Gambler accused of dice sliding at Wynn Las Vegas - Sued for return of $700,000

If I do that I will actually have to take the on-line typing class my wife thinks I am now doing. Plus what would Dan do for entertainment. Certainly not make another feeble attempt at playing pool !

Quote: MathExtremist

Quote: Paigowdan

I say yes. Remember the show "Bewitched"?
If you had super-human skills, whether they were mathematical/IQ related, or just magical in nature, if you lead a life where you could pluck off low-lying fruit, twitch your nose, pull your putz, or whatever, and get whatever you wanted in life with no effort, nothing would really have any sweat-equity to it, and I would atrophy into a spoiled sloth.

I did not say super-human skills, I said super-human intelligence. The character on Bewitched had telekinesis and the ability to manifest objects out of thin air. If I could do that, I'd just manifest some gold and not bother with gambling. And your argument doesn't seem persuasive. It doesn't matter whether you would atrophy into a sloth if you had super-human intelligence; that wasn't the question. The question was whether someone with super-human intelligence, playing roulette with a significant player advantage simply from looking at the wheel, would be playing improperly or cheating. They would not be doing either. It wouldn't be much of a challenge for the player, and the casino would lose its shorts, but there's no rule-breaking going on. There is no rule, written or otherwise, against beating roulette by looking at the wheel.

Your argument seems to be that using fairly-gotten knowledge to gain an advantage over one's casino opponent is improper. I contrast this with ill-gotten knowledge, such as from dealer collusion, which would definitely not be proper.

My argument to this is that if you are exceptionally gifted, and are knowingly playing a game that is designed and geared to players with no such exceptional gift, then you are the super-student who is purposely taking the remedial basket-weaving class for the personal advantage of getting an easy A.
Ethics involves using your intelligence for accomplishing "what is right," as opposed to using gifted intelligence for the obvious and express purpose of personal gain at the cost of others. One can argue that both Jesus and Lucifer are equally brilliant, and therefore both are good guys on that basis. And advantage play profits come from inducing additional loses on your fellow innocent players, as house adjustments to the game (to obtain reasonable operating profits) are non-selective, also selfish and unethical. A descending tide lowers all ships.

Quote: MathExtremist

But using fairly-gotten knowledge to gain an advantage is well-accepted in a casino: in a poker room, do you suggest that an astute player, having identified an opponent's tell, should not act on that knowledge? Poker players are expected to act on their fairly-gotten knowledge of their opponents. Why should blackjack players not be?

Because of the history of the game as non-countable later discovered to be countable when the game was already entrenched, and the violation of casino ground rules as specifically applied to distinctly different games. In poker, and by casino approval, you are supposed to process hisorical data. in Blackjack, through casino disapproval, you are NOT supposed to employ card-counting processes, then act on them.

Quote: AcesAndEights

You're never going to see eye to eye. Give it up.

This is interesting to most of us because very
seldom do you get an actual DarkSider, like
Dan, who is also a game inventer, and is smart
and can express himself and is passionate about
his profession. The closest I ever saw was a pit
boss from England a few years ago, but he was
a real smart ass and his idea of a discussion was
to tell us how casinos were going to take all our
money and we had no idea what fools we were
considered to be by the rank and file casino
workers. I'm sure Dan feels the people who play
his game are fools too, but at least he doesn't say
it.

Quote: AcesAndEights

This thread=

You're never going to see eye to eye. Give it up.

Great, now I have to explain to my company's IT department why my monitors and keyboard are covered in soda:-)

Quote: Paigowdan

Ethics involves using your intelligence for accomplishing "what is right," as opposed to using gifted intelligence for the obvious and express purpose of personal gain at the cost of others.

Quote:

And advantage play profits come from inducing additional loses on your fellow innocent players

Darn it, I'm going to have to give up poker. Must if I'm to get any shot at avoiding Heck.

Do you know if they have separate circles there for table bullies and check-raisers, or are they jamming us in together with card counters and buffet gluttons?

Quote: EvenBob

This is interesting to most of us because very
seldom do you get an actual DarkSider, like
Dan, who is also a game inventer, and is smart
and can express himself and is passionate about
his profession.

Thanks!

Quote: EvenBob

The closest I ever saw was a pit
boss from England a few years ago, but he was
a real smart ass and his idea of a discussion was
to tell us how casinos were going to take all our
money and we had no idea what fools we were
considered to be by the rank and file casino
workers.

I do not consider players fools if the get their recreation value for the trip. I consider players to be fools when they:
1. fail to admit that they are problems gamblers who have no business being in a casino - like an alcoholic in a bar.
2. Get publicly drunk and belligerent, and publicly disgrace themselves;
3. Argue or bicker with other players or floor supervisors.

Quote: EvenBob

I'm sure Dan feels the people who play
his game are fools too, but at least he doesn't say
it.

No, not at all. I must request that you speak for yourself concerning my actual intentions. I play my game, and I had designed it to have a lower HA (a better player's edge), with no useless farting around with change-making and shorting people on wins via commission charges. I designed it as a pai Gow player - which I AM, - and not as a casino owner, which I am not.

" I designed it as a pai Gow player - which I AM, - and not as a casino owner, which I am not. "

Then why does your IP address show up as " 1 TRUMP PLAZA " ?

Quote: rdw4potus

Quote: AcesAndEights

This thread=

You're never going to see eye to eye. Give it up.

new and very interesting points and arguments are introduced left and right, so it is not a dead horse. That's like saying a ball game is boring the moment it started because it is the same thing - a ball game.
If you want, you can think of this thread as a car wreck: you cannot help but to look.

Quote: rdw4potus

Great, now I have to explain to my company's IT department why my monitors and keyboard are covered in soda:-)

You see, I told you....

Quote: buzzpaff

" I designed it as a pai Gow player - which I AM, - and not as a casino owner, which I am not. "

Then why does your IP address show up as " 1 TRUMP PLAZA " ?

Love it.
Well, it is because I see more disfavor in card counting than in casino defenses against it.

Wow, I agree with the dead horse sentiment. However, I think the thing about Dan's position that rubs me (and many others) the wrong way is this: the casino knowingly offers a beatable game but then considers those who actually are able to beat it to be "cheaters." They could easily rectify this in one of two ways: change the game so it is no longer beatable, or allow those that have the required skill to beat it. The current situation is rigged in that they PRETEND to offer a beatable game. If someone shows up who actually can beat it, that person is not allowed to play.

Quote: Paigowdan

new and very interesting points and arguments are introduced left and right, so it is not a dead horse. That's like saying a ball game is boring the moment it started because it is the same thing - a ball game.
If you want, you can think of this thread as a car wreck: you cannot help but to look.

I have read the whole thing and it seems like new points stopped coming up about 5 pages ago. But that's just my opinion...carry on as long as you are getting something out of it!

Quote: AcesAndEights

I have read the whole thing and it seems like new points stopped coming up about 5 pages ago. But that's just my opinion...carry on as long as you are getting something out of it!

But Dan dd not rise to my pool playing challenge. I must be losing my hustler's pitch in my old age. SIGH

This Blackjack problem stems from its history, in that it became an "AP beatable" game long after it was entrenched as a believed-uncountable game.
Sloppy, messy fixes were applied.
And the "Adjustments" to keep and fix the game have taken too much of a cat-and-mouse status quo aspect, the attitude of "apply some variable and selective defenses" to it is open to manipulation from all sides.

" open to manipulation from all sides. " Surely not by those on the other side of the table. Not those honorable dealers and gentleman owners. Quick Josie, bring me a glass of water. I am feeling faint.

Quote: jml24

I think the thing about Dan's position that rubs me (and many others) the wrong way is this: the casino knowingly offers a beatable game but then considers those who actually are able to beat it to be "cheaters."

Thats pretty much it. The casino is very much a
spiders web, when you enter you get caught up
in it and its very hard to escape without it costing
you something. If you figure a way to beat the
spider at his own game, the spider will hate you
and call you a cheater for beating him. This is the
spiders web after all, its his domain, just cooperate
and give it up peacefully..

Quote: EvenBob

Thats pretty much it. The casino is very much a
spiders web,

Then so are restaurants, movies, theater, bars, and even Disneyland, - and any for-profit entertainment outlet.

Quote: EvenBob

when you enter you get caught up
in it and its very hard to escape without it costing
you something.

Unless you win.
or choose not to go.
or go there and had fun feeling it was a fine value.
or go to their Steakhouse.
Or go to their movie house.
Or go to their bowling alley....

Quote: Evenbob

If you figure a way to beat the
spider at his own game, the spider will hate you
and call you a cheater for beating him.

If you can't seem to play by known rules, then yes, you get backed off because you did something wrong. 100% of the time.
And casino workers - as a job - don't have any more or less "resentment or hatred" or (whatever you're personally feeling, Bob, really) for their customers - as do bowling alleys, bars and pubs, movie houses, the theater, restuarants, - or any other entertainment outlets.

Quote: EvenBob

This is the
spiders web after all, its his domain, just cooperate
and give it up peacefully..

As people are subject to the same public behavior protocols in any public business - just as they are in bars, Walmarts, restaurants, movie houses, etc., so you really can't say that one very-tightly regulated industry that depends of public good will and patronage is evil, when another tightly-regulated industry that also depends on public support and patronage is not.

Let me put it this way, Bob: a person cannot say that "waiter-serviced restaurants are good," while saying that movie houses are the "evil dark side" - unless of course they had some sort of irrational, personal grudge or resentment against that industry - and that they project this outwards, which clearly shows this all off.
This is what I think is going on with your view of gaming.
I say that neither casinos or movie houses or bars or restaurants are inherently good or evil, and that we patronize them on a voluntary basis.
I say that if a person is making a claim that "industry 'x'" is "evil" or "the dark side," then he is broadcasting his own personal issues or hangups with that particular industry, and that that industry is neither "good" or "bad" or has any such characteristics.

Quote: buzzpaff

" open to manipulation from all sides. " Surely not by those on the other side of the table. Not those honorable dealers and gentleman owners. Quick Josie, bring me a glass of water. I am feeling faint.

I said open to manipulation from all sides - without bias. good people or bad people can be anywhere, in any industry, on any side of the table, whether your facing a waiter or a dealer or a counter clerk.
I also said that underpaying a player or overpaying a player by mistake is just a mistake to be corrected, too, without taking sides or bias. so taking any deliberate attempt to be overpaid yourself (cheating, AP, etc.) is the item in ethical question.

Quote: Paigowdan

Then so are restaurants, movies, theater, bars, and even Disneyland, - and any for-profit entertainment outlet.

But they offer value for the money you
spend, the casino doesn't. What they
do offer is a false dream of winning at
a negative expectation game. If you go
once, win, and never go again, you have
indeed won. But who does that. The
casinos know they offer nothing, I've read
the articles by casino designers. So they
make it exciting, with lots of whistles and
bells and lots of distractions, so people
won't notice. And it works.

Imagine exactly the same games, except
in a setting like Sams Club. No carpet, no
lit up slots, so reels on the slots, because
they serve no purpose. You push the button
and know immediately if you've won or lost.
The table games are played on plywood
tables, no felt, no chairs, no free drinks.
Take away all the glitz and glamour, all
the useless frills, the games themselves
are just boring money making devices.
Without the smoke and mirrors, a casino
is an empty shell.

Quote: EvenBob

But they offer value for the money you
spend, the casino doesn't.

Sure, the casino does. Excitement, recreation, - exactly the same things as movies, water parks, ball games, etc. You leave movies and water parks and ball games only a loser, with no chance at winning any money for attending - unlike casinos, where you can be up; indeed, that is the player's goal.

Quote: EvenBob

What they
do offer is a false dream of winning at
a negative expectation game. If you go
once, win, and never go again, you have
indeed won. But who does that. The
casinos know they offer nothing, I've read
the articles by casino designers. So they
make it exciting, with lots of whistles and
bells and lots of distractions, so people
won't notice. And it works.

You also always lose monetarily at ANY entertainment business at all that you go to, and can think of.
So the casinos product is excitement for your money AND a chance to win.
Movies, bars, water parks = excitement for your money also, but no chance to ever leave a winner monitarily.
Look at it this way, Bob: the House edge at the movies and ball games and waterparks are 100%; rail on them for that House Edge!

Quote: Paigowdan

house adjustments to the game (to obtain reasonable operating profits) are non-selective, also selfish and unethical.

Do you really think a casino operator who changes their game from double-deck to 6-deck, has dealers hit on soft 17, or pays 6-to-5 on naturals, is acting unethically?

Quote: MathExtremist

Do you really think a casino operator who changes their game from double-deck to 6-deck, has dealers hit on soft 17, or pays 6-to-5 on naturals, is acting unethically?

No, and with slot machines that go from 99% payout to 98% payout, let's say, if they are NOT acting in collusion with competing casinos, and if they are addressing a loss problem, and if they are addressing that loss problem to restore the better games. If they are colluding, or are failing to address inefficiency problems or failing to adjust to competition, then yes.
If a casino starts hitting a hard 17 or soft 18 on a face-up game when facing players who have pat 20 hands, then hell yes.

If BJ games are < 2.5% with NO attention to 3x raises, and PGP games are < 3.0%, and craps is better than 2x odds with vig on win only, and 3CP is 40-30-6-3-1 or better, these "within range" adjustments are minor.

Quote: EvenBob

Imagine exactly the same games, except
in a setting like Sams Club. No carpet, no
lit up slots, so reels on the slots, because
they serve no purpose. You push the button
and know immediately if you've won or lost.
The table games are played on plywood
tables, no felt, no chairs, no free drinks.
Take away all the glitz and glamour, all
the useless frills, the games themselves
are just boring money making devices.
Without the smoke and mirrors, a casino
is an empty shell.

And now you know what the casino offers. If you don't like it, then go to Sam's Club instead.

Casinos, and BJ pit bosses in particular apparently, are just like religion, in that they both rely on attracting stupid people who can't, or won't, think for themselves, and are threatened by those of us who do.

BTW, last few pages have gotten away from the thread topic a tad.

Quote: Paigowdan

So the casinos product is excitement for your money AND a chance to win.

Its the same thing the old carnivals offered, I've always
said a modern casino is just the old carnival in a premanent
location. Everybody knows what the old carnival attitude
was towards the public. They had disdain for them, and no
respect. They thought of them as clueless, as 'marks', as
deserving to be plucked clean like chickens.

The only difference between the old carnival and the new
casino is, modern PR hides the fact that the disdain is still
there, the old attitudes still exist, they're just hidden beneath
the slick veneer. You hear it in the dealer breakrooms, you hear
it in the staff meetings. You can even read it in the articles
in casino industry magazines if you know how to interpret
the doublespeak. The plucking of the clueless chickens is
still going on. The more things change, the more things stay
the same.

Bottom line guys: AP is not cheating. Back offs are not illegal. Play smart, play safe.

Don't be a whiner, be a winner.

" any deliberate attempt to be overpaid yourself (cheating, AP, etc.) is the item in ethical question. "
Dan can not reply without lumping AP with cheaters at every opportunity !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quote: zippyboy

Casinos, and BJ pit bosses in particular apparently, are just like religion, in that they both rely on attracting stupid people who can't, or won't, think for themselves, and are threatened by those of us who do.

Casino operations just a business, and is treated as a business by managers.
This is like accusing a Buffet owner of being threatened by fat people.
I have indeed noticed that AP Players would simply love to believe that casino supervisors and managers as all cowering and scared by some kid wearing an MIT tee-shirt carrying bottled water, very self-flattering and club membership-like, but this is not the case. If surveillance calls or a floorman catches AP play then he gets backed off; if not, he stays to play.

Quote: zippyboy

BTW, last few pages have gotten away from the thread topic a tad.

okay:
1. Dice sliding is an attempt at casino cheating with a known and established cheating manuever.
2. Wynn should have nipped it in the bud, but instead had drawn it out.

Quote: buzzpaff

" any deliberate attempt to be overpaid yourself (cheating, AP, etc.) is the item in ethical question. "
Dan can not reply without lumping AP with cheaters at every opportunity !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

They are both deliberate attempts to be overpaid, - and by doing something that is against the known ground rules.
They lump themselves together.

Quote: Paigowdan

2. Wynn should have nipped it in the bud, but instead had drawn it out.

Still baffles me they got away with this more than once. I would pay some good money to see those surveillance tapes.

" I have indeed noticed that AP Players would simply love to " No one on this forum lumps you in with lazy, belligerent, rude dealers.
Why do you insist on painting all AP players with the same brush : cheaters ?

Quote: EvenBob

...The only difference between the old carnival and the new
casino is, modern PR hides the fact that the disdain is still
there, the old attitudes still exist, they're just hidden beneath
the slick veneer. You hear it in the dealer breakrooms, you hear
it in the staff meetings.

In that regard, APs are none better than pit bosses when they are calling the kettle black: "Dark Side," "Evil casinos," "clueless chickens" [getting fattened up for the slaughter], and all that paranoid jazz.
Has it occurred to you that the vast majority of dealers and floormen are casino customers? That is clearly saying - at the very least - that they believe the product to be fair enough and quality enough to patronize themselves, knowing the deal.

Quote: AcesAndEights

Still baffles me they [Wynn] got away with this more than once. I would pay some good money to see those surveillance tapes.

So would I, it would be howling....We'll need a combination of Wikileaks and Youtube for this one....

Quote: YoDiceRoll11

Bottom line guys: AP is not cheating.

1. It is legal, so not cheating in the eyes of the law - but it may be in the pit bosses eyes, at least an issue - and so it's still a reason for a "gig" or back off/86, - if caught.
2. Doesn't matter what a guy in a suit in the pit thinks about it, he's just doing his business from his POV, as is the AP. If the pit boss is disinterested in the AP's opinion of it, then so should the AP be disinterested in the pit boss' opinion without concern or whining about what someone else thinks. It's the actions of doing it, or getting caught, - and properly handling a back off that counts.

Quote: Paigowdan

If the pit boss is disinterested in the AP's opinion of it, then so should the AP be disinterested in the pit boss' opinion

Is that how life works, Dan? Really? If you remember,
thats how things like racism used to work. If I have
a certain opinion of you because of your race, I'm not
really interested if you like it or not. So because I'm
not interested, you shouldn't be interested either.
You get to make all the rules, and call people whatever
names you like, and get away with it. Do you see a
problem with this?

Quote: Paigowdan

It is legal, so not cheating in the eyes of the law - but it may be in the pit bosses eyes, at least an issue - and so it's still a reason for a "gig" or back off/86, - if caught.

I am far less concerned with the idea of card counters being backed off than I am with the constant reference to them as cheaters and to their legal actions as cheating, just because the casino personnel prefer that those players not count the cards.

Suppose there were some perfectly legal action on the part of casino personnel, which the players would prefer the casino not do (early shuffles, backing players off, etc.) Would you consider it just fine if the players referred to these actions as the casino cheating? Suppose there were numerous reports every day on this forum and elsewhere on the internet that your casino was cheating its players (i.e., doing things players prefer you wouldn't do), when everything that was going on was perfectly legal operation of the casino. Would you consider that an ethical and honest reporting by people making such posts?

Quote: Doc

I am far less concerned with the idea of card counters being backed off than I am with the constant reference to them as cheaters and to their legal actions as cheating

What pisses me off the most is how the casino
is in cahoots with Griffin Investigations. Griffin
lists all counters in their books as 'casino cheats'.
When you ask the casino why that is, they'll
tell you its Griffin, ask them. When I saw an
interview with the woman who runs Griffin and
she was asked the same question, she said in
the eyes of the casino they're cheats, so thats
what Griffin calls them. Its the same old doubletalk
and run around you get when dealing with
casinos.

Quote: Doc

I am far less concerned with the idea of card counters being backed off than I am with the constant reference to them as cheaters and to their legal actions as cheating, just because the casino personnel prefer that those players not count the cards.

Firstly, I am a little stunned that gamblers - who view the casino operators that provide gamine services to you as "evil" "dark side" "out for them selves" "money grubbing" - should now gripe when an AP or counter - who uses manuevers and processes that are clearly forbidden by casino rules of play under threat of back off or 86-ing - which would be the casino operator's definition of a cheat itself - would gripe. \
Simply put:
1. By the legal definition I will not use "cheat" for an AP;
2. For the casino pit/table games view of AP play, I shall indeed if it is practiced against our operating rules.

Quote: Doc

Suppose there were some perfectly legal action on the part of casino personnel, which the players would prefer the casino not do (early shuffles, backing players off, etc.) Would you consider it just fine if the players referred to these actions as the casino cheating?

THEY DO ANYWAY - AND IN ANY CASE!
HELLO!

Quote: Doc

Suppose there were numerous reports every day on this forum and elsewhere on the internet that your casino was cheating its players (i.e., doing things players prefer you wouldn't do), when everything that was going on was perfectly legal operation of the casino. Would you consider that an ethical and honest reporting by people making such posts?

Of course not.
But Falsification and false reporting, - the fabrication of cheating accounts to slander people and events is a lot different than taking a point of view on a practice that you either endorse or disagree with. Can you see that??!!

Quote: Paigowdan

- which would be the casino operator's definition of a cheat itself - would gripe.

If the casino operator is free to set out his own definitions of cheating, completely disregarding the law and the reality, then so are the players.

Quote: Doc

Suppose there were numerous reports every day on this forum and elsewhere on the internet that your casino was cheating its players (i.e., doing things players prefer you wouldn't do). Would you consider that an ethical and honest reporting by people making such posts?

Quote: Paigowdan

But Falsification and false reporting, - the fabrication of cheating accounts to slander people and events is a lot different than taking a point of view on a practice that you either endorse or disagree with. Can you see that??!!

But he didn't say fabrication. He said players will be free to define cheating as things they don't like, clearly protested by them under the threat of leaving the casino. It is only fair to balance things out.

For instance, when a casino sends me a mailer promising comped rooms and a couple matchplay coupons for $100, still a small fraction of my theo there, and upon arrival I discover that they will only comp half the room rate and coupon are actually only $10 - for me as a player this falls clearly under the definition of cheating. As such, from now on I will feel entitled and obliged to refer to such incidents as cheating on the casino's side.

Wait, I think that $100 coupon worth $10 might legally constitute fraud, so no, that is cheating. What changes is that now I shall also call it cheating if it turns out blackjack only pays 1:1 on that coupon, or if the mailer promised "a luxurious suite" and all I was offered on arrival is a parking lot view cabin with a bent coat rack.
Fair enough?

Quote: P90

If the casino operator is free to set out his own definitions of cheating, completely disregarding the law and the reality, then so are the players.

Isn't 6/5 BJ cheating? I'm sure it is...

Let me say this.
I think a lot of hurt feelings and outrage stem from the fact that the definition of "cheating comes not from what the pit boss thinks ( - like an advantage player would care what he thinks), but from what regular people would think: Mom and Dad.

It hits close to home, and,
it is VERY hard to falsify, - and THAT bothers us.

Look, our first lessons in cheating came as kids - via Monopoly, Go Fish, or what have you.
We're playing with little Johnny, or timmy, and we are losing our asses. He's doing something, and we see watching and Dad laughing, and he explains to us that little Johnny was cheating. He explains to us that it is:

1. Not playing by the rules, or breaking the rules, and
2. Johnny did it to WIN MORE, AND
3. The police did not need to come. has nothing to do with them. Cheating has nothing to do with the police, not for go Fish, not for monopoly, and not if you don't get caught.
A very good definition, really.

Now, look at card counting, it is:
1. Not playing by the casino ground rules - clearly, they can legally back you off or 86 you, and it is done if you don't play by the rules.
2. APs do it to WIN MORE. Clearly the reason. AND..
3. It has nothing to do with the police. Card counting is legal - right?? Still can be viewed as cheating by some.
It fits mom and Dad's definition, and the longer I look at this, the more impossible it is to falsify, to say "that's not true."
This is why it is so bothersome to some...

Quote: Paigowdan

I think a lot of hurt feelings and outrage

You keep insisting on applying labels through terms. When someone says "afraid of counters", you are quick to dismiss a comical scenario of bouncers running scared and say that APs and cheaters are never more than an annoyance. When someone points out that you don't have the moral high ground on this issue, you dismiss it as "hurt feelings".

That is not a replacement or a reinforcement for logical arguments. "Afraid" does not denote panic; your own bouncers tell people "I'm afraid you have to leave" without being in a state of horror. Neither does "Concerned" denote crying in the shower; we are just concerned.

Quote: Paigowdan

We're playing with little Johnny, or timmy, and we are losing our asses. He's doing something

No, he isn't "doing something". Only a big Johnny can be "doing something" that you would not dare spell out.
What exactly is he doing?

Because if little Johnny is placing the dice to face just right or hiding monopoly money in his sleeve - he is cheating.
If little Johnny has memorized certain facts about the game and is using them to improve his play - he is not cheating.

Quote: Paigowdan

1. Not playing by the casino ground rules - clearly, they can legally back you off or 86 you, and it is done if you don't play by the rules.

It is not a rule. If it was a rule, tables would have a fixed bet limit. Or you would pick your bet size when sitting down.

The rules are that:
1. The player can bet any value between table minimum and table maximum on a hand.
2. The player can stand, hit, in some cases split or double, at his decision, as described in game rules and on the placard.

Card-counting, as such, is strictly within the rules.
It is a play made following the rules to optimize the results to your best ability.
If you change rule 1, then you will have a leg to stand on and counters won't.

What you are objecting to is not rule-breaking, what you are objecting to is skilled play.
Maybe you should have players pass an IQ test at casino entrance. If it's over 86, then 86'ed you go sir.

Quote: P90

The rules are that:
1. The player can bet any value between table minimum and table maximum on a hand.
2. The player can stand, hit, in some cases split or double, at his decision, as described in game rules and on the placard.

No, sorry. There appears more going on here. And here's the problem:
Sometimes when he [the player] bets a bet amount between the table minimum and the table maximum, - just like you SAID he could, P90 - he gets backed off, or even 86-ed. Totally legal, totally unstoppable, you have to accept it and leave. So he actually cannot do this in real life, or do it freely, at will.

So your theory of "any bet within the table limits is okay" - appears to be NOT okay, apparently. It is just not true, for real.
He gets backed off or 86-ed. For real.
But not on Baccarat. Or on Pai Gow, or on Craps, or on Roulette.
Only Blackjack. And on a pitch game or a shoe game - never on a CSM....(could it be...card counting?)
There seems to be in place...additional rules, house rules,
that over ride this, that are more powerful than your theory of "any bet in table range is okay," because your theory doesn't work.
Your test, your theory, fails - in real life, and in real casinos. All over the place. Real backs offs, with real posts about it, and real griping about it. Nobody can make a living counting cards anymore, pretty much.

Now here's another model or theory that seems to work, whether we like it or not:
1. Abide by the casino rules (no card counting, no public drunkenness, no shot taking, no hole carding, etc.) and we are okay.
2. Break the casinos rules, and we are not okay. We are backed off, we are 86-ed, we are put on watch lists. Not good. Doesn't matter how we feel about it.
That's it.
Now this model, this paradigm, is proven to work 100% of the time. In real life. And you can count on it, no pun intended. That Is How It Works. It will set you free. :)

It is based on the another model:
1. If you don't play by the rules, - in order to seek a personal gain or advantage over other people - you might be stopped, and be viewed as a bad faith player, a cheater, a dirty player, whatever. and
2. Doesn't matter what the cops say or the law says, it matters what the house boss says: you are not playing here. And this gets carried out with the cop's blessing and the law's blessing.

This is the paradox that causes so much cognitive dissonance because people think the former model ("any bet okay=card counting okay") always works when it actually doesn't, when the second model ("just abide by the house rules") is really the only one that actually works 100% of the time. And this is because because we select the model that we'd like to believe will work, - over the model that actually works. The mind's model of being comped a suite on top of the Hard Rock, raking in thousands at the tables while fashionably dressed people quietly applaud and say "wow, he's so kewl..." slaying the big, mean, nasty casinos like David and Goliath. For a short period of time the MIT team actually did live like this, never to happen again. People actually chase this, or aspects of it: "Card counting will work for me..." or, "I'm Robin Hood facing down the bad guy faceless casinos, I'm the good guy against the Dark Side..." We've all read Thorpe's "Beat the dealer," "Bringing down the house," "Burning the tables," "Blackjackhero.com," "Blackjackforumonline.com" for some, it had some alluring, romantic aspects....
For others, it was an interesting read, but had a Scientology or Amway "feasibility problem" or fiction for us, as either any serious endeavor, or a good use of our time in Gaming Endeavors, although it would be nice to believe it and hope it can come to be for us. Study it and know it, yes; live it, defend it as viable, and believe in it, no, for some, including me. I took an even longer long shot route: New Game design.

And we choose the former model ("card counting works, and defend it like a religion") - sometimes because we'd also like to believe that Card counting is still viable; others think it is not a viable income source, nor does it seem to be a lot of fun to do, or a very progressive and expansive area in modern gaming thought, or a productive use of a gambler's time in life. Many view card counting as over, a thing of the past, a relic; some have let it go, others still cling to it, still invest in it, or at least believe it as a still-viable gaming concept, and defend it passionately, even with a hint of denial....

Quote: P90

Card-counting, as such, is strictly within the rules.

What rules where, and with which casino's blessing? Shall I say "show me where it is written?...." No. I just accept it as "really not within the casino rules," simply because I actually work in a tables game pit where I see people get backed off, and read the surveillance "no play people" lists...ya know, this is enough to convince me, even though I had little denial to break on this one....

Quote: P90

It is a play made following the rules to optimize the results to your best ability.
If you change rule 1, then you will have a leg to stand on and counters won't.

I have a leg to stand on because I don't get 86-ed, and don't waste time with things that are no longer reasonably viable.

Quote: P90

What you are objecting to is not rule-breaking, what you are objecting to is skilled play.

No, I made it clear that what I am objecting to is rule-breaking. I practice skilled play.
Skilled play is setting the hand KQ77422 as KQ/77224, and not as 22/77KQ4
Skilled play is not drinking when in a casino with money on the line.
Skilled play is not chasing good money after bad.
Skilled play is not gambling your rent money.
Skilled play is knowing what methods work, versus those that no longer work, avail you little, and get you into trouble.

Quote: P90

Maybe you should have players pass an IQ test at casino entrance. If it's over 86, then 86'ed you go sir.

We can't do that. We'd deny the card counters the chance of living in a dream world they still hold so dear.
I read the story of Keith Taft and felt he could have done so much if not misdirected. Fascinating reading. Kept me totally away from the whole scene within gaming.

I'm going to stay at the craps table.

Quote: P90

For instance, when a casino sends me a mailer promising comped rooms .... and upon arrival I discover that they will only comp half the room rate ...

