Funny you should say that; when John's brother was up about $10k they started offering him comps which kept on coming and which he respectively declined. They didn't change anything about the game at allOriginally Posted by Banker
Sure, I can understand that and that surveillance has sophisticated tracking systems however, wearing a normal watch is a different case altogether. Why would they suspect anything anyway ? If done correctly this comes across as a perfectly normal win...And anyway, you really use the timer just to start with. After a few weeks of practice it becomes second nature without using a timer. I'd advise all AP blackjack players to try their hand at other games where they can get an advantage. And poker. It can reduce the heat significantly. But hey, I'm naive and have only been doing this successfully for 40 years. What do I know ?
ug
Taft, speaking about demonstrating his large, bulky, original BJ computer ("George") for a TV show:
"Again the computer lay dormant until I was approached by a PBS show called Secrets. We had this secret that fit right in with their format. We went to demonstrate it in South Lake Tahoe. I actually resuscitated the original George, the big brass job, and wore that into the casino. They filmed this, and interviewed a pit boss on scene. While I played they asked the pit boss if someone could play with a secret computer. The boss said, “Impossible. Our security is too good.”
http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/...t/taftint.html
Best, SiMi
Everyone is speaking at cross-purposes here. The point is not whether you can get away with cheating, as defined by the statutes. Anyone dumb enough to try deserves the consequences. The point is not to encourage newcomers to use a watch to time a roulette wheel, to predict the outcome of the spin, which could land you in jail.
I could say this in another language, if it would help, but for now, English ought to suffice.
As for Um, if you've been at this for 40 years, and you can conclude that people ought to continue to try to use their innocent-looking watches to do something illegal, maybe you aren't as clever as you think you are.
Don
Interesting exchange. Just to throw a curve ball into the discussion, in the UK I'm not sure that using a common-or-garden unmodified wristwatch to clock a wheel-of-doom would be something that would meet the threshold to be considered cheating.
Cheating has been a criminal offence in the UK for some years now (since 2005 I think?), but the definition of cheating as defined in the Gambling Act tends to focus on interfering with the apparatus in use, on misleading or distracting the staff conducting the gaming (this is where Ivey ran into problems) or doing something that is clearly outside of the usual practice of whatever it is being played or breaks the rules in order to gain an advantage. Unless blatent, because cheating can be so hard to prove prosecutions are very rare and I think the only one has been of some Turkish Gents who were passing cards between themselves below the table line on a three card poker table - something which clearly met the threshold. Clocking a wheel-of-doom, whether using a watch to assist or simply using a mark one eyeball is, I think, a grey area in the UK and one could certainly put the same arguments forward around this being a case of skill and observation as is the case with counting cards at the blackjack tables.
In any case, because of the burden of proof, I think the Crown Prosecution Service would be extremely reluctant to prosecute a case against someone who happened to be looking at their watch far more often than one might consider normal, and I'm not even sure your average plod would be prepared to arrest someone on the strength of that alone if they were called to a venue. I suspect if anything the response would simply be a case of escorting someone off the premise with a subsequent ban on returning by the operator. I appreciate things are very different in the States, where I'm sure if the police are called in over a case of suspected cheating the odds are the subject of the call will be arrested and the pros and cons will be argued in court.
So I think there are some big differences around what constitutes "cheating" on each side of the pond, and this may have some bearing on what's been offered by different contributors?
Cheers.
PS - Having written what I have, I wouldn't want anyone to think that I endorse cheating at the tables or of encouraging others to do so. Personally, I think clocking a wheel is fair game and doesn't cross the line (although I'm happy to be proven wrong on this point).
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Visit UK-21's Degenerate Gamblers Pages - www.uk-21.org
discussion is a UFO sauna where drunk old men never saw a tilting wheel. same speed same difference. Worn out frets might cause some bias but not differences in speed. the differences in rpm are immeasurable and the ball starts from different positions.
so bj is dead lets go to roulette!!! same happened to thor..
Last edited by conte543; 06-08-2019 at 11:36 AM.
I appreciate you rarely get anything at all wrong but can you point out where I said " people ought to continue to try to use their innocent-looking watches to do something illegal " ? And while I'm here, your assumption that you think I think I'm clever says more about you than it does about me.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Visit UK-21's Degenerate Gamblers Pages - www.uk-21.org
Device laws varies by state. Basically any thing can be a device if it gave you information not available to the public. And before anyone jump on this, card counting is ok because the public can see all the small and big cards, so the information is out there and computed in the head. If you used bunch of beads to do it, would be illegal So, yes and innocent looking watch would be a device.
In the UK, many casinos will very kindly provide a card and a pencil to players of the wheel-of-doom (and at the Punto tables too) so that they can track past results (beyond the last ten or so that show on adjacent results boards - usually in bright lights), identify trends and use this information to inform betting decisions. Although we all know that doing this is not going to provide any advantage over the house whatsoever, it does raise the question of whether such cards could also be considered to be cheating devices?
I think the discussion around whether a common-or-garden unmodified wristwatch could be considered a cheating device or not is one for the lawyers, after a case comes to court. Are there any cases in the United States where someone has actually been convicted of cheating through clocking a wheel with the assistance of their wristwatch? None in the UK for sure. If not, it becomes a matter of opinion rather than fact (based on caselaw).
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Visit UK-21's Degenerate Gamblers Pages - www.uk-21.org
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks