). The fourth checked ok and were introduced to the game. The patron wanted to file a dispute form with the OCCC. (The patron did not want to file a complaint until after the Shift Manager refused to retest the dice on the hard surface of the chip bank cover or the podium in the pit, and then refused to reimburse the patron for his losses due to unbalanced dice being used by the casino in violation of state law as noted below. The patron was aware that the inspection is required to be conducted on a hard surface [ Note: see patron's filed complaint; and, this was the subsequent reason for dismissing the tests conducted at the table by the boxman, which actually did not distort the conclusion of the tests performed on the felt layout of the table.] ).

Related Addresses

Address Relationship

1000 Broadway Street Cincinnati, Ohio 45202,

Horseshoe Casino Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OHIO, 45202 OCCURRED

Charges

Offense Type Offense Attempted/Committed Statute UCR Class

1. Regulatory - Patron Complaint / Dispute NOT APPLICABLE REG UCR

Related Subjects

Name Relationship Type Sex Race Age DOB

XXXX xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxx xxx

Related Property

Property Class Property Type Description Prop Status

1. EVIDENCE Miscellaneous - Sleeve of 5 red dice from table 306 - EVIDENCE/SEIZED
(Note – the 2 other sleeves listed from this Initial Report’sSynopsis above are missing from EVIDENCE – why - as Ohio Administrative Code (OAC), highlighted below clearly indicates they should be removed from play.

Where is the casino's discrepancy report, as later noted by Mr. Martin, the Ohio Director of Regulatory Compliance in an email ?? This requirement was even highlighted in yellow by the Patron in the OAC he attached to his Complaint. )

2. LOST US Currency $XXXX USD lost at craps table 306 ---

Narrative

On XXXX, at Craps Table 306, XXXX was playing the game for about an hour according to statements, when he asked the boxman (supervising dealer) of the table to test the dice being used in play. His reasoning for the request was that certain combinations of the die were showing up more frequently than others and this made him suspect that the dice were not 'balanced.'

Testing of the dice began at the table, on the table felt around 8:55 hours. Via XXXX XXXX's statement and surveillance footage, the dice that were in play at the time were taken off the table due to faults (the Casino Boxman determined that all these sticks of dice were unbalanced by using the caliper). Two more sleeves of die (dice) were also tested by the Boxman and both of those, as well were deemed to have faults (determined that all these sticks of dice were unbalanced by properly using the balancing caliper) and were taken out of the game.

The fourth sleeve tested ok and were introduced to the game. During the testing OCCC agents were requested. Contact was made around 1000 hours. XXXX alleged the dice he was using and other players were 'unbalanced.' Those dice were seized by agents as evidence for a regulatory matter. He went on to state the other sleeves tested after were 'unbalanced' as well. XXXX was given a dispute form and was advised he could bring the form back to us or mail a copy to Columbus. He stated he would, and requested that his $XXXX he lost on the game be returned for the dice being out of compliance (attached is the casino CMS record indicating a lost of $XXXX on XXXX).

He was advised to speak with the Casino about that matter and that the OCCC could not make that determination right then and there.

As related above, the Casino did find the disputed dice to be out-of-balance, as well as two new sleeves of dice, therefore I recommend this case be Closed, Transferred to Regulatory Compliance.

Attached are: Casino CMS records of play and loss, OCCC Dispute form, OHLEG printout. Also, video of the complainant's play has been flagged.

Attachments

Description Size Mime Type Record Origination

1. OHLEG (ohleg.pdf) 237 KB application/pdf XXXX
2. Dispute Form (disputeform.pdf) 12,660 KB application/pdf XXXX
3. Casino CMS Record for XXXX (cmsrecord.pdf) 18 KB application/pdf XXXX
View Image Report

Record Status Information

Record Origination Operator: Chapman, Kyle (Cincinnati / Ohio Casino Control Commission)
Record Origination Date: XXXX
Last Update Operator: Koeppe, Stu (Cincinnati / Ohio Casino Control Commission)
Last Update Date: XXXX

ACISS software licensed by Ohio Casino Control Commission
msiba XXXXXXXX

___________________________________________________________________

Quote: Bohemian

"Certain combinations of the die were showing up more frequently than others."

