Thread Rating:

Paigowdan
Paigowdan
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
October 6th, 2011 at 2:58:39 AM permalink
Quote: EvenBob

But its not, Dan. Nowhere in any casino rulebook
is it written down that card counting is against
the rules. Its not tolerated, its not against the
rules. Its not written in the rulebook that excessive
flatulence is against the rules, but its not tolerated
either.



Huh?? Bob - are you joking, or just 100% naive about gambling or what!
1. Card counting is against the house rules, and procedures are written up all over the industry on it. In fact, card counting defenses are a gaming industry cottage industry, there is so much handling of it...
2. If Mike tolerates flatulence at WOV (and there's a shit load of flatulence here Bob!!, not only speaking for myself), but:
3. This "where is it written B.S." is a lame answer to a house rule violation. It is written of the pit boss' lips, as in "read my lips...you're done for the night..."

Floormen and Shift managers get DAILY Surveillance notices of "face-sheets" on card counters to watch for and back off.

Typical faxed memorandum:
" 'Baseball Cap Guy #37' [see photo] made a 5x jump bet from $50 to $250 on two hands with count at +7 at Sunset Station on 8/2/11 during swing shift operations, 11PM to 1AM; white male, 5'10", 220 lbs, played uncarded, orders Whiskey Sour as 'cover drink.' Typically Bets insurance at +5, jump bets 3X on +4, 5x +6 or higher. Left BJ-14 table at 11:37PM on 8/2/11 with floorman "DC" observing action, played on Rouette table R-2 Sunset for 20 mins hedging bets before re-attempting mid-shoe game entry on BJ-6 at 12:05AM 8/3/11" etc., etc., etc....



Card Counting has been a complete table games "house felony" for eons - absolute ages, for decades, essentially for a generation. Early in card counting history, when the families ran Las Vegas, people were indeed back-roomed (had their hands broken by baseball bats over discussions of "don't do that and don't come back!")
Card counting is written up in casino house documents for pit crews, surveillance, shift managers, and casino managers. It used to be a feared threat that was at one time dealt with very harshly. Bob, how naive are you about Blackjack and gambling history?? This is while it is technically legal and not a felony by the local police precenct to count cards, it is against against house rules and players get backed off and tracked.
I did a WHOLE thing on "it doesn't always matter what the police think! - Because it matters what The pit boss will think, and he will 86 you" (expel you with tresspassing warning, if need be), and card counting is the MAIN reason for being backed off Blackjack.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
NowTheSerpent
NowTheSerpent
Joined: Sep 30, 2011
  • Threads: 15
  • Posts: 417
October 6th, 2011 at 3:12:44 AM permalink
*****
NowTheSerpent
NowTheSerpent
Joined: Sep 30, 2011
  • Threads: 15
  • Posts: 417
October 6th, 2011 at 3:20:13 AM permalink
*****
NowTheSerpent
NowTheSerpent
Joined: Sep 30, 2011
  • Threads: 15
  • Posts: 417
October 6th, 2011 at 3:21:04 AM permalink
Quote: Keyser

This entire dice sliding lawsuit is just plain sleazy. It stinks of 'bad faith' on the part of the Wynn.

Here's why... Why didn't the pit crew or surveillance stop the game once they saw that they were sliding?
Are we for even on minute to believe that they weren't aware of the slide until after they viewed the video tapes? Or did they just decide at the time that it's ok if they slide just some of the time, because it would give the casino a chance to win the money back even if the players won?

Here's what I believe really happened. The Wynn knew they were sliding, and chose to let them continue playing, realizing that if they were to lose, that they would win the players money. If the players were fortunate enough to win, then the casino knew that they could always use the video tape in order to sue for the return of the money. The Wynn saw this play as a win/win game. This entire folly is the fault of the Wynn for not enforcing proper gaming procedures. They intentionally chose to bend the rules so that they could have a shot at winning the big players bank.

Again, this predatory gambling on the part of the casino. It's a disturbing trend in which casinos are also reviewing big wins to see if they can win back some of the money that they have lost. It's sleazy when Caesar's Palace does it, and it's sleazy when the Wynn does it. The fact that the players were foreigners makes it easier for the casinos to get away with it in the end.

Put the word out, the Wynn is sweating the money these days. If you're lucky enough to win big, then they will use their attorneys or the patron dispute process in an attempt to win their money back! Truly disgusting!

-Keyser



Keyser, I TOTALLY believe you! Corporations which couldn't formulate a strategy like the one you're enunciating here could never afford a spot on the Strip. I TOTALLY believe they would do this. Players need to learn a way to defeat this kind of "welching" strategy.
EvenBob
EvenBob
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
  • Threads: 428
  • Posts: 24697
October 6th, 2011 at 3:26:12 AM permalink
Quote: Paigowdan

Card counting is against the house rules



But those rules aren't written anywhere, Dan. You have
yet to produce any such rules. There's no dealer handbook
that lists card counting as being against any rule. Just
like excessive flatulence isn't in the book, but its not tolerated
either. Its just assumed in the industry that counters will
be dealt with, but no pit in its right mind will ever tell you that
to your face. They will never whip out the rulebook and point
to number 6.1: "Card counting is against the rules in this
casino." Indeed, if you're backed off of 'trespassed', they
will never EVER tell you why they're doing it. Why is that,
Dan, if its in the rulebook.
"It's not enough to succeed, your friends must fail." Gore Vidal
MrV
MrV
Joined: Feb 13, 2010
  • Threads: 313
  • Posts: 6888
October 6th, 2011 at 3:27:59 AM permalink
Quote: AlanMendelson

MrV you just ended the discussion when you wrote: "I hope to criminalize dice setting."

Okay, I'm sure everyone will want to belly up to a craps table to watch the dealer throw the dice.

Oh, as a matter of fact, in California you can watch the dealer turn over playing cards... and they call that California Craps. And it has been failing miserably in one casino after another.

Like I said, if you doubt the current regulations ask the NGC yourself.



I simply am asking YOU to post the "current regulations."

You ARE an expert, yes?

C'mon, reporter: report fact, not opinion.

As for my hoping to criminalize dice setting: why should that end the discussion?

Oh, I get it.

You're one of those starry eyed dreamers who has attempted to hitch a ride on the dice setting star.

Call me Zarathustra: your god is dead.
"What, me worry?"
Paigowdan
Paigowdan
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
October 6th, 2011 at 3:28:33 AM permalink
An interesting response to this situation for the Serpent is this:

If someone tried to burglarize (burgle) you house and failed and had left, only leaving a couple of minor scratches on your door, - would you file a police report and file an insurance claim? No. In fact, YOU might let him hack a way for a little further, seeing that he cannot do it, before you take action. True?
If the burglar said, "I'm innocent of my criminal actions because the homeowner watched me for a short while to assess the situation, so I am now innocent of any wrong doing" - would you accept that argument?

If someone tried to burgle your house, and had succeeded, and took a fortune from you, and wrecked your house in the process, would you file a police report and an insurance claim? Yes.
If the burglar said, "I'm innocent of my criminal actions because the homeowner watched me for a short while to assess the situation, so I am now innocent of any wrong doing" - would you accept that argument?

You might even file a civil lawsuit to get back the property.
Hmm....You would indeed do it for yourself if you incurred a loss.
Especially after you found out that he suceeded in robbing, but when you would not have - if he had failed.

One might argue that that is what Wynn is trying to do is to get back is property that was lost by clear theft.
If you would do this for yourself, then why would you argue against him that he wishes to do it for himself, when you would do it for yourself also?

You will say:
1. He is rich enough, so he has no right.
2. He is an evil casino operator, so he has no right.
3. He is both, so he doubly has no right.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
FleaStiff
FleaStiff
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
  • Threads: 265
  • Posts: 14484
October 6th, 2011 at 3:39:46 AM permalink
What determines that a drink is a "cover drink" rather than simply a drink.
pacomartin
pacomartin
Joined: Jan 14, 2010
  • Threads: 649
  • Posts: 7895
October 6th, 2011 at 4:06:58 AM permalink
Quote: Paigowdan

Surveillance tape played to the judge and jury is tough to argue.



A surveillance tape of a man throwing dice to the best of his ability. Also on the tape is a pit boss who fails to call a "no roll".

If casinos wanted to remove dice control from the player they could make a device


They do not, because they know that players are enthralled with the ability to handle the dice, and to attempt dice control. They would bet a lot less money if you take that part of the game away.

It is entirely up to the casino to enforce governing rules. If the players paid off the pit boss, that is an entirely different story.

You really don't see this viewpoint as reasonable?
EvenBob
EvenBob
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
  • Threads: 428
  • Posts: 24697
October 6th, 2011 at 4:18:19 AM permalink
Quote: pacomartin

They do not, because they know that players are enthralled with the ability to handle the dice, and to attempt dice control.



EXACTLY! And now that they've achieved it, they're
labeled crooks and cheaters and dirtbags. 'Casino
Integrity', an oxymoron if there ever was one.
"It's not enough to succeed, your friends must fail." Gore Vidal

  • Jump to: