Rumour about casino cheating on Shufflemaster games

Okay, I have no first-hand direct knowledge here, so I cannot assert that the following is true. But, this is what I have been told from a source:

I have been told that Shufflemaster has a variant of their automated shuffler machines that is marketed only to unregulated casinos -such as Indian-reservation casinos and perhaps certain foreign countries. These shuffler machines have a switch that changes the house edge in the game by a large amount - I heard it referred to as "Beast Mode." Reportedly, this feature is marketed to Indian casinos as an "anti-AP" feature. If the pit boss identifies a player as an Advantage Player, they flip the switch and the players will lose a disproportionate amount of the hands - until the AP leaves, when the shuffler machine is switched out of Beast Mode and back into normal mode.

Here are some specifics of what I was told:

In Mississippi Stud, the first three cards out of the shuffler machine are the three face-down common cards. In Beast Mode, these 3 cards will be unpaired and have an unusually high frequency of cards with low ranks. Players will still occasionally be dealt a pair and win (or push) on a hand, but on unpaired hands they are at a great disadvantage because the board keeps turning up 2's and 3's, etc.

In 4 Card Poker, the automated shuffler provides a series of 5-card packets. These 5-card packets are arranged on separate shelves in the automated shuffler. The cards are identified with image-ID software, and other software identfies the "Poker hand value" of each of the 5-card packets. The earliest packets out of the shuffler are the player hands, and the 6-card dealer hand is formed from the last two 5-card packets. When switched into Beast mode, the 5-card packets are arranged to come out of the machine this way: packets with the lowest poker hand value are selected to be first to emerge and the packets with the highest poker hand value tend to be the last to be dealt. Thus, the dealer wins and the players lose. A tell-tale is that the dealer's winning 4-card hand usually does not involve the face-up card -it usually is formed from four of the five face down cards that are part of a single five-card packet.

My source insisted that that Beast mode is only used (in the casino in question) to repel or 'back off' known or suspected Advantage Players. My source claimed this is completely legal - that the use of such machines breaks no regulations because Indian casinos are unregulated and because the Indian casinos in question never actually represent to the public that their games are fair or that cards are dealt without any prior knowledge of their content.

Again, I have no way of verifying that my source is reliable and that this account (or rumor) is true. If it is not true, I would appreciate it if a representative of Shufflemaster or the casino industry would clear the air on this subject.

Very Doubtful.
When the House Always has edge there is no real reason to cheat.
Anyone playing enough will run into that edge.
IMO its in the best interest of the house to keep the game honest.

That is your opinion only. The game protection industry (take, for example, Eliot Richardson) has preached that the house doesn't always have an edge against advantage players. And my source says that this is only done against a table with a known or suspected advantage player and that the action breaks no laws and violates no regulations.

If the game is honest, then the representatives of the Indian-casino industry should certainly be willing to state categorically to the public that the game is honest. Its in their best interest to say this, if it is true. But, to the best of my knowledge, they have never said it. And someone has told me the opposite is true. Again, I invite representatives of the industry who have authoritative knowledge on Indian reservation games to confirm or deny this account.

I suspected dem Injuns was cheating me!

Seriously, I hope to see some good discussion in your thread. Checkable facts are good.

There really were a couple times at BJ that seemed awfully far out on the edges of possible distributions of results, for extended periods. I've had a Pit suit come change one of the stacks of decks in the shuffle machine during my play. Which obviously gives him access to the shuffler physically, and I proceeded to lose my a$$ for hours then. I should have changed tables, Duh! But I have no facts. Someone recently mentioned a possibility of having too many 10s/faces in groups so that at least one of those groups should be beyond the deck penetration for BJ. But other than something like that, or starting with other than 'normal decks' i.e. 10's/faces/aces missing, I can't see how to manipulate the cards via the shuffler, at least for BJ. Too much weird play at table for shuffler to predict ;-)

Best of luck.

Quote: gordonm888

That is your opinion only. The game protection industry (take, for example, Eliot Richardson) has preached that the house doesn't always have an edge against advantage players. And my source says that this is only done against a table with a known or suspected advantage player and that the action breaks no laws and violates no regulations.

If the game is honest, then the representatives of the Indian-casino industry should certainly be willing to state categorically to the public that the game is honest. Its in their best interest to say this, if it is true. But, to the best of my knowledge, they have never said it. And someone has told me the opposite is true. Again, I invite representatives of the industry who have authoritative knowledge on Indian reservation games to confirm or deny this account.

Have you actually asked these questions of a representative of any tribal casino? If they denied your accusations, would you believe them?

And why is your source credible? What bona fides does he or she have?

Quote: gordonm888

Okay, I have no first-hand direct knowledge here, so I cannot assert that the following is true. But, this is what I have been told from a source:

I have been told that Shufflemaster has a variant of their automated shuffler machines that is marketed only to unregulated casinos -such as Indian-reservation casinos and perhaps certain foreign countries. These shuffler machines have a switch that changes the house edge in the game by a large amount - I heard it referred to as "Beast Mode." Reportedly, this feature is marketed to Indian casinos as an "anti-AP" feature. If the pit boss identifies a player as an Advantage Player, they flip the switch and the players will lose a disproportionate amount of the hands - until the AP leaves, when the shuffler machine is switched out of Beast Mode and back into normal mode.

Here are some specifics of what I was told:

In Mississippi Stud, the first three cards out of the shuffler machine are the three face-down common cards. In Beast Mode, these 3 cards will be unpaired and have an unusually high frequency of cards with low ranks. Players will still occasionally be dealt a pair and win (or push) on a hand, but on unpaired hands they are at a great disadvantage because the board keeps turning up 2's and 3's, etc.

In 4 Card Poker, the automated shuffler provides a series of 5-card packets. These 5-card packets are arranged on separate shelves in the automated shuffler. The cards are identified with image-ID software, and other software identfies the "Poker hand value" of each of the 5-card packets. The earliest packets out of the shuffler are the player hands, and the 6-card dealer hand is formed from the last two 5-card packets. When switched into Beast mode, the 5-card packets are arranged to come out of the machine this way: packets with the lowest poker hand value are selected to be first to emerge and the packets with the highest poker hand value tend to be the last to be dealt. Thus, the dealer wins and the players lose. A tell-tale is that the dealer's winning 4-card hand usually does not involve the face-up card -it usually is formed from four of the five face down cards that are part of a single five-card packet.

My source insisted that that Beast mode is only used (in the casino in question) to repel or 'back off' known or suspected Advantage Players. My source claimed this is completely legal - that the use of such machines breaks no regulations because Indian casinos are unregulated and because the Indian casinos in question never actually represent to the public that their games are fair or that cards are dealt without any prior knowledge of their content.

Again, I have no way of verifying that my source is reliable and that this account (or rumor) is true. If it is not true, I would appreciate it if a representative of Shufflemaster or the casino industry would clear the air on this subject.

I have first hand knowledge that not only are these accusations silly, they are not even possible. Indian casinos are not unregulated as you accuse. The one I work at is more regulated than a Las Vegas Casino. Also, Shuffle Master products are certified by GLI to function fairly. No chance on each they would modify them to cheat for a casino.

ZCore13

Gordon just curious, you didn't post for 9 months and now are back pairing very different topics the you posted before , they all seem to be house integrity questions now

I do not work for SHFL, but I am a product vendor to them for over 2 years now. In my experience, this is absolutely not happening. They make their money guaranteeing the integrity of their shufflers and have specific lockout and security mechanisms in place to prevent this kind of manipulation or tampering. They also have their equipment and software certified and sealed by 3rd parties.

Is what you suggest possible? Yes, I suppose. Is it happening? Absolutely not. A single case of this would damage their entire division beyond repair, and they have 10s of thousands of high dollar rentals and sales in the marketplace. They would never jeopardize their legitimate business with a cheating mode available. I think it's just someone's way of justifying bad variance.

Bbb is pretty spot on. Once word would get out it existed it would damage their integrity across the board and it inevitably would get out

Quote: Zcore13

I have first hand knowledge that not only are these accusations silly, they are not even possible. Indian casinos are not unregulated as you accuse. The one I work at is more regulated than a Las Vegas Casino. Also, Shuffle Master products are certified by GLI to function fairly. No chance on each they would modify them to cheat for a casino.

ZCore13

Thanks for your input. I am really trying to understand this subject. What entity regulates your casino? The Casino in question from my source operates on Cherokee nation land in North Carolina (there are two such casinos). Might there be state-to-state differences regarding regulation?

Your reference to GLI certification of Shuffle Master products is important. I will try to do more research on pubicly- available information and statements regarding Shuffle Master products and their certification by GLI. I really don't want to disparage Shuffle Master or anyone else. However, it is also clear that products from the same vendor that are intended for different markets may undergo different certification processes -or no certification at all -depending upon the specific requirements of the market. For instance, shufflers intended for European casinos may need to be submitted to an EU lab for certification. And it is not yet clear to me what kind of certification is required by the Cherokee nation. I have been told by someone that there is no regulation, but I don't know that that is true and so I am asking questions.

They are harrahs properties zer I mean zero chance your source is accurate

Start by reading the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act...

They are actually North Carolina based Tribal Casinos that are in a management agreement with Harrah's. I don't know how common that is around the country, or if this is a special case. Also totally ignorant about the amount of regulation, or lack there-of by the state of NC.
But I'm listening.

It's very very common

Quote: beachbumbabs

I do not work for SHFL, but I am a product vendor to them for over 2 years now. In my experience, this is absolutely not happening. They make their money guaranteeing the integrity of their shufflers and have specific lockout and security mechanisms in place to prevent this kind of manipulation or tampering. They also have their equipment and software certified and sealed by 3rd parties.

Is what you suggest possible? Yes, I suppose. Is it happening? Absolutely not. A single case of this would damage their entire division beyond repair, and they have 10s of thousands of high dollar rentals and sales in the marketplace. They would never jeopardize their legitimate business with a cheating mode available. I think it's just someone's way of justifying bad variance.

Babs, I actually find your post to be very persuasive. In my experience, corporate culture is a very real thing and a corporate culture that stresses integrity of their products can be a very powerful force. So, I am persuaded that this seems unlikely.

But let me continue to investigate and ask questions, perhaps with a change of tone. There have been too many well-known Christian ministers caught with hookers for anyone to doubt the ability of people to make self-destructive decisions. And look at the incomprehensible actions of Volkswagon and cheating on emissions testing. Or Pilot, who makes billions of dollars a year selling diesel gas to trucking firms but still decided to cheat by ignoring the discounts they had promised their customers when they billed them.

I mean, if its legal, possible, and makes money - won't someone eventually decide that they are smarter than everyone else and do it?

Not good examples

Sounds like you are running bad and looking for excuses tbh-
There would be ZERO BENEFIT TO SHL MASTER TO BUILD THIS IN

So now I don't just have to read your posts, I have to have you flaunt your Avatar in my face?
And Face has to wait another day before we can talk fishing again?
You rascal rated. I made the scorings exponential now, BTW ;-)
I'm not sure exponential is the right term.
But I'm rating you like earthquakes now ;-)

Quote: gordonm888

I mean, if its legal, possible, and makes money - won't someone eventually decide that they are smarter than everyone else and do it?

No, and here's why. If a top-tier vendor like Sci Games gets caught doing something fishy in some remote gaming jurisdiction, their manufacturing license is in jeopardy not just in that jurisdiction but in Nevada and everywhere else. The Nevada Gaming Control Board has the absolute authority to revoke any vendor's license if they deem the vendor "unsuitable" for any reason. E.g., in 2013 the California gaming regulators issued a finding of unsuitability for Galaxy Gaming (specifically Rob Saucier) based primarily on actions in Washington state. Nevada has issued several million+ dollar fines for failing to have sufficient internal controls to prevent money laundering, or for the unauthorized use of a slot key in another casino's machines (without changing anything). Imagine what they'd do if it were discovered that SHFL's shufflers were actually rigged. For a publicly-traded company like Scientific Games (the parent of Bally and therefore SHFL) the risk is far too great relative to the potential gains.

And there aren't any potential gains. After all, what's in it for SHFL to provide a gaffed shuffler like that? They lease the units to casinos for a flat amount, not a percentage of win, so it doesn't matter how well the game performs. SHFL makes the same amount regardless. Does it seem plausible to you that the executives of a publicly-traded company would put a significant chunk of revenue on the line (and invite a massive shareholder lawsuit) just so a handful of customers could make a few extra bucks per month?

You didn't answer my question from before. What are your source's qualifications, and why do you believe them over your own common sense?

There's a guy on BJTF (BJGenius007) who's been saying this kind of nonsense for a while now, particularly regarding blackjack, where the ASM clumps the cards. But, he also has absolutely no proof, likely blaming the machine for bad variance.

Quote: mrsuit31

Start by reading the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act...

I have scanned this and also read about it in Wikipedia. I have gone into the Federal Register to search documents from the National Indian Gaming Commission and have gone onto legal sites to try to understand more about North Carolina laws regarding gaming regulation.

Briefly, this is what I found;

The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act defines casino gambling as Class III Gaming and defines Bingo and similar activities as Class II gaming. Bizarrely, the regulation of Class II gaming (Bingo) is left to the Federal Government and is performed by the National Indian Gaming Commission. The regulation of Class III Gaming is left to the States and is to be executed through State-Tribal Pacts. Items to be regulated that are specifically called in law are out are: money transactions, financial reporting, background checks on casino employees and rules related to prevention of money laundering. The purpose of "ensuring that games are honest" is expressly mentioned in the law as one of the purposes for regulation but I have not found any specific requirements regarding "ensuring honest games" that are mentioned in the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. Presumably this is left to the State-Tribal Pacts.

North Carolina has a record of strictly forbidding gambling of any kind. No sports betting, Bingo or online gambling has ever been permitted. Until 2009 the only type of gambling in the state was the one Indian casino. In 2009 a state lottery was approved and a year or two ago a second Indian casino opened. That's it -there has never been any other gaming activity for NC State to regulate. So far, I have been unable to identify a NC State office or agency that regulates gaming -but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I just haven't found it yet.

Quote: RS

There's a guy on BJTF (BJGenius007) who's been saying this kind of nonsense for a while now, particularly regarding blackjack, where the ASM clumps the cards. But, he also has absolutely no proof, likely blaming the machine for bad variance.

Innumeracy + confirmation bias + mistrust of gaming regulators = conspiracy theory.

Also, since the shufflers use true random number generators based on the decay of radioactive particles like Cesium-137, you should always sit on the far side of the table from the card shufflers to avoid radiation poisoning.

Quote: MathExtremist

Innumeracy + confirmation bias + mistrust of gaming regulators = conspiracy theory.

Also, since the shufflers use true random number generators based on the decay of radioactive particles like Cesium-137, you should always sit on the far side of the table from the card shufflers to avoid radiation poisoning.

In virtually all compacts they also expressly state that the facilities must follow a set of Minimum Internal Controls (MICs). These would include equipment use and approval.

Most of the time you can pull the compacts up on the state websites and review the actual contracts. However, I'm not sure if you can pull the MICs...

Quote: MathExtremist

If a top-tier vendor like Sci Games gets caught doing something fishy in some remote gaming jurisdiction, their manufacturing license is in jeopardy not just in that jurisdiction but in Nevada and everywhere else. The Nevada Gaming Control Board has the absolute authority to revoke any vendor's license if they deem the vendor "unsuitable" for any reason. E.g., in 2013 the California gaming regulators issued a finding of unsuitability for Galaxy Gaming (specifically Rob Saucier) based primarily on actions in Washington state. Nevada has issued several million+ dollar fines for failing to have sufficient internal controls to prevent money laundering, or for the unauthorized use of a slot key in another casino's machines (without changing anything). Imagine what they'd do if it were discovered that SHFL's shufflers were actually rigged. For a publicly-traded company like Scientific Games (the parent of Bally and therefore SHFL) the risk is far too great relative to the potential gains.

And there aren't any potential gains. After all, what's in it for SHFL to provide a gaffed shuffler like that? They lease the units to casinos for a flat amount, not a percentage of win, so it doesn't matter how well the game performs. SHFL makes the same amount regardless. Does it seem plausible to you that the executives of a publicly-traded company would put a significant chunk of revenue on the line (and invite a massive shareholder lawsuit) just so a handful of customers could make a few extra bucks per month?

Got it. I understand - there are major business disincentives for SHFL to do this and little apparent incentive to do so. I think this is a very good argument.

Quote:

You didn't answer my question from before. What are your source's qualifications, and why do you believe them over your own common sense?

Regarding my source's qualifications, they are casino-specific -but I won't say any more than that. Sorry, I am protecting my source. Also, I have not been pounding on my source's credentials and asking people to believe this.

I have maintained a degree of skepticism about what my source told me because I know that people have a natural tendency to b---s--t about stuff like this in order to seem important and "in the know." I also realize that sometimes people will know "a little bit" and make up stuff to fill in the blanks in the story -which can lead to an erroneous or highly-distorted picture.

But what leant an air of credibility to what I heard was the amount of detail in the account and the manner and tone it which it was told to me. We all have a built-in lie detector that we use every day of our lives, and I did not immediately dismiss what was said to me as a lie.

So, my question is: Who is in charge of assuring that the games in this NC casino are honest? Is this a credible story? (many in this forum are of the opinion it is not and they have been pretty persuasive) And if we had a casino in a state with no history of gaming regulation, is it possible that abuses might occur?

Okay. Big news. There apparently is NO regulation by North Carolina State of the Cherokee casinos.

Here is an internet link to the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians/ North Carolina State Pact establishing the right to the have a casino. Its only one page of text and a second page of signatures -so click on this and read it!

EBCI/North Carolina Pact

The phrase important to our discussion is:

"WHEREAS, existing regulatory controls and criminal sanctions are adequate to fill the policies and purposes set forth in the Compact."

Therefore, the right to a casino was granted by the State of North Carolina without requiring that its operation be subject to the authority of any specific state regulatory agency. "Existing regulatory controls" were agreed to be adequate in a state that had never had any prior gambling activity of any kind.

On August 3, 2012 there is a Federal Register notice announcing the Dept of Interior's approval of an expansion of this pact to include allowing "table games with dealers." I cannot find a copy of the text of this expansion agreement, but newspaper articles report that the amendment to the pact defined the fraction of casino revenue from these games that would go to public education in North Carolina.

I am trying to keep an open mind, but I am concluding that North Carolina Indian casinos are indeed "unregulated." I realize that is completely contrary to the situation in many other states.

Quote: gordonm888

Okay. Big news. There apparently is NO regulation by North Carolina State of the Cherokee casinos.

Here is an internet link to the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians/ North Carolina State Pact establishing the right to the have a casino. Its only one page of text and a second page of signatures -so click on this and read it!

EBCI/North Carolina Pact

The phrase important to our discussion is:

"WHEREAS, existing regulatory controls and criminal sanctions are adequate to fill the policies and purposes set forth in the Compact."

Therefore, the right to a casino was granted by the State of North Carolina without requiring that its operation be subject to the authority of any specific state regulatory agency. "Existing regulatory controls" were agreed to be adequate in a state that had never had any prior gambling activity of any kind.

On August 3, 2012 there is a Federal Register notice announcing the Dept of Interior's approval of an expansion of this pact to include allowing "table games with dealers." I cannot find a copy of the text of this expansion agreement, but newspaper articles report that the amendment to the pact defined the fraction of casino revenue from these games that would go to public education in North Carolina.

I am trying to keep an open mind, but I am concluding that North Carolina Indian casinos are indeed "unregulated." I realize that is completely contrary to the situation in many other states.

This seems to be an add on to the "original compact" they refer to several times in that single page. I would assume that "original compact" sets out those controls they reference.

Edit: The title and first paragraph make it clear there is a previous compact that this is simply adding the right to have electronic bingo and electronic raffle games.

This document is not "the compact".

Why are you suddenly so concerned about this- just curious- you seem to be really bothered by what your friend told you

Quote: gordonm888

Okay. Big news. There apparently is NO regulation by North Carolina State of the Cherokee casinos.

Tribal sovereignty precludes it. That's like suggesting that the Nevada Gaming Commission has the authority to regulate the casinos in Canada or Germany.

But if you think the casino is wholly unregulated, that's factually wrong:
http://www.cherokee.org/OurGovernment/Commissions/GamingCommission/AbouttheCommission.aspx

Quote: mrsuit31

This seems to be an add on to the "original compact" they refer to several times in that single page. I would assume that "original compact" sets out those controls they reference.

Edit: The title and first paragraph make it clear there is a previous compact that this is simply adding the right to have electronic bingo and electronic raffle games.

This document is not "the compact".

Hmm, you are correct, good catch.

After considerable research, here is the current complete pact netween NC and the EDCI as fully amended to include the regulations on Table Games

Current Version of NC/Cherokee Pact

The full pact has a long list of regulations on video games and slot machines including requirements for certification of video game equipment by an accredited external laboratory. There is a short section, Section 6 D, on Regulation of Table Games, requiring that any table game devices be compliant with 25 CFR 542.12 and that 25 CFR 542.12 shall serve as the Minimum Internal Controls for Gaming Equipment on.

In all of the pact, there is no language about automated shufflers or external certification testing of any equipment other than slot machines and video games. This is also true for the Federal Regulations promulgated in 25 CFR 542.12. Here is a link to those regulations.

Minimum Internal Controls For Live Table Gaming 25 CFR 542.12

The current version of the pact does indeed establish a Certification Commission, jointly appointed by the Tribe and the NC Governor, to approve casino equipment and to review any issues . It is comprised of three appointees who shall be paid $9,000 to $12,000 per year and who must meet at least quarterly!

But that is it -that is the only regulatory body created in the pact. Three political appointees who meet 4 times per year.

And no requirements regarding automated shufflers.

Quote: gordonm888

In all of the pact, there is no language about automated shufflers or external certification testing of any equipment other than slot machines and video games.
...
And no requirements regarding automated shufflers.

Read more closely:

Quote: Cherokee Compact, Section 6, REGULATION OF GAMING ACTIVITY

(D) Regulation of Live Table Gaming
(3) All equipment utilized in the conduct of live table gaming must receive approval and certification from the Tribal Gaming Commission prior to being placed into operation

I get the sense that you're trying to demonstrate that the Cherokee casino is crooked. Why exactly is that?

The Tribal Gaming Commission is the part time commission that I already mentioned - 3 guys making $9K to $12K per year and meeting 4 times per year. And I already said it has the role of approving/certifying equipment. But there are no standards.

The original version of this commission was created in 1994, but gradually it went out of existence because it never met. For over a decade there was literally no regulatory body over this casino. The Tribal Gaming Commission was formed again in 2011. Its a little hard to tell if it actually does anything now in 2016. It doesn't even have a website and doesn't seem to be on the org chart for NC State Government.

Quote: MathExtremist

I get the sense that you're trying to demonstrate that the Cherokee casino is crooked. Why exactly is that?

Your sense is wrong. I feel an obligation as the original poster on this thread and I am trying to honestly engage what other people are posting. I am working much harder on this topic than I really care to because I am trying to keep a high level of intelligent dialogue and meaningful analysis. I'm sorry if you don't like me asking questions and and doing research that challenges your assumptions.

To turn it around, I get the sense that you are trying to defend a casino that you have never been to and that you know absolutely nothing about on a first hand basis. Why exactly is that?

Quote: gordonm888

But that is it -that is the only regulatory body created in the pact. Three political appointees who meet 4 times per year.

I only read the definitions in the compact, as I'm not reading all 28 pages, and that alone made it pretty clear that there are two commissions. Section 3(C)-the certification commission and (G)-the tribal gaming commission. I would assume the tribal gaming commission, the "agency responsible for effective regulation of all gaming activities", is the one who constantly monitors everything, while new "video game" submissions are certified by the quarterly meeting certification commission.

I think you may be misreading the roles of both these agencies... Again I haven't read the whole compact.

Edit: Additionally, the section 15(D)(3) that mathextremist referenced expressly states that it is the tribal gaming commission, not the certification commission, who approves this type of equipment (e.g. Shufflers). They are overseeing gaming year round and not on a quarterly basis.

You stated earlier that the tribal gaming commission is a part time commission and that is entirely incorrect. And again they, the certification commission, only seemingly deal with certifying new video game submissions and not approval of gaming equipment.

Quote: gordonm888

The Tribal Gaming Commission is the part time commission that I already mentioned - 3 guys making $9K to $12K per year and meeting 4 times per year. And I already said it has the role of approving/certifying equipment. But there are no standards.

Quote: gordonm888

I feel an obligation as the original poster on this thread and I am trying to honestly engage what other people are posting. I am working much harder on this topic than I really care to because I am trying to keep a high level of intelligent dialogue and meaningful analysis. I'm sorry if you don't like me asking questions and and doing research that challenges your assumptions.

Seriously? You started a thread based on an anonymous and unverifiable accusation, buttressing your position with a cursory search on the Internet, and you're calling that "intelligent dialogue"?

Intelligence would dictate doing more work than that. How about doing some meaningful analysis into your accusations, rather than demonstrating your ability to jump to baseless conclusions after a few hours of Google research? Write letters to regulators asking them how their process works. Call the casino. Call the vendor. Actually ask the questions, don't just toss out unfounded accusations, do a bit of Googling, then say "Okay. Big news."

Right now, your accusation has less legitimacy than the cold fusion paper. Back it up with something concrete. Prove you're not a crank.

I agree that I confused the issue by saying these were the same commission, but I disagree on the roles of the two commissions..

The Tribal Gaming Commission regulates the finances, monetary transactions, personnel hiring, and other items in Section 5 of the Pact. Regulation of these aspects is granted to the Indian Tribe in the pact.

The Section 6 activities -regulation of gaming devices - are not assigned to the Indian Tribe. Regulation of Gaming Devices is placed in the hands of the Certification Commission - the joint State/Tribe-appointed appointed commission that I accurately described in my previous post. It has 3 part time members that are paid $9 to 12K per year and is required to meet at least quarterly. It actually lapsed in the late 1990s and didn't meet or effectively exist for a period of longer than 10 years. IMO, this organization in no way compares to the Nevada Gaming Commission or the New Jersey Gaming Commission.

Quote: gordonm888

I agree that I confused the issue by saying these were the same commission, but I disagree on the roles of the two commissions..

The Tribal Gaming Commission regulates the finances, monetary transactions, personnel hiring, and other items in Section 5 of the Pact. Regulation of these aspects is granted to the Indian Tribe in the pact.

The Section 6 activities -regulation of gaming devices - are not assigned to the Indian Tribe. Regulation of Gaming Devices is placed in the hands of the Certification Commission - the joint State/Tribe-appointed appointed commission that I accurately described in my previous post. It has 3 part time members that are paid $9 to 12K per year and is required to meet at least quarterly. It actually lapsed in the late 1990s and didn't meet or effectively exist for a period of longer than 10 years. IMO, this organization in no way compares to the Nevada Gaming Commission or the New Jersey Gaming Commission.

Section 6(D)(3) "all equipment utilized in the conduct of live table gaming must receive approval and certification from the Tribal Gaming Commission prior to being placed in operation".

I'm sorry, what am I misreading exactly?

If anyone thinks that casinos don't cheat because they're "regulated" by some type of government entity, you're sadly mistake. Most corruption in this country is IN government.

Quote: MathExtremist

Seriously? You started a thread based on an anonymous and unverifiable accusation, buttressing your position with a cursory search on the Internet, and you're calling that "intelligent dialogue"?

Intelligence would dictate doing more work than that. How about doing some meaningful analysis into your accusations, rather than demonstrating your ability to jump to baseless conclusions after a few hours of Google research? Write letters to regulators asking them how their process works. Call the casino. Call the vendor. Actually ask the questions, don't just toss out unfounded accusations, do a bit of Googling, then say "Okay. Big news."

I heard a claim by someone and posted it on a WOV forum where I expected that people would have the expertise to immediately refer me to relevant websites and advise me as to what to think of it. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. I think I've been upfront about acknowledging the value of what people have told me and have said that I've been persuaded that its unlikely that the story about the vendor could be true.

Quote:

Right now, your accusation has less legitimacy than the cold fusion paper. Back it up with something concrete. Prove you're not a crank.

Really Mathextremist? Name-calling? The first refuge of the over-matched? Is that all you've got?

Let me tell you something about myself. Since 2010, I have served as Senior Scientist in the Dept of Energy's Office of Intelligence and as Chief Technology Officer of Oak Ridge National Laboratory. I have served as a member of a State Dept delegation to Russia on nuclear security issues, and received a commendation from NASA for my support to their Cassini mission to the moons of Saturn. I have raised and married off two wonderful daughters, celebrated a 25th wedding anniversary, traveled extensively and developed a rich network of friends and relationships.

Now, let me tell you something about you, Mathextremist. Since 2010, you have posted on the WOV website 5,278 times. LOL, five thousand two hundred and seventy eight times.

So, excuse me if I don't place a lot of weight on your advice because I'm really not impressed.

Quote: gordonm888

I heard a claim by someone and posted it on a WOV forum where I expected that people would have the expertise to immediately refer me to relevant websites and advise me as to what to think of it. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. I think I've been upfront about acknowledging the value of what people have told me and have said that I've been persuaded that its unlikely that the story about the vendor could be true.

Let me tell you something about myself. Since 2010, I have served as Senior Scientist in the Dept of Energy's Office of Intelligence and as Chief Technology Officer of Oak Ridge National Laboratory. I have served as a member of a State Dept delegation to Russia on nuclear security issues, and received a commendation from NASA for my support to their Cassini mission to the moons of Saturn.

That's an impressive CV, but it's also highly incongruent with someone who would even give such a crank accusation a second thought. You're a senior nuclear scientist with an advanced degree and you don't know what to think of a claim like "Shufflers have Cheat Mode?" It's reasonable to demand a greater degree of critical thinking from the people in charge of something as important as ORNL. It's also reasonable to expect federal employees not to publicly accuse sovereign nations like the Cherokee of widespread fraud, especially when there is absolutely no evidence to support that accusation.

Please demonstrate the level of intellectual rigor that someone in your position should display, rather than the level of rigor we've come to expect from people who believe they can control the dice. For starters, if you have an advanced science degree you already know how to statistically test for bias in hand outcomes. If you haven't already done that, why not?

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

If anyone thinks that casinos don't cheat because they're "regulated" by some type of government entity, you're sadly mistake. Most corruption in this country is IN government.

That's not equivalent to actually having evidence that casinos are cheating. The same logic could be used to claim, with equal validity, that every shuffling machine in Nevada is gaffed too. Government is government, right?

Don't fall prey to sloppy reasoning just because it's fun to disparage the government. If you make a claim like "the Cherokee Nation is using gaffed shufflers," it's not valid to point to "all governments are corrupt" as evidence of that claim.

The whole thread seems like he got a lot of people to waste there time for some bad beat or bad run that he had

1. I am retired now from government service.

2. What bias in hand outcomes? You are making a wrong assumption.

3. I am done chatting with you, MathExtremist, and will not respond any further to your posts.

I really hope this isn't a trolling thread

Quote: gordonm888

1. I am retired now from government service.

2. What bias in hand outcomes? You are making a wrong assumption.

3. I am done chatting with you, MathExtremist, and will not respond any further to your posts.

Did you just ask me a question (#2) and then say you're not responding further (#3)?

I'll answer anyway: you've accused the shufflers of biasing the results. This is an easy thing to test with statistics, collecting empirical data and comparing it against the expected distribution of hand outcomes. For example, you wrote:

Quote: original post

In Mississippi Stud, the first three cards out of the shuffler machine are the three face-down common cards. In Beast Mode, these 3 cards will be unpaired and have an unusually high frequency of cards with low ranks. Players will still occasionally be dealt a pair and win (or push) on a hand, but on unpaired hands they are at a great disadvantage because the board keeps turning up 2's and 3's, etc.

It's pretty easy to collect a sample of 3-card hands and compare them against the expected distribution of 3-card hands to examine, for example, whether the "frequency of cards with low ranks" is expected or anomalous. If you haven't done this, why not?

Quote: MathExtremist

That's not equivalent to actually having evidence that casinos are cheating. The same logic could be used to claim, with equal validity, that every shuffling machine in Nevada is gaffed too. Government is government, right?

Don't fall prey to sloppy reasoning just because it's fun to disparage the government. If you make a claim like "the Cherokee Nation is using gaffed shufflers," it's not valid to point to "all governments are corrupt" as evidence of that claim.

I was going to add on to that but got busy watching poker. Even though I stand by what I said, in no way am I accusing any casino of any wrong doing.

Naming this proposed anti-AP measure "Beast Mode" makes this sound like a complete load of crap, imo. Is your "source" under 30?

I highly would doubt Bally would do this for the reasons previously described. If the NGC got wind of this happening even if it wasn't in their state, I doubt they would not take action against Bally.

Well said, honestly I think it's bs along with the whole thread

Quote: tringlomane

Naming this proposed anti-AP measure "Beast Mode" makes this sound like a complete load of crap, imo. Is your "source" under 30?

I highly would doubt Bally would do this for the reasons previously described. If the NGC got wind of this happening even if it wasn't in their state, I doubt they would not take action against Bally.

If you need any additional evidence of that, don't forget that the NGC put Archie Karas in the Nevada black book for what he did in California. Good regulators don't consider jurisdictional borders when evaluating suitability, nor should they.

It would be impossible to tell when the machine was in "beast mode" because the OP claims that "beast mode" only happens when there is a suspected AP at the table. I guess it's akin to VW telling its engines to run clean when it's plugged into an emissions tester. That never happens.

Does SHFL make clean machines? Absolutely. Is there source code possible to make it possible to have a "beast mode"? Absolutely. Would SHFL make any claim that it would give operators use of that code? Never. Does it happen anyway? Who knows.

Just because casinos make 0.2% - 7% off of every hand (depending on the game) doesn't mean it's enough. For a company like CZR who is hanging on a wire, rigging a slot machine or game to go from 5% to 50% has a direct impact on its bottom line.

A year ago, I would say "nah", impossible. But given what VW did and what online casinos are doing, and the technology behind SHFL machines now, I would say "anything is possible".

I'm in the camp of probably not, but certainly not impossible. If the FBI can find a hack to break into an I-Phone, someone else can find a hack to create a SHFL "beast mode".

Note - I am not attacking SHFL. They probably make a very clean game but it doesn't mean that it's not hackable.

I am the original poster, but I am coming around to agree almost exactly with the views that boymimbo just expressed.

I think the story I was told was either mostly or entirely BS. I think its extremely unlikely -or even incredible -that SHFL would doctor their own automatic shufflers. I would edit my original post to add an upfront statement to that effect, but too much time has passed and I can no longer edit it.

But, I do think its healthy to maintain a skepticism about the honesty of the games that we play and to constantly ask questions. The creation of casinos originally solved a genuine problem. Before casinos there were a lot of dishonest games with loaded dice and card-sharking dealers. Even today, when a new deck of cards is opened a dealer will spread the cards face up - to show the players that all 52 cards are in the deck.

But with the creation of automated shufflers and electronic games (with no actual deck of cards in the game) it is harder and harder for the gambling public to trust that the games are fair and honest. Historians say: "Anything that can be done eventually will be done." If we can imagine how a casino can cheat, then it is likely that at some point in time someone will cheat that way.

I am not impressed with the situation in North Carolina. In setting up its gaming regulation infrastructure, I think that North Carolina has done the absolute minimum a state can do to meet the requirements of federal law. Given that the NC/EBCI Certification Commission actually did not meet for over ten years prior to 2011 and is currently composed of 3 people making $9-12K/yr and does not even have a website, I am personally not comfortable that there is effective regulation.

The lack of a strong regulatory system does not mean that casinos are cheating in NC. But, IMO, it does mean that the risk of casino cheating is higher in NC then in Nevada, Missouri, Michigan, New Jersey, etc. I think that reasonable people can disagree about high that risk is.

P.S. -The phrase "Beast Mode" was the colorful expression of the person who told me this story. I never had the impression that he meant that this was the terminology used by the casino or vendor staff who he alleged were involved in changing the shuffler settings.

I would tend to agree the casinos don't need to resort to stuff like this but then I remember threads I started like this one so I agree the casinos can have what seem like ridiculous situations where they are in fact cheating the customers. https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/other-casinos/21787-slot-malfunctions-in-nys/