EvenBob
EvenBob
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
  • Threads: 427
  • Posts: 24597
September 6th, 2012 at 12:47:29 PM permalink
Kewlj made a good point about the casino 'hand picking'
who can play.

They have a long line of potential players and they go down
the line saying, idiot: you're ok. Moron: ditto. Clueless:
you're in. Uninformed: we love you. Big Dope: come on
in. Informed Player who Uses his Brain: Oops, nope, sorry,
move along.

The casino not only rigs all the games in their favor, they
cherry pick who can play. Or at least they try too.
"It's not enough to succeed, your friends must fail." Gore Vidal
Woldus
Woldus
Joined: Jan 13, 2011
  • Threads: 14
  • Posts: 215
September 6th, 2012 at 12:48:36 PM permalink
Quote: Paigowdan

No, I can see how people can find fault with my views - it makes absolutely no sense to some. Some others come around and say, "yeah, I can see breaking the rules concerning loss prevention being an issue for any business." Most of the players we have come in for a clean game, don't take money they didn't legitimately win, and tell the dealer - "You overpaid me - here it is back - I didn't have a flush," etc.

And these people aren't career or amateur AP's - they're doctors, educators, data processing executives, film industry executives, teachers, real estate agents, and the like. Normal people who think that doing anything that may smack of theft-of-services as just unacceptable, and not what they're about as people.

And they are absolutely unfathomable to some professional gamblers.



Dan... I always appreciate the high morals you live by and you certainly do a great job of explaining your viewpoint. I can also understand that the casino gets to set the rules for people who want to come inside and play. Obviously, I agree that if a person is doing something underhanded it's out-of-bounds. I am not an AP and probably don't have the aptitude for it. I'm more of an EP (Entertaining Player... I enjoy a full table that's joking around and having a good time).

Now the "However". However, I am intelligent enough to notice when the house over-serves someone and lets them keep playing while they're drunk off their ass. I've seen dealers routinely point out some of the worst bets on the layouts as "smart plays". I've had dealers suggest how to tip. And so on.

We all grew up knowing that sneaking a cheat sheet into an exam was blatant cheating, but I don't believe someone with a gift of simply remembering what they read or studied is cheating in a testing situation. I'm not sure I can distinguish that kind of ability from someone who can keep track of the count. I'm not sure that using that ability is cheating. If it is considered cheating by the house it feels a little like having your cake and eating it, too.

You mentioned several legit things the house can do to "foil" AP's... 50% penetration, CSM's, lousy pay tables, etc. As somone who plays simply for enjoyment when I encounter those things I can see why people think poorly of the industry and the people who make the rules.

EDIT: I remember when Texas Hold'em Bonus first came out. They paid the Ante bet on a winning player STRAIGHT or better. I guess the house felt like they were paying out too much money because everytime I've seen it since the felt states they pay the Ante on a FLUSH or better. That's the kind of thing that makes my wife mutter, "We're not at a big enough disadvantage already?"
Paigowdan
Paigowdan
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
September 6th, 2012 at 1:12:28 PM permalink
Thanks, MidwestAP, really.

I think that the effort to be a card-counting Blackjack AP player is not a Holy Grail goal in gambling, and hasn't been since the 90's, when it look like this door would remain open at least somewhat, for a while. I don't think this is the case, and the effort is better spent pursuing more legitimate careers and pasttimes, such as game design or poker play, if you're in the business. I don't use "nominally legal by the state's statutes" as a basis, I use the local house rules of acceptable/unacceptable to guide my behavior, and if I don't like the house rules, I go elsewhere or play something different.

As for counting being an advantage of the game, this was NOT widely known before Edward O. Thorpe widely revealed it, and by then, the game was entrenched, and so had to be limited to "non-pro's" who wouldn't try to stomp it, to the wails and complaints of the pro's. At one time, the New York City transit system was pretty easy to defeat, fare-wise, until the advent of the MetroCard. And various "beat the system" scofflaws lamented the closing of this slug usage loophole, saying, "we were just using our BRAINS here, so why are they PUNISHING us??"

And of course Blackjack play from pro's versus gamblers cannot work on the "Honor system," - so shallow penetration, bad rules, CSM's, and the like were instituted, and example of where AP play just drives up the cost of action, and hurts table games in general.

I have designed a side bet for a shoe game for which I had an AP protection report and a "count-ability" report done. The house edge was adjusted, and it was also discussed to leave a tiny and "seldom experienced in play" counting opening - as a lure, bait if you will, for AP players as a Siren lure. Get them to say, "Wow, this is [nominally] beatable! Such a deal, everyone must play it!" We know if the side bet gets out, then Steve How of discountgambling.net may write an "attack piece" on how to properly AP-play it. Fine. So also gone are the days when a game designer designs a good game, fun to play, and gets some installs, only to receive a team attack that dumps it and gets it uninstalled and killed.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 182
  • Posts: 10360
September 6th, 2012 at 1:19:05 PM permalink
Quote: buzzpaff

Come on Teddy. I admire Dan for not preaching to the choir. And he is more than capable of defending his positions. !

I think it's quite obvious that he needs no help defending his position.

I just don't think this thread served any purpose, except to stir the pot and set Dan off.
I invented a few casino games. Info: http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ 覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧 Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
Paigowdan
Paigowdan
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
September 6th, 2012 at 1:28:51 PM permalink
Quote: Woldus

Dan... I always appreciate the high morals you live by and you certainly do a great job of explaining your viewpoint. I can also understand that the casino gets to set the rules for people who want to come inside and play. Obviously, I agree that if a person is doing something underhanded it's out-of-bounds. I am not an AP and probably don't have the aptitude for it. I'm more of an EP (Entertaining Player... I enjoy a full table that's joking around and having a good time).

Now the "However". However, I am intelligent enough to notice when the house over-serves someone and lets them keep playing while they're drunk off their ass. I've seen dealers routinely point out some of the worst bets on the layouts as "smart plays". I've had dealers suggest how to tip. And so on.


Thanks! And remeber, there are lot of knuckleheads in the gaming industry. But my point is is that players aren't responsible for bad dealers, but they are still responsible for their own behavior. Nobody else sets my bar level. The argument of "Little dealer or player 'Johnny' down the street is doing such-and-such - why shouldn't I?" must be resisted.

Quote: Woldus

We all grew up knowing that sneaking a cheat sheet into an exam was blatant cheating, but I don't believe someone with a gift of simply remembering what they read or studied is cheating in a testing situation. I'm not sure I can distinguish that kind of ability from someone who can keep track of the count. I'm not sure that using that ability is cheating. If it is considered cheating by the house it feels a little like having your cake and eating it, too.


There are some tips offs on its status:
1. Being told, "Sorry, Sir, you can no longer play blackjack here" is quite clear. Being Backed-off, 86-ed, flat betted, and the like are all very clear, and issued to players to let them know what "cheating" is, regardless of State rules on its legality. I'm sure there are many things that are legal which are also unacceptable in your house, as well as in mine, - regardless of the state statutes. Besides, needing to camoflage, cover, or disguise your play, or purpose for playing, indicates that something is clearly going on with that player. No need to conceal anything legit.
2. It is not "having your cake and eating it too." Casino House rules of game protection and loss prevention are in effect for all games, and for all employees and players.

Quote: Woldus

You mentioned several legit things the house can do to "foil" AP's... 50% penetration, CSM's, lousy pay tables, etc. As somone who plays simply for enjoyment when I encounter those things I can see why people think poorly of the industry and the people who make the rules.

EDIT: I remember when Texas Hold'em Bonus first came out. They paid the Ante bet on a winning player STRAIGHT or better. I guess the house felt like they were paying out too much money because everytime I've seen it since the felt states they pay the Ante on a FLUSH or better. That's the kind of thing that makes my wife mutter, "We're not at a big enough disadvantage already?"


In the case of Texas Hold 'em bonus, that was a game design or "game audience" issue. It actually has a low house edge where very fine poker players can play that game hard and well, often taking it down. I've dealt that game when it got slammed for thousands, - and I was fine with that, as it was clean expert play by the house rules, and we made our money back at other times. The quirk of that game is that the low house edge (still low with the flush or better payout) applies only to expert poker players, and is too easy to misplay as a social gambling game.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
Hunterhill
Hunterhill
Joined: Aug 1, 2011
  • Threads: 44
  • Posts: 1850
September 6th, 2012 at 1:31:05 PM permalink
I have to disagree when you say the casinos have had to switch to csm`s and shallow penetration,this is just an overreaction by the casino`s.They are costing themselves money.If they would just deal deep and have a fast shuffle they would make more money.When they have a strong player on the game then take action.The casinos overestimate the number of skilled players and waste so much time and effort trying to stop players who have little to no edge.

The casinos that take good action and don`t sweat the games are usually the most profitable,coincidence I think not.
The mountain is tall but grass grows on top of the mountain.
Paigowdan
Paigowdan
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
September 6th, 2012 at 1:41:23 PM permalink
Quote: Hunterhill

....When they have a strong player on the game then take action....

The casinos that take good action and don`t sweat the games are usually the most profitable,coincidence I think not.



I agree. But taking good action and rejecting the action from pro's is the cause of complaint against the casinos.
I agree more with casinos using CSM's or impossibly shallow penetration, as it avoids the back-off scenes and the resulting wailing from the AP community about back-offs. The edge is the same on a CSM or shallow shoe whenever non-pro gamblers are playing, so it hurts nothing or no one, except the pro's.

CSM's and shallow penetration gets rid of the whole "double standard/why can't I play/"Where is it written"/ "- and well, it's LEGAL, you know" arguments. Expert Card counter? Sure, play on our CSM's or 50% penetration games, or go elsewhere. "Our BJ table hold is 20%+ and we plan to keep it that way" is an argument I heard from a gaming exec, and it makes fiscal sense to me.

The Golden Nugget AC Baccarat debacle shows that skimping on shuffling time or game protection is costly.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
Boney526
Boney526
Joined: Sep 25, 2011
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 366
September 6th, 2012 at 2:05:08 PM permalink
This is ridiculous.

I may not always agree with Dan, but seriously....

This is just weird.
Paigowdan
Paigowdan
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
September 6th, 2012 at 2:21:45 PM permalink
For AP players, it is weird, - if not galling, - just pure nerve - for casinos to implement game protection.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
MidwestAP
MidwestAP
Joined: Feb 19, 2012
  • Threads: 22
  • Posts: 1262
September 6th, 2012 at 2:30:40 PM permalink
For someone who practices AP (but certainly not for a living, only recreationally), I don't at all find it galling that casino's implement countermeasures. In many cases I think it's foolish as I believe they will end up costing themselves more money than they would have lost, but if they choose to, it's their call to make business decisions.

But like many others, I cannot accept labeling individuals who play within the legal confines of the game as cheaters or theives. I have always been interested in finding the correct LEGAL plays to get the house edge to a minimum or even turn it around, and if the casino offers such a game, I don't have any moral reservation about taking advantage of it.

  • Jump to: