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

+1 Doc.

Counting is not cheating. Casinos don't want it to be cheating either. They will happily take all monies from counters who don't count well and even from good counters who just are having bad luck. However, they also want to be able to back off counters who are successful.

This is the casino's best case scenario.

If game protection was the paramount concern, then by all means, install CSMs, use 8 deck shoes with a 2 - 3 deck penetration, and institute small maximums. Casinos don't do that because they can back off successful counters.

Quote: Doc

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 While you might dislike or even bar a player who doesn't comply with your unpublished policies or "secret rules", that doesn't make that player a "cheater" nor does it make it appropriate for you to make repeated, public condemnation of those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.

+1. Well said, Doc.

I agree. But I think try to convince Dan his view is in error is like trying to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig.

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.

He does.
You are confusing the cause and the effect.
Cheating, being impolite towards casino personnel, smoking in a non-smoking area or counting cards all can result in a player being backed off or banned.
This does not make every player that was backed off a cheating abusive card-counting chain smoker.

Quote: Paigowdan

What rules where, and with which casino's blessing?

Have I missed Harrah's acquiring a chain of megachurches recently?

Quote: Paigowdan

when the second model ("just abide by the house rules") is really the only one that actually works 100% of the time.

Then tell me what house rule was broken by Video Poker players that got banned.

Quote: Paigowdan

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 hitting on T+2, but not 9+3 in a SD game.
Skilled play is betting higher when TC is above 2.
Skilled play is taking insurance on TC of 3 or more.
Skilled play is keeping 2 suited connectors above 6 in Full-Pay Deuces Wild.

All of that is skilled play.
And whenever it gets you a chance to break better than even over the long term, be it blackjack, video poker or anything else, casinos will be backing you off, banning you and labeling you a cheater.

The only house rule Richard Brodie broke was "Don't win" - the only true rule in a casino. Winners are only adored when they are going to lose it right back. Long-term winners are banned.
Most of the players here even agree you should be allowed to do that, but don't get gung-ho and libel everyone you don't like as a cheater.

Quote: Paigowdan

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..

And thats why the casino does it, Dan, thats why
they label AP's as cheats when they know they're
not. Nobody likes the social stigma that comes when
you're branded as a cheater and you're not a cheater.
Its the same reason the Church branded scientists
like Galileo as heretics because they said the earth
orbited the sun. The stronger the accusation, the
more its appears the accused really committed some
crime.

The casino knows AP's aren't cheats. But they hope
it will convince some of them not to do it, people
don't like being called crooks when they're not. Its
just more casino flim-flammery, more two-faced
casino obfuscation.

Isn't obfuscation a great word? It means "the hiding
of intended meaning in communication, making
communication confusing, wilfully ambiguous, and
harder to interpret." Its what casinos do best, they
obfuscate. They say they love winners when they
really hate them. They make up secret rules and don't
tell you about them. They give the impression that
if you play long enough you can get ahead of the
casino and stay ahead, when the opposite is true.
They pretend to be your friend so they can take your
money. They call you a cheater when they know
you're just an advantage player.

Quote: Paigowdan

1. If you don't play by the rules, - you might be stopped, and be viewed as a bad faith player, a cheater, a dirty player, whatever.

But lumping AP's together with past posters
and card markers is wrong by anybodies
standards. They don't send drunk drivers
to max security prisons with the rapists and
murderers, do they.

The really 'immoral' crimes being committed
here aren't being done by AP's, they're being
done by the casino. They know perfectly well
that 95% of the people who gamble, especially
slot players, have no idea they can't win in the
long run, and the casino depends on them
remaining ignorant. They're no better than the
patent medicine salesmen who depended on
the ignorance of their customers to stay in
business.

Quote: MathExtremist

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.

Yes, right, Stacy; it is not universally, true. It was in New Jersey, and NJ is very different.

Look, I think casinos cheat when they falsely put symbols on a slot machine indicating a player "almost" won when in fact
the "almost" is just a bogus comeon to deceive players. PaigowDan thinks this practice is great, upstanding, and in the finest
tradition of American capitalism. He might be right about that last part, but he'll never even admit to the fundamental dishonesty here.

So good luck getting from him an admission that using your mind while playing blackjack is ethical.

Quote: P90

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.

He does.
You are confusing the cause and the effect.
Cheating, being impolite towards casino personnel, smoking in a non-smoking area or counting cards all can result in a player being backed off or banned.
This does not make every player that was backed off a cheating abusive card-counting chain smoker.

That is correct, P90. Getting backed off does not make you a cheater. It might have been for public drunkenness/disorderly conduct, or for being under age with false ID, or for any one of a myriad of reasons. People get expelled for breaking ANY house rule. Not just for cheating, or just drunkenness, - for any one.

Quote: P90

Have I missed Harrah's acquiring a chain of megachurches recently?

When I said casinos do not give your their blessings for card counting, it is a figure of speech. I was not implying they are churches. Why does this need to be explained....

Quote: P90

Then tell me what house rule was broken by Video Poker players that got banned.

Greektown was in the wrong for banning perfect strategy Video Poker players. Perfect strategy play is not counting play, nor is it rigging a machine with a mechanical device.

Quote: P90

Skilled play is hitting on T+2, but not 9+3 in a SD game.
Skilled play is betting higher when TC is above 2.
Skilled play is taking insurance on TC of 3 or more.
Skilled play is keeping 2 suited connectors above 6 in Full-Pay Deuces Wild.

All of that is skilled play.

No, not all of it. Sorry. Keeping 2 suited connectors above 6 in Full-Pay Deuces Wild is the only skilled play example in your group of examples.
This is because skilled play works.
If any play at all gets you 86-ed, blacklisted, or backed off, it is just not skilled play. It is shooting yourself in the foot, and that is not skilled play.

Quote: P90

And whenever it gets you a chance to break better than even over the long term, be it blackjack, video poker or anything else, casinos will be backing you off, banning you and labeling you a cheater.

No. Depends on how you get there. You win a progressive, a Baccarat streak, or the like, and you may be up for life without being labeled a cheater.
In fact, if you are up from playing Blackjack without counting or on CSMs, you're fine, too.
Casinos want winners to play, in order for their wins to behave like only a loan.

Quote: P90

The only house rule Richard Brodie broke was "Don't win" - the only true rule in a casino. Winners are only adored when they are going to lose it right back. Long-term winners are banned.

Depends on how they win.
Think about it: if a casino bans a winner, they lock in a player's winnings, so they would not do that.
If the bar a cheater, they lock out a problem, and they should indeed carry that out.

