Warped Roulette, Card Counting or any other Advantage Play...is it fair?
Quote: 24BingoQuote: MakingBookThe most precious resource we have is TIME. You are spending your time trying to convince people
that card counters are cheaters, thieves, and even rapists. The same nonsense over and over.
You've said this several times. Do you have a link? It doesn't sound like something Dan would say.
I said it twice, MB said it once. I was wrong. He was comparing the Golden Nugget coup to rape, not card-counting.
Quote: Mission146Quote: 24BingoQuote: MakingBookThe most precious resource we have is TIME. You are spending your time trying to convince people
that card counters are cheaters, thieves, and even rapists. The same nonsense over and over.
You've said this several times. Do you have a link? It doesn't sound like something Dan would say.
I said it twice, MB said it once. I was wrong. He was comparing the Golden Nugget coup to rape, not card-counting.
I said it was a totally opportunistic and unprincipled abuse of a clearly misdealt shoe. If there is any dirty action going on at a live money table, (like maneuvering bets on a clearly stacked shoe for personal profit), an ethical person would know exactly what the situation is, that it was not a legitimate deal. There is no question of this.
So I compared the way they attacked that misdealt shoe to some slob jumping on a passed out woman, - totally opportunistic - it was exactly how these gamblers handled the situation. I also clearly said that card-counters are more planned and predatory and NOT just simply opportunistic, quite different. They calculate odds, cover plays, team coordination techniques, (spotter, big player, wonging signals), and take a business-like approach to utilizing positive count shoes where they do NOT know exactly what cards will be coming out, unlike the Golden Nugget Baccarat players.
For the record, I don't have to convince anyone of jack squat; simply I pointed out what these players' behavior was akin to. Did I say these players comitted rape? I absolutely did not. But did I say these people embodied the same type of opportunistic mentality? I sure as hell did.
I can debate a point without a care in the world of who is, or is not, convinced of what is right or wrong on a sanctioned live money game. And I know what game protection is, I know what people do when given a chance to pull of some crap, I see it all the time, and I know it when I see it.
Quote: Paigowdan
I both play and deal, and almost never see an incident that requires a constant floorman's or management's call on things when players are playing a clean game and NOT taking shots. Everyone who has ever worked in a casino or gambling hall will also tell you this.
I am sure that casinos have no problem with suboptimal play from players. Besides bad behavior it is only perceived optimal play that leads to problems.
Quote: PaigowdanChoosing to take insurance or not is simply not an advantage play, unto itself. When insurance is openly offered by the house dealer when he has an Ace up, - you may take it or not. That's how it works. To say that the offering of insurance when the dealer has an Ace showing is some sort of 'card counter trap" is bullshit. He has to do this, and you have to either take insurance or not. This is normal Blackjack game play. If a player is counting, a review is done over many hands to see if the player's bet or basic strategy changes in accordance with the true count. Every counter and casino pit professional knows this, and to say that offering insurance, - and responding to this, - is a casino trap is assinine.
It is an advantage play, or a more advantaged play, to use any information from any cards on the table or from previous hands to make that decision. There is no ethical difference between seeing the 14 small cards on the table (or in previous hands) and recognizing the value in taking insurance, and traditional "card counting" that you are calling unethical. In fact, one is part of the other. The only difference between those two things is that the casino is bothered more by one than another. I don't make their decisions of how bothered they are by things, I don't agree to them, and I am not bound to them.
I am also not bound to figure out these unwritten rule thresholds when they aren't provided to me. I never agreed to abide by the casino's mathematical model of anything. If they have a mathematical model that predicts sub-optimal play from me then they've made a mistake. A consistent system of ethics would require that I play within a game's rules. I do, but I do so optimally.
NBA rules say that when a ball goes out of bounds possession will go to the team that DID NOT touch it last. The purpose is to penalize the team that caused it to go out of bounds. Is it unethical to throw the basketball off of an opponent's leg and make it go out of bounds, so you can regain possession in a more advantageous area?
Quote: Paigowdan[responding to a comment that there is no ethical difference between slightly counting and counting enough to defeat the house edge]
This is very naive. It is because the mathematical specifications and model of a casino game is based on its allowed game rules and procedures, and violating these game rules and procedures renders the house edge mathematical model invalid (which the house depends on), - and so is invalid for players breaching the game rules, and other subterfuge.
Why am I bound to a casino's mathematical model that anticipates suboptimal play? What if every casino expected every player to surrender every hand? Why do casino expectations--- which are firmly NOT grounded in reality--- set ethics for everybody?
Why can't I just announce that my mathematical model requires that I win every hand, and if they deal me cards when I put money in this circle they are agreeing to that? That is the price of admission for looking at my beautiful face during the time they pay me. Better, I will just whisper it to my friends and not even inform the casino of my apparently required expectations, but they are still bound to them because I expect it.
Quote: PaigowdanIf you violate the casino's loss prevention policies that is expected of players and you get caught, then yes, they will do something about it and YOU are the one defeated. And it is ethical, regardless of whether you like it or not. Like I said, if you cannot even function in a casino as a player by their house rules under their radar, then you are pretty much a failure as both an AP player and as a casino player. You go to the steak house or the movies because you aren't allowed on the tables anymore.
