Open Card Counting Tables and Casino Standardization

We had some "intensity" on the "Is Card Counting Cheating" Thread, and one glaring problem is the lack of transparency, consistency, and open honesty on the part of casino operators on some glaring problems in this regard.
I responded to TheCessPit - who made some good arguments.
//---
Cess - glad to do so, you're right about this.
I will admit there is also a ton of inane B.S. in the gaming industry on the casino operations side, too, (- Now, please, everybody, do NOT post:"Aha!! You see, Dan - you ADMIT it yourself! na-HAAA....!!!")

Some things actually need to be cleaned up on the casino operations end, really some sort of standardization and fearlessly honest policy.

We spend a lot of time constantly re-training dealers and annoying players with petty changes because SOME new shift manager or casino managers does his own tinkering and tweaking of games, thinking it going to make a difference. And floormen "fib" about card-counting policy upfront, only to back you off if you do it successfully.
Some of MY casino operations pet Peeves:
1. replacing one daffy side bet with another all the time/changing house rules all the time!
2. re-writing the pai gow house way every season using a dart-board - instead of a gaming mathematician recommendation!
3. allowing or dis-allowing "money-in-action" rules for multiple hands on pitch blackjack games, etc.
4. No formal written policy on "running down a deck" (Polite "pit speak" for card counting.)

Okay:
Some ideas:
1. All Six deck shoe and CSM games should have the same basic rules among a property group in the same "price" range (MGM, Harrahs, Stations, etc.) Why should it differ?
For example, all $5 to $50 6-deck/CSM tables: Dealer hits Soft-17, DAS, DOA, 75% penetration, split up to four hands, no surrender; and all should have either selected "Lucky Ladies," "Bust it!," "Push Your Luck," or "Bad Beat BJ" as the side bet. PICK ONE, G-DDAMN IT!" Same proven table spec and layout at every property, just consistent. Saves player aggrevation and annoyance, saves dealer retraining, saves surveillance errors - what's the problem? SAME CONSISTENT POLICY WITH SAME LAYOUT!

2. Crap tables: why does Fiesta HAVE the Fire bet, Sunset [Station] removed it, and Boulder station has the Replay bet? Some have the Field paying 3x on 12, some 2x, some have 5x odds, some 10x odds. (Or Standardize on the "HardCome/Hard Pass bet" of Olympian Gaming as a new bet. :) ) So players complain: "We can use the same 'Boarding Pass' players comp card everywhere, but every crap game is different. What's the deal with THAT!" If Both dice fail to hit the BACK wall - automatic no call/no roll, whether winner, another number, or a seven out! SAME CONSISTENT POLICY WITH SAME LAYOUT!

3. Pai Gow House ways: Every property has its own. I think they're trying to standardize that. But sheesh, call Charles Mousseau, and let him show you Pai Gow House Ways math reprorts as to which one really is easiest, and works best, - and just use it! And LOSE THE DRAGON HAND! It's a waste of time and money. COPY OF HOUSE WAY MUST BE AVAILABLE IN THE "HOW-TO-PLAY" SHEET RACK FOR THE PLAYERS!

4. Open and Honest Card Counting Policy without lying about it: "IF YOU ARE BELIEVED TO BE RUNNING DOWN A DECK, MANAGEMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO FLAT-BET YOU, - OR ASK YOU TO GO TO THE CSM or COUNTERS' BLACKJACK TABLE WITHOUT APOLOGY. NO HARD FEELINGS, NO ARGUMENTS - JUST BUSINESS."

5. Actually Having an open card-counters' table: Double-Deck, 60% penetration, $5-$25, Double on 10 or 11, Split up to two hands, DAS if 10/11. Count you ass off! Make the game 0.0% house edge if you are counting perfectly - like 100% pay slots, - which we also have....

6. Alcohol policy: If a player is visibly drunk, cut him off! If he's more interested in freaking drinking, 86-him to the bar! Some of the most despicable and outrageous casino behavior IS alcohol-related!! Sorry, this is nuts. Some Casinos have got to be responsible for some DUI's and DUI accidents, as well as drunken security incidents at their own properties, IMHO.

7. Three-card poker: PAY the ANTE bonus on a straight or better even if the player hand loses!

I'm gonna start a new post with this. Here it is.

Quote: Paigowdan

5. Actually Having an open card-counters' table: Double-Deck, 60% penetration, $5-$25, Double on 10 or 11, Split up to two hands, DAS if 10/11. Count you ass off

Wouldn't that be nice for the casino. They can take 100
pics of every counter and nail them from ever counting
anywhere ever again. Do you really think counters are
stupid enough to fall for such a transparent scam? You
can't be serious.

No, because it would now be legit and standard play.
Everyone gets to play.
They don't take pics of little old ladies playing full 100% slots now that casinos offer it - now DO they Bob, - (except in your paranoid mind) - because it's all now okay...and what are they going to do with the card counter pics - now that casinos are themselves offering freely counting tables - offer then buffet passes and free bet coupons just like 100% slots??
That's the point...
To make card-counting a legitimate casino practice with a new legit game - like 100% slots.
Better than what we have....
The time has come...
But Lost on you, Bob, sheesh!...
(Bob: "they're taking PICTURES...it's a casino conspiracy, I tell ya....")
Nut job.

Quote: Paigowdan

No, because it would now be legit and standard play..

So your plan is to seat them at the kiddie
table, where they can play and play and
make no money because the max bet
is a joke. Again, you can't be serious.
You yell and scream that counting is
dead, yet you want to neutralize it?
Make up your mind, is it dead or isn't it.

No,
5 x or 10x table limits. Same as many other tables. Not a kiddie table, in the way that 100% slots is not kiddie slots, it's pro slots, with no house edge.
Feel free to play as you see fit with maxzed-out counting - "blackjack as it ought to be" as so many people say! - And on an officially approved and countable Blackjack table - just like we do having "100% payout slots."
By removing DOA, add split only once, and with 60% penetration, with a $5 to $50 limit,
you are now allowed to count freely...

Now - Is 100% payout slots kiddie? A LOT of people p[lay them
So...neither is 0.0% house edge "legally counting blackjack" games:
Play a perfect counting Blackjack game, - you get 0.0% if you can do that.
Just like 100% slots.
The idea irritates you no end...I can see that.
But I think it is a good idea.
Let's here from others on this, like Math Extremeist or Charles Mousseau.

This is how you neutralize it - you make it a game, fully approved...just like 100% slots. Bob, do not play it if you do not want to. No CIA there taking pictures of people playing there...now, right, Bob?
It's time has come, I say...

Quote: Paigowdan

No,
Regular table limits. Same as any other table..

You said $5-$25, thats NOT regular table limits. $25
max bet is a joke. It doesn't matter, no counter would
give up his identity to play at any table set aside for
counters. Gimme a break.

No, it is not.
But you actually get to count legally, AND raise your bet UP TO FIVE TIMES without getting flak, a 5:1 spread.
There could be $1,000 to $5,000 tables, but more likely $10 to $50 on the strip, and $5 to $25 at local gringer joints, - with no fear of "counter reprisals."
Count all you want.
No DOA, no split to four hands, only 60% penetration.
That's the catch...just like playing the machines on 100% pay slots.
With that: Be a perfect slot player - and you got NO HOUSE EDGE -
With THIS: be a perfect Blackjack counter - and you also got no house edge. And NO C.I.A., aside from you talking about "pictures" and complaining about the concept.
But I think it is a good idea.
And Bob - You already chimed in.

Quote: Paigowdan

No, it is not.
But you actually get to count legally, AND raise your bet UP TO TEN TIMES without getting flak - up to $50.

OOOh, up to $50! Somebody pinch me, its too good to
be true. Yesterday you say counting is dead, nobody
can win. Today you want to corral them so you can
limit their play. My god, you're as transparent as a
plate glass window. You don't believe its dead, and
nobody thought you did..

