Hold-Out Cheat arrested at Mirage 20-40 Holdem?
gutsh...@worldnet.att.net
I heard an out of town player was caught holding out cards in a 20-40
Holdem game this past week in the Mirage. Rumor was the guy was
winning several 1000 per night for up to two weeks. Dealer and some
players were suspicious due to an awkward mucking motion by the
player. A local finally caught him in the act. He was taken in back
office for hour or two, then LV police showe up and hauled him away.
Can anyone expand on this?
It should be noted that I feel very safe playing at the mirage. Some
out of towners think if any cheating is done, it is perpetrated by a
collusion of locals. Actually an outsider is much more likely to try
something. The locals are actually the watchdogs.
RMITCHCOLL
I posted a message here a few weeks ago regarding these rumors. A friend of
mine returned from LV and relayed to me the rumor that locals were colluding at
the Mirage. All of the replies I received said this was nonsense.
Randy
Barbara Yoon
> ...caught holding out cards in a 20-40 Holdem game this past week in
> the Mirage. Rumor was the guy was winning several 1000 per night...
> Dealer and some players were suspicious due to an awkward mucking
two,
> then LV police showed up and hauled him away.
Edward Yung wrote:
> Could someone elaborate on how the guy cheated by the awkward
> mucking action? I don't understand the meaning of 'hold-out'. Thanks!
Edward, you sound like a nice young fella eager to learn... It's not so
much
"cheated by the awkward mucking motion," but more "CAUGHT in the act"
because of it -- the trick is to hold it out and muck it SMOOTHLY...got it?!
Edwardyung
> In an earlier posting,
I heard an out of town player was caught holding out cards in a 20-40
Holdem game this past week in the Mirage. Rumor was the guy was
winning several 1000 per night for up to two weeks. Dealer and some
players were suspicious due to an awkward mucking motion by the
player. A local finally caught him in the act. He was taken in back
office for hour or two, then LV police showe up and hauled him away.
Can anyone expand on this?
It should be noted that I feel very safe playing at the mirage. Some
out of towners think if any cheating is done, it is perpetrated by a
collusion of locals. Actually an outsider is much more likely to try
something. The locals are actually the watchdogs.
>
Could someone elaborate on how the guy cheated by the awkward mucking action?
I don't understand the meaning of 'hold-out'. Thanks!
Edward Yung
Tom Weideman
Barbara Yoon wrote:
>
> > ...caught holding out cards in a 20-40 Holdem game this past week in
> > the Mirage. Rumor was the guy was winning several 1000 per night...
> > Dealer and some players were suspicious due to an awkward mucking
> two,
> > then LV police showed up and hauled him away.
>
> Edward Yung wrote:
> > Could someone elaborate on how the guy cheated by the awkward
> > mucking action? I don't understand the meaning of 'hold-out'. Thanks!
>
> much
> "cheated by the awkward mucking motion," but more "CAUGHT in the act"
> because of it -- the trick is to hold it out and muck it SMOOTHLY...got it?!
I don't think this explains "hold out", Barbara. Edward: To "hold out"
in poker is to keep certain cards (instead of mucking them) for use in a
later hand (e.g. hold out an ace and wait for another ace in a future
hand to match it with, dumping the "leftover" card at the first
opportunity). The awkward mucking action was no doubt a result of
camouflaging either a muck of 1 card (holding back a card) or 3 cards
(returning the extra card).
Tom Weideman
Paul Westley
Tom Weideman wrote:
> ...
> Edward: To "hold out"
> in poker is to keep certain cards (instead of mucking them) for use in a
> later hand (e.g. hold out an ace and wait for another ace in a future
> hand to match it with, dumping the "leftover" card at the first
> opportunity). The awkward mucking action was no doubt a result of
> camouflaging either a muck of 1 card (holding back a card) or 3 cards
> (returning the extra card).
>
> Tom Weideman
Thanks for the explanation Tom, but I don't get how it works. Everywhere I play
the dealer counts down the deck after laying down the river card, how do they get
around that?
Paul
Steve Brecher
In aedwa...@aol.com (Edwardyung) wrote:
> Could someone elaborate on how the guy cheated by the awkward mucking action?
> I don't understand the meaning of 'hold-out'. Thanks!
To hold out is to secretly retain cards in one's possession rather than
return them to the dealer. The cards so retained are used in a future
hand to replace cards dealt to one.
The awkward mucking action was a clue to others that something was amiss.
--
st...@brecher.reno.nv.us (Steve Brecher)
Larry Stone
>Thanks for the explanation Tom, but I don't get how it works. Everywhere
I play
>the dealer counts down the deck after laying down the river card, how do
they get
>around that?
I've never seen a room where the dealer counts down the deck every hand.
Once or twice a down, yes. Every hand, no.
--
-- Larry Stone --- lst...@wwa.com
http://www.wwa.com/~lstone/
Schaumburg, IL, USA
I work for United Airlines but never, never speak for them
Cheech1505
gutsh...@worldnet.att.net wrote: "Rumor was the guy was
winning several 1000 per night for up to two weeks. Dealer and some
players were suspicious due to an awkward mucking motion by the
player."
Though you also stated that you feel safe playing at the Mirage, I would
re-think my position on that issue. I this rumor is true, and if this person
was getting away with this long enough to "win several thousands per week" as
you indicated, that tells me that the dealers are NOT counting down the deck
periodically as they should. This is a very simple, quick way of spotting and
preventing this type of activity. It takes only a couple of seconds and can be
done after the final card is dealt and before the pot is pushed. Good dealers
frequently count down the deck while they are in the box, and *every* dealer
should count down the deck when taking over the box.
Dave Scharf
Paul Westley wrote:
>
> Tom Weideman wrote:
>
> > ...
>
> > Edward: To "hold out"
> > in poker is to keep certain cards (instead of mucking them) for use in a
> > later hand (e.g. hold out an ace and wait for another ace in a future
> > hand to match it with, dumping the "leftover" card at the first
> > opportunity). The awkward mucking action was no doubt a result of
> > camouflaging either a muck of 1 card (holding back a card) or 3 cards
> > (returning the extra card).
> >
> > Tom Weideman
>
> the dealer counts down the deck after laying down the river card, how do they get
> around that?
>
I also have NEVER seen a room in which the deck is counted down after
avery hand. However, I think that if you hand me a deck that is one card
short I will pick it up and announce "I think this deck is one card
short." I'm not even a dealer accustomed to the feel of a full deck in
my hand for many many hours. The "feeling" of being short might be
enough to cause the dealer to count down the cards.
Regards,
Dave Schard
Publisher - Canadian Poker Monthly
online subscription at http://www.canadianpoker.com
Lee Jones
In article <347866...@canadianpoker.com>,
Dave Scharf <da...@canadianpoker.com> wrote:
>I'm not even a dealer accustomed to the feel of a full deck in
>my hand for many many hours. The "feeling" of being short might be
>enough to cause the dealer to count down the cards.
Yes, it's scary that this maneuver went on as long as it did without getting
caught by a count-down of the stub. And, as you say, any experienced dealer
should notice the deck being short a card.
I'm rather disappointed that the Mirage didn't catch this sooner.
Regards, Lee
--
Lee Jones | "Let me tell you 'bout a man I knew
le...@sgi.com | Rode the breadth and the depth of China..."
650-933-3356 | -Paul Kantner
Tom Weideman
There have been several posts refering to the dealer practice of
counting down the deck, but I'm not convinced that this will be quite as
effective as everyone thinks. I don't think a dealer will announce to
the table that the deck is a card short after the countdown. Why do I
think this? Because in all the time I've played I have never seen it
happen. You may think this is because hold out cheats are very
uncommon, and you are right, but I would expect that dealer miscounts
are not all that uncommon (since they are human, and because they are
busy with the action while they are counting), and I have never heard a
dealer speak up in one of these instances. I think the dealer will just
assume (s)he miscounted and count down the deck again at the next
opportunity. This may give the cheat (who has witnessed the count down)
time to return the card, especially since the dealer has no great outlet
for catching the cheat, such as changing the deck or calling for a new
set up when these actions are not requested by the players. What will
NOT happen is a stop in the action with a floorman searching the sleeves
of the players, based on the dealer's one-time count of the cards.
The main advantage of the dealer counting the deck comes from the
incremental increases in suspicion when it occurs often, followed by
close scrutiny of the players by the camera. This could obviously take
quite a long time, especially if the cheat suspects the casino may be
catching on due to frequent dealer counts.
Tom Weideman
Paul Westley
Dave Scharf wrote:
...
> > Thanks for the explanation Tom, but I don't get how it works. Everywhere I play
> > the dealer counts down the deck after laying down the river card, how do they get
> > around that?
> >
> > Paul
>
> I also have NEVER seen a room in which the deck is counted down after
> avery hand. However, I think that if you hand me a deck that is one card
> short I will pick it up and announce "I think this deck is one card
> short." I'm not even a dealer accustomed to the feel of a full deck in
> my hand for many many hours. The "feeling" of being short might be
> enough to cause the dealer to count down the cards.
>
> Regards,
> Dave Schard
> Publisher - Canadian Poker Monthly
> online subscription at http://www.canadianpoker.com
Hi Dave, no, I said the opposite; where I play (California Grand, Pacheco CA) they
ALWAYS count down the deck after EVERY hand. I just assumed that happened everywhere
because I'm so used to it at my local cardroom. With you and Lee saying you don't see
that happening, I'm wondering just how many poker rooms follow that procedure. It must
be a bit of a pain for the dealers, but the good ones do it as soon as they've turned
the river card and have usually finished counting before the hand is over. It certainly
doesn't seem to slow the game down.
Paul
Edwardyung
>Tom Weideman explained 'hold-out':
To "hold out"
in poker is to keep certain cards (instead of mucking them) for use in a
later hand (e.g. hold out an ace and wait for another ace in a future
hand to match it with, dumping the "leftover" card at the first
opportunity). The awkward mucking action was no doubt a result of
camouflaging either a muck of 1 card (holding back a card) or 3 cards
(returning the extra card).
Tom Weideman
>
Suppose one holds out an ace, where would one hide it? I don't think pamling
it would work unless he/she is Shaq O'Neil. And then there is the
question/technique of switching the undesired hole card with the hold-out card
(should be an ace). How did these cheats pull it off? What if the cheat wins
the hand and cannot muck his/her hand? Is he/she stuck with the unwanted card?
Can someone with the skill of card mechanic shine light on this subject? We
can all use some education to avoid being vitimized. Thanks!
Edward Yung
McFearless
Paul Westley <pwes...@jps.net>
>Everywhere I play the dealer counts down the deck after laying down the >river
card, how do they get around that?
Not necessarily. They don't always count the deck down, and it varies from
dealer to dealer. About a month ago it was discovered in my local 12-24 game
that we were playing with a 54 card deck. No one knew just how long we had
been playing with that deck. My evil and suspicious mind, of course, figured
it was at least two hands back when my nut flush got cracked by a full house on
the river. Who knows? But I'll be watching that kid next time he comes in...
--D
Maverick
On Sun, 23 Nov 1997, Paul Westley wrote:
> Hi Dave, no, I said the opposite; where I play (California Grand, Pacheco CA) they
> ALWAYS count down the deck after EVERY hand. I just assumed that happened everywhere
> because I'm so used to it at my local cardroom. With you and Lee saying you don't see
Do they count down the deck after every hand in Hold'em?
Paul Westley
Mike Caro wrote:
> ... I'll ask my wife, Phyllis, who was once Director of
> Dealer Operations at the Bicycle Club Casino, before moving on to
> become President of the United States or whatever the hell her current
> title is...
>
No Mike, it's not that, that's Hillary.
David Monaghan
On 23 Nov 1997 22:47:15 GMT, edwar...@aol.com (Edwardyung) wrote:
>Suppose one holds out an ace, where would one hide it? I don't think pamling
>it would work unless he/she is Shaq O'Neil. And then there is the
>question/technique of switching the undesired hole card with the hold-out card
>(should be an ace). How did these cheats pull it off?
In my youth my father, who was a member of The Magic Circle in London,
took me to the pub they went to post-meetings. My father wasn't a card
magician but he had the books and so I had a pretty good idea of the
moves. Despite that I couldn't see a thing wrong while one of my
fathers drinking partners made cards disappear, reappear, and quite
probably jump out of the deck and split cider in my ear......
As I understand it virtually all the manipulations and moves that
professional magicians use in card magic have come from card mechanics
so the guy who was caught ( if that's really the case because so far
it seems to be rumour ) seems to have been a real amateur - which
makes the failure of detection over the period of time quoted
particularly worrying.
DaveM
Mike Caro
By the way, Dave, you seem to have spelled you last name wrong. Don't
be embarrassed. Many people get it confused. The actual spelling is
"Scharf," in case you'd like to correct this for future reference.
Straight Flushes,
Mike Caro
Mike Caro
Dave --
Kindly ignore my comment about the spelling of your name (separate
post). I was taking a roundabout way of telling you that your
automatic signature needed fixing, but in looking at some of your
other posts, I see that your name is correct. You probably enter your
signature manually (as I do), and that must have been a one-time-only
typo, which doesn't need correcting.
Straight Flushes,
Mike Caro
Dennis Yelle
In article <3478AA72...@jps.net> Paul Westley <pwes...@jps.net> writes:
>
[...]
>Hi Dave, no, I said the opposite; where I play (California Grand, Pacheco CA) they
>ALWAYS count down the deck after EVERY hand. I just assumed that happened everywhere
>because I'm so used to it at my local cardroom. With you and Lee saying you don't see
>be a bit of a pain for the dealers, but the good ones do it as soon as they've turned
>the river card and have usually finished counting before the hand is over. It certainly
>doesn't seem to slow the game down.
>
>Paul
Paul, have you ever seen what happens when the dealer finds the deck short?
I have also seen dealers count the deck down, but I have NEVER seen
a dealer announce that the deck was short.
Dennis
--
den...@netcom.com (Dennis Yelle)
"You must do the thing you think you cannot do." -- Eleanor Roosevelt
Paul Westley
Dennis Yelle wrote:
> In article <3478AA72...@jps.net> Paul Westley <pwes...@jps.net> writes:
> >
> [...]
> >...where I play (California Grand, Pacheco CA) they
> >ALWAYS count down the deck after EVERY hand. I just assumed that happened everywhere
> >because I'm so used to it at my local cardroom...
> >
> >Paul
>
> Paul, have you ever seen what happens when the dealer finds the deck short?
> I have also seen dealers count the deck down, but I have NEVER seen
> a dealer announce that the deck was short.
>
> Dennis
They are very polite, they usually just say *Paul, please may I have the card back* :)
No, actually, I have never seen them do anything, but there again, I would like to think
that this is an extremely rare occurence. I am going to ask one of the dealers that I'm
buddies with what the official procedure is, and if he knows anyone it's ever happened to,
this has got me quite curious. A good point was made that the dealer would probably
initially think they had miscounted and this would give the perp (I watch Cops) a chance to
switch the card back in, but if I was going to be a bad boy I don't think I'd want to do it
somewhere where they ALWAYS count down the deck.
Paul
Bill Vanek
Some details from a floorman at Binion's:
First, the guy was wearing a cheating device on his arm.
He masked the hold out move by pretending his hand
was partially crippled. He also sat in the one seat so he
could drop his hand right on the muck, as opposed to throwing
the cards across the table. He supposedly has been caught
elsewhere - the floorman thought Fort Macdowell - and is
apparently a career cheat.
The bad news is that it really did go on for a couple of
weeks, and it was a player who caught him (although they
apparently had this guy on tape, so they might have been
watching him before the player caught him).
He was arrested and charged with a felony. How this could
go on for so long is unclear; I guess it's possible that
enough dealers were either always counting the deck at the
same point in their down, or not at all. (The rule at Binion's
is that the dealers must count the deck at least once during
each down, I'm assuming it's similar at the Mirage).
Mike Caro
If I remember correctly, it was normal procedure at some Los
Angeles-area clubs for dealers to count down decks EVERY hand in
jackpot games. I'll ask my wife, Phyllis, who was once Director of
Dealer Operations at the Bicycle Club Casino, before moving on to
become President of the United States or whatever the hell her current
title is.
Anyway, I know that dealers would be put on leave or even fired for
not counting the deck down in these games. Even in the big-limit
games, I noticed that my dealers would start to count down every hand,
but would usually discontinue the count as soon as a pot was ready to
be awarded.
Straight Flushes,
Mike Caro
On Sun, 23 Nov 1997 11:24:46 -0600, Dave Scharf
<da...@canadianpoker.com> wrote:
>Paul Westley wrote:
>>
>> Tom Weideman wrote:
>>
>> > ...
>>
>> > Edward: To "hold out"
>> > in poker is to keep certain cards (instead of mucking them) for use in a
>> > later hand (e.g. hold out an ace and wait for another ace in a future
>> > hand to match it with, dumping the "leftover" card at the first
>> > opportunity). The awkward mucking action was no doubt a result of
>> > camouflaging either a muck of 1 card (holding back a card) or 3 cards
>> > (returning the extra card).
>> >
>> > Tom Weideman
>>
>> Thanks for the explanation Tom, but I don't get how it works. Everywhere I play
>> the dealer counts down the deck after laying down the river card, how do they get
>> around that?
>>
>> Paul
>
>I also have NEVER seen a room in which the deck is counted down after
>avery hand. However, I think that if you hand me a deck that is one card
>short I will pick it up and announce "I think this deck is one card
>short." I'm not even a dealer accustomed to the feel of a full deck in
>my hand for many many hours. The "feeling" of being short might be
>enough to cause the dealer to count down the cards.
>
Holdemjoe
Can someone answer the original question? Was the guy caught? Did the LV Police
take him away? what was the final outcome of the event?
joe miranda
In article <347934E5...@jps.net>,
Paul Westley <pwes...@jps.net> wrote:
>
>> Paul, have you ever seen what happens when the dealer finds the deck short?
>> I have also seen dealers count the deck down, but I have NEVER seen
>> a dealer announce that the deck was short.
>>
>> Dennis
>
>They are very polite, they usually just say *Paul, please may I have the card back* :)
>
>No, actually, I have never seen them do anything, but there again, I would like to think
>that this is an extremely rare occurence.
I am a dealer (artichoke joe's, but I've worked at other clubs, mostly
in Nevada). We are instructed to count the deck down at least twice a
down. If one is found to be short, the first thing *I* do is assume I may have misscounted, and I will re-count the deck NEXT HAND. No one can replace a card before I recount because to replace it, he will have to put the card in the muck, and the muck isn't counted, only the stub, or
remaining cards in the dealer's hand is counted, which *should* add up to
two cards for every player plus the flop and burns from 52, or 26 cards for a full 9 handed game. If the deck is short, the last thing we want to do is
make a grand announcement that the deck is incorrect. First of all, the
deck may have been bad from the start. At artichoke joe's, the dealer who
was dealing when the setup was brought in is responsible for the setup, to
check it carefully and make sure all is kosher. If there are too many
cards, or not enough, that dealer will be made aware of his screw up.
Believe me, a congressional investigation has nothing on the search for
that dealer. Secondly, you don't announce it to the table for a more self
serving reason (from the house's point of view): you don't want the table
knowing a card is missing because you don't want someone complaining that
he was drawing to a non-existant card and trying to claim the house "owes"
him all or some of his losses. Also, there is no way to know how long the
card has been missing. Thirdly, if the deck is bad, all we do is call for
another setup, which is brought to the table by the chipsellers. At that
point, without making a big deal of it, I'll tell the chipseller to keep
the setup aside, or if I can do it inconspicuously, I'll tell him to give
it to the floorman to check. When I get up, I'll tell the floorman what's
up away from the table. If the deck is right, we know there is a big
problem, because I already checked it *twice* and found it to be short
both times. In any case, they are alerted to the problem and can use
surveilance to watch the game much more closely. Hopefully, the perp is
unaware of what happened, and will continue his wicked ways long enough to
be caught. If they were smart, they wouldn't be thieves in the first place,
so usually they get caught pretty quickly. To find something like this
going on is extremely rare. I've been at artichoke's for 9 years and there
have been no more than 2 or 3 incidents where customers have been found
cheating, and if memory serves, those were in the asian games. Collusion is
far more apt to be the problem, and no two or more could get away with it
for long.
Joe M
TIGER123
at the taj mahal in atlantic city, each dealer is required to count down the
deck three times during a 30-minute shift.
tiger
mpla...@earthlink.net
(The rule at Binion's
> is that the dealers must count the deck at least once during
> each down, I'm assuming it's similar at the Mirage).
Okay, I'm dumb. I thought downs were in football. What's a down in
poker
Dave Scharf
Mike Caro wrote:
>
> By the way, Dave, you seem to have spelled you last name wrong. Don't
> be embarrassed. Many people get it confused. The actual spelling is
> "Scharf," in case you'd like to correct this for future reference.
>
> Straight Flushes,
> Mike Caro
Actually Mike since the person "Dave Scharf" is reknowned throughout
western Canada as a big fish I was quietly attempting a name change in
the hopes that I might again strike fear into the hearts of my
opponents. You've caught me out. Of course, misspelling one's own name
could be a sign of being "crazy" which, from what I hear is a pretty
good table image...
Regards,
Doug Schaeffer
Pooblishur - Kandee-en Poe-ker Mans-lee
Winner777
Most all cheating is detectable if you are paying attention, providing of
course that you know what to look for. NOBODY holds their hand the way somebody
that is holding out does. Take a card and put it in the palm of your hand,
quite a bit of the card will come up where your fingers are, therefore you have
to keep your fingers tight together so nobody will see the card through them.
The problem is there is so many legitimate things that you need to pay
attention to in poker that I find it next to impossible to look out for
everything. We were playing $75-$150 in the Mirage and played an entire half
hour with 2 brown cards in a green deck. This got by the dealer and 9 players.
The deck didn't have two extra cards, I guees when it was put together the
person that did it didn't pay attention to what color the cards were.
Ed Hill
Barbara Yoon
Mike Caro:
>> By the way, Dave, you seem to have spelled you last name
>> it confused. The actual spelling is "Scharf," in case you'd like
>> to correct this for future reference.
Dave Scharf:
> Actually Mike since the person "Dave Scharf" is reknowned
> throughout western Canada as a big fish I was quietly attempting
> a name change in the hopes that I might again strike fear into
> the hearts of my opponents. You've caught me out. Of course,
> misspelling one's own name could be a sign of being "crazy"
> which, from what I hear is a pretty good table image...
Well, Dave, if that's your reason, then allow me to suggest something
perhaps somewhat more effective like "Scharp" or "Schark"...
Maverick
On 24 Nov 1997, Winner777 wrote:
> attention to in poker that I find it next to impossible to look out for
> everything. We were playing $75-$150 in the Mirage and played an entire half
> hour with 2 brown cards in a green deck. This got by the dealer and 9 players.
> The deck didn't have two extra cards, I guees when it was put together the
> person that did it didn't pay attention to what color the cards were.
I have a real problem with the brown-green deck colors. Not only are many
people color blind to this combonation, but also people with normal
eyesight have to pay attention to make sure the cards are of the right
deck.
Dave Scharf
Actually, when placed on the waiting list I often asked to be called
"Cincinatti Slim" or some other such "classic" poker moniker. It's fun
to watch all the people at the blackjack tables look up when the over
head speakers boom out "Cincinatti Slim to the poker room please,
Cincinatti Slim."
Regards,
Dave Scharf
Maverick
On 25 Nov 1997, PBO COP wrote:
> I have seen a dealer come up short on cards a couple times. The first time,
> they have that look like it can't be true. They deal the next hand and count
> it down again. It is short again. They ask for a setup and nothing is done
> about it again. Whoever has the hidden cards still has them and uses them in a
> couple hands in the new decks. Then later when the next dealer comes in, the
> decks have too many cards. Never ending....they just call for new setups !!
What casino is this at? I've played for years and I never notice this
short deck -> overloaded deck routine going on.
In fact, the only time I really saw anything wrong with a deck in play was
when I sat down at a 7stud game at the Commerce in L.A. My first hand I
had wired Q's and the other two Q's were face up on two other hands so I
thought I was screwed. On the river, I caught another Q giving me Q's
full and thus being the 5th queen in the deck. I felt guilty just showing
the hand even though I didn't do anything and was starting to doubt if I
really saw two Q's on third street(both those players folded). Anyways,
someone immediately asked for a deck change and that was the end of it.
Abdul Jalib
I know someone who was in the game when the cheat was identified
and backroomed. He wanted me to post this for him so that he
would remain anonymous...
================================================================
First, the pure facts. I was playing the Mirage 20-40 Hold'em
game on November 19, 1997 on table #5 between 4:45 am and 10 am.
Around 7 or 8 am, "Silver" asked for a deck change. The next
hand, each player had been dealt two cards, the first players
had folded, and an old guy in the #1 seat had just folded,
pushing the cards awkwardly into the muck as he had done all
night, which didn't seem unusual since he had crippled hand.
At that point, a player loudly demanded the dealer to stop and
count the discards. The dealer didn't understand, nor did the
players, and I think the game just would have proceeded were
the player not on his feet and quite insistent that the
discards be counted. The dealer spread the discards. Nine.
There should have been an even number, namely eight.
The player, an ex-cop from Chicago, accused the old guy in the
#1 seat of holding out cards. Much ugly language followed.
The #1 seat player remained unusually quiet through
this, getting out not much more than a weak "the dealer dealt
me three cards", whereas earlier he had been outraged when a
dispute erupted over who was allowed to switch tables, yelling
at another player "are you calling me a liar?!" The #1 seat
player got out of his seat, put on his jacket, and remained
until security arrived and he was escorted into the back room.
Security came to search the area around his seat more than once,
apparently never finding any card; I assume at least one of the
old decks must have been short for them to search repeatedly.
The ex-cop described in more detail what he had seen. He
had been suspicious, because the guy bet and discarded using
a crippled right hand (and it did seem legitimately crippled
because of scars), while his perfectly good left hand remained
under the table much of the time while at other times making
unusual movements. The ex-cop said this time he was sitting
out to just watch this player. He said the player put his
left hand on his right bicep area and held it there until he
received his first two cards. He said the player then slid
his left hand down his right arm and pushed his hand into
the muck, without apparently even having looked at his first
two cards. (He needed to get the extra card back into the
deck before the new deck came in.)
I never observed the dealers counting down the deck during
the time I was playing that night. They are supposed to do
it once per half hour. It's possible that I could have missed
it, but I've been watching since then, and I still haven't
seen any dealer count down a deck. I have indeed observed
Mirage dealers counting down the deck on their own in the
past, but recently they seemed to have slacked off, perhaps
because they never get in trouble for not doing it. I'm going
to stop tipping for pots and start tipping for counting down
the deck. I'm going to start counting the cards along with
the dealer, so that I can hold up the game if the deck is
short, rather than allowing that scenario of the dealer
assuming he made a mistake, and the cheater getting the
held out card back into the deck before the dealer counts
down the deck again.
Earlier, when the cheater left the other table, he was warmly
welcomed into our table by the eager sharks, who had heard how
fishy this guy was from the talk at the other table. The sharks
were about to lose their place at the top of the poker food
chain. The cheater had me fooled. I did not suspect him of
cheating. He was *not* an amateur. He was a very practiced
professional cheater, in my opinion. This was the ex-cop's
opinion too. The cheat had a good act and some pretty smooth
moves.
He played in a very strange and fishy manner. Not only did
he call three bets with Q6 offsuit (hell, I would call three
bets with QQ6 offsuit too, and get rid of a queen once two
6's hit), but he played very passively. He pulled an
unusual number of full houses, and he always seemed to have
at least a pair against me.
I lost about $1500 during the time the cheater was at the table.
Between the two tables, the cheater had won $1500 on his $500
buy-in. Obviously, I cannot claim the cheater took all that
money from me, but I was none too pleased.
Now the hearsay and facts that I did not observe directly and
thus I cannot personally vouch for their veracity. They
say that in the back room, Mirage management found that the
player had a hold-out device built into his shirt sleeve,
not at the wrist but up in the bicep area. Mirage
management supposedly found on his person a card, the ace of
hearts. Mirage confiscated his $2035 and it sounds like,
pending the gaming commission investigation and litigation,
the money may be split among the victims on those two tables.
The player had been playing on several other days. A dealer
had spotted an extra discard a week earlier and had told
management he was suspicious of this player, and Mirage had
this incident on tape, but wanted to catch him in the act.
The camera had been on him ever since. (Mirage does not
cover every table with a camera, not even close, but they
can fix one of their few cameras on a given table.)
Apparently he disappeared for five days and came back with
a different appearance. He supposedly won big every time he
played. Some hapless sharks had intentionally played in his
games for days. Rumor has it that the same player had been
booted from an Arizona cardroom, which had not pressed
criminal charges. Supposedly the guy was indeed arrested
at the Mirage, which is supposedly pressing criminal
charges.
This is the SECOND time such an incident has occurred at
a table I was seated in at the Mirage, and I've only played
about 500 hours at Mirage. The other time was 10-20 (or
perhaps 5-10) 7-card stud. I had just been seated and had
not received a hand, so I didn't lose any money. But a
player had demanded that the dealer count down the deck
right during a hand, and then another player had run to
the restroom, never to return. Security later discovered
one or more cards in the restroom garbage can. That hold-out
cheat apparently got away and they may not have even gotten
him on camera.
Disgustedly,
An anonymous cheated player
===========================================================
Abdul here again. I don't think I can post this over on
twoplustwo's forum, because Mason Malmuth harshly criticized me
for (and nearly censored) my last post that claimed that
cheating exists in casino poker and gave some hearsay accounts
of it, in a followup to Mason's post where he said cheating was
not a problem.
In the case of Mirage, I think it is asking for cheaters to
hit it, since it does not keep cameras on all the games, and
the dealers do not routinely count down the decks like they
are supposed to. Donna Harris claims that even the 40-80
games are not covered by cameras most of the time. In contrast,
Hollywood Park casino has cameras on all its "top section"
(15-30 and up) games, perhaps even on all its games. The
one time when I asked for the camera to be checked at the
Mirage (someone had stolen some of my chips from my stack),
management refused. The one time when I asked for the camera
to be checked at Hollywood Park (when the dealer had caused a
huge confusion by moving the button back and forth and there
was question over who had put in the blinds), Hollywood Park
management complied and told us exactly what the cameras
had shown. Are a few more cameras and VCR's and more
cooperative management too much to ask for?
--
Abdul
PBO COP
LouKrieger
> I heard an out of town player was caught holding out cards in a 20-40
>Holdem game this past week in the Mirage. Rumor was the guy was
>winning several 1000 per night for up to two weeks.
I have no knowledge of the allegded Mirage incident, but I was told by a dealer
at Viejas about two months ago of a similar incident that occurred there. If
true, it could easily be the same guy. The M.O. is identical.
Keep flopping aces,
Lou Krieger
PBO COP
A down is each sitting for the dealer. Usually about a half hour at each
table....
Paul Westley
Abdul Jalib wrote:
> I know someone who was in the game when the cheat was identified
> and backroomed. He wanted me to post this for him so that he
> would remain anonymous...
> ...
> Disgustedly,
> An anonymous cheated player--
Wow, that was one fantastic post Abdul, thanks, and many thanks to Mr.
Anonymous. I'm going to try to find out about cameras and counting down
where I play, I'd really like to hear from anyone else who finds out
what goes on at their clubs.
Paul
Maverick
On Tue, 25 Nov 1997, Paul Westley wrote:
> > An anonymous cheated player--
>
> Wow, that was one fantastic post Abdul, thanks, and many thanks to Mr.
> Anonymous. I'm going to try to find out about cameras and counting down
> where I play, I'd really like to hear from anyone else who finds out
> what goes on at their clubs.
>
> Paul
I think I'm gonna be watching seat #1 every time I play now.
John Harkness
John Harkness writes:
Dave Scharf wrote:
SNIP ASSORTED YADDA YADDA
> Actually, when placed on the waiting list I often asked to be called
> "Cincinatti Slim" or some other such "classic" poker moniker. It's fun
> to watch all the people at the blackjack tables look up when the over
> head speakers boom out "Cincinatti Slim to the poker room please,
> Cincinatti Slim."
>
> Regards,
> Dave Scharf
> Publisher - Canadian Poker Monthly
> online subscription at http://www.canadianpoker.com
And Dave, they'd be even more impressed if you could spell Cincinnati.
Can't wait to read this magazine you're editing.
John
Fred K
> >> Paul, have you ever seen what happens when the dealer finds the deck
short?
> >> I have also seen dealers count the deck down, but I have NEVER seen
> >> a dealer announce that the deck was short.
> >>
> >> Dennis
> >
> >They are very polite, they usually just say *Paul, please may I have the
card back* :)
> >
> >No, actually, I have never seen them do anything, but there again, I
would like to think
> >that this is an extremely rare occurence.
>
>
> Joe M. wrote....
Great post Joe...
I've always thought that a two color setup was short, rainbow the cards,
many colors change often and you prevent day to day card keeping... As it is
now only the dumb get caught... The kept card can be brought into a game
days later,and the card doesn't have to be high, any card at the right time
can turn the pot... as you say the answer is with the dealer...
Fred K.
remove spam block for prvt rep
Edwardyung
Here is a solution for casino poker rooms to deal with hold-out cheats without
counting down after every hand. Set up an electronic balance somewhere near
the dealer. After each hand, the dealer collects the cards and weigh them. If
the measured weight deviates from the original weight by more than 1 card, then
we know someone is cheating. Maybe then body search is in order.
Edward Yung
James P. Massar
Abdul Jalib <abd...@earthlink.net> w
>Abdul here again. I don't think I can post this over on
>twoplustwo's forum, because Mason Malmuth harshly criticized me
>for (and nearly censored) my last post that claimed that
>cheating exists in casino poker and gave some hearsay accounts
>of it, in a followup to Mason's post where he said cheating was
>not a problem.
Well, I think that Mason is correct in that hearsay is indeed very
dangerous. Hearsay can destroy someone's (or some entity's)
reputation quickly and without much recourse.
"I heard Mr. XXX is a child molester..."
Discussions of specific cheating at various clubs should be based on
facts and eyewitness accounts.
Discussions of cheating in general, and its effects on a cardrooms,
players, and pros, is certainly of general interest and while Mason
clearly doesn't like the idea of discussing cheating very much I get
the impression that he would not react as overtly to such discussion
or the relaying of factual accounts as you did above as he did to
your first post.
By the way, the 'hearsay' that the guy was arrested and charges are
being filed should be a matter of public record, no? Anyone in Las
Vegas would be able to verify this, I would think, with a little
effort.
>In the case of Mirage, I think it is asking for cheaters to
>hit it, since it does not keep cameras on all the games, and
>the dealers do not routinely count down the decks like they
>are supposed to. Donna Harris claims that even the 40-80
>games are not covered by cameras most of the time.
> Are a few more cameras and VCR's and more
>cooperative management too much to ask for?
The bottom line is, as we all know, that there is significantly
less incentive for the Mirage to surveille its poker games than
for it to take action against cheats beating its house games
and counters beating its BJ games.
And as the only game in town, success brings complacency,
I would guess.
Perhaps this incident, as it becomes more widely known, will
cause a review of their policies.
>--
>Abdul
Cheech1505
While you may *think* nothing is being done about, I have witnessed occasions
of missing cards, marked cards or too many cards in a deck in Vegas myself. I
have also witnessed a player being unceremoniously removed from the card room
to the security office in the case of an Omaha hi/lo game where the deck was
repeatedly fouled within the space of two hours, with each incident involving
(how *conincidental* in a lowball game), an ace.
One incident of a bad deck may not be significant in itself, but when a pattern
develops at a table, the "eye in the sky" proves very useful. The tapes are
there to be replayed in the event something appears amiss, and while it is
doubtful that the floorman is likely to tell everyone that there is a suspicion
of foul play, what goes on behind the scenes can be quite another matter.
Security has access to the video tapes, and these can easily be checked while
the game goes on in hopes of finding the culprit.
Do not assume that merely because the cardroom hasn't filled you in on what it
is doing to investigate the matter, they have no concern.
Dave Scharf
Fortunately, the announcer doesn't spell it over the speakers...
RPGross
I am shocked to learn from several dealers who have said what they do when a
deck is short is that they deal another hand and then count it down again. Why
deal even one more hand if a deck is short or suspected of same?
HitTheFlop
>> John Harkness writes:
>
>And Dave, they'd be even more impressed if you could spell Cincinnati.
>
>Can't wait to read this magazine you're editing.
>
> John
John is off to Vegas again. I see that last time he did take a dictionary
with him, as I suggested. We need more spelling cops on RGP. Please
take the time to point out any errors you see in any posts. I find it adds
so very much to my enjoyment of this NG.
Best Luck,
Ed
People never lie so much as after a hunt, during
a war or before an election. -- Otto Von Bismark
I guess he never heard a bad beat story.
Barbara Roy
hi from colorado
Barbara Yoon
Abdul Jalib:
>> I don't think I can post this over on twoplustwo's forum,
>> because Mason Malmuth harshly criticized me for (and
>> nearly censored) my last post that claimed that cheating
>> exists in casino poker and gave some hearsay accounts
>> of it, in a followup to Mason's post where he said cheating
>> was not a problem.
HitTheFlop:
> If I were a big time poker book publisher and author, and
> motivated by self interest, I would do most anything to present
> the world of poker in it's most favorable and honest light. The
> same can be said for card room management... You will
> continue to get no worthwile information about cheating from
> the poker establishment. ...Maria Stern / WSOP / Card Player
> situation from this spring. Notice the frequency of articles
> about cheating in Card Player. There are, to my knowledge,
> none. I would love someone to correct me if this is not the case.
Hmmm...I recall quite a no-holds-barred discussion of the Maria Stern
episode in the publisher's column in CARD PLAYER, including frank
statements (not any cover-up) from Stern herself. And do you really
believe some "establishment" dictates to the likes of Mike Caro and
others what to write and not to write?! And myself as one who has
warmed Mason Malmuth's toes on points like the bias in his variance
formula, and his over-rating of suited connectors, I would not hasten to
rake him over the coals for "nearly censoring...hearsay accounts"...
Coatie1
>R="#ffffff">Subject: Re: Hold-Out Cheat arrested at Mirage 20-40 Holdem?
I read all 40 posts...thinking about the movie casino and what they did in the
bacxkroom to the Blackjack cheats...
HitTheFlop
Abdul Jalib <abd...@earthlink.net> writes:
>Abdul here again. I don't think I can post this over on
twoplustwo's forum,
>because Mason Malmuth harshly criticized me
for (and nearly censored) my last
>post that claimed that
cheating exists in casino poker and gave some hearsay
>accounts
of it, in a followup to Mason's post where he said cheating was
not
>a problem.
If I were a big time poker book publisher and author, and motivated
by self interest, I would do most anything to present the world of
poker in it's most favorable and honest light. The same can be said
for card room management and their need for the games to appear
totally honest. Who among us would play in a crooked game? Only
a world class cheat. How many of us would study a game (and buy
the needed books) if there was a good chance of facing a line up full
of cheats? I sure wouldn't.
You will continue to get no worthwile information about cheating from
the poker establishment. No motivation exists for this to occur. Take
a quick review of the Maria Stern / WSOP / Card Player situation from
this spring. How much pressure was required for any response? A lot.
Notice the frequency of articles about cheating in Card Player. There
are, to my knowledge, none. I would love someone to correct me if
this is not the case.
RGP will continue to be the only source of information on cheating
available to me. Please keep the community informed.
Dave Scharf
Barbara Yoon wrote:
>
> Abdul Jalib:
> >> I don't think I can post this over on twoplustwo's forum,
> >> because Mason Malmuth harshly criticized me for (and
> >> nearly censored) my last post that claimed that cheating
> >> exists in casino poker and gave some hearsay accounts
> >> of it, in a followup to Mason's post where he said cheating
> >> was not a problem.
>
> > If I were a big time poker book publisher and author, and
> > motivated by self interest, I would do most anything to present
> > the world of poker in it's most favorable and honest light. The
> > continue to get no worthwile information about cheating from
> > situation from this spring. Notice the frequency of articles
> > about cheating in Card Player. There are, to my knowledge,
> > none. I would love someone to correct me if this is not the case.
>
> episode in the publisher's column in CARD PLAYER, including frank
> statements (not any cover-up) from Stern herself. And do you really
> believe some "establishment" dictates to the likes of Mike Caro and
> others what to write and not to write?! And myself as one who has
> warmed Mason Malmuth's toes on points like the bias in his variance
> formula, and his over-rating of suited connectors, I would not hasten to
Well… I don’t recall the discussion as being no-holds barred. In fact, I
recall being sort of disappointed with the lack of harsh words.
There is a great deal of pressure, especially on non-traditional news
sources to "censor" information which is damming to the clients. I am
the morning co-host of a successful FM radio station. It doesn’t come up
often, but it occasionally happens that something that I would like to
say, I don’t. Simply because of the $$$ involved. I know of a morning
man who mentioned his new Honda and cost his radio station $70,000 a
year from the local Ford dealer. I refer to it as "economic censorship."
Similarly, I now publish a modest poker magazine here in Canada. I admit
that where it comes to saying something bad about a client or potential
client it will be difficult to say the least. Rather, my magazine is
more likely to simply ignore the issue. Newspapers and television news
more than other media seem to have avoided this. They are traditional
news sources and usually will publish "big" news stories regardless of
the effect it may have on present of future advertising or sales.
Magazine like Card Player depend on a small number of potential clients.
To shut off even one can be very damaging to revenues.
Bruce Schechter
Barbara Yoon wrote in message <65itgu$joq$1...@winter.news.erols.com>...
>Abdul Jalib:
>>> I don't think I can post this over on twoplustwo's forum,
>>> because Mason Malmuth harshly criticized me for (and
>>> nearly censored) my last post that claimed that cheating
>>> exists in casino poker and gave some hearsay accounts
>>> of it, in a followup to Mason's post where he said cheating
>>> was not a problem.
>
>HitTheFlop:
>> If I were a big time poker book publisher and author, and
>> motivated by self interest, I would do most anything to present
>> the world of poker in it's most favorable and honest light. The
>> same can be said for card room management... You will
>> continue to get no worthwile information about cheating from
>> the poker establishment. ...Maria Stern / WSOP / Card Player
>> situation from this spring. Notice the frequency of articles
>> about cheating in Card Player. There are, to my knowledge,
>> none. I would love someone to correct me if this is not the case.
>
>Hmmm...I recall quite a no-holds-barred discussion of the Maria Stern
>episode in the publisher's column in CARD PLAYER, including frank
>statements (not any cover-up) from Stern herself. And do you really
>believe some "establishment" dictates to the likes of Mike Caro and
>others what to write and not to write?! And myself as one who has
>warmed Mason Malmuth's toes on points like the bias in his variance
>formula, and his over-rating of suited connectors, I would not hasten to
>rake him over the coals for "nearly censoring...hearsay accounts"...
>
>
The Marai Stern episode had almost nothing to do with cheating. Reading
about it, I'm sure, did not cause one poker player to hesitate for even a
second before sitting down in a poker game at the Mirage or anywhere else.
I'd be more impressed if CARD PLAYER would publish a factual account of the
arrest of the Hold-Out Cheat at the Mirage and a frank discussion of the
prevalance of casino cheats.I don't think it will happen. This is not to
castigate CARD PLAYER, Mason Malmuth or whoever. CARD PLAYER does not
pretend to be a disinterested journalistic forum offering unbiased
reporting on the poker world. No such animal yet exist; rgp is the closest
thing to one, thanks to the efforts of people like Abduhl.
Maverick
The Tangiers was much nicer than I would be to any cheat.
Maverick
On Wed, 26 Nov 1997, Barbara Yoon wrote:
> Hmmm...I recall quite a no-holds-barred discussion of the Maria Stern
> episode in the publisher's column in CARD PLAYER, including frank
> statements (not any cover-up) from Stern herself. And do you really
I think this is a severe misstatement. I remember the card player doing
their best to downplay the occurence and Maria Stern trying to weasel her
way out of the problem. The fact is her husband purchased her a gold WSOP
bracelet thereby discrediting the WSOP in the future. Stern should be
ashamed to ever wear that bracelet. It will be worthy to note in next
year's WSOP whether or not she does wear it.
