'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
