The Savannah

Interesting link about Richard Marcus' brilliant roulette cheating move, The Savannah

I have read his books which are interesting but poorly written. The thing that shocks me the most is that he was never arrested.

I don't like cheats, but i have to agree this is a genius cheating move. The book is excellent too, the way he describes the dealers and casinos procedures, you can tell he really knows his stuff. Still a scumbag cheat though.

Quote: DRich

I have read his books which are interesting but poorly written. The thing that shocks me the most is that he was never arrested.

Yeah, i was wondering how he never got arrested too.

Quote: ShineyShine

I don't like cheats, but i have to agree this is a genius cheating move. The book is excellent too, the way he describes the dealers and casinos procedures, you can tell he really knows his stuff. Still a scumbag cheat though.

Yeah, he got his start cheating at the tables at Four Queens...as a dealer.

Obviously it seems to have worked but did he have to leave a table after 1 win? Losing on $15 bets and winning on $5010 ones seems like it would draw heat quickly.

Quote: Boz

Obviously it seems to have worked but did he have to leave a table after 1 win? Losing on $15 bets and winning on $5010 ones seems like it would draw heat quickly.

If i remember the book correctly, they would leave after one attempt, win or lose. On the even chance bets, they wouldn't have to wait long for a winner obviously. I think they considered doing it on a straight up , but would be potentially waiting too long to hit.

I'm guessing there's a statute of limitations on Marcus's crimes which has since run out?

One thing i cant get my head round though, and i cant remember if he explains it in the book or not, is that if its a $15 or less minimum bet on the even chances, there's no table i've ever dealt on that would have a $5,000+ maximum without prior agreement for that player.

Back in the old days when humans were the only eye in the sky it was understood they were all ex-crossroaders because that is how they got their jobs. Dice was illegal until Vegas opened and it was bad guys who generally learned how to cheat at various games.

Later, these cheaters from time to time became gambling consultants but there was no respect or trust, they were just viewed in the industry as thieves who had been caught.

Some casinos did hire such consultants from time to time but I don't think anyone accords them a level of trust and respect.

In the days of miniature electronics it must be a field day at roulette tables but clocking a wheel to get "target octests" just doesn't yield much.

Richard Marcus will give you a private one day class in card counting for $5,000. I'll bet no one has taken him up on that.

Quote: Greasyjohn

Richard Marcus will give you a private one day class in card counting for $5,000. I'll bet no one has taken him up on that.

I will also give private card counting classes for ONLY 3k.

Quote: ShineyShine

If i remember the book correctly, they would leave after one attempt, win or lose. On the even chance bets, they wouldn't have to wait long for a winner obviously. I think they considered doing it on a straight up , but would be potentially waiting too long to hit.

My memory is that they would play a few more hands after they claimed a big win, and in a similar style. For example they might bet $510 after winning on a $5200.

Quote: ShineyShine

One thing i cant get my head round though, and i cant remember if he explains it in the book or not, is that if its a $15 or less minimum bet on the even chances, there's no table i've ever dealt on that would have a $5,000+ maximum without prior agreement for that player.

I haven't read the book, but I think that is one of the issues they discuss in the video, without specifically stating it. Once the bet has been placed on the table and the wheel and ball have been spun/rolled, it certainly appears that the casino has accepted the wager, even if it exceeds the table maximum. That's why they said they had to pay off the winning bets. The whole Savannah scam started to die in Las Vegas when the casinos began to refuse to pay out on the winning bets, presumably by saying it was invalid because it exceeded the posted limits. That was the turning point when he took the scam international. At least that's what I thought I heard them say.

There are plenty of Roulette tables you can bet $5000 on the outside in Vegas. Why wouldnt they let you with a 5% edge?

Quote: Doc

The whole Savannah scam started to die in Las Vegas when the casinos began to refuse to pay out on the winning bets, presumably by saying it was invalid because it exceeded the posted limits.

The casinos started to not pay the bets not because they exceeded the posted limits, but because they knew that Marcus knew that if Gaming was called in that he would get too much heat for pulling the same move more than once. It worked. Marcus never did want Gaming called.

Quote: ShineyShine

Still a scumbag cheat though.

Cheating scumbag casinos is an honorable
profession.

Quote: mcallister3200

I will also give private card counting classes for ONLY 3k.

Does that include a laminated Basic Strategy card?

Quote: Greasyjohn

Does that include a laminated Basic Strategy card?

I charge $9.99 extra for the laminated cards, but my course is only $2k per day or $3k for the weekend! PM for details ;) lol

This was absolutely a genius tactic. It shows in the fact that he was never arrested doing it. No casino could really catch him if they bet once then left unless they were specifically targeting him, and HOPED that he lost so they could catch the switch on tape. Regardless if he was a delinquent or not, it was a genius idea in it's time.

He has some other interesting stories and cheat moves on his website for those that might be interested.

http://www.richardmarcusbooks.com/pokercheatingmoves.php

Where's Dan when we need him to comment?

Quote: Romes

I charge $9.99 extra for the laminated cards, but my course is only $2k per day or $3k for the weekend! PM for details ;) lol

This was absolutely a genius tactic. It shows in the fact that he was never arrested doing it. No casino could really catch him if they bet once then left unless they were specifically targeting him, and HOPED that he lost so they could catch the switch on tape. Regardless if he was a delinquent or not, it was a genius idea in it's time.

The thing that's so clever about it is that he doesn't try to grab the bet unnoticed. He lets the dealer catch him, and plays it off like a rookie mistake. As far as the dealer, or anyone in surveillance is concerned, here's a guy who picked up his bet simply because he thought the hand was over. It happens dozens of times a day with dozens of players, and nobody thinks anything of it. Nobody realized that the bet he's "putting back" is not the bet he picked up.

Not condoning his actions either, but you have to marvel at it.

Quote: Greasyjohn

Does that include a laminated Basic Strategy card?

I offer the laminated basic strategy cards only for $24.99 each, but I don't make you sit through the class to get them for that price.

I'm not surprised about that. Richard Marcus wasn't the best at editing his online articles.

The casino personnel just alerted and called surveillance to confirm Richard's legitimate $5,000 bet, At this point, the casino will be monitoring you more closely for the rest of the session. As such, it made sense for Richard to switch casinos after 1 cheat move.

In fact, Richard and his team did not always cash out their chips right away, because that would bring unwanted attention, and force them to spend more time in casinos at a time when they are getting casino heat.

Richard also made it a policy never to show his ID, because that gives the casino more leverage over suspected cheaters and advantage players.

At the time, CTR's were required at $30k or more, which was lowered to $10k in due part because of 9/11.

Quote: Bowler377

At the time, CTR's were required at $30k or more, which was lowered to $10k in due part because of 9/11.
link to original post

Now that's something I never knew. While we're on the subject of raising the W2G threshold, can we bring this back too?

EDIT: A quick Google search shows that the threshold has been $10,000 ever since the law went into effect in 1972.

That's because he was wrong, about that, among other things.

Speaking of reporting, what we definitely did not want passed was the original HR 5376 Build Back Better bill which would have required banks to report over 10K in movements in and out of taxpayers' bank accounts where the inflows and outflows weren't accounted for by wages, salaries and federal benefits. Talk about Big Brother watching.

I didn't read the bill (it didn't pass anyway) to see if it applied just to personal bank accounts, or business ones too, but I assume personal only, maybe sole proprietorships lacking EINs too.

https://www.frazierdeeter.com/insights/treasury-offers-facts-v-fiction-points-on-reporting/#:~:text=The%20original%20threshold%20for%20reporting,for%20the%20tax%20year%202023.

Bankers’ Group Opposed
The American Bankers Association (ABA) opposed the measure, calling it “bad tax policy” in a letter to House congressional leaders. The group says the provision “raises significant concerns regarding the privacy of personal financial information, cost of implementation and impact on average Americans.” Financial institutions will be required to develop the necessary technology and processes to identify the accounts, report to the IRS and customers and educate customers and bank staff on what the information does (and does not) mean, the group notes. The ABA offers this example of the reach of the reporting requirement.

Examples: Consider a taxpayer who earns $18 an hour, has no other income and pays rent and other living expenses – the sum of gross inflows and outflows after taxes would be around $60,000. Also, self-employed contractors who buy materials and install them for customers will commonly have gross inflows and outflows that far exceed the income they earn and will be subject to reporting.

Quote: MDawg

That's because he was wrong, about that, among other things.

Speaking of reporting, what we definitely did not want passed was the original HR 5376 Build Back Better bill which would have required banks to report over 10K in movements in and out of taxpayers' bank accounts where the inflows and outflows weren't accounted for by wages, salaries and federal benefits. Talk about Big Brother watching.

I didn't read the bill (it didn't pass anyway) to see if it applied just to personal bank accounts, or business ones too, but I assume personal only, maybe sole proprietorships lacking EINs too.

https://www.frazierdeeter.com/insights/treasury-offers-facts-v-fiction-points-on-reporting/#:~:text=The%20original%20threshold%20for%20reporting,for%20the%20tax%20year%202023.

Bankers’ Group Opposed
The American Bankers Association (ABA) opposed the measure, calling it “bad tax policy” in a letter to House congressional leaders. The group says the provision “raises significant concerns regarding the privacy of personal financial information, cost of implementation and impact on average Americans.” Financial institutions will be required to develop the necessary technology and processes to identify the accounts, report to the IRS and customers and educate customers and bank staff on what the information does (and does not) mean, the group notes. The ABA offers this example of the reach of the reporting requirement.

Examples: Consider a taxpayer who earns $18 an hour, has no other income and pays rent and other living expenses – the sum of gross inflows and outflows after taxes would be around $60,000. Also, self-employed contractors who buy materials and install them for customers will commonly have gross inflows and outflows that far exceed the income they earn and will be subject to reporting.
link to original post

I would think it would be good to ensure people aren't spending money they are not reporting

Nowadays, casinos are much more likely to rewind the tape if they even suspect somebody of past posting, even if it's a small minimum bet.

There was a brief time during the MIT Blackjack Team's run, when you couldn't buy $30k in chips without showing ID (Breaking Vegas).

That threshold is lower now at $10k, With transactions of $5k, $3k, and $2k the law is a lot less unclear.

Nobody knows how to deal with those transactions without risking large or alienating their customers.