Gambler accused of dice sliding at Wynn Las Vegas - Sued for return of $700,000
Quote: PaigowdanThis 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.
\
You missed my point, Dan. You offer an extremely
flawed game that any schmuck can beat, and then
call him a cheat for beating it. So instead of pulling
the game, you make it almost unplayable with all
your counter measures, still hoping the schmucks
will come in and try to beat it. The casino wants it
both ways, to offer a flawed game, and to cry
themselves to sleep at night when the schmucks
try and beat it. You need to wake up and smell the
stale cigarette smoke and realize these are AP's
and NOT cheats. They're doing just what you want
them to do.
Quote: bbvk05He 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.
Here, here.
Quote: EvenBobYou missed my point, Dan.
No, I hadn't. :;
Quote: EvenBobYou offer an extremely
flawed game that any schmuck can beat, and then
call him a cheat for beating it.
No, Bob, like with any game, you can play it by the rules, or take a shot at it, exploit it.
There were wrong-headed arguments here about how wonderful, legal and righteous it is to hole-card Three Card poker at a casino, too. I argued that it was cheating whether or not YOU the player took the action to glimpse at the hole card, or if you just "graciously utilized" the illicit information that "the dealer just GAVE you" by mistake.
I assure you and all that the posted house edge of that game, - and the house edge figure that the gaming authorities used to approve that game - is NOT the same house edge that it was approved and installed by. Or that it is the house edge casinos are operating on and relying on to run their businesses, when hole-carding, card counting or any unauthorized AP play is applied to the game's official performance.
Quote: EvenBobSo instead of pulling
the game, you make it almost unplayable with all
your counter measures, still hoping the schmucks
will come in and try to beat it.
No, if you apply game protection measures to the game, you basically knock out ONLY APs and shot takers and cheaters and the like, - which is the desired result, (and yes, they are lumped into the same catagory here in terms of "game house edge threat.") It's immaterial to a non-counting basic strategy player who's playing a narrow bet range whether the table limits are $10 to $30, or $10 to $3,000,000 if he's betting $10 to $30 because he isn't raising or lowering bets 10x in response to the count. And it's immaterial if it's 95% penetration or 40% penetration, because he isn't processing and tracking the discards with basic strategy.
Quote: EvenBobThe casino wants it
both ways, to offer a flawed game, and to cry
themselves to sleep at night when the schmucks
try and beat it.
We want it just one way, and one way only: a clean game so a reasonable house edge can do its work without it being sabotaged, that's all.
Quote: EvenBobYou need to wake up and smell the
stale cigarette smoke and realize these are AP's
and NOT cheats.
No. Cheating is:
1. breaking the known rules of a game, (rules so known well by ALL that you KNOW you can be backed off or 86-ed or face 40% penetration)....and:
2. To illicitly obtain a personal advanatge or gain, and
3. The opinion or the status of the cop or lawyer is immaterial; in fact, the cops give us their approval to back person 'x', and your own lawyer will say to you, 'Yeah, the pit boss can back you off of a game at his discretion, so go play another game or see a movie...."
OR in New Jersey, "yeah, the cut card penetration is what it is at 40%, and the table limits are what they are. Don't like it, then don't play, or set up your OWN casino and see how you like it."
Certain AP play, but not all, fits the description. You can play PERFECT Poker play at a Pai Gow table and while reducing the house edge to exactly its low house edge, but you still cannot reverse it to the player's favor. Play the hand KQ77422 as KQ/77224 instead of 22/77KQ4, and you will have increased your player's return, but not to the point where the house edge can go below 2.43% on the main bet.
Quote: EvenBobThey're doing just what you want
them to do.
Only if:
1. They come to the casino instead of the bowling alley or the movie house, and
2. Play by the rules: no unauthorized card-counting, no hole carding, no inserting of electronic jamming devices into the slot machines, etc. and,
3. Do not drink so much free alcohol that they are publicly drunk and beligerent.
We do not have a problem with #1, above. They come and play.
We sometimes have problems with items #2 and #3.
Quote: kpPage 41. What's the over/under on how many pages it takes to change someone's mind on the Internet? Is anyone one the verge of changing their mind?
The minds of the posters are not always changed. We can see that.
However, with over 10,000 hits, a lot of minds are reading and debating these issues, - aside from us posters who are presenting our arguments.
You can watch a tennis match, like Wimbeldon or the U.S. Open, and say, "oh, those tennis players are only hitting the ball from ther OWN side and POV.' Or say, "Oh, those Pittsburgh Steelers are trying to score touchdowns only for the OWN side." How one-sided and boring...
Some disagree. There is indeed a big audience, and THEY vote with their remote controls or keystrokes, which is the point of it all.
Quote: kpPage 41. What's the over/under on how many pages it takes to change someone's mind on the Internet? Is anyone one the verge of changing their mind?
It's not about changing Dan's mind, it's about figuring out if a coherent defense can be put up for his position.
Currently I think some members may have changed their position from "Counting is a gray area, but not quite cheating" to "Counting is actually completely within the rules".
Quote: P90It's not about changing Dan's mind, it's about figuring out if a coherent defense can be put up for his position.
You mean against my position. Let's put it this way: We still don't have 95% penetration on eight-deck shoes, DOA, DAS, S17, split any 4x, hit aces after split with back offs never to occur. And looks like it'll never happen. The cats out of the bag, the show is over, never to come back, no matter how your side argues, - not the side I agree with.
It isn't me, nor the pit boss, nor the floor supervisor, nor the legal department to any casino operator who can get to the point of agreeing with you guys. Won't happen, and this is the real story. Deny it publicly if you like, (you are doing so), we all will just relish it to the point of 10,000+ hits on this thread. If this endeavor were possible, we'd offer again 95% penetration on eight-deck shoes, DOA, DAS, S17, split any 4x, hit aces after split, and we would put Public Assistance programs out of business. They'd say, "Want free money? Get a job card counting, report to Wynn at 10AM sharp...." Not that casinos would be around any longer for it, just like "the shoe-game bank of America" folding out of business a few pages ago.
Quote: P90Currently I think some members may have changed their position from "Counting is a gray area, but not quite cheating" to "Counting is actually completely within the rules".
You don't know, you speak for yourself.
And really, it doesn't matter squat what you or me or anyone thinks or believes, - it matters what we can really change.
Quote: IbeatyouracesAnd while you all are arguing, we are beating up a flashing 3cp game at this very moment :). And they DO use the flush mounted shufflers.
Good. Enjoy it while the enjoying is good. Knock yourselves out, I share your joy. [A lot of 3CP dealers haven't master the art of sliding the dealer's card packet to his position without flashing yet.]
Just continue to go to the casinos instead of movies, restaurants, and other outlets...this is the main thing I approve of whole-heartedly. And we have some very fines steakhouses, fast-food outlets, cinemaplexes, the whole nine yards, too. Great shows, too! Hit bands, comedy shows, great headliners, - Casinos ARE the one-stop place to go on your free nights!
Quote: PaigowdanLet's put it this way: We still don't have 95% penetration on eight-deck shoes, DOA, DAS, S17, split any 4x, hit aces after split with back offs never to occur. And looks like it'll never happen.
You're redirecting the issue from "It's cheating to count cards" to "It's not profitable to count cards".
The position that has offended a number of members here is the former, not the latter.
Quote: PaigowdanYou don't know, you speak for yourself.
Its solidified my position that casinos don't have
a shred of proof that being an AP is cheating.
Its just an opinion the casino has about anybody
who takes away from their bottom line. They're
cheats, crooks, and evil. I consider even more
that the casino is the DarkSide and whatever
happens to them from an AP is well deserved and
well earned by the casinos 'us against them'
attitude towards the public.
As for casinos not having a shread of proof, I think they have PLENTY of experience as to what may or may not suck the lifeblood out of their own bottom line. Lord knows there are threats against it....
As for what that something is you, can say:
1. Well...Casinos look at threats that may affect the bottom line, and so they address it, OR:
2. you can put your head in the sand, and say: "Could it be....SATAN?
I choose #1 - that they consider and address all threats to their business operations.
Just call me crazy, out of touch, and all that jazz....
Quote: EvenBobTwo 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.
Those details do not show in the record. The files show that Resorts banned Uston six months after opening and before Caesars Boardwalk Regency opened.
Yet the crowds persisted, as Gambling Times noted in January 1980:
"Opened just a few months ago was the Boardwalk Regency Hotel, which is a division of Caesars World. Both places enjoy capacity crowds, with long lines to get into the casino on weekends and a long wait to get a seat at the tables, particularly the lower range tables, the $2 and $5 minimum tables where you may wait as long as two or three hours to get a seat. And it's very difficult to move around in these casinos in the evenings, because the crowds are packed three-deep around the tables."
If other historical materials are available, they would help build a more complete historical record than appears today.
Quote: PaigowdanAs for casinos not having a shread of proof, I think they have PLENTY of experience as to what may or may not suck the lifeblood out of their own bottom line..
When BJ was introduced in the casinos, it was
considered a boilerplate game, unbeatable.
Counters existed, but they were few and far
between and casinos weren't really aware of
them. So it wasn't an unbeatable game
to begin with. It popularity is so high, in the
States anyway, that they can't get rid
of it. Its hard to know who to blame for introducing
a game so easily beaten. Ignorance is its own
punishment, I guess.
So he kept it to about $50 when the count was good, colored up a few thou, and there was never any trouble.
In retailing, many business have loss leaders. They don't mind someone getting a few of the deals, but they do put limits on their loss leaders so someone doesn't get too many of them and spoil the fun for other customers too.
If the card counting skill really grows to the point where casinos start losing money on BJ the end result will probably mean lower table limts.
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.
Scarne also suggested that casino's use a shoe when dealing BJ. But it was not as a measure against players, but to prevent players from being cheated.
Quote: PaigowdanYou can watch a tennis match, like Wimbeldon or the U.S. Open, and say, "oh, those tennis players are only hitting the ball from ther OWN side and POV.' Or say, "Oh, those Pittsburgh Steelers are trying to score touchdowns only for the OWN side." How one-sided and boring...
Eventually someone is going to win the tennis match or football game. The only way we'll have a winner here is for you to embrace card counters as good guys or convince others that they are cheaters. How many pages will it take for you to be convinced? How many pages will it take to convince others?
Well, as one of the "others", I could probably be convinced that card counters were cheaters if it were demonstrated that counting violated the law or that the casino had published and made available to all of the players a specific set of rules that prohibit card counting in their casino (including a clear definition of what they mean by card counting.) If it eventually turns out to be just (published) house rules violation and not a law violation, I would still prefer a term other than "cheater", to distinguish counters from criminals.Quote: kpEventually someone is going to win the tennis match or football game. The only way we'll have a winner here is for you to embrace card counters as good guys or convince others that they are cheaters. How many pages will it take for you to be convinced? How many pages will it take to convince others?
It appears, though, that all we are going to hear is that counting violates "house rules" and that players are supposed to know exactly what those rules are, even if the casino is not willing to tell us openly exactly what they are.
Quote: kpEventually someone is going to win the tennis match or football game. The only way we'll have a winner here is for you to embrace card counters as good guys or convince others that they are cheaters. How many pages will it take for you to be convinced? How many pages will it take to convince others?
What people need to be convinced of is that there are NO "good guys" and NO "bad guys" based on "just" capping bets, or "just" card counting, or "just" taking chips from the rack, or "just" this thing or "just" that thing. It's breaking the rules to take from the till for personal gain, and get heat for exactly that reason.
1. people who come to play at a casino may win or lose. Has nothing to do with the dealer's feelings, he doesn't particularly care who wins or loses. It's the casino's money versus the player's money.
2. Dealer pays out based on the results of the cards or dice, win or lose. So now the casino actually doesn't care either - since the math of the house edge is established. Some win, slightly more lose, and the house edge is the difference, where it covers the light bills, salaries, decorations and expenses. The House edge is a constant from the casino's POV - like a movie ticket fee, a Buffet entrance fee, a subway or bus fare. It is the cost of doing business to operate the premises in the first place...it is the till.
3. The good guys and the bads guys are broken out as follows:
- those who pay their fare, and
- those who don't pay their fare, breach the rules, for personal gain at someone else's expense.
It really doesn't matter who messes with the house edge income (fee) system:
- a dealer who steals chips from the rack, seeking personal gain.
- a hole-carder, seeking personal gain.
- a floorman who steals chips, seeking personal gain.
- a card counter, seeking personal gain.
- a "count-room" employee who steals cash from the drop boxes, seeking personal gain.
- a player who caps or pinches bets, seeking personal gain.
- an executive who pads his expense account, seeking personal gain.
- a player marking cards, seeking personal gain.
- a cage worker stealing cash,seeking personal gain.
- a player inserting gaffed dice onto a crap game, seeking personal gain.
- a dealer who steals from the communual tip boxes, seeking personal gain. etc.
These are all the bad guys: breaking the ground rules of play (at whatever game or task they are supposed to abide by) - for personal gain.
They are all the losers, the "bad guys" - as they are ALL taking from the till for personal gain at someone else's expense against the fair play ground rules - and they all get justified heat for that exactly reason - get it?
Quote: PaigowdanThe House edge is a constant from the casino's POV - like a movie ticket fee, a Buffet entrance fee, a subway or bus fare.
Which means that you, Dan, are a cheater when you use your custom improved Pai Gow Poker strategy, reducing that constant compared to the house way that the casino expects its customers to play, at best.
You aren't sneaking in through the fire exit, but you are using your dad's Senior Citizen Card to get in for a discount price.
- And you, who only pays part of his fare.Quote: PaigowdanThe good guys and the bads guys are broken out as follows:
- those who pay their fare, and
- those who don't pay their fare,
Quote: Paigowdanand they all get justified heat for that exactly reason - get it?
You have to seperate those that actually cheat,
from those that are taking advantage of a flawed
game. Everything you listed is against the law,
except hole carding and counting.
Quote: Paigowdan...
It really doesn't matter who messes with the house edge income (fee) system:
- a dealer who steals chips from the rack, seeking personal gain.
- a hole-carder, seeking personal gain.
- a floorman who steals chips, seeking personal gain.
- a card counter, seeking personal gain.
- a "count-room" employee who steals cash from the drop boxes, seeking personal gain.
- a player who caps or pinches bets, seeking personal gain.
- an executive who pads his expense account, seeking personal gain.
- a player marking cards, seeking personal gain.
- a cage worker stealing cash,seeking personal gain.
- a player inserting gaffed dice onto a crap game, seeking personal gain.
- a dealer who steals from the communual tip boxes, seeking personal gain. etc.
These are all the bad guys: breaking the ground rules of play (at whatever game or task they are supposed to abide by) - for personal gain.
They are all the losers, the "bad guys" - as they are ALL taking from the till for personal gain at someone else's expense against the fair play ground rules - and they all get justified heat for that exactly reason - get it?
Dan, eight of your eleven examples are clearly criminal acts. The padded expense account is also probably a criminal act, depending upon agreements and expectations between the executive and the company.
The remaining two items are hole carding and card counting. I am not certain, but I think that hole carding is not considered a criminal offense provided the player is just making use of information made available through dealer errors (which should be dealt with through training.) As for the final item, I am confident that card counting is not a criminal offense.
I have tried in my posts to make two things clear: (1) I am not and have never been a card counter, and (2) I find it quite offensive that anyone would repeatedly group non-criminals with criminals (as you have in your list) in what appears to be an deliberate attempt to libel and malign the non-criminals by association. We get it that you don't like card counters; that does not make them either criminals or cheaters. See above for what it would take to convince me that they are cheaters.
(Edit: Slow typing. EvenBob made most of my point in fewer words.)
Dan is wrong when he calls counters cheaters
Dan is right when he says that casinos don't like counters and will try to prevent them from being successful
Dan is wrong when he calls counters cheaters
Dan is wrong when he calls counters cheaters
etc...
Since I may have missed a post here and there, is there any other forum member who agrees that card counting is cheating?
I have to tell you, I would consider it quite an insult for another person to call me a cheater because I altered my bet at a blackjack table, due to seeing certain cards dealt the previous hand.
Quote: SOOPOOis there any other forum member who agrees that card counting is cheating?
I understand Dan's viewpoint, I just don't agree
with it. Some women think if their husband even
looks at another man, its cheating. Casinos consider
anybody playing BJ at more than the idiot level
to be cheating. Its an hysterical reaction (excessive
emotion, such as fear or panic), just like the woman
reacting to her husband. Counters aren't cheats,
they're advanced players. But casinos tend to get
emotional where money is concerned, so they brand
counters as cheats because it makes them feel good
to do so. It justifies the drastic steps they take to
defeat them.
BJ team said a few years ago.
"Over the years, the average yearly income of a blackjack player from our group has been $25,000. Granted, it’s part time work, but it’s not that profitable really. There have got to be a hundred other things casinos spend more money on. Measured from a cost/benefit standpoint, their countermeasures are ridiculous. They probably spend 10 times as much money to stop us compared to what they’d ever lose."
Exactly. Its hysterical paranoia on the casinos
part. They want and think they deserve every
dime that walks thru their doors and will do
anything to get it.
Quote: EvenBobI understand Dan's viewpoint, I just don't agree
with it. Some women think if their husband even
looks at another man, its cheating.
My wife never says anything when I look at other men. She even let's me hang out with my guy friends unsupervised.
Quote: P90Which means that you, Dan, are a cheater when you use your custom improved Pai Gow Poker strategy, reducing that constant compared to the house way that the casino expects its customers to play, at best.
No it doesn't. The maximized Pai Gow strategy, player tuned, simply reaches or approaches the maximum that does NOT breach or go above the listed 2.47% on the game. That house edge figure on the math report submitted for gaming approval (and approved) was a figure that was produced in a simulation run using optimized player play against the standard house way of casino operator 'x'. Players who ocasionally misset hands, play at 2.48% HA or higher, depending on how well they set their hands in PGP.
When I play Blackjack (which is occasionally), I play 100% basic strategy with 0% card counting; basically, I play perfect Basic Strategy, I flat bet, and never take insurance. Once went on a streak here I turned $200 into $2,300 with no back offs or anything. I was also playing on a CSM.
Also I play craps, and had some 45 minute rolls that I pressed to make big money too.
And I am down overall, not much, and certainly happy for the gambling pleasures I had.
Quote: p90You aren't sneaking in through the fire exit, but you are using your dad's Senior Citizen Card to get in for a discount price.
- And you, who only pays part of his fare.
Bullshit, speak for yourself.
No, I play full fare, everytime, AND I get to where I need to be with no hassles. I also never rigged a gas pump to get free gasoline or used stolen money to pay for auto insurance, and I pay my car loan every month from salary.
Quote: Doc
Dan, eight of your eleven examples are clearly criminal acts. The padded expense account is also probably a criminal act, depending upon agreements and expectations between the executive and the company.
I am not talking about crinimal acts here; again, I am talking about acts that are unethical without regards to its nominal legal status, - and are 100% of the time are against the house rules, in which breaching these house rules for personal gain, whether or not they are additional illegal, are the issue, and are the reason for the back off, push back 86 action. Some dealers or employees caught for theft or rule-breaking too are simply fired without legal involvement.
Quote: DOCThe remaining two items are hole carding and card counting. I am not certain, but I think that hole carding is not considered a criminal offense provided the player is just making use of information made available through dealer errors (which should be dealt with through training.) As for the final item, I am confident that card counting is not a criminal offense.
I never presented this list as a legal list, but as an actionable ethical list.
Did you know that dealers who steal tips (essentially from their fellow dealers in the tip count room) and not committing a criminal act against the casino operator, as it is theft of pooled tip money against their fellow dealers, and NOT against the casino operator. The operator has NO legal basis to prosecute itself, while the fellow dealers might - but at THEIR own legal expense, and almost always feel it is best to just simply terminate without legal/criminal involvement.
Quote: docI have tried in my posts to make two things clear: (1) I am not and have never been a card counter,
Neither am I, This was by choice
Quote: docand (2) I find it quite offensive that anyone would repeatedly group non-criminals with criminals (as you have in your list) in what appears to be an deliberate attempt to libel and malign the non-criminals by association.
For that matter, neither are fellow dealers who steal tips from their other dealers tip boxes and not the casino's till technically criminals, but are terminated on an unprofessional behavior basis, an ethical basis, for behavior unbecoming a casino employee. Dealers may or may not persue the additional increase in status, and always opt not to, being satisfied with a term for the bad guy.
Quote: docWe get it that you don't like card counters;
Fine, I thought that was clear.
Quote: docthat does not make them either criminals or cheaters.
It does not make them criminals, but it does make them ethically challenged to the point where they can legitimately be view or seen as breaking the ground rules for personal gain at the expense of others, which is a non-criminal definition of cheating. For that matter, Cheating at Monopoly or Go Fish never brings a squad car, but instead an opinion or POV. And Why care about what someone else thinks if you can legally do it?
Quote: docSee above for what it would take to convince me that they are cheaters.
Not interested in the legal def, interested in the ethical def. And not really interested if any one specific person 'x' sees this POV.
Quote: doc(Edit: Slow typing. EvenBob made most of my point in fewer words.)
That's okay;A good reference on these arguments.
Quote: PaigowdanCheating at Monopoly or Go Fish never brings a squad car, but instead an opinion or POV. And Why care about what someone else thinks if you can legally do it? Not interested in the legal def, interested in the ethical def.
The mashup or conflation of legal and ethical issues continues, and the confusion is clearly purposeful. If the Monopoly or Go Fish games are for money and a dispute erupts, there is somewhat of a likelihood of law enforcement having to step in. If 8 of the 11 problems posted were clearly crimes, of varying severity, in virtually all jurisdictions, that is trying to cast counting and similar pursuits as criminal. That is uncalled for and has turned around my opinion on the question 180 degrees.
Quote: PaigowdanThe operator has NO legal basis to prosecute itself, while the fellow dealers might - but at THEIR own legal expense, and almost always feel it is best to just simply terminate without legal/criminal involvement.
IANAL, but it seems like you certainly aren't either - matters of criminal law, and larceny and embezzlement fall under that, are prosecuted by the DOJ, typically the local DA office. There is no expense involved beyond filing a report, and not any legal expense.
Now, DOJ has some discretion in what cases to prosecute, but petty cases are universally settled out of court at little effort from either side.
Quote: PaigowdanFor that matter, neither are fellow dealers who steal tips from their other dealers tip boxes and not the casino's till technically criminals
Yes, they are criminals. It's embezzlement, possibly larceny.
Quote: PaigowdanNot interested in the legal def, interested in the ethical def. And not really interested if any one specific person 'x' sees this POV.
Ethics are communal, not individual.
You do not consider card counters (and perhaps hole carders) to be engaging in criminal acts, but they are violating casino preferences, which, for lack of a better term I can only refer to as "unwritten rules." Although you have made lists and repeatedly associated card counters with others who are committing criminal acts, you claim you do not mean to condemn them through association -- you are merely pointing out that the criminals are likewise acting against casino preferences, without regard for whether they are violating any law.
Have I misrepresented your position there?
Consider a completely separate discussion. Suppose that I repeatedly posted comments that I strongly disliked murderers, rapists, child molesters, embezzlers, and casino dealers who sometimes frown. (Assume that I consider it against my personal, unwritten-other-than-here rules for a dealer to frown, murder, rape, etc.) Suppose further that I had a name (not "cheater") that I applied to these despicable characters, maybe something like "scuzzbuckets". Suppose that every time I wanted to make a comment about a dealer that let a frown slip onto his face, I described him as one of those scuzzbuckets -- murderers, rapists, frowning dealers, child molesters, etc.
Can you see how a dealer -- one who couldn't maintain a smile 100% of the time -- might find it offensive to be repeatedly described as a member of that group of scuzzbuckets? That's why many of us -- counters and non-counters alike -- take offense at your describing card counters, bet cappers, and chip stealers as members of a group you call cheaters. Particularly since there are a number of criminal acts (card counting not being one) that are classified as cheating at a casino game.
Quote: PaigowdanThe maximized Pai Gow strategy, player tuned, simply reaches or approaches the maximum that does NOT breach or go above the listed 2.47% on the game.
But the casino expects a 9.4% hold on the game due to sub-optimum play. By playing optimally, you are cheating the casino out of their expected return. You, sir, are a casino cheat.
I will repeat this for 42 pages at which point I'm sure you'll see the light and agree with me.
Quote: DocDan, I do not mean to put words into your mouth, but I am going to try to summarize your position as I now understand it from your latest post.
You do not consider card counters (and perhaps hole carders) to be engaging in criminal acts, but they are violating casino preferences, which, for lack of a better term I can only refer to as "unwritten rules." Although you have made lists and repeatedly associated card counters with others who are committing criminal acts, you claim you do not mean to condemn them through association -- you are merely pointing out that the criminals are likewise acting against casino preferences, without regard for whether they are violating any law.
Have I misrepresented your position there?
Consider a completely separate discussion. Suppose that I repeatedly posted comments that I strongly disliked murderers, rapists, child molesters, embezzlers, and casino dealers who sometimes frown. (Assume that I consider it against my personal, unwritten-other-than-here rules for a dealer to frown, murder, rape, etc.) Suppose further that I had a name (not "cheater") that I applied to these despicable characters, maybe something like "scuzzbuckets". Suppose that every time I wanted to make a comment about a dealer that let a frown slip onto his face, I described him as one of those scuzzbuckets -- murderers, rapists, frowning dealers, child molesters, etc.
Can you see how a dealer -- one who couldn't maintain a smile 100% of the time -- might find it offensive to be repeatedly described as a member of that group of scuzzbuckets? That's why many of us -- counters and non-counters alike -- take offense at your describing card counters, bet cappers, and chip stealers as members of a group you call cheaters. Particularly since there are a number of criminal acts (card counting not being one) that are classified as cheating at a casino game.
Again it is not being a member of non-member of a legally criminal group 'x'. It is breaking the known rules for for personal gain at someone else's expense. It is an ethical or behavioral group that is dealt with and is 86-ed For Real.
And also, the typical table hold of PGP is about 29%, corresponding to an effective house edge of about 2.9%, up to a half percent lossed, due to hand setting misplays, - not 9% or anthing in that range.
That is not correct Dan. You show me the rules and I'll know them. If there is a rule associated with playing a casino game it darn well had better be posted for you to expect it to be known. Quit bleating your asinine comments about "house rules" which as you have said are not posted anywhere for anyone to see. If anything that a casino dealer, manager or owner chooses can be a house rule then you know as well as I and anyone else that this concept of "house rules" is nothing more than an uneven playing filed which is akin to cheating.Quote: PaigowdanIt is breaking the known rules for for personal gain at someone else's expense. It is an ethical or behavioral group that is dealt with and is 86-ed For Real.
Seeing as you have no problem speaking for your casino and its management I'll ask you again; if 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) and I ask him if there is a rule against this, what's his response going to be?
I'm curious to see if your answer is the same as that of your casino.
Quote: TheNightflyThat is not correct Dan. You show me the rules and I'll know them. If there is a rule associated with playing a casino game it darn well had better be posted for you to expect it to be known.
Oh, really now. the pit boss says, "Sir, you're done for the night, goodbye" - and out you go. The rules are on his lips, read 'em.
Quote: TNFQuit bleating your asinine comments about "house rules" which as you have said are not posted anywhere for anyone to see. If anything that a casino dealer, manager or owner chooses can be a house rule then you know as well as I and anyone else that this concept of "house rules" is nothing more than an uneven playing filed which is akin to cheating.
Ah...I get it. The casino successfully blocks you from unauthorized advantage play, and you say they're cheating. This is all opinions, doesn't change who directs the security guards, apparently.
Quote: p90Seeing as you have no problem speaking for your casino and its management I'll ask you again; if 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) and I ask him if there is a rule against this, what's his response going to be?
His reponse will be, "Sir, we will judge your play. Buy-in for $10,000?" That is pretty much it.
Quote: P90I'm curious to see if your answer is the same as that of your casino.
Of course it is. Pit boss makes all the calls, and they get carried out. See it all the time, never had a problem with it. Sometimes - often - a player disagrees:
"I washn't drunk-k-kkkk - how dare you through me out!"
"My play was legit, so what if I was counting cards....what - you're backing me off??? Oh, my God!"
"The dealer showed me the hole card - and that mirror ring is my wedding ring, not a hole-carding device..."
"What electronic jammer - in what slot machine?..."
That's a BS response. I asked you what the supervisor would say if I asked him if counting is against the rules. I know that they can back a player off for any reason they can think of, real or imagined. I know that the casino makes rules up as they go and that's the point I'm making - and you're just as complicit as the house if you think this is fine.Quote: PaigowdanOh, really now. the pit boss says, "Sir, you're done for the night, goodbye" - and out you go. The rules are on his lips, read 'em.
Ah...I get it. The casino successfully blocks you from unauthorized advantage play, and you say they're cheating. This is all opinions, doesn't change who directs the security guards, apparently.
His reponse will be, "Sir, we will judge your play. Buy-in for $10,000?" That is pretty much it.
I'm asking to play a game. The game has rules. The rules are clearly posted. Except for the rules the house makes up behind closed doors on a whim. If I ask a supervisor before I sit down and play BJ if there is a house rule against me counting cards while I play, what's his response going to be? If he tells me that there is such a rule then I going in knowing this rule exists and most likely will be enforced. If he says, "No sir, we don't have such a rule" then, according to you he'd be lying through his teeth.
If he says that no such rule exists then counting is fair game. If he tells me that it is against the house rules then I have no problem with that. If, however he says nothing and doesn't answer my question then how the heck can he expect me to play by the rules?
And don't go off on your usual tangent about not having to explain the rule about my not being permitted to take chips from the tray or grabbing the waitress's breast or playing in the buff. Rules against those things already do exist and they are called laws and I'm already aware of them as they're written quite clearly for anyone to see if they ask.
So Dan, If I ask a supervisor in your joint if there is a rule against counting cards while I play BJ, what's the answer going to be?
Quote: AlanMendelsonExcuse me, but what is the point of this discussion?
It is: "if card counting is unethical behavior to carry out," from an absolute Point of view or scale, as an obvious extention of the dice sliding case and its ethics.
Quote: TNF
Quote: PGDthe pit boss says, "Sir, you're done for the night, goodbye" - and out you go. The rules are on his lips, read 'em.
Ah...I get it. The casino successfully blocks you from unauthorized advantage play, and you say they're cheating. This is all opinions, doesn't change who directs the security guards, apparently. [Dan - no it doesn't. The one who tracks counters is the one who directs the security guards, runs the pits, and makes the calls ]
His reponse will be, "Sir, we will judge your play. Buy-in for $10,000?" That is pretty much it.
[TNF:]That's a BS response. I asked you what the supervisor would say if I asked him if counting is against the rules. I know that they can back a player off for any reason they can think of, real or imagined. I know that the casino makes rules up as they go and that's the point I'm making - and you're just as complicit as the house if you think this is fine.
I answered it fine. You ask a pit boss what his response to being asked if it is okay for card counters to play here [- Golly Gee willikers!] and the boss will say, "Let's see you play, buy-in for $10,000, we will judge it.' But it's not making up rules as you go along, it's You play like shot takers and APs, you'll get 40% shoes and narrow limits and heat, or be shown the door. Don't like it, try it at the next house, and the next, and the next, and see if you get anywhere.
What do you expect him to say, for him to reveal his high-level internal manual of operations from Steve Forte to a smuck who walks up to demands anwsers now, right now. He may ask, "what's it to you, who's your group, and are you recennoitering our counter-measures or what? Get lost, Jack. Come up to me and ask me how I handle card counters and I can tell you you're pulling my dick with this by this question - if you're not buying into a table with cash on the line. Put your money where you mouth is: Buy in and play if you want. Show us your real play intentions, and we make a call. If there's no problem, stay and play; if there's a problem, you will be leaving. You don't get a copy of our internal procedural manuals, we do. You want a copy, get a job in surveillance after we vet you."
Complicit in this? First of all, how else to do you think casino management should handle such a question? It's the honest answer: "If you don't count cards, you're fine with us. If you do, and are a problem to us, we'll shut you down. That's it. You already know how this works. What else do you want us to tell you that you don't already know?"
They don't need to explain to you the history of card counting and how counter-measure came to be implemented, or what you feel about it, or what they think of you guys, etc. They can say we think you're a great bunch of guys but your action is too good for us, so you're cut off. Not back roomed, mind you, just rejected for play. Shut down, at least in this joint and a hundred others. You know the deal: You play fine by the house rules, and you're fine. You don't, you're out. Now let's see how you play, throw some cash on the table. We'll be the judge.
What would you like to see in Casino Shangra-La?
Carry on.
Quote: DocDan, I do not mean to put words into your mouth, but I am going to try to summarize your position as I now understand it from your latest post.
You do not consider card counters (and perhaps hole carders) to be engaging in criminal acts, but they are violating casino preferences, which, for lack of a better term I can only refer to as "unwritten rules." Although you have made lists and repeatedly associated card counters with others who are committing criminal acts, you claim you do not mean to condemn them through association -- you are merely pointing out that the criminals are likewise acting against casino preferences, without regard for whether they are violating any law.
I associated them with some who were committing criminal acts (along with some who were not, and this mix was deliberate) - because it was full group of ethically questionable actors - in all cases - and where criminality was NOT a factor in all of cases, although "ethics," "bad faith play," "cheating" and "stealing" were the consitent factors in the group - where the legal issues or statuses were not.
Quote: DocHave I misrepresented your position there?
Yes. By implying that the criminal law is strictly the ethical basis of this issue, - as opposed to a business and ethical basis concerning casino operation, this better addresses how this is handled and viewed in the real-world business environments in which it occurs. It (AP play to include card counting) is viewed simply:
- as knowingly breaking the establish ground rules of a game by a non-standard, non approved processes or manuevers applied on a game,
- to change its behavior or business operation result, - forbidden for a game,
- and at the cost of others involved, with ethics being an issue.
It does not matter what the cops think, the Constitution says, as it is handled internally at a casino with actions that declare such AP play processes to be unacceptable and unethical by virtue of being rejected by the operator. When you break a lock on a door to gain access, it says something quite ethically different than if you had used an authorized key to gain such access. And being backed off or expelled as real world measures against AP play clearly display this dissapproval and view, and with the blessing of the law on these counter-measures - if including legal views here also. And I am saying that Criminal law is not always a basis: a house boss expells card counter 'x' from the premises, based on his professional and business view that the players are "playing in bad faith,"cheating, "a practicer of nefarious cheating ploys," etc., based on what shenanigans were carried out by them on the property - actions that were deliberately done to apply an attack on a business's needed model of operation.
Quote: DocConsider a completely separate discussion. Suppose that I repeatedly posted comments that I strongly disliked murderers, rapists, child molesters, embezzlers, and casino dealers who sometimes frown. (Assume that I consider it against my personal, unwritten-other-than-here rules for a dealer to frown, murder, rape, etc.) Suppose further that I had a name (not "cheater") that I applied to these despicable characters, maybe something like "scuzzbuckets". Suppose that every time I wanted to make a comment about a dealer that let a frown slip onto his face, I described him as one of those scuzzbuckets -- murderers, rapists, frowning dealers, child molesters, etc.
This is a little far fetched and arbitrary. I noted very specific reasons and related attributes of APs as a group that are quite similar to other casino threats, namely:
1. They Break house and work ground rules on proper game play as defined by the business offering the games, and who have to manage these games - as their fair-play model;
2. AP is done for selfish, self-seeking personal gain, whether its cash or ego aggrandizement - "This is worthy of the Blackjack Hall of FAME!" (and don't tell me cash that was gotten from Courd-counting or hole-carding is for altruistic purposes in nature!)
3. And at the cost of others: un-involved recreational players who don't use AP techniques, and wouldn't want to, having to pay higher costs (House edge and services charges), workers increased work loads and lower salaries, and the like. I said it seems to behave as a "theft of services" effect on gaming business who have to account for such AP losses through modification of services charges and house edge increases on games, like 6;5 BJ, using CSMs, reducing penetration (that increased costs by getting less hands out per hour via constant reshuffling), and other hardships that innocent players, workers, and organizations have to sholder.
Now I said above that it gets to a point where if a player approaches a pit boss and starts demanding, "Hey! WHERE does it say THIS and THAT about card counting, and I demand the right to count cards here - or else you have to show me your internal business documentation that shows your internal policies, operating procedures and the like against us card counters, - else you are the cheaters, Aha!" Obviously I said the pit boss will say no, and just buy in and play and we'll tell you and take action if you "play with problems" in our view. I mean, pehaps some board members will canvas some casinos and see if they get a dialogue with casino execs....not that arguing on the floor is the way to do it, and the pit boss, who's busy enough, will view this unkindly and a bit ridiculous, and will tell you to either play or buzz off.
Quote: DocCan you see how a dealer -- one who couldn't maintain a smile 100% of the time -- might find it offensive to be repeatedly described as a member of that group of scuzzbuckets? That's why many of us -- counters and non-counters alike -- take offense at your describing card counters, bet cappers, and chip stealers as members of a group you call cheaters. Particularly since there are a number of criminal acts (card counting not being one) that are classified as cheating at a casino game.
I can see it, and again say it is a far-fetched and weak example. The costs of sabotaging the house edge on games via openly forbidden back-door processes, manipulations, and manuevers are;
1. Clearly and obviously forbidden in terms of fair play in the offering casinos view, and known as such by all involved;
2. done to seek personal advantage over others by its practitioners,
3. and occurs at the cost of others, the others generally being "the others I don't give a damn about if I'm running down a table to fill my pocket with purple chips...". Card counting cannot escape these characteristics of its usage, and it shares it VERY closely in nature with other "sister" AP mechanisms and attitudes such as hole-carding, pinching and capping bets, and marking cards, and other advantage plays, regardless of the legal 'cops and lawyers" status that may differentiate it somewhat.