Bob - I will pinch you:
1. $5 to $25, or $10 to $50. That's 5 times, fine - that's the design, I stated it. Try ranging your bet on VP the same out, (5x) or placing 5x odds on craps - and you're actually okay, too! That is what real people play.

2. Yes - counting is dead. But That might actually be the problem. The Overwhelming action on the "counting Thread" shows that people WANT it BACK - they would LIKE to be allowed to count freely and legally in the casino pit's game offerings! True?

3. So - let's actually bring it back alive - in a way that's possible for a casino. With a 0.0% house edge under p[erfect counting - like 100% payout at perfect VP.

4. Granted, you can't bet $5- $5,000 table limits while counting in a real casino pit, but to expect that anyway is crazy. You get a 5x limit - just like on 100% Video Poker - which is more than 95% of the limits that blackjack players use anyway!

So Bob - before you criticise this game idea or game design anymore - can YOU show us here at this board how YOU would introduce a legally countable Blackjack Variant?

Instead of Criticising this - just show us YOUR Blackjack game design. If you can come up with one.

Quote: Paigowdan

Instead of Criticising this - just show us YOUR Blackjack game design.

I like it just the way it is. The smart counters
continue to outsmart the dumbass casinos.
It drives them nuts that anybody can beat
them in their house at one of their games.
Perfect...

Bob,
Save your counting criticisms for the counting thread.
I was discussing some casino solutions and ideas to address both:
1. The general lack of casino standardization, and
2. Developing a version of regular blackjack that is hassle-free of counting issues, - something that is sorely needed. Believe you me, that time has come.
Counting was only a threat in the days gone by, but is no longer a threat today;
Instead, it is just an expensive casino pit operational problem today - and an harassment to the new generation of card counters who can't get to practice it without problems, and who feel it is a legitimate practice of the game of blackjack. Okay - THIS I can see: to make full blackjack a part of the casino pit with card counting allowed, and no fear of reprisals.
Most non-card counters flat bet anyway!
Most card counters have to bet in a 5x range anyway just for camo cover, and don't do foolish splits and doubles anyway!
So how can it be allowed today - and to allow them a 0.0% house edge if they do it perfectly - just like perfect VP players on 100% slots today - and as a viable casino game offering for the popular game of blackjack?

I think via:
1. A restricted - but reasonable - bet spread that allows for good spread, but gets rid of insanely wide bet spreads - that regular players don't us, and would announce card-counters in any case.
2. 50% to 60% penetration. Maybe the four-deck shoe could come back - it's quick and easy to shuffle, it never threatens the house with a long positive count, and it never delays a counter with a long negative count, and it really quick and easy to deal - no pitching, - being a shoe.
3. Removing soft-hand doubles and excesive splitting.

Quote: Paigowdan

2. Developing a version of regular blackjack that is hassle-free of counting issues, - something that is sorely needed. Believe you me, that time has come.

So today counters are a huge threat and yesterday
they were a joke. Wow, quite an about face. No
legit counter would ever, in a hundred years, sit
at a table where counting was encouraged. Casinos
just have to live with the fact that one of their games
has been compromised, or get rid of the game entirely.

First off, let me say that these ideas are much better constructed than your tirade to open the Card Counting Cheating thread. I kind of agree with Bob that you do tend to contradict yourself, but I'm learning to accept that about your posts...

That being said, I think you're actually onto something here.

Quote: Paigowdan

Okay:
Some ideas:
1. All Six deck shoe and CSM games should have the same basic rules among a property group in the same "price" range (MGM, Harrahs, Stations, etc.) Why should it differ?
For example, all $5 to $50 6-deck/CSM tables: Dealer hits Soft-17, DAS, DOA, 75% penetration, split up to four hands, no surrender; and all should have either selected "Lucky Ladies," "Bust it!," "Push Your Luck," or "Bad Beat BJ" as the side bet. PICK ONE, G-DDAMN IT!" Same proven table spec and layout at every property, just consistent. Saves player aggrevation and annoyance, saves dealer retraining, saves surveillance errors - what's the problem? SAME CONSISTENT POLICY WITH SAME LAYOUT!

This does drive me nuts, especially at Midwest casinos. Break dealers will have a string where they have three different side bets on BJ games. It slows the game down as they are trying to figure out which game they are on. However, you really should include "21+3." The house edge on the side bet is one of the lower ones, and I actually enjoy that game. I have stopped playing it, and I'm saving money doing so, but of all the side bets I've seen, that's the only one that I will actually play if it's available. And most 21+3 tables are JAM PACKED.

Quote: PaigowDan

2. Crap tables: why does Fiesta HAVE the Fire bet, Sunset [Station] removed it, and Boulder station has the Replay bet? Some have the Field paying 3x on 12, some 2x, some have 5x odds, some 10x odds. (Or Standardize on the "HardCome/Hard Pass bet" of Olympian Gaming as a new bet. :) ) So players complain: "We can use the same 'Boarding Pass' players comp card everywhere, but every crap game is different. What's the deal with THAT!" If Both dice fail to hit the BACK wall - automatic no call/no roll, whether winner, another number, or a seven out! SAME CONSISTENT POLICY WITH SAME LAYOUT!

Two different issues with two different responses:
1) Side Bets: I don't care what the layout is in the center, since I don't play them. Much like I watch for two Queen of Hearts on BJ for the "Lucky Ladies," I do like to see when the Fire Bet would have paid out but they don't offer it. But since I don't put a dollar on it, I don't really care. Standardization on this is kind of silly, unless like the above, there are multiple offerings at the same casino.

[edit] 2) Rolling dice to backwall: This SHOULD be standardized. Every casino should follow the same procedures.

Quote: PaigowDan

3. Pai Gow House ways: Every property has its own. I think they're trying to standardize that. But sheesh, call Charles Mousseau, and let him show you Pai Gow House Ways math reprorts as to which one really is easiest, and works best, - and just use it! And LOSE THE DRAGON HAND! It's a waste of time and money. COPY OF HOUSE WAY MUST BE AVAILABLE IN THE "HOW-TO-PLAY" SHEET RACK FOR THE PLAYERS!

It amazes me how Caesars Palace has one set of rules and Flamingo has another... they are owned by the same company and yet they are quite different. I agree; there should be one set of house rules. As far as the dragon hand, as referred to on Pai Gow Plus, yes get rid of it. However, Harrah's Kansas City uses the dragon to the first hand dealt to a nonplayer and allows another player to play that hand at table min (as opposed to having to double). Get rid of the stupid double rule, then get rid of the dragon. Otherwise, I don't mind it.

Quote: PaigowDan

4. Open and Honest Card Counting Policy without lying about it: "IF YOU ARE BELIEVED TO BE RUNNING DOWN A DECK, MANAGEMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO FLAT-BET YOU, - OR ASK YOU TO GO TO THE CSM or COUNTERS' BLACKJACK TABLE WITHOUT APOLOGY. NO HARD FEELINGS, NO ARGUMENTS - JUST BUSINESS."

Nice to hear you agree with us on this one... And we thought you were a callous individual

Quote: PaigowDan

5. Actually Having an open card-counters' table: Double-Deck, 60% penetration, $5-$25, Double on 10 or 11, Split up to two hands, DAS if 10/11. Count you ass off! Make the game 0.0% house edge if you are counting perfectly - like 100% pay slots, - which we also have....

I think this is a good idea, and advertise it as such. Put up a big flashing neon sign that says "100% payback" and super small type underneath that says "with optimal play." Ironically, I think card counters would avoid this table, and it would end up being filled with grandmas and drunk tourists who think that they will will 100% every time.

Quote: PaigowDan

6. Alcohol policy: If a player is visibly drunk, cut him off! If he's more interested in freaking drinking, 86-him to the bar! Some of the most despicable and outrageous casino behavior IS alcohol-related!! Sorry, this is nuts. Some Casinos have got to be responsible for some DUI's and DUI accidents, as well as drunken security incidents at their own properties, IMHO.

This is such a touchy issue. I agree that something should be done to limit the behavior, but I can get drunk after one vodka mixer (The 11 I had on New Years Eve turned REALLY UGLY... although...)

Actually that fateful New Years Eve, I vowed I would not gamble, and rather I was going to just drink. I didn't have ALL that much money on me, and I figured table mins would be ridiculous. I kept drinking and drinking and not gambling. Finally, I decided to play some live poker, where I learned, I become the TIGHTEST player (Honestly, I threw away pocket 10s on the button to a small raise). When I did get Aces, basically everybody folded, except one guy who knew he was beat. I won the hand too...

My point is that casinos would have to be careful on this issue. One person's drunk is another ones buzz...

Quote: Paigowdan

7. Three-card poker: PAY the ANTE bonus on a straight or better even if the player hand loses!

I thought this was the case in all casinos... I didn't realize this was an optioned rule.

Quote: Tiltpoul

First off, let me say that these ideas are much better constructed than your tirade to open the Card Counting Cheating thread. I kind of agree with Bob that you do tend to contradict yourself, but I'm learning to accept that about your posts...

That being said, I think you're actually onto something here.

Quote: Paigowdan

Okay:
Some ideas:
1. All Six deck shoe and CSM games should have the same basic rules among a property group in the same "price" range (MGM, Harrahs, Stations, etc.) Why should it differ?
For example, all $5 to $50 6-deck/CSM tables: Dealer hits Soft-17, DAS, DOA, 75% penetration, split up to four hands, no surrender; and all should have either selected "Lucky Ladies," "Bust it!," "Push Your Luck," or "Bad Beat BJ" as the side bet. PICK ONE, G-DDAMN IT!" Same proven table spec and layout at every property, just consistent. Saves player aggrevation and annoyance, saves dealer retraining, saves surveillance errors - what's the problem? SAME CONSISTENT POLICY WITH SAME LAYOUT!

This does drive me nuts, especially at Midwest casinos. Break dealers will have a string where they have three different side bets on BJ games. It slows the game down as they are trying to figure out which game they are on. However, you really should include "21+3." The house edge on the side bet is one of the lower ones, and I actually enjoy that game. I have stopped playing it, and I'm saving money doing so, but of all the side bets I've seen, that's the only one that I will actually play if it's available. And most 21+3 tables are JAM PACKED.

Side bet silliness and inconsistency Drives me nutty too, when on relief string dealing for table dealers, and not on an assigned table - just no reason for the inconistency! I understand that casinos have "arrangements" with gaming suppliers, but on a per-game type basis, can we keep game types together with some consistency??!! Agree fully!

Quote: PaigowDan

2. Crap tables: why does Fiesta HAVE the Fire bet, Sunset [Station] removed it, and Boulder station has the Replay bet? Some have the Field paying 3x on 12, some 2x, some have 5x odds, some 10x odds. (Or Standardize on the "HardCome/Hard Pass bet" of Olympian Gaming as a new bet. :) ) So players complain: "We can use the same 'Boarding Pass' players comp card everywhere, but every crap game is different. What's the deal with THAT!" If Both dice fail to hit the BACK wall - automatic no call/no roll, whether winner, another number, or a seven out! SAME CONSISTENT POLICY WITH SAME LAYOUT!

Quote: tiltpoul

Two different issues with two different responses:
1) Side Bets: I don't care what the layout is in the center, since I don't play them. Much like I watch for two Queen of Hearts on BJ for the "Lucky Ladies," I do like to see when the Fire Bet would have paid out but they don't offer it. But since I don't put a dollar on it, I don't really care. Standardization on this is kind of silly, unless like the above, there are multiple offerings at the same casino.

Not really. It causes disruptions to dealing staff - and player dis-loyalty who favor particualr side bets.

[edit] 2) Rolling dice to backwall: This SHOULD be standardized. Every casino should follow the same procedures.

Absolutely. A shot-takers abuse method, and a ruling that is "either [selectively!] enforced when high-rollers are playing," or brutally enforced when low-rollers/fleas are shooting dice. Unacceptable. HAS to be consistent.

Quote: tiltpoul

It amazes me how Caesars Palace has one set of rules and Flamingo has another... they are owned by the same company and yet they are quite different. I agree; there should be one set of house rules. As far as the dragon hand, as referred to on Pai Gow Plus, yes get rid of it. However, Harrah's Kansas City uses the dragon to the first hand dealt to a nonplayer and allows another player to play that hand at table min (as opposed to having to double). Get rid of the stupid double rule, then get rid of the dragon. Otherwise, I don't mind it.

The dragon hand just sets up another "hand setting perios" - usually for the table minimum - and just horribly drags the game of Pai Gow Poker down - something I know a lot about! Please, - let us just lose this drain!

Quote: PaigowDan

4. Open and Honest Card Counting Policy without lying about it: "IF YOU ARE BELIEVED TO BE RUNNING DOWN A DECK, MANAGEMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO FLAT-BET YOU, - OR ASK YOU TO GO TO THE CSM or COUNTERS' BLACKJACK TABLE WITHOUT APOLOGY. NO HARD FEELINGS, NO ARGUMENTS - JUST BUSINESS."

Quote: tiltpoult

Nice to hear you agree with us on this one... And we thought you were a callous individual!

I am not [heartless], nor a casino operator's lackey [well...maybe a little bit...]
But I did some soul-searching, and can only agree that by paying simple and full attention during the game of blackjack - as you would with any game other reasonable card game environment, it is fully accepotable and reasonable. [#$% Arrgh!]. Especially with your own money on the line - I have FINALLY concluded that it is the only fair and reasonable and intelligent way to play the game offered while dealing in the pit, and I would like to see the casinos' house rules changed by allowing a true version of blackjack that allows this reasonable aspect to be an accepted part of the game. Wow. I actually said that! [Aww! sh]t!! #$%^@~~~!! G-ddamn it...will somebody please just F@#$k##g shoot me and take me out of my traitor misery!!! Auurrghh! Ack-Ack-ack! BANG! I am dead...] Anyway, I now agree this is the only posture that makes sense, and that casino operators are utterly mistaken for considering "public card play discard knowledge" as somehow being "out of bounds," - instead of using this natural card play information as a natural part of the game as somehow falsely being "out of bounds" for a player that selects to use this public intelligent and public information. [more @#$&$*&%!! auuuuggghhh....]
We need a version of casino blackjack that gives up to a 0.0% (or 100% payout) on perfect play, like slots.

Quote: PaigowDan

5. Actually Having an open card-counters' table: Double-Deck, 60% penetration, $5-$25, Double on 10 or 11, Split up to two hands, DAS if 10/11. Count you ass off! Make the game 0.0% house edge if you are counting perfectly - like 100% pay slots, - which we also have....

I think this is a good idea, and advertise it as such. Put up a big flashing neon sign that says "100% payback" and super small type underneath that says "with optimal play." Ironically, I think card counters would avoid this table, and it would end up being filled with grandmas and drunk tourists who think that they will will 100% every time.[/w]

As a game designer who sides closely with casino operators, I am grossly ashamed of myself that I even though of, designed, and proposed a rough sketch for a 0% house edge Blackjack based on freaking card counting of all things. Please just freaking shoot me in the head...personally, I blame my association with a Charles R. Mousseau of Winnipeg, Canada, and his very evil influence on this matter...

Quote: tiltpoul

This is such a touchy issue. I agree that something should be done to limit the behavior, but I can get drunk after one vodka mixer (The 11 I had on New Years Eve turned REALLY UGLY... although...)

Actually that fateful New Years Eve, I vowed I would not gamble, and rather I was going to just drink. I didn't have ALL that much money on me, and I figured table mins would be ridiculous. I kept drinking and drinking and not gambling. Finally, I decided to play some live poker, where I learned, I become the TIGHTEST player (Honestly, I threw away pocket 10s on the button to a small raise). When I did get Aces, basically everybody folded, except one guy who knew he was beat. I won the hand too...

My point is that casinos would have to be careful on this issue. One person's drunk is another ones buzz...

I thought this was the case in all casinos... I didn't realize this was an optioned rule.

I actually considered whether Dan's idea would be viable some time ago. I thought "What if I owned a casino and allowed counters in with the payoff being that if they admitted it then they could play Blackjack with some restrictions rather than being banned".

I think that rather than setting up a separate game for counters it would possibly be better to let a 'confessed counter' play any table game BUT they cannot enter mid-shoe and they can only go to 5x or 10x their minimum bet.

It actually might work as a form of 'achievement' in the sense that a lot of Blackjack players think they play well and, as a lot of players don't spread more than x5, they could see it as a '1-up' thing to tell their friends that they can only bet from 1 - 5 units as they are 'too good'.

On the downside however, if it did take off slightly then you would get more small-time counters in the casino and that could possibly lead to a counter+non-registered counter teaming up and getting the 'novice' to bet more when signalled. Furthermore, a typical player could take advantage if they used it correctly - for example, Mr. X, a known slot player and gambler, targets a confessed counter and waits for him/her to bet a max' bet of, say, $125 ($25-$125) and then decides to bet $500 himself as he is not limited to any bet size.

So, I could see it attracting some players and counters who wish to be able to count at will without any repercussions and enjoy the surroundings rather than focusing on staying under the radar. If it added more players to the casino then that would be a good thing particularly if the casino is struggling with foot traffic. There's nothing better (IMO) than walking into a casino and seeing a thriving table games pit with players enjoying themselves.

When I go to Vegas I'm no longer interested in playing Blackjack to win although I can't help but count the card values as it's 2nd nature. When I play Blackjack (rarely) I will limit myself to a 1-5 spread in a shoe game as I don't want to upset anyone and I'm really just there for the ambiance and to see how the games are being dealt. I still find it challenging and, in some ways, I like the fact that I am playing a better game than anyone else on the table - sort of self-indulgence I guess :-)

Quote: Switch

I actually considered whether Dan's idea would be viable some time ago. I thought "What if I owned a casino and allowed counters in with the payoff being that if they admitted it then they could play Blackjack with some restrictions rather than being banned".

I think that rather than setting up a separate game for counters it would possibly be better to let a 'confessed counter' play any table game BUT they cannot enter mid-shoe and they can only go to 5x or 10x their minimum bet.

Geoff,
That would be too messy and problematical for floor operations in a casino pit to "mix and match" limits on varying players at the same table.
Just MAKE a table where all can play.

One game with one set of rules - where the "fancy" rules and abilities (huge table limits, DOA) that aren't already used by the non-afficionados anyway are restricted, and where their use would announce the card-counters anyway. The result is this:

1. The game is essentially the same of 97% of the people who play it.
2. For the expert, they can play it freely, without ever getting backed-off, and never receiving any shit for their play, and always on friendly terms with the floor and security guards as they play, - no matter how much they take us down for.
A lot of card-counters would like to return to the tables - true?

A Max Rubin/Ian Anderson/Stanford Wong wet dream.

It could attract some counters (as well as wannabe 'I'm a good player' types). Trying to think how a casino would encourage it purely for the fact that they are set hold % targets and a table with (presumably) close to 0% hold will bring the other tables down.

Upper management would have to ok it and accept that it would be separated from the other games in the pit.

I think it's a nice thought but can't see how it could be implemented so that 'both sides' would be satisfied.

Hmmm, I wonder what the managers would say if I had a new game, "Card Counters Blackjack" :-)

Quote: Paigowdan

Some ideas:
1. All Six deck shoe and CSM games should have the same basic rules among a property group in the same "price" range (MGM, Harrahs, Stations, etc.) Why should it differ?

Yeah, while we are at it, let's also make sure that all cars in the same price range have the same features. Why should some have leather seats, and other have a dvd changer? That is inconsistent, and confusing for the consumer, and also complicates the car dealer's job.

Quote:

4. Open and Honest Card Counting Policy without lying about it: "IF YOU ARE BELIEVED TO BE RUNNING DOWN A DECK, MANAGEMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO FLAT-BET YOU, - OR ASK YOU TO GO TO THE CSM or COUNTERS' BLACKJACK TABLE WITHOUT APOLOGY. NO HARD FEELINGS, NO ARGUMENTS - JUST BUSINESS."

Isn't that the current policy anyway? Who lies about it?

Quote:

5. Actually Having an open card-counters' table: Double-Deck, 60% penetration, $5-$25, Double on 10 or 11, Split up to two hands, DAS if 10/11. Count you ass off! Make the game 0.0% house edge if you are counting perfectly - like 100% pay slots, - which we also have....

I think, EvenBob is right about this. No serious/real card counter will ever be seen there. First, because the rules are worse than he can find elsewhere, and second because he does not want casino personnel to associate his face with counting.

Also, I think, that the casino would consider this a bad idea too, because it would popularize counting, and provide a way too good practice ground to people who want to learn before they move to the "real game".

Quote:

6. Alcohol policy: If a player is visibly drunk, cut him off!

That is the current policy as well. It's the definition of "visibly drunk", perhaps, that you have a problem with. Some supervisors are more tolerant than others.
If the guy becomes a nuisance, and bothers other players, he well be ejected from the table. If he does not, then it's none of the casino's business.

Quote:

Some Casinos have got to be responsible for some DUI's and DUI accidents, as well as drunken security incidents at their own properties, IMHO.

Yes, of course. And so do some bars and restaurants, even more so, perhaps. But I don't think there is very much that can be reasonably done about it, aside from putting a police checkpoint at the exit, with a mandatory breathalyzer test. (I don't know why they don't it btw, but think the reason is that the town just does not want to upset the big businesses by scaring their customers away).

Quote: weaselman

Quote: Paigowdan

Some ideas:
1. All Six deck shoe and CSM games should have the same basic rules among a property group in the same "price" range (MGM, Harrahs, Stations, etc.) Why should it differ?

Yeah, while we are at it, let's also make sure that all cars in the same price range have the same features. Why should some have leather seats, and other have a dvd changer? That is inconsistent, and confusing for the consumer, and also complicates the car dealer's job.

That's what's sells - and is what what's needed in Gaming. Nissan and Hyundai - NOT GM and Chrysler - are on the right track.
Aftrer all - One hit movie that is seen by One Billion people - is indeed a successful example of standardization. Perhaps a little bit of consistency is needed here in the gaming industry.
4.

Quote: Dan

Open and Honest Card Counting Policy without lying about it: "IF YOU ARE BELIEVED TO BE RUNNING DOWN A DECK, MANAGEMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO FLAT-BET YOU, - OR ASK YOU TO GO TO THE CSM or COUNTERS' BLACKJACK TABLE WITHOUT APOLOGY. NO HARD FEELINGS, NO ARGUMENTS - JUST BUSINESS."

Quote: weaselman

]Isn't that the current policy anyway? Who lies about it?

Every casino - before they back you off from play or 86-you with another excuse.
That is how it works in the real casino world. You can read about it in this forum.
As for "Flying under the radar," that simply means you cannot even step foot into a real casino without surveillance and security guards tossing you into the street. Nothing to be proud about.

5. Actually Having an open card-counters' table: Double-Deck, 60% penetration, $5-$25, Double on 10 or 11, Split up to two hands, DAS if 10/11. Count you ass off! Make the game 0.0% house edge if you are counting perfectly - like 100% pay slots, - which we also have....

Quote: weaselman

I think, EvenBob is right about this.

Then you too are a moron. P,EOS.

Quote: weaselman

No serious/real card counter will ever be seen there.

For that matter - No serious card counter can pop his head up in a real casino without getting it slapped off! - HELLO!
They've long been expelled, and as for "flying under the radar" - then yes they are - if they're crawling on the floor being unable to even pop their heads up and say hello in public - a sad state of being!
The goal is to bring back Max Rubin, Ian Anderson, and Stanford to to openly play at a table. They can't currently DO THAT unless selling a game. Not even Mike without being backed off - and he'll tell ya himself. My floor supervision tells me this.

Quote: weaselman

First, because the rules are worse than he can find elsewhere,

Then maybe he should play cards cards with his wife and kids at the kitchen table - if he thinks he can dictate the casino's odds.

Quote: weaselman

and second because he does not want casino personnel to associate his face with counting.

If he were any good it he has already been in the black "book" for thirty years and excluded. If not, he's giving cash to the casinos like very other pedestrian player.....Like they are not already in the book of "Restricted Persons" for gambling in the past x years and haven't been ABLE to come back? They are ALL associated with card counting and are restricted from play for decades - and maybe they wish to return legally.
If not - then many NEWBIE card counter may wish to learn an INTEGRAL part of the game - which is card-counting - and in legal play!
Now that never crossed crossed your brain...
Furthermore, by making card-counting a legal and accepted part of the game, a VITAL and INTELLIGENT aspect of the game is now allowed to be played - as part of the game - which is what the other massive p[ost had been clammoring for.

Tilthead- you do not work in the gaming industry - and neiother do you have a clue to get legal, bona-fide FULL blackjack out into the casinos for ALL to play - including card counters.

What is your game design to get it back into the casinos legally??

Quote: weaselman

Also, I think, that the casino would consider this a bad idea too, because it would popularize counting, and provide a way too good practice ground to people who want to learn before they move to the "real game".

Like this site doesn't popularize and defend card counting..If we do - then make we should finally help to make it LEGIT!
If it's legal and accepted, mathematically doable - and gets action - they will want it. That's how game popularity works in the casino industry.

I think the 100% pay card counting tables could work actually. Although, a non-counter could sit down and just model his bet off the legitimate counters sitting down doing all the work. Regardless with a shitty rule set, variance can molest you even on a postive count. I could see the casino's losing almost no money at this and pulling some amateurs in.

However, anybody doing this for real money, wouldn't even consider fingering themselves for surveillance. Even with some sort of assurance that they wouldn't be photographed or profiled, and even if that was the truth, if you play for large money you wouldn't take the risk of losing that side income.

If a special table, I think they should make the bet limits tight so you can't work up a big spread. Card counters can still ply their trade, the good ones can be +ev, the wannabes pay for it by flunking. But no one can make a killing.

I bet the comp's for your action on these tables would be non-existent though :( that's a bit on the discouraging side.

You cannot make that assumption at all.
Between huge action, bad counters, and house rules it might perform about the same as regular Blackjack tables, and so would be the same.

Quote: odiousgambit

If a special table, I think they should make the bet limits tight so you can't work up a big spread. Card counters can still ply their trade, the good ones can be +ev, the wannabes pay for it by flunking. But no one can make a killing.

Yes - the argument is that the spread is 5x - like crap game odds, with double on 10 or 11, no soft hands, and 50%-60% on a double deck or a four deck shoe, - quick to shuffle.
Aside from that - knock yourself out and count your ass off. The best you can do is 0.0% EV - also like crap game odds.
But the sales pitch is like 100% payback slots, if with perfect play - if you can.
Most non-counters do NOT vary their bet limit not knowing.
Most card counters DO vary their bet limit knowing full well the count- but are often mistaken, or get a bad break.
If the table follows the master player there - then okay.
By having 5 spots - not seven, damage is reduced, and speed is increased.

Quote: Paigowdan

We had some "intensity" on the "Is Card Counting Cheating" Thread, and one glaring problem is the lack of transparency, consistency, and open honesty on the part of casino operators on some glaring problems in this regard.
I responded to TheCessPit - who made some good arguments.
//---
Cess - glad to do so, you're right about this.
I will admit there is also a ton of inane B.S. in the gaming industry on the casino operations side, too, (- Now, please, everybody, do NOT post:"Aha!! You see, Dan - you ADMIT it yourself! na-HAAA....!!!")

Some things actually need to be cleaned up on the casino operations end, really some sort of standardization and fearlessly honest policy.

We spend a lot of time constantly re-training dealers and annoying players with petty changes because SOME new shift manager or casino managers does his own tinkering and tweaking of games, thinking it going to make a difference. And floormen "fib" about card-counting policy upfront, only to back you off if you do it successfully.
Some of MY casino operations pet Peeves:
1. replacing one daffy side bet with another all the time/changing house rules all the time!
2. re-writing the pai gow house way every season using a dart-board - instead of a gaming mathematician recommendation!
3. allowing or dis-allowing "money-in-action" rules for multiple hands on pitch blackjack games, etc.
4. No formal written policy on "running down a deck" (Polite "pit speak" for card counting.)

I completely support those ideas.

Quote:

5. Actually Having an open card-counters' table: Double-Deck, 60% penetration, $5-$25, Double on 10 or 11, Split up to two hands, DAS if 10/11. Count you ass off! Make the game 0.0% house edge if you are counting perfectly - like 100% pay slots, - which we also have....

I believe (as in I read somewhere) that the Sahara used to have a open counting table, with players allowed to even discuss the count between themselves.

Did they have a low spread/low max bet? Or was it a no holds bar'd go for it thing? How did it pan out/why is it not around anymore?

Quote: APDave

Did they have a low spread/low max bet? Or was it a no holds bar'd go for it thing? How did it pan out/why is it not around anymore?

I wish I could remember the exact details of the story... it was from one of several "I used to be a pro-gambler" type books I've collected, and don't have the time right now to dig it out.

I think it closed as the table didn't make enough.

Aye, probably no one wanted to sit in it and willingly go into the griffyn's book or whatever other counter database.

Quote: APDave

Aye, probably no one wanted to sit in it and willingly go into the griffyn's book or whatever other counter database.

They shouldn't need to.
It should be absolutely pointless now - in this day and age - by eliminating card counting as a wrongful act in the CASINO's eyes.
But his has to be done on the casino operator's end.

How about just a 100% (with optimal play) blackjack game that allows flat bets only? Your first bet is your minimum and maximum. Walk up and bet $5, that's your min and max. $500, same deal. I don't have the bankroll to even think I can profit from counting cards, so I'd play this game in a heartbeat.

Good idea, - but flat bets are not happening.
It's already that the floorman subjects you to this shit as a punishment - flat betting - if he just thinks you are card counting.
We need someting better. At least on slot/VP - you can go 5x bet.

You can't get 100% with "optimal play" without being able to lower your bet on shit counts, and hammer the positive ones. You could make a favorable rule-set with say 2 to 1 pay blackjacks, early surrender, etc. that should be theoretically 100%, flat-betting makes counting irrelevant.

Hey, I'd like standardization also:

Rooms quoted with or without tax should be standardized and rooms quoted with or without added fees should be standardized too.

Rules should be pretty much standardized as well.

This "for" and "to" in payout odds always confuses me...get that standardized as well.

We are all able to deal with dress codes at various clubs and restaurants. No one is going to show up at the Opera wearing jeans and white shoes. We are able to deal with "neighborhood" descriptions that are a bit lax and with touristy descriptions that are a bit vague about just how "near" something is.

We don't ask for absolute regimentation, but I fail to see why Red Chip Card Counters get backed off at SouthPoint and welcomed elsewhere. We all know dress codes vary and well as codes of conduct but drunken louts are drunken louts everywhere and I don't think policies should vary much.

Suite seems to be a meaningless word. Deluxe has been a universally employed but meaningless travel adjective for years. And "one owner" vehicles seem to be all that is ever available. All girls are "not from an agency" All strip clubs have the hottest girls.

There are advantages to fully and frankly confronting ignorance and adopting an agreed upon policy.

Card counters generate endless articles and casino policy revisions and a few lawsuits, but I don't really know if it should be much of a concern to the casinos. Dice Setters generate the same endless articles but no one really seems to think of them as a threat to the casino.

Quote: APDave

Aye, probably no one wanted to sit in it and willingly go into the griffyn's book or whatever other counter database.

I think it was the opposite. A bunch of sharps hogged the table for for weeks and the margins were either low or negative for the casino, so they shut it down.

If I remember, I'll try to dig out a reference to the story at some point.

Quote: Paigowdan

That's what's sells - and is what what's needed in Gaming. Nissan and Hyundai - NOT GM and Chrysler - are on the right track.

Nissan and Hyundai have different feature though, don't they?
If I like leather seats, but don't care about dvd changer, why force me pay for both?

Likewise, I might prefer interesting, entertaining rules (DAS, double any two cards, surrender etc.) over an decreased house edge (e.g., S17, but no surrender) ... or wise versa. Or, maybe I am willing to play a higher minimum bet in return for a decrease in house edge (or just for fewer restrictions in rules).

What's the point in limiting my options by making all games the same? If you think you have too many customers, and want turn some away, sure ... But otherwise, there is no sane reason to do it.

Quote:

Every casino - before they back you off from play or 86-you with another excuse.
That is how it works in the real casino world. You can read about it in this forum.

I don't know what you are talking about. How exactly do they lie?
Another excuse? You mean, they don't tell you you are being backed off because you are counting? That's just because they can't prove that you are, and don't want to get into an argument with you. In the end of the day, they don't have to provide the reason - "we do not want you to play anymore" is reason enough.

Quote:

As for "Flying under the radar," that simply means you cannot even step foot into a real casino without surveillance and security guards tossing you into the street. Nothing to be proud about.

How needs to be proud about it? You are speaking in riddles.

Quote:

Then you too are a moron. P,EOS.

I would like to say the feeling is mutual, but I don't really think you are a moron. I think, you are just an asshole.

Quote: weaselman

Nissan and Hyundai have different feature though, don't they?
If I like leather seats, but don't care about dvd changer, why force me pay for both?

Because it makes it possible to have them both. The same engine in every line makes every car afforadable or even possible. Simple and cheap to get into it and start driving. Like a Toyota that sold millions all the same way. Likewise, simple and standardized rules helps casino games through reduces expenses (like dealer training), and makes it more accessible because it is more consistent. That's the point.

Quote: weaselman

Likewise, I might prefer interesting, entertaining rules (DAS, double any two cards, surrender etc.) over an decreased house edge (e.g., S17, but no surrender) ... or wise versa. Or, maybe I am willing to play a higher minimum bet in return for a decrease in house edge (or just for fewer restrictions in rules).

No you don't, - like the higher minimum bet has killed the game of Deuces Wild, making it WAY too expensive to play for a cheap game.
Or like having too many options in SuperFun-21 that killed off that game. They are both now pretty much gone. It was striking.

Quote: wealeman

What's the point in limiting my options by making all games the same?

We're not making all the games the same: we're just making the SAME game the same, so you know it and can play it, and making it cheap and easy to play in the first place. Consistency. Anywhere that you play Blackjack, you can play this blackjack, and by removing card counting as a threat to play it. Like a Toyota that sold millions all the same way. Simple and easy to drive, and no hassels driving it.
That's what killed Super-fun-21: too many options making it too expensive to play. You had a Million extra options with SuperFun-21 in a blackjack game that simply killed that game: Double on Any number of cards that you have, no matter how many, and at any time; Surrender at at any time no matter how many cards you have; a Five card 21 pays two-to-one; six cards automatically wins; Your blackjack takes even money even if you didn't ask for it; and they thought counters gravitated to that game. We're looking for a blackjack idea to get away from this:
1. Easy to play, so just play easy blackjack;
2. And...Card counters allowed, so no threats of being backed off.

Quote: weaselman

If you think you have too many customers, and want turn some away, sure ... But otherwise, there is no sane reason to do it.

Yes there a few reasons to play it.
1. Actually, [there are] not enough blackjack customers now.
2. Some new customers are introduced to the game via card counting (like on this board), and it would help the game to remove the threat of being backed off.

Quote: weaselman

I don't know what you are talking about [about casino pit crews lying about backing off card counters]. How exactly do they lie?

Okay:
1. If asked, a casino pit crew or floorman publicy states to you - when you ask them their card counting policy [which only a moron would ask anyway] - and they say that they have no official policy about backing off card counters - when they actually do such a policy.
2. So, You then count cards, and then you raise and lower your bet with the count in a real casino.
3. Then they back you off (ask you to leave then the casino) when they catch you doing it.
4. Then you say to yourself on the way out the door: "Oh! So they lied to me...and they are escorting me out the casino door. I'm such a moron. I get it now...!"
Duh.

Quote: weaselman

Another excuse? You mean, they don't tell you you are being backed off because you are counting? That's just because they can't prove that you are, and don't want to get into an argument with you. In the end of the day, they don't have to provide the reason - "we do not want you to play anymore" is reason enough.

See above, as you are escorted out.

Quote: weaselman

How needs to be proud about it? You are speaking in riddles.

Huh?

Quote: weaselman

I would like to say the feeling is mutual, but I don't really think you are a moron. I think, you are just an asshole.

Ohh...that's different...Speak for yourself.

Different casinos offer different game to create a competitive advantage and disadvantage and to account for costs due to a different cost structure. CET has a bunch of 6-5 games for BJ, MGM generally doesn't. Some casinos like to offer the hand shuffle games. The Peppermill in Reno (where I'm staying this week and Mike was backed off) has a bunch of single deck and double deck 3-2 games with a bit of stingy rules but they do so to compete. I don't think competition should be stifled.

But I'll say it again: get rid of the policy to back off counters and make them flat-bet, or just put in CSMs and vary the rules accordingly to move the advantage around. I would never play at a "counter's table" for the paranoia that EvenBob described... it's pretty easy for a pit boss or security to recognize the skill of your game at the counter table and then more easily back you off somewhere else in the casino, which is the last thing i would want as a counter.

Casinos (not on the strip, mind you) offer all kinds of 100+% VP games because most players don't know how to play it or don't recognize it as such. Once again, at the Peppermill, there's a bank of 5-7-10 DDB and a bunch of NSUD games (in the same bank). Most players are playing by much worse rules at other machines.

As for Dan Lubin and everyone else, let's be a bit more respectful.

Quote: FleaStiff

Hey, I'd like standardization also:

Rooms quoted with or without tax should be standardized and rooms quoted with or without added fees should be standardized too.

We're talking about gambling games here. This is a gamblers forum asking about standardizing gambling games.

Quote: FleaStiff

Rules should be pretty much standardized as well.

Yes, they should, to some degree.

Quote: FleaStiff

This "for" and "to" in payout odds always confuses me...get that standardized as well.

You're tight - it should all be in "to format, instead of the more confusing "for" format.

Quote: FleaStiff

We are all able to deal with dress codes at various clubs and restaurants. No one is going to show up at the Opera wearing jeans and white shoes. We are able to deal with "neighborhood" descriptions that are a bit lax and with touristy descriptions that are a bit vague about just how "near" something is.

We're talking about gambling games here. This is a gamblers forum asking about standardizing gambling games.

Quote: Fleastiff

We don't ask for absolute regimentation, but I fail to see why Red Chip Card Counters get backed off at SouthPoint and welcomed elsewhere. We all know dress codes vary and well as codes of conduct but drunken louts are drunken louts everywhere and I don't think policies should vary much.

We're talking about gambling games here. This is a gamblers forum asking about standardizing gambling games.
they didn't get backed off because of how they dressed.

Quote: Fleasstiff

Suite seems to be a meaningless word. Deluxe has been a universally employed but meaningless travel adjective for years. And "one owner" vehicles seem to be all that is ever available. All girls are "not from an agency" All strip clubs have the hottest girls.

True. Strip club girls are hotter. But..
We're talking about gambling games here. This is a gamblers forum asking about standardizing gambling games.

Quote: fleastiff

There are advantages to fully and frankly confronting ignorance and adopting an agreed upon policy.

Yes. It should be applied to gambling rules in a casino pit.

Quote: fleastiff

Card counters generate endless articles and casino policy revisions and a few lawsuits, but I don't really know if it should be much of a concern to the casinos. Dice Setters generate the same endless articles but no one really seems to think of them as a threat to the casino.

That is true.
They both deserve little attention, and a way to remove BJ card counting attention is to offer a game where you can card count legally, so as not to get attention on a forum, since you can now do it in a casino without problem.

I've openly spoke about such tables as Dan is mentioning at work, I think something along these lines would be worth a shot. 100% payback at Dan's proposed rules? Why not?

Hell, my idea was having the dealer openly state throughout the hand what the count was, but with worse than the 100% payback rules Dan suggested. Why? Well...

While I think EvenBob has a point that "no self respecting counter would be caught dead at this table", these self respecting counters are less than 1% of the total BJ players. How many threads here have statements like "Man, the $25, 3:2 table was empty, RIGHT NEXT TO a chock full 6:5 table!" The general public aren't the people here. They don't understand the math behind the game. Sure, the self counting game is gimmicky, but how many people out there that think "21" was a documentary would look at a counted game as a gold mine? Anyone out there that DOESN't have the mind of a WoV member would think it was cool, which would either A) increase revenue, or at least B) increase good publicity.

Quote: boymimbo

Different casinos offer different game to create a competitive advantage and disadvantage and to account for costs due to a different cost structure. CET has a bunch of 6-5 games for BJ, MGM generally doesn't. Some casinos like to offer the hand shuffle games. The Peppermill in Reno (where I'm staying this week and Mike was backed off) has a bunch of single deck and double deck 3-2 games with a bit of stingy rules but they do so to compete. I don't think competition should be stifled.

Actually, those are very good examples of excessive variety and variance where they can be reduced.

Quote: boymimbo

But I'll say it again: get rid of the policy to back off counters

We were told this would be a good idea and the goal. You guys finally got me on board with this one.

Quote: boymmbo

and make them flat-bet,

not a good idea, as gamblers want some variance in betting levels, that's what they were asking for here

Quote: boymimbo

or just put in CSMs and vary the rules accordingly to move the advantage around.

CSM machines and excessive rule variance is the problem we are seeking to get rid of here.

Quote: boymimbo

I would never play at a "counter's table" for the paranoia that EvenBob described...

then you are as nutty as Bob, as neither the CIA nor the casinos would be after you if you play a game they are offering, - nor would they even care! Do they go after you as an enemy of the state for playing 100% payout slots at some casino? I wouldn't be paranoid about it, and if I were, I would take medication for it and continue to play. Actually, the cocktail waitresses bring the medication for free...one of the perqs of casino play....

Quote: boymimbo

it's pretty easy for a pit boss or security to recognize the skill of your game at the counter table and then more easily back you off somewhere else in the casino, which is the last thing i would want as a counter.

No, because if you are not playing blackjack, you'd be playing dice or Roulette where counting does not apply and no one is worrying about it or you, and if you were playing blackjack, you can play at any table you choose. If they did think you were counting, the could then ask you to go back to the other table anyway.

Quote: boymimbo

Casinos (not on the strip, mind you) offer all kinds of 100+% VP games because most players don't know how to play it or don't recognize it as such.

Exactly, it is the same thing here, and it works as a good casino policy. I was just trying to apply it to blackjack because it is such a good policy.

Quote: boymimbo

As for Dan Lubin and everyone else, let's be a bit more respectful.

My apologies. That is a good idea.

If I had a casino I would make a BJ game using one of those IDeal shoes from shuffle master and have it attached to a computer monitor that displays the count as well as some different types of BJ counting. I would also display the number of aces left in the shoe. In exchange I would put some stingy rules like BJ paying even money etc... I think people who are interested in counting would get a kick out of this and the house edge would be higher than a regular game. The BJ counters on the good bj tables would be sent here. Perhaps this is an idea for a new BJ game. One could even advertise this with a slogan such as "We do the counting for you" I would play it with a 6 deck shoe with a 70% penetration point. I like the fact of giving the players an advantage on the possibility of a huge positive count, but would be saved with the high shuffle point.

Quote: Face

I've openly spoke about such tables as Dan is mentioning at work, I think something along these lines would be worth a shot. 100% payback at Dan's proposed rules? Why not?

Hell, my idea was having the dealer openly state throughout the hand what the count was, but with worse than the 100% payback rules Dan suggested. Why? Well...

While I think EvenBob has a point that "no self respecting counter would be caught dead at this table", these self respecting counters are less than 1% of the total BJ players. How many threads here have statements like "Man, the $25, 3:2 table was empty, RIGHT NEXT TO a chock full 6:5 table!" The general public aren't the people here. They don't understand the math behind the game. Sure, the self counting game is gimmicky, but how many people out there that think "21" was a documentary would look at a counted game as a gold mine? Anyone out there that DOESN't have the mind of a WoV member would think it was cool, which would either A) increase revenue, or at least B) increase good publicity.

I like the idea.
I cannot patent it get any ownership of the idea, and I don't want it.
I just want to see it go public and become established, if only to reduce the card counting craze lunacy on the Internet gambling forums saying how great it is and what a God given right it is to be able to count cards without harassment.

If it is not actually cheating, - and maybe it's not - then let us end this fantasy that it is.
Mkes sense to my crazy mind.

This was tried already in AC when Resorts opened.
They decided that counters would not be backed
off or banned. It lasted exactly 2 weeks before the
casino threw in the towel. Legit counters made a
fortune in those 2 weeks, Ken Uston included. The
only way it would work now is to change the rules,
as Dan is suggesting. Sure, you would get the 95%
of counters from Bumshit, Iowa who don't know what
they're doing anyway and were never a threat. But
any legit counter would never play at a table where
the rules make the game impossible to win in the long run, or
where they can be identified once this nutty idea
doesn't work and everything goes back to the way
it was before. For an AP, cover is everything. Having
your pic posted in every casino as a known counter
makes your job 10 times harder. And it is our god
given right to count cards with or without harassment.

Quote: paigowdan

Count you ass off! Make the game 0.0% house edge
if you are counting perfectly

Then what would be the point, Dan. The whole idea
of counting is to have the edge. Take that away and
its just a game of tic tac toe, nobody can win.

Quote: Paigowdan

Because it makes it possible to have them both.

But I don't want both! That's the point.
And I don't appreciate businesses forcing me to pay for stuff I don't want. That's racketeering.

Quote:

The same engine in every line makes every car afforadable or even possible.

That's not my problem or my decision. If the business finds it feasible to have a variety of different products, accommodating the requirements of different types of customers, the thing to do is applaud their innovation, not invent regulations to shut it down.

Quote:

Simple and cheap to get into it and start driving.

So, you like it simple and cheap, while I prefer it sophisticated and inexpensive. There is nothing wrong with your choice, like there is nothing wrong with mine either. Thus the need for a variety.

Quote:

No you don't, - like the higher minimum bet has killed the game of Deuces Wild, making it WAY too expensive to play for a cheap game.

So? Not all products that make it to the market turn out to be viable. Some will die because they are too expensive, or not as good as other or whatever. That's not the reason to forcibly kill those that are doing just fine.
If a particular game or a flavor of blackjack or a particular variation of bj rules proves not attractive to the customers, it will go away by itself. There is no need to take any "standardization" action killing games people actually enjoy playing along the way to make that happen.

Quote:

We're not making all the games the same: we're just making the SAME game the same,

You say six, I say half dozen.
What is "the same game" anyway? Are you talking about a name? Blackjack is a name of a class of games, not just one game.
"A game" is defined by its rules, not its names. Are single-zero roulette and double-zero the same game or different?

Quote:

so you know it and can play it, and making it cheap and easy to play in the first place.

I know it, and can play it as it is. I find it pretty cheap to play (the cheapest game in the house), and I don't want it to be easy. I find games, that are easy to play boring.

Quote:

We're looking for a blackjack idea to get away from this:

Who are "we"? I certainly am not ...

Quote:

1. Easy to play, so just play easy blackjack;

I don't view ease as a benefit at all. The harder it is, the more interesting. Bring it all!
If you want easy, play baccarat.

Quote:

2. And...Card counters allowed, so no threats of being backed off.

I am fine with the threat, can handle it just fine. The actual rules of the game I am playing are way more important to me than the hypothetical threat, that isn't even scary. I am not afraid of getting backed off, it's just a game, you know ...

Quote:

1. Actually, [there are] not enough blackjack customers now.

If that really is the case, the market will take care of it. Some games will close, some tables will disappear.
There is no need to regulated it artificially by introducing "consistency".
If you feel there are not enough customers now, when they actually have a good array of choices, wait and see what happens when you take the choices away. I mean, some people who play now will certainly not like when their game disappears, and go away. How do you expect to solve the "not enough customers" problem by deteriorating the level of the service you provide? That just boggles my mind.

I had trouble finding a free spot to play in MS the other day BTW, so I have to take your "not enough customers" assertion with a grain of salt. Maybe there is not enough customers willing to play your "standardized" games on the strip, that pay 6:5 for blackjack etc... but old good "3:2, S17, unlimited DAS, surrender available" blackjack tables seem to be pretty busy nowadays to my unprofessional eye.

Quote:

2. Some new customers are introduced to the game via card counting (like on this board), and it would help the game to remove the threat of being backed off.

For the hundredth time, it's not a threat. Especially, not for "new customers", that just got introduced to the game.

Quote:

Okay:
1. If asked, a casino pit crew or floorman publicy states to you - when you ask them their card counting policy [which only a moron would ask anyway] - and they say that they have no official policy about backing off card counters - when they actually do such a policy.

As you know, I actually did ask a floor supervisor about card counting the other day, and he told me that if they think I count, they will back me off. So, there goes your theory.
No, he did not lie to me.

Quote:

2. So, You then count cards, and then you raise and lower your bet with the count in a real casino.
3. Then they back you off (ask you to leave then the casino) when they catch you doing it.

It is their God given right to back me off for any reason or for no reason.

Quote:

Huh?

You said there was nothing to be proud about in connection with being backed off (or with having backed off a customer - I am not sure). I did not get that remark, because I don't understand who and why is looking for reasons to be proud in a casino.

Quote:

Ohh...that's different...Speak for yourself.

Of course, it's different. I ALWAYS AM speaking for myself.

I would assume a counter might actually play a counting table some to establish cred as a pretty good novice. Just another way to establish cover. Novices are going to play everywhere, so it's not like anyone is immediately identified from where they play.

Of course, that would only be useful as long as there are at least two options in the same casino as to what to play.

Quote: rxwine

I would assume a counter might actually play a counting table some to establish cred as a pretty good novice.

Thats what would happen. Bad counters would
perfect their games at the counting tables, learn
how to count under pressure, etc, before they
moved onto the real tables. And good counters
would never play at the counting tables, the
rules make it impossible to get an edge.

Quote: EvenBob

This was tried already in AC when Resorts opened.

Bob, this was three decades ago, or three centuries ago in gaming terms. We know about that. We read the blackjackforum here also.

Quote: EvenBob

They decided that counters would not be backed off or banned. It lasted exactly 2 weeks before the casino threw in the towel. Legit counters made a
fortune in those 2 weeks, Ken Uston included.

Which is why the Nevada State Senate does not have the reach into the casinos that Nevada Gaming has. We know about that, and have known about that in the interim 30 years since then. Nevada has learned from NJ's mistakes.

Quote: EvenBob

The only way it would work now is to change the rules, as Dan is suggesting.

Yes, indeed. This is the whole point of the thread. Kind of like the way New Jersey is doing it now, but with a little tighter limits and fewer mistakes. And maybe we should try this, instead of continuing the ridiculous fantasy that knowing and seeing and considering the discards from a shoe is somehow illegal or cheating, as this board had forcefully explained to me that it is not.

Quote: EvenBob

Sure, you would get the 95% of counters from Bumshit, Iowa, who don't know what
they're doing anyway
- they might be offended by this off-hand comment in Iowa, and I am told that I am rude for plain speaking
and were never a threat.
not in New jersey, not here, not anywhere - thats a point I'm trying to make]
But any legit counter would never play at a table where the rules make the game even harder to win,
yes they will play, - if offered fabulous conditions like betting spreads
or where they can be identified once this nutty idea doesn't work
no, Bob, the CI A is not involved with this idea, or with 100% payout slot for that matter
and everything goes back to the way it was before...
which was not good, I mean really bad, and that we are trying to change now, in spite of your useless comments.
For an AP, cover is everything.
Yeah, no shit, I know, and nothing kills off the need for cover by making it completely legitimate so that you don't have to have or even think about cover
Havingyour pic posted in every casino as a known counter
- what - if counting is now a normal part of the game? This would be approximately as innocent and legal as hitting a hand of 9 against a dealer's up card of Ace. What they going to do - do you think the CIA will take your picture for being a grandmother from Kansas on a Sunny day?
makes your job 10 times harder.
No, it doesn't if it is approved like craps or Roulette
And it is our god given right to count cards with or without harassment
I agree - That's my point with this, clown.

From what I heard at this board, - and you guys managed to finally get me to agree - it should be our God-given right to play Blackjack with our brains of card knowledge, and with Zero fear of being backed off, or getting into ANY trouble at all - as this should be a natural part of the game of Blackjack. I get it, and had submitted a game design proposal. That's the whole point of the thread - to give a new beginning, a new allowance, where you can play blackjack in a casino without it being a problem - like 100% payout slots not being a problem.

Now I'm getting confused, Dan. Lay this out
again for me. You said in your first post that
the rules would be changed so the counters
edge is 0.0%. You said:

Quote: Paigowdan

Count you ass off! Make the game 0.0% house edge
if you are counting perfectly

Have you changed this? Because if you
haven't, and the counter can't win long
term, whats the fricking POINT? We
play to win, not break even.

Quote: rxwine

I would assume a counter might actually play a counting table some to establish cred as a pretty good novice. Just another way to establish cover. Novices are going to play everywhere, so it's not like anyone is immediately identified from where they play.

Of course, that would only be useful as long as there are at least two options in the same casino as to what to play.

If such an idea takes off, do you need or even want any cover to play any blackjack? For that matter, do you need cover to play Roulette or dice or Pai Gow Poker?

To give up the idea of cover if it is no longer needed.

Quote: EvenBob

Now I'm getting confused, Dan. Lay this out
again for me. You said in your first post that
the rules would be changed so the counters
edge is 0.0%. You said:



Have you changed this? Because if you
haven't, and the counter can't win long
term, whats the fricking POINT? We
play to win, not break even.

Who is ''we'' Bob? Are you trying to say that you are a big-time counter who takes millions from the stupid casinos? Is that why you have so much time to be the resident WoV asswhip? You earn enough in your once a year jaunt to Vegas, where you own something (I assume a trailer), that you can post here the rest of the time? I recall something about you not gambling, that you only play when you have a guaranteed win. I guess that is why you talk so much, you never step foot in a casino.