Is it really true you can cheat at roulette by just pressing a switch whenever the wheel passes a certain point, and having a computer calculate a few parameters for a roulette wheel? I just don’t see that being accurate enough - I read about cheaters having computers in their shoes and toe switches, but I would assume human factors would make it too inaccurate.
Reason I bring it up is that obviously there are vastly simpler ways to do this now, such as a button camera and an accomplice outside or something. It might be possible to build a rig to cheat with that would be pretty hard to spot.
The catch in the movie “21” was that some people were counting cards and then signalling to others about the state of the deck. When multiple people are playing “together” like that, is that considered cheating? I presume if I tell my friend or a total stranger “this table is hot!” it’s legit?
Recall reading an article by someone who started off by cheating in Vegas for a while, many many years ago. His technique was to stack a pair of chips so that the top one was slightly toward the dealer, making it difficult to tell what the bottom one was. Somehow if he won he would switch the bottom one for a bigger chip, or maybe if he lost he would swap the bottom one for a smaller chip - don’t recall the details or technique. But yeah, video would probably catch that today, and I assume nowadays it’s “hands off the chips” once the action is under way…
I assume too, that the size of Vegas businesses today, it’s less important that they “teach a lesson” to cheaters who might make a few thousand, so much as it’s a matter of catching and identifying and getting rid of the cheats, and plugging any flaws in the system. Salaries for a huge security staff and the cost of video equipment probably exceed what they lose in petty cheats. Vigilance just means they aren’t giving away the store.
As for giant cheats - how often does someone have the chance to win over $100,000 - and how closely are those games scrutinized, when someone wins?
Often and very, very closely. There are whales who regularly play $100K/hand in the high-limit rooms. But the regular shmoes on the floor? About the only way to score that big either takes a bit of time, which means the pit bosses and camera guys will be well alerted to what is going on early, or a slot machine hit, in which case you aren’t getting paid until they go over the footage with a fine-tooth comb.
Depends on what you mean by legit. Card counting IS NOT ILLEGAL. However the casinos are not obligated to let you play. Count cards all you want, alone or in a team, but if the casino thinks you’re going to walk away with their money they’ll just refuse to let you play.
In New Jersey casinos they are not allowed to ban you from counting cards. It was a state Supreme Court ruling years ago. They do other things to decrease the advantage to counting.
That’s true. They can flat-bet you or tell the dealer to shuffle every few hands, or shut down the table, or just generally annoy you until you leave, though.
Casinos won’t get on your case for having a good luck streak and winning big. It happens all the time, and they know what it looks like.
They also know what cheating or card counting looks like. When they suspect it, they have ways to either spot it clearly (can footage) or change the situation in ways that an honest better who just happens to look fishy wouldn’t mind, bit would thwart or expose a cheater/counter.
If gamblers were smart (and perhaps many are), casinos would mostly redistribute money, while skimming a small percentage. For example, if the typical gambler bet any given dollar only once, and left when his “fresh” stack was empty, taking whatever his winnings were with him, they’d only skim 1 to 6%. Some would leave winners, some losers, and most only down a bit.
Fortunately for casinos, lots of gamblers just keep feeding those dollars back in, whittling it down by the expectation, and quitting far too late. But others do get lucky, and as mentioned above, the casinos make the most of it, comping their rooms or other perks, because in the long run it’s good for business.
Regarding 1-green roulette wheels, I saw them I 1986 in Australia. IIRC, it was a legal requirement.
As I understand it, 6:5 means they pay 6 to 5 odds on your blackjack instead of the more favorable 3:2 odds. In 3:2, if you put down 50 dollars and get blackjack you get 75 dollars. In 6:5, that same 50 dollars only gets you 60 dollars for blackjack.
Never play a blackjack table that says 6:5. Also, never play a table that says Dealer hits soft 17. That’s also a bad deal for the player.
Mostly they just shuffle more. They already have long shoes to make it more difficult and shuffle pretty early. I’ve spoken to quite a few pit bosses over the years. They are not that concerned with individual card counters. Most are not very good at it. When you have an eight deck shoe and routinely shuffle long before the end it already takes away a lot of the advantage.
It’s true that H17 (hit soft-17) is a bad rule for the player, but 6:5 blackjack is much, much worse. Sadly, these days S17 (stand on soft-17) is often only found in high-limit rooms. But a good H17 game is very beatable if you’re willing to put in the time and effort.
I left Vegas in 1994, so my firsthand knowledge is very very rusty. It sounds like **friedo **& others are still there in the culture and/or in the industry. So a question if I may…
Even back then 6-deck shoes and early shuffles were commonplace anti-counting strategies in BJ.
To what do you attribute the rise in 6:5 and H17? Is it simply undemanding customers and greedy managers / shareholders? Is there a bigger meta-effort to push people to machine-based games rather than labor intensive hand-dealt games?
ISTR that many mainstream casinos used to compete on offering a more favorable gambling experience than the joint next door. It sounds as if that’s now passe and they’re in effect competing to see who can offer the worst payouts possible. How is that thought to be a winning strategy in the competition for customers?
The rise of 6:5 is just due to rubes, I think. If you can convince a few drunken frat boys to sit at a 6:5 table and start playing, you’re going to have a profitable night. There’s a reason they always put those tables by the front door, as well. Most people just don’t know any better. The 3:2 tables tend to have higher limits because most (by no means all) people who want to bet more money tend to be a little more educated about the game. A whale can always demand more favorable rules, which is why S17 is still pretty standard in high-limit rooms.
Casinos still do and will compete to attract high limit players, sometimes to their detriment, but there are a few things putting downward pressure on the quality of games in Vegas, IMHO:
A lot of huge Asian players have abandoned Vegas for Macau, Singapore, etc.
MGM and Caesars have a near duopoly on the Strip at this point. If you’re playing at the Bellagio and are unsatisfied, it doesn’t mean much for the bottom line if you threaten to go down the street to Aria.
Vegas has seen gaming revenues decline substantially since the growth of Indian gaming and other states starting to license casinos, especially when states were desperate for revenue during the financial crisis.
IOW, Vegas has a glut of gaming capacity and little motivation to innovate. They still have some of the best blackjack rules available if you’re willing to pay for them, but for the average joe you’ll have to go off-strip to find decent rules with affordable minimums.
Post snipped. The anecdote sounds like B.S(#1), though it is possible someone tried. The wifi system will be on a logically and physically separate network from the casino equipment. Additionally, it wouldn’t work anyway. First, a machine won’t print a million dollar ticket, there is a limit due to tax issues. If you won a large amount a slot tech would come over after the machine alerted the staff. Also, the games, until very recently, were not controlled by the servers. The games reported to the servers but the actual processing was done at the game(#2). Third, for large payouts the machines are inspected to ensure that no cheating or malfunctions took place. Seriously. I know of a woman who won a large sum (100,000 +) who had it taken back because the machine faulted. I’ll see if I can find some details.
Cheating in a Vegas casino is a loser. The surveillance staff pays a lot of attention and everything is recorded. The casinos share information on known or suspected cheaters. Additionally, the Nevada state gaming board takes a dim view of cheaters. And card counters will get blacklisted by the casinos if they suspect you are counting.
The surveillance is quite amazing, especially when people start winning a lot. The casinos have staff watching the games and the gaming board has very specific rules on camera placement, etc. They see everything and the newer equipment is rather good. One surveillance vendor came out with a system (I sat in the demo) where the operator could highlight a customer and the cameras would track the customer throughout the casino.
When a cheat is caught, assuming a law was broken, the cheat will be detained by the security staff and the local law enforcement will be called. They will be arrested and taken to jail. I watched it happen a couple times. In court, the casino will have video evidence of the whole thing.
Slee
#1. Unless it is an Indian casino. Then all bets are off.
#2. I know this as I was a network administrator at a Vegas casino. I configured the networking for the first trial of networked games in the state. I hung out with the lead surveillance administrator all the time and worked extensively with his systems as his specialty was cameras/gaming regs while I handled the storage/networking requirements. Oh, I also built one. Well, I built the computer side of the house, roughly 200 servers, 500 switches and a 150 or so PCs, plus printers and POS stations.
In Vegas, cheating is a crime and you can be jailed/fined for it, so the casino would call the police.
however, in my experience, contrary to those above, if somebody is getting lucky and goes on a winning streak, the casino will do whatever it takes to keep the person there rather than let them go to another casino and lose their money. I’ve seen free meals, rooms, shows, etc. In general, everybody knows that eventually you will lose the longer you keep playing, so they don’t need to do anything to stop you from winning.
My question here is was a “backoff” really even necessary here? The guy was down in the game when the backoff occurred. His betting strategy obviously revealed counting, but it wasn’t really working for him. (Yes, I understand it’s a long slog and there’s going to be high variance using counting and to end up ahead, you need to do it for quite awhile.) But assuming they’re using 6- or 8-shoe deck that is not played too deeply, how much of an advantage does counting give you over the house?
Wouldn’t this attention from the casino seem creepy? It would mean, “You’re different, and we’re watching you closely.” Seems to me it ought to be an immediate red flag to the gambler.
Getting lucky at a casino is GOOD. The casino isn’t out to make sure every individual loses. Far from it. They want some people to win and be seen to be winning and a lot more people to lose. Given the odds at casinos, this is what normally happens. Given enough time, the house always wins, but in one night, or even a whole week’s vacation, a certain smaller percentage of gamblers will make out like bandits. Their screaming and victory dances make other people want to spend money too.
Think of it like sports betting. In any sports bet, about half the bettors win and the other half lose. So let’s say you as a bookie take 100 bets. The winners and losers are even, yet you make money off of the vig(the extra fee charged for losing bets on point spread wagers). If one guy wins all 100 bets, it makes no difference at all to you.