Thread Rating:

boymimbo
boymimbo
Joined: Nov 12, 2009
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 5994
October 7th, 2011 at 11:18:53 AM permalink
Like any large company, before a lawsuit is filed, a risk analysis is completed to see what the likelihood of winning would be. After reviewing all of the evidence that Wynn had over the period of a month, and given the successful arrest of the two accused, it seems like the probability of getting their money back would be good, worth a legal battle over.

As well, it puts the industry on notice on a cheating phenomenon that may have bilked a number of other casinos out of money. The scheme fooled Wynn, for a month, and the eye in the sky probably didn't notice for a while that it was even going on.

It seems like this was more of a long term conspiracy rather than a simple cheat scheme. The lawsuit mentions that there were other customers who were designed to distract the personnel, responsible for calling "no-roll". Sliding probably only occurred on a few percentage of the accused rolls. It was the partner who was placing bets, not the bettor. So, a few things probably happened here:

(1) Tips were in place to ensure that the dealers took a cut of the winnings and to bypass a possible "no-roll" call.
(2) Distractors were in place perhaps to block the launch of the roll or to distract the box/stick during the roll, perhaps a post-bet or some other distraction.
(3) The sliding only occurred on the rolls where the bet meant something, not to the shooter, but to the winner.
(4) It probably took Wynn security a while to figure out who the team was - others are still unidentifiable.

Still, absolutely, i agree, once a roll is called as such, (1), (2), and (3) shouldn't matter. It's the crew's responsibility to maintain the integrity of the game, no matter what happens.
----- You want the truth! You can't handle the truth!
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1388
  • Posts: 23329
October 7th, 2011 at 11:27:37 AM permalink
Quote: boymimbo

Like any large company, before a lawsuit is filed, a risk analysis is completed to see what the likelihood of winning would be. After reviewing all of the evidence that Wynn had over the period of a month, and given the successful arrest of the two accused, it seems like the probability of getting their money back would be good, worth a legal battle over.



I think that the lawsuit is motivated by vindictiveness, and the Wynn attorneys may not know about dice setters, and thus not foresee the "selective prosecution" argument the defense is likely to raise.

I'm willing to bet that the Wynn loses.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
Keyser
Keyser
Joined: Apr 16, 2010
  • Threads: 35
  • Posts: 2057
October 7th, 2011 at 11:46:25 AM permalink
I for one would like to see the gaming commission come down on the Wynn for 'bad faith'.
AlanMendelson
AlanMendelson
Joined: Oct 5, 2011
  • Threads: 113
  • Posts: 3891
October 7th, 2011 at 11:51:24 AM permalink
Quote: kp

So a slot technician who changes the hold percentage on a slot machine is cheating?



The hold cannot be changed without the permission, and I believe the supervision, of a rep from the Gaming Commission. this prevents casinos from switching chips.

There is a different rule with server controlled slots, and I am not familiar with those rules, but I think it says that the hold for any game cannot be changed, but that games themselves are allowed to be changed. in other words, if the game "cherry pin ball has a payback of 87% at the 25-cent level" it can be switched to a "cherry pinball with a payback of 92% at the $1 level" but the payback of the $1 game cannot be switched using the server.

Wizard: a key to this whole thing is about the dealers who were reportedly "fired." Were they duped, were they unskilled in identifying sliding, or were they in on it? If they were in on it, then the Wynn case is very strong because if one of the dealers confesses to the scam then there is little the defense could do.

if the dealers were not in on it, and they just didn't do their jobs well, the defense will probably claim that the casino failed to call "no rolls." and what strengthens the defense is that this was 7 rolls over a period of time. typical shooter in any craps game throws the dice an average of five times per hand.

Average roll takes 20 seconds. That means in an hour there can be 180 rolls (3 per minute X 60 minutes), or 720 rolls in four hours.

If the shooters in the case were at a table with six total players, they could have had 120 rolls each per day of four hours of play. After 20 days of play thats 2400 rolls.

Being questioned are 7 out of 2400 rolls or less than one-third of one percent.

Without someone from the crew claiming they were in on a scheme and admitting to these exact seven slides, it would seem to me that "lucky" slides for less than one-third of one percent of the shooter's hand doesn't quite smell of anything more than chance. At least thats the way the defense can play it.

Im not much of a math guy, but that's the way I look at the legal issue.
Paigowdan
Paigowdan
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
October 7th, 2011 at 11:55:19 AM permalink
Quote: kp

So a slot technician who changes the hold percentage on a slot machine is cheating?


No. Depends on how it is effected and the change approved.
Changing the house edge percentage via payout table modification on a game is not cheating.
Some casinos use 98% payout, some use 99% payout, etc.
Changing from "9/7" to "9/6" or "8/5" payout tables on Jacks or Better is not cheating.
For table games, paying "6/4" to "6/3" on the straight and flush payouts on the Pair Plus tables.
What is covered is not "rigging" the natural frequency of hands during the electronic shuffle and deal process on Video Poker, of rigging the card shuffler/reader/dispenser machines to stack the decks on an I-deal machine.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
Doc
Doc
Joined: Feb 27, 2010
  • Threads: 45
  • Posts: 7102
October 7th, 2011 at 11:59:16 AM permalink
Quote: buzzpaff

But Lady Justice is blindfolded, so she will not see the dice roll!

You just reminded me of Arlo Guthrie's song "Alice's Restaurant Massacree" and the prosecutor with the "twenty-seven 8x10 color glossy pictures with the circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one" who was shocked and disappointed as the judge entered with his seeing eye dog.

Quote: Wizard

I'm willing to bet that the Wynn loses.

Ah! I see an opportunity for some bookmaking!
Paigowdan
Paigowdan
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
October 7th, 2011 at 12:06:43 PM permalink
Quote: MathExtremist


NRS 465.015 Definitions. As used in this chapter:

1. “Cheat” means to alter the elements of chance, method of selection or criteria which determine:
(a) The result of a game;
(b) The amount or frequency of payment in a game;
(c) The value of a wagering instrument; or
(d) The value of a wagering credit.



....
Quote: boymimbo

There is NO regulation within the gambling statutes of Nevada that defines what is an illegal versus a legal throw...


Quote: Paigowdan

Sliding the dice is covered by the very same NRS regulation that you quoted in black and white, right above you not seeing it covered by NRS 465.015 - to alter the elements of chance...which determine the results of a game. Sliding the dice alter the elements of chance which determine the results of a game.


Quote: MathExtremist

Under this interpretation, if sliding is altering the elements of chance, so is precision throwing. If precision throwing is a crime, so is attempting a precision throw: NRS 465.088 imposes equal punishments for cheating and attempted cheating. Therefore, everyone who sets the dice and tries to influence the outcome is guilty of a category B felony.

That cannot be the correct interpretation. Whatever sliding is, its interpretation must be consistent with the fact that it is a settled expectation that the player may manipulate the dice prior to throwing them, and may throw them in a wide variety of manners.


Stacy, Dice sliding is viewed very differently from dice setting on crap tables.
Dice sliding prevents tumbling, as one axis (the vertical axis) of each die does not rotate; the top and bottom faces of each die remain parallel to the table felt as they slide down the table, essentially keeping the same "face up" starting number setting as the dice slide along the table.
In Dice setting, you start your dice throw with a specific "dice number" orientation - but throw them in the air so that the dice DO tumble upon landing, thereby re-randomizing the dice, - although you'd like there to be a minimum amount of tumbling.

Edit: persoanlly, I like Alan M.'s recommendation/discussion/observation of using a small rod under the felt to force sliding dice to tumble. A small metal rod placed under the felt between the center prop area's "C&E" bet locations and the base dealers' areas would be discreet, effective, and force sliding dice to tumble. Something in size and shape like a rifle cleaning rod, long and narrow, under the felt in this location.
And Remember fellows, if the house does something to STOP cheating or excessive Advantage Play, it doesn't mean or make it that "the house is then cheating." It means that the players are not/cannot be cheating. For example, by using the new table-mounted I-deal shuffler machines (instead of the old 'high-rider' machines) where the bottom card of hands cannot be seen, this stops hold carding on Three-card poker, while allowing the game to proceed normally and safely.
It's just good game protection solutions.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
Alan
Alan
Joined: Jun 14, 2011
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 582
October 7th, 2011 at 12:23:22 PM permalink
Caveat..I didn't read all the pages of this thread.

It's hard for me to believe that the coefficient of friction is low enough to allow dice to slide across felt without tumbling. A freshly resurfaced ice rink, glass or a slick counter top, sure, but felt?
Paigowdan
Paigowdan
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
October 7th, 2011 at 12:34:29 PM permalink
Generally it isn't easy, but there are some conditions that allow it, especially when dice are "spinning while sliding" on the vertical axis of sliding dice.
Some of the new design of felts are more glossy than fuzzy, which is fine for card games. And old worn felts get a sheen to them.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
AlanMendelson
AlanMendelson
Joined: Oct 5, 2011
  • Threads: 113
  • Posts: 3891
October 7th, 2011 at 12:53:34 PM permalink
Quote: Alan

Caveat..I didn't read all the pages of this thread.

It's hard for me to believe that the coefficient of friction is low enough to allow dice to slide across felt without tumbling. A freshly resurfaced ice rink, glass or a slick counter top, sure, but felt?



Indeed it is not easy, but it can be done when the dice are near the end of their "shift" when the corners are worn and the sharp edges are gone. This is one reason why dice are replaced several times a day.

Table layouts also get worn and the more "flat" the easier to slide.

I did some slides on a home mini table table. First time I ever tried. Used a new stick of dice from a Vegas casino, and had no trouble doing it. Of course there wasnt a crew there to call a "no roll."

YouTube link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPkgvNV_IuE

  • Jump to: