Dave: Any good Double deck around michigan,illinois?

[Dave]

Hey. I'm planning on going to a casino soon and wondered if anyone knew of any good double deck games around michigan, illinois, indiana, or ohio? I already know Grand Victoria is terrible. Has anyone been to St. Charles station in Missouri? A site says its good but it may be out-dated. Anyone been to Lady Luck or President in Illinois?

[Ouchez]

It has been confirmed that casino game protection agents read these pages religiously.

Posting about any good games, and few are left, will only lead to their demise.

I know of players accosted at the BJ tables by casino execs for what they have written on the net, as well as pit bosses engaging posters in conversation about postings, good and bad.

I presently know of one who may be barred for what he DID NOT write about a certain casino and pit boss.

I also know of one poster who was threatened with bodily injury if he is ever even seen in one particular casino chain! All from what he wrote.

Blasting burn joints is OK but let's not mention the decent ones.

[SnoopDarr]

There are plenty of online databases of the types of blackjack offered everywhere... I wouldnt count on anyone who knows a good game telling you or anyone else

> Hey. I'm planning on going to a casino soon
> and wondered if anyone knew of any good
> double deck games around michigan, illinois,
> indiana, or ohio? I already know Grand
> Victoria is terrible. Has anyone been to St.
> Charles station in Missouri? A site says its
> good but it may be out-dated. Anyone been to
> Lady Luck or President in Illinois?

[Sun Runner]

> It has been confirmed that casino
> protection agents read these pages religiously.

> Posting about any good games, and few are left, will only lead to their demise.

> Blasting burn joints is OK but let's not
> mention the decent ones.

If you are talking about a game being good because of a trackable shuffle, a specific dealer dealing deeper than normal, or something the casino may not be aware of, I would agree. However, if a game is good because the rules or the penetration is good, I imagine it's because the casino is trying to attract the play and your posting about it would be right down their alley.

> I know of players accosted at the BJ tables
> by casino execs for what they have written
> on the net, as well as pit bosses engaging
> posters in conversation about postings, good
> and bad.

> I presently know of one who may be barred
> for what he DID NOT write about a certain
> casino and pit boss.

> I also know of one poster who was threatened
> with bodily injury if he is ever even seen
> in one particular casino chain! All from
> what he wrote.

How is it that individual "A" gets associated with certain "posts" by the casino dudes trolling these boards? I still find it difficult to comprehend how the casino's trolling efforts result in a signifigant dent in the play of a specific poster. I would imagine it is the actions and activity of individual "A" off these boards that gets them in trouble.

If I were individual "A", and I had been made and subsequently roughed up because of my posts, I believe I would change my handle [and my IP address! ].

SR

[ET Fan]

However, if a game is good because the rules or the penetration is good, I imagine it's because the casino is trying to attract the play and your posting about it would be right down their alley.

I sincerely believe many small casinos offering good conditions (and they are getting few and far between) do it simply because they think counting is a lot of HOOEY! Some in the top echelon know it works, but they don't win every political battle, plus communication is never perfect with the PBs and dealers on the front line.

The second reason casinos offer decent conditions is time and the ploppy effect. Poor penetration reduces hands per hour and hurts their bottom line. Unnatural rules, like only allowing doubles on certain totals, angers ploppies. Surrender actually HELPS the casinos bottom line, since very few players use it correctly.

There may be a few casinos that actually understand the delicate balance between rules, good vs. poor counters, free advertising, and the ploppy effect, but those casinos are very rare indeed. And those places are typically interested in offering games just barely better than their nearest competitor.

There is simply no reason to say anything good about a casino ever, in a public forum. If we were getting PAID to make entertaining trip reports, it would be a different story. Just spell out the rules and the pen. Anyone capable of taking advantage of good conditions can recognize them instantly. If the reader can't discern good conditions, you certainly aren't doing him any favor by talking about all the easy money you pocketed.

ETF

[Sun Runner]

You have made my point better than I could have myself. A casino offers the rules they do -on purpose -to attract play. They certainly would not be offended by talk of those rules on this board.

They do offer games just slightly better than their competitor. Why? To attract their competitor's players. Not because they are ignorant and accidently put up a beatable game. (Yes, I know it happens occassionally).

IMO, the only reason for not posting information about a good game would be to keep others reading this board from swarming there (which is not a bad reason). But the casino would be happy for the free pub.

> There is simply no reason to say anything
> good about a casino ever, in a public forum.

Comments like this, and others I read really drive me crazy.

Somebody puts up a couple of million dollars, builds a casino, hires people to start putting their money at risk, gives you an opportunity to walk away with a signifigant portion of it -and comments like yours sound to me as if you would be just as satisfied if they would go BK. What would you do then; play the lottery?

There is no constitutional right to play at an advantage. You can only "gamble" with those willing to risk their money and give you a game.

What's the harm in talking up a good casino -such as Parker does about the joints in SoCal?

No, I don't work for them. Yes, I think a whole lot of their actions are deplorable. Sometimes I am treated unfairly. But nobody is breaking my arm (no pun intended) to play there.

[BTW, I use the pronoun "you" alot. Please don't take it personally.]

SR

[ET Fan]

A casino offers the rules they do -on purpose -to attract play.

To attract play, yes. To attract our play -- the play of people smart enough to flip on a computer and read a few words about it -- NO WAY IN HELL!!!

They certainly would not be offended by talk of those rules on this board.

You think I'm worried about offending these people???

Get this straight: The casinos don't deliberately "offer" a beatable game. They got backed into the situation by a book called "Beat The Dealer." It turned out to be the greatest publicity stunt they could ever have imagined, but THEY never predicted that. If BTD had been written before the game had a foothold, blackjack wouldn't exist at all in casino form today. They hate the fact they've been backed into this situation despite the fact it makes money for them. The ONLY reason any beatable forms of BJ remain is because they make slightly more money with them than without them. They do NOT like it, nor do they understand it. Ignorance is the rule, NOT the exception. They wish it would all fo away! And eventually -- with your help -- it appears they'll have their way.

ETF

[Viktor Nacht]

> Ignorance is the rule , NOT the exception.

Don?

,

V

[Sun Runner]

> You think I'm worried about offending these people?

No, I'm very clear about that.

> Get this straight: The casinos don't deliberately "offer" a beatable game.

They offer the very worst game they can get away with while still enticing you and the un-educated to keep coming back. If that game happens to be beatable by some, they can live with that by not playing with those they perceive can beat them.

> They got backed into the situation by a book called "Beat The Dealer."

Actually, I believe playing conditions today are better for them now than they were in the late 1960's. They got backed in to nothing.

>They hate the fact they've been backed into this situation despite the fact it makes money for them.

What I think they hate is that the overall skill level is higher (not brilliant, but higher). They may sit around on a slow day and pine for the good old days. But the game the public is allowing them to offer is making them plenty of money today. I have not met a business man yet who hates making money.

> The ONLY reason any beatable forms
> of BJ remain is because they make slightly
> more money with them than without them.

True; but I am not sure about the "slightly" part.

> They wish it would all fo away! And eventually -- with your help -- it appears they'll have their way.

No, with the way I played last month, they can stay in business a little longer.

I simply see it as another extension of the free enterprise system. If I were to guess, I would guess that you have never owned your own business, never had employees you were responsible for feeding, never had to figure out who you were going to sell your next widget to.

So, here is a proposition. If it is so great for the casino, let's play cards at your house next month. We'll sit around the kitchen table, you deal; I'll play. Rules are SD S17 DA2 DAS RSA SURR spread 1 to 10. Sound like a deal?

No? Me neither. So why do you expect them to?

[ by the way, you did take my last post personally, and I am sorry, it was not intended that way .. it's just how I speak. ]

SR

[ET Fan]

Actually, I believe playing conditions today are better for them now than they were in the late 1960's. They got backed in to nothing.

Raaaaaiiiiight. They LOVED Beat The Dealer. They APPLAUD Ed Thorp for his noble efforts.

They offer the very worst game they can get away with while still enticing you and the un-educated to keep coming back.

This is where we differ. They are NOT trying to entice me or ANY readers of this page to sit at their table.

Bottom line: I believe every positive public post re: blackjack rules or penetration hastens the deterioration of said conditions. Do you agree or disagree?

ETF

[SnoopDarr]

It absloutely hastens it, but for no good reason. If a casino is making plenty of money on their blackjack tables and someone posts here that it's a great game, then why is that a reason alone for changing the game? It's like in elementary school when someone told me not to do something, and I did it just because they said not to... I gained nothing from it, and I was perfectly fine before they told me not to do it... that's great business.

Oh, and sunrunner, you can come to my kitchen and play that game, but you have to let me let the idiots on my block fill the other 2 seats at my kitchen table, and if we have sufficient evidence you're counting, I'll bar ya! I'll be the richest guy in my neighborhood in a week, because after you make a few grand and get banned, a ploppy will fill your seat and give it all back.

> Actually, I believe playing conditions
> today are better for them now than they were
> in the late 1960's. They got backed in to
> nothing. Raaaaaiiiiight. They LOVED Beat
> The Dealer. They APPLAUD Ed Thorp for his
> noble efforts.

> They offer the very worst game they can get
> away with while still enticing you and the
> un-educated to keep coming back. This is
> where we differ. They are NOT trying to
> entice me or ANY readers of this page to sit
> at their table.

> Bottom line: I believe every positive public
> post re: blackjack rules or penetration
> hastens the deterioration of said
> conditions. Do you agree or disagree?

> ETF

[Sun Runner]

Points made; ideas expressed.
Lets talk about something else.

SR

[ET Fan]

I had a reason for asking you the question. I would sincerely like to know if you agree or disagree with the statement: "every positive public post re: blackjack rules or penetration hastens the deterioration of said conditions."

If you disagree, I would like to propose a way for us to settle the question. I think it's important.

ETF