'Wizard of Odds' website on trial in casino cheating case
"convincing table games dealers to mark the 7, 8 and 9 cards. The state alleges the men increased their bets when they knew one of the favorable cards was about to be dealt." Hmm, shouldn't the casino go after the dealers, according to the sentence, they marked the cards.
Quote: EvenBob'Peer reviewed'? They peer review gambling websites?
It is peer reviewed by cheaters.
Quote: terapined"convincing table games dealers to mark the 7, 8 and 9 cards. The state alleges the men increased their bets when they knew one of the favorable cards was about to be dealt." Hmm, shouldn't the casino go after the dealers, according to the sentence, they marked the cards.
It would depend whether dealers marked the cards in plain view or in a back room somewhere. If the dealer put a big B on the back of the 7-9 cards with a Sharpie right there at the table, then I would indeed say the blame should fall on the dealers and everybody up the chain of command for letting it happen. Still, I can't envision this happening at a casino like the Mohegan Sun. The article does not say how the cards were marked.
I just wrote to the reporter with my "high priority" Email address, since she said I couldn't be reached for comment.
Quote: WizardIt is peer reviewed by cheaters.
It would depend whether dealers marked the cards in plain view or in a back room somewhere. If the dealer put a big B on the back of the 7-9 cards with a Sharpie right there at the table, then I would indeed say the blame should fall on the dealers and everybody up the chain of command for letting it happen. Still, I can't envision this happening at a casino like the Mohegan Sun. The article does not say how the cards were marked.
I just wrote to the reporter with my "high priority" Email address, since she said I couldn't be reached for comment.
The article is kind of vague on exactly how the cheating was done. If this was collusion between the players and dealer, then it seems to me the dealer should also be a defendant. If the dealer was simply stupid and the players convinced him to somehow give them an edge without the dealer realizing it, seems this is the casinos problem and should eat the loss.
By the way this reminds me of the James Swain fiction books on gambling. The main character is a detective that specializes in catching cheaters. Lots of dealer player collusion cheating in his books.
Quote: terapinedThe article is kind of vague on exactly how the cheating was done. If this was collusion between the players and dealer, then it seems to me the dealer should also be a defendant. If the dealer was simply stupid and the players convinced him to somehow give them an edge without the dealer realizing it, seems this is the casinos problem and should eat the loss.
By the way this reminds me of the James Swain fiction books on gambling. The main character is a detective that specializes in catching cheaters. Lots of dealer player collusion cheating in his books.
I've read (I think) all the Swain books. Earlier better than later books, but all worth a look.
Wiz, sorry to see this; sounds like obfuscation to me. Hope there's no serious bounceback in a negative way.
You hiding out in them foreign airports again?Quote:The "Wizard" is Michael Shackleford .... He could not immediately be reached to comment.
A guy from casino surveillance has watched zillions of hours of general casino play so he is an expert in general casino play.
How many hours of marking cards has he watched? How many hours of marking cards in that same alleged manner?
This testimony should not have been admitted at all. He should only have been permitted to testify as to having made the tape and to having kept it in the ordinary course of casino business.
They should have been forced to fly the Wizard in ... put him up at a hotel, provide his customary expert fee. If they want the expert testimony of a shot taker at craps they would have to fly me in as well as provide the services of an attractive Tray Lizard from the casino.
boldface = edited
Quote: FleaStiffA guy has watched zillions of hours of general casino play so he is an expert in general casino play.
How many hours of marking cards has he watched? How many hours of marking cards in that same alleged manner?
This testimony should not have been admitted at all.
They should have been forced to fly the Wizard in ... put him up at a hotel, provide his customary expert fee.
Those comments seem to suggest that perhaps you think the Wizard has watched many hours of cards being marked in the same alleged manner. I'm skeptical.
Quote: WizardIt is peer reviewed by cheaters.
I just wrote to the reporter with my "high priority" Email address, since she said I couldn't be reached for comment.
Wizard of Odds page in question
Wouldn't it make more sense to mark the Ace, Two, Three (5% advantage). That way the player in cohorts could simply keep betting banker so as not to draw attention to his bet, and just increase the amount of the bet when he sees a marked card.
It would be a lot less visible then placing a huge bet when he has a 21% advantage. That would add up pretty quickly.
My experience with reports is "he couldn't be reached for comment" usually means one lazy phone call. They are seldom interested the next day.
Tisk, tisk, tisk Mark Smith. I print out things from the Wizardofodds.com website just like you and I'm not a cheater. Math should not be a crime and if they are insisting the website is criminal, then corruption has gone mad. Personally these accused seem to have a quite inexperienced lawyer who seems unprepared for this trial.
Quote: WizardI made the news again in this article: 'Wizard of Odds' website on trial in casino cheating case published in theday.com.
so the guys convinced the DEALERS to mark the 7,8,9?
i guess they tipped big?
and how did they get caught?
also, why are the gamblers on trial? sounds like they played by the rules.. they didnt touch the cards
Quote: 100xOddsQuote: WizardI made the news again in this article: 'Wizard of Odds' website on trial in casino cheating case published in theday.com.
so the guys convinced the DEALERS to mark the 7,8,9?
i guess they tipped big?
and how did they get caught?
also, why are the gamblers on trial? sounds like they played by the rules.. they didnt touch the cards
New York Baccarat Cheaters plead not guilty
Who wants to be tried by 12 other car thieves?
Quote: onenickelmiracleWhere do you even begin after reading this article? It's not like advantages knowing cards isn't inherently obvious with simple rules involved and no website is needed to be able to figure this out. I object they would have witnesses who can't prove the math themselves, because it makes their other testimony seem infallible as "experts".
If you haven't had experience with this sort of trial, the prosecuting attorney always goes after the expert witness finding something to attack his credibility. His goal is to devalue the testimony.
The obvious point is that knowing the next card is obviously useful in some card game. The exact percentage of increased EV is a secondary calculation. The expert may have trouble explaining the difference between increased probability of winning, and actually knowing the outcome. If you watch depictions of card counters in movies or on TV, they always "know" the outcome, they don't just have an increased probability of winning.
Wizard, did you copyright the information on WOO? Did you get paid for using your data in court or anywhere else?Quote: WizardI made the news again in this article: 'Wizard of Odds' website on trial in casino cheating case published in theday.com.
How could they not have plea bargained down to a lesser charge already??
ZCore13
Quote: WizardI just wrote to the reporter with my "high priority" Email address, since she said I couldn't be reached for comment.
You might instead write to the attorneys for both parties and the court. I think there's a way to file a non-party brief in a case like this, similar to an amicus brief at the appellate level. Talk to your attorney for options and how (or whether) to proceed.
Heres a quote from Norwich Bulletin
"Ng said the unidentified man “Lee” visited him at his Norwich home, where he showed him how to mark cards. Police said Ng told them he was paid $1,000 every night he marked cards, which Ng estimated to be eight times."
1st off, risk your job and getting busted for a measley 1k a nite. 8k total, gee enough to live on for a few months. If I was a dealer, I would demand 1/2 of all winnings but even that is kind of stupid. As soon as they start winning big, the tapes of the game are going to be examined very closely. Dont commit a crime if in the end you will definitly caught. stupid.
Quote: terapinedWhat a stupid dealer.
Heres a quote from Norwich Bulletin
"Ng said the unidentified man “Lee” visited him at his Norwich home, where he showed him how to mark cards. Police said Ng told them he was paid $1,000 every night he marked cards, which Ng estimated to be eight times."
1st off, risk your job and getting busted for a measley 1k a nite. 8k total, gee enough to live on for a few months. If I was a dealer, I would demand 1/2 of all winnings but even that is kind of stupid. As soon as they start winning big, the tapes of the game are going to be examined very closely. Dont commit a crime if in the end you will definitly caught. stupid.
Norwich Dealer Article
Stupid on multiple levels. It is pretty obvious to most people that knowing that and 8 or a 9 is the next card is going to give an advantage to the player to win the hand. The most likely next card is a face card worth zero. The exact percentage of the increased EV is almost irrelevant.
But to use the Wizard's calculation to maximum advantage, the dealer should have marked the face cards and the 10's. To the mathematically disadvantaged, knowing that a card worth zero is going to be dealt to the player seems to be worthless information. However, the Wizard's calculations show claerly that there is an advantage since you know that it is not a bad card. The banker hand now has a 5% advantage in EV.
By tripling his bet on banker hand when a marked card is shown, the co-conspirator would slowly increase his winnings without betraying himself. He has the advantage of always betting banker, and only changing his bet.
Now that would be a clever use of the information on the WOO site. It may have been subtle enough to go unnoticed by the casino.
BTW, when did this dealer have access to the cards to mark them? Do they reuse the decks?
Quote: pacomartin
BTW, when did this dealer have access to the cards to mark them? Do they reuse the decks?
From your own link above:
"A review of Mohegan Sun surveillance footage shows Louie marking seven, eight and nine cards with his thumbnail as he was picking cards off the table,"
Quote: MathExtremistYou might instead write to the attorneys for both parties and the court. I think there's a way to file a non-party brief in a case like this, similar to an amicus brief at the appellate level. Talk to your attorney for options and how (or whether) to proceed.
I don't see what is in that for me. I'd be interested in helping the prosecution, but not to the point of offering unsolicited help.
Wizard, are your numbers copyright?Quote: WizardI don't see what is in that for me. I'd be interested in helping the prosecution, but not to the point of offering unsolicited help.
Quote: WizardI don't see what is in that for me.
Exactly.
No upside, only a downside.
Quote: WizardI don't see what is in that for me. I'd be interested in helping the prosecution, but not to the point of offering unsolicited help.
No, I'm not suggesting that you offer unsolicited (or unpaid) help. But insofar as your website and methods may have been maligned in a public setting, you may consider clarifying the facts for the Court.
Quote: UCivanWizard, are your numbers copyright?
I'm not a lawyer, but the article as a whole enjoys some copyright protection. However, I don't think the numbers themselves do.
Quote: UCivanWizard, are your numbers copyright?
They weren't copied so that's not an issue. The statistics were merely relied upon to commit a crime, but that doesn't mean the publication of the numbers was in any way wrong or criminal. The NFL publishes information like game schedules and that's not wrong either, even if the information is used to plan a break-in of an NFL player's house while he's at an away game.
Jury acquits NYC men in cheating case
Quote: Zcore13So I wonder what their defense is? "The WOO said it's possible to get the advantage if we knew the cards so it's the Wizard's fault, not ours?"
How could they not have plea bargained down to a lesser charge already??
ZCore13
Their defense was simply that they did not break the law....
Quote: http://www.theday.com/article/20130723/NWS02/130729918/-1/NWSJudge Arthur C. Hadden on Friday granted the defense attorneys’ motion for judgment of acquittal with respect to the cheating charge, because the state law on cheating prohibits anyone from knowingly marking cards but does not clearly prohibit someone from participating in a game with marked cards. None of the evidence showed that Hu or Leung marked the cards.
Quote: http://www.theday.com/article/20130723/NWS02/130729918/-1/NWSThe two dealers, Jeian Ng and Bong Gate Louie, had admitted from the witness stand that they used their thumbs to mark the faces of the 7, 8 and 9 cards. They testified with the hope of gaining leniency in their own criminal cases, which are pending in the same court.
Uh, the faces of the 7, 8, and 9 cards are already marked. They say "7, 8, and 9" on them.
"state law on cheating prohibits anyone from knowingly marking cards but does not clearly prohibit someone from participating in a game with marked cards. None of the evidence showed that Hu or Leung marked the cards.
Ng, a dealer, had testified that he started marking cards after he was approached by a man named “Lee” and that he received payments anonymously in his mailbox. Nobody named Lee was identified through the evidence or called to testify at the trial."
so the prosecution failed to prove that the defendants were the ones that bribed the dealers to mark the cards.
they just knew the cards were marked and took advantage of the situation.
with this, i can see how they beat the cheating charge.
but i'm surprised they beat the conspiracy charge.
Solicitation to commit murder is the initial crime; you are guilty of that even if the hit man doesn't kill. If he kills, you are guilty of murder (as an accomplice) and also of conspiracy to commit murder. You can be tried and convicted of both, or either. It depends on what the prosecution wants to charge.Quote: WizardI'm no lawyer, so help me out here. If you pay a hit man to kill somebody, and he does, are you guilty of murder or conspiracy to commit murder?
Quote: teddysSolicitation to commit murder is the initial crime; you are guilty of that even if the hit man doesn't kill. If he kills, you are guilty of murder (as an accomplice) and also of conspiracy to commit murder. You can be tried and convicted of both, or either. It depends on what the prosecution wants to charge.
If that is the case, why didn't the MS crew get convicted for cheating?
The judge said they were not guilty of cheating as a matter of law. Because they was no evidence they marked the cards, according to the statute they did not cheat, period. It was not even a question the jury was permitted to decide.Quote: WizardIf that is the case, why didn't the MS crew get convicted for cheating?
The conspiracy and larceny charges were a question for the jury, and they decided not guilty.
Too bad we're not all in one jurisdiction.
Quote: WizardIf that is the case, why didn't the MS crew get convicted for cheating?
And killing someone has far greater consequences than cheating.