You are conflating the casino's right to exclude patrons with my right to play a game optimally within its rules. I think barring AP players is completely ethical as long as it doesn't involve false arrests, etc. Just like I would only go to casinos with good rules, casinos clearly have the right to only cater to players with 'good' (profitable) playing habits. I think jurisdictions the prohibit back-offs and exclusion are tyrannical.
The other side of the coin is that there is nothing moral or ethically wrong with playing a game optimally. I am on the fence on hole-carding ethics, as there is a dishonest intent there generally. Counting, on the other hand, only uses information the casino intended to give you.
Quote: PaigowdanNo, I said that optimal play is limited by "your best effort" under what is approved by the house and game rules - which they decide and will supervise, and not by YOU, unfortunately, even if you think that you should set the rules and how the game is supervised; ain't gonna happen, and you may run your own casino to find out. Break those rules, and you're off the game. Don't like it, - go bowling.
More conflation of casino's right to bar players with moral rightness of counting. See above.
Quote: Paigowdan[responding to claim that counting isn't against rules] Horseshit. You can watch the detailed methods, procedures, and results of AP game play attempts right under your nose on a live game, with real money, real chips, real bet raising that stem from the actual count that surveillance monitors. If your "Contained Mentally" actions makes your gambler's hand place do certain things - like jump-raise a bet on a high count, or put a dab on ink on a card to mark it, well then, your gambling plans are no longer "contained mentally" now once it hits the felt, - now is it? Duh.
Yes it is barred by house rules. That's why camoflage, cover plays, false identities and the such are used by Casino AP players (and differentially) casino cheats, and why back-offs, 86-ing, and even arrests happen, ahem. And if you think I'm lying to you, spend some money on a gaming attorney to fill you in on the facts. Or read about some old-school back-rooming; it's because SOME house rule was indeed breached.....
You listed two acts that counting leads to. Lets discuss them:
1. raise a bet on a high count
Please direct me to any gaming commission or house rule rule that prohibits raising your bet. The prohibited act isn't raising your bet (which the casino normally invites), it is knowing when to raise your bet. That is mental, and that is why they run the video back to get the count before your act. See the difference? Kinda screwed this one up didn't you?
2. dab ink on a card
This violate several gaming rules and the vast majority of card counters do no such thing. The regulated act is actually touching the cards, and by touching the cards and marking them you've violated it. There's no knowledge state required.
Do you note the difference between these two things? One actually physically violates a published rule that players must agree to by law and the casino publishes. The other is completely allowed under normal circumstances, but may be disallowed at any time by the casino at their whim if they think it is losing them money. Whims don't make a consistent ethical code.
Camouflage prevents being kicked out, sure. But this is completely circular... the house bans you for doing something they don't like that is completely within the rules they put out. Okay. That does nothing to settle the question of ethics.
Quote: PaigowdanNo, it is EV- with Basic Strategy optimal play. It is EV+ with disallowed AP play. And this is surprising an obvious distinction for the casino pit, but not to all too many people on many forums.
This presupposes that I am ethically bound to the casino's double secret counting rules. I am not. I am only bound to rules that I agree to or I am statutorily required to agree to. These are known as the published rules like getting one card on a double down. I never agreed to not use prior hands to make future decisions and no statute or game rule incorporated by statute requires me to refrain from using past information.
Quote: PaigowdanFirstly, that total B.S. - as the motivations to play is to make money, and to take money from the "evil" casino, -- especially if you are involved in AP play, as this is an absolutely fundamental basis and premise of AP play.
Your dichotomy is comical, and isn't the absolute fundamental basis for anything. I rather like casinos, their management, and their staff. Most AP's hate casinos because they get hassled. That still isn't the starting point or basis.
I make considerably more money at my job, or at poker tables. I do the limited AP that I do because I like figuring things out and winning games. When a casino offers a weak game that is EV+ with optimal play I enjoy figuring out that play and trying it out.
Quote: PaigowdanIt wasn't a hilarious prediction, - it was a realistic one: your AP career is pretty limited, if not a wasteful fantasy if you are seriously considering this. And if you disagree with me, then knock yourself out to make it a career.
Your prediction was that I would claim some extravagant AP career. That was hilarious and unrealistic. My AP 'career' isn't the best use of my time, but it is entertaining. It is very firmly grounded in reality.
Quote: PaigowdanTaking advantage of casino offerings is smart. If you clear $2000 a year, that's chump change. Clear 100x times that for $200,000 and you're paying some bills.
Which I acknowledged. But taking advantage of casino offerings must be unethical because their mathematical model for free rooms and bonus play indicates they should make $XX from a person accepting those offers, and they don't make that off of me.
I didn't play by their expectations that they set at their own whim, didn't share with me, didn't publish, and didn't incorporate by reference into gaming commission rules. I must be unethical because they don't like my optimal play inside the rules they DO share with me, publish, and incorporate.
Quote: PaigowdanQuote: Mission146Quote: 24BingoQuote: MakingBookThe most precious resource we have is TIME. You are spending your time trying to convince people
that card counters are cheaters, thieves, and even rapists. The same nonsense over and over.
You've said this several times. Do you have a link? It doesn't sound like something Dan would say.
I said it twice, MB said it once. I was wrong. He was comparing the Golden Nugget coup to rape, not card-counting.
I said it was a totally opportunistic and unprincipled abuse of a clearly misdealt shoe. If there is any dirty action going on at a live money table, (like maneuvering bets on a clearly stacked shoe for personal profit), an ethical person would know exactly what the situation is, that it was not a legitimate deal. There is no question of this.
So I compared the way they attacked that misdealt shoe to some slob jumping on a passed out woman, - totally opportunistic - it was exactly how these gamblers handled the situation. I also clearly said that card-counters are more planned and predatory and NOT just simply opportunistic, quite different. They calculate odds, cover plays, team coordination techniques, (spotter, big player, wonging signals), and take a business-like approach to utilizing positive count shoes where they do NOT know exactly what cards will be coming out, unlike the Golden Nugget Baccarat players.
For the record, I don't have to convince anyone of jack squat; simply I pointed out what these players' behavior was akin to. Did I say these players comitted rape? I absolutely did not. But did I say these people embodied the same type of opportunistic mentality? I sure as hell did.
I can debate a point without a care in the world of who is, or is not, convinced of what is right or wrong on a sanctioned live money game. And I know what game protection is, I know what people do when given a chance to pull of some crap, I see it all the time, and I know it when I see it.
I am included to agree with Paigowdan that taking advantage of the unshuffled decks was unethical if the players knew there was a malfunction or the cards were not shuffled. It doesn't accord to game rules and it is like keeping an overpayment. Dishonest and unethical.
That said, I don't think it was illegal and they should probably get their money (GN should be estopped from withholding because they continued play after they also discovered the problem).
Quote: bbvk05The quoting quotes thing is becoming cumbersome, so I will break down the parts I feel relevant.
I am sure that casinos have no problem with suboptimal play from players. Besides bad behavior it is only perceived optimal play that leads to problems.
Wrong again. Optimal Basic Strategy play is just fine. So is perfectly setting poker and pai gow hands. Optimal play is 100% fine with casino crews, so as long as no house rules (Hello?) are broken. For the record, there is optimal play and strategies that are totally wihin house rules, and www.wizardofodds.com game list lists all the optimal table game strategies that are just fine to use.
Quote: bbkv05It is an advantage play, or a more advantaged play, to use any information from any cards on the table or from previous hands to make that decision.
In Blackjack, yes there is, - clearly - and this is known as well as undeniable, hence all the discussion and practice of camoflage, cover plays, discrete signaling, code words ("eggs=the count is +12", etc.) et al.
Quote: bbkv05There is no ethical difference between seeing the 14 small cards on the table (or in previous hands) and recognizing the value in taking insurance, and traditional "card counting" that you are calling unethical.
There sure as hell is, and it is in bet spread. That is the real tip off or hallmark of card counting, and it is not comprised of a one-off insurance bet. - Why do you think card-counters are flat-betted when they are not backed off or pulled from a table?
Quote: bbkv05In fact, one is part of the other. The only difference between those two things is that the casino is bothered more by one than another. I don't make their decisions of how bothered they are by things, I don't agree to them, and I am not bound to them.
And neither is the casino bound to let you play Blackjack, or is bound to offer better-than-50% deck penetration, or better than 3x bet spreads, or the use or non-use of CSM machines to thwart card counters.
Quote: bbkv05I am also not bound to figure out these unwritten rule thresholds when they aren't provided to me.
You are if you wish to play AP Blackjack.
Quote: bbkv05I never agreed to abide by the casino's mathematical model of anything.
You don't have to - you don't set the house rules. They set the conditions onto YOU.
Quote: bbkv05If they have a mathematical model that predicts sub-optimal play from me then they've made a mistake. A consistent system of ethics would require that I play within a game's rules. I do, but I do so optimally.
You may think you do, as did a slew of people who are barred from casino play. If you are counting cards, you are NOT playing optimally within the house rules, you are playing optimally outside of the house rules, and may get backed off. make this distinction.
Quote: bbkv05Why am I bound to a casino's mathematical model that anticipates suboptimal play?
Because they will back your butt off of a Blackjack game, that's why. Or flat-bet you, or 86 you, or wipe out your comps, or tell you to play Roulette, that's why. And if you think that playing perfect basic strategy without counting, which is optimal casino play, is NOT optimal casino play to you without having some God-given right to count down shoes on live money games (it ain't), then learn the difference between allowed optimal play, and barred optimal play, which is not optimal play considering the results.
Quote: bbkv05What if every casino expected every player to surrender every hand? Why do casino expectations--- which are firmly NOT grounded in reality--- set ethics for everybody?
because they own the business operation, which means they can do so, and because they have to follow some business guidelines that are actually grounded in business reality, to stay in business, that's why.
Quote: bbkv05Why can't I just announce that my mathematical model requires that I win every hand, and if they deal me cards when I put money in this circle they are agreeing to that? That is the price of admission for looking at my beautiful face during the time they pay me. Better, I will just whisper it to my friends and not even inform them of my apparently required expectations, but they are still bound to them because I expect them.
Now this is getting out there...
Quote: bbkv05You are conflating the casino's right to exclude patrons with my right to play a game optimally within its rules.
Your right to play a game optimally within its rules is based on the casino operator's right of determining these game rules, - since they are offering the game - and it obviously may excude such things as card-counting, hole carding, etc., regardless of how someone may feel about that horrible injustice.
Quote: bbkv05I think barring AP players is completely ethical as long as it doesn't involve false arrests, etc.
I agree with you here. But realize some infractions may result not in false arrests, but in valid arrests, depending on what rules are broken.
Quote: bbkv05The other side of the coin is that there is nothing moral or ethically wrong with playing a game optimally.
That depends on whether or not your ethical basis is also in agreement with the house rules of play for a particular game, as you do not and cannot set the rules if someone else (such as a casino) is banking the table game's pit games.
Quote: bbkv05I am on the fence on hole-carding ethics, as there is a dishonest intent there generally. Counting, on the other hand, only uses information the casino intended to give you.
No, they did not intend to give you this information. You see, the original game of blackjack was originally thought to be uncountable until is was otherwise proven otherwise by Edward O. Thorpe and others after the game was already established in gambling halls. By this point, the only two options were to pull the game from service after it was entrenched, or to disallow card-counting play for card-counters, but allow basic strategy play for non-card counters. This is why non-card counters are allowed to play without problem, and card counters encounter push-back from casinos. Were you aware of this?
Quote: bbkv05You listed two acts that counting leads to. Lets discuss them:
1. raise a bet on a high count
Please direct me to any gaming commission or house rule rule that prohibits raising your bet. The prohibited act isn't raising your bet (which the casino normally invites), it is knowing when to raise your bet. That is mental, and that is why they run the video back to get the count before your act. See the difference? Kinda screwed this one up didn't you?
No, because it isn't just mental - it requires undeniable physical actions and responses that manifest themselves, and that are clearly visible to floormen's eyes, and surveillance crews' eyes. You see, when your physical actions manifest themselves in following the true count, not just your mental thoughts are doing things, because your hands are actually pushing out a big pile of black chips on a +11 count, so you are no longer just in your own mental world, (actually you may be.....) but you're also in the casino's world. You have actually taken a physical action that the casino must respond to. And the way they respond to this is as follows:
a) Player's bet rises and falls not in accordance with the count = non-problem player.
b) Player's bet rises and falls in accordance to the count = card-counter detected and to be addressed.
Simple.
Quote: bbkv05This presupposes that I am ethically bound to the casino's double secret counting rules. I am not. I am only bound to rules that I agree to or I am statutorily required to agree to. These are known as the published rules like getting one card on a double down. I never agreed to not use prior hands to make future decisions and no statute or game rule incorporated by statute requires me to refrain from using past information.
Uh, no. You are bound by the casino's rules on the games they are operating. Your agreement to this is immaterial.
Quote: bbkv05Your dichotomy is comical, and isn't the absolute fundamental basis for anything.
I like to think I am able to make the disction between sanctioned casino play, and improper casino play. As a matter of fact, I get paid by a casino operator to make these distinctions while I am on the job. Non-card counter? No problem. Card-counter? Report it to a floorman.
Quote: bbkv05I rather like casinos, their management, and their staff. Most AP's hate casinos because they get hassled. That still isn't the starting point or basis.
I like my management, I think they're great guys.
Quote: bbkv05I make considerably more money at my job, or at poker tables. I do the limited AP that I do because I like figuring things out and winning games. When a casino offers a weak game that is EV+ with optimal play I enjoy figuring out that play and trying it out.
I figured as much. Card-counting is a grind, filled with hassles.
Quote: bbkv05Your prediction was that I would claim some extravagant AP career. That was hilarious and unrealistic. My AP 'career' isn't the best use of my time, but it is entertaining. It is very firmly grounded in reality.
Good to hear. Some AP's are not.
Problem is you also think you can read minds better than Kreskin.
Quote: IbeatyouracesThe hassles are well worth the rewards.
Anyway though, I put it this way:
Players AND the casinos reserve the right to NOT PLAY WITH A DISADVANTAGE. Being backed off is no different then me deciding to not play with a disadvantage.
Being backed off should be no big deal, an "I gave it a shot, the doors may be closing" kind of thing. It's going to eventually happen. But Getting a record from some other types of casino activity is different, as that may affect external careers.
Quote: Paigowdan
Because they will back your butt off of a Blackjack game, that's why. Or flat-bet you, or 86 you, or wipe out your comps, or tell you to play Roulette, that's why. And if you think that playing perfect basic strategy without counting, which is optimal casino play, is NOT optimal casino play to you without having some God-given right to count down shoes on live money games (it ain't), then learn the difference between allowed optimal play, and barred optimal play, which is not optimal play considering the results.
Most of your post is a recycling. You seem to hilariously believe that I am ethically bound to the casino's double secret rules. Thus, I am only responding to a few of the above, which represent the essence of your argument.
The casino is allowed to set whatever secret terms or rules they want for purposes of choosing to play a game with me, just like I am allowed to choose any casino and rule set I what to play. Their arbitrary enactment and enforcement of these rules DOES NOT set a system of ethics I am bound to, it simply determines whether or not they will let me play. Getting kicked out of a casino means nothing ethically.
You use the word 'rule' interchangeably to mean rules that are published and players are legally bound to AND rules that the house employs to determine who to back off. The distinction is significant when it comes to ethics.
Are you just arguing that the casino CAN exclude people for card counting? Congratulations you won an argument nobody disagrees with you on. Are you arguing that it is unethical to violate a casino's double secret rules they don't share with you by using past information to play a game optimally? For all your words (and the sum total is considerable) you've failed to explain in any consistent or reasonable system how I am morally or ethically bound to rules I don't agree to and arn't shared with me.
You've spent a lot of time explaining the rights of the casinos to bar players. YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS. Please stop mixing that with the ethical nature of the behavior of the AP. Your conflation abilities are very good, but most people here are reasonably intelligent and see right through the mixed topics.
Quote: PaigowdanNo, because it isn't just mental - it requires undeniable physical actions and responses that manifest themselves, and that are clearly visible to floormen's eyes, and surveillance crews' eyes. You see, when your physical actions manifest themselves in following the true count, not just your mental thoughts are doing things, because your hands are actually pushing out a big pile of black chips on a +11 count, so you are no longer just in your own mental world, (actually you may be.....) but you're also in the casino's world. You have actually taken a physical action that the casino must respond to. And the way they respond to this is as follows:
a) Player's bet rises and falls not in accordance with the count = non-problem player.
b) Player's bet rises and falls in accordance to the count = card-counter detected and to be addressed.
Simple.
The point, which you have not yet gotten around, is that there is nothing wrong or unethical with raising your bet either morally or in the rules published. The game rules specifically say you can bet $5-500 (or whatever). The conduct prohibited by the double secret casino whim is that you can't bet more when things are good for the players. Still doesn't make a system of ethics, just makes their policy on booting players.
Quote: Paigowdan[responding to claim that casino intends to give you information about cards during blackjack game]
No, they did not intend to give you this information. You see, the original game of blackjack was originally thought to be uncountable until is was otherwise proven otherwise by Edward O. Thorpe and others after the game was already established in gambling halls. By this point, the only two options were to pull the game from service after it was entrenched, or to disallow card-counting play for card-counters, but allow basic strategy play for non-card counters. This is why non-card counters are allowed to play without problem, and card counters encounter push-back from casinos. Were you aware of this?
I believe you seem to be intelligent generally, but this post is making it extremely difficult to justify my belief. I will assume that you are intelligent and explain it like I would to an adult.
When the casino turns over cards for player inspection during the game of face-up blackjack, they do so willingly and intend to show those cards. They do so for a number of reasons (speed being one), but those are not relevant here. This is in contrast to face-down blackjack, where the casino does not intend that player A see the cards of Player B.
The casino INTENDS to provide you that information because they intend to show you the cards. The fact that this information is more valuable than anticipated 80 years ago, or more valuable than intended, is irrelevant. The game rules they offer require them to show the cards, they do, and they intend to. It is completely ethical for you to use this information--- that they willingly and knowingly intended to give you--- against the casino.
When you hole-card (or make an effort to hole card) you are observing information that the casino by their rules never intended to show you. It is dishonest to try to gain an advantage outside of the incorporated, published, agreed to rules.
I can't believe I had to explain that. Please at least tell me you were going for hyperbole and understand the casino does in fact intend to show you the cards and provide you the information. That they regret providing the information is very nice to point out, but they do intend to.
"You may think you do, as did a slew of people who are barred from casino play. If you are counting cards, you are NOT playing optimally within the house rules, you are playing optimally outside of the house rules, and may get backed off. make this distinction."
I understand that if I do things the casino doesn't like I will get backed off. You simply refuse to recognize the significant ethical difference between the double secret "house rules" that are not published or part of any ACTUAL game rule, and ACTUAL game rules the casino publishes and are incorporated by law into commission rules. The difference is huge.
When I say rules, I mean rules. When you say rules, you could mean rules or secret whimsical casino policy. I am only ethically bound to RULES. Your sloppy and argument-charged abuse of the word has led you to several apparent misunderstandings.
Teams don't get to change the actual rules of basketball mid-game. They can refuse to play, but you can't sit here and pretend I am unethical for taking every advantage I have under the actual rules even when it makes the other team uncomfortable enough to quit.
Quote: IbeatyouracesI don't think its necessarily about secret rules. It's common knowledge that casinos barr pros. All the casino is doing is when determining someone is playing with the edge in whatever game, then they decide to not play against that person any longer.
But Dan is always saying counters violate the rules of the game. But will not admit that the rule is you may only play BJ if you are willing to leave your brain at home. All counters understand that. But not Dan.
I am not an AP player but in the case of BJ, it seems a pretty obvious distinction. The casino wants you to pretend you are playing at a CSM. You are not. Are you ethically bound by the casinos expectation that you will pretend you are?
If the casino dealt black jack with both dealer cards face up and told you to pretend you could only see the one on the left (maybe it saves the casino money if no card is ever dealt face down somehow), would it be unethical for you to look at both?
The question, though, is WHY. What motive do you have to turn a slightly losing game into a slightly winning one, when you have to grind day in and day out to make any money, dodging your opponents' eyes? If you're so intent on playing to win, why not go play sports book or poker, where the people whose money you're taking will pat you on the back for it? Is it that you'd rather "best" someone's enterprise than their challenge? Then how the hell can you object to being called swindlers? If you're so offended that you're expected not to count discards in blackjack, don't play blackjack. Don't act like you're doing nothing wrong when you're purposefully denying the game you're playing its sole source of revenue.
Quote: IbeatyouracesQuote: 24BingoThe problem is that the casino is offering a losing game. It's too much in demand for them to get rid of it, but they can't let their money hemorrhage out. CSMs are one response, though unpopular since they buck tradition, and the other is to boot or flat-bet counters.
The question, though, is WHY. What motive do you have to turn a slightly losing game into a slightly winning one, when you have to grind day in and day out to make any money, dodging your opponents' eyes? If you're so intent on playing to win, why not go play sports book or poker, where the people whose money you're taking will pat you on the back for it? Is it that you'd rather "best" someone's enterprise than their challenge? Then how the hell can you object to being called swindlers? If you're so offended that you're expected not to count discards in blackjack, don't play blackjack. Don't act like you're doing nothing wrong when you're purposefully denying the game you're playing its sole source of revenue.
Why? The same reason casinos offer LOSING GAMES like craps to the stiffs, to make money. Blackjack is not a loser for the casino. Sure very very few if us can consistantly win money at it but casinos are making tons more of it from the millions that can't even grasp the idea of basic strategy. I could make a mint with just the money the house keeps when ploppies take even money.
Don't forget all the counters that lose their shirts as well.
Quote: rainmanI will never ever enter into a game for money and not play it to the best of my ability period.
Good for you... but have you ever watched some half-drunken tourist encounter a game for the first time and yet play in such a manner that you are not even sure he knows what the rules are? Those are the players the casino loves! They may think they are experts at Blackjack because they've "got it down, tight" ... they draw to 16 and stand on all 17s, that way they've got the house advantage with them! Gotta love lazy drunken fools.... they provide the money for comps to card counting advantage players.
Quote: FleaStiffGood for you... but have you ever watched some half-drunken tourist encounter a game for the first time and yet play in such a manner that you are not even sure he knows what the rules are?
Ironically, often those players win a bundle, which is possibly the worst possible outcome for them.
I see it all the time. They plop down at the table, buy in for a couple hundred and tell their sad story of how they just started playing, they won $700 the first night, but now are down $1200 and can't figure out how they did it that first time. That "dumb luck" gave them the gambling bug and now they can't stop - until, of course, they win their money back... which never happens.
Quote: IbeatyouracesWhy? The same reason casinos offer LOSING GAMES like craps to the stiffs, to make money.
A: Why does this so offend you? Those games are being offered free of charge; why shouldn't they be losing games? How else do you expect them to exist? Those at the table who don't know it's a losing game think the casino is trying to trick them into thinking it is, and there, at least, they're onto something: the casinos openly mock systems bettors and have disclaimers posted at every entrance that yes, these are losing games. Most of the players aren't there to win in the long run, but have a good session now and then with money they can afford to lose. If you think that's stupid, go find something else to play, but don't tout yourself as some great hero of freethought for your attempt to punish them for providing what so many consumers want.
B: There are better ways to make money than playing a gamble with a slight positive edge and an enormous spread over which you've no control.
Quote: IbeatyouracesBlackjack is not a loser for the casino. Sure very very few if us can consistantly win money at it but casinos are making tons more of it from the millions that can't even grasp the idea of basic strategy. I could make a mint with just the money the house keeps when ploppies take even money.
This is only true because it's widely recognized that counting is forbidden. If it weren't, there would still be bad players, sure, but they wouldn't cut it. Your argument destroys itself.
"Ah," you'll say, "but I'm a brilliant shining star, and the stiffs will never match the great wit of a card counter!" Newsflash: it's not that hard to keep a hi-lo tally. The hard part is doing it while keeping under the floor's radar, which is only an issue because you are swindling them.
Quote: 1BBDon't forget all the counters that lose their shirts as well.
Exactly! Unless you press at it, day in and day out, with a huge bankroll and very few mistakes, you're hardly less at the mercy of Lady Luck than the ordinary BS player. All for a tiny fraction of what you've been risking, made sweet by the smug self-satisfaction in money made by deceit. You've got that kind of money, find a better investment.
Quote: 24Bingo
This is only true because it's widely recognized that counting is forbidden. If it weren't, there would still be bad players, sure, but they wouldn't cut it.
I don't know that this is necessarily true. Most of the players I talk to on BJ assume that counting is too difficult or they just don't have any idea how it works or they think it's like the movie Rain Man (hence too difficult again) and that is why they don't pursue it.
But if magically everyone learned to count well, or somehow the players did manage to make use of information provided by the casino, the game would simply change to make counting less effective. How about a table with $25-$50 limits, or $100-$200 limits. Or bad game rules like even-money naturals. If a game is not profitable it will disappear from the floor, even if it's a gaming staple like blackjack. Faro used to be a staple too.
Quote: MathExtremistBlackjack would still likely be profitable if the casino counted for you and displayed the count on the table (or even the exact contents of the remaining deck).
I envision the entire table wonging out when the count turns negative. The table would sit idle until the dealer shuffles. That would be funny.
Quote: MathExtremistBlackjack would still likely be profitable if the casino counted for you and displayed the count on the table (or even the exact contents of the remaining deck). We've had this discussion before. The only way a player profits from BJ is to properly modify bets or play strategy based on knowledge of the remaining deck. The vast majority of players flat bet or play poorly enough so knowing the count wouldn't matter.
The majority of players flat bet, or bet based on their "luck," because they know counting is forbidden, not because they're not of the mighty counter echelon.
Quote: MathExtremistBut if magically everyone learned to count well, or somehow the players did manage to make use of information provided by the casino, the game would simply change to make counting less effective.
They are. That's what you're looking at, and what you're all whinging on about.
Quote: MathExtremistHow about a table with $25-$50 limits, or $100-$200 limits. Or bad game rules like even-money naturals.
Both these solutions screw over the people who play the game as it's meant to be played, especially the second. The game is there for gamblers, not professionals, who are there to have fun, vary their bets for excitement, and certainly don't want the edge to go up tenfold to spite some people who've decided that it's unconscionably greedy to set up a game that isn't a net drain on your own assets.
Quote: MathExtremistIf a game is not profitable it will disappear from the floor, even if it's a gaming staple like blackjack. Faro used to be a staple too.
Faro didn't cease to be a staple because it ceased to be profitable, on a per-person basis, but because it ceased to be popular. If a casino set up a faro table, and got enough people playing, it would make them as much as ever. Blackjack is in the unusual position of being heavily in demand, by gamblers and AP alike, but beatable.
Quote: rainmanBingo you keep painting counters in a negative light by using words like deceitful etc... What are your thoughts on the deceitful tactics employed by the gaming industry.
What there are, I'm against. But until they have to dart around actively hiding their misdeeds like counters do, it's not comparable.
Quote: rainmanHere are some examples, Advertising that there slots payout (x) when really its just one machine hidden somewhere.
Myth.
Quote: rainmanServing free alcohol under the guise that its a fun friendly gift to are playing customers. When in fact its well known that this is done to cloud ones judgement and lessen their self control.
It is a fun, friendly gift. It has an upside to them, sure, as they'll freely admit, but if you don't know that drinking gets you drunk, that's your problem.
Quote: rainmanServing free alcohol under the guise that its a fun friendly gift to are playing customers. When in fact its well known that this is done to cloud ones judgement and lessen their self control.
Exactly. If alcohol is so great, why not have free
drinks in Vegas in restaurants, shows, your room.
Because your loss of judgement in those venues
doesn't profit the casino, thats why.
Quote: rainmanBingo you keep painting counters in a negative light by using words like deceitful etc... What are your thoughts on the deceitful tactics employed by the gaming industry. Here are some examples, Advertising that there slots payout (x) when really its just one machine hidden somewhere. Serving free alcohol under the guise that its a fun friendly gift to are playing customers. When in fact its well known that this is done to cloud ones judgement and lessen their self control.
Order a Pepsi. Drink if you want. No one is holding a gun to you head to drink.
1. If people were charged for drinks, they'd wail: "Casinos are such evil and cheap bastards, charging us for drinks!"
2. If people were not offered drinks, they'd wail: "Casinos are such evil and cheap bastards, for not providing beverage service!"
3. If people were offered complimentary drinks, they'd wail: "Casino's are such evil and cheap bastards giving us FREE drinks - as it's a CONSPIRACY, I tell you!"
Which one is it?
And as for game protection, which is really what this thread is about, people wail: "Casinos are such evil and cheap bastards, protecting the games from counters and AP play and hole carders to they can pay their employees and bills! The nerve of them."
Really.
My wife and I had flown into Maui for a break and they learned that we were from LV. Anyway, we started talking about LV, when he asked what we like to play. I said craps and my wife liked roulette and slots. He told us that he worked behind the scenes, and proceeded to talk a bit about the games.
I told him about my wifes gambling and how I felt roulette was horrible. His words were, not always. He said that wheels do wear out and that they do become bias. When I asked how he knew, he just smiled, and said, " Well, we always have known that some of our wheels were biased, but we just moved them around to keep the players confused.
I asked, "Why don't you guys replace the wheels then?"
He said, "Well, we recently in 2010/2011 replaced all of the readerboards with better boards from a company out of England instead, so now we know which wheels are the most biased. The new boards give us complete and rapid access to wheel fitness. "
I asked, "Why didn't you replace the wheels? He smiled and said, almost bragging that, "it's easier to deal with the player than it is to replace the wheel when you're already making money on the wheel."
Now my question is, is this legal? Isn't it very illegal to leave unfair equipment in use? This seems very corrupt to me.
What happened to the Vegas I used to know?
I guess I now know how TF is paying for his condo remodel.
Quote: howardmirk
I asked, "Why didn't you replace the wheels? He smiled and said, almost bragging that, "it's easier to deal with the player than it is to replace the wheel when you're already making money on the wheel."
.
A guy who said he was a VP at Caesars told you this
to you, a complete stranger, recently. Either you're
exaggerating or he's lying about being a VP.
I'm neither a lawyer nor a casino employee, but...Quote: howardmirkNow my question is, is this legal? Isn't it very illegal to leave unfair equipment in use? This seems very corrupt to me.
I do not think it's illegal to continue to use the bias wheel, as long as the players aren't told about it.
It would be illegal to use a wheel that had any type of method of altering the outcome on demand.
And, as long as the customers don't know where the bias is, then, mathematically, the odds are still the same.
Quote: DJTeddyBear
And, as long as the customers don't know where the bias is, then, mathematically, the odds are still the same.
That was my point. Biased wheels don't change the
odds in the casinos favor, they have no reason to
leave them purposely in place as this poster indicates.
Quote: EvenBobThat was my point. Biased wheels don't change the odds in the casinos favor, they have no reason to leave them purposely in place as this poster indicates.
How much does buying a new roulette wheel cost (including meeting any regulations and man hours)? I could imagine there being a window of wear based bias that is acceptable, similar to how you don't replace car tires every week.
Quote: kulinHow much does buying a new roulette wheel cost?
Spinetti's has a variety. Their largest, 32", runs a mere $5,500. The smallest, a 19" model, is $600:
Quote: Spinetti'sAll our professional casino quality wheels are hand made in USA. Each wheel is made specifically for your order and production time is approximately two weeks.
You can order both standard American and European style.
The bowls are made of handcrafted mahogany, and other exotic woods, with a professionally hand rubbed, high-gloss finish. Bowl liner is a cast aluminum. Dish is aircraft solid aluminum, machined by computerized numerically controlled equipment at very high tolerances. We use high quality precision bearings and the turret is chrome-plated solid brass.
SKU SKU178076
Weight 190.00 lbs
Size 32"
Style American
Our price: $5,500.00
Quote: PaigowdanOrder a Pepsi. Drink if you want. No one is holding a gun to you head to drink.
1. If people were charged for drinks, they'd wail: "Casinos are such evil and cheap bastards, charging us for drinks!"
2. If people were not offered drinks, they'd wail: "Casinos are such evil and cheap bastards, for not providing beverage service!"
3. If people were offered complimentary drinks, they'd wail: "Casino's are such evil and cheap bastards giving us FREE drinks - as it's a CONSPIRACY, I tell you!"
Which one is it?
And as for game protection, which is really what this thread is about, people wail: "Casinos are such evil and cheap bastards, protecting the games from counters and AP play and hole carders to they can pay their employees and bills! The nerve of them."
Really.
I don't get comped, don't ask for any, don't sign up for any, its bad for business. that includes free drinks.
As far as people thinking casinos are evil cheap bastards for not forking over free stuff I hear ya. Dealers always think this of me as well when I don't tip. I wish I could offer dealers free drinks lol might get better pen. I also hear ya on game protection some of the things I must do are hit & run got to protect my anonymity. Also gotta protect my BR from robbers this includes casinos trying to rob me by trying to get me to play 6:5. The nerve of them how do they expect me to pay myself and my bills.
The casino industry as a whole tries to present there offerings as a fun activity where if lucky one can fulfill their wildest dreams and change their life forever. Please come and play if loose your money its okay look at all the entertainment you had. That's a nice perspective for them to push. l like things straight forward though. We are gambling they are trying to win my money I'm trying to win theirs period, may the best man win.
On a side note we may disagree but I have much respect for you.
Your smart and never wavering. I have definitely learned a thing or two from jousting with you.
I am sitting there at third base usually. Not hiding a damn thing !!!
Quote: bbvk05
I think jurisdictions the prohibit back-offs and exclusion are tyrannical.
The reason that some jurisdictions now prohibit back-offs is that they have deemed this practice unethical.
Quote: rainmanI don't get comped, don't ask for any, don't sign up for any, its bad for business. that includes free drinks.
As far as people thinking casinos are evil cheap bastards for not forking over free stuff I hear ya. Dealers always think this of me as well when I don't tip. I wish I could offer dealers free drinks lol might get better pen. I also hear ya on game protection some of the things I must do are hit & run got to protect my anonymity. Also gotta protect my BR from robbers this includes casinos trying to rob me by trying to get me to play 6:5. The nerve of them how do they expect me to pay myself and my bills.
If you want to make money, start your own damn game, rather than trying to eek out by subterfuge a profit so marginal that you can't even afford to leave a minuscule tip to one of the many people working for your "business."
Quote: rainmanThe casino industry as a whole tries to present there offerings as a fun activity where if lucky one can fulfill their wildest dreams and change their life forever. Please come and play if loose your money its okay look at all the entertainment you had. That's a nice perspective for them to push. l like things straight forward though. We are gambling they are trying to win my money I'm trying to win theirs period, may the best man win.
If you see gambling this way, why play against people you know don't? Oh, right, because they can be beaten by rote application of techniques you learned from a book. Congratulations, you've beaten a de facto robot whose strategy isn't allowed to vary, intended to just barely beat a player who's playing "badly," i.e., by rules generally understood to apply, you big man, you.
Quote: PaigowdanOrder a Pepsi. Drink if you want. No one is holding a gun to you head to drink.
1. If people were charged for drinks, they'd wail: "Casinos are such evil and cheap bastards, charging us for drinks!"
2. If people were not offered drinks, they'd wail: "Casinos are such evil and cheap bastards, for not providing beverage service!"
3. If people were offered complimentary drinks, they'd wail: "Casino's are such evil and cheap bastards giving us FREE drinks - as it's a CONSPIRACY, I tell you!"
Which one is it?
And as for game protection, which is really what this thread is about, people wail: "Casinos are such evil and cheap bastards, protecting the games from counters and AP play and hole carders to they can pay their employees and bills! The nerve of them."
Yeah, I am with you on all of this. And I am not sure if the alcohol is given to impair judgment or more with the goal of keeping your ass planted in the gaming area. They don't serve enough or strong enough to get wasted fast enough. It's a simple loss-leader, everyone does it.
Quote: doubleluckThe reason that some jurisdictions now prohibit back-offs is that they have deemed this practice unethical.
I suppose that is the reason. Not only are they wrong about that, but it is tyrannical to legislate ethics when there is no harm to an individual or their rights. Declining to enter a bet with someone doesn't harm them or their rights. The state violates your freedom of contract by forcing you to enter it.
And it isn't unethical to protect your interest by refusing to take a wager.
One poster gave a great overview: In Nevada, the casinos can and do bar. It really does not matter if it is fair.
Everyone can form their own opinion. Free country (or suppose to be).
The casinos do not care about AP's except to bar and AP's try to rip the casinos head off. Best of luck to both......
