I heard James Bond was an inveterate London casino cheat.Originally Posted by UK-21
Ivey clearly was cheating by collusion ~ employing a Chinese Dealer (and a Chinese Companion),
to physically maneuver the cards ~ "Edge Sorting" ~ to radically increase the odds in his favor.
While England has no laws against cheating a casino, the playing field is partially leveled
by their ability to seize chips and cash on deposit without so much as revealing their justification.
Crockfords in London refused to release a 6 figure sum to me and my partner some while back after "suspecting"
that we were counting cards. They later backed down, concluding that we were NOT doing so; and released the funds,
but it led to further barrings in London's private casinos. Actually, "revoked membership" is a more accurate rendering
of same, as PRIVATE Casinos are very private indeed.
Interestingly, casinos sharing information about a player is strictly forbidden by law, as I understand it,
but in my case, another private casino admitted having been contacted directly by Crockfords.
Do you have any support for this allegation? I haven't seen anything that would lead me to conclude that he was "clearly" colluding. Social engineering, sure, but I have no reason to suspect collusion. There's nothing wrong with asking a casino for favorable conditions and playing the game if they agree.
If you're playing poker, I think you should definitely learn how to spot second-dealing, false shuffles, and marked cards. In blackjack at corporate casinos in the US, you're probably ok, but if you play at Indian casinos I'd learn the moves as well. You probably won't be able to pin down a move 100%, but you'll have a suspicion that something is up. The shuffle doesn't look right, the cut doesn't look right, the dealing motion doesn't look right, etc.
The Cash Cow.
One idiot dealer did when he did a blatant cold-deck. It was a limit game, flop comes out AKQ, turn A, river Q. 4 people show 10-j, 2 show AK, and one shows pocket queens for the winning quads. Everyone took their money back and left. I'm amazed it didn't get violent.
I've also seen some false shuffles and a lot of over-raking. The game had a $5 rake. One dealer came in, dealt a single hand, and had 3 red chips in the rake bucket at the end of the hand.
The Cash Cow.
It does now. Cheating is now a criminal offence in the UK. In the Ivey case, it is interesting that if Crockfords were successful in their counter-claim against Ivey for losses incurred as a result of him cheating (although they never actually incurred any), then there might be a criminal case against him and a warrant could be issued for his arrest if he ever stepped foot on UK soil again. If it was viewed as a serious enough offence the crown could request his extradition from the States. No surprise then that it's all been brushed under the carpet?
You are correct - we have the Data Protection Act, that is very specific as to the circumstances in which personal information on living individuals may be passed on, and to whom. However, in practice it isn't worth the paper it's written on. Another issue will be the smallprint in the membership T&Cs may mean that you agreed that your personal data may be shared with whomever Crockfords deemed fit to receive it without condition, when you joined.
Regards from our side of the pond.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Visit UK-21's Degenerate Gamblers Pages - www.uk-21.org
Seems to happen in online games all the time?
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Visit UK-21's Degenerate Gamblers Pages - www.uk-21.org
So everyone got pissed after seeing that hand and took their money back? Wow, everyone had something! Imagine that. It would be difficult for me to spot a fake shuffle. A player would really have to be paying attention to spot that one.
On Monday night I took down a second consecutive win at the local watering hole playing No-limit Hold'em. It probably won't take long before I'm known. Burned through another group of players (2 full tables), most were from the previous night. I'm convinced that they will have to change the dynamics of the shuffle because I have an advantage. According to the rules of "their" game the person to the right of the dealer has the option to cut the deck. Well, there lies the problem because the person making the cut can stack the deck if he/she pays attention to how the dealer is shuffling and sees the cards on the bottom or top of the deck. I personally used this knowledge to give people crappy cards on purpose if they were in the blinds or just after the big blind. I see it as the dealer not protecting the cards, it's not my fault for paying attention to the deal/dealer.
Last edited by Blitzkrieg; 12-11-2013 at 03:05 PM.
It was really amateurish. He did a fake strip where he held a clump of cards from the top of the deck, then stripped the rest of the deck. It was obvious. Then I noticed the fake riffles to keep the top of the deck intact. It's really not hard to not shuffle the top 10 cards or so.
I've also seen a dealer that I suspected had a rather bulky holdout device. He always wore baggy sweatshirts with sleeves down past his wrist. Inside the sweatshirt it looked like his arm was too big. I don't know if it was actually a device or not, and I don't know if it was a card holdout device, or something to help him pull chips out of the pot. Either way, I didn't play with him.
The Cash Cow.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks