If BJ was invented today, could the inventor be charged with conspiracy and cheating?

If BJ was invented today, could the inventor be charged with conspiracy and cheating because the game can be beaten via legal methods, such as card counting and shuffle tracking?

These days there are several games being invented by what seems to be everyone and their brother. It makes you wonder if some of these fly by night game inventors have knowledge of some built in flaw within some of their game designs, of which the casinos might be unaware. If such a game inventor had knowledge of such game flaws could they be charged with conspiracy and cheating? What if they did not have advanced knowledge of such flaws? Perhaps some kind of negligence?

Quote: Keyser

If BJ was invented today, could the inventor be charged with conspiracy and cheating because the game can be beaten via legal methods, such as card counting and shuffle tracking?

Maybe it would be invented by ShuffleMaster, and require a "Card Randomizer" (CSM) that "ensures the required 12 decks are always completely randomized..."

No, they would be charged with anything, except stupidity.
If a casino puts in a defeatable game, that is, if it gets past gaming approval, it gets pulled and taken off the approved games list.
Blackjack was for the longest time considered safe, undefeatable, etc., until Edward Thorpe defined a specific type of system to count it down, using IBM computers in his research to develop and verify the exact method of card counting. This was all described in his book, Beat the Dealer. Since BJ was already in place, defenses were applied to it (disallowing players to count cards, reducing bet ranges and penetration depths, etc.) Casinos operators define and notice the distinction in players who don't count versus those who do, and may bar them at their option. In one state where there are "all must play" laws, BJ is so heavily limited in deck penetration and bet spread tolerance that it is uncountable as the casinos offer it.

Edit:
It does seem like everyone and his brother has a casino table game idea. I'm one of the guys that review new games for playability, feasibility, and suitability for a table games distributor. While many games are seen, it doesn't mean such games have much of a chance of become adopted by game distributors or casino operators. You follow up with a game idea to the best of your ability, and it might pay off.

Perhaps some of the inventors can be perhaps a bit to analytical, while overlooking the obvious.

Quote: Keyser

If BJ was invented today, could the inventor be charged with conspiracy and cheating because the game can be beaten via legal methods, such as card counting and shuffle tracking?

I don't think so. Card counting can (in theory) be developed without a computer, it's just that a computer makes the calculations more tractable. The "Four Horseman of Aberdeen" did many of the calculations in the 1950's before digital computers were invented. I would think it would be up to the operators to hire independent mathematicians (like the Wizard) to check the probabilities of the game.

Now the legendary series of plays that are supposed to be embedded in some slot machines that will make them pay off, would allow a game developer to be charged with cheating. But these are probably just part of the urban legend. In one of the final scenes in Oceans 11, Brad Pitt sets one of the slot machines in the airport to hit a jackpot to compensate all the suffering they put the AAA hotel evaluation agent through.

For a realistic scenario, one online poker company hired someone to look for bugs in their software. He found the bugs, but when the company did not acknowledge him, he exploited the software bugs to see the other players cards, and won hundreds of thousands of dollars in poker. But since he didn't camaflouge his play, he was caught.

Quote: Keyser

Perhaps some of the inventors can be perhaps a bit to analytical, while overlooking the obvious.

Or biased, that is to say blind to his child's beauty - or lack thereof.

That's what the game distributor's reviewers and the various gaming control boards do, that is, to ensure that a game is up to snuff.
Obviously, a patent lawyer or game mathematician won't turn down a paying client, but may advise the client as to what kind of shot a game realistically has, and ask if they wish to continue or persue the idea.

You'd have to prove that the inventor knew.

In light of the events surrounding the exploitability of the Baccarat side bet, I'd say it's quite possible the inventor did NOT know. Further, you could argue that the casino is also at fault for not discovering the weakness in their own math analysis.

Quote: pacomartin

Now the legendary series of plays that are supposed to be embedded in some slot machines that will make them pay off, would allow a game developer to be charged with cheating. But these are probably just part of the urban legend.

Ron Harris was a famous example of a casino cheat, who, as the senior computer systems auditor Nevada Gaming, rigged some slot machine software codes to be triggered by sequences. Another account of his shananigans here.

Quote: pacomartin

For a realistic scenario, one online poker company hired someone to look for bugs in their software. He found the bugs, but when the company did not acknowledge him, he exploited the software bugs to see the other players cards, and won hundreds of thousands of dollars in poker. But since he didn't camaflouge his play, he was caught.

They should have listened to him.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

You'd have to prove that the inventor knew.

In light of the events surrounding the exploitability of the Baccarat side bet, I'd say it's quite possible the inventor did NOT know. Further, you could argue that the casino is also at fault for not discovering the weakness in their own math analysis.

Casino operators don't do any mathematical analysis. It's up to the game inventor or distributor to supply a mathematical report for gaming approval; the game inventor must know if his game is defeatable or not, just by going through the process of developing a new game, with real intention and purpose, and from follow-up review. Occasionally, a bet is discovered to be "slightly countable," and examples of this are some Baccarat side bets, which some gaming mathematicians very eagerly shed light on. In these cases, I may say that these mathematicians could be considered more thorough than the original mathematicians on these game projects.

As for the casino operators, the casino just uses a list of approved games, and selects which gaming products they wish to install, that they feel would provide the best mix of products to offer their clients.

I was saying "You could argue...."


But to the original question, I kinda think if BJ were introduced today, 6:5 would be the standard, along with other crappy rules, and since it would be a new carnival game, nobody would complain about the rules.

And most important, an advantage player would only cut the edge, not get able to get an edge.

Therefore, the inventor wouldn't be charged with anything, since that game would still be negative EV.

If BJ was invented today it would die quickly , as would craps !!

Reminds me of the movie Ocean's 13 (correct me if I'm wrong on the number). As I recall the crew trying to rob the Bellagio got them to accept a game on field trial. Unlike how it usually goes down, this new game was staffed by the game owners. This was to get the mole/dealer the requisite security clearance.

The most unrealistic scene was casino presidents getting to a bidding war at a gaming show to field trial this game.

To answer the question asked, putting ethics aside, it would still be a lousy idea. New games are watched very carefully and have low limits. Once it was down $5,000 or so I think the casino manager would pull it out. Should the inventor bide his time, hoping to attack it after the field trial, then he risks another advantage player figuring out the flaw and attacking it first. If one can think of a game good enough to get a field trial my advice would be to play it legitimately and hope it becomes the next Three Card Poker.

Quote: Wizard

The most unrealistic scene was casino presidents getting to a bidding war at a gaming show to field trial this game.

I've only seen the movie a couple times, but my impression was the "bidding war" was all a ruse to get Bank to buy the game. Although they don't always show it, there are WAY more than 13 people in on any heist. The casino presidents may have had the same reasons that Eliot Gould's character did for getting back at Bank.

My experience is that casinos are very slow to move and that they are at times dazzlingly inefficient. I can see how they could quite easily overlook a bad game and how it would take a series of memos about memos about memos about memos about a clear cover on a memo about a memo before such a game would be removed.

Inefficiencies like certain comp policies, some player rebate offers, transparent pai gow tiles etc., immediately come to mind.

If Blackjack is to be invented today, it would be like baccarat in that the dealer makes all plays: the Customers bet on the outcome. This would require some silly hit/stand rules and probably prohibit DD and Splits. The Bank (Dealer as we know it) would probably lose all ties except Blackjack ties because the Players rules aren't too stupid. Nonetheless, another place your money on a winner game.... simple, rather unintelligent, with a chance at counting the extremes of +6 and -6 being temporarily profitable.