Duh!!!!

SanchoPanza, now you are starting to understand.

What I don't understand is why not take advantage of the bias? Why keep playing the same way until you lose?

Keep coming back until they realize there's a problem.

AxelWolf, depends on the type of bias present and the ability to recognize it soon enough to take advantage. Pair of dice can be unbalanced in 26 different combinations and you only have a 5% chance of picking the exact same dice as the guy that just tossed the dice before you.

Quote: Bohemian

to prevent customers from taking advantage of a certain bias in dice, Casinos are changing the bias from one shift to the next.

Also, we are finding more Casinos using a stick of dice that has several different loads - that not all dice in the same stick are equal. How do you know which 2 dice loads you have just picked up to roll with gives you which combination of numbers ?!! Is this the reason you just rolled 4 hardways on your first toss but you cannot even roll a hardway on your 2nd toss because you're using 2 different dice with different probabilities !!

The 2 certain dice that you're using on your 1st toss may produce a 25 roll. However, the 2 dice you picked out the 2nd time may be unbalanced differently and assist in a PSO or much shorter roll with your same set on the same table. It's harder to maintain consistency if you are not using the same equipment.

But is that really fair to the average unsuspecting carnival craps player that assumes all the dice are fair in accordance with most state laws?

What is eye-opening about this article is how blatant the Gaming Commission is pro-casino and anti-player!

Quote: Bohemian

SanchoPanza, now you are starting to understand.

Where in the material does it specify which combinations appeared inordinately, because 60 or 70 sevens out of 420 rolls ain't too far off of standard deviation? Where are the numbers from the pathetically and shamelessly ignorant "regulators" of Ohio?

Quote: SanchoPanza

Where in the material does it specify which combinations appeared inordinately, because 60 or 70 sevens out of 420 rolls ain't too far off of standard deviation? Where are the numbers from the pathetically and shamelessly ignorant "regulators" of Ohio?

SanchoPanza, according to the author and documents obtained under the Open Records Act, this particular craps player in Ohio is not a math wiz and he did not need "420 rolls", but realized that the dice were out of balance without the assistance of a balancer or charting with paper simply by observing that the normal pyramid distribution was not occurring according to The Wizard of Odds website:

Quote: The Wizard of Odds

Dice Probability
Before you play any dice game it is good to know the probability of any given total to be thrown. First lets look at the possibilities of the total of two dice. The table below shows the six possibilities for die 1 along the left column and the six possibilities for die 2 along the top column. The body of the table shows the sum of die 1 and die 2.

https://wizardofodds.com/gambling/dice/

If you read the article in the OP's link, you will learn this from the documents obtained under the Open Records Act:

Quote:

Original Patron Complaint filed with the Ohio Casino Control Commission

This incident occurred on XXXX morning XXXX, approximately from XXXX at the craps table of the Horseshoe Cincinnati Casino. The following description of events are to the best of my knowledge and recall as to what occurred and the actual events can be verified by casino surveillance video. I began play on table number CR 20-306 alone but was soon joined by a few other players over an hours play. I noted to the dealers during my first six or seven turns the point of 10 or 4 was established , mostly the 10, and that was very strange and unusual. I also noticed that there were many 4s, 10s and horn numbers being tossed, many more than the statistical probability; so much so, that there were comments being made by the other players and myself. I also noticed that there were many more 7s coming with the 5 face and the 2 face; this occurred frequent enough that I wanted the dealers and boxman to be aware of this, so, I stated, that when this happened in many of the Las Vegas casinos, where there are no dice specification laws or regulations, the dealers would announce “cinco dos, adios”!