That's not true. They set their expected win by the true experience at a table. Blackjack is not a 0.3% - 0.7% game depending on the rules: it is probably a 2 - 3% game because people don't play basic strategy and lose more than they should because they are not playing the game properly. If blackjack was being played perfectly by everyone, the casino would see the holds go way down and the game would be adjusted massively for the HA to be at 2% - 3%, which gives them an acceptable table-level gross profit.
The same is true at Craps: if all of a sudden everyone who played simply bet the pass line and placed the 6-8, the game would be gone, or the odds would be adjusted downward to 1x everywhere, or the payouts would change.
Any table game with a player decision will also have a true casino advantage well above the house advantage... it could be setting a hand wrong in Pai Gow, someone playing blind at Caribbean, someone in 3 card chucking in their Q 10 8 hand, someone in 4 Card not tripling their bet on a pair of Kings, someone in Spanish playing blackjack basic strategy, playing center bets in craps, not folding at the right time at Mississippi Stuid, and so on and so forth, ad nauseum.
Casinos take counters into effect when it comes to setting rules in Blackjack. They also, more importantly, follow the competition. With 4 major casino companies operating on the strip, it's easy to set up an oligarphy where all good Blackjack games disappear, all 3 card pay tables change to 1-3-6, single 0 roulette moves to the high limit room, etc. I expect that if card counting was truly an issue for the casino, they would just install CSMs everywhere or the nice ShuffleMaster machine that can tell Security what each card was dealt to each player, what their bet was, and simply run some software that would easily identify counters.
Casinos want the wannabe counters to happily play their game and they offer the games to still do so (though not as much). Casinos have the right to back off counters not because they are CHEATING, but because they are "too good".
Hovever, counting is not CHEATING, and is not ILLEGAL. I'm still waiting for someone to quote an article, post, any shred of evidence (in Nevada) where someone was ARRESTED for counting cards.
Because the rules in Nevada are terrifically clear that someone can be prosecuted for cheating (and people are prosecuted, all of the time), why wouldn't the casino use all of the countermeasures available and ARREST the counter? Because casinos realize that a well-defended lawsuit (like New Jersey) would prove that counting is not cheating and that would invite ALL counters to play without being backed off, which would just kill the game.
Quote: Paigowdanas it is handled internally at a casino with actions that declare such AP play processes to be unacceptable and unethical by virtue of being rejected by the operator.
You are operating here under the premise that casino operators' preferences can be a source of ethics.
They can not. Your premises are incorrect, explaining why so are your conclusions.
Quote: PaigowdanWhat do you expect him to say, for him to reveal his high-level internal manual of operations from Steve Forte
And once again a misunderstanding of what can be a source (of law, ethics, rules) and what can not.
NDA-protected internal manuals of operation do not set game rules. Only public documents, available to all parties, have the power of setting rules. Laws, gaming regulations, placards near the table, terms of service. What is not public, is not a rule.
Quote: boymimboThere was a statement that casinos set their expected win by what the house advantage is.
That's not true. They set their expected win by the true experience at a table. Blackjack is not a 0.3% - 0.7% game depending on the rules: it is probably a 2 - 3% game because people don't play basic strategy and lose more than they should because they are not playing the game properly. If blackjack was being played perfectly by everyone, the casino would see the holds go way down and the game would be adjusted massively for the HA to be at 2% - 3%, which gives them an acceptable table-level gross profit.
The same is true at Craps: if all of a sudden everyone who played simply bet the pass line and placed the 6-8, the game would be gone, or the odds would be adjusted downward to 1x everywhere, or the payouts would change.
Any table game with a player decision will also have a true casino advantage well above the house advantage... it could be setting a hand wrong in Pai Gow, someone playing blind at Caribbean, someone in 3 card chucking in their Q 10 8 hand, someone in 4 Card not tripling their bet on a pair of Kings, someone in Spanish playing blackjack basic strategy, playing center bets in craps, not folding at the right time at Mississippi Stuid, and so on and so forth, ad nauseum.
Casinos take counters into effect when it comes to setting rules in Blackjack. They also, more importantly, follow the competition. With 4 major casino companies operating on the strip, it's easy to set up an oligarphy where all good Blackjack games disappear, all 3 card pay tables change to 1-3-6, single 0 roulette moves to the high limit room, etc. I expect that if card counting was truly an issue for the casino, they would just install CSMs everywhere or the nice ShuffleMaster machine that can tell Security what each card was dealt to each player, what their bet was, and simply run some software that would easily identify counters.
Casinos want the wannabe counters to happily play their game and they offer the games to still do so (though not as much). Casinos have the right to back off counters not because they are CHEATING, but because they are "too good".
Hovever, counting is not CHEATING, and is not ILLEGAL. I'm still waiting for someone to quote an article, post, any shred of evidence (in Nevada) where someone was ARRESTED for counting cards.
Counting is CHEATING that is not ILLEGAL. You bet BACKED OFF but NOT ARRESTED, but still backed off, precisely for cheating. They may say "You were too good" ig they optional allow 'losing cheaters" to play.
Quote: BoymimboBecause the rules in Nevada are terrifically clear that someone can be prosecuted for cheating (and people are prosecuted, all of the time), why wouldn't the casino use all of the countermeasures available and ARREST the counter? Because casinos realize that a well-defended lawsuit (like New Jersey) would prove that counting is not cheating and that would invite ALL counters to play without being backed off, which would just kill the game.
It would prove it as legal cheating, and where in a state you can be backed off a private property business, that they would have to play by the rules offered or undergo a back-off for legal cheating, complete without an additional arrest.
