Casinos cheat ... here's how ...

And then ... "casinos" do cheat ... not by fixing their games, who needs to break the law where there are easy and legal ways to take more money from patrons ... here are 4 ways, there are many, many more ... "casinos" creativity in taking more money from gamblers is boundless ...

1) Expiration dates

2) Blackjack 6-to-5

3) Preferential shuffling

4) Resort fees

ETC ...

It's so easy for casinos to "cheat" legally ... so very easy ...

--Dorothy

Quote: DorothyGale

It's so easy for casinos to "cheat" legally ... so very easy ...

--Dorothy

The distinction has been rather definitively drawn, in other threads, between shady/questionable/ethically dubious casino practices, and outright cheating. Both casinos and other business entities do a great deal of both; although I would agree that the former deeds outnumber the latter (in most cases), I do NOT agree that the ease of the former means that the latter will never be done, by casinos, Enron, Madoff, Congress, or any other profit-motivated institution.

For one thing, shady business practices are generally noticeable by the public; cheating generally isn't. It all comes down to a simple risk/reward calculation, which, in the absence of moral scruples or other such namby-pamby considerations (the complete and utter absence, in the case of the casino industry), may equate to the decision to cheat being the best available way to enhance the bottom line.

Quote: mkl654321

The distinction has been rather definitively drawn, in other threads, between shady/questionable/ethically dubious casino practices, and outright cheating.

The only cases of outright cheating that circulate in the newspapers are cases where a casino manager will throw a drawing so that a whale who lost a lot of money will win a car. I can't imagine a casino cheating at one of the games when it is so easy to change the paytables.

Two casino owners of the Golden Nugget were goofing off in front of the cameras for the cast of "The Sopranos" by throwing them cards. Unfortunately they had to pay a rather hefty fine to Gaming Comission which does not recognize goofing off under any circumastances.

I have never seen, nor heard from anyone who has seen, a gaming commission representative entering the casino and taking the dice from the table and measuring and spinning them for patrons to see. I have not seen or heard of them taking the cards from a shuffler and counting them down.

Does anyone have any knowledge of this type of activity by the gaming commission? Does it occur or does it not? Are there regulations to prevent the gaming commission from doing this? Should the gaming commission be allowed or required to do this?

Quote: Headlock

I have never seen, nor heard from anyone who has seen, a gaming commission representative entering the casino and taking the dice from the table and measuring and spinning them for patrons to see. I have not seen or heard of them taking the cards from a shuffler and counting them down.
Does anyone have any knowledge of this type of activity by the gaming commission?

Before the tables open for the day, I've seen CCC personnel in Atlantic City walking around as the calipers were being deployed. It's not a big deal. And it's probably more in the casinos' interest to have unbiased dice in the event that sharp-eyed customers might pick up on some anomaly.

I work in a casino...they don't cheat, they just open the doors.

Quote: SanchoPanza

Before the tables open for the day, I've seen CCC personnel in Atlantic City walking around as the calipers were being deployed. It's not a big deal. And it's probably more in the casinos' interest to have unbiased dice in the event that sharp-eyed customers might pick up on some anomaly.

I would not expect an unusual distribution of numbers, which could be observed, but rather an alteration of the timing.

I have a further question, for those who believe casinos cheat; how does this belief affect your actions?

I firmly believe that online casinos cheat; I do not gamble online because of that. I don't believe that they all cheat everyone. But believe that is is highly probable that a given casino would not offer a fair game, and I have no way of knowing whether or not I'm bucking both the edge and the programming, and I don't feel confident playing, so I don't play. However, I don't believe b&m casinos cheat. I just think it's a losing proposition in general no matter how you cut it, and I budget entertainment dollars accordingly because I get a good experience from it, it scratches my itch.

But if I thought I was being cheated I wouldn't play. So, if you play, why? And I don't mean the question sarcastically; I believe that you think casinos cheat, yet you play anyhow. I wouldn't, but you do. Why?

Quote: appistappis

I work in a casino...they don't cheat, they just open the doors.

Yeah, that is all that is necessary. Cheating would add so little to their bottom line anyway. And what are they going to do? Make the ball stop on red? Or Black?... their money comes from "the action" providing them a "vig". Some short term alteration of red or black would only hurt them.

Quote: Mosca

I have a further question, for those who believe casinos cheat; how does this belief affect your actions?

It doesn't in general, except for, maybe, being more vigilant (if I play all night, and not get a single blackjack, chances are, I'll never return to that casino).

Quote:

But if I thought I was being cheated I wouldn't play. So, if you play, why? And I don't mean the question sarcastically; I believe that you think casinos cheat, yet you play anyhow. I wouldn't, but you do. Why?

I know that banks cheat, but still use credit cards. I do pay close attention to my statements however (and do find "mistakes" every now and then). I think of this (the chance of getting cheated) as part of the costs. If the cost becomes too large, I'll stop using the cheating institution.

Quote: Mosca

I have a further question, for those who believe casinos cheat; how does this belief affect your actions?

It makes me more vigilant. I am therefore that much less inclined to dismiss a horrible session as just the unfortunate result of variance. I also change casinos frequently (I lost seventeen hands in a row--it was PROBABLY just bad luck, but why not just walk down the street?).

I do feel that given the volume of customers, my chances of being cheated in any given session are relatively small. I also play at stakes where it would not be worthwhile for the casino, as in risk-reward ratio, to cheat me.

The above notwithstanding, I used to play blackjack for significant stakes, at a semiprofessional level, and I observed cheating, as Haley Joel Osmont said in "The Sixth Sense", "ALL THE TIME". Mostly, I wasn't the one who was being cheated, because part of my "cover" was to always be the third or fourth smallest bettor at the table. One time, I saw as Asian man, who had been betting $25 a hand, grimace and pull $2000 out of his pocket. In a series of swift, fluid motions, the dealer swooped up all the cards, pushed them together, did three pull-through shuffles, and dealt herself a blackjack. I was so in awe that I completely forgot to remove my minimum $15 bet, and lost it while the Asian guy's $2000 was being scarfed. The Asian guy walked away mumbling, and I (genuinely impressed), said to the dealer, "Wow. that was efficient." She laughed and replied, "Thanks! I got hit hard before my last break, so..." What I thought was interesting was that she didn't even do the pull-through in a particularly undetectable manner. Evidently she had always gotten away with it, and frankly, I only saw it because I watch every shuffle closely. Similarly, when a dealer deals seconds from a hand-held game, if she does it clumsily, you can detect the sound--but only if you know what to listen for.

Okay. What was in it for her, though? Why would she care? Was this in a casino, or a "private game" situation? For her it is all risk with no reward. If she gets caught and a player demands the tape, she's put her career on the line for nothing; the house doesn't care, they'd give her up in a heartbeat.

Quote: Mosca

Okay. What was in it for her, though? Why would she care? Was this in a casino, or a "private game" situation? For her it is all risk with no reward. If she gets caught and a player demands the tape, she's put her career on the line for nothing; the house doesn't care, they'd give her up in a heartbeat.

1. A dealer whose game showed poor results, i.e., insufficient profit, would gradually come under suspicion. That suspicion would be, specifically, that she was deliberately losing to a confederate. Casino bosses, being both ignorant and paranoid, would come down on the dealer much sooner than later for this; I've known several dealers who were summarily fired for having a couple of bad shifts (i.e., they lost). The flip side of this is that some dealers (again, a couple of whom I knew) were indeed blowing off money to confederates, and in order to "balance the books", they would cheat other customers. What was truly indicative of the bosses' epic ignorance was that because of this, a dealer who had a couple of bad results probably actually WAS honest.

I realize that the above doesn't address the thrust of your question, which is how would the dealer profit from deliberately cheating AT THE HOUSE'S BEHEST. Well, for one thing, it may not have been as blatant as all that. She may be fed a subtle message to "protect your game", which she may interpret as "blow away winners". Remember, the house has never made a distinction between skilled players and cheating players; even now, the majority of the American public thinks that card counting is cheating, showing the effectiveness of casino propaganda. So the casinos feel that all's fair in love and war. A player wins--he must have cheated. Therefore, it's OK to cheat him. That's the way they think. Really.

All the above means that a casino blackjack dealer's performance is largely evaluated by how much his or her game wins. It's irrational and unfair, but those two words pretty much sum up casino-employee relations in general. So there is subtle, and sometimes explicit, pressure for the dealer to make as much money for the house as possible. Performance and compliance are rewarded--as in, being allowed to keep your job.

The above information is gleaned from my experience of having dealt blackjack in over a dozen Vegas casinos, as well as having played advantage-player blackjack for more than two decades. So I may be a paranoid-delusional raving nutjob for saying all these terrible things about the noble casino industry, but I'm an INFORMED paranoid-delusional raving nutjob, at least.

I don't think the industry is noble; I think it is the same as all the other industries, in that it runs sort of on autopilot. People come in, do their job, go home, get paid. It might be my ignorance, but I just don't see it. A job that gets too emotionally involved for folks usually isn't worth it to them. Generally speaking, people prefer to punch the clock, do the routine, make no waves. Smile, deal, break, repeat.

Thanks for the insight into your point of view. It's not going to change my mind, but in return I won't try to change yours, either. i just wanted to understand where you are coming from. Thanks.

If 6 to 5 is cheating, then 3 to 2 is just cheating on a lesser scale - both carry a house edge, correct?

Preferential shuffling - the casino is just using their head, but to avoid that "cheating," just play the first hand only after a shuffle.

Quote: dm

If 6 to 5 is cheating, then 3 to 2 is just cheating on a lesser scale - both carry a house edge, correct?

Preferential shuffling - the casino is just using their head, but to avoid that "cheating," just play the first hand only after a shuffle.

6:5 isn't "cheating"--it's making the game dramatically worse for the player, but they tell you right on the layout that a blackjack pays 6:5. So there's no element of concealment or deception.

Advertising "SINGLE DECK BLACKJACK--BACK BY POPULAR DEMAND!!!!" on your marquee (as Bally's did for months) is shady, deceptive, misleading, and unethical (since the game they were dealing, i.e., 6:5 single deck blackjack had never existed before, and thus couldn't possibly be "BACK", and it's highly improbable that ANY player "demanded" that he be paid 6:5 instead of 3:2 on his blackjacks). But it isn't, strictly speaking, cheating.

Preferential shuffling IS cheating, since it introduces a non-random element into the dealing of the cards. Furthermore, it brings in a condition that profoundly affects the game (to the detriment of the players, although for the purposes of discussion, that isn't a prerequisite), WITHOUT INFORMING THE PLAYERS OF THAT. To put it another way, how many people do you think would play if there was a sign of the table that said, "SHOE WILL BE SHUFFLED WHENEVER IT BECOMES MORE LIKELY FOR THE PLAYERS TO WIN"?

Quote: mkl654321

how many people do you think would play if there was a sign of the table that said, "SHOE WILL BE SHUFFLED WHENEVER IT BECOMES MORE LIKELY FOR THE PLAYERS TO WIN"?

Just about as many as play now without that sign or who play slot machines at exorbitant prices or who take insurance or who make side bets or who go to strip clubs or who go to frenzied nightclubs to shell out a fortune for Bottle Service or who get long-hauled at the airport.