Quote:

I must have announced this 5 or 6 times as it continued to occur. I finally was sure that this sleeve of dice was clearly biased and not balanced. I then asked the boxman if he would have these dice tested for balance with the balancing caliper and that if the test was administered properly we could prove why we were seeing all the unusual numbers being rolled and less inside numbers, or the proper statistical pyramid distribution of numbers.

I told him that I have seen dice sleeves being tested here before and that the balance test was seldom done correctly with the intent to confirm that the dice were balanced, but mostly just going through the motions. I explained to him that if he would let me test the dice, I could show how it should be done to confirm balance and disclose if a die were not balanced as required for a fair game and in accordance with Ohio Administrative Code (3772-11-20 Dice specifications (A)(6)). To his credit, he told the floor supervisor that I believed the dice were biased and out of balance. To the floor supervisors credit, he brought a square and balancing caliper to the table and told the boxman to test the dice.

Of course, they were not going to allow me to conduct these tests, but the boxman proceeded to conduct the tests by allowing me to instruct him on the procedures while explaining why it is the correct way to determine if the die is out of balance and to what degree. I told him that I have seen dice sleeves tested all over the country and have seen it done incorrectly too many times. The first die tested was observed as it slowed to a stop, it then changed the direction of rotation and went backwards about 90 degrees, stopped, changed direction of rotation, again backwards a little less than 90 degrees, stopped, again changing direction of rotation approximately 45 degrees, stopped and again rotated in the opposite direction. I told him to stop and note that this die stopped and changed rotation direction 4 times and that is a result of the heavy side of the die seeking to come to rest on bottom of the axis it is spinning on. I also told him to note that the one (1) pip was facing upward, and that I suspected that this die was out of balance and the six (6) pip face was heavy; and , we should spin it again to confirm this. The exact result occurred, changed rotation direction 4 times and the one (1) pip face was up when it came to rest. I asked him to confirm this again by spinning the die in the opposite direction. He did this and got the exact same result two more times, 4 direction changes of rotation and the one (1) pip upward. I then asked him to note that the three (3) pip face was positioned so as to be perpendicular to the balancing caliper, which he agreed. I then explained that if we were to remove the die and place it back in the balancing caliper so that it would be parallel to the caliper, we would then have two different opposite corners of the die and a different axis in which to perform a spin balance test to confirm that which we already knew.

After trying twice to position the die this way and get it adjusted where it wasn't too tight and allow it to spin freely, he conducted two more tests, spinning the die in different directions and did get the same result, changing the rotation direction after stopping 4 times before coming to a stop with the one (1) pip face up. He was convinced that this was a valid procedure and concluded this die was extremely out of balance. He proceeded to the second die to test and we placed the first unbalanced die to the side with the one (1) face up. The second die also was extremely unbalanced as proven by following the same procedure. It also changed rotation direction 4 times and came to rest on the same pip face up and was done on a different axis with the same conclusion. The next two dice were also out of balance, stopping with the same pip faces up on different axis tests; while they didn't change rotation directions 4 times, we agreed that they were not fit for fair play as required. The fifth and last die was also in this category but to a lesser degree.

The floor supervisor then came over to the table and the boxman told him that he did have a problem with these dice and they were out of balance. I asked him if I could have my money back and that I had lost $XXXX of my $XXXX buy in playing with dice that were not in accordance with Ohio Administrative Code (3772-11-20 Dice specifications (A)(6) Have its weight equally distributed throughout the cube, with no side of the cube heavier or lighter than any other side of the cube).

He told me he was contacting the manager or shift manager. In the interim, he brought another sleeve of dice to the table and I asked if they could be tested. They were, and these also were biased out of balance. I noted to the boxman after he tested the first die in this sleeve, since we see that it is not balanced, normally when these tests are done, this would be reason enough to reject the sleeve since they are all the same serial number and its required to offer the player five fair dice to choose from. He did test the rest of the sleeve finding more unbalanced dice. At this point the floor supervisor brought another sleeve, and this one also was not fit for fair play due to unbalance. The fourth sleeve was tested and concluded were fair.

So this shows that the dice are unbalanced that the casino was using? Where are all of the guys that said that would never happen the casinos would lose their license?

I'm struggling to understand your motives here. Is your plan simply to make anonymous gripes on the Internet, or is it to expose and mitigate casino use of faulty gaming equipment? Because you're doing a great job of the former but a lousy job of the latter.

Have you contacted any investigative journalists? State representatives? Attorneys willing to file a complaint on spec? Anyone outside the circle of corruption that you allege is happening here?

Quote: Bohemian

This particular craps player in Ohio is not a math wiz and he did not need "420 rolls", but realized that the dice were out of balance without the assistance of a balancer or charting with paper simply by observing that the normal pyramid distribution was not occurring according to The Wizard of Odds website

Thank you for conceding that neither the complainant nor the casino nor the commission are particularly knowledgable about the game of craps, in which they are all supposed to be partaking.

There is no indication anywhere in the postings that the results were outside standard statistical norms.

Most tellingly, what was the outcome of all that hubbub?

Quote: SanchoPanza

Thank you for conceding that neither the complainant nor the casino nor the commission are particularly knowledgable about the game of craps, in which they are all supposed to be partaking.

SanchoPanza, I never conceded that the player was not knowledgeable about the game, in fact quite the opposite would be determined from most reasonable persons reading the article.

Here is another article from the same aforementioned reference about the Mississippi Gaming Commission:

"The following is from a Report to the Mississippi Legislature Gaming Regulation in Mississippi: A Progress Report The Mississippi Gaming Commission (MGC) done by a Joint Legislative Committee on Performance Evaluation and Expenditure Review (PEER):

Enforcement
The MGC’s Enforcement Division still lacks a formal inspection program that would include a plan for conducting unannounced inspections of casino operations a pre-determined number of times to ensure adequate monitoring of the fair play of casino games.

MGC does not provide adequate training for enforcement agents regarding MGC’s regulations, table games, and electronic gaming devices and equipment. Thus MGC does not ensure that enforcement agents have the knowledge, skills, and abilities necessary to ensure that gaming is conducted honestly and competitively.

MGC’s Theory of Inspections
Since the agency’s inception, the MGC’s enforcement field operations have been driven primarily by industry complaints rather than by an aggressive inspection program. The theory has been that casinos are primarily responsible for detecting and reporting incidents and potential violations to the MGC. According to MGC staff, an underlying assumption of this theory is that the casinos are owned by legitimate corporate businesses that are not going to risk losing their gaming licenses through unethical, unfair, or illegal play of the game practices.

A formal inspection program for casino regulation would include an inspection of every facet of each casino’s operations a pre-determined number of times, comprehensive and standardized checklists to document evaluations of casino games and operations, and twenty-four hour coverage, seven days a week, on a “no notice” basis in all MGC districts. Such a program would aggressively monitor all casino operations without an assumption that licensees are trustworthy and would report all potential violations of state laws or regulations to the MGC.

MGC still does not have a formal inspection program in place for monitoring casino games.

The MGC has criteria for table game approval and modifications (e. g., a new game should not exceed the estimated hold percentage of games already approved in Mississippi, games should be compatible with the public policy of the state). However, MGC has not written these procedures for this process. PEER contends that without written criteria, MGC cannot assure that table games are being conducted in an honest and competitive manner. Without sufficient policies governing the approval or modification of table games, the commission cannot be assured that table games are being approved in a consistent manner and played consistently on a statewide basis. Because the standard is discretionary, there is no objectivity in the table game approval and modification process. Without this objectivity, the MGC cannot ensure fair and equitable treatment of casino patrons or operators."

Link to Full Report

Quote: Bohemian

"Without sufficient policies governing the approval or modification of table games, the commission cannot be assured that table games are being approved in a consistent manner and played consistently on a statewide basis. Because the standard is discretionary, there is no objectivity in the table game approval and modification process. Without this objectivity, the MGC cannot ensure fair and equitable treatment of casino patrons or operators." Link to Full Report

More than 125 pages of blather serve only to reinforce the view that the so-called regulators, and their evaluators, don't have much of a clue. Here is the lone reference to dice -- balanced, unbalanced or undigested:

"MGC’s Enforcement Division is responsible for monitoring casino activities through regulatory inspections, which include the following types of inspections: . . . cards and dice."

