The future or end of AP Play?

Quote: Paigowdan

Absolutely Everywhere. In every Bridge text book on play that I have ever read the topic of discards is discussed in detail, - along with the reading of subtle clues in the bidding sequence of the game, and the complex bidding systems to help decern player holdings that are used as well, when discussing the bidding process.

But the RULES of Bridge do not state anything about tracking discards. You are mixing the strategy of the game with the rules.

Quote:

Every single piece of available information in an active game of bridge can be used to determine what each player is holding from all clues and information provided, - just short of reaching over to another player an pulling his hand back to see his cards. This is how proper bridge is supposed to be played - a game of clues and discernment.

I choose to play blackjack the same way. Use all the clues and information provided. The house can decide not to play with me if they decide. Their choice. I end up not playing blackjack. Such is life. I can still enjoy Vegas without a game of blackjack, you know. (*)

Further... where in the RULES of blackjack does it say I should double on a 11 against a 6? It doesn't. But if I don't, I lose some of the EV of the game. The strategy of the game are not the Rules.

Calling it 'theft of services' is all well and good, but in the end, the casino doesn't like players who can beat their precious house edge, and are within their rights to deny service.

And people have been backed of Roulette for 'being too good'. It's rare, and due to problems with the game as it was served. The casino adapted as well to stop others. I'm not counting the 'reading the randomness' guys...

(*) - don't worry, I'm pretty sure the casino is a net winner when I count.

Quote: Paigowdan

Yes we DO! I make prop bets all the time, - ask Mike here at this board, and it IS non casino gambling, BTW - and it is a gaming industry sub-industry that is large: Michael Konic's book The man with the $100,000 breats is an extensive compending of interesting gambling accounts of MANY real-world betting situation where intelligence - using your solely your brains - cause many questions of bet and rules validity.

I'm talking about a game, though: a "real game" that has a real set of rules: not a bet. In my context, a "bet" is not a "game".

Quote: Paigowdan

"Press Your Luck" was a great example - a Nationally Televised game show where a contestant used his brain through great research to implement a MENTAL and learned strategy to win big, with no physical props - also causing great questions about the validity of his winnings.

But that has nothing to do with what I was talking about: which is to find other non-gambling situations where using your brain is somehow "against the rules" for a particular game.

Quote: Paigowdan

We don't know. But I am sure there are countless situations when playing family board games where rare game-play situations occur that many players claim some action invalid, even though only thoughtful methods and trickery are used. I don't know how many times playing Scrabble and Monopoly and the like family members claim "foul" over a clever game board response.

I'm sure people can claim foul, but if you were in a scrabble competition, I doubt there would be any discrepancies as they'd use a well-defined dictionary and adhere to the rules.

Quote: Paigowdan

I assure you, both board game and gambling result contentions occur all the time over clever, mental-only actions all the time outside the casino. You will hear "No! You can't do that, that's Invalid" - followed by "Oh Yes it WAS!" when board games and prop bets are played. I gave examples of non-casino gambling disputes on "using your brain to win" that were clearly and heavily contested.

And for the casinos, Blackjack isn't the only game that is countable, with purely mental processes used.
The fact of the matter is that many times "using your brain only procedures" in games, especially in wagering games, the results are questioned, and sometimes determined to be out of bounds.

But in casino operations, there is a long history of casinos declaring such mental processes - if disallowed - to be reason to back off players. If you are trying to say "non-casino games don't have that aspect, therefore the casino is wrong!" - then not only are there examples outside of casinos, but that non-casino examples are not applicable to casino business, as they are business who have a right to handle loss prevention through guidelines.

Well, I don't see anyone posting other examples of real *games* outside of the gaming industry that have a well-defined set of rules where using your brain is somehow against those rules.

People should just call a spade a spade though: counting isn't against the rules of the *game*, it's playing the game to its most optimal strategy. Casinos then discriminate against good players because to remain competitive, they need to offer that particular variation of a game that can be beaten. They probably wish they could just solve the problem with CSMs, but then they'd lose business. They want it both ways so they bar players. Not saying I wouldn't do the same, but just because someone has brains and plays a particular game to its optimal strategy doesn't make them criminals or immoral.

Quote: thecesspit

Quote: Paigowdan

Absolutely Everywhere. In every Bridge text book on play that I have ever read the topic of discards is discussed in detail, - along with the reading of subtle clues in the bidding sequence of the game, and the complex bidding systems to help decern player holdings that are used as well, when discussing the bidding process.

But the RULES of Bridge do not state anything about tracking discards. You are mixing the strategy of the game with the rules.

No I'm not. BOTH the official rules of Bridge and Blackjack don't mention tracking discards, thereby allowing them as unrestricted by the basic game rules - and tracking discards is an advantage on both games, obviously.
It is the casino's Loss prevention "house rules" that restrict card counters' play; internal policy and procedures of the establishment. Blackjack was in place before card counting was a casino loss prevention issue, and when it became an issue, new casino policies and procedures were put into effect.

Quote: thecesspit

I choose to play blackjack the same way. Use all the clues and information provided. The house can decide not to play with me if they decide. Their choice. I end up not playing blackjack. Such is life. I can still enjoy Vegas without a game of blackjack, you know. (*)

Yes. And I enjoy Vegas without blackjack, living here. For me it's shows, craps, UTH, Pai Gow, dinners and movies. Sometimes I even play BJ on a CSM, and play $1 video keno. This makes me happy.

Quote: thecesspit

Further... where in the RULES of blackjack does it say I should double on a 11 against a 6? It doesn't. But if I don't, I lose some of the EV of the game. The strategy of the game are not the Rules.

Yes. Same with Pai Gow Poker. Every house way seems to be different on Pai Gow Poker, and you may choose to split pairs, or play the flush. Every player may play blackjack his own way, hitting and standing and doubling as he sees fit. So as long as you're cool with the house, you're fine.

Quote: thecesspit

Calling it 'theft of services' is all well and good, but in the end, the casino doesn't like players who can beat their precious house edge, and are within their rights to deny service.

Exactly.