... might legally constitute fraud, ... that is cheating.

And don't forget those resort fees, which could be over $25 per night. The Ultimate Casino Cheat.

there are really two sides to this argument.

Casinos create shoe dealt games that are countable. If players are not thinking, the HA is limited to the BS HA plus any player error from delving from the basic strategy chart. If the player is counting, than the HA is lowered by an amount from the player skill, probably to the negative territory. If you want the game to be fair to everyone:

- CSM
- Give everyone a basic strategy chart.
- Have the dealer memorize the Basic Strategy chart and force the players to play blackjack the "house way".
- Change the rules to give blackjack a higher edge (6:5, double on 10, 11, no double after split, etc) of say, 2%.
- and take all of the fun out of the game.

Until that happens, in my opinion, counting is fair game. If casinos are earning money off of "recreational gamblers" who essentially don't know the best way to play and "wannabe counters" who can't actually count or don't know basic strategy, then casinos are just inviting regular counters into the game. It's part of the risk that casinos take to make 21 viable to all.

" Now, look at card counting, it is:
1. Not playing by the casino ground rules - clearly, they can legally back you off or 86 you, and it is done if you don't play by the rules."

keep saying counting against the rules. say it a million times to satisfy your frustrations. But it will still NOT be true !

Quote: buzzpaff

" Now, look at card counting, it is:
1. Not playing by the casino ground rules - clearly, they can legally back you off or 86 you, and it is done if you don't play by the rules."

keep saying counting against the rules. say it a million times to satisfy your frustrations. But it will still NOT be true !

Aye, there's the rub. You're both right.

Quote: Paigowdan

No, sorry. There appears more going on here. And here's the problem:
Sometimes when he [the player] bets a bet amount between the table minimum and the table maximum, - just like you SAID he could, P90 - he gets backed off, or even 86-ed. Totally legal, totally unstoppable, you have to accept it and leave. So he actually cannot do this in real life, or do it freely, at will.

If this were universally true, Ken Uston would have lost his suit. See Uston v. Resorts International Hotel, Inc.

Strictly off subject but his daughters seem to have forgiven Ken for abandoning his wife and 2 little girls. To the point they are trying to get a movie made on their late Dad's life.

Quote: Paigowdan

... he explains to us that little Johnny was cheating. He explains to us that it is:

1. Not playing by the rules, or breaking the rules, and
2. Johnny did it to WIN MORE, AND
3. The police did not need to come. has nothing to do with them. Cheating has nothing to do with the police, not for go Fish, not for monopoly, and not if you don't get caught.
A very good definition, really.

Now, look at card counting, it is:
1. Not playing by the casino ground rules - clearly, they can legally back you off or 86 you, and it is done if you don't play by the rules.
2. APs do it to WIN MORE. Clearly the reason. AND..
3. It has nothing to do with the police. Card counting is legal - right?? Still can be viewed as cheating by some.

It is my understanding that genuine cheating in a casino is a crime and does indeed have something to do with the police. And did you really mean to imply that it is a very good definition that everything, including cheating, is OK so long as you don't get caught? I would not agree with that, and I doubt that you do.

I suppose one of the difficulties in this discussion is defining just what "the rules" are. Most (all?) casinos have printed rules available for their games. Some of them (but not Fiesta Henderson) post the rules for their games on their web sites. On the other hand, we understand that casinos also have various policies that may prohibit some things at their tables -- abusive language, excessive B.O., and, apparently, staying fully aware of what has been going on in the game. If someone violates these policies, the casino has the right to restrict, discourage, or terminate their play. No argument there.

Now the casino might call these policies "rules" in discussions with employees, but if you don't publish them and make them readily available to all of the players, they can only be considered "secret rules." Not being willing to openly tell the players, in writing, all of the "rules" of the games just opens your business to being mocked. Of course, keeping your company's policies private/secret is fine, but keeping them secret while declaring them to be "rules" that your customers must follow or be classified as cheaters is not proper. While you might dislike or even bar a player who doesn't comply with your unpublished policies or "secret rules", that doesn't make that player a "cheater" nor does it make it appropriate for you to make repeated, public condemnation of those players by calling their behavior "cheating", which lumps them together with the genuine cheaters, who are criminals.

As I stated before, you may back off or ban a player you don't want at your table for most any reason you like, but don't be so absurd as to call them "cheaters" when they have not violated the law or any published rules of the game. Making such statements either here on this forum or elsewhere in public, characterizing those players with a term that clumps them along with criminals engaging in felonious conduct, is a slanderous/libelous action.