Serves anybody right for playing at what are at best poorly regulated operations. Players shouldn't expect much recourse

Quote: SanchoPanza

Quote: Bohemian

"Without sufficient policies governing the approval or modification of table games, the commission cannot be assured that table games are being approved in a consistent manner and played consistently on a statewide basis. Because the standard is discretionary, there is no objectivity in the table game approval and modification process. Without this objectivity, the MGC cannot ensure fair and equitable treatment of casino patrons or operators." Link to Full Report

More than 125 pages of blather serve only to reinforce the view that the so-called regulators, and their evaluators, don't have much of a clue. Here is the lone reference to dice -- balanced, unbalanced or undigested:

"MGC’s Enforcement Division is responsible for monitoring casino activities through regulatory inspections, which include the following types of inspections: . . . cards and dice."

Serves anybody right for playing at what are at best poorly regulated operations. Players shouldn't expect much recourse

SanchoPanza, G**D***F***ingAmenHallelujahYes! Can you give me another Hallelujah! You nailed it!

Quote: MathExtremist

I'm struggling to understand your motives here. Is your plan simply to make anonymous gripes on the Internet, or is it to expose and mitigate casino use of faulty gaming equipment? Because you're doing a great job of the former but a lousy job of the latter.

Have you contacted any investigative journalists? State representatives? Attorneys willing to file a complaint on spec? Anyone outside the circle of corruption that you allege is happening here?

I guess Ahigh says it best as he agrees with Wizard (who has a Black List of cheating casinos and you don't question him)

Quote: Ahigh

Right wrong or indifferent, I just wanted the right thing to be done. If I had busted out my camera and gotten all theatrical, I think there may have been some doubts as to my motives.

I have been asked, since working in a position where I talk to regulators and others in the industry, many times why it is that I am so concerned about players.

The answer is really simple:

IT IS GOOD BUSINESS!

Anyone who disagrees with me expect me not to be swayed about how it's better business to be greedy when it comes to taking more than you should from less intelligent people. And I don't care who you are! I care about the State of Nevada and that includes people who gamble. I'm sorry, but I do actually freaking care that people get a good deal!

This is probably the single biggest reason why I keep coming back to this site. This is the overlap between myself and Michael. And I wouldn't be in this industry if not for Michael putting all this casino crap up on the internet where I could find it before I had ever come to Las Vegas.

But I will keep doing my thing.

I refuse to apologize for my ethics, though, no matter who I butt heads with in this town.

One of them demands and verifies actual proof when he accuses a company of cheating. The other doesn't.


ZCore13

ZCore13, plenty of proof abound by both Ahigh, on the internet in videos linked on this website and in the documents in the OP of this thread. However, you will either die defending your casino industry or you are as Leonardo Da Vinci describes:

There are 3 classes of people:
- Those who see;
- Those who see when they are shown;
- Those who do not see

Quote: Bohemian

I guess Ahigh says it best as he agrees with Wizard (who has a Black List of cheating casinos and you don't question him)

No, the issue of overseas, unregulated remote wagering websites is a totally different issue. First of all, it's easy to detect (mathematically) that an online game is behaving unfairly -- the Wizard has described many statistical techniques for doing this analysis. Second, and more importantly, playing at an unregulated Internet casino is equivalent to handing your address and $100 to a stranger at the airport who's headed to Las Vegas and telling him to put it on the passline for you, and to please mail you a check for the winnings. There *is no recourse* for someone scammed in such a way, so the Wizard (and others) have posted blacklists to attempt to prevent anyone from doing business with those websites in the first place.

