cheating don't come bettor...

So I head to the craps table in between waiting for a poker table to open up. I stand next to a don't bettor, who is betting $200 flat on the Don't pass (He laid minimum odds). The casino offers 100x odds with a $5 minimum, so I see the man as somewhat foolish, as he could get seemingly better advantage (or rather, worse disadvantage) by taking advantage of the casinos low limit with generous odds. Also it was alarming to see the guy placing $200 bets with only $10 odds.

However, it didn't take me long to figure out the man's reasoning. Every so often, he would only place a $100 bet on the come out roll, and after the come out roll, he would add an additional $100 with his odds.

At first, I figured maybe he just accidentally did so, and was unaware that adding to his don't pass bet was in his favor. However, after it happened multiple times (that I noticed, but the dealers didn't), I was pretty sure that the man was completely aware of what he was doing.

Let's say on average, the man partook in this practice every 10th roll. What would his overall EV be?

The probability of rolling a 7 before a random point is 0.59393939 (98/165)

So, the $100 past post is worth $18.79, less the $1.36 EV from the first $100 = $17.43

The normal $200 bet loses $2.73

By my calcs, still -EV at once every 10 rolls, losing $10 every 10 rolls. Have to step up the ruse to once every 6 rolls or so to break even.

Yup, it's cheating to add to a don't pass' flat bet, but not to its lay odds.
Shame enough that the dealers didn't catch this "capping" after the point got established, but for surveillance to miss this...yikes...

Quote: dwheatley

...Have to step up the ruse to once every 6 rolls or so to break even...

I wouldn't advise casino cheating as a method to "break even," unless you're willing to conver the fines and defense attorney expenses.
I've seen people get arrested and get police records for bet capping (this is more than just "advantage play"), and dealers get fired.
You never really get even again if this happens.

I'm somewhat confused. He's adding $100 to his odds after the come out, or he's adding $100 to his Don't Pass after the come out? The latter's cheating, the former's fine.

He's adding - sneaking a cap - to the flat bet part (illegal), - while also legally making the odds lay bet as a cover move.
A pretty standard "bet capping" maneuver, if the base dealer on a crap game isn't tracking the don't bettors' flat bets closely.
Surveillance often misses it, too.

Note: Usually cheats know what they are doing.

Now as to working out the math there is one major question to be resolved.

Do we work the analysis from his bets made or from his money at risk viewpoint?
You can add up all his foolishly high flat bets and foolishly low odds bets and then compare that with the every tenth "secretly capped" bet but I think it makes more sense to add up all his money in play and compare it to the opportunity he had to make lower flat bets and concentrate his money on the odds portions of the bet.

If you look at this way, he has a long way to go to "break even" much less to be at some sort of "advantage". So it is quite possible that the casino is intentionally turning a blind eye to his flatbet-capping behavior. It means he is a cheat but a stupid cheat. Its like the shooter who dropped an extra die from his sleeve, the boxman said "go ahead and roll... your point is 16".

All joking aside, he is a cheat but he is not really getting away with all that much and he is probably just an idiot.

cheating or -- if he's caught -- he claims an "error" and he meant the extra chip to go as "odds."

He can keep doing this until he's caught doing it. Then he'll be warned.

My question is why the dealers don't see this? Game protection is their #1 duty.

Which reminds me of how the dice sliding got by the Wynn dealers??

You've got to wonder if the dealers are in on it?

Dealers all too often gear themselves to the day of work that they're expecting, or hoping for.
Many are just trying to get through their shift without making waves.
Some don't notice small shots, some don't care, or care more to ignore it and let the next loss handle it, but very few are in collusion.
Don't attribute to malfeasance to what can be attributed to incompetence, bad attitude, or minimal compliance.
Some dealers do spot it, and nip it in the bud, and the player knows it's all serious and so it stops.
Attention to detail is everyone's #1 job, but "minimal compliance practice" exists all over the place, everywhere.

The player would have trouble claiming ignorance, especially if previously warned. Ignorance of the law....

Its not ignorance or mistake ... he is a shot taker who is perhaps best classified as a minimalist. Intermittently trying to set himself up for a slight little bonus. Meanwhile he is risking his money. Its similar to a guy who slips a few extra greens into the circle at Blackjack while his wife is ramming ten grand through slot machines. Its a small price for the casino to pay.

Crew collusion? No. Probably not. They have probably noticed what has happened even though they probably missed it the first few times.

Quote: FleaStiff

Its a small price for the casino to pay.

Bullshit rationalization for the cheater. Especially because you, the gambler pays, not the casino. If we're open for business, it's because we've already covered our nut from your outlay.
You see, you the customer will foot the bill for the transgrestion of others, just as you pay more for insurance when others commit insurance fraud. It's more similar to the guy who is the petty thief that everyone else has to pay for. If you wanna justify it as a "small price to pay," - then it will indeed be you who pays for it when you walk into a casino. Don't kid yourself.
Complain about "bad rules?" High house edges?
All gamblers cover for the cheating gambler when we all need to be competitive.
As for minimalism, a petty thief is just a thief on your dime.

Quote: Fleastiff

Crew collusion? No. Probably not. They have probably noticed what has happened even though they probably missed it the first few times.

Very True. No love lost for the casino owner, on the part of most dealers or pit crews.

Quote: Paigowdan

If you wanna justify it as a "small price to pay," - then it will indeed be you who pays for it when you walk into a casino. Don't kid yourself.

What are you gonna do, raise the house edge on your
games? The truth is, the casino pays with loss to their
bottom line. You can cut comps, but in the end all that
does is drive business away. You have to eat it when you
get cheated and you know it.

Quote: Paigowdan

Dealers all too often gear themselves to the day of work that they're expecting, or hoping for.
Many are just trying to get through their shift without making waves.
Some don't notice small shots, some don't care, or care more to ignore it and let the next loss handle it, but very few are in collusion.

I would still hold the dealers also as being guilty. I would say they are guilty of cheating just like the player because they did NOTHING to protect themselves and the game.

I can not even imagine at a $5 table that the first time a black chip hits the layout a dealer does not make an alert call.
"Black chip plays." Say it out loud and clear. Dealers are taught in school to do this, and should practice proper procedures at all times, no matter how jaded they become.
This is part of game protection.

My 2 cents.
I would let the local gaming commission know about his.

And the OP actually watched this cheating going on and did not say anything except here.
Makes him also guilty of cheating in my book.
Tell it to the judge.

Quote: 7craps

I can not even imagine at a $5 table that the first time a black chip hits the layout a dealer does not make an alert call.
"Black chip plays." Say it out loud and clear.

^^^THIS!!

At a nickel table, I can't believe a dealer, stick, and box don't know exactly how much black is playing on a come out roll. But I also don't think they are "letting" him do it just because it's still -EV overall. It's like saying that if you capped your Roulette winner every 50th spin they wouldn't care because overall you are still behind the edge. So I don't know what the cause could be, because both possibilities seem very far fetched. (Not noticing or ignoring)

Quote: EvenBob

What are you gonna do, raise the house edge on your
games? The truth is, the casino pays with loss to their
bottom line. You can cut comps, but in the end all that
does is drive business away. You have to eat it when you
get cheated and you know it.

No we don't, the players pay for the cheaters, and you can fool yourslef by believing what you want. There is NO free lunch.
Casinos won't operate at a loss, or they'll bang up edge or they'll be closed and sold, and the good-value place gone for the gamblers.
Raise the edge on the games, you? - We've all seen 6:5 single deck come to be, and it was not by accident. We've seen 6-4-1 Three card Poker become 6-3-1 Three card poker. We've seen high-edge side bets tacked onto to every damn BJ table there is. We see comps go down the tubes. You will see player banking and the dragon hand slowly disappear from Pai Gow Poker, with stronger house ways coming in - one of the things I'm working on.
We've seen our favorite places close, replace by high-brow, high edge joints. We spend more work looking for value, and it isn't working anymore.
How hard is it now to get comped the steak house, the buffet, or a pack or cigarettes, even?
You should smile at the cheater who's getting detained for the police by casino security, because this just kept a comp for you, - or a good value game on the floor.
You, not us, pay for cheating, even your own, one way or another, just like insurance fraud. The house edge effect is a rigorous as the monthly premium.
Truth is, Free lunch is a fairy tale, and the loopholes are closing. Good people are working on it.

deleted

Its casino greed that causes them to change games,
and player ignorance that lets them. Casinos would
be changing the games even if they had no 'cheaters',
thats why they're there, to take every dime you have,
any way they can.

We've got to be competitive with other casinos, driving down house edge and comps up - but only to what CAN be supported.
That's what's really going on. If theft loses and loss prevention weren't issues, comps would be better and H.E's lower on a wide and competitive scale.
State Farm can't charge you $900 a month while GEICO charges $220 for the same coverage. Pilferage and fraud effect all, and in every business.

So why did they add two extra zero fields (one later removed) when porting the game of Roulette to America - was the New World ripe with native wheel watchers and winning system players?

If there is an extra grand saved somewhere - it goes to the shareholders, not the players.
As a shareholder, I wouldn't have it any other way.

Healthcare maintains a profit margin between 20% and 25%. Automotive industry has a margin between 2% and 4%.
People will pay what people will pay, and industries will make what they can make.
Cars are priced at the brink of profitability, but Chevy Aveos won't cost any less from gangsters buying more Escalades at list price.

Yes, very true - but single zero popped its head in, again, competitive pressures. Not all American casinos serve American Roulette (with both 0 and 00). Negative connotation - like there's a catch to it....

And that such things happen when the industry is at one of its lower points just goes to show - games are priced and comps returned based on competition and players' inclination to seek better games and comps, not on operating surplus or deficit.

Yes, but up to a point, as casinos cannot operate at a loss either, or else they are not in existence for us.
Cheating and pilfering drive up costs, house edges, and reduce our comps. State Farm and GEICO make a profit, insurance fraud notwithstanding. We ultimately always pay for the sins of others if tolerated.

Dan is actually right. Though we pay more not only for cheaters but also to support the Bob Dancers of the world....

All industries take losses at times. Car dealerships selling vehicles below invoice, computer stores doing it all the time, for investment it's outright routine.
While it's true that cheaters do have an eventual effect, it's only global and indirect. Only to the extent that cheaters take money out of the sector, thus reducing its size, thus potentially reducing competition, and it's only the reduction in competition that ultimately affects the market price, to the extent of such reduction. It's not occurring at a high enough rate to put a significant dent here.

If you will offer a slashed paytable and half the comps, should a cheater attack occur, so as to help your bottom line - why wait for the cheater and not do it right now?


Online poker has twice more hands per hour, ~100 times lower operating costs (one employee per hundreds of players, versus one per only a few players in casino), yet the rake is still in 5%-8% up to $5 range, only a little below live casinos. Why? Players still swallow it.

All while rake-free and zero-edge sites show it's possible to profitably operate at a small fraction of the take.
But... a zero-edge game is still a -EU proposition, and rake-free sites are populated by smarter players, which don't bleed chips at the rate fish does. Relegating such sites to only a small market niche, since players dumb enough to fleece don't care enough to move.

If casino operators want to institute zero-edge games, it's their call.
If it's profitable, they'll do it.
We place our bets, and we wait and see.
Personally, I'd like to see zero-edge and fraud-free auto insurance implemented, and pay $3 a month on my new car for my fine driving record.
Maybe online, not meaning to be too glib....

Quote: Paigowdan

If casino operators want to institute zero-edge games, it's their call.
If it's profitable, they'll do it.

Not correct.
If it's the most profitable game they can offer, then they'll do it.

Until then, if increasing the house edge increases the profit, then that is what will be done, until the point where higher edge results in lower profit.

Quote: P90

Not correct.
If it's the most profitable game they can offer, then they'll do it.

Okay - good point.
Question: Would that house edge/table hold necessarily have to go up, to cover increased theft or pilferage?
What defines "most profitable" when accounting for these variables? Would it change/increase?

So if the rest of us as players are paying for the cheating of others, a question:

If you are a player and you spot another player "cheating" do you say something?
If you are a player and you see a dealer make incorrect pays (too much) do you say something?
I guess you can also add -- if you are a player and you see a dealer paying too little to some other player do you say something?

Quote: Paigowdan

Okay - good point.
Question: Would that house edge/table hold necessarily have to go up, to cover increased theft or pilferage?

Only in specific circumstances.

Imagine you're a small overpriced store on the Strip, selling sodas for $5.00 a bottle. Customers have the choice of going elsewhere on LVB for $4.50 a bottle, going a bit offstrip for $3.50 a bottle, or driving to a supermarket.
You are starting to get increased theft rate. Do you increase the price further?
No. By setting it at $5.50, a lot more customers will be willing to walk extra 50 yards to save what is now $1 rather than $0.5.

Increased price will only bring reduced revenue, and no reduction in losses - the price-demand elasticity is not affected by your pilferage problem.
Neither can you just jack the price up if you're that supermarket 10 miles away: people only drive that far because you're the cheapest. Although in that case it gets a bit more involved.

Eventually the effects will reach the consumer, but in modern economy you aren't much more affected by a shoplifter in your neighborhood than you are by hoodlums way on the other coast breaking windows in an entirely different store.

Quote: Paigowdan

What defines "most profitable" when accounting for these variables? Would it change/increase?

Revenue = players*(player bankroll)*hold, where players<=n*tables
Gross profit ~= revenue - ((table cost)*tables+cheaters*antihold
Net profit ~= gross profit - (dealer cost)*tables

The point of maximum revenue is when adding to house edge either doesn't add to hold anymore (players lose too fast and leave), or when added hold doesn't compensate for player loss.
The point of maximum (gross) profitability is a little north, if table cost is significant, as fewer players means fewer tables. Table cost would be significant if you're either short on space or the game requires per-table royalties.
Net profit optimization pushes it a little further up due to adding dealer cost. Optimization for net profit impedes business growth, but becomes necessary if closing to the break-even point.

Unlike players, cheaters aren't shopping for the best rules, as they aren't playing by them, so their number remains roughly a constant. It will only decrease if there simply aren't enough tables for them all.
Increase in base game HA also only has a minimal effect on negative hold. So there is no direct way in which an increase in HA beyond the point of optimal revenue helps offset an increase in losses.

Indirectly, if the losses to cheaters are very significant, they will push your profit margins down. The lower your profit margin, the more weight will you be assigning to net profit versus revenue and gross profit in business strategy optimization. Such optimization will favor having fewer tables in order to reduce costs, at which point you do increase the HA to detract players exceeding your capacity. Another way of cutting down on cheater losses would be pulling the game completely or almost completely.

I could never make myself cap a post-come-out Don't bet even if I thought I could get away with it. I did remove a Pass line bet after a point was set once without immediately realizing what I had done, fumbling with a bunch of chips from the winnings of another bet. Then someone instantly 7d out. I didnt bother tossing back in my loser, and I have to tell you it felt good! I can see how you could get into this kind of cheating. I am resolved, though, to never intentionally cheat, this has served me pretty well in life and I always have noticed with my own observations that the old saying "cheaters never prosper" is absolutely true.

Quote: AlanMendelson

So if the rest of us as players are paying for the cheating of others, a question:

If you are a player and you spot another player "cheating" do you say something?

Yes, I do always, and have done so. Sometimes (- rarely) the player feels guilt or remorse, but often is annoyed, and says that I took money away from him. I always say that:
1. that was never the case, as he had NOT won it; a dealer error does not make ill-gotten money "yours" or "not my business." If I am at a table witnessing this crap - it is my business.
2. And if he wanted to be a petty thief, he should go stick up a 7-11.
For that matter, if I saw someone pilfering cash from a broken ATM location, let's say, I'd call the police with a plate number with other details; what would I otherwise say? Good for the crook? Not my business? No way.

Quote: AlanMendelson

If you are a player and you see a dealer make incorrect pays (too much) do you say something?

Yes. You overpaid him by x dollars. Again; - money not his to begin with, and; - it is my business if at the table.

Quote: AlanMendelson

I guess you can also add -- if you are a player and you see a dealer paying too little to some other player do you say something?

Yes. You the dealer underpaid him by 'x' dolllars. Again, not the house's money to begin with if the house is wrong, and, yes, it is my business, if at the table.

Quote: P90

[PGD Question: Would that house edge/table hold necessarily have to go up, to cover increased theft or pilferage?] Only in specific circumstances.

Like...if such loses occur.
If loses do not occur, then they cannot cut into profits being absent.
If loses do occur, then they do cut into profit. They are not, and "cannot not" be of cost. Money is tracked closely, and if loses or AP is a problem, it gets addressed: 6:5 Bj gets put in, automatic shufflers get put in, it's what we do in table games.

Quote: P90

Imagine you're a small overpriced store on the Strip, selling sodas for $5.00 a bottle. Customers have the choice of going elsewhere on LVB for $4.50 a bottle, going a bit offstrip for $3.50 a bottle, or driving to a supermarket.

If theft or loss is occuring at all places, then all places have to account and offset for theft or loses; customers (the demand) don't have that "elsewhere." In fact, if the theft or loss problem is uniform, which we assume it is, then the rent/location differential of the strip is even proportionately smaller. Going elseshere as a solution is so nullified, as the other places are affected also. Same with casinos: cheaters and APs and other threats don't prefer Boyd casinos over Stations or Cannery casinos, and techniques of game protection and counter-measures travel the industry - with its costs.

Quote: P90

Increased price will only bring reduced revenue, and no reduction in losses - the price-demand elasticity is not affected by your pilferage problem.

Increased price (HA) is sometimes required and implemented for loss prevention; loss prevention operations (including surveillance and additional floor supervision) against threats, including AP, costs money. Otherwise, if losses are bad enough, and cannot be addressed by raising prices, it'll just reduce or eliminate outlets: less supply. Double-deck BJ gets pulled, 6:5 goes in. If it is not profitable to operate, they won't operate outlets. Less outlets (supply) and less competition = increased prices.

Quote: P90

Eventually the effects will reach the consumer, but in modern economy you aren't much more affected by a shoplifter in your neighborhood than you are by hoodlums way on the other coast breaking windows in an entirely different store.

First of all, Crooks will find the easy mark. Second of all, casino operations respond fairly quickly, not "eventually."

Quote: P90

Revenue = players*(player bankroll)*hold, where players<=n*tables
Gross profit ~= revenue - ((table cost)*tables+cheaters*antihold
Net profit ~= gross profit - (dealer cost)*tables

The point of maximum revenue is when adding to house edge either doesn't add to hold anymore (players lose too fast and leave), or when added hold doesn't compensate for player loss.

Which means we'll apply it - until that point is reached. When theft or losses get to the point where increased prices won't compensate, supply is killed off. In that regard, theft and losses hurt and shut down certain "good" tables, and even casinos just as it would any other outlet. Again, we all pay for the sins of a few. Again, I do not and cannot look at cheaters or excess AP as Robinhoods, the way many on the gamblers' side do. I am a gambler, but I am a deeply involved industry worker, and yeah, I support the industry and see the need to operate with a profit.

Quote: P90

The point of maximum (gross) profitability is a little north, if table cost is significant, as fewer players means fewer tables. Table cost would be significant if you're either short on space or the game requires per-table royalties.

Would you consider increased game protection costs/loss prevention costs as such royalties that increase costs?

Quote: P90

Unlike players, cheaters aren't shopping for the best rules, as they aren't playing by them, so their number remains roughly a constant. It will only decrease if there simply aren't enough tables for them all.

If there are less tables for the same supply, demand goes up as ALL action would decrease, and would provide a negative inducement to offering best rules. A descending tide lowers all ships. Casino cheats aren't shopping for the best rules, they're shopping for the best marks, so wouldn't they have a downward pull against offering best rule conditions if they are significant population, (being "best rules" indiscriminant), if they provide some income via their attempts?

Quote: P90

Increase in base game HA also only has a minimal effect on negative hold.

Which means it has some effect, often enough, especially if demand is in excess of supply. Granted, if you're hemorrhaging with negative hold from theft to the point where people are just reaching into the racks pulling out purples, then increasing the HA may be futile. But HA has an effect on positive hold, increasing positive hold in positive scenarios within reason. Players don't notice a painful hit difference between a table holding 18% and one holding 22%; we generally do not see popular tables being abondoned by the playing population with a hold of around 30% or less. Three Card Poker and Pai Gow Poker isn't going anywhere. But players will notice between a table holding 18% and one 45%. Texas Hold 'em Bonus got dropped by the playing public for having that game constantly slam them, a lot of it due to poor play on a deceptively simple and tricky game.

Quote: P90

So there is no direct way in which an increase in HA beyond the point of optimal revenue helps offset an increase in losses.

1. This assumes that the gaming industry is operating at the point of optimal revenue.
2. Increasing HA below that point works. BJ side bets work exactly in that fashion. Many BJ tables are below 10% table hold in mature markets, and are also offset by higher margin games, robber Peter to pay Paul in the Pit to a point.

Quote: P90

Indirectly, if the losses to cheaters are very significant, they will push your profit margins down.

Losses through internal and external theft agents directly pushes the profit margin down, with any loss being a loss. Known theft loses and leakages are addressed straight away.

Quote: P90

The lower your profit margin, the more weight will you be assigning to net profit versus revenue and gross profit in business strategy optimization.

We review tables on a net profit basis; if they cost too much to run (net), and robbing Peter to pay Paul gets out of hand, they get pulled. If double-deck BJ gets hit to hard by card counters or APs, in goes a continuous shuffler or a 6:5 single deck with reviewed procedures. When the threat fades, they get re-introduced and re-tried.

Quote: P90

Such optimization will favor having fewer tables in order to reduce costs, at which point you do increase the HA to detract players exceeding your capacity. Another way of cutting down on cheater losses would be pulling the game completely or almost completely.

Yup.

I generally keep my yap shut at a craps table... at least about things like cheating. Its their casino and their employees and I don't know what phone calls have already been made.

Crews know who the shot takers are. Crews may have an alertness curve and a learning curve. Floor men and pit bosses may have a tolerance curve too. I don't try to dictate to the casino what those curves should be.

If a floor man is upbraiding the dealer and apologizing to the cheating customer, it may be the floor man's mistake or it may be a stalling tactic employed to make sure the Blue Meanies arrive from all directions at one time. Unless asked by casino personnel I don't say or do nuttin'.

Consider the following: Hotel guest returns to room after breakfast finds three strange suitcases lying there just inside the door to her room and freaks out. Additionally there is a palpably false claim that two hundred dollars is missing from her room. Hotel apologizes for clerk having typed wrong room number into computer and bellman's delivery of suitcases to the room was therefore improper. Hotel reimburses guest for the missing two hundred dollar bills knowing full well no money was left there at all. This is essentially a shot taker in the hotel rather than the casino. Why does the hotel allow the shot taker to get away with it? Heck, you know darn well they look at her players card record first. You know that two hundred came back to them in the casino that very day!
Does this affect the cost of comps? Nah. Keeping a customer happy is the first rule of running a casino.

Its the same way with false claims in the casino. They see it, they consider it, they decide. Usually its a Game Protection decision but the experienced employees know whether to pounce or not. A first time player gets latitude, other players may not. Its the casino's decision. I've got my own money to look after, I don't look after the casino's money as well.

We have a pulse on known shot-takers, but there is a lot of travel that they do, to keep fresh. A LOT of scammers do it for the "juice" or action of it all, as some get their juice not from the play of the cards or the roll of the dice, vbut in what they can get away with, a little klepto in all of us kind of thing.

But we can pretty much discren an innocent good-faith error from a down scam.

I take a harder line than many "customer service at all costs" members of the casino community.
While true, we have our own money to look after (and charity begins at home, with many trying to help themselves), I feel a crime-in-progress or a scam-in-progress is a callable offense as witness. I truly believe what goes around comes around.

Quote: Paigowdan

Yes, I do always, and have done so.
1. that was never the case, as he had NOT won it; a dealer error does not make ill-gotten money "yours" or "not my business." If I am at a table witnessing this crap - it is my business.

I'm just curious (and I think your logic in the entire thread has been solid), do you do the same in other aspects of life where the same could be said to be true? If you saw someone in front of you in line at the grocery store get a 10 back instead of a 5, would you similarly say "Wait! You got the wrong change give that money back!" I admire your ability to inject yourself into the situation for the greater good, I just don't think I'd want to risk getting involved for such a tiny increase.

Also, I wish we could talk more about this specific example and how he could get away with it multiple times. I'm still having a hard time believing a casino lets someone past-post black chips on a 5 dollar table.

Quote: cclub79

I'm just curious (and I think your logic in the entire thread has been solid), do you do the same in other aspects of life where the same could be said to be true?

Yes. If it isn't mine, then I don't deserve it or want it, and am comfortable with that. A lot of people are actually like this, but not enough. I work for and buy my own stuff, I don't need to steal it or get it by nefarious means, - it's tainted, foul. I don't view money as "green," I view it as clean or not. Game protection had invaded my moral psyche. I view gaming as a great and legitimate industry, profitable and lucrative (and that's all right for the workers and winners and all, hard luck and times for the unlucky), - but one industry that has to be really clean to survive and prosper. And I feel that way in personal matters, too. I do have a dim view of a lot of workers and players, to be honest, and good views of some of them, too. I socialize with very few fellow dealers, though a lot of ex-dealers.

Quote: cclub79

If you saw someone in front of you in line at the grocery store get a 10 back instead of a 5, would you similarly say "Wait! You got the wrong change give that money back!"

I give back wrong, overpaid change just as I would note of being shortchanged; it's same basic event, really, isn't it, beyond the POV view. At a Jack in the Box drive-through not too long ago, I gave back a ten, saying, "you broke a ten dollar bill, not a twenty." I generally can't see, don't count or noticed change for people in front of me, but at the tables and as a dealer with years of experience, if I see something wrong I'll just mention it.

Quote: cclub79

I admire your ability to inject yourself into the situation for the greater good, I just don't think I'd want to risk getting involved for such a tiny increase.

I'm comfortable in a casino environment, and also, I circle around in safe areas. I'm never in gangland territory. I wouldn't be there, and if I were, I'd be practical and safe about things, wouldn't look for trouble there. Devils doing stuff in their own court, I wouldn't be there, or I would be invisible until I got out of there. This doesn't mean I have a double standard. It means I'm not freakin' suicidal. Now here in my own POV, the better good is for me not to become dead.

Quote: cclub79

Also, I wish we could talk more about this specific example and how he could get away with it multiple times. I'm still having a hard time believing a casino lets someone past-post black chips on a 5 dollar table.

So do I, you'd have to blind as a bat or unconscious, really. Black action on a nickel table really stands out and is tracked, can't miss it. Subtle tiny changes ($25 in five $5's versus $30 in six $5's) are harder to notice.

Quote: Paigowdan

If loses do occur, then they do cut into profit. They are not, and "cannot not" be of cost. Money is tracked closely, and if loses or AP is a problem, it gets addressed: 6:5 Bj gets put in, automatic shufflers get put in, it's what we do in table games.

And it is done if there is no problem, too.

The only factor determining whether game payouts will be reduced is whether the casino can get away with it. APs may be an excuse, but if you can gain more with 6:5 - you can gain more with 6:5 whether there are APs or not.

Quote: Paigowdan

If theft or loss is occuring at all places, then all places have to account and offset for theft or loses; customers (the demand) don't have that "elsewhere."

Yes. One place doesn't make the choice.
If your place gets no shoplifters - you still won't drop the price, as long as customers keep coming.
If you are being hit particularly badly - raising the prices above optimum profit-demand point won't solve anything.

Prices and expenses are separate concepts, the knee-jerk reaction of raising prices in response to expenses is just that, a knee-jerk. If higher prices mean higher profit, you should have increased them before; if not, you're only digging yourself in deeper.

Quote: Paigowdan

Which means we'll apply it - until that point is reached.

And regardless of there being any APs or cheaters. Profit is profit, you don't need to have a loss first.

Quote: Paigowdan

1. This assumes that the gaming industry is operating at the point of optimal revenue.

Why wouldn't it be? If not, the executives responsible should be flipping burgers: it's their job to ensure it is.

The Big Six wheel doesn't have a house edge of 10-15% because of wheel-watchers clearing out roulette tables or lower-edge big wheels.

Quote: P90

And it is done [installing 6:5 BJ]if there is no problem, too.

The only factor determining whether game payouts will be reduced is whether the casino can get away with it. APs may be an excuse, but if you can gain more with 6:5 - you can gain more with 6:5 whether there are APs or not.

No, 6:5 was getting installed precisely because there WAS a problem with double-deck BJ being AP-ed too much, too many hands in the cookie jar grinding it to death. Management and Staff simply noticed and discussed the losses and lack of profit, and responded.

Quote: P90

Quote: PGD

If theft or loss is occuring at all places, then all places have to account and offset for theft or loses; customers (the demand) don't have that "elsewhere."

Yes. One place doesn't make the choice.
If your place gets no shoplifters - you still won't drop the price, as long as customers keep coming.

No, you drop the price to increase share and revenue over the competition as part of being competitive. and no one can be competitive when all have the additional costs of theft, cheating, and loss prevention.

Quote: P90

If you are being hit particularly badly - raising the prices above optimum profit-demand point won't solve anything.

Doesn't mean it won't be tried or considered. Didn't we discuss that not any one particular place, - but all places - get hit with this? That we agree that cheaters, APs, etc. don't say "let's only hit Boyd gaming - and spare MGM resorts." Right? It's not one placebeing hit particularly bad, no one is spared, so the supply raises prices in unison, and they have too, and we all pay because we're trying to justify the initial problem in the first place. Every outlet's a target, everyone gets hit, and everyone raises prices, HA, or installs 6:5?

Quote: P90

Prices and expenses are separate concepts, the knee-jerk reaction of raising prices in response to expenses is just that, a knee-jerk. If higher prices mean higher profit, you should have increased them before; if not, you're only digging yourself in deeper.

Prices are controlled by such things as costs as well as the need to be competitive - they are both factors. If costs go up for all suppliers, prices go up for all customers. Justifying "it's okay to beat the system" beats us all, and we don't get it when we complain about the lousy rules that competition can't address - because of the costs for all from it.

Quote: P90

Quote: PGD

Which means we'll apply it - until that point is reached.

And regardless of there being any APs or cheaters. Profit is profit, you don't need to have a loss first.

No, but competition clamps down on raising the prices unless they have the same costs problems also. And they do.

Quote: P90

Quote: PGD

. This assumes that the gaming industry is operating at the point of optimal revenue.

Why wouldn't it be? If not, the executives responsible should be flipping burgers: it's their job to ensure it is.

I guess we're not in Kansas anymore, Toto. Business executives are like government officials, in the sense that they are at least not flipping burgers.
And casino executives are looking at automated dealer tables, like the "Pretty Model" dealing machine for Three-card poker, and the automated Roulette and Crap tables [which are cheat-proof, AP proof, and shot-taker proof], and have installed higher HA games as business decisisons in the real world. This is the response to the "anything you can do is okay at gambler's forum 'x', 'y', and 'z' (Blackjackinfo.com, Anthony Curtis, and here all endorse AP play to the point of breaking known casino house rules and ground-rules such as hole-carding, counting, etc., and so we're all paying the price and seeing higher HA games like 6:5 BJ and the new technology come in. To a great degree, we have no one to blame but ourselves. It's happening.

Quote: P90

The Big Six wheel doesn't have a house edge of 10-15% because of wheel-watchers clearing out roulette tables or lower-edge big wheels.

No, it's 10-15% edge is why it basically disappeared. It's exactly why it isn't around as a game anymore, aside from a Vegas show peice and curio here and there. To use the Big Six wheel as a serious game argument is to not recognize its current role as a momento of days gone by for casino atmosphere, ashow peice momento by the entrance.

Quote: Paigowdan

I take a harder line than many "customer service at all costs" members of the casino community.

Really?

:-)

Quote: Paigowdan

No, 6:5 was getting installed precisely because there WAS a problem with double-deck BJ being AP-ed too much, too many hands in the cookie jar grinding it to death. Management and Staff simply noticed and discussed the losses and lack of profit, and responded.

Perhaps it was indeed the initial thought.

But card-counting no longer have anything to do with it. Now 6:5 is installed because people will still play it. Toss every single card-counter to the Moon, destroy every single book on counting, erase every reference to such a thing having ever existed - and it will not slow down the introduction of 6:5 tables the slightest.

There are so few successful counters left that it's almost the case; in fact, it was largely already the case when 6:5 was being mass-introduced.

Quote: Paigowdan

No, but competition clamps down on raising the prices unless they have the same costs problems also. And they do.

Big casinos don't compete on price anymore, it's kind of official now.

Quote: Paigowdan

And casino executives are looking at automated dealer tables, like the "Pretty Model" dealing machine for Three-card poker, and the automated Roulette and Crap tables [which are cheat-proof, AP proof, and shot-taker proof], and have installed higher HA games as business decisisons in the real world. This is the response to the "anything you can do is okay at gambler's forum 'x', 'y', and 'z' (Blackjackinfo.com, Anthony Curtis, and here)

There is what, 100 regulars on this forum?
Perhaps 1,000 on all such forums combined.
That's for millions of ploppies visiting casinos every year.


Let's take for comparison poker. I know, casinos don't care because players fight between one another. But that's details. In the big picture, if you black-box the game, it's the same: players put their money in, and a smaller portion is redistributed among them.
Ultimately, the money gained by winning players comes from losing players in both cases.

In poker, 10% of players are at an advantage and end up consistently taking money out. In Blackjack, it's barely 0.01%. So how come only the much less numerous (and generally less profitable) blackjack APs are disliked, despite both interfering with the process of money sliding orderly down the rake chute?

The only explanation I can come up with is that casinos don't like variance. A picture with a vast majority of losing players, a small fraction of break-evens and a handful of long-term winning players is not considered acceptable; it's just supposed to be the losers and the house.

Quote: Paigowdan

No, it's 10-15% edge is why it [Big Six] basically disappeared.

Now let's see.
Were counters, APs and cheaters hitting Big Six wheels? No.
Would it still be profitable with a lower house edge on it? Yes, easily.
Did casinos take to lowering the edge on their Big Six to be competitive? No.


The same way it is with every other game. You set HA as high as you can, but if you set it too high, there are too few winning players, too few returning players, and eventually no one wants to play. So it's a matter of balancing it, finding the highest long-term take point.
Losses are bad, but have nothing to do with it. If Big Six was being hit by APs and cheaters, would it be saved by raising the edge to 20%-30%?

Quote: AlanMendelson

So if the rest of us as players are paying for the cheating of others, a question:

If you are a player and you spot another player "cheating" do you say something?
If you are a player and you see a dealer make incorrect pays (too much) do you say something?
I guess you can also add -- if you are a player and you see a dealer paying too little to some other player do you say something?

Good point. Is cheating something only bettors can do? Isn't incorrect payout as detrimental to game and reputational integrity?

Its an industry based on trust, but its also a commercial enterprise that has to keep flowing smoothly without undue fuss or alarm. So trivial mistakes will be written off as trivial mistakes, minor acts will be treated as minor so the game can continue, the casino will realize people have temptations and may have been drinking or losing heavily, but, above all, any serious problems will be dealt with carefully and with concern for the safety of others and the reputation of their business as a place of fun and relaxation.

Pouncing on someone who carries her infant into the casino is not good business. Backrooming some neophyte who picks up a one dollar chip is not good business. Coming down like a ton of bricks on someone who caps a three dollar bet is not good business. Tolerating a shot taker for too long is not good business either, but a well-placed frown or a cutting remark can often do more for Game Protection than a blue meanie wielding a billy club.

Yes, we ALL pay for fraud. We all pay for everything. If you want to pay only the "right and proper, morally justifiable cost" you better find a debating society rather than a casino.

We all know surveillance worries more about dealers or dealers and players in collusion than it does about players. If some of those players are shot takers, its for the casino to decide. Same as it is if some of those players are a bit tipsy or a bit desperate. You are there to "pay your money and take your chance" not run the place or tell the casino how to run the place.

can't you take the time to learn to post properly without hijacking multiple threads?

I'm really uncertain why I am considered just as bad as the cheater for not saying anything. It is not my job to out the man for cheating, nor does his actions affect me in ANY way.

As far as I can tell, the odds for craps have been the same since I can remember. With the downturn of the economy, the odds are still the same. As for the cutting of comps, I have never gambled at a level high enough to worry about my comps. I mostly go to the casino to play poker, and I only play craps while waiting for a table. As far as I'm concerned, the comp money I receive from both is negligible.

On the other hand, I could out the guy, piss him off, and possible receive a nice mugging/stabbing as I'm leaving the casino. That would totally be worth the extra $0.50 in comps that this cheater is obviously robbing from me.

Also, I was raised to mind my own business. As far as I'm concerned, his cheating is not my business...

Quote: Triplell

I'm really uncertain why I am considered just as bad as the cheater for not saying anything.

You're not - not at all. We're having an ethics debate here.

Quote: Triplell

It's is not my job to out the man for cheating, nor does his actions affect me in ANY way.

1. Sometimes silence is collusion by silence. If you see something and know something and don't say something, it says something. It implies collusion and it slams ethics. If it's on a table you're at, right under your nose, you gotta wonder...
2. Silently condoning the acceptance of "wrong money" at a table you're on says something very different about you than someone who says, "- not at a table I'm on!" to the same thing.
3. His actions do affect you: drives costs up, bad will up, distrust up, problems up. Things are affected with or without you connecting the dots as to how it affects the situation. Not knowing something's effect doesn't mean it lacks effect.

Quote: Triplell

On the other hand, I could out the guy, piss him off, and possible receive a nice mugging/stabbing as I'm leaving the casino. That would totally be worth the extra $0.50 in comps that this cheater is obviously robbing from me.

Yes, it might. Pointing out a minor wrong to be corrected in East L.A. is a little different than pointing out a minor wrong to be corrected on Fifth Avenue, as I pointed out earlier. Gauge your environment, know where you are. For that matter, you can end up on a "watch this guy" list if you "see something, do nothing" while in the midsts of any malfeasance. You don't want to be around it, you don't want to be seen acting like, "that's okay with me."

Quote: Triplell

Also, I was raised to mind my own business. As far as I'm concerned, his cheating is not my business...

If you in the same game on the same table, and cheating occurs a foot from your nose, you might consider it your business.

Quote: NowTheSerpent

Good point. Is cheating something only bettors can do? Isn't incorrect payout as detrimental to game and reputational integrity?

1. Depends if it's an innocent mistake or a deliberate shot. Those two things are very different. An incorrect payout from misreading the payout table or the hand value because the dealer is tired is different than the dealer who deliberately overpays the player who's a childhood buddy.
2. Anyone at the table involved in the game can cheat. But when dealers cheat, they don't reach over to the players' stacks and scoop up their chips and say, "pardon me, buddy, I need this for the phone bill." They pluck chips from the casino's racks, not the players' stacks. The casino has to watch everyone.

Quote: Paigowdan

Sometimes silence is collusion by silence. If you see something and know something and don't say something, it says something. It implies collusion and it slams ethics. If it's on a table you're at, right under your nose, you gotta wonder...

In the 35 years of casino going, I've witnessed
dozens of dealer mistakes. I always point out
under paying the player, and always ignore
over paying the player. The casinos one and
only job is to take as much of a players money
as possible on every visit. When I assist them
in this, they make me a co-conspirator. Why
on earth would I want that lowly distinction,
Dan. Its always important to keep your priorities
straight when you're in the casino. Realize who
you are, and never forget who the Dark Side is.
Never let them recruit you, don't become what
they are..

Quote: EvenBob

In the 35 years of casino going, I've witnessed dozens of dealer mistakes. I always point out under paying the player, and always ignore over paying the player.

This is taking sides. I advocate that all hands dealt should result in an accurate payout based on the game play results, regardless of which way, this-or-that, the error occurs on. I've seen floormen inform dealers of mistakes that even players didn't notice, saying "you underpaid the player - pay the player an additional x amount of dollars on his odds" just as often as "you over paid him x dollars" [and then to the player] "Sir, we overpaid you x dollars. Can you please return that amount, it was an innocent error." For the record, no dealer ever proetsted or said, "No! - we should KEEP the extra money," but have witnessed countless players protest returning an over payment. If a dealer's mistake does not make wrong money the house's money, then neither a mistake make it the player's wrong money either. Honestly, now, who here ever heard or seen:
1. a dealer refuse to make up the difference if acidentally underpaying a player when pointed out.
2. a player protesting to keep an accidental overpayment when pointed out.

Quote: EvenBob

The casinos one and only job is to take as much of a players money as possible on every visit.

No it's not. A casino job is to provide gambling outlets where players are paid based on the fair result of hands played, - win OR lose. If that's true, then that's the goal for ANY business model or operation, - no different and no exceptions.

Quote: EvenBob

When I assist them in this, they make me a co-conspirator. Why on earth would I want that lowly distinction, Dan.

Because your dealer or floorman is actually not Darth Vader. [Except for me. I am apparently that around here.]
Its always important to keep your priorities straight when you're in the casino.

Avoid the booze. Bet with your head, not over it.

Quote: EvenBob

Realize who you are, and never forget who the Dark Side is.

I won't. The Force is with me.

Quote: EvenBob

Never let them recruit you, don't become what they are..

I work for the gaming industry. Above the dealer and floormen level, there are a lot of great, smart, sharp, and exceptional people. And at the pit level, there are a lot of fair, average, balanced, and normal people.

Quote: Paigowdan

I work for the gaming industry. Above the dealer and floormen level, there are a lot of great, smart, sharp, and exceptional people. And at the pit level, there are a lot of fair, average, balanced, and normal people.

Who's ultimate job is to take as much of a customers
money as humanly possible by telling them as little
of the truth as possible. Its no different than the old
carnie games. How many customers would the ring
toss guy get if he told everybody who wanted to play that
the ring only fit over the neck of two of the 10 bottles
they were tossing at. How many slot customers would
a casino lose if a big sign was right in front of the
player on every machine that explained how this was a
negative expectation game with a zero chance of a
player ever getting ahead and staying ahead in the long run.
Most slot players really believe they can do that, you
know, just ask them.

My thoughts about all this craps after a stint. The Dont Pass, Smoothe Bro who is stocking away chips in that oversized
jacket smiling and nice the whole time is a smart man.You can call it cheating but Good for him if he came up with something
that works and after all its the casinos fault not concurring the rules more clearly.


I am Not mad at this guy in any way ,who cares but i watched him put stacks of chips in that big jacket!

Heres the gig for eg. first person: I play the dont pass 5 dollars sometimes a lot more like a 100 in nickles as not to be
consistent All the time paying attention to dealers going away(day dreaming). The rub is in properly timed Lay odds bets that blend in with the original dont pass. The dealers will generally notice the late addition to the dont pass ,and will place a lay button on top of the dont pass stack,however many times they do not catch this and pay dont pass even money for all the chips placed .

I have watched many do this without incident, it seems to me that the house should not allow players to lay a point on the DP
If the house allows relaxed rules & places lay buttons on stacks of late dont pass bets its kind of a gimme , cant blame a guy.

The burden of proof is heavily in a players favor since a warning
does not constitute anything since players go through no training.

My dice: Other shooters= wait for point . Try to get two dc bets on 4 and 10 (no action 6 or 8) 5 and 9 is play action .
heavy lay odds on 4 or 10 with easy 4s and 10s as insurance>also hard 4 s and 10 sufficient to cover hards.
Bet 6 and 8 place bets but win a couple and take down.
7 hop 3 way by feeling ,
my roll: set dice 6 and 3 up -the 5s touch ,the three is in front the (6 and 8 working come out, 3 way craps check, easy 10 hop.)
stand just left of stick two spots to set dice.generally bet on self &bet against others.

General:lots of 7 hops and lots of take downs after hits on 6 and 8s