Quote: P90

Most of the players here even agree you should be allowed to do that, but don't get gung-ho and libel everyone you don't like as a cheater.

Doesn't matter what players here agree on. It's a like a consensus of foxes stipulating the conditions of a chicken coup's security, and then bitching about being thwarted by effective security. The whining here from AP wannabees simply indicates that adequate casino game protection is in effect, and is relieving to see. Consensus means little without considering its source.
There is no libel. The formula is simple: "Break the ground rules of a game" + "do it for obtaining and taking in a personal gain" = "an action that may reasonably be considered cheating."

Quote: RaspberryCheeseBlintz

Look, I think casinos cheat when they falsely put symbols on a slot machine indicating a player "almost" won when in fact
the "almost" is just a bogus comeon to deceive players. PaigowDan thinks this practice is great, upstanding, and in the finest
tradition of American capitalism. He might be right about that last part, but he'll never even admit to the fundamental dishonesty here.

Bullshit, and speak for yourself.
Displaying winners instead of losers on adverts is good advertsing, - and you would do it in a second if you owned or managed a casino. If you owned a farmer's market, would you advertise pictures of rotten, maggot-infested fruit? Do you criticize them - or cry conspiracy - for advertising tasty, succulent fresh fruit? No. But you hypocritically do so here!:
On the progressive jackpot that pays on a 7-card straight flush, they display specifically an Ace-high 7-card straight flush in Hearts (a 7-card Royal if you will) on it, as an example jackpot win. This is not sleazy practice, you cannot reasonaby expect them to display a low pair of 5's, - which is a LOSER. Neither would you do it on your game.
However, rigging active slot machines to constantly display "near big win hits" in a fashion out of frequency with its statistical occurence on a live machine is a sleazy practice, and you will hear me say this.

Quote: RaspberryCB

So good luck getting from him an admission that using your mind while playing blackjack is ethical.

I admit that using your mind on doing something that gets you backed off, 86-ed, or nowhere in life, - is having your head in your ass, and not using your mind in an effective manner in your life on valid endeavors, - and believing otherwise in the fairy tale is a form of being in denial.

My challenge is that I have NEVER heard ANYONE here say "I am a card counter; I make $200,000 a year, never get caught, never have any hassles, and casinos just love my action - it is a GREAT JOB! I live like James Bond, the Life of Reilly!" this is because the real story is that it's an ineffective, no-where activity that people defend through denial.

Few - if any - here made any money on it. I think the time wasted, plus hassles incurred by it is greatly below the value of the income received from it (IF ANY), and just about all who attempt it are living proof of this endeavor's poor inherent value as a legitimate practice in this day and age. I think you'll have a hell of a time trying to falsify that - as to counting's real value today.

Quote: Paigowdan

My challenge is that I have NEVER heard ANYONE here say "I am a card counter; I make $200,000 a year, never get caught, never have any hassles, and casinos just love my action - it is a GREAT JOB! I live like James Bond, the Life of Reilly!"

You are right, that person does not exist, because anyone who counts cards for any length of time is going to have hassles. It just comes with the territory.

Quote:

this is because the real story is that it's an ineffective, no-where activity that people defend through denial.

But implying that there is no one out there in the world right now making a decent living from counting cards or that such a thing isn't possible is ignorant. I recently became a green chipper over at bj21.com, and believe me, they are out there. Sure, it's not as glamorous as the noobs and rookies (like me, haha) might imagine, but it's possible.

Quote: Paigowdan

Few - if any - here made any money on it. I think the time wasted, plus hassles incurred by it is greatly below the value of the income received from it (IF ANY), and just about all who attempt it are living proof of this endeavor's poor inherent value as a legitimate practice in this day and age. I think you'll have a hell of a time trying to falsify that - as to counting's real value today.

I disagree, because I look at it as a hobby - a hobby that will eventually pay me in the long run. So all the time I put into it, I just look at it as another hobby. You like to work on your old car or build birdhouses or whatever, I count cards.

Dan, I know this means you don't have a lot of respect for me as someone who is trying to take money from the casinos by violating the house rules. I'm not arguing this point and I respect you for your positions on this topic.

Quote: Paigowdan

People get expelled for breaking ANY house rule.

And sometimes even without breaking any.

Quote: Paigowdan

Greektown was in the wrong for banning perfect strategy Video Poker players.

But you just used an argument that counting is cheating because it gets you banned (sometimes).
You are constantly using "might makes right" reasoning here. There is no room for exceptions in that world view.

Quote: Paigowdan

No, not all of it. Sorry. Keeping 2 suited connectors above 6 in Full-Pay Deuces Wild is the only skilled play example in your group of examples.
This is because skilled play works.
If any play at all gets you 86-ed, blacklisted, or backed off, it is just not skilled play.

Then perfect strategy video poker is not just skilled play either. That wasn't the only case of VP players getting banned.

Quote: Paigowdan

Depends on how they win.
Think about it: if a casino bans a winner, they lock in a player's winnings, so they would not do that.
If the bar a cheater, they lock out a problem, and they should indeed carry that out.

Well, when they banned Richard Brodie, he wasn't cheating. He wasn't even playing perfect strategy on a >100% machine.
But he got a few royal flushes in too short a time. He's a lucky guy, to have struck some silver with Microsoft, and then to have finished ITM in several WSOP and WPT events. So they figured he's too lucky to be allowed to play, and banned him to lock out a problem. It's rare for this to happen in this day and age, but it did.

Is Richard Brodie a cheater now too?

Quote: Paigowdan

There is no libel. The formula is simple: "Break the ground rules of a game" + "do it for obtaining and taking in a gain" = "an action that may reasonably be considered cheating."

There is no rule that players can not hit, stand or double following a strategy other than basic, such as Illustrious 18.
There is no rule that players can not change their bet size in the middle of the game.
There is no rule that players can not increase their bet size when the shoe is hot and quit when it is cold.

There is a rule that you can't split 8 and 7. There is a rule that you can't hit after doubling down, or double down after hitting. There may be a rule that you can't double down on hands containing an ace. These are the ground rules of the game.
The player can bet any amount within table limits and take any action on his hand that is permitted by these rules.

Card-counting is a play that takes maximum advantage of these rules. But it doesn't break any. A counter and a non-counter can make the exact same bet changes and plays over a number of hands. What is within the rules for one player can not be against the rules for another.

The only argument you present for why card-counting is rule-breaking is because you sometimes ban people for it, "might makes right". But you also sometimes ban people for playing perfect video poker, for optimizing their bonuses, for being too lucky, or just because you don't like them for some other reason. Don't confuse the cause and the effect.

Quote: AcesAndEights

Quote: Paigowdan

Few - if any - here made any money on it. I think the time wasted, plus hassles incurred by it is greatly below the value of the income received from it (IF ANY), and just about all who attempt it are living proof of this endeavor's poor inherent value as a legitimate practice in this day and age. I think you'll have a hell of a time trying to falsify that - as to counting's real value today.

I disagree, because I look at it as a hobby - a hobby that will eventually pay me in the long run. So all the time I put into it, I just look at it as another hobby. You like to work on your old car or build birdhouses or whatever, I count cards.

Dan, I know this means you don't have a lot of respect for me as someone who is trying to take money from the casinos by violating the house rules. I'm not arguing this point and I respect you for your positions on this topic.

Not necessarily. You, AcesandEight, I have a lot of respect for. I studied card counting as both part of my training and as a personal interest.
As a serious life option that was both viable and ethical - I rejected it out of hand, especially being in gaming.
As an interest, a curio to study, fine. As a practice, no.
I know some wanna be, or pseudo-counters, who may make an extra bit of chump change here and there, and accept it as their peccadillo, indulgence, hobby, or whatever. I don't call Gaming - I roll my eyes. For that matter, studying butterflies or bird-watching are hobbies, too. Everybody's got hobbies, habits, areas of interest, and affectations.

But Some AP play suffers from the "Free Lunch Syndrome," if it works, or "Fantasy" syndrome (waste of time) if it doesn't work well, and that's the issue with CC-ing. It's either one or the other.

Let me explain the "Free Lunch Syndrome." It's getting excess easy money - free money - by some circuitous or nefarious and deliberate method.

Let's say you discovered an unknown bug in the ATM machines of a certain national bank that you knew was untraceable. The Shoe-game Bank of America. Like cheating or really effective AP, never to get caught. You go to an ATM of that bank, and only that bank, and hit a sequence of keys on the keypad, without requiring a card or anything. Say that number is an easy-to-remember 867-5309, followed by two pound keys and the star key. ("Jenny, Jenny, who can I turn to?...") Out comes $500, into your pocket it goes, and you can do this on a daily basis if you want. How you know this, it came in a dream. You were dreaming of reading a book called "Beat the ATM," by Edward O. Snorpe. Nobody knows about this, not the local branch manager, not the bank's data processing department, not the pit boss or surveillance, what have you. Bank only notices that they have to raise a certain monthly fee by a trivial 5 cents on all their many account holders as their quarterly profit-and-loss adjustment, - the only effect it has. You spend it on dinners, movies, auto repairs, and boy, is it a help in your life.
You not only have no problem with it, you find it salacious, delightful. How is this wrong - if it can be done?? they're giving it to me, right? It's not cheating, as I can do it and get away with it - any nobody knows!!" Your little secret, you little AP, - you're only taking it from the non-AP players who aren't smart enough to know or practice this little scheme, right? you say to yourself.

Then a few weeks later, you notice another guy in front of you at an ATM. You see that he punches in 867-5309 ## *, takes $500 with a smile, and walks away. you say, "Dang, he read Beat the ATM is HIS dream, too...."

Soon, the rates have to go up even further, and the bank is noticing, panicing. You don't say, "Aha! Are you sweating the money, you bastard evil banks?" instead you say, "This looks bad...there's going to be counter measures. Maybe some camo would work if they're taking pictures...." Naturally, you want the glory days to continue.

You go to the ATM, and see a longer line, people wearing wigs and what not. A lot of them now know. Only $300 comes out now...and people are leaving the bank because their rates are too high, switching over to the CSM Bank of America. More 6:5 ATM machines are coming, more CSM ATMs are coming, more cameras are in the ATM booths, so you're thinking:
1. you'd have to get a real job, a legit, by-the-books job.
2. And those evil, dark side banks are clamping down on the free money, Damn Them!!

You're now taking tranquilizers because of nerves, and the halcyon days have turned into a Halcion daze...you have to travel further, the amount that comes out is less than $100 if that, but you hold fast. You've met up with fellow afficionados, lamenting the situation, and even joined a forum, the WizardofATMs.com. Everybody knows the situation.

There's a member at the WizardofATMs forum (let say his handle is ByTheBookDan), and he keeps saying,
1. it doesn't work anymore, guys.
2. it's not really ethical, really. It's cheating when you think about it.
3. it's pretty much indefensible and not viable to do anymore.
4. And understand the bank's point-of-view, - they actually have a right to respond, and to restrict the "Jenny-Jenny, who do I turn to" ATM machines.

Not you, but a bunch of the Jenny-Jenny ATM believing members [OddBob, DeepDenial, P45 et al] just want to firebormb the sh]t out of ByTheBookDan and his point of view.
Clearly, he's crazy, clearly he's wrong, the Dream must live on.

If you think remembering the cards in the game you are playing is unethical and the same as hacking (phreaking) an ATM, well, there is no hope for this conversation. Really no hope. IT IS NOT THE SAME.

You want to call it "gaming", well let it be a game, with rules, and the ability to apply skill. Otherwise, it's not a game, it's not "Gaming", and casino's should stop referring it to as Gaming. It's gambling. It's not a Game if one side has hidden rules (well actually, theres Mao, which is a game about finding out the hidden rules...).

Remembering the cards played in bridge is not cheating, and not against the rules. Remembering the properties taken in Monopoly isn't. Calculating probabilities in Settlers of Cataan is not cheating or against the rules. In fact, people who don't do that will lose, and have a poor time playing.

It's completely naive to expect people not to apply their brains to a game. Absolutely naive. You CANNOT regulate against it. It may be undesired, it may the game has to change to keep the house advantage but it's gonna happen.

The casino has every right to protect the game and apply any rules they think are necessary. Point 4 is fine. Go ahead. The rules can change. You can pay 6:5, or cut the deck early. Sure make your offering. But it's complete folly to say "well, it's all your fault for playing the game to well, you shouldn't have".

The above is a terrible analogy, and it is actually a civil tort to keep overpayments from an ATM. If it is unethical to play a game within its rules (non-cheating AP) then it is unethical to offer that game. Non-cheating AP just reverses the direction of rigging using the information the casino provides as a part of the game.

Unlike the bank in your ATM example, casinos are aware of the weaknesses of their game and choose to offer the game with the weak rules anyway. Non-cheating AP is as unethical as doubling down an 11 against a 10. It isn't free money. There is a risk and both parties agree to bear that potential loss based on the game rules offered by the house.

A friend offers to bet you $100 that the Giants will win the superbowl. It will pay 1:1, an even bet. Lets say that your friend offers this 5 minutes before kickoff and tells you that you have until halftime to decide. He says regardless of the score at halftime you can accept or reject the bet. Your friend says he knows that this idea has some downsides but that sincerely believes that the Giants will win without regard to the score at halftime. Is it unethical to take the bet under the rules offered by your friend when the Patriots lead 42-0 at halftime?

Quote: thecesspit

If you think remembering the cards in the game you are playing is unethical and the same as hacking (phreaking) an ATM, well, there is no hope for this conversation. Really no hope. IT IS NOT THE SAME.

Yes it is - and it's a great way to get a clear idea of the situation.
Card counting is hacking the game of blackjack:
1. If the game is offered unrestricted without ANY counter-measures of AP play, it a complete loss drain for the house as a game offering, and it is gone, as some hackers will kill the game off entirely, killing the non-hacker "recreational players" of the game in the process.
2. Counter-measures to restirct AP play or "hacks" at the game are put in place - in the real world - to keep the game offering viable for the houses, and to great lament and complaint from the cc afficiandos.

"Applying your brains effectively" gets good results in the real world. "Applying your brains ineffectively" getting no good results in the real world, but is ALSO is using your brain - ineffectively at that. Card counting as a serious pursuit is simply no longer is viable. That's the real story. One can argue that practicing denial of the sitation, developing arguments to hold onto beliefs that are no longer viable, and the like is also using your brain, as you are burning glucose in your grey matter - to hang onto what you want to believe, but no longer works well.

Quote: RaspberryCheeseBlintz

Look, I think casinos cheat when they falsely put symbols on a slot machine indicating a player "almost" won when in fact
the "almost" is just a bogus comeon to deceive players. l.

Actually, this "near miss" feature is illegal in NJ and NV. The slot manufacturer Universal had this programmed into their games back in the late 80's. No longer permissible.

Mark

Quote: bbvk05

The above is a terrible analogy, and it is actually a civil tort to keep overpayments from an ATM. If it is unethical to play a game within its rules (non-cheating AP) then it is unethical to offer that game. Non-cheating AP just reverses the direction of rigging using the information the casino provides as a part of the game.

it's a clear analogy: rigging the game by using an unauthorized process or procedure on the game - to reverse the direction of the edge is in a sense "theft of services," as the house edge is the valid mechanism of a casino or gambling hall's income, and circumventing that mechanism is theft of services. It's like entering a movie house via a fire door, to see a movie for free. It's like using a slug on a vending machine to get free goods. It's like using a counterfeit transit pass to avoid paying your fare. It doesn't matter if this "makes sense" to you, or if you "get this," or "can see it." You can get backed off and say, "Well, I do not feel that that was right!!" Doesn't matter if you "get it" or "how you feel about it" or say "but I disagree with THAT!" - it matters if you commit it and get 86-ed, even if you don't understand it yet, or ever. You still get 86-ed, and for good reason.

Quote: bbvk05

Unlike the bank in your ATM example, casinos are aware of the weaknesses of their game and choose to offer the game with the weak rules anyway. Non-cheating AP is as unethical as doubling down an 11 against a 10.

No, this is not true. you don't get backed off for doubling an 11, as it is a proper play within the casino's house rules. you get backed off for card counting which is breaking the house rules, and is WHY you are backed off, and this is established and known. Deny that, and you're lying.

Quote: bbvk05

It isn't free money. There is a risk and both parties agree to bear that potential loss based on the game rules offered by the house.

Only providing that you play by the house rules that define the risk. Take action to destroy the house edge outside of the house rules of play, - and you're essentially committing theft of services. Not every hand that is hole-carded in 3CP is a winner: you see a 3, yet the dealer may have a pair of threes. You can cheat and still lose, and it still doesn't make it a right action. That simple. Just because there is still a risk of loss doesn't make cheating OR unauthorized AP acceptable. If you modify the risk off loss from the ground rules mathematics, you are cheating. Certain AP play to include card counting is in violation of the house rules, and gets a justify back off or an 86, which is WHY it happens. For that matter, if a burglar spent 40 hours of research and $1,000 in equipement on a jewelry store job, he can say, "I worked hard for this, I earned this booty." He will indeed think that, and there is just NO convincing him otherwise. He sees and does what makes sense to him. Spending 20 years in jail - a possible real world result - might not convince him that it was not a viable pursuit, - much like making very little money and getting a lot of heat and back offs or worse would discourage a true believer AP dreamer or cheater. It's where you heart and juice is. Keith taft story is like this a little bit. As a brilliant electrical engineer, could have invented a revolutionary heart pacemaker or medical device, the next I-Phone before its time, or what have you. He spent his time inventing bulky "strap-on" card counting computers in the 80's, got a lot of heat and heartache. He could have been a Martin Cooper (AT&T inventor of the cell phone) or another Steve Jobs.

Quote: bbvk05

A friend offers to bet you $100 that the Giants will win the superbowl. It will pay 1:1, an even bet. Lets say that your friend offers this 5 minutes before kickoff and tells you that you have until halftime to decide. He says regardless of the score at halftime you can accept or reject the bet. Your friend says he knows that this idea has some downsides but that sincerely believes that the Giants will win without regard to the score at halftime. Is it unethical to take the bet under the rules offered by your friend when the Patriots lead 42-0 at halftime?

No, if it is in accordance to the agreed upon rules upfront. If I faded the bet, I'd happily pay it, as I agreed to it. It breaks no known or established ground rules. But "Card Counting is fine with us" is not a house rule in ANY casino, and we ALL know that it is against the rules, period, end of story. You know this to be the case for a certainly if you're doing it, and/or wearing or carrying out camoflage, or have studied it, or were 86-ed. Everything listed on Blackjack hero sites and card counting sites, and in every book on card counting discusses the casinos view and position, their counter-measures, and how to foil counter measures, and the like. To deny this is pure abject denial.

Quote: marksolberg

Actually, this "near miss" feature [on slot machines] is illegal in NJ and NV. The slot manufacturer Universal had this programmed into their games back in the late 80's. No longer permissible.

Mark

This is an excellent development.

I've never seen a rule against making decisions based on previous cards exposed, changing bets, doubling at odd times, taking insurance, etc. You keep pretending there are these rules. This nonsense becomes a rule once you are backed off, relegated to flat bets or continuous automatic shufflers, or something along these lines (and I think it would be unethical to keep playing somehow once you are backed off)- BUT IT IS NOT A RULE FOR THE INITIAL CUSTOMER, anywhere. If you are at 3rd base and have a hard sixteen vs a dealer 10 in a 6 deck game, and you watch the 5 players in front of you collectively draw 15 fives, is it against house rules to stay? You see people do minor card counting all the time. Show me one casino rule that says you are not allowed to make any decisions based on the cards that came out previously.

You've developed this grand scheme that reversing the house edge breaks some kind of rule and is a theft of services, which is completely laughable. Theft of services is denying payment owned for a valuable service provided. There is no agreement about how much is owed or sitting at a blackjack table.

THERE ARE NO GROUND RULE MATHEMATICS that create some kind of ethical standard. There is the casino estimate that they will make money despite some players knowing how to play better than others completely within the rules of the game. Reversing the house edge in blackjack, video poker, or any other beatable game is just as ethical as the house offering the game in the first place.

This whole thing is absurd, by the way. Card counting doesn't even violate gaming's expansive definitions of unfair advantage. If casinos don't like card counting they are free to change their rules. Players using a completely legal and sound strategy to play a game a casino offers in an optimal way don't violate any reasonable ethical standard. Is the moment it becomes unethical the moment it becomes and even bet, or the moment it becomes favorable? Is it unethical to narrow the house edge with sub-optimal card counting systems, as long as I don't defeat it? Who decides where these completely arbitrary lines lie?

Quote: Paigowdan

Only providing that you play by the house rules that define the risk.

Quote: Paigowdan

If you modify the risk of loss from the ground rules mathematics, you are cheating.

Wow, Dan. You stated your position clear as day. And made yourself consistent, at that; you weren't before.

Then your custom Pai Gow Poker strategy is cheating as well - it modifies the risk of loss from the ground rules mathematics, i.e. the house way.

Quote: Paigowdan

1. If the game is offered unrestricted without ANY counter-measures of AP play, it a complete loss drain for the house as a game offering, and it is gone, as some hackers will kill the game off entirely, killing the non-hacker "recreational players" of the game in the process.

Not really.

A counter's edge is very small and very fragile. All it takes to destroy it is to reduce penetration from 75%-85% down to 40%-50%.
One little piece of plastic moved in the shoe, and it's done. A reasonably fair game for everyone, counting or not counting, playing or banking.

In many legislatures, outside of Nevada, it's illegal for a casino to ban or back off card-counters. So they just moved the cut card and got over it. You don't even have to do it all the time, only when you notice players varying their bets by more than 4:1.

Quote: bbvk05

I've never seen a rule against making decisions based on previous cards exposed, changing bets, doubling at odd times, taking insurance, etc. You keep pretending there are these rules.

This is really deep denial: If it's done precisely because of the true count, and as your response to a true count situation - and they watch you commit this in your stoll down the primrose path - then you get busted by surveillance for card counting and expelled. EVERYONE knows card counting gets tremendous heat, and is totally against the house's rules, and this is ALL OVER card counting books, sites, history, you name as part of card counting training - it's part of the mistique, culture, its very being.

Learning the whole process of card counting states up front that it gets heat precisely because it breaks the very casino house rules that you are trained to breach. So you do indeed know early on that it is against the casino's rules of fair play - it's required training at the core of card-counting! Why would you bother to camoflage otherwise? This is along with training you that you are also somehow fighting the evil entity casinos who must die - while simultaneously hoping they'd prosper and be around long enough - so you can illicitly grab some cash for personal gain, and to find it all scintillating, exciting, and righteous! All the while calling the casinos the evil money-grubbers for taking these actions! (This is called the "justifying projection" of your own action's guilt onto your targeted victim, - much like a burglar who feels that items are deserved to be stolen - if he is able to defeat the defenses and break in in the first place.)

Yet the very presence of locks are there to show that it is a theft to breach them, - just as getting backed off or 86-ed should show you that you're breaking the rules for your personal gain, - and at someone else's expense. You justify it as money from "other tourist players who are too stupid to play well because these idiots play by the evil house rules" and "taking the evil casino's money anyway, because they set the rules." This is like saying laws should indeed be broken because they're made by damn cops, lawyers and politicians.

And that you are the valiant, righteous dude for carrying out the very processes that are against the ground rules of established fair play of the game, - to grab illicit cash for your own personal gain (really, are you going to donate it back to the IRS, or give it to the retired casino dealers' fund?), while projecting these greedy attributes onto the casino operator. Actually, you'd indeed have to accuse the other guy as the bad guy in order to commit these actions, to justify these actions in the first place against him. I wouldn't do this, so I decided not to touch card counting.

Yet the casino operator simply provides:
1. gambling services;
2. with dealers and floormen who actually don't care who wins or loses (neither your money or the casino's money is our money or interest outside of the game calls and correct payouts), - we just carry out the results of cards and dice as the results indicate without bias. That's IT. Is it the taxi's driver's interest if you're going to a celebration or to a funeral? His only job is to carry out the indications of stoplights and traffic on the route you are both traveling together....it's neither his job to speed up the fare meter, nor your job to slow the fare meter down, as both actions are cheating, and the meter just says what it should say....
3. With casino executives who trust and rely on the laws of mathematics - that the house edge is their operating fee, (just like paying an entrance fee at a Buffet, a transit system, or Movie house) - and is reviewed and enforced by gaming authorities. The house edge should not be altered by dealers stacking the deck or dealing seconds out of a deck of cards against you, or using loaded dice against you, nor should this be tolerated. And neither should the house edge be corrupted by hole-carding, card-counting, or marking the deck, capping and pinching bets - all of which screw with the gaming-posted house edge that is required for the services to be offered, and should also not be tolerated.

All of this is as plain as day. How can it be claimed otherwise?.... Sheesh.

Quote: bbvk05

This nonsense becomes a rule once you are backed off, relegated to flat bets or continuous automatic shufflers, or something along these lines (and I think it would be unethical to keep playing somehow once you are backed off)- BUT IT IS NOT A RULE FOR THE INITIAL CUSTOMER, anywhere. If you are at 3rd base and have a hard sixteen vs a dealer 10 in a 6 deck game, and you watch the 5 players in front of you collectively draw 15 fives, is it against house rules to stay? You see people do minor card counting all the time. Show me one casino rule that says you are not allowed to make any decisions based on the cards that came out previously.

For non-CSM blackjack, it's there. Trust me, read the practice's history....

Quote: bbvk05

You've developed this grand scheme that reversing the house edge breaks some kind of rule and is a theft of services, which is completely laughable. Theft of services is denying payment owned for a valuable service provided. There is no agreement about how much is owed or sitting at a blackjack table.

No, not me. I didn't develop this at all. I'm involved with craps, Baccarat and Pai Gow Poker. However, Casino management did, and as they practice it. We see it. I reported this situation.

Quote: bbvk05

THERE ARE NO GROUND RULE MATHEMATICS that create some kind of ethical standard.

Yes there is. It's called the required house edge. And this is listed for all games at this site , and is based on the games' standard operation. Do something to destroy that house edge (Hole carding, marking cards, card counting all destroy the required house edge), and casinos repond.

Quote: bbvk05

This whole thing is absurd, by the way.

Yes it is, I sure do agree. love the show, got to admit.

Quote: bbvk05

Card counting doesn't even violate gaming's expansive definitions of unfair advantage.

So they back you off just because you're a nice guy, I suppose...I have heard that claimed by APs, by the way...

Quote: bbvk05

If casinos don't like card counting they are free to change their rules.

They do indeed, and to some wailing and howling.

Quote: bbvk05

Players using a completely legal and sound strategy to play a game a casino offers in an optimal way don't violate any reasonable ethical standard.

Exactly. i have no problem with that, no one does.

Quote: bbvk05

Is the moment it becomes unethical the moment it becomes and even bet, or the moment it becomes favorable? Is it unethical to narrow the house edge with sub-optimal card counting systems, as long as I don't defeat it? Who decides where these completely arbitrary lines lie?

The casino operator decides. And his supervisors enforce the rules and carry it out. We all know what they are as plain as day, and discuss them.

Quote: Paigowdan

Yes it is - and it's a great way to get a clear idea of the situation.
Card counting is hacking the game of blackjack:
1. If the game is offered unrestricted without ANY counter-measures of AP play, it a complete loss drain for the house as a game offering, and it is gone, as some hackers will kill the game off entirely, killing the non-hacker "recreational players" of the game in the process.
2. Counter-measures to restirct AP play or "hacks" at the game are put in place - in the real world - to keep the game offering viable for the houses, and to great lament and complaint from the cc afficiandos.

Hacking an ATM and playing blackjack with the information provided BY THE HOUSE are not equivalent. One is theft (removal of something that does not belong to you), the other is using your brain power.

As stated, I have no problem with the casino changing the rules to protect gambling on blackjack. Blackjack is NOT a game if it has rules where you can't use information freely provided to play the game however you want. That is a untenable position to take.

Quote:

"Applying your brains effectively" gets good results in the real world. "Applying your brains ineffectively" getting no good results in the real world, but is ALSO is using your brain - ineffectively at that. Card counting as a serious pursuit is simply no longer is viable. That's the real story. One can argue that practicing denial of the sitation, developing arguments to hold onto beliefs that are no longer viable, and the like is also using your brain, as you are burning glucose in your grey matter - to hang onto what you want to believe, but no longer works well.

I'm not arguing whether Card counting is worthwhile or not. I don't care if it is or not. That doesn't make it right OR wrong by the rules of the game. And that is all I am concerned with in my argument. That's all. I just can't agree that it's wrong to count cards based on the points given anywhere here.

This whole mishmash of BS comes down to one thing: you think there is a "required house edge" and "standard operation" that players are obligated to follow, which is laughable because it does not conform to the rules the casinos publish. You also state that "the casino operator decides" where the completely arbitrary line of ethics lie. You are just asserting that whatever the casino would like to happen is ethical, and whatever it would not like to happen is unethical. This is a very poor and indefensible system of ethics. You are free to hold it, of course, but that doesn't do much to limit its stupidity.

Show me one casino, ANYWHERE that has a published rule against basing future decisions on the cards that come out. Getting backed off for something does not mean the behavior that caused it was proscribed in game rules that I agree to. I support casino's right to back people off as a liberty that every person and business has, but I am not going to pretend that it is unethical for me to play optimally inside the rules they do give me.

Even if there were such published rules (never has been at any rule card at any casino I have ever been to), the rule itself is dubious because it doesn't describe action, but thought.

Dan. Let's say I go into your casino and tell a supervisor that I'm going to play BJ and that I'm going to keep track of the cards dealt in my mind and I'm going to use this information to help me make my decisions (which I would explain would include how much I bet and whether or not I hit or stand or split or double). I ask him if there is a rule against this. What's his response going to be?

Quote: Paigowdan

It's like entering a movie house via a fire door, to see a movie for free. It's like using a slug on a vending machine to get free goods. It's like using a counterfeit transit pass to avoid paying your fare. It doesn't matter if this "makes sense" to you, or if you "get this," or "can see it." You can get backed off and say, "Well, I do not feel that that was right!!"

That is quite an inflated sense of importance and authority to equate extralegal, unpublished and varying casino rules with common everyday criminal violations and misdemeanors that have been and continue to be prosecuted and punished daily.

He seems to think that if the casino can ethically back someone off (they can), then the behavior that caused the backing off was unethical. The problem is that both acts can be completely ethical.

The casino remains free to back me off any time with a "new rule: get the fuck out." I'm free to use any information they provide me to make decisions. Under his ethical construction it would be unethical to stop playing a game when 20/24 aces come out of the first 5 hands if you would have otherwise kept playing. Of course, it would be exceptionally stupid to keep playing.

The casino knows AP's aren't cheats. But they hope
it will convince some of them not to do it, people
don't like being called crooks when they're not. Its
just more casino flim-flammery, more two-faced
casino obfuscation.

Isn't obfuscation a great word? It means "the hiding
of intended meaning in communication, making
communication confusing, wilfully ambiguous, and
harder to interpret." Its what casinos do best, they
obfuscate. They say they love winners when they
really hate them. They make up secret rules and don't
tell you about them. They give the impression that
if you play long enough you can get ahead of the
casino and stay ahead, when the opposite is true.
They pretend to be your friend so they can take your
money. They call you a cheater when they know
you're just an advantage player.

Quote: thecesspit

If you think remembering the cards in the game you are playing is unethical and the same as hacking (phreaking) an ATM, well, there is no hope for this conversation. Really no hope.

And yet it continues. Page after page.

Has anyone ever won an argument on the Internet?

Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome is...

Quote: kp

And yet it continues. Page after page.

Has anyone ever won an argument on the Internet?

..

What agrument. AP's aren't cheats, according to the
Supreme Fricking Court. Just because you're a sore
loser doesn't mean you get to make the rules.

Quote: bbvk05

He seems to think that if the casino can ethically back someone off (they can), then the behavior that caused the backing off was unethical. The problem is that both acts can be completely ethical.

EXACTLY. Did anyone read my bottom line???

deleted

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

Regardless of what anyone thinks or feels, I will keep winning the casinos money legally for as long as I see fit, and if anyone doesnt like it, tough! If casinos ask me to leave, they have that right and I will never cry or complain about it.

Personifies my "don't be a whiner, be a winner" mantra. Excellent attitude!

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

Regardless of what anyone thinks or feels, I will keep winning the casinos money legally for as long as I see fit, and if anyone doesnt like it, tough! If casinos ask me to leave, they have that right and I will never cry or complain about it.

Personifies my "don't be a whiner, be a winner" mantra. Excellent attitude!

deleted

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

Some AP's may be whiners when booted or the dealer gets corrected but me and my teammates are'nt.

Excellent. Don't be a whiner, be a winner applies to both players and casino personnel.

deleted

Quote: P90

Quote: Paigowdan

If you modify the risk of loss from the ground rules mathematics, you are cheating.

Wow, Dan. You stated your position clear as day. And made yourself consistent, at that; you weren't before.

I was clear and consistent. The house edge of a certain percentage is a valid requirement by the house for it to remain in business. If a player does something to reduce or eliminate it that is openly against the house rules (hole carding, card counting, pinching and capping bets), is cheating of some sort, just like using a counterfeit transit pass to skip out of the fare, or sneeking into a movie house to see a flick for free.

Quote: P90

Then your custom Pai Gow Poker strategy is cheating as well - it modifies the risk of loss from the ground rules mathematics, i.e. the house way.

No, not at all. Both fortune Pai Gow and EZ pai Gow were tested by mathematician 'x', and optimal play could not beat the house commission (fortune), or the queen-qualifer mechanism (EZ Pai Gow) - no matter what perfect strategy was used. Using a "perfect player" strategy cannot eliminate the house edge from either game, and players may use any hand-setting strategy they wish without it being cheating of any sort. In fact, we say come and play, use any strategy you want, welcome.

Quote: P90

A counter's edge is very small and very fragile.

So is the house edge, it's under 1% on BJ.

Quote: P90

All it takes to destroy it is to reduce penetration from 75%-85% down to 40%-50%.

Yes, and players complain, and re-shuffling costs money by kill hands per hour, etc.

Quote: P90

In many legislatures, outside of Nevada, it's illegal for a casino to ban or back off card-counters. So they just moved the cut card and got over it. You don't even have to do it all the time, only when you notice players varying their bets by more than 4:1.

Using 40% penetration is necessary precisely because of card counters in areas where players cannot be backed off, like NJ.
If any card counter complains of 40% penetration, he brought it upon himself.

Quote: Paigowdan

Greektown was in the wrong for banning perfect strategy Video Poker players.
...
Keeping 2 suited connectors above 6 in Full-Pay Deuces Wild is the only skilled play example in your group of examples.
This is because skilled play works.
If any play at all gets you 86-ed, blacklisted, or backed off, it is just not skilled play.

This is both inconsistent and circular. FPDW is a game which is always +EV when played optimally. Blackjack is a game which is sometimes +EV when played optimally. Yet you consider optimal FPDW players ethical while you consider optimal blackjack players unethical. That makes no sense. There are many games in casinos which may occasionally become +EV. Blackjack is the most obvious example, but so is standard JoB video poker with a progressive royal, any slot machine with a progressive jackpot, certain bonus rounds on banking slot machines, etc. You presumably don't consider using one's intelligence to achieve +EV on a slot machine to be unethical. You're inconsistent with regard to blackjack, and blackjack only, on the grounds that blackjack is well-known and entrenched -- but that's just as true for any of the other games in a casino. The vulnerability of blackjack to card counting has been known since long before Edward Thorp's "Beat the Dealer" -- John Scarne refers to "card casing" or "counting down the deck" in his book "Scarne's Encyclopedia of Games". From p. 285:

Quote: Scarne's Encyclopedia of Games

I was the first person to beat the game with a countdown, and the first to be barred from playing Black Jack in Las Vegas, back in 1947. I was barred because I told Benjamin (Bugsy) Siegal, builder of the swank Flamingo Hotel Casino, that I could beat the game with a countdown. He challenged me to prove it. I did, by beating every casino on the Las Vegas Strip. The result -- I was barred from the casino Black Jack tables throughout Nevada and the rest of the country.

Your argument basically boils down to "the casino won't allow certain +EV activities because they're against casino rules, and the casino rules are all about what the casino will allow and won't allow." Of course, that's as circular as it can possibly be. "An activity that gets you 86-ed is just not skilled play" -- those activities include FPDW optimal play, at least at Greektown. If it were universally true that +EV play was against the rules (any rules, written or unwritten), you wouldn't have a problem with the Greektown FPDW ban. In reality, there are often no rules per se; that is, it's a discretionary managerial decision to allow, mitigate, or bar a +EV player, regardless of the game, and regardless of the technique they're using as long as it's legal. To wit: does your property always bar a card counter? Have you ever barred a card counter? If the answers are no and yes (and I'm sure they are), then there's discretion involved.

You're not arguing that remembering past cards in blackjack is illegal, nor are you arguing that changing play strategy or bet amount from hand to hand is illegal -- proposing either would be asinine. You don't like the combination of the two because it may hurt the bottom line, but that's not news at all to any casino operator. Moreover, such advantage play is clearly not an ethical issue. Ethics isn't determined on a case-by-case basis, such that +EV VP play may be ethical but +EV blackjack play is not. And I'm not sure why you even need to bring ethics into it. There's a bright line between card counting, optimal FPDW play, progressive hunting, comp optimization, etc. and actual cheating activities. A casino may not like any of the former activities, and its operators are more than justified in removing players who engage in them (except in New Jersey), but they may not be reasonably considered cheating.

Quote: Paigowdan

If a player does something to reduce or eliminate it that is openly against the house rules (hole carding, card counting, pinching and capping bets), is cheating of some sort

Dan, its not cheating if you have a poorly designed
game, which BJ obviously is. If any schmuck can
beat a game just by watching and remembering
the cards, then the game shouldn't be offered in
the first place. The casino has to either fix the game
so its unbeatable, or stop crying like a new born
baby every time somebody beats it. You're like the
dumb kid down the street who says 'bet you can't
throw a rock and hit me' and every time somebody
hits him, he calls them a cheater. He's offering a
flawed game, just like the casino is.

deleted

Quote: EvenBob

Dan, its not cheating if you have a poorly designed
game, which BJ obviously is.

It's handled very poorly in many jurisdictions, no doubt in my mind.

Quote: EvenBob

If any schmuck can
beat a game just by watching and remembering
the cards, then the game shouldn't be offered in
the first place. The casino has to either fix the game
so its unbeatable, or stop crying like a new born
baby every time somebody beats it. You're like the
dumb kid down the street who says 'bet you can't
throw a rock and hit me' and every time somebody
hits him, he calls them a cheater. He's offering a
flawed game, just like the casino is.

1.No, a few - enough - smucks can beat the game without counter measures. Casinos don't cry if someone beats it, the change the rules, the view the rule-breakers as cheaters as the new rules are globally known, and watch the card counters cry and steam about the rule changes.
2. such a kid should be held down by the other kids and hit with rocks until he gives up that silly game, which is what the casinos are counters are giving each other via BJ. It's the new ground rules are: no counting - get caught counting and get backed off.

Quote: Paigowdan

No, a few - enough - smucks can beat the game without counter measures..

Far more than a few, Dan. Two AC casinos, Resorts and Boardwalk,
offered a special deal to BJ counters in 1979. No backing off,
no banning. The place was jammed with AP's, they cost
the casinos a ton of money. The grand experiment lasted 2 weeks,
they called it off or go broke.

The point is, if you have no counter measures, AP's would
put any casino out of business in record time. Every schmuck
WOULD be counting and there would be legions of them. BJ
is a very beatable game, and you offer it. And cry when its
beaten. Who's the the bad guy in reality, Dan. You can't offer
a flawed game and then blame those who take advantage of it.

Quote: EvenBob

Far more than a few, Dan. Two AC casinos, Resorts and Boardwalk,
offered a special deal to BJ counters in 1979. No backing off,
no banning. The place was jammed with AP's, they cost
the casinos a ton of money. The grand experiment lasted 2 weeks,
they called it off or go broke.

The point is, if you have no counter measures, AP's would
put any casino out of business in record time. Every schmuck
WOULD be counting and there would be legions of them. BJ
is a very beatable game, and you offer it. And cry when its
beaten. Who's the the bad guy in reality, Dan. You can't offer
a flawed game and then blame those who take advantage of it.

This says it all, proves it all - and Thank you Bob!: - offer freely countable Blackjack and watch your table games pit get punished for it and the casino manager fired for it.
As for the bad guy? He's the casino manager who offered countable blackjack and got his ass beaten badly. A schmuck. This guy cried when he was beaten because he was beaten out of a manager's job for incompetence.
A better guy is the casino manager who puts in a lot of BJ counter measures, including back offs, 86-ing, and the like, so that he can keep Blackjack in the casino.
The best guy? Offer Blackjack with counter measures that keep APs from ever bothering your casino: shallow penetration, CSMs, 2-thru-6 Blackjack, bet ranges of $5-$25, $25-$100, $100-$300, and $300-$1,000. But have DOA, DAS, H17, split including aces 4x.

Quote: Paigowdan

[If you modify the risk of loss from the ground rules mathematics, you are cheating.]
The house edge of a certain percentage is a valid requirement by the house for it to remain in business.

Quote: Paigowdan

Both fortune Pai Gow and EZ pai Gow were tested by mathematician 'x', and optimal play could not beat the house commission (fortune), or the queen-qualifer mechanism (EZ Pai Gow) - no matter what perfect strategy was used.

Of course you can't eliminate the house edge in these games, the commission is no joke.
But you can reduce it from the certain percentage that the house expects. And you do reduce it with your strategy.

So it's not quite like sneaking into a movie theater through a fire exit then. It's more like using your dad's Senior Citizen Card to get the ticket for 3/4 the price. Bad, bad boy.

Quote: Paigowdan

Yes, and players complain, and re-shuffling costs money by kill hands per hour, etc.

Players don't complain when they get used to it.
Yes, reshuffling does cost money by reducing the number of hands per hour. So? It fixes the game, making it effectively undefeatable by counters.

Of course you want it both ways, get maximum hands per hour, AND get no losses from successful counters. That's an understandable desire. In Nevada - but not in New Jersey and not almost anywhere outside US - casinos have the privilege of being able to back off and ban players at will, and so are able to realize that desire.

And that's all there is to it. Blackjack itself isn't broken, the only broken part is the highly countable way of dealing it with deep penetration. You can fix it, but prefer not to, because the exploitable deep-penetration version is more profitable. The price for that extra profit is that skilled players will have +EV.

Surely you'd rather they didn't, but saying "cheaters!!" a million times won't change the fact that it's the version of the game you choose to offer with full knowledge that gives good players an advantage, not any altering of the elements of chance that determine the outcome.

Quote: EvenBob

Two AC casinos, Resorts and Boardwalk,
offered a special deal to BJ counters in 1979.

Where was this Boardwalk casino?

It was probably "under the boardwalk down by the sea".

There were 3 casinos in Atlantic City in 1979- Resorts, Bally's, and Caesars. The only Boardwalk Casino that I know of was on the Vegas strip.

Quote: Paigowdan

Yes it is - and it's a great way to get a clear idea of the situation.
Card counting is hacking the game of blackjack:
1. If the game is offered unrestricted without ANY counter-measures of AP play, it a complete loss drain for the house as a game offering, and it is gone, as some hackers will kill the game off entirely, killing the non-hacker "recreational players" of the game in the process.
2. Counter-measures to restirct AP play or "hacks" at the game are put in place - in the real world - to keep the game offering viable for the houses, and to great lament and complaint from the cc afficiandos.

Card counting may be hacking the game of blackjack, but it's a game that the casino invites to hack. It's VERY simple to install a CSM. It's very simple to have an early shuffle. Countermeasures are easy, but it hasn't happened. Why? Because casinos realize that most hackers are not very good - it just invites more losing players to the game.

Counting is becoming less viable only because the business intelligence has improved to recognize the counters. The casino has the best of both worlds: they can back off the advantage players and take the money from the players who believe that they have the skill but don't.

Quote: SanchoPanza

Where was this Boardwalk casino?

In 1979 its was called Caesars Boardwalk casino.