Thread Rating:

pacomartin
pacomartin
Joined: Jan 14, 2010
  • Threads: 649
  • Posts: 7895
October 5th, 2011 at 8:40:21 AM permalink
Quote: MrV

In the absence of either statute, regulation or court case, the issue is wide open for interpretation, which should provide very fertile ground indeed for a competent defense attorney to successfully defend against a claim of cheating.



Personally, I don't think the casino has any case. Even if the players openly admit that they were sliding the dice, I don't see how that violates any laws. They were not using any extra equipment, just their own skill. The only chance is if the casino can show organized collusion with their employees.

That's why I think that the purpose of the accusation is to send a message that the Wynn will be hard on calling "no roll" in the future.
jwblue
jwblue
Joined: Jan 25, 2011
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 96
October 5th, 2011 at 8:54:28 AM permalink
Quote: pacomartin

Personally, I don't think the casino has any case. Even if the players openly admit that they were sliding the dice, I don't see how that violates any laws. They were not using any extra equipment, just their own skill. The only chance is if the casino can show organized collusion with their employees.

That's why I think that the purpose of the accusation is to send a message that the Wynn will be hard on calling "no roll" in the future.



A good point.

That is why I never understood why tables don't enforce the rule with the dice needing to hit the back wall.

The accused could say

"That is how I throw the dice."

Someone said that the casinos don't want to enforce the rule because they don't want to alienate high rollers.

Why would anyone get upset? Those are the rules.
thecesspit
thecesspit
Joined: Apr 19, 2010
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 5936
October 5th, 2011 at 9:00:02 AM permalink
I wish the casino did enforce the hit the back wall rule.. I seven'd out twice with short rolls just when it was getting interesting, and refuels would have been nice...
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
Paigowdan
Paigowdan
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
October 5th, 2011 at 9:17:48 AM permalink
Quote: pacomartin

Personally, I don't think the casino has any case. Even if the players openly admit that they were sliding the dice, I don't see how that violates any laws.


Frank, cheating a casino establishment violates laws, laws related to gaming. Doesn't matter how you or I see, it, it matters how the lawyers and judges will see it and rule.

Quote: PacoMartin

They were not using any extra equipment, just their own skill.


Cheating may or may not involve additional equipment, that is irrelevent. Cheating is an illegal action, whether or not an additional device is used.

Quote: pacemartin

The only chance is if the casino can show organized collusion with their employees.


No, people can try to cheat casinos with or without the collusion of internal agents. Many casino cheats are solo practitioners who are acting as their own agents.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
Paigowdan
Paigowdan
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
October 5th, 2011 at 9:26:43 AM permalink
Quote: jwblue

The accused could say
"That is how I throw the dice."


And they would be answered: "Not here can you throw the dice like that! That is cheating and you may get backed off or arrested."
Saying something like, "Well..that's how I do it" doesn't make it right.
A bank robber or car thief can also say, "Well...that's just how I pay the bills, - so it makes it all right." No it doesn't.

Quote: jwblue

Someone said that the casinos don't want to enforce the rule because they don't want to alienate high rollers.


Casinos do not wish to alienate high-rollers, that's true.
However, Casinos do not mind alienating casino cheats - that's different.
This is a difficult distinction for some to see.

Quote: jwblue

Why would anyone get upset? Those are the rules.


People get upset at rules they do not like, or don't agree with, and people get upset when people don't follow the rules.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
Doc
Doc
Joined: Feb 27, 2010
  • Threads: 45
  • Posts: 7107
October 5th, 2011 at 9:27:24 AM permalink
Quote: jwblue

I never understood why tables don't enforce the rule with the dice needing to hit the back wall.

Some of us wimps have trouble throwing the dice that far. :-)

More than a year ago, I posted here about a casino that complained that my throws weren't bouncing to the end of the table, while I complained that their tables didn't let the dice bounce in that direction. The little cubes kept jumping to the left on every throw, twice hitting the dealer who was no where near in line with my throw.
Keyser
Keyser
Joined: Apr 16, 2010
  • Threads: 35
  • Posts: 2057
October 5th, 2011 at 10:00:22 AM permalink
I'm sure the gaming commission would like to know why the Wynn chose not to enforce the gaming rules while the players won.

It's the responsibility of the casino to enforce the rules of the game. A responsible and non corrupt gaming commission could pull their license for not enforcing the rules.

For now, I guess we're supposed to believe that the craps crew at the Wynn is an incompetent bunch of boobs.

A really sleazy situation over there.

Again, can anyone say 'bad faith'?
reno
reno
Joined: Jan 20, 2010
  • Threads: 124
  • Posts: 721
October 5th, 2011 at 10:33:30 AM permalink
The mystery is why their winning spree went on for so long before a dealer or stickman or boxman or floor supervisor or camera surveillance noticed. There are really only 4 possibilities:

1) A casino employee(s) colluded with the Argentinians

2) The entire chain of command for security at Wynn is incompetent

3) Security at Wynn did notice, but they declined to pursue the matter because the Argentinians had an enormous bankroll and the casino figured their dice-setting was bound to fail

4) These Argentinians are really really skilled at disguising their dice-setting

Which possibility is most likely?
Keyser
Keyser
Joined: Apr 16, 2010
  • Threads: 35
  • Posts: 2057
October 5th, 2011 at 10:45:55 AM permalink
or option 5,

5) The casino noticed that the dice weren't hitting the backwall everytime and that they may have been sliding once in a while. Consequently the casino decided that it was a win/win situation. Meaning if the players lost, fine. The casino keeps the loss. If the players happen to win, they figured they could use the patron dispute process and attorneys to get the money back. 'Bad faith'.
pacomartin
pacomartin
Joined: Jan 14, 2010
  • Threads: 649
  • Posts: 7895
October 5th, 2011 at 11:18:33 AM permalink
Quote: reno

3) Security at Wynn did notice, but they declined to pursue the matter because the Argentinians had an enormous bankroll and the casino figured their dice-setting was bound to fail



As we all know, card counting in blackjack has a drawback. If you miscount, you could actually lower your odds of winning. I have seen it in print many times that surveillance sees people trying to count cards all the time. You would expect that given the number of people who purchase books on the subject. Most of the time, security is satisfied that the player is not a very good counter, and they let them go, happy in the knowledge that they are probably going to lose money. After all, what really matters is the motivation to keep playing.

While I recognize that my opinion doesn't matter, but it is a judges call. I just imagine the following testimony:

"My client has been practicing sliding dice. He did some experiments where he threw the dice 100 times. One time he got a 6 in the single sliding dice to come up 25 times, and another time it came up 16 times. Normal expectation is that it will come up 16-17 times.

Friends of my client told him that he was just wasting his time. The casino is free to disallow dice throws that don't bounce off the back wall. My client said he wanted to fly to Vegas and try it anyway. The Wynn personnel was free to use their legal option at any time to disallow the throws. They chose not to do that."

I find it very difficult to believe a judge will find them guilty of some legal violation. They were not using loaded dice, or lasers, or computers.

The Wynn casino makes $73K per hour over a 24 hour day. It seems to me that they would not pursue this couple over $700K given that they could have stopped them at any time, by simply enforcing the back wall rule. It seems much more logical that the Casino wants a high profile case, so that they can enforce the back wall rule all the time, and most people in the casino will know about arrest. They are much less likely to protest it when "short rolls" are recalled.

  • Jump to: