Local UTH is broken and I want to know how to exploit

Quote: Paigowdan

There should be a bad brick-n-mortar casinos warning page similar to Mike's online blacklist page. White hat casinos and black hat casinos and provably the why. They don't advertise here in any case.

Not a bad idea. Just an Only Complaints page about every casino. Perhaps with links to real cases for the provable cases. Maybe an I heard this about them: section too for the unverified cases.

I wonder if we can edit the thread title to "I want to have a long, drawn out argument about the ethics of advantage play, with a side discussion on if it's bad while employed as a dealer elsewhere."

...oh, and a disturbing subtopic of prison rape.

Quote: Elastoid

I wonder if we can edit the thread title to "I want to have a long, drawn out argument about the ethics of advantage play, with a side discussion on if it's bad while employed as a dealer elsewhere."

...oh, and a disturbing subtopic of prison rape.

This always happenes when an AP topic comes up (with the exception of rape). A long drawn out debate between PGD and the world. Neither side ever budges.

We're making progress though. I think we now all agree that Aps don't deserve to be raped:)

Quote: RS

...
And NO - it's not some "big IF". Playing certain ways that casinos do not like (ie: hole-carding) is NOT illegal.
Do not confuse it with dealer flashing, which is where the dealer takes the action to expose cards. If the dealer doesn't expose cards, but the player goes beyond the pale to obtain information, that is different. One young casino patron was capping bets for a trivial amount propelled the casino manager to have him arrested by the police.

Why do you keep doing this? As if capping bets is at all related to hole-carding...

It sure is, being is in the same disallowed status. And card marking and Edge sorting, etc. It isn't about legal or illegal status, it's about if the AP play is of a stoppable status, where it might not be able to be done.
All disallowed play is disallowed, and subject to being stopped. This is normal. Isn't that the issue? The extent of the stoppage varies, but the issue is "Occurrences of Back offs and greater."

Quote: RS

And I don't think anyone is saying that every casino is backrooming people or no-paying them every single day. OF COURSE IT'S A RARE OCCURRENCE.

You're trying to argue that casinos abide by the law and have their own house rules and act like any other business...but oh yeah some do illegal things, but I'm not talking about that, I just wanna talk about how they're like regular businesses and stuff.


PGD, do you agree or disagree casinos use illegal tactics (unlawful detainment, no-pay [legal] legitimate patrons, etc.) against players whom they don't like / "broke the house rules", even though the patron did nothing against the law?

No, Generally not, - on occasion yes.
1. Depending on circumstances, detainment is lawful and appropriate. Detainment for 100% legal activities, or justified detainment with added abuse is unacceptable and rare. Agree here.
2. It's not a question of "it's not against the law." It is a question of doing a legal back-off offense that receives a legal back off.

Quote: Paigowdan

Quote: RS

Why do you keep doing this? As if capping bets is at all related to hole-carding...

It sure is, being is in the same disallowed status. And card marking and Edge sorting, etc. It isn't about legal or illegal status, it's about if the AP play is of a stoppable status, where it might not be able to be done.

Pinching, capping, and card marking are not AP plays. They are unlawful. Saying that bet capping is an AP play is like saying picking pockets is an AP play. You seem to hold the position that legal AP moves like card counting are as equivalently disallowed as crimes like bet capping. They aren't, and casinos have lost millions in legal damages for failing to respect that difference. That's why an attorney like Bob Nersesian has the practice he does. A casino has probable cause to detain a gambler suspected of capping bets. They do not have the same right if the gambler is merely suspected of counting cards.

Quote: NRS 200.460

  Definition; penalties.
1.  False imprisonment is an unlawful violation of the personal liberty of another, and consists in confinement or detention without sufficient legal authority.

Quote: MathExtremist

Pinching, capping, and card marking are not AP plays. They are unlawful. Saying that bet capping is an AP play is like saying picking pockets is an AP play. You seem to hold the position that legal AP moves like card counting are as equivalently disallowed as crimes like bet capping. They aren't, and casinos have lost millions in legal damages for failing to respect that difference. That's why an attorney like Bob Nersesian has the practice he does. A casino has probable cause to detain a gambler suspected of capping bets. They do not have the same right if the gambler is merely suspected of counting cards.

Not really. The category of casino actions that are disallowed or stoppable can fall under one generally category in this realm, "actions that are disallowed by the casino" and will get you 86-ed or higher. Consider it "disallowed casino play."

APHEAT.NET and others discusses it all as under one umbrella site, to include hole-carding, collusion, edge-sorting, etc., and where multiple levels of responses or penalties may further be broken out. APHEAT.net is not TheVariousCatagoriesOfDisallowedPlay.net.

I've stated that improper detentions (false imprisonment) are illegal and a call Bob N. or equivalent offensive, with a "go Bob!" on that, as well as saying some detentions are justifiable.

Quote: Paigowdan

Not really. The category of casino actions that are disallowed or stoppable can fall under one generally category in this realm, "actions that are disallowed by the casino" and will get you 86-ed or higher. Consider it "disallowed casino play."

No. The casino can legally 86 anyone for almost any reason. They cannot legally "and higher" (including backrooming or other detention) without a very specific fact pattern. It doesn't matter whether a gaming operator doesn't like a particular legal activity. Physically detaining someone who is not suspected of breaking the law is itself unlawful.

Quote: MathExtremist

No. The casino can legally 86 anyone for almost any reason. They cannot legally "and higher" (including backrooming or other detention) without a very specific fact pattern. It doesn't matter whether a gaming operator doesn't like a particular legal activity. Physically detaining someone who is not suspected of breaking the law is itself unlawful.

Stacy, I fully agree, but we aren't discussing being 86-ed from a joint for public intoxication or something (which they can also do), - we're discussing table game card play-related actions. I never disputed that they may not back room anyone for bogus reasons, I stated that they can detain for more serious reasons (the "and higher" part), and if committed, with the casino responses appropriate to the player transgression.

However the casino seems to have an attitude of "Guilty until proven Innocent" all too often.

Quote: muleyvoice

However the casino seems to have an attitude of "Guilty until proven Innocent" all too often.

Shouldn't be that way, visible attitude can affect PR and business. Some back offs are friendly. Oh, - and bad attitude can also needlessly offend people.

Quote: Paigowdan

Stacy, I fully agree, but we aren't discussing being 86-ed from a joint for public intoxication or something (which they can also do), - we're discussing table game card play-related actions. I never disputed that they may not back room anyone for bogus reasons, I stated that they can detain for more serious reasons (the "and higher" part), and if committed, with the casino responses appropriate to the player transgression.

Are you seriously claiming you can get legally detained for breaking casino rules (but not the law) like hole-carding ? I'd love to see the law on that one.

Quote: RS

Are you seriously claiming you can get legally detained for breaking casino rules (but not the law) like hole-carding ? I'd love to see the law on that one.

No, not unless a law is broken. This is why is said higher level than card counting. The most they can do is expel you from the property for that. Often, you only have to leave the game or the pit (no action on your play). Detention requires a legal basis.

Quote: Paigowdan

Not really. The category of casino actions that are disallowed or stoppable can fall under one generally category in this realm, "actions that are disallowed by the casino" and will get you 86-ed or higher. Consider it "disallowed casino play."

APHEAT.NET and others discusses it all as under one umbrella site, to include hole-carding, collusion, edge-sorting, etc., and where multiple levels of responses or penalties may further be broken out. APHEAT.net is not TheVariousCatagoriesOfDisallowedPlay.net.

I've stated that improper detentions (false imprisonment) are illegal and a call Bob N. or equivalent offensive, with a "go Bob!" on that, as well as saying some detentions are justifiable.

I think we've landed on the core of the dispute. APs take offense at being labelled criminals because, by definition, they are only doing legal plays. Throughout this discussion people have been referencing legal AP without consideration of the illegal activity because those plays wouldn't even be considered. You seem to refuse to make that distinction. So each side is having a completely different discussion, and getting frustrated because of it.

If you don't see a need for distinguishing between legal and illegal activity, even amongst the plays that fall under "against house rules" then I don't see any value in participating in a discussion with you, since we won't be discussing the same topic. I really don't care about bet capping or players who mark cards because there is no grey area there and it isn't worth talking about.

Also, I don't think I've seen anything on apheat.net that I would consider illegal play or that Eliot would consider illegal. Either way, it is obvious to anyone objectively ready posts from APs that the distinction is clear and nobody is advocating breaking the law.

Quote: RS

Are you seriously claiming you can get legally detained for breaking casino rules (but not the law) like hole-carding ? I'd love to see the law on that one.

Show Spoiler

i do not give a sh*t about bet capping or bet pinchers or mirror users etc. I'm only talking about legal play.

I don't think the casino can detain you. But if they do, then they have to read to you the Miranda rights :-)

Quote: Paigowdan

No, not unless a law is broken. This is why is said higher level than card counting. The most they can do is expel you from the property for that. Often, you only have to leave the game or the pit (no action on your play). Detention requires a legal basis.

Then what does this mean:

Quote: PaiGowDan

Quote: MathExtremist

Pinching, capping, and card marking are not AP plays. They are unlawful. Saying that bet capping is an AP play is like saying picking pockets is an AP play. You seem to hold the position that legal AP moves like card counting are as equivalently disallowed as crimes like bet capping. They aren't, and casinos have lost millions in legal damages for failing to respect that difference. That's why an attorney like Bob Nersesian has the practice he does. A casino has probable cause to detain a gambler suspected of capping bets. They do not have the same right if the gambler is merely suspected of counting cards.

Not really. The category of casino actions that are disallowed or stoppable can fall under one generally category in this realm, "actions that are disallowed by the casino" and will get you 86-ed or higher. Consider it "disallowed casino play."

Because to me, it reads like you're saying you can get detained for simply breaking house rules.

Quote: RS

Because to me, it reads like you're saying you can get detained for simply breaking house rules.

Then re-read this - you even quoted me:

Quote: Paigowdan

No, not unless a law is broken. This is why is said higher level than card counting. The most they can do is expel you from the property for that. Often, you only have to leave the game or the pit (no action on your play). Detention requires a legal basis.

Quote: jopke

I think we've landed on the core of the dispute. APs take offense at being labelled criminals because, by definition, they are only doing legal plays. Throughout this discussion people have been referencing legal AP without consideration of the illegal activity because those plays wouldn't even be considered. You seem to refuse to make that distinction. So each side is having a completely different discussion, and getting frustrated because of it.

I address them clearly:
1. They can detain you only if laws are broken, and without additional/gratuitous abuse in the process. This excludes counting.
2. I discuss disallowed casino play, which does include counting, which is why you get backed off or 86-ed. and just as legal for the casino to do as it is to count.

The AP resistance here is in saying or admitting, "Well, yeah, in the end, I really don't have the right to do disallowed play, cannot expect that it will be allowed, and that I am just fine with a back off or even ejection from property if discreet and polite. I'll play another game, or go somewhere else, and I am fine with that." Actually, the best AP's take this very approach, get into less trouble, and fly under the radar longer.

Quote: jopke

If you don't see a need for distinguishing between legal and illegal activity, even amongst the plays that fall under "against house rules" then I don't see any value in participating in a discussion with you, since we won't be discussing the same topic. I really don't care about bet capping or players who mark cards because there is no grey area there and it isn't worth talking about.

You see, I had and I do distinguish between legal and illegal, all under the umbrella of disallowed play. "Legal and disallowed play" incurs a back off or 86 with no arrest or dention, and illegal may involve a detention for the police to arrive. These are quite different, and I do make this distinction.

Quote: RS

Also, I don't think I've seen anything on apheat.net that I would consider illegal play or that Eliot would consider illegal. Either way, it is obvious to anyone objectively ready posts from APs that the distinction is clear and nobody is advocating breaking the law.

Great. MathExtremist posted the legality on hole carding illegality via some Nevada regs a short while ago on hole carding, which is a hot topic at AP heat:

Quote: MathExtremist

But while we're at it, let's talk about hole carding. I was under the impression that hole carding was in the same legal bucket as card counting -- casinos don't like it but it's not illegal. However, can someone please explain to me how hole carding is legal (in Nevada) given the following language?

Quote: NRS 465.070  Fraudulent acts.

  It is unlawful for any person:
2.  To place, increase or decrease a bet or to determine the course of play after acquiring knowledge, not available to all players, of the outcome of the game or any event that affects the outcome of the game or which is the subject of the bet or to aid anyone in acquiring such knowledge for the purpose of placing, increasing or decreasing a bet or determining the course of play contingent upon that event or outcome.

APHEAT discusses hole-carding, illegal according to above NV regs. (You might be thinking of dealer flashing.)
Also glad to hear about "no grey area" in taking advantage of marked cards.

It is helpful to acknowledge that the casino has the right to back off people on legal game-play transgressions, as legal itself.

Ap heat also discusses the casino as enemy Ap heat the casino as enemy.

Quote: Paigowdan

.....

Also glad to hear about "no grey area" in taking advantage of marked cards.

It is helpful to acknowledge that the casino has the right to back off people on legal game-play transgressions, as legal itself.

And acknowledge that a good way for an AP to handle it is accept a back off graciously as an allowable casino response, and go somewhere else to try again.

"taking advantage of marked cards" is VERY different from "marking cards", which is what jopke and others were talking about, if I'm following their intent correctly. If cards become marked (going back full circle to the start of the conversation) through normal wear, casino maintenance, or dealer procedure, and a player observes this to his advantage, is not cause for the casino to punish the player. If a player is daubing, scoring, nicking, bending, or otherwise defacing particular cards in order to gain an advantage, that's illegal and punishable.

These two things cannot be lumped together.

It is perfectly LEGAL (legal does not mean that it is ethical or moral) to exploit one's weakness as long as you don't ILLEGALLY create the weakness environment that you are trying to exploit.

Quote: beachbumbabs

"taking advantage of marked cards" is VERY different from "marking cards", which is what jopke and others were talking about, if I'm following their intent correctly. If cards become marked (going back full circle to the start of the conversation) through normal wear, casino maintenance, or dealer procedure, and a player observes this to his advantage, is not cause for the casino to punish the player. If a player is daubing, scoring, nicking, bending, or otherwise defacing particular cards in order to gain an advantage, that's illegal and punishable.

These two things cannot be lumped together.

It may matter how the card were marked, be it by the casino or by the player, or by accident or deliberately, but the Nevada Regs simply say the following, as MathExtremist pointed out:

Quote: NRS 465.070  Fraudulent acts.

  It is unlawful for any person:
2.  To place, increase or decrease a bet or to determine the course of play after acquiring knowledge, not available to all players, of the outcome of the game or any event that affects the outcome of the game or which is the subject of the bet or to aid anyone in acquiring such knowledge for the purpose of placing, increasing or decreasing a bet or determining the course of play contingent upon that event or outcome.

This implies using marked cards also, with no requirement on who marked the cards or how they got marked.

In other words, the regs do not say "but it is okay if the beneficiary of the marked cards benefits - on condition that he hadn't marked the cards himself." Where is that seen or described?

It pretty much says: [acquiring improper knowledge on] "any event that affects the outcome of the game." This may happen through machine failure, and deliberately allowed for advantage. Card are supposed to be taken out of play to prevent this scenario; to leave it in and take advantage of it might be an issue. Now, in defense of the player, dealer flashing is distinct from player hole-carding as to who committed the game fault action, or if it were deliberate or not.



.

The law is too vague.One could argue that the player sitting in the last seat at a bj table has information not available to all players,as he gets to see more cards before he plays his hand.

Quote: Paigowdan

It may matter how the card were marked, be it by the casino or by the player, or by accident or deliberately, but the Nevada Regs simply say the following, as MathExtremist pointed out:

Quote: NRS 465.070  Fraudulent acts.

  It is unlawful for any person:
2.  To place, increase or decrease a bet or to determine the course of play after acquiring knowledge, not available to all players, of the outcome of the game or any event that affects the outcome of the game or which is the subject of the bet or to aid anyone in acquiring such knowledge for the purpose of placing, increasing or decreasing a bet or determining the course of play contingent upon that event or outcome. Now, in defense of the player, dealer flashing is distinct from player hole-carding as to who committed the game fault action, or if it were deliberate or not.


This implies using marked cards also, with no requirement on who marked the cards or how they got marked.

In other words, the regs do not say "but it is okay if the beneficiary of the marked cards benefits - on condition that he hadn't marked the cards himself." Where is that seen or described?

It pretty much says: [acquiring improper knowledge on] "any event that affects the outcome of the game." This may happen through machine failure, and deliberately allowed for advantage. Card are supposed to be taken out of play to prevent this scenario; to leave it in and take advantage of it might be an issue.


.

The way the rule is written or at least one can interpret that card counting is unlawful.

Let's focus on the marked card: The marked card is available to ALL players, and it can give the conscious player(s) an advantage, but it does not singlehandedly affects the outcome of the game. Collectively, all cards and players' decision affect the outcome of the game.

Based on my interpretation of NRS 465.070, it is my opinion that it is perfectly LEGAL (legal does not mean that it is ethical or moral) to exploit one's weakness as long as you don't ILLEGALLY create the weakness environment that you are trying to exploit.

Quote: Paigowdan

It may matter how the card were marked, be it by the casino or by the player, or by accident or deliberately, but the Nevada Regs simply say the following, as MathExtremist pointed out:

...

Quote: 777

The way the rule is written or at least one can interpret that card counting is unlawful.

I would wholeheartedly say that we can consider that the legal convention is that card counting is legal. Let me add not more than that, like it is good or wholesome and that it should be always be allowed. Just Legal...

Quote: 777

Let's focus on the marked card: The marked card is available to ALL players, and it can give the conscious player(s) an advantage, but it does not singlehandedly affects the outcome of the game. Collectively, all cards and players' decision affect the outcome of the game.

It doesn't say available. It said acquirable, requiring that you have prior knowledge of "if and how the cards are marked." A marked deck is available to all at the table, but the actors have to know that they are marked and how they are marked. This is arguably not acquirable unless you're in on it, knowing that they're marked and then knowing how the marks work. Things are best hidden in plain sight if you're not in on it.

Quote: 777

Based on my interpretation of NRS 465.070, it is my opinion that it is perfectly LEGAL (legal does not mean that it is ethical or moral) to exploit one's weakness as long as you don't ILLEGALLY create the weakness environment that you are trying to exploit.

I don't think it says that. If this were true, then it would be legal to just purchase a deck of marked cards from a contact who has them, and slip them into play.
I don't think this is legal. You can't say, "Well, I didn't mark them, Jimmy the Ax did...." then deny how they got into play. I also don't think this discounts the actions of others: if you play at a table where it's going on, and got tipped off or figured it out, you wouldn't be home free, or if they somehow got mysteriously marked. I think the regs basically imply "you cannot use cards that are marked to your advantage on live money games."

Dan,

I just read this entire thread and have a few questions for you about terminology that you use. Can you please define for me as specifically as possible:

House Rules-

Disallowed Play -

My follow up questions to these are:
Where can I find this in the casino?

Do they vary from house to house?

Do you feel they should be posted for transparency purposes so the patron knows exactly what they are signing up for?

Quote: SlackJawYokel

Dan,

I just read this entire thread and have a few questions for you about terminology that you use. Can you please define for me as specifically as possible:

House Rules-

Disallowed Play -

My follow up questions to these are:
Where can I find this in the casino?

Do they vary from house to house?

Do you feel they should be posted for transparency purposes so the patron knows exactly what they are signing up for?

Sure.
1. House Rules - these are property rules of behavior on the property or for the business, covering such areas a customer behavior ( handling excessive drunk patrons/alcohol awareness, which as mentioned may not always be followed), along with game play issues (handling card counting/counters, dice sliding on craps, etc.) dealer behavior (dealers may not patronize the sports book on break in uniform, or have relative stay at the property's hotel; dealers may not play table games at their own property but at sister properties, but may play slots if off-duty and not in uniform at any property, etc.). These things are handled with Internal documents called "Internal Controls," which customers may not peruse on demand; they are operational guidelines for internal use. More on this below.

2. Disallowed play This may include card counting, and certainly marked cards, capping and pinching bets, sliding dice on craps, late betting on Roulette, and are in dealer procedures and in the Internal Control documents. The Dealer's procedure guidebook has details on Shuffles (single-deck, double-deck, six-deck, CSM card re-load procedures, etc.) as well as house ways to learn, actually, details on all game procedures. The guidelines on card counting is floor supervision, surveillance and above, and handled by them unless a dealer reports.
The disallowed play is at least a back off or flat-betting, etc., with the exception of detention guidelines for criminal acts, which all floormen and above and guards learn and must follow at the directions of managers and above.

3. they (internal rules) may vary from house to house, but generally not that much within an operator's umbrella. That facilitates inter-property transfers and corporate-level guideline consistency.

4. Where can I find this in a casino? In the surveillance room, in the table games shift office, in the slot manager's office, in human resources, and for use by corporate managers and approval personnel only.

5. Do you feel they should be posted for transparency purposes so the patron knows exactly what they are signing up for?
No. It's none of the external general public's business. Besides, your friendly neighborhood floorman will notify you of any issue, should there be an issue. Really, if you're using camouflage plays, wearing disguises, then it's clear you too know of disallowed play if detected, otherwise they'd be need or use of such ploys.
They're privileged Internal Documents for corporate use only. It would jeopardize game protection to publicly post them. For example, information on the shuffle techniques and the like would aid shuffle-trackers if available and studied. Why would they allow this? they're under no obligation to do so, and would not disseminate it. Can you walk into a great restaurant and demand their recipes, saying "My brother-in-law also has an Italian restaurant, and I demand you reveal your fantastic recipe for pasta fagioli, so he can compete with you and hurt your business." Riiiiight. Wow, the entitlement.....

The day that casinos put little placards on the tables saying "Patrons, please do not try to keep track of how many aces and tens are left in the shoe and use that information to either bet more or change how you play. We will ban you from playing if you do this." is the day I will consider card counting to be "disallowed play" and not do it in that casino because they clearly stated that it is not allowed. Until that day, it's none of the casino business as to how I choose to play their game.

Quote: sabre

The day that casinos put little placards on the tables saying "Patrons, please do not try to keep track of how many aces and tens are left in the shoe and use that information to either bet more or change how you play. We will ban you from playing if you do this." is the day I will consider card counting to be "disallowed play" and not do it in that casino because they clearly stated that it is not allowed. Until that day, it's none of the casino business as to how I choose to play their game.

This is malarkey. If being backed off or 86-ed doesn't tell you this, nothing will. We know this.

Just tells me they're poor losers.

Quote: Paigowdan

Lets say there is someone who actually doesn't realize it's supposedly against the house rules.

I'm sure it's happened.

Quote: AxelWolf

Lets say there is someone who actually doesn't realize it's supposedly against the house rules.

I'm sure it's happened.

I’m pretty sure it hasn’t. And this doesn't matter.
This is impossible to believe. Camouflage, cover plays, disguises, ID handling, and the practice’s unwelcome status are impossible to avoid at every stage of a counter’s education, no less real casino work. If you’ve learned to count, you’ve learned at least as well that it is not a casino-friendly practice to partake in, its welcome status. It strains credibility to claim otherwise. In any case, it matters little of it happened or not, that a competent counter had no idea that card counting isn't casino-endorsed. This is because a back off doesn’t depend on what an AP believes or thinks, it matters what a suit thinks, and checks with surveillance on it. The suit makes the call.

Quote: Paigowdan

Quote: Paigowdan

It may matter how the card were marked, be it by the casino or by the player, or by accident or deliberately, but the Nevada Regs simply say the following, as MathExtremist pointed out:

...

I would wholeheartedly say that we can consider that the legal convention is that card counting is legal. Let me add not more than that, like it is good or wholesome and that it should be always be allowed. Just Legal...


It doesn't say available. It said acquirable, requiring that you have prior knowledge of "if and how the cards are marked." A marked deck is available to all at the table, but the actors have to know that they are marked and how they are marked. This is arguably not acquirable unless you're in on it, knowing that they're marked and then knowing how the marks work. Things are best hidden in plain sight if you're not in on it.


I don't think it says that. If this were true, then it would be legal to just purchase a deck of marked cards from a contact who has them, and slip them into play.
I don't think this is legal. You can't say, "Well, I didn't mark them, Jimmy the Ax did...." then deny how they got into play. I also don't think this discounts the actions of others: if you play at a table where it's going on, and got tipped off or figured it out, you wouldn't be home free, or if they somehow got mysteriously marked. I think the regs basically imply "you cannot use cards that are marked to your advantage on live money games."

The law is not clearly black and white and is subjected to various interpretations. Your interpretation of NRS 465.070 rule is as good as mine or any others (after over 200 years the U.S. Constitution is still a hot topic of debates and is being interpreted/MIS-interpreted by everyone including the 9 supreme beings).

Collusion or cooperation in an illegal activity, or accessory to a crime is illegal. Perhaps there is another Nevada status that broadly covers the topic of collusion in all areas and not just specific to casino environment. If one simply takes advantage of a situation that he/she did not illegally create (collusion is an illegal activity), then I see nothing illegally about it from the common sense perspective and from my interpretation of NRS 465.070 rule. The house has an OVERWHELMING edge in all games, so it is perfectly normal for the consumer to exploit and take advantage of all available opportunities as long as it is done within the legal framework.

As I stated before, what is legal does not necessarily mean that it is ethical or moral, and this applies to both the consumer and the business entity. The business entity is in the business of generating profit (creating job is just the afterthought, but making money is the MAIN objective), and can establish any house rules within the legal framework. Take card counting as an example (I too believe that card counting is legal and there should be a law to allowing card counting). Prohibiting card counting is allowed and is legal. But does it mean that such business practice is ethical or moral?

Quote: Paigowdan

I’m pretty sure it hasn’t. And this doesn't matter.
This is impossible to believe. Camouflage, cover plays, disguises, ID handling, and the practice’s unwelcome status are impossible to avoid at every stage of a counter’s education, no less real casino work. If you’ve learned to count, you’ve learned at least as well that it is not a casino-friendly practice to partake in, its welcome status. It strains credibility to claim otherwise. In any case, it matters little of it happened or not, that a competent counter had no idea that card counting isn't casino-endorsed. This is because a back off doesn’t depend on what an AP believes or thinks, it matters what a suit thinks, and checks with surveillance on it. The suit makes the call.

What if there was a real life rain man who had no concept of what the casino rules were?

Maybe the casino just give him a beating.

I'm surprised they haven't issued security tasers yet. Just imagine the lawsuits.

The rules should be posted. The fact is they want counters, they just don't want good ones.

Counting isn't against the rules. Being good at it just pisses them off.

They will let you count an "uncountable" game. So the casinos either don't have a rule about counting or they are scumbags who change the rules in the middle of the game, it's biased to different people. Kinda like welshing.

Quote: AxelWolf

What if there was a real life rain man who had no concept of what the casino rules were?

Maybe the casino just give him a beating.

I'm surprised they haven't issued security tasers yet. Just imagine the lawsuits.

The rules should be posted. The fact is they want counters, they just don't want good ones.

Counting isn't against the rules. Being good at it just pisses them off.

They will let you count an "uncountable" game. So the casinos either don't have a rule about counting or they are scumbags who change the rules in the middle of the game, it's biased to different people. Kinda like welshing.

Card counting is ALLOWED only when one is losing 9,999 consecutive hands. Yes, with bad luck, even extremely good card counter can lose 9,999 consecutive hands. But card counting is DISALLOWED ONLY when the casino is threatened by its customer’s continuous winning.

All casinos have a common rule, and it is called the “bottom line” rule. And the bottom line is their profits. If their bottom line is greatly eroded by a player, then he/she will be ejected, and conversely, he/she is more than welcome to stay when their bottom line is greatly enhanced. And all this is legal, but does such business practice ethical and moral?

PGD,

Let's say a dealer is flashing the HC (not flashing on purpose, just poor form), and ALL PLAYERS at the table are able to view the hole-card. Illegal? What if I'm playing by myself and I am the only player and I can see the HC...this is legal then, right?

What if you inadvertently see the HC? Are you required to play how you normally would without knowing the HC? Is it illegal to know what the HC is, but not deviate your strategy? What if it was a quick-flash and I don't know for certain what the card is, but I make a guess at what the card is. I don't know what the card is -- I'm guessing at what the HC is. Surely, guessing what the HC is isn't illegal, is it?

Let's say I'm playing a single deck (pitch, face down) game. I'm playing 2 hands and someone else is playing 2 hands. Dealer shows an Ace up on the first hand, "Insurance anyone? Insurance open..." I look at my first two cards, I see two tens. I look at my next hand, and two more tens. I decline insurance. The guy next to me looks at his cards, he sees a 2,8 and A,6. I can't see his cards and he can't see mine. He thinks to himself, "I've seen 5 non-face card valued cards, with 47 cards remaining and 16 tens remaining, insurance is a good bet." And he places insurance. I, on the other hand, think to myself, "I've seen 1 non-ten valued card and 4 ten-valued cards, with 47 cards remaining and only 12 tens remaining in the deck, insurance is a poor bet." The guy next to me makes an insurance wager, and I properly do not make an insurance wager. Did I commit a crime because I used information he doesn't have? Did he do something illegal because he used information not available to me?

Let's say I'm playing Pai Gow Poker. In most casinos I've played PGP in (very rarely), they don't allow the players to show cards to other players (I suppose a house rule?). This is also common in other carnival games, like Mississippi Stud. So, I the player, am forced to play the game using information not available to other players. Am I breaking the law? Surely, I'd have to show my cards to other players so that I'm not breaking the law....but wait -- that's against house rules! Bit of a conundrum, isn't it? What if I'm playing with my friend and the house permits you to show your cards to others. He shows me his cards and I show him mine, but we don't show our cards to others at the table. Is this illegal? If I show my cards to another player, should I then be forced to show my cards to all players? Hell, shouldn't I and everyone else be forced to show our cards to everyone else so that we are all using the same information?


And BTW, as far as I know, card-counting is permitted in all casinos. I've never heard "we don't allow card counters here". Actually, (at Barona), I've heard on several accounts (dealers + floor people), that they actually ENCOURAGED card counters to play there. But no casino, ever, have I heard them say they don't allow players to count cards. I don't know WTF people are doing writing sh*t down at the bacarrat tables, but, seems to me, they're OK with players keeping track of whatever they're keeping track of.

Card counting is permitted in casinos: 1
Card counting not permitted in casinos: 0


Let's say I sit down at the juicy BJ game, SD, 3:2, deep pen, S17, great rules, etc. and I, naturally, start my card counting. Maybe I even announce it to the pit boss, "I'm a card counter and will count right now." Not a while later, I get backed off. Ok. Let's say same scenario, but it happens at the 6:5 CSM, H17, NDAS, noRSA, D10...etc, awful game. I announce to the pit boss, "I'm a card counter and will count right now." Will I get kicked out for breaking the house rules?

Why aren't the rules POSTED? Surely, the patrons don't need to know about internal who-ja-ma-whats, like shuffle procedure, what to do when a patron is too drunk, how to back off a player, reporting requirements, how to handle jackpots, etc. But wouldn't it make sense that if there are HOUSE RULES that the patrons should be permitted to know what is accepted and what is not accepted?

Quote: Paigowdan

Sure.
1. House Rules - these are property rules of behavior on the property or for the business, covering such areas a customer behavior ( handling excessive drunk patrons/alcohol awareness, which as mentioned may not always be followed), along with game play issues (handling card counting/counters, dice sliding on craps, etc.) dealer behavior (dealers may not patronize the sports book on break in uniform, or have relative stay at the property's hotel; dealers may not play table games at their own property but at sister properties, but may play slots if off-duty and not in uniform at any property, etc.). These things are handled with Internal documents called "Internal Controls," which customers may not peruse on demand; they are operational guidelines for internal use. More on this below.

2. Disallowed play This may include card counting, and certainly marked cards, capping and pinching bets, sliding dice on craps, late betting on Roulette, and are in dealer procedures and in the Internal Control documents. The Dealer's procedure guidebook has details on Shuffles (single-deck, double-deck, six-deck, CSM card re-load procedures, etc.) as well as house ways to learn, actually, details on all game procedures. The guidelines on card counting is floor supervision, surveillance and above, and handled by them unless a dealer reports.
The disallowed play is at least a back off or flat-betting, etc., with the exception of detention guidelines for criminal acts, which all floormen and above and guards learn and must follow at the directions of managers and above.

3. they (internal rules) may vary from house to house, but generally not that much within an operator's umbrella. That facilitates inter-property transfers and corporate-level guideline consistency.

4. Where can I find this in a casino? In the surveillance room, in the table games shift office, in the slot manager's office, in human resources, and for use by corporate managers and approval personnel only.

5. Do you feel they should be posted for transparency purposes so the patron knows exactly what they are signing up for?
No. It's none of the external general public's business. Besides, your friendly neighborhood floorman will notify you of any issue, should there be an issue. Really, if you're using camouflage plays, wearing disguises, then it's clear you too know of disallowed play if detected, otherwise they'd be need or use of such ploys.
They're privileged Internal Documents for corporate use only. It would jeopardize game protection to publicly post them. For example, information on the shuffle techniques and the like would aid shuffle-trackers if available and studied. Why would they allow this? they're under no obligation to do so, and would not disseminate it. Can you walk into a great restaurant and demand their recipes, saying "My brother-in-law also has an Italian restaurant, and I demand you reveal your fantastic recipe for pasta fagioli, so he can compete with you and hurt your business." Riiiiight. Wow, the entitlement.....

Thanks for the clarification.

We feel much differently about this and I know it is not really worth arguing. By the way I am a performance auditor so I know all about "internal controls". The point being internal controls are used to control actions inside a company and guides policy. You alluded to this in your definition above, not once did you mention patrons need to follow these internal controls, policies, or house rules. Why? because they are not held to the same standards and not known or agreed to by all patrons.

The only point that I take exception to is that a casino does not welcome a counter. They will be more then happy to accommodate a counter if he is not playing a winning game. In fact I could argue that they would encourage play from this person. Do you agree with this? If counting is disallowed play per the internal control manual he should be stopped no matter if winning or losing as soon as identified. Does this happen? I would imagine that it is not likely for a few reasons.(Honestly do not know) First it does not effect revenue in fact it adds to the bottom line at the end of the day. Secondly this person is not viewed as a threat by management. One other random thought about this if the company sticks to the internal policy once you are backed off for counting you should never be allowed to play again because it is against house rules. Everybody on this forum knows that this does not happen, how many times have we read about multiple backoffs.

I am not wanting to argue with you about this, I am just trying to understand your perspective. I appreciate your responses.

Quote: AxelWolf

What if there was a real life rain man who had no concept of what the casino rules were?

He would be given a Buffet comp and be told "we're so proud of you because you are too good for us." Make him feel good about it.

Quote: AxelWolf

Maybe the casino just give him a beating.

Maybe the casino won't. And if and since they won't, please don't claim that they will, just to manufacture and feed a "casinos are evil" list of the crimes. The reality is he'll just won't be allowed to play, which is neither a player's right nor a casino crime.

Quote: AxelWolf

I'm surprised they haven't issued security tasers yet. Just imagine the lawsuits.

Do you really want to see this, or wish that this would be true, to delight in a cat-n-mouse knockdown rumble between the AP's and the casino businesses like picking a side at a boxing match or watching the hunger games? I'm not thinking about casino guards with Tasers.
I'm not seeing this scenario. I'm imagining a world in which AP players who are deep into this AP mindset and realm wake up one day and say, "I'm going to open a business, it'll be a Thai restaurant, and with all the focus and effort I can muster, it'll be four-star Zagat rated, and in the concourse at the Wynn!
Any visions of casino guards as Robocops firing tasers at AP players as they run to Bob Nersesian for lawsuits is not something that I'm imagining.
Casinos are aware that people are looking to claim against them, people see dollar signs, their legal departments are filled with claims of "I broke my ankle on your escalator" too. If it's legit, fine, but a lot aren't.

Quote: AW

The rules should be posted. The fact is they want counters, they just don't want good ones.

They are posted. It's posted as "Blackjacks now pay 6:5 [because of all the AP play losses]."

Quote: RS

Counting isn't against the rules. Being good at it just pisses them off.

Not against NV regs, but against the house rules, yes it is, so saying "we're just beating them by their own rules" is codswallop. Casinos can count themselves via preferential shuffling, but if they did that, THEY'D be counting, too, and you won't allow them to count when you yourself wish too, either.

Quote: RS

They will let you count an "uncountable" game. So the casinos either don't have a rule about counting or they are scumbags who change the rules in the middle of the game, it's biased to different people. Kinda like welshing.

They will let you count an uncountable game as irrelevant to the game's outcome. In fact, they show the history on Roulette on a display board, basically saying "okay, count THAT." The rules vary as they are game specific. Different games have different rules.

6:5 has absolutely nothing to do with AP losses, period!! It's nothing more than corporate greed. Just look at how VP tables are getting worse and worse also. That said, if the suckers will play it, might as well offer it. I would!

Quote: RS

PGD,

Let's say a dealer is flashing the HC (not flashing on purpose, just poor form), and ALL PLAYERS at the table are able to view the hole-card. Illegal? What if I'm playing by myself and I am the only player and I can see the HC...this is legal then, right?

Perhaps yes. A distinction is defined between dealer flashing (as a dealer action to include incompetency) and player hole-carding (player takes action, is trying to effect that). I was once playing 3CP and I had a QJ7 to play, and the dealer banged her arm on the shuffle machine corner and flashed a K bottom card. I said to me self, "Dang, I saw it" and I still played the hand because I would have by Mike's 3CP strategy of Q-6-4. I was watching me. I would have felt creepy if I had folded. I told the dealer, don't show your hole cards.

Once when I was dealing 3CP, we switched to keeping the dealer's hand in the shuffler. A player buys in and quickly protested this, saying "aren't you going to draw your hand?" I said, "I will, after all players Play or Fold." He asked, "why is that?" [ahem...] I said to the guy perched in the CORNER seat, "It is to prevent hole-carding.....y'know, there are a few low-lives who'll try to do that crap." [wink]. This guy smiles and laughs, tapping the tables, and colors up to go to the 3:2 shoe game. Must have been reading AP heat.

Quote: RS

What if you inadvertently see the HC? Are you required to play how you normally would without knowing the HC? Is it illegal to know what the HC is, but not deviate your strategy? What if it was a quick-flash and I don't know for certain what the card is, but I make a guess at what the card is. I don't know what the card is -- I'm guessing at what the HC is. Surely, guessing what the HC is isn't illegal, is it?

Guess all you want, you're gambling, that's okay. Play normally, you decide your play, as do I (see above).

Quote: RS

Let's say I'm playing a single deck (pitch, face down) game. I'm playing 2 hands and someone else is playing 2 hands. Dealer shows an Ace up on the first hand, "Insurance anyone? Insurance open..." I look at my first two cards, I see two tens. I look at my next hand, and two more tens. I decline insurance. The guy next to me looks at his cards, he sees a 2,8 and A,6. I can't see his cards and he can't see mine. He thinks to himself, "I've seen 5 non-face card valued cards, with 47 cards remaining and 16 tens remaining, insurance is a good bet." And he places insurance. I, on the other hand, think to myself, "I've seen 1 non-ten valued card and 4 ten-valued cards, with 47 cards remaining and only 12 tens remaining in the deck, insurance is a poor bet." The guy next to me makes an insurance wager, and I properly do not make an insurance wager. Did I commit a crime because I used information he doesn't have? Did he do something illegal because he used information not available to me?

No, that's okay, the pitch game rules state (even in the dealer's manual!) that players are allowed to look at both hands if playing two hands when insurance bets are called to the players. You get a Papal dispensation here. Go forward and sin no more, my son. ;)

Quote: RS

Let's say I'm playing Pai Gow Poker. In most casinos I've played PGP in (very rarely), they don't allow the players to show cards to other players (I suppose a house rule?). This is also common in other carnival games, like Mississippi Stud. So, I the player, am forced to play the game using information not available to other players. Am I breaking the law? Surely, I'd have to show my cards to other players so that I'm not breaking the law....but wait -- that's against house rules! Bit of a conundrum, isn't it? What if I'm playing with my friend and the house permits you to show your cards to others. He shows me his cards and I show him mine, but we don't show our cards to others at the table. Is this illegal? If I show my cards to another player, should I then be forced to show my cards to all players? Hell, shouldn't I and everyone else be forced to show our cards to everyone else so that we are all using the same information?

You know, when I driving and highway traffic is moving 70mph, I stay with the flow of traffic for safety. Am I technically breaking the law? yes. Do we get tickets? No. Do I worry about it? No, do you?
On PGP games I dealt and play, showing cards and asking for advice is very common. If it's okay with the floor, it's okay. Like I say, go with the flow of traffic, CHiPs will apprise you of any bottleneck.

Quote: RS

And BTW, as far as I know, card-counting is permitted in all casinos. I've never heard "we don't allow card counters here". Actually, (at Barona), I've heard on several accounts (dealers + floor people), that they actually ENCOURAGED card counters to play there. But no casino, ever, have I heard them say they don't allow players to count cards. I don't know WTF people are doing writing sh*t down at the bacarrat tables, but, seems to me, they're OK with players keeping track of whatever they're keeping track of.

Different casinos differ. Barona is a special case. You're kind of trapped there up on a hill, and they pride themselves on their extreme looseness. They do figure you're stuck there until you finally lose, and they sweat NOTHING, they're the anti-sweaters. Bless 'em. But any back off or 86-ing is a clear no go, as is 6:5 a message, and Baccarat has no real key cards to count. Again, different games, different rules. For the record, I personally know someone who is barred at the Barona, and it was handled very quietly in a Win-Win kind of way.

Quote: Rs

Card counting is permitted in casinos: 1
Card counting not permitted in casinos: 0

As is back-offs and 86-ing. I could say:
Back offs allow: 1
Back off not allowed 0.

Quote: RS

Let's say I sit down at the juicy BJ game, SD, 3:2, deep pen, S17, great rules, etc. and I, naturally, start my card counting. Maybe I even announce it to the pit boss, "I'm a card counter and will count right now." Not a while later, I get backed off. Ok. Let's say same scenario, but it happens at the 6:5 CSM, H17, NDAS, noRSA, D10...etc, awful game. I announce to the pit boss, "I'm a card counter and will count right now." Will I get kicked out for breaking the house rules?

If they like your play, no. If they don't, yes.

Quote: RS

Why aren't the rules POSTED? Surely, the patrons don't need to know about internal who-ja-ma-whats, like shuffle procedure, what to do when a patron is too drunk, how to back off a player, reporting requirements, how to handle jackpots, etc. But wouldn't it make sense that if there are HOUSE RULES that the patrons should be permitted to know what is accepted and what is not accepted?

Since gambling (outside of NJ) requires mutual consent, A House can back off play, just as any player can walk away from a table, so it isn't necessary.
Rules aren't posted because they're off-putting, and will openly admit that the game of BJ has vulnerabilities. Then you'll have the mass conversion of ploppies, learning with index cards, practicing the Illustrious-18 and what have you. You'll have a million people yapping "Why can't I DO THIS HERE! WHERE IS IT WRITTEN THAT....Buddy, here's a comp, go to the Buffet, get outta here....Then we will have a form of Blackjack called Charlie-21, where all Blackjacks pay even money, but where players instantly win on 5 or more card Charlies, providing a very count-neutral and uncountable game that hits and plays like blackjack, a much lower house edge than 6:5 [I have the GLI report], where the plus-side bonuses on Blackjacks are transferred to the negative-side Charlies, neutralizing the game with essentially the same low house edge of regular 3:2 BJ. And the ploppies won't notice, they'll think they will win more hands more often, with a fraction of the house edge of 6:5 - and they'll be right. Imagine that scenario. Scared, eh? We already have 6:5, the writing is on the wall. Now, my contention is that if Blackjack had started out like that by serendipity instead of a slight mis-design (who thought of mathematical game protection in 1908?), the world would have missed out on the delightful AP battles that keeps our blood flowing, - just a great loss.

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

6:5 has absolutely nothing to do with AP losses, period!! It's nothing more than corporate greed. Just look at how VP tables are getting worse and worse also. That said, if the suckers will play it, might as well offer it. I would!

Sure, 6:5 does relate to card counters. Is it much harder to count? Yes. That was the point.
All the suits say "we have to implement this punitive change just to deal with #$%#@ card counters. They caused it. We would have never done it if it weren't for them. A crying shame."

Quote: Paigowdan

Sure, 6:5 does relate to card counters. Is it much harder to count? Yes. That was the point.
All the suits say "we have to implement this punitive change just to deal with #$%#@ card counters. They caused it. We would have never done it if it weren't for them. A crying shame."

Bull$h!t and you know it. For every 1 competent card counter, there are 100,000 horribly bad civilians.

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

Bull$h!t and you know it. For every 1 competent card counter, there are 100,000 horribly bad civilians.

All it takes is a few teams and the casino is toast. MIT proved that out. 6:5 really helps game protection, it was put in for game protection.
Each side is simply responding to the conditions that exist.

PGD, you didn't answer my question regarding the single deck blackjack. I'm looking at my 4 cards and using those 4 cards of information that the other player isn't using, since he can't see my cards. This, to you, should be breaking the law, according to the statute posted earlier in this thread.

I don't care about "go with the flow, break the law as long as everyone else is". Are you recommending someone break the law?

Quote: RS

PGD, you didn't answer my question regarding the single deck blackjack. I'm looking at my 4 cards and using those 4 cards of information that the other player isn't using, since he can't see my cards. This, to you, should be breaking the law, according to the statute posted earlier in this thread.

I don't care about "go with the flow, break the law as long as everyone else is". Are you recommending someone break the law?

No, not the case.
As I've stated, You may look at both of your hands on all pitch games before making a decision when Insurance is called, and as codified allowable in written procedures. I stated this, even going so far as to call it a Papal dispensation level exception so as to be notable and recalled.

And as for breaking the laws, if you get a ticket for speeding, you can't complain about it if you were. But you should also move at the speed of highway traffic conditions also.

Quote: Paigowdan

No, not the case.
As I've stated, You may look at both of your hands on all pitch games before making a decision when Insurance is called, and as codified allowable in written procedures. I stated this, even going so far as to call it a Papal dispensation level exception so as to be notable and recalled.

That's not what I'm referring to.

I'm referring to the fact I can see cards the other player cannot see!

Quote: RS

Quote: Paigowdan

No, not the case.
As I've stated, You may look at both of your hands on all pitch games before making a decision when Insurance is called, and as codified allowable in written procedures. I stated this, even going so far as to call it a Papal dispensation level exception so as to be notable and recalled.

That's not what I'm referring to.

I'm referring to the fact I can see cards the other player cannot see!

Then play on a shoe game where the cards are dealt face up, if that bothers you. In blackjack pitch games, you see only your own cards. In shoe games, all player cards are face up. This is how it works, and no laws are broken here. Play the game you wish to play.

Quote: Paigowdan

Quote: RS

Quote: Paigowdan

No, not the case.
As I've stated, You may look at both of your hands on all pitch games before making a decision when Insurance is called, and as codified allowable in written procedures. I stated this, even going so far as to call it a Papal dispensation level exception so as to be notable and recalled.

That's not what I'm referring to.

I'm referring to the fact I can see cards the other player cannot see!

Then play on a shoe game where the cards are dealt face up, if that bothers you.

You sure like to pick both sides of the fence "but the law says this and that's illegal.....oh it that! yeah if it bothers you go play something else".

It doesn't bother me. What does the law say about this situation though? Don't you think if the law says you can't use info that's not available to all players, the casino wouldn't allow such a situation to occur? On the contrary, they're forcing players to use information not available to all players.

Or, maybe the "use of information not available to all players" law is a bunch of sh*t.

But you can't have both sides of the coin. So which is it -- this is a legitimate law, and the casinos should be charged for forcing the players to break the law....or the law is bogus and it's a bunch of nonsense? Or are you still in the middle ground, where the law sometimes applies and sometimes doesn't?

Quote: RS

Quote: Paigowdan

Quote: RS

Quote: Paigowdan

No, not the case.
As I've stated, You may look at both of your hands on all pitch games before making a decision when Insurance is called, and as codified allowable in written procedures. I stated this, even going so far as to call it a Papal dispensation level exception so as to be notable and recalled.

That's not what I'm referring to.

I'm referring to the fact I can see cards the other player cannot see!

Then play on a shoe game where the cards are dealt face up, if that bothers you.

You sure like to pick both sides of the fence "but the law says this and that's illegal.....oh it that! yeah if it bothers you go play something else".

It doesn't bother me. What does the law say about this situation though? Don't you think if the law says you can't use info that's not available to all players, the casino wouldn't allow such a situation to occur? On the contrary, they're forcing players to use information not available to all players.

Or, maybe the "use of information not available to all players" law is a bunch of sh*t.

But you can't have both sides of the coin. So which is it -- this is a legitimate law, and the casinos should be charged for forcing the players to break the law....or the law is bogus and it's a bunch of nonsense? Or are you still in the middle ground, where the law sometimes applies and sometimes doesn't?

If I'm not making an argument that pitch Blackjack games violate the law, then neither should you. Players conceal their hands in poker games as they do in pitch Blackjack games, and this information isn't supposed to be available to all players in these games, otherwise they'd be dealt face up.

In shoe games, the cards are suppose to be face up. The reg that says "use of information not available to all players" regards gleaning information on the cards that are not supposed to be seen, lest they improperly effect the course of play. In open card games, like shoe games, you may indeed look at the cards that are face up on the table, that's why it's dealt face up.

Like I said, select the game that you want to play, as the casino gives you choice and variety.

Quote: Paigowdan

If I'm not making an argument that pitch Blackjack games violate the law, then neither should you.

Wait...what?

Quote: Paigowdan

Players conceal their hands in poker games as they do in pitch Blackjack games, and this information isn't supposed to be available to all players in these games, otherwise they'd be dealt face up.

My point exactly.

We're making progress.
But be aware that I never thought pitch games or face up games as being a problem or illegal, one versus the other. I don't see one or the other being very different Blackjack except for style of play. Dealt them all, had never said or had seen a problem with either style. I have no preference between pitch style BJ and shoe style BJ. To say that I was implying that one is bad or illegal is simply not true, I never mentioned any issues with either style of play except to say play what you want to play. I quoted the Nevada Regs via MathExtremist's post. I think it basically says that concealed cards are to remain concealed until exposed, without improper attempts to glean information, and that face up cards are all right to be exposed. There's my interpretation of the NV regs, - not that I am a lawyer, - and that how I think the Nevada gaming regulations are generally interpreted.

Edit: I'm going to go play. Probably dice and Pai Gow, but maybe some double deck. I am going to flat bet myself, just play basic, see how I do.