Quote: thecesspit

And people have been backed of Roulette for 'being too good'. It's rare, and due to problems with the game as it was served. The casino adapted as well to stop others. I'm not counting the 'reading the randomness' guys...

I've Never seen a Roulette back-off that didn't involve alcohol or past-posting.

(*) - don't worry, I'm pretty sure the casino is a net winner when I count.

Not always. I see rules and limits getting changed from time to time on this, usually penetration depth.

Maybe if the casino posts a sign saying absolutely no card counting no exceptions, I wouldn't do it. :)

Good morning Dan. Sorry you took any comments personally. I respect you as a man, husband , and game inventor. I just don't agree with your opinion that I am a cheater. You have called counters cheaters in the past. Now you just allude to it. Have you ever wondering why so few poster agree with you.?Is it possible your are wrong? Just asking , OK

You have been wrong on one occasion before. When you attempted to display my thoughts and so called envy of everybody at Focus Group 1.

And yes, I do occasionally fire just for effect. But you have no need to reply. It is admirable that you never fail to defend your position against evil counters. But that alone does not make you right.

Quote: Buzzard

Good morning Dan. Sorry you took any comments personally.

Buzz, you meant them personally, and I felt that they were very inappropriate and unnecessary.

Quote: Buzzard

I respect you as a man, husband , and game inventor. I just don't agree with your opinion that I am a cheater.

Sheesh, Buzz, will ya move on?
It's common knowledge that pit personnel view card-counters as committing "theft of services" - to use a more polite term. I certainly do not consider you a cheater, but I also do not consider you an adept card counter either. I've done absolutely nothing to you, and have little interest in your posts, except when you throw darts at me. I find your preoccupation with me strange and creepy. Please cease and desist. WTH.

Quote: Buzzard

You have called counters cheaters in the past. Now you just allude to it.

I have the views that I have, what the hell, but I am now using much more politically correct and much softer euphemisms. I express the operational end view of card counting, not the MIT's team view of it. SW.

Quote: Buzzard

Have you ever wondering why so few poster agree with you.?Is it possible your are wrong? Just asking , OK

No, was never concerned.
I think we should be concerned with bring forth interesting arguments and points of view as to the "why" of things, as it is seen and handled in certain ways by the operators themselves, than with falsely agreeing and log-rolling or taking personal shots.

Quote: Buzzard

You have been wrong on one occasion before. When you attempted to display my thoughts and so called envy of everybody at Focus Group 1.

Sure, I've been wrong, and we all have been wrong. We're all only human. As for Focus Group 1 from way back when, you answered for yourself very finely in the way that you do, I've got nothing against you, and if there is still any resentment, please either get over it or PM me privately; and stop taking shots. Use PM.

Quote: Buzzard

And yes, I do occasionally fire just for effect. But you have no need to reply.

Then don't take a shot at me in the first place; why? - I will answer and defend for myself. I ask you to use PM if you have a beef with me, because if you take a shot at me in public, my defense may be public. You take a shot, you can expect to get a shot.

Quote: Buzzard

It is admirable that you never fail to defend your position against evil counters.

Thanks. I use realistic arguments and real-world examples as to where the AP of card-counting is failing in Blackjack. If I were an AP player, I'd look to somewhere else at this point at the very least, or even give up AP-ing, and just get on with my gambling life with craps and UTH. Card counters evil? No. Misguided? Yes, and almost always, unless you're Max Rubin or Stanford Wong. One thing a successful AP player MUST be is realistic.

Quote: Buzzard

But that alone does not make you right.

We can't always be right, sure, but I am often spot on, and besides, we're here on presenting our ideas and arguments as food for thought to discuss, and I am fine on that basis; so are a lot of others.

Like I said, if you have any personal, non-gambling issues with me, then use PM.
Dan.

Quote: Paigowdan

As for AP Player catagories, there are three:
Black-ops AP player: capping, pinching bets; marking cards; hole-carding as opposed to taking advantage of a flashing dealer; electronics; working with a dealer on stacked decks. 100% illegal.
Grey-AP: legal but unethical, and against the house rules: card-counting, taking advantage of a newbie “flashing” dealer; claiming; accepting wrong payouts in one direction, as opposed to rejecting all “wrong” money.
White AP: Best strategy play, and always within house rules. A smart recreational player.
Non-AP: a ploppy.

I know this has been addressed previously (in this thread and before), but Dan, you're simply wrong here. What you call "black-ops AP" is cheating. That's not AP any more than pickpocketing someone's wallet is AP.

AP is playing with a positive theoretical advantage, using whatever legal techniques are available to you. The legality of various methods of AP (e.g. card-counting and hole-carding) has already been established by caselaw and supercedes your opinions to the contrary. Furthermore, ethical considerations are irrelevant to the question of whether a given play technique is both legal and +EV. Anything that is both is AP, and attempting to parse that spectrum into "grey, white, black" is not useful. The only basis the house has to exclude APs is found in law, not in a subjective sense of ethics (either yours or theirs), so legality is all that matters.

Finally, what you consider "White AP" isn't AP at all: by definition, if you don't have a positive Player Advantage, you are not an Advantage Player.

Your "theft of services comment" is interesting Dan. Does that apply to other forms of AP as well? Is any player playing with an advantage 'stealing services' in your opinion? A player that sits down at a video poker machine that returns more than 100%. Is he stealing services? The player or team of players that will scout out and play banks of machine where the progressive payout has grown to the point that such play is +EV, are they stealing services? I myself play through 15 grand a month on full pay VP machines. The return is not over 100%, but rather 99.54%, so the house does have a small edge. So at the end of the month, my expected loss is about $75. But now from this play I receive a my monthly mailer with $300 to $400 in free play, making the whole experience +EV. Have I somehow stolen services? All three cases are playing the game by the rules just as it was intended to be played. The third case even playing a negative EV game. It is only the mailer that makes the whole deal plus EV, so the casino is actually inviting me back to play. I am getting mixed signals here?

Quote: Paigowdan

This post is all about the future of AP play, and the strange lack in the industry of a truly open policy on arguably AP play. It is also about your thoughts on what an AP player would do if such a quicker transition were to happen. It is long, but interesting.

On the original question, Advantage Play has always existed and I believe will Always continue to exist.
I define Advantage Play as taking calculate risks with a positive EV (positive enough to justify the risk)
AP appears in many areas in life including gaming and more specifically your subject matter Land Casinos.

But people who practise AP do not limit their activities to gaming or just to casinos.
The inventor of Card Counting himeslf Thorpe, realised early that there are bigger AP plats out there, namely the Stock Exchange and did not really pursue Card Counting.
Most people who are AP in a casino enviroment and capable of making good money in a casino enviroment (card counting or other AP technique) can make more money in other areas in business , profession or elsewhere. So most Casinio AP players do the Casino AP as a form or recreation with the side effect of also making some money and the extra BIG side effect of Winning. Most people who are competitive like to Win at whatever Sport or other Activity they do.
Such people cannot imagine Competing in a casino enviroment without learning how to beat the house. Like playing a sport and trying to become better to beat your opponenets.
These people represent the vast majority of APs and because they also have other better things to do only use a small part of their time in casino AP.
They do not really represnt a threat to the casino as they spend a limited amount of their time. If they get banned or the rules change as you say, they will simply stop playing that casino or that game.
Professional Players ( ie ful time Casino AP players) are a very small % of APs.

You also see the position only with regards to the US.
I play mostly outside the US and I usually combine business travel with casino AP when available.
I have seen situations where Casinos introduced games (outside the US) with positive EV only with Basic Strategy for that game.
Casino often offer promotions that are positive EV (even in the US)
So even with your Position that Card Counting, Hole carding and other similar AP techniques are unacceptable, even without these there are still postive EV games in the world just with Basic Strategy (maybe a complicate Basic Strategy) if someone looks around.

So whatever the casino industry does Casino AP will most probably continue to exist in the foreseeable future.
BUT, that is the wrong emphasis.
I have read somewhere of a restaurant banning Obese people who eat a lot from their restaurant Buffet. The decision was based on a cost analysis that such a person was costing them money by the quantity of food he was consuming from the Buffet. If you agree with such a policy of a restaurant, then nothing I will say will convince you that going after APs in a casino is waste.
The casino should look at more at the bigger picture of attracting customers, minimising costs, protecting their games with a small cost (cost/benefit analysis)and do not spend so much time on the small % of APs who might be costing them a very small Amount of money.

Quote: MathExtremist

Quote: Paigowdan

As for AP Player catagories, there are three:
Black-ops AP player: capping, pinching bets; marking cards; hole-carding as opposed to taking advantage of a flashing dealer; electronics; working with a dealer on stacked decks. 100% illegal.
Grey-AP: legal but unethical, and against the house rules: card-counting, taking advantage of a newbie “flashing” dealer; claiming; accepting wrong payouts in one direction, as opposed to rejecting all “wrong” money.
White AP: Best strategy play, and always within house rules. A smart recreational player.
Non-AP: a ploppy.

I know this has been addressed previously (in this thread and before), but Dan, you're simply wrong here. What you call "black-ops AP" is cheating. That's not AP any more than pickpocketing someone's wallet is AP.

Yes, you're right. But take into account, if it's okay with you:
- I am pretty much restricted here from using the word "cheating," - flak-wise - so I added "100% illegal."
- Yes, I used a top catagory of "Black AP", to expand AP upwards, to avoid the "c" word. Again, "100% illegal" was used instead.
- Stacey, you'd be the one to find the 100% correct legal nomenclature, - and very to fine.
- We may indeed use the "c" word in the pit loosely, in relation to any "loss prevention problem players" shall I say, and never had a lawyer walk into the pit to correct us on it, - so your help is indeed invaluable. But yes, it is how we view "theft of services" actions and loss prevention issues, based on player actions versus our house rules.

Quote: ME

AP is playing with a positive theoretical advantage, using whatever legal techniques are available to you.

Yes. I used instead "AP at 100% illegal" to show the obviously worst catagory. This is incorrect nomenclature, so may I use "cheating" for marking cards, etc., in these cases without any flak?....

Quote: ME

The legality of various methods of AP (e.g. card-counting and hole-carding) has already been established by caselaw and supercedes your opinions to the contrary.

Stacey, It doesn't superceed my opinion, because my opinion is that card counting is legal, - as is removal from a casino; and I've stated that many times in this Thread.
What I said was that both card counting - and being walk off the premises FOR card counting - are both legal. But you still get walked off. You wait at the
Bus Stop instead of in Jail. The problem is solved without cops and lawyers.

Quote: Stacey

Furthermore, ethical considerations are irrelevant to the question of whether a given play technique is both legal and +EV.

No, ethical issues do exist, and sometimes play a part. This is because WE in the casino pit feel if you:
1. Violate our house rules - that is our "loss prevention procedures" - to obtain some additional illicit money - then you have indeed committed an ethical breach against us also. We don't think this view is unreasonable, so forgive us for feeling this way, and seeing that way. And as such, you have also committed an "infraction" (correct word, counselor? :) - against our loss prevention guidelines, so you will be backed off or asked to leave on THAT basis - for legal protection.

So, - you are dismissed from the property for an "infraction," - for what we consider - and feel - was unethical behavior, unacceptable game play behavior, or bad faith behavior on a live money table game. If you're telling us we don't feel that way, well, many do.

If a card counter, who apparently approaches a table in false good faith to play, and in disguise so that he is not recoginzed - and he counts cards and runs the table down, and gets a shift manager fired for the loses, do you think we'd feel it was "ethical?"

Would YOU feel so, - if it were your job or business?
I don't think so. I don't think anyone would in those shoes. This is impossible for so many to see - unless of course it happens to him or a co-worker.

Quote: ME

Anything that is both is AP, and attempting to parse that spectrum into "grey, white, black" is not useful.

If your legal business requires further breakdown, then yes, I would suppose so.
We do use "severity levels" of player actions. You can call it "serious," "major," and "minor" instead; how is not useful for prioritizing things?

Quote: ME

The only basis the house has to exclude APs is found in law, not in a subjective sense of ethics (either yours or theirs), so legality is all that matters.

Would "a customer infraction of our loss prevention guidelines" qualify as legally acceptable here? I mean we back off and throw out players all the time, as do many other casinos?

Maybe all the card counters and "good AP players" who were thrown out can file a class action lawsuit against every casino operator, if all the countless back-offs and expulsions were illegal to do - as you say. And I will say this: if that were to happen, EVERY blackjack table would be 50% with 3x bet spreads, or CSM - and the WHOLE AP problem would be over, yes? Indeed, EVERY game would be made impossible to defeat, just in order to avoid lawsuits, and all we would deal to is the 95% of casino players who are social players.

And we go right back to the first post in this thread: Are we seeing the end of AP Play - just to handle these situations? I think yes.

Quote: ME

Finally, what you consider "White AP" isn't AP at all: by definition, if you don't have a positive Player Advantage, you are not an Advantage Player.

Yes, I know. But I also know that the ONLY WAY to stay IN the casino - forever, without EVER getting backed off - is to play the the house rules, the "loss prevention" rules, where you cannot do anything to exceed the "parameters" of the game your playing.

So the maximum edge you'd be allowed - that you'll get - is the 0.5% house edge on Ultimate Texas Hold 'em, or 0.4% on a good crap game. And that's it.
Since I KNOW I can't comfortable exceed that via counting or unallowed AP play, the highest level you can get in safety is that 0.4% or 0.5%, - as the other "player percentages" don't actually exist at the bus stop, or without disguises to throw off facial recognition systems.

Dan, although you admittedly have toned down your wording and try to use more politically correct terminology, I think it is fair to say that you see no distinction between card counters and cheaters. Just to prove you are on the wrong end of that way of thinking, The Griffin Agency, the original database and long time standard for the casino industry shared your view, no distinction between card counters (legal) and cheats (illegal). Griffin would list photos and information on card counters right along side photos and pictures of cheats, making no distinction. Counters complained about this treatment for years. As I am sure you know, the courts ruled this to be wrong. By placing pictures and info of players playing by legal means right there with cheats and making no distinction, Griffin was violating the rights of the legal players. This ruling and the damages awarded sent Griffin into bankruptcy.

Kewlj -
I am familiar with the griffin debacle. They were sometimes extreme, out there.

Quote: kewlj

Dan, although you admittedly have toned down your wording and try to use more politically correct terminology, I think it is fair to say that you see no distinction between card counters and cheaters.

In terms of Loss prevention / Theft of services views, they are functionally in the same catagory. Violate the house edge performance of a live money game against the rules of the business, then one is out, as it is unacceptable. If there are additional criminal charges, then so be it. If there are no additional actions, then expulsion is the limit.

This is NOT a legal thing - it is a business operational thing. Can't play? - goodbye. Can play? - stay. Any further crinimal charges are handled separately.

No business can withstand a Hemorrhaging business operation, even if that Hemorrhaging business item is the Blackjack pit. Kill it, you're in a casino with no AP opportunities in the future. Don't kill it - you have a quasi-possible selection of semi-AP-able games.

All of you insisting you "only" take maximum advantage of the information available - do you? Because given sufficient bankroll, that means shooting straight to the max, a 100-1 spread, every time the TC hits, I think, +1 under liberal rules, +2 under tighter ones. Doesn't it? So is that what you do? Of course not. You limit your advantage just to pull the wool over the eyes of the house. So don't act like the house's ability to kick you out makes it honest. A monte mob will let their marks walk away, too, just that, exactly like you, they try to keep them from doing so. (And isn't TCM just as legal in a lot of places?)

Quote: 24Bingo

All of you insisting you "only" take maximum advantage of the information available - do you? Because given sufficient bankroll, that means shooting straight to the max, a 100-1 spread, every time the TC hits, I think, +1 under liberal rules, +2 under tighter ones. Doesn't it? So is that what you do? Of course not. You limit your advantage just to pull the wool over the eyes of the house. So don't act like the house's ability to kick you out makes it honest.

Yes, the wise AP player will alter their bet such that the casino will (likely) not stop them from playing. Yes, the wise AP player does not want to be identified as such by the casino. But, as has been stated a gazillion times here before, if the casino decides that they do not want you to play, they have the right to forbid you from playing. The casino has the right to alter penetration. The casino has the right to offer rules that more favor the casino (6-5 as an example, CSMs as an example). The player has the right to alter their bets according to the posted limits at a table depending on what cards have already been played.

As far as 'maximum advantage', if I knew a situation existed where I would win 52% of the time and lose 48% of the time, I don't know how much I'd actually bet. It certainly isn't $1,000,000, but it certainly is more than $1.

I'll say it again. AP (card counting and alterring bet sizes) is totally legal, totally ethical, and difficult to do properly.
Casinos banning an AP is totally legal and totally ethical.

The casinos know the above. The APs know the above. I can't figure out why Dan can't figure it out!

The casinos do not "know" that card counting is totally ethical. I would argue, as I have, that venial though it is, it isn't "totally ethical," since you're taking advantage of a service whose cashflow you're consciously acting to reduce, and doing so by fundamentally misrepresenting yourself. Most casino personnel would agree.

And a number of the posters here (one of whom appears to be currently busy stockpiling guns and canned food) do not appear to "know" that banning AP, or offering a losing game at all, is ethical.

Quote: SOOPOO

Yes, the wise AP player will alter their bet such that the casino will (likely) not stop them from playing. Yes, the wise AP player does not want to be identified as such by the casino. But, as has been stated a gazillion times here before, if the casino decides that they do not want you to play, they have the right to forbid you from playing. The casino has the right to alter penetration. The casino has the right to offer rules that more favor the casino (6-5 as an example, CSMs as an example). The player has the right to alter their bets according to the posted limits at a table depending on what cards have already been played.

As far as 'maximum advantage', if I knew a situation existed where I would win 52% of the time and lose 48% of the time, I don't know how much I'd actually bet. It certainly isn't $1,000,000, but it certainly is more than $1.

I'll say it again. AP (card counting and alterring bet sizes) is totally legal, totally ethical, and difficult to do properly.
Casinos banning an AP is totally legal and totally ethical.

The casinos know the above. The APs know the above. I can't figure out why Dan can't figure it out!

Scott, I did figure it out. Read my posts. Quote me in this thread where I said card counting is illegal. Give it a go:
1. it is ALL legal. Both Card Counting and the back-offs stemming from it are legal. Card counter goes to the bus stop instead of to jail.
2. Casinos set the house rules.
3. The door is closing, because if you think it is an issue at this board with ONE pit worker who sides with casinos, then real AP players in real casinos is rougher. Read Eliot Jacobson's Back off and detention account here.

I'm a pussycat.

Quote: SOOPOO

I'll say it again. AP (card counting and altering bet sizes) is totally legal, totally ethical, and difficult to do properly.
Casinos banning an AP is totally legal and totally ethical.

The casinos know the above. The APs know the above. I can't figure out why Dan can't figure it out!

Well now, SOOPOO, partial disagreement. lol Card counting is legal....no question (proven so by courts). Casinos banning AP's...yes also legal (again, we know this because the courts have said so). But either of these things ethical? That is a matter of one's own opinion. Dan obviously feels thinking is unethical. lol You, I and the rest of the world see it differently. But now, casinos banning AP's being ethical. Again, a matter of opinion. I don't think a business that opens it's doors to the general public should get to pick and choose which customers they want to serve or in this case deal to. If they don't want people playing the game with an advantage, they have the ability to offer games in which only the house has an advantage. If they choose not to exercise that option and offer a game that the player can play at an advantage, then they shouldn't be shocked when people do so. lol

Basically, in my mind they are saying they want to pick and choose who can play. Maybe they should bann everyone with more than a tenth grade education or an IQ over a certain amount. Maybe there should be a test given before you can play. If you score well, you are not allowed in. Those too smart...need not apply. Of course, the exception will be those with any kind of alcohol addiction. They will take all of those people, regardless of intelligence, because they know they can prey on their addiction and dumb them up with free alcohol. Nothing unethical about that. lol

But you are right, sir. Both sides know the status of the game. It hasn't changed for 50 years, and I am not sure why anyone thinks it will change going forward.

Quote: 24Bingo

The casinos do not "know" that card counting is totally ethical. I would argue, as I have, that venial though it is, it isn't "totally ethical," since you're taking advantage of a service whose cashflow you're consciously acting to reduce, and doing so by fundamentally misrepresenting yourself. Most casino personnel would agree.

Venial...as opposed to Cardinal. Math Extremist though "Black, gray, and white" were bad. I think venial/cardinal is great.
I like:
1. Cardinal
2. Semi-Kosher, and
3. Venial
...levels of questionable play. I think this is beautiful.

And a number of the posters here (one of whom appears to be currently busy stockpiling guns and canned food) do not appear to "know" that banning AP, or offering a losing game at all, is ethical.

Quote: 24Bingo

The casinos do not "know" that card counting is totally ethical. I would argue, as I have, that venial though it is, it isn't "totally ethical," since you're taking advantage of a service whose cashflow you're consciously acting to reduce, and doing so by fundamentally misrepresenting yourself. Most casino personnel would agree.

Venial...as opposed to Cardinal. Math Extremist though "Black, gray, and white" were bad. I think venial/cardinal is great.
I like:
1. Cardinal
2. Semi-Kosher, and
3. Venial
...levels of questionable play. I think this is beautiful.

Quote: Paigowdan

Scott, I did figure it out. Read my posts. Quote me in this thread where I said card counting is illegal. Give it a go:
1. it is ALL legal. Both Card Counting and the back-offs stemming from it are legal. Card counter goes to the bus stop instead of to jail.
I'm a pussycat.

Now, why do you have to stoop to the bus stop reference. Do you REALLY think there are very many AP's that use public transportation? Just an attempt to put down the group of people that you dislike. We were having an respectful and intelligent conversation, here for the most part, why resort to such elementary school behavior. That is really weak, Dan.

As for pussycat....I think you are half right. :)

Quote: kewlj

Dan obviously feels thinking is unethical. lol

No, I think it is great, as I do playing by the house rules.
I said use max info available to you in playing Bridge - but not
I clearly said thinking is great, ethical, - but breaking the rules for ill-gotten gains is unethical thing.
Don't misquote me.
Also note that your thinking was not great at all if you're waiting at a bus stop after getting 86-ed. I said that all over the place, too.

Quote: kewlj

I don't think a business that opens it's doors to the general public should get to pick and choose which customers they want to serve or in this case deal to.

Why not? If they're breaking your business anti-loss rules, and trying to run you bankrupt, you'd be the first to implement a rule to expel them.

Quote: kewlj

If they don't want people playing the game with an advantage, they have the ability to offer games in which only the house has an advantage.

Why should they? - With the current set-up, they can just back-off and expel the sharp AP players, and keep the ploppies. Casinos won't change unless they need to.

Quote: kewlj

If they choose not to exercise that option and offer a game that the player can play at an advantage, then they shouldn't be shocked when people do so. lol

They're not shocked. They get annoyed, and walk people out.

Quote: kewlj

Basically, in my mind they are saying they want to pick and choose who can play.

YES, they do that, obviously. And I think that's a problem. And I think if we had uncountable, unAP-able games, a lot would be solved. Kind of like owning a movie house where no one can sneak in though the back door. It a business loss prevention thing.

Quote: kewlj

Maybe they should bann everyone with more than a tenth grade education or an IQ over a certain amount.

No, because they can simply ban the AP players as it stands now, and that's all they really need to ban to solve this AP problem.

Quote: kewlj

Maybe there should be a test given before you can play.

No, because they can simply ban the AP players as it stands now, and that's all they really need to ban to solve this AP problem.

Quote: kewlj

But you are right, sir. Both sides know the status of the game. It hasn't changed for 50 years, and I am not sure why anyone thinks it will change going forward.

I agree with you if you are saying the gaming industry has a lot of inertia.
Except for the for the fact game that distributors (who are the people casinos buy gaming products from) are begin to focus on game protection, and are making it an issue. To pay for distributors products, they have to show the casinos where such savings and security can occur.
1. I-Table, shufflemaster
2. Uncountable side bets
3. RFID betting spots
4. Facial recognition software
Then casinos will say, "wow, we saved a lot with game protection products from distributor xyz....but we pay for that...hmmm, what can WE do with game protection - while keeping our regular (ploppie) players....Oh! I've got it!"

Quote: kewlj

Now, why do you have to stoop to the bus stop reference. Do you REALLY think there are very many AP's that use public transportation?

YES.
We have people trying to scrounge up gas money for an old pickup truck by card counting. ("Watch this, honey!") I told this story in another thread. spreading $5-$40 or so (an 8x) spread, quickly backed off. (is $40 enough gas to go on a long drive? Iffy.) A Real amateur. Wasted everyone's time.

Quote: kewlj

Just an attempt to put down the group of people that you dislike. We were having an respectful and intelligent conversation, here for the most part, why resort to such elementary school behavior. That is really weak, Dan.

I've stated here many times here that I felt card counters were the best of the lot by far, sharp guys trying something that appears misguided. I said I do not think it will avail the VAST majority of them at all. In this thread alone, we had a poster who wanted to count as a source of income because he was out of a job and needed easy money. Good idea? What do you think of that, kewlj? Would you recommend card counting as a stop-gap temp job for someone who needs to pay his bills to survive?

Edit: Eliot jacobson posted a card counting incident of his, a real disaster, on his www.apheat.net site. This is a real incident, read it. Is anyone here at this site a better card counter than Eliot Jacobson??!! - It's the kind of stuff you're looking at with this. you want it, take it.

Quote: Paigowdan

YES.
We have people trying to scrounge up gas money for an old pickup truck by card counting. ("Watch this, honey!") I told this story in another thread. spreading $5-$40 or so (an 8x) spread, quickly backed off. (is $40 enough gas to go on a long drive? Iffy.) A Real amateur. Wasted everyone's time.

Is this true? Why the hell would a casino back off a player with a max bet of $40?

Quote: MakingBook

Is this true? Why the hell would a casino back off a player with a max bet of $40?

1. a $5 house.
2. Counting.
3. Spreading 8x, obvious and awkward, averaging even, high count win $40, lose $40. low count, win $5, lose $5, do-see-do.
4. It was done to spare him, really. Floorman was saying, "Buddy, do you really want to try this? Put what you got left in your tank, goodnight...."

Quote: Paigowdan

YES.
In this thread alone, we had a poster who wanted to count as a source of income because he was out of a job and needed easy money. Good idea? What do you think of that, kewlj? Would you recommend card counting as a stop-gap temp job for someone who needs to pay his bills to survive?

Well that's ME Dan. After I left my last job, I started card counting as a stop-gap temp job. :) That was 2004. Someday I will probably leave this temporary job. lol

Really that makes no sense, Dan. Stick to your principals, even if they are wrong. lol If something is a bad idea, such as you think this is, then it's a bad idea, period. Prostitution is a bad career move. Just because someone is out of work, doesn't then make it less of a bad idea. lol

Again, I don't think APing is going anywhere. You mentioned several advances in technology over the last decade that were supposed to put an end to APing and most have been considered failures.

CSM appear to be on the decline here in vegas. These machines are generally used at the lower end tables, because players playing higher amounts balk at them. Unless things have changed in the last couple years, these machines must be leased rather than purchased and that just makes the cost too high for the gain from using them at the lower end games. Also, I have several acquaintances that work in pits at different casinos that claim the machines break down frequently and maintenence costs are high.

RFID, just never caught on, except a very few high end high limit rooms. Again, costs are high and out weigh benefits at all but the high end games.

Facial recognition has just been a total bust. It is very unreliable and not nearly as accurate as it is described.

Side bets. Most are countable. The casino probably does benefit from these because the house edge on these bets is very high. But they can slow a game down to a crawl. That certainly has to cut into any advantage.

I am having my best year by far of my 9 years of supporting myself from AP. Currently, just about double what I made last year, however it should be noted that 2011 was not one of my better years, as my results were off from previous years due to illness and being unable to play for 3 months. But this is still by far my best year (knock wood). At any rate, I am betting AP opportunities are not coming to an end, and I will have many more years of opportunities in front of me.

Quote: Paigowdan

Read Eliot Jacobson's Back off and detention account here.

Dan, here is part of my incident report you may not have read:

===========

I am very thankful to casino security for all the times they have helped me when I’ve asked for assistance, and all the times they protected me without my knowledge. Like our nation’s police force, military and other security agencies, however, there are rogues who get into casino security. Unfortunately, in the casino industry, these rogues often single APs out for abuse. This has played out many times in court when APs have won civil rights judgments against casinos based on abuses by casino security.

In my opinion, unlike that of the vast majority of APs, the criminal actions of rogues in the casino industry should not give a bad name to all those who guard the assets of the casino, while protecting and serving the patrons and employees. On this particular night, I happened to get on the wrong side of some under-trained and overzealous rogue security guards. I was never a high level or particularly good AP. This incident occurred to a player making wagers of $50 per hand who was up only $400. I have no idea why on this particular night, these security personnel behaved in such an outrageous fashion.

Those APs who have the skills are beating the house fair and square. No action can be taken against APs that is stronger than would be taken against any other law-abiding citizen who is going about his business. Matters of kidnapping, battery and false arrest, when they arise, should be dealt with harshly by the courts, no matter the perpetrator.

Those who argue that being an AP is akin to cheating are misguided and dangerous. There is a slippery slope. If you believe that being an AP is cheating, then you may feel justified in acting towards the AP as you might act towards a cheat. That is a bad idea. Thought police and repression go hand-in-hand. Cheating will get you five-to-ten. Kidnapping, threatening and battering a law-abiding citizen will also get you five-to-ten.

The lesson here is that being an AP is a legal activity. Whether it is card counting, hole-carding, or some other law-abiding way of getting an edge, the house has no legal authority to arrest, detain or demand information from the AP. The AP can be shown the door, but that is as far as the casino can go.

I work for the casino-side of the table right now. But, I will always be on the side of civil-rights.

===============

Quote: Paigowdan

I'm a pussycat.

You said it.

Quote: teliot

Quote: Paigowdan

Read Eliot Jacobson's Back off and detention account here.

Dan, here is part of my incident report you may not have read:

===========

I am very thankful to casino security for all the times they have helped me when I’ve asked for assistance, and all the times they protected me without my knowledge. Like our nation’s police force, military and other security agencies, however, there are rogues who get into casino security. Unfortunately, in the casino industry, these rogues often single APs out for abuse. This has played out many times in court when APs have won civil rights judgments against casinos based on abuses by casino security.

In my opinion, unlike that of the vast majority of APs, the criminal actions of rogues in the casino industry should not give a bad name to all those who guard the assets of the casino, while protecting and serving the patrons and employees. On this particular night, I happened to get on the wrong side of some under-trained and overzealous rogue security guards. I was never a high level or particularly good AP. This incident occurred to a player making wagers of $50 per hand who was up only $400. I have no idea why on this particular night, these security personnel behaved in such an outrageous fashion.

Those APs who have the skills are beating the house fair and square. No action can be taken against APs that is stronger than would be taken against any other law-abiding citizen who is going about his business. Matters of kidnapping, battery and false arrest, when they arise, should be dealt with harshly by the courts, no matter the perpetrator.

Those who argue that being an AP is akin to cheating are misguided and dangerous. There is a slippery slope. If you believe that being an AP is cheating, then you may feel justified in acting towards the AP as you might act towards a cheat. That is a bad idea. Thought police and repression go hand-in-hand. Cheating will get you five-to-ten. Kidnapping, threatening and battering a law-abiding citizen will also get you five-to-ten.

The lesson here is that being an AP is a legal activity. Whether it is card counting, hole-carding, or some other law-abiding way of getting an edge, the house has no legal authority to arrest, detain or demand information from the AP. The AP can be shown the door, but that is as far as the casino can go.

I work for the casino-side of the table right now. But, I will always be on the side of civil-rights.

===============

You said it.

Dan posted in my thread "Warped wheel, card counting and other AP" that AP'S are "Swindlers"....ha ha ha

That really got me, Buzz and Even Bob going along with a bunch of other people.

Legal play="Swindler" in the mind of Dan.

I am not going to post again in this thread considering the thought process of the OP.

As of this point in time, I am begining to view All AP as a "Sub-culture" of Gaming.

From Kewlj's success, to Eliot's trials and tribulations, a strange, proud, defensive, and adamant sub-culture where people descend into that realm - lifestyle - if you will, to varying degrees of depth and success.

Tilton, Anderson, the MIT crew, Taft, I read these stories and it is cultist, - a club of members.

Robin Hoods against the Man, in this case Harrah's, MGM, Ceasars', Stations, etc.

If the casino scene becomes AP proof from everything from technology to dragonian rule changes, what have you, a genocide of a sub-culture might occur.

You guys have a lot of defenders here.

From all that I've read, and heard, it is a cult of sorts, in order to be able to do this, with one hell of an initiation after a point; changes galor.

I believe changes are comming, and I don't know if it is quick or slow, when things will change. Amazing.

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

Absolutely. If everyone did what I do then you just couldn't do it. The only game I may play with a slight dissadvantage is PGP (and I prefer your idea better), and that is rare when I do play. Usually its just to bide time waiting on a seat. I've said it many times, "I'm not winning the casinos money, just money the ploppies lost." In no way will I ever make a casino unprofitable.

I think your quotation hits the nail square on the head. No way a small fish like me would/could think to be EVER taking "house money". Start dropping 100Long at baccarat, and we're talking House Money. FWIW the Ivey story recently (+7.5Million E$) as exmple.

Had to respond separately... Dan, it does appear that way, and it actually appears to be Human Nature. I mean everone wants to go the distance with the Champ (Rocky-ism). Take down the big man, get a moral victory if not. Its challenging Everest, Walking on the Moon, Skydiving, Folding Proteins, Swimming with Sharks, all rolled into one.

Quote: Paigowdan

Edit: Eliot jacobson posted a card counting incident of his, a real disaster, on his www.apheat.net site. This is a real incident, read it. Is anyone hear at this site a better card counter than Eliot Jacobson??!! - It's the kind of stuff you're looking at with this. you want it, take it.

Well, you're also looking to be compensated for this.

Quote:

Second, the settlement (if any) prohibits giving out this information.

"If any" being a pretty transparent way to circumvent non-disclosure. I've been through much worse in service, and the compensation is never as good as what I know even the smallest settlements in the matter to be.

And retelling incidents like this only reinforces people's intent to take as much away from casinos as possible without breaking the law - I mean gray hat+ methods here, not counting. You can't simultaneously plead your case to please abide by casinos' unwritten rules and remind everyone that casinos themselves don't follow rules.

deleted

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

The El Cortez will back you off betting $5-$25.

Yes. Right after I posted that, the El Cortez came to mind.

Edit- I've seen a back-off in the $5 double-deck game.

deleted

Wow. This thread... wow.

Quote: bigpete88

Legal play="Swindler" in the mind of Dan.

Legal = ethical in the mind of bigpete.

Quote: 98Clubs

I think your quotation hits the nail square on the head. No way a small fish like me would/could think to be EVER taking "house money". Start dropping 100Long at baccarat, and we're talking House Money. FWIW the Ivey story recently (+7.5Million E$) as exmple.

It sounds like you take even money. Can't let that nasty push cut into the money you won, after all.

Quote: Paigowdan

Is anyone here at this site a better card counter than Eliot Jacobson??!!

I will assume this isn't serious. Practically any professional AP is far better than I ever was. And this site has some real pros. These are impressive people. As brilliant as you could imagine, creative, genuinely good people (some of them, not all, some real sociopaths and miscreants in there too). As far as card counting, I stopped doing that in 2002. The last 3 years it was other stuff, mostly OCP.

deleted

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

Same here. I use counting as a last resort when there are no other opportunities. OCP is the next to last. Rediculous variance and most of the time too slow.

OCP?

Quote: mrclean

OCP?

One Card Poker ssssshhhhhh

deleted

Quote:

if overnight the Gaming Commission unilaterally imposed on ALL casino operators that ALL Blackjack games must be made impossible to count? Think about this in your life.

A better question: What would the Gaming Commission do if it was high on bath salts? Other than eat each other.

I have participated in discussions on this topic a dozen times now on 3 or 4 different sites. It always boils down to ethical vs legal. And it always boils down to one or two casino employees that seem to see things differently. Their loyalty to the industry is understandable, but it's kind of funny that same industry that they are so loyal to will kick them to the curb and replace them with electronics at the drop of a hat. I can think of at least 20 casinos here in Vegas, that have replaced table games and human dealers with an electronic version of the same game, roulette, craps, big six, blackjack in just the last year. I am not talking about individual terminal type video games, I am talking the multi-station, 5,6,8 seat versions that replace an actual table, dealers and pit people. One casino actually replaced an entire pit. Be interesting to see if that loyalty remains. lol But that's another discussion.

Now back to ethical vs legal. There are many ways to gain and advantage over a game. I think we can all agree that some are illegal. Some are legal, but seem a little shady, unethical or immoral. How shady depends on each individuals own standards. Hole-carding is one example that I often use. Another is enticing dealer mistakes. Dealers are human (in most cases...lol) and as such make mistakes. Sure I have dealers pay me on a push or push my losing hand from time to time and I don't jump up and point it out to them. But let them take my wager when it should be a push and I do point it out. Is that unethical or immoral? For me personally, the answer is no. But take it a step further. Just a couple erroneous payoffs per session can turn the EV of that session from negative to positive. I know players that really try to entice these types of mistakes. One such method is rainbow wagering. Wagering 3 or 4 different color and denomination chips to encourage dealer payoff mistakes. Not illegal, but unethical? In my mind, yes. You are taking advantage of a human being's weakness and subsequently could be contributing to them getting fired. Here's another one, and I have to admit, I employed this one for a little while early on in my career. You draw a multicard hand of a number of small cards and end up busting with 22 and you excitedly exclaim "yes 21!". You would be surprised how often this works. Or the variation, when the dealer draws a multi-card 21, you say "22 break". This works less often as they are more apt to double check their own hand. Are these moves illegal? No. Unethical or immoral. In my mind, yes.

I don't think there is anything unethical or immoral about card counting. You are playing the game exactly by the rules, wagering within the stated parameters of table minimum and maximum and taking advantage of no one except the 3rd grade mathematical education you received. No one has yet to convince me this is unethical or immoral.

Now what I do find funny (sad-funny) is these same PG-Dan's of the world that insist that an activity like card counting is immoral or unethical seem to completely overlook the morality of the very industry that they defend. The gaming industry preys on the weak, the elderly, those with gambling and substance (alcohol) addictions and even those that just aren't too bright. Nothing illegal about this. But immoral? Com' on! I can't for the life of me figure how these same people can sit up on their high horse and judge card counting, while they work for such an industry. I understand different folks have different values in terms of immorality, but don't get this double standard. These folks must go through a lot of sleeping pills to be able to sleep at night. lol

Quote: kewlj

INow what I do find funny (sad-funny) is these same PG-Dan's of the world that insist that an activity like card counting is immoral or unethical seem to completely overlook the morality of the very industry that they defend. The gaming industry preys on the weak, the elderly, those with gambling and substance (alcohol) addictions and even those that just aren't too bright. Nothing illegal about this. But immoral? Com' on! I can't for the life of me figure how these same people can sit up on their high horse and judge card counting, while they work for such an industry. I understand different folks have different values in terms of immorality, but don't get this double standard. These folks must go through a lot of sleeping pills to be able to sleep at night. lol

Every industry has its abusers. It's not a double standard to provide a service that can be made self-destructive while totally above board about its nature, yet condemn those who attempt to trick this service's proprietors into acting to their own detriment.

Why do people always refer to the product of a casino as a service? What they provide is a vice.

I am afraid, you have lost me, 24Bingo. Who is trying to trick the casinos into acting to their own detriment?

Quote: 24Bingo

Every industry has its abusers. It's not a double standard to provide a service that can be made self-destructive while totally above board about its nature, yet condemn those who attempt to trick this service's proprietors into acting to their own detriment.

Totally above board? Like in the above board manner in which they will provide an illegal service like prostitution, to it's higher end clients. That kind of hush-hush, totally above board service? No immorality there. lol

Quote: rainman

Why do people always refer to the product of a casino as a service? What they provide is a vice.

It's a service, Becasue they "services" your vice.

Quote: Paigowdan

It's a service, Becasue they services your vice.

Hmmm... Ok ill buy that for a dollar. Although I may not have a vice if they didn't provide me with the ability to have one.

Yay personal responsibility! "Ish not my fault I'm a drunk, ish the damn 21sh Amendment..."

Quote: kewlj

I am afraid, you have lost me, 24Bingo. Who is trying to trick the casinos into acting to their own detriment?

You're trying to trick them into allowing you to play a game in which you have violated the implicit understanding, that just like a hedger making sucker bets in the futures market pays not to gamble, you are paying to gamble, inasmuch as someone has to. It doesn't matter that they'll probably get the money elsewhere - there, on that table, you mean them to provide a service not just for free, but to pay extra for providing it.

Quote: kewlj

Totally above board? Like in the above board manner in which they will provide an illegal service like prostitution, to it's higher end clients. That kind of hush-hush, totally above board service? No immorality there. lol

I know you AP folk like to see the law as the ultimate arbiter of right and wrong, but there's a difference between being evasive with the law to provide an illegal service (or more often, simply allow one to be provided) and dealing dishonestly with your associates themselves.