But you're not talking about an unregulated overseas online website, you're talking about a land-based casino in a U.S. jurisdiction with what should be appropriate regulatory oversight. In other words, you have appropriate recourse for complaints. You haven't taken those steps, however, and that tells me you're not actually serious about chasing this down.

If you ever want to get serious, if you ever want to step out from behind your veil of anonymous, paranoid accusations of widespread conspiracy and file a complaint (with legitimate evidence) with the appropriate authorities, I'm sure we'd all be interested in reading the details. The choice is yours. But having a proper outlet for your grievance and not using it, that's telling.

Quote: Bohemian

ZCore13, plenty of proof abound by both Ahigh, on the internet in videos linked on this website and in the documents in the OP of this thread. However, you will either die defending your casino industry or you are as Leonardo Da Vinci describes:

There are 3 classes of people:
- Those who see;
- Those who see when they are shown;
- Those who do not see

Cool. Show me then. Somebody who is playing craps and observes 100 something rolls while playing is not proof that the dice are providing an unfair game.

That will never be proof to anyone other than those with an agenda. All I ask is for real proof that one, dice are being used that are not fair to the players. And two, even more damaging, that casinos do it on purpose like some of you have claimed.


ZCore13

Quote: Zcore13

...Cool. Show me then. Somebody who is playing craps and observes 100 something rolls while playing is not proof that the dice are providing an unfair game.

That will never be proof to anyone other than those with an agenda. All I ask is for real proof that one, dice are being used that are not fair to the players. And two, even more damaging, that casinos do it on purpose like some of you have claimed.


ZCore13

Like I said, when they win, they think they're superior DIs. When they lose, they make all sorts of bogus claims about bad dice.

Quote: Zcore13

Cool. Show me then.

All I ask is for real proof that one, dice are being used that are not fair to the players.

ZCore13

ZCore13, fair enough. Here is proof of 1 example removed from a live casino floor - parts of Ohio Gaming Agent's report referenced in the original post of this thread:

Case Status: CLOSED
Case Lead LEO: Chapman, Kyle
Type Of Report: Initial Report
Report Date/Time: 09/13/20XXXX 0:00
Description: Player Dispute
Reporting LEO: Chapman, Kyle (Cincinnati / Ohio Casino Control Commission)
Occurred From: 09/13/20XXXX 6:15
Occurred To: 09/13/20XXXX 9:10
Source Of Info: XXXX
Source Reliability: XXXX
Dissemination: SYSTEM WIDE
Approved By: Koeppe, Stu (Cincinnati / Ohio Casino Control Commission)
Approved Date/Time: XXXX
Approval Status: Approved
Expense Status: Not Posted

Synopsis

On 09-13-XXXX a patron playing at craps Table 306 disputed that the dice in play were out of balance and requested them to be changed. A new set was brought in and calibrated/checked on the table in front of the patron. He claimed the new set was out of balance and asked for another set. (To clarify, the Casino Boxman determined that all these sticks of dice were unbalanced by properly using the caliper, not the patron.) The third set was also found to be out of balance (by the Casino Boxman). The fourth checked ok and were introduced to the game. The patron wanted to file a dispute form with the OCCC.

Address Relationship

1000 Broadway Street Cincinnati, Ohio 45202,

Horseshoe Casino Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OHIO, 45202

Quote: Zcore13

And two, even more damaging, that casinos do it on purpose like some of you have claimed.

That's not the issue, only a distraction. However, consider this - Quality control standards put human error at about 2% and we are finding 10 times and more than 2% of dice in play are out of balance.

So either your fellow employees are dumb as shit incompetent or they are inserting the unbalanced dice into play on purpose. You choose.

The law states as follows:

3772-11-20 Dice specifications.
(6) Have its weight equally distributed throughout the cube, with no side of the cube heavier or lighter than any other side of the cube;

Quote: Bohemian

On 09-13-XXXX a patron playing at craps Table 306 disputed that the dice in play were out of balance and requested them to be changed. A new set was brought in and calibrated/checked on the table in front of the patron. He claimed the new set was out of balance and asked for another set. (To clarify, the Casino Boxman determined that all these sticks of dice were unbalanced by properly using the caliper, not the patron.) The third set was also found to be out of balance (by the Casino Boxman). The fourth checked ok and were introduced to the game. The patron wanted to file a dispute form with the OCCC.

Whoever is doing the clarifying accomplished just the opposite. Seeing as how just Set No. 1 was in play, "all these sticks of dice" would seem to apply to the opened but rejected sets of dice, per SOP. The fourth set, which received an OK, was put into play. Therefore, just Sets Nos. 2 and 3 were found defective in the normal course of checking and were never put into play, per standard operating procedure. So no unbalanced dice were ever in play according to this post.

Quote: SanchoPanza

Whoever is doing the clarifying accomplished just the opposite. Seeing as how just Set No. 1 was in play, "all these sticks of dice" would seem to apply to the opened but rejected sets of dice, per SOP. The fourth set, which received an OK, was put into play. Therefore, just Sets Nos. 2 and 3 were found defective in the normal course of checking and were never put into play, per standard operating procedure. So no unbalanced dice were ever in play according to this post.

SanchoPanza, a closer reading of the original documents would lead most reasonable persons to conclude that 3 of 4 sticks out of balance were put into play:

"This incident occurred on XXXX morning XXXX, approximately from XXXX at the craps table of the Horseshoe Cincinnati Casino. The following description of events are to the best of my knowledge and recall as to what occurred and the actual events can be verified by casino surveillance video. I began play on table number CR 20-306 alone but was soon joined by a few other players over an hours play. I noted to the dealers during my first six or seven turns the point of 10 or 4 was established , mostly the 10, and that was very strange and unusual. I also noticed that there were many 4s, 10s and horn numbers being tossed, many more than the statistical probability; so much so, that there were comments being made by the other players and myself. I also noticed that there were many more 7s coming with the 5 face and the 2 face; this occurred frequent enough that I wanted the dealers and boxman to be aware of this, so, I stated, that when this happened in many of the Las Vegas casinos, where there are no dice specification laws or regulations, the dealers would announce “cinco dos, adios”!

I must have announced this 5 or 6 times as it continued to occur. I finally was sure that this sleeve of dice was clearly biased and not balanced. I then asked the boxman if he would have these dice tested for balance with the balancing caliper and that if the test was administered properly we could prove why we were seeing all the unusual numbers being rolled and less inside numbers, or the proper statistical pyramid distribution of numbers.

I told him that I have seen dice sleeves being tested here before and that the balance test was seldom done correctly with the intent to confirm that the dice were balanced, but mostly just going through the motions. I explained to him that if he would let me test the dice, I could show how it should be done to confirm balance and disclose if a die were not balanced as required for a fair game and in accordance with Ohio Administrative Code (3772-11-20 Dice specifications (A)(6)). To his credit, he told the floor supervisor that I believed the dice were biased and out of balance. To the floor supervisors credit, he brought a square and balancing caliper to the table and told the boxman to test the dice. Of course, they were not going to allow me to conduct these tests, but the boxman proceeded to conduct the tests by allowing me to instruct him on the procedures while explaining why it is the correct way to determine if the die is out of balance and to what degree. I told him that I have seen dice sleeves tested all over the country and have seen it done incorrectly too many times. The first die tested was observed as it slowed to a stop, it then changed the direction of rotation and went backwards about 90 degrees, stopped, changed direction of rotation, again backwards a little less than 90 degrees, stopped, again changing direction of rotation approximately 45 degrees, stopped and again rotated in the opposite direction. I told him to stop and note that this die stopped and changed rotation direction 4 times and that is a result of the heavy side of the die seeking to come to rest on bottom of the axis it is spinning on. I also told him to note that the one (1) pip was facing upward, and that I suspected that this die was out of balance and the six (6) pip face was heavy; and , we should spin it again to confirm this. The exact result occurred, changed rotation direction 4 times and the one (1) pip face was up when it came to rest. I asked him to confirm this again by spinning the die in the opposite direction. He did this and got the exact same result two more times, 4 direction changes of rotation and the one (1) pip upward. I then asked him to note that the three (3) pip face was positioned so as to be perpendicular to the balancing caliper, which he agreed. I then explained that if we were to remove the die and place it back in the balancing caliper so that it would be parallel to the caliper, we would then have two different opposite corners of the die and a different axis in which to perform a spin balance test to confirm that which we already knew.

After trying twice to position the die this way and get it adjusted where it wasn't too tight and allow it to spin freely, he conducted two more tests, spinning the die in different directions and did get the same result, changing the rotation direction after stopping 4 times before coming to a stop with the one (1) pip face up. He was convinced that this was a valid procedure and concluded this die was extremely out of balance. He proceeded to the second die to test and we placed the first unbalanced die to the side with the one (1) face up. The second die also was extremely unbalanced as proven by following the same procedure. It also changed rotation direction 4 times and came to rest on the same pip face up and was done on a different axis with the same conclusion. The next two dice were also out of balance, stopping with the same pip faces up on different axis tests; while they didn't change rotation directions 4 times, we agreed that they were not fit for fair play as required. The fifth and last die was also in this category but to a lesser degree.

The floor supervisor then came over to the table and the boxman told him that he did have a problem with these dice and they were out of balance. I asked him if I could have my money back and that I had lost $XXXX of my $XXXX buy in playing with dice that were not in accordance with Ohio Administrative Code (3772-11-20 Dice specifications (A)(6) Have its weight equally distributed throughout the cube, with no side of the cube heavier or lighter than any other side of the cube).

He told me he was contacting the manager or shift manager. In the interim, he brought another sleeve of dice to the table and I asked if they could be tested. They were, and these also were biased out of balance. I noted to the boxman after he tested the first die in this sleeve, since we see that it is not balanced, normally when these tests are done, this would be reason enough to reject the sleeve since they are all the same serial number and its required to offer the player five fair dice to choose from. He did test the rest of the sleeve finding more unbalanced dice. At this point the floor supervisor brought another sleeve, and this one also was not fit for fair play due to unbalance. The fourth sleeve was tested and concluded were fair. "

THEN, for some reason the Gaming agent only took the 1st sleeve into evidence and the other 2 sleeves got put back into the regular play inventory:

Quote:

Property Class Property Type Description Prop Status

1. EVIDENCE Miscellaneous - Sleeve of 5 red dice from table 306 - EVIDENCE/SEIZED

(Note – the 2 other sleeves listed from this Initial Report’s Synopsis above are missing from EVIDENCE – why - as Ohio Administrative Code (OAC), highlighted below clearly indicates they should be removed from play.

Where is the casino's discrepancy report, as later noted by Mr. Martin, the Ohio Director of Regulatory Compliance in an email ?? This requirement was even highlighted in yellow by the Patron in the OAC he attached to his Complaint. )

"!! As noted below – Yes – inquiring minds want to know what happened to the other 2 sleeves that disappeared from evidence !!
___________________________________________________________________

Quote:

From: Martin, Patrick D
Sent: XXXX AM
To: Siba, Michelle
Subject: RE: 9/13/20XXXX incident report

Michelle:

Is there anything to this complaint about three of four sleeves’ dice being out of balance?

Patrick

__________________________________________________________
Below is an eMail from the Ohio Casino Control Commission Director of Regulatory Compliance to the State Commission Assistant General Counsel admitting that the craps player is correct that the Casino has not complied with its regulatory duties.
__________________________________________________________

Quote:

From: Martin, Patrick D
Sent: XXXXAM
To: Siba, Michelle
Subject: RE: 9/13/20XXXX incident report

Ok, thanks. If the claims are correct, the casino should have given us a dice discrepancy report.

(Note - Where is this statutory required report from the casino in the record ?? This is just another noncompliance issue that shows complete failure of the system.)"