Bettie: Attorney sues casinos for using counting system

[Sonny]

> The informed player can leave; who said they
> were required to give you a fighting chance?

I think that the NGC said that they are required to give you a fighting chance (a.k.a. a "fair game"). The casinos are not allowed to manipulate the game in a way that changes the outcome or odds. They cannot remove any of the cards from the deck, they cannot "skip over" certain cards as they are dealing, and they cannot purposely stack the deck so that only certain cards are dealt.

>> Yes, but we are not changing the odds of the
>> game.
>
> We aren't? Then what am I counting for?

Because APs know how to win money despite the casino's advantage. We are not changing the cards that are dealt, we are not affecting the game for any other players, and we are not changing the odds of the game. We are still playing the same hands as everyone else. We are not manipulating the game at all. We are simply playing the game and taking advantage of the favorable situations that arise naturally.

> Hold on now. Card counting is not cheating.
> We do it; they do it. Dealing seconds,
> peeking, etc is cheating and the dealers, if
> caught and prosecuted, will go to jail.

Why is that? Because dealing seconds changes the outcome of the hands. Changing the size of your bet does not change what cards you will be dealt (although I wish it could!). Stacking the deck is illegal because it restricts what cards that will be dealt. The casino is required to deal an honest and reasonably random game to the public. I don't feel that they should be allowed to restrict what cards are dealt.

> Frankly, and I know this will make some of
> my full-time BJ friends upset, but if I
> owned a casino, and spotted a counter, I
> would not let them set there and drain me
> dry.

Neither would I. I would tell them that they are too skillful and restrict their play somehow (flat betting, cut the deck in half, etc.) or tell them to leave. There is no reason to resort to PSing a player.

> I know this is an issue divided and I
> respect your views. But to me it's gambling
> for money. They offer a game, I accept the
> game .. or not.

I agree. This is simply a difference of opinions. You obviously have good reasons for thinking the way that you do, and I respect them. I'm glad that I got a chance to see your point of view since most people here are pretty predictable.

-Sonny-

[bigplayer]

Preferential shuffling is completely legal (unethical) as long as the casino does not use an illegal device or counting aid to accomplish the task.

[bigplayer]

make less money with them. Outside of the Vegas strip, most casinos that put in CSM's had to take them out because business dropped so much.

[ET Fan]

> How does the gambling commission allow
> MARKED CARDS to be introduced into a
> game!?!?

Huh? The cards have always been marked. Why would you want a game where you can't even tell if you're holding a natural? There's no reason, from the Midplay point of view, that the backs of the cards have to be marked. The machines can just as easily read the fronts.

> I guess I don't care because I don't do
> slots. Presumably those computers track
> play, randomy generate numbers, and let the
> hostess know when mama needs more nickles.

Somehow I doubt the "I don't care" argument will hold much weight in court ...

> BTW, set-ups like this are going to be bad
> for the 'crusade!'

Oh, I'm against Mindplay. Make no mistake about that. I just don't understand why you are against it.

ETF

[Ouchez]

[Sun Runner]

>> Frankly, and I know this will make some of
>> my full-time BJ friends upset, but if I
>> owned a casino, and spotted a counter, I
>> would not let them set there and drain me
>> dry.

> Neither would I. I would tell them that they
> are too skillful and restrict their play
> somehow (flat betting, cut the deck in half,
> etc.) or tell them to leave. There is no
> reason to resort to PSing a player.

First, to 'ToAnyOne' -I certainly didn't mean to offend you and I apologize for doing so.

Sonny, reading your version as to how a casino should deal with a player who they know to count and know to win makes a lot of sense and maybe for the first time has caused me to re-think my position.

Still, let me say this. The only reason you (we) hold PSing in such low esteem is because it 'hurts' the unaware.

Think about it. Half shoes, bet restrictions, barrings, or PSing all gets the desired result from you that the casino wants. You leave.

Sure, the ploppy gets hurt a little until you and I catch on, but then we leave, and probably the casino goes back to dealing normally because they know that, if for nothing else, even the ploppies get tired of being shuffled up on (although for different reasons than you and I do.)

So, big deal. The ploppy played through negative EV hands until you left and they are back to losing at their same old slow rate of speed after you are gone.

I think any casino that PS on ploppies as a matter of practice is scum (although in my limited expeience I don't know of any). I also think ploppies that go to a gambling establishment and let that happen to them are partly to blame -but again, I think that is probably not the norm.

PS'ing, as desribed above to drive counters off the table, while maybe being not the most fair way of doing it .. to me .. is better than a whole new round of legislation to try and stop it.

Enough about this for me; I'd rather talk about MindPlay!

Thanks for the input.

[Sun Runner]

> Huh? The cards have always been marked. Why
> would you want a game where you can't even
> tell if you're holding a natural? There's no
> reason, from the Midplay point of view, that
> the backs of the cards have to be marked.



> The machines can just as easily read the
> fronts.

Apparently not.

Maybe the cards are marked because it is to difficult, to inaccurate, to impossible to read them quick enough without marking them -yet.

When that time comes I suppose I'll have to then rail against computers in the surveillance room!

I am happy enough to play against the general dealer population (I don't think it fair I have to also play against his extended family in the ceiling and in the pit, but I'm not bitching) because I believe I can beat them. Even if they count so as to give their employers an advantage, more likely than not they will get tired, become lazy, or not count at all.

I can't beat a computer that effortlessly keeps dealing a negative advantage game 100% of the time.