Tape Reviews

[SplitFaceDisaster]

I`ve always wondered, is there a certain amount in terms of a monetary win that triggers a mandatory tape review? Or is it just up to the pit to decide whether play should be reviewed? Obviously I know it will differ from store to store, and that it also will depend on how suspecting the pit and/or surv. is of you, but any kind of information on this would help because I`m pretty clueless when it comes to anything in this area. I know Cellini (I may be spelling his last name/surname wrong) released a book about this subject matter; has anyone read it and have an opinion of whether it`s worth the money? Usually I would just snap buy it as long as it had good reviews, but it`s pretty expensive for a book (I think $55.00 or so), so I don`t want to get it if it`s not going to be worth it....

[Bubbles]

Yes. Reviews are done when you hit a specific win/loss point. This amount varies by casino. The pit or surveillance can also decide at any time that you need a skills check too.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Freightman]

Yes. Reviews are done when you hit a specific win/loss point. This amount varies by casino. The pit or surveillance can also decide at any time that you need a skills check too.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

The review points are not written in stone, or simply by feel by certain management. If I recall correctly, my local market bounced me at these various points. Time not specified.
-5 or 6 week run at 18k
-after hiatus, 5 week run 22 sessions at 28k
-cumulative 15 or 20 k over 12-18 months. Final straw was some ngative index play. Still pretty much a red chipper then.
-ytd 50kby August end, losing 8 k over 2 months regaining by 5-6k or so over 3 -4 days in November.
-85 k one year, 40k the next, (tolerant joint) then had a bad run and recovered. House cleaning after some out if town pillaging

Bounced by another joint for complaint on buffet. Other dollars from previous play, but I think you get the point.

One joint never bounced from, converted to CSM.

[SplitFaceDisaster]

Yes. Reviews are done when you hit a specific win/loss point. This amount varies by casino. The pit or surveillance can also decide at any time that you need a skills check too.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Thanks again for the response as well as to all the others who chimed in. An additional thing I was wondering in regards to this is, let`s say for the average LV strip casino, what would be a one-time win amount that would automatically trigger a tape review? Obviously I know it`s not the same everywhere as was already discussed. But for the example let`s just say that a middle of the road casino in terms of action where the one-time win is in a vacuum. Meaning, leaving the factor of heat from the pit, etc., completely out of the equation so that the win amount is the only thing considered. 5k? 10k? Not that I`ve hit wins anywhere close to those, I`m just curious. No one may have an exact answer, but I`m sure there`s probably at least a few on here whose educated guess would probably be really close.

[dw44]

Are these mandatory reviews strictly for blackjack or for other games as well?

[Bubbles]

Are these mandatory reviews strictly for blackjack or for other games as well?

All the games.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Three]

Since Freighter showed that we never know what triggered a review but listing why we got backed off may be helpful. Here are mine that relate to blackjack.

1) I won too many sessions in a row on a trip to Vegas. The sorry part is I was positive progression betting very early in my career and was counting only to increase winning hand frequency by making better playing decisions. I was using Hiopt1 and a few side counts on a pitch game. After playing constantly for a few days the suit that backed me off said I never lose and nobody is that lucky. He implied I was either cheating.

2) Decades later I was backed off after making too big a stink over the casino attempts to cheat me. They knew I was card counting for about a year but were tolerating me. the cheating attempts were probably a signal to me I had overstayed my welcome. I should have just left. I probably still would be able to play there. Instead I made a big fuss about the dealer attempting to cheat me. When I returned they said my game was too strong for them and I couldn't play BJ anymore but could play other games in the casino. I know it was the incident.

3) A lifetime win back off. It was a small joint and I had a long winning history. My best month was over two years prior were I won over $20K red chipping. I had developed a number of new strategies for cover that cost basically nothing and in some cases where plus EV. I upped my stakes to more than double in the next 2 years or so. The game got worse so I didn't go as often, plus my BR doubling that month and continuing to grow very steadily had me playing for much higher stakes so I didn't need the fact that I could find the lowest minus there to help boost my spread. Finally my comps dried up. Almost a year after that I was backed off. About once a year they paid big bucks to a consultant to help them make more money. That had them socialite from two extremes. Whatever was the current procedure the consultant would make the argument that it was wrong and switch back to the other extreme to justify his massive fee. I saw the cycle repeat many times and figured out what was going on. Right when the cycle was expected to hit I got backed off. The suit was real nice about it and talked to me for a while. He said they had reviewed my play a number of times over the years and knew I wasn't counting cards but I just won too regularly so they didn't care why. They weren't going to let me play BJ or any BJ variants anymore. I was welcome to play anything else. I had won about $60K over 4 or 5 years starting as a low level red chipper and ending betting table max as my top bet. In retrospect that was probably too aggressive for that little joint.

4) The place was a true Zender model casino dealing to dealer dependent 1/4 to a 1/2 deck cut off. If they had cut off more cards I would have steadily won but the extreme pen caused extreme volatility. On trips I would oscillate between up 5 figures to down 5 figure and finish the trip at some random point in-between. Before they went to extreme pen I won steadily and didn't have a problem. The pen was very good but not extreme. I would usually win $6K to $7K on a trip by slowly winning money and rarely lose. The massive swings at extreme pen just made me stick out like a sore thumb. It was clear to me their revue was inconclusive but they acted because the volatility of my results fit what they would expect from a side counter. I had been APing a number of different games in their casino for decades. My host once told me they had 3 ways to track the return on their comp investments in gamblers and I was ahead on every one of them so I should be happy with whatever I got.

Obviously this casino tracked things a lot closer than most casinos. It was a massive casino bigger than three big casinos combined. They said I could still play BJ but I was bet restricted to flat betting whatever the table minimum was. It was pretty funny because the review flagged my card so I hadn't been earning comps for days. They finally pulled me aside but didn't know what to say because the review wasn't conclusive. After some time some suits left and came back and eventually they just said I was flat bet restricted at table minimum. They said they didn't like the way I was betting but they couldn't accuse me of anything specific and didn't have to. The last trip when I was still earning comps I swung from up $6 or $7K to down as much several times a day. When I returned months later they had frozen my ability to earn comps but never froze my comps. After having so many suits leave and come back to find out what to say to me it was obvious that they weren't sure what I was doing but decided they didn't care. Eventually they came back and pretty much said as much. It was obvious, they decided I was a threat and shouldn't be allowed to play without deciding what made me a threat. They decided not to discontinue my play but reduced my threat level equal to whatever the table minimum was. I would have been better off leaving with one deck left on each shoe rather tan playing the extreme pen. One shoe heads up there were 4 cards left at the end of the last round. I would have received a lifetime win backoff instead but I figured I was due that in another $10K to $20K as they had recently tightened that way up. Maybe that was what they ultimately thought as well. But they had months to review my play after my last visit and never came up with a decision. I think the trigger was the massive swings that came with the change from great pen to extreme pen. I was fine when I just made money slow and steady, relatively speaking.

[Dog Hand]

Folks,

The above discussion about "tipping for pen" made me wonder how you'd react if the dealer was actually cheating to help you, in the hope (or expectation?) of receiving tips from you.

Examples:

Are you cheating if:

1. The dealer frequently flashes her hole card.

2. In a face-up game the dealer frequently misdeals on rounds where you're dealt a crappy hand versus her strong upcard.

3. A somewhat dated example from the time "before peekers": when the dealer has an Ace upcard, she quickly checks her hole card and then asks for insurance wagers only when she actually has a BJ.

Now how would your responses change if I append the phrase "but only on rounds where you have a bet out for her" to each example?

->Open Spoiler<-

Personally, without the "tip" I'd play 1 and 2, but not 3. With the "tip" I wouldn't play any of these situations.

Just some food for thought!

Dog Hand

[Bubbles]

Folks,

The above discussion about "tipping for pen" made me wonder how you'd react if the dealer was actually cheating to help you, in the hope (or expectation?) of receiving tips from you.

Examples:

Are you cheating if:

1. The dealer frequently flashes her hole card.

2. In a face-up game the dealer frequently misdeals on rounds where you're dealt a crappy hand versus her strong upcard.

3. A somewhat dated example from the time "before peekers": when the dealer has an Ace upcard, she quickly checks her hole card and then asks for insurance wagers only when she actually has a BJ.

Now how would your responses change if I append the phrase "but only on rounds where you have a bet out for her" to each example?

->Open Spoiler<-

Personally, without the "tip" I'd play 1 and 2, but not 3. With the "tip" I wouldn't play any of these situations.

Just some food for thought!

Dog Hand

I tip for pen. It doesn't have an affect on the outcome of the game. If anyone gives me insane pen, I tell them not to do anything that will get them in trouble.

I'll play a HC game, but if I think they're aware that they're flashing, like only flashing when there's a tip, I run. I tend to not tip at HC games just because I don't want collusion to come up.

Frequent misdeals, especially those that cause the floor to come over, slow the game down and draw attention to your table. No thanks. I don't want anything to do with that.

The last one that peeks.. Holy hell. Run far away. No thanks.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[RCJH]

DH,

I have played #1.

I would play #2.

I have also played thought small, infrequent misplays in my favor.

To avoid the ethical conflict, in places where I am unknown I'll tip small at the beginning of a shoe, and/or on color up. I don't tip per hand, or when I raise my bet. (First hand after buy in when the pit is recording your bet is a GREAT time to tip...)

I did have a situation where I am known. Locally, I tip more. About 90% of my tips YTD have been within 150 miles of my house. I had a dealer grossly overpay me, and he went as far as to not splay the chips for the camera. I pointed out the overpay, and he whispered "now don't do that...." I finished the shoe, DID NOT TIP, and left. I also waited over 8 months to go back to that casino.

[21forme]

Doghand,

Good post!

If the dealer is expecting/soliciting tips by purposely doing these things, I'd find another table. A purposeful flash of a HC is going to be obvious to more than just you.

[Freightman]

RCJH said
"I did have a situation where I am known. Locally, I tip more. About 90% of my tips YTD have been within 150 miles of my house. I had a dealer grossly overpay me, and he went as far as to not splay the chips for the camera. I pointed out the overpay, and he whispered "now don't do that...." I finished the shoe, DID NOT TIP, and left. I also waited over 8 months to go back to that casino.

I had a combo dealer critter offer to help me in that regard. I told him in no uncertain terms never to do that again - heads up at the time. That is collusion. Now, I also didn't discount the possibility that this was a house set up.

[BoSox]

Has anyone else had ever been told the line that you can only flat bet/or you can play any other game, in an extremely loud hostile way? I have, and this was done while on vacation in Vegas years ago without any prior history with that casino, as well as no unwritten deal going on with the dealer. I thought the pit crew was f----- nuts but besides that, it was a very memorable experience in this aspect. If a player can get a reaction like that from just counting cards I thought just imagine the reaction one would receive if the house also suspected any improprieties going on with an employee. Right then and there I decided I would never put myself in a position like that. Now here is the reason why I would not. The unpredictability of the moment. You more than likely could be dealing with unprofessional security personnel looking to make an impression. Never mind that the casino could have to settle in the distant future, you could easily get messed up big time instantly before anyone even thought about consequences down the road.