Indiana Joins New Jersey on BJ card counters: can't eject 'em!

The Indiana court of appeals just decided Donovan v. Grand Victoria. Donovan, a card counter, was ejected from the casino after playing blackjack and winning. He suded, claiming that the casino had no right to eject him; he wasn’t cheating. Grand Victoria relied on the common law right of exclusion, where an owner may eject anyone for any reason or no reason at all, as long as it’s not for an impermissible motive such as race or sex.

The Indiana courts took a page from a similar issue in New Jersey. The New Jersey courts have long held that because gambling is such a specifically and heavily regulated activity in their state, the legislature has abrogated the common-law right of exclusion, and a player who is counting cards may not be excluded merely fdor exercise of that mental skill.

Indiana adopted that reasoning in toto.

Victory for card counters everywhere!

Any chance the victory might migrate out west to Nevada?

I predict an uptick in unfortunate accidents among people of the card-counting persuasion.

Well, it’s up to the casinos to fix the rules (one way or another) to deal with the issue. If card counting is allowed, they could increase the number of decks in play, and not use them for so long that card counting becomes likely to be useful.

Or use continuous shuffle…

Won’t someone think of the poor casinos? :rolleyes::smiley:

Card counters don’t count all the cards. Card Counters have countered the use of even six deck shoes.


From the thread title, I thought this was going to be about something else. I was going to say I didn’t know they had cards for that.

Intersting decision, and it always did seem unfair to me that card counters wre ejected for simply exercising a mathematical strategy. Couldn’t they be countered by some kind of syetme that automatically shuffles or randomizes the shue after every hand, though?

Card counting is a lot harder than it looks. I made a casino run last week, and tried counting for the first time. Even at a table that was only half full, the cards fly so fast that I lost the running count about halfway through the shoe most of the time.

That said, the cited case is interesting. Wonder if that logic would be adopted in Mississippi? There’s an awful lot of casinos in the state, and they likely exercise considerable political clout…

Yes. There are Continuous Shuffle Machines.

I like this ruling.

I’ve never played blackjack in a casino, and have no real interest in starting now, but i’ve always thought it ridiculous that casinos were allowed entice someone into a game where the central skill is determining your odds off winning a hand, and then eject a person who actually has the skill to make the most of those odds.

Well, of course they do. How are you supposed to claim your tenth one for free if you don’t have some way of keeping track of the first nine?

You guys are saying you misread the title as “Indiana Jones,” right?


No, I misread it as people being ejected from BJ’s club because they didn’t have a membership card :slight_smile:

Man, I hate continuous shuffle machines, but they getting to be ubiquitous around Vegas. They really take the rhythm out of the game. It’s not like the casinos were losing to the counters. So many people do it so badly, or don’t know how to do it at all, that they still make a handy profit on the game.

Nine stained blue dresses (or dry cleaning receipts thereof)?

They may use continuous shuffle, but like silenus pointed out, a lot more people think they can count cards than can do it. The casinos want people to think it’s possible - they just don’t want it to happen. This ruling might finally do it for Indiana, though.

I think this is a bit ridiculous - the casino should be able to kick anyone out for any reason they want (other then race/sex/etc of course).

Not that I think they should actually do it - how many people can actually count cards (it’s hard! I tried in a friendly game with just one deck and could barely keep track!) and how much money do they lose vs how much extra they get from other people seeing someone win and betting more because they think they will too? Not to mention the bad publicity they would get for kicking out winners.

But of course the government can’t resist the temptation to stick it’s finger in everything.

I’m going to shuffle this over to the Game Room.

twickster, MPSIMS mod

Really? What is the expected return for 6 deck shoes that are shuffled 1/2 through the six decks?