> believe some "establishment" dictates to the likes of Mike Caro and
> others what to write and not to write?! And myself as one who has
Oh come on...I've even had casino personell(sp?) in the local club attempt
to get me to be quiet about an incident because it'd hurt business
Maverick
Ed actually makes a post with some value for once. You can't expect
anyone who is profiting from the industry to be very open and honest about
anything negative concerning their industry until the occurence and outcry
is so widespread that they can't avoid it for fear of losing credibility.
Even once the problem is admitted by the industry, it will be severly
downplayed as in the WSOP. They don't want to kill the goose that's
laying those golden eggs.
On 27 Nov 1997, HitTheFlop wrote:
> If I were a big time poker book publisher and author, and motivated
> by self interest, I would do most anything to present the world of
> poker in it's most favorable and honest light. The same can be said
> for card room management and their need for the games to appear
> totally honest. Who among us would play in a crooked game? Only
> a world class cheat. How many of us would study a game (and buy
> the needed books) if there was a good chance of facing a line up full
> of cheats? I sure wouldn't.
>
> You will continue to get no worthwile information about cheating from
> the poker establishment. No motivation exists for this to occur. Take
> a quick review of the Maria Stern / WSOP / Card Player situation from
> this spring. How much pressure was required for any response? A lot.
Barbara Yoon
> I am one of those who took [CARD PLAYER magazine, publisher Linda
> Johnson] to task last Spring about the reportage on the Maria Stern episode.
> I have since come to know Linda personally and I will state, without any
> reservation, that I do not know ANYONE in the entire world of poker who has a
> greater love for the game than she does. I am ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN that
> Linda would be the first to condemn, in Card Player, any proven instance of
> cheating at poker. I believe, now, that Linda was using her forum (during the
> Maria Stern thing) to do what a responsible journalist SHOULD do ... present
> the truth behind the issue so that we all could fully understand just what was
> going down. I hereby apologize to both Linda and Maria for my "rush to
> judgment" last Spring. But, more importantly, I think we should all understand
> that the reason we don't read more about cheating at (card room) poker is that
> it is not a common occurence. Indeed, it is an extremely rare one.
You seem naively unaware that CARD PLAYER, Linda Johnson, Mike Caro, et.al.
are all part of an "establishment conspiracy"... But seriously, you should point out in
this that the "Maria Stern thing" was only a momentary lapse of judgment into some
unfortunate foolishness (which I'm sure she'll forever regret), and not cheating...
Bruce Schechter
VC61 wrote in message <
, I think we should all understand that the
>reason we don't read more about cheating at (card room) poker is that it is
not
>a common occurence. Indeed, it is an extremely rare one.
>
Well, it just happened in the Mirage. Where is the CP story?
HitTheFlop
In article <65itgu$joq$1...@winter.news.erols.com>, "Barbara Yoon"
<by...@erols.com> writes:
>Hmmm...I recall quite a no-holds-barred discussion of the Maria Stern
episode
>in the publisher's column in CARD PLAYER, including frank
>statements (not any cover-up) from Stern herself.
The article came 2 weeks after the first WSOP results were
reported. I know, deadlines yadda yadda. Read it again. It's
cream puff stuff. Linda Smith is a WSOP champion and accepts
regular advertizing from Binion's. Just how objective do you
think she can be?
> And do you really believe some "establishment"
>dictates to the likes of Mike Caro and
>others what to write and not to write?!
I have great respect for Mike Caro but in all the tens of
thousands of words I've read, he has avoided the topic.
I would be anxious to see an artice in Card Player but
I know that won't happen.
VC61
>Take a quick review of the Maria Stern / WSOP / Card Player situation from
the frequency of articles about cheating in Card Player. There are, to my
knowledge, none. I would love someone to correct me if this is not the case.>
=================================================
I am one of those who took CP (and, thus, Linda Johnson) to task last Spring
about the reportage on the Maria Stern episode.
I have since come to know Linda personally and I will state, without any
reservation, that I do not know ANYONE in the entire world of poker who has a
greater love for the game than she does. I am ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN that Linda
would be the first to condemn, in Card Player, any proven instance of cheating
at poker.
I believe, now, that Linda was using her forum (during the Maria Stern thing)
to do what a responsible journalist SHOULD do ... present the truth behind the
issue so that we all could fully understand just what was going down.
I hereby apologize to both Linda and Maria for my "rush to judgment" last
Spring. But, more importantly, I think we should all understand that the
reason we don't read more about cheating at (card room) poker is that it is not
a common occurence. Indeed, it is an extremely rare one.
We should all be grateful for the fact that legal poker exists, and that we are
well-protected by the card rooms who deal it to us.
When I was a young man in the '50s, playing in a back room game in a strange
town, that was surely not the case.
Bill Alan, ADB
Richard Sooy
As tige...@aol.com has said, the deck is REQUIRED to be counted AT
LEAST 3 times per half-hour... Personally, I try to count it more than
that, if time premits (meaning... "will it slow up the game? No? count
that sucker!) If I find a card missing, I WILL re-count the deck, no
matter what, and if still short, I will take that deck out of play,
after the hand is done, and switch to the other deck...Then, when a
floorperson is near (note I will not stop action, to call the floor...
I try and make it casual-looking), I will motion him/her over, so that
they stand next to me, and DISCREETLY, ask them to check the deck for
me..
Although, you'd be surprised at the amount of times the floorperson
actually gives me this "why are you bothering me?" look!
go figure....
Rich
--
Richard Sooy
Poker Dealer, Trump Taj Mahal, Atlantic City, NJ
Email addresses:
rs...@toke.com
Richar...@juno.com
************************************************************
* HomePage URL: http://users.jerseycape.com/rsooy *
************************************************************
Richard Sooy
Edward... Unfortunately, due to the fact that cards (paper OR plastic)
Tend to pick up oils from the human hand, and or moisture from the
air,and dirt, this presents the possibility of the cards weighing
more, at times, even though all 52 cards are in the deck.... to use a
device such as you suggest, would involve the practice of doing an
initial "weigh-in" on each deck, as the new setup is brought in, and
having the scale equipped with a switch, so it knows which deck it's
weighing (such as, in the case of a player-requested deck change...)..
Besides the added cost, for the machine, it would also serve to slow
up the game..... the best, and easiest way, is simply what most
cardrooms SHOULD be doing... Counting the deck as often as possible..I
agree with the Taj Mahal's decision that the decks MUST be counted at
least 3 times per half-hour....
Sincerely,
Barbara Yoon
Abdul Jalib:
>> >> I don't think I can post this over on twoplustwo's forum,
>> >> because Mason Malmuth harshly criticized me for (and
>> >> nearly censored) my last post that claimed that cheating
>> >> exists in casino poker and gave some hearsay accounts
>> >> of it, in a followup to Mason's post where he said cheating
>> >> was not a problem.
HitTheFlop:
>> > If I were a big time poker book publisher and author, and
>> > motivated by self interest, I would do most anything to present
>> > the world of poker in it's most favorable and honest light. The
>> > same can be said for card room management... You will
>> > continue to get no worthwile information about cheating from
>> > the poker establishment. ...Maria Stern / WSOP / Card Player
>> > situation from this spring. Notice the frequency of articles
>> > about cheating in Card Player. There are, to my knowledge,
>> > none. I would love someone to correct me if this is not the case.
B.Y.:
>> Hmmm...I recall quite a no-holds-barred discussion of the Maria Stern
>> episode in the publisher's column in CARD PLAYER, including frank
>> statements (not any cover-up) from Stern herself. And do you really
>> believe some "establishment" dictates to the likes of Mike Caro and
>> others what to write and not to write?! And myself as one who has
>> warmed Mason Malmuth's toes on points like the bias in his variance
>> formula, and his over-rating of suited connectors, I would not hasten to
>> rake him over the coals for "nearly censoring...hearsay accounts"...
Dave Scharf:
> Well… I don’t recall the discussion as being no-holds barred. In fact,
> I recall being sort of disappointed with the lack of harsh words.
I guess we both ought to go back and dig up the old CARD PLAYER
issue, and read it again... My own recollection is of an unequivocal
condemnation of Maria Stern's little "arrangement" (and Stern herself,
an otherwise popular player, acknowledging and regretting her own
stupid mistake) -- and as Bruce Schechter points out, we have to keep
in mind here that what Stern did was NOT really "cheating"...
Winner777
>Hmmm...I recall quite a no-holds-barred discussion of the Maria >Stern episode
in the publisher's column in CARD PLAYER, >including frank statements (not any
cover-up) from Stern herself.
The only reason anything about the episode was in Card Player is because it was
all over the RGP and Linda Johnson had no choice but to publish it, otherwise
it would have been swept under the rug.
If I remember correctly, Linda Johnson said that Maria Stern should be
applauded for comming forth with her confession. Yeah right, you come forth
after you are caught and you should be applauded.
Ed Hill
Bill Vanek
In article <19971128063...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
Winner777 <winn...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>If I remember correctly, Linda Johnson said that Maria Stern should be
>applauded for comming forth with her confession. Yeah right, you come forth
>after you are caught and you should be applauded.
>
>Ed Hill
What she said was: "I applaud Maria Stern for coming forward and being
courageous enough to discuss what happened...".
Nowhere in the article does she criticize Stern, in fact, there is nothing
but praise for her. (It's the May 30, 97 issue.)
TBill
Just back from Tunica, MS. At the Horseshoe I asked if they had been
playing triple draw low ball (big money game) and was told they haven't
had the game since this hold out artist came thru. Sat in the number 1
seat and did his thing. Got away with about $6000. Guess he was on
tour. Seems they were suspisious, but the camera only took in the table
area, not his large arms. Everyone is happy he was caught, but a little
annoyed that he was allowed to continue playing even tho the decks were
being counted down short.
TBill
***This is as bad as it gets, but don't bet on it.***
Edwardyung
>>I wrote:
>>Here is a solution for casino poker rooms to deal with hold-out
cheats without
>>counting down after every hand. Set up an electronic balance
somewhere near
>>the dealer. After each hand, the dealer collects the cards and weigh
them. If
>>the measured weight deviates from the original weight by more than 1
card, then
>>we know someone is cheating. Maybe then body search is in order.
>>Edward Yung
>and Richard Sooy replied,
>Edward... Unfortunately, due to the fact that cards (paper OR plastic)
>Tend to pick up oils from the human hand, and or moisture from the
>air,and dirt, this presents the possibility of the cards weighing
>more, at times, even though all 52 cards are in the deck.... to use a
>device such as you suggest, would involve the practice of doing an
>initial "weigh-in" on each deck, as the new setup is brought in, and
>having the scale equipped with a switch, so it knows which deck it's
>weighing (such as, in the case of a player-requested deck change...)..
>Besides the added cost, for the machine, it would also serve to slow
>up the game..... the best, and easiest way, is simply what most
>cardrooms SHOULD be doing... Counting the deck as often as possible..I
>agree with the Taj Mahal's decision that the decks MUST be counted at
>least 3 times per half-hour....
>Sincerely,
Richard,
Yes, cards tend to pick up grease and moisture during play, but I doubt the net
gain will be over 1/52th (~2%) unless someone spills coffee or drinks over the
card surface (in that case a replacement deck is in order). As long as the
sensitivity (window) of the weight measurement is set to be 1/52th of the
original weigh-in, I don't think the pick up of oil or moisture will be a
factor.
Yes, this method does require an initial weigh-in of the deck in use. As I
remembered, in most poker rooms a deck is in use until someone asks for a deck
change. So it's not like one really needs a switch on the balance to flip back
and forth. Any of the digital balances costing no more than a few hundred
dollars can do the job, a puny investment for a poker room. As far as delay of
game, I think the weigh-in would take no more than 10 seconds, certainly faster
than a manual countdown. And a weigh-in can be done for every hand to root out
cheating.
As a dealer, I bet you'd rather avoid the chore of frequent countdown of decks.
Right?
What the card room really needs to do after implementing this method is to deal
harshly (cement shoes as a thought) with the cheatrs who get caught. The best
way to draw customers is to gurantee that the games they sponsor are absolutely
clean.
Sincerely,
Edward Yung
Erik Reuter
edwar...@aol.com (Edwardyung) wrote:
> >>I wrote:
> >>Here is a solution for casino poker rooms to deal with hold-out
> cheats without
> >>counting down after every hand. Set up an electronic balance
> somewhere near
> >>the dealer. After each hand, the dealer collects the cards and weigh
> them
Perhaps someone can answer a naive question of mine. I've seen ads for
"card shuffling machines". Why are these not used in casino poker?
The reason I brought it up is that I was thinking a combination
card-counting/card-shuffling machine might be useful.
--
Erik Reuter, e-re...@uiuc.edu
Coatie1
>>Hmmm...I recall quite a no-holds-barred discussion of the Maria >Stern
>episode
>in the publisher's column in CARD PLAYER, >including frank statements (not
>any
>cover-up) from Stern herself.
Anuone who doesn't realize how self serving Card Player is someoine i want to
play poker with..While im sure the people involved love poker..its all about
$$$$$$ Never a hartsh word about anyone or anything in it and of course never a
word about rooms in Vegas that don't advertise in it..e.g Flamingo
David Monaghan
This got me thinking -
I wonder how he got the crippled hand.......?
DaveM
Dennis Yelle
In article <19971128182...@ladder02.news.aol.com> edwar...@aol.com (Edwardyung) writes:
[...]
>Yes, this method does require an initial weigh-in of the deck in use. As I
>remembered, in most poker rooms a deck is in use until someone asks for a deck
>change. So it's not like one really needs a switch on the balance to flip back
>and forth. Any of the digital balances costing no more than a few hundred
>dollars can do the job, a puny investment for a poker room. As far as delay of
>game, I think the weigh-in would take no more than 10 seconds, certainly faster
>than a manual countdown. And a weigh-in can be done for every hand to root out
>cheating.
Many banks have currency counters that can count 50 bills in less
than 5 seconds. A similar machine to count cards could be built,
if there was a market for it. If you put the old deck in the top,
remove the other deck from the front and then push the button
to start the counter, you don't waste much time.
Once you do that, you might even want to go to a machine that both counts
and shuffles the old deck while the hand with the other deck is being
played. This combination count and shuffle machine would actually
speed up the game because the dealer would not have to shuffle.
The machine could also check the back color to make sure that all
the cards have the same back color, and, if you want, could check
to make sure that there were no duplicate cards in the deck.
This combination shuffle/check back/check front machine would
eliminate the hold out cheat. But, I suppose there are still
other types of cheats. And now some people might start to
wonder if they should really trust a machine that can do all that.
Do you think that poker players want something like this?
Do you?
Dennis Yelle
--
den...@netcom.com (Dennis Yelle)
"You must do the thing you think you cannot do." -- Eleanor Roosevelt
Jim Geary
The first time I played with Linda Johnson, I was talking about
RGP with another player, and she asked what had been said about
Card Player. I mentioned the Stern incident, and that people
felt that had it not been for RGP "journalism," the story would
never have appeared in Card Player. She stated frankly that she
did not read RGP, and that the reason she published the story was
because she felt it needed to be said. I believe her. I will
be surprised if anyone who has met her does not.
Jim Geary
jaygee at primenet dot com
http://www.primenet.com/~jaygee/
On 28 Nov 1997, HitTheFlop wrote:
> In article <65itgu$joq$1...@winter.news.erols.com>, "Barbara Yoon"
> <by...@erols.com> writes:
>
> >Hmmm...I recall quite a no-holds-barred discussion of the Maria Stern
> episode
> >in the publisher's column in CARD PLAYER, including frank
> >statements (not any cover-up) from Stern herself.
>
> The article came 2 weeks after the first WSOP results were
> reported. I know, deadlines yadda yadda. Read it again. It's
> cream puff stuff. Linda Smith is a WSOP champion and accepts
> regular advertizing from Binion's. Just how objective do you
> think she can be?
>
> > And do you really believe some "establishment"
> >dictates to the likes of Mike Caro and
> >others what to write and not to write?!
>
Barbara Yoon
Erik Reuter wrote:
> I've seen ads for "card shuffling machines." Why are these not used
> in casino poker? The reason I brought it up is that I was thinking a
> combination card-counting/card-shuffling machine might be useful.
And right now would be perfect timing from a marketing standpoint...
Barbara Yoon
B.Y.:
>>> Hmmm...I recall quite a no-holds-barred discussion of the Maria Stern
>>> episode in the publisher's column in CARD PLAYER, including frank
>>> statements (not any cover-up) from Stern herself.
HitTheFlop:
>> The article came 2 weeks after the first WSOP results were reported.
>> I know, deadlines yadda yadda. Read it again. It's cream puff stuff.
>> Linda Smith is a WSOP champion and accepts regular advertizing
>> from Binion's. Just how objective do you think she can be?
B.Y.:
>>> And do you really believe some "establishment" dictates to the likes
>>> of Mike Caro and others what to write and not to write?!
HitTheFlop:
>> ...in all the tens of thousands of words I've read, he has avoided the topic.
>> ...anxious to see an artice in Card Player but I know that won't happen.
Jim Geary:
> The first time I played with Linda Johnson, I was talking about RGP with
> another player, and she asked what had been said about Card Player.
> I mentioned the Stern incident, and that people felt that had it not been for
> RGP "journalism," the story would never have appeared in Card Player.
Yeah, just like the rooster believing the sun wouldn't rise if it weren't for his
"cock-a-doodle-doo"...
PBO COP
I will see Linda today and leave with her and the other Card Player group on
the Mexican Riviera cruise on Sunday. I printed all the posts for her to read
so she can reply accordingly and know what people are thinking. For your info,
Linda would never tolerate any type of cheating and would write about it
immediately. You could never meet a more honest, caring, and considerate
person....
Barbara Yoon
Well, I sure hope you had enough printer paper -- the only other r.g.p.
thread I've seen of comparable length was the "Caro roulette system"...
Maverick
I think we all know now.
Maverick
On 28 Nov 1997, Jim Geary wrote:
> The first time I played with Linda Johnson, I was talking about
> RGP with another player, and she asked what had been said about
> Card Player. I mentioned the Stern incident, and that people
> felt that had it not been for RGP "journalism," the story would
> did not read RGP, and that the reason she published the story was
> because she felt it needed to be said. I believe her. I will
> be surprised if anyone who has met her does not.
I think she does read this newsgroup. Why? Because it's in her best
interest to. She's running a magazine that needs to be informative and
keep in touch with the readers. Reading this newsgroup would seem a
mandatory step in doing so. I think the reason she says she doesn't read
this newsgroup is to attempt to discredit the importance of this
newsgroup. The fact is RGP has a tremendous impact on cardplayer
magazine. She knows it. She can't stop it. She can only attempt to
lessen our impact by "poo pooing" the newsgroup.
Linda Johnson may be one great gal. But, you start threatening her pocket
book by criticizing her Magazine and she's gonna go on defense.
Barbara Yoon
Jim Geary:
>> ...played with Linda Johnson...she asked what had been said [on r.g.p.]
>> about Card Player. I mentioned the Stern incident, and that people felt
>> that had it not been for RGP "journalism," the story would never have
Maverick:
> I think she does read this newsgroup. Why? Because it's in her best
> interest to. She's running a magazine that needs to be informative and
> keep in touch with the readers. Reading this newsgroup would seem
> a mandatory step in doing so. I think the reason she says she doesn't
> read this newsgroup is to attempt to discredit the importance of this
> newsgroup. The fact is RGP has a tremendous impact on cardplayer
> magazine. She knows it. She can't stop it. She can only attempt to
> lessen our impact by "poo pooing" the newsgroup. Linda Johnson
> may be one great gal. But, you start threatening her pocket book by
> criticizing her Magazine and she's gonna go on defense.
Pardon me if I'm being dumb here, but please explain exactly how r.g.p.
"threatens CARD PLAYER magazine's pocketbook" so much that its
publisher would feel compelled to stoop into such deceitful "poo poo?!"
Dave Horwitz
Erik Reuter wrote:
> Perhaps someone can answer a naive question of mine. I've seen ads for
> "card shuffling machines". Why are these not used in casino poker?
I've seen some of these things at the pai-gow tables in some casino in
Reno. They are *very* slow, and *very* complex pieces of machinery (and
I understand that they are expensive). At least 1/4 of them were broken
and not working at all or periodically malfunctioning requiring the
dealer
to straighten things out and shuffle that deck by hand to get it into
play.
For holdem I think you might need 4 or so going at once in rotation to
keep up with the pace of play.
Not sure which ones they were but they were very intricate looking, with
most of the machinery exposed and all stainless steel. Kind of brought
the mechanical spiders from Tech Wars to mind...
-Quick
Maverick
On 28 Nov 1997, Coatie1 wrote:
> Anuone who doesn't realize how self serving Card Player is someoine i want to
> play poker with..While im sure the people involved love poker..its all about
> $$$$$$ Never a hartsh word about anyone or anything in it and of course never a
> word about rooms in Vegas that don't advertise in it..e.g Flamingo
Are you saying a poker player will lie? Say it ain't so, Joe.
Maverick
On Fri, 28 Nov 1997, Barbara Yoon wrote:
> Pardon me if I'm being dumb here, but please explain exactly how r.g.p.
> "threatens CARD PLAYER magazine's pocketbook" so much that its
> publisher would feel compelled to stoop into such deceitful "poo poo?!"
very easily Barb. 1. Card Player plays close attention to this
newsgroup. There is plenty of evidence of this based upon the articles
in CP based upon this newsgroup. 2. A common lawyer's ploy to discredit a
witness's testimony is to discredit the witness. 3. By saying she never
reads this newsgroup, Linda Johnson could be trying to make the assertion
that what goes on here is meaningless to her which just isn't so.
Jackie Knight
Erik Reuter wrote:
Perhaps someone can answer a naive question of mine. I've seen ads for
> "card shuffling machines". Why are these not used in casino poker?
>
> The reason I brought it up is that I was thinking a combination
> card-counting/card-shuffling machine might be useful.
>
Erick,
ShuffleMaster (tm) makes the only casino accepted card shuffling machine.
It is too slow for poker play. In fact, it is too slow for all card games
with 3
or less players. Also, the ShuffleMaster (tm) is not dealer friendly nor
ergonomically correct, not to mention that if it's shuffle spread were judged
by the same standards as a dealer is, it would never get hired. In other
words,
it creates a lousy spread. That is why Pit Supervisors and dealers both
shuffle
a new deck before turning it over to the ShuffleMaster (tm). Several casinos
lost big bucks on Royal Flush jackpots by trusting a ShuffleMaster (tm) to
produce a good spread with a new deck. So why do casinos use such a piece
of crap instead of more efficient dealers? Casino management doesn't trust
their
dealers to not stack a deck for a friend to win.
On the other hand, I've invented a card shuffler that overcomes all the
deficiencies of a ShuffleMaster (tm) and then some. However, as most
inventors, I lack the funds to prototype and go into production (do not
construe this as a solicitation for funds, that is illegal in this format).
How ever, if anyone has any suggestions for backing that doesn't want
the lions share of the profits, I can accept those reccomendations.
Jackie Knight
Abdul Jalib
Winner777 wrote:
>
> >Hmmm...I recall quite a no-holds-barred discussion of the Maria >Stern episode
> in the publisher's column in CARD PLAYER, >including frank statements (not any
> cover-up) from Stern herself.
>
> all over the RGP and Linda Johnson had no choice but to publish it, otherwise
> it would have been swept under the rug.
While we're ragging on Card Player, note that Card Player published
its cover of Casino Sycuan just a month or so after that casino
was allegedly found to be using marked cards on blackjack. (The games
were banked by player bankers, similar to Pai Gow, with the house
charging a flat $1 or whatever per hand to play. The casino allegedly
sent in their own players to exploit the player bankers with those
marked cards. Evil!) Card Player has never mentioned this incident,
to my knowledge. Card Player sells its cover for $10K (or was it $20K).
--
Abdul
John MacDonald
They could be used and may be used in some casinos. For instance, the
ShuffleMaster brand is used for Let-It-Ride Poker (albeit this is not
real poker). One problem *might* be that a lot of casinos probably
use narrower cards for poker than they do for other table games. I'm
not sure if these devices would work "as-is" on the narrower cards. I
have a manual for the ShuffleMaster device here, I'll look it up and
get back to you on Monday.
e-re...@uiuc.edu (Erik Reuter) wrote:
>edwar...@aol.com (Edwardyung) wrote:
>> >>I wrote:
>> >>Here is a solution for casino poker rooms to deal with hold-out
>> cheats without
>> >>counting down after every hand. Set up an electronic balance
>> somewhere near
>> >>the dealer. After each hand, the dealer collects the cards and weigh
>> them
>Perhaps someone can answer a naive question of mine. I've seen ads for
>"card shuffling machines". Why are these not used in casino poker?
>The reason I brought it up is that I was thinking a combination
>card-counting/card-shuffling machine might be useful.
>--
>Erik Reuter, e-re...@uiuc.edu
john harkness
John Harkness writes:
In the Toronto "charity casinos", dealers are responsible for their
decks -- each dealer brings a deck to the table, and immediately upon
his or her departure, the deck is resorted to basic order.
I suspect the reason we will not see autoshufflers in poker rooms is
that the damned things are EXPENSIVE. It used to be, when Shufflemaster
started using Let It Ride to market the games, they were on a lease only
basis. The last time this came up in a thread, apparently they can now
be purchased, but the purchaser has to sign a long term maintenance
contract with Shufflemaster.
Mike Caro
Ed --
I was hoping someone would set the record straight on this, but I
guess I'll have to do it myself. I appreciate your concerns about
cheating in poker. I agree with you that not nearly enough is done to
combat cheating, especially partnerships.
I certainly don't expect you to read everything I write, so it's just
my bad luck that you've missed the many times I've written candidly on
this very topic.
Because this is such an important subject to me, and because I've
devoted so much time to it, I'm going to continue this message in a
new thread so more people will see it. You may be surprised about what
I'm going to say. The new thread will be "Poker Cheating."
Straight Flushes,
Mike Caro
On 28 Nov 1997 00:41:17 GMT, hitth...@aol.com (HitTheFlop) wrote:
>In article <65itgu$joq$1...@winter.news.erols.com>, "Barbara Yoon"
><by...@erols.com> writes:
>
>>Hmmm...I recall quite a no-holds-barred discussion of the Maria Stern
>episode
>>in the publisher's column in CARD PLAYER, including frank
>>statements (not any cover-up) from Stern herself.
>
>The article came 2 weeks after the first WSOP results were
>reported. I know, deadlines yadda yadda. Read it again. It's
>cream puff stuff. Linda Smith is a WSOP champion and accepts
>regular advertizing from Binion's. Just how objective do you
>think she can be?
>
>> And do you really believe some "establishment"
>>dictates to the likes of Mike Caro and
>>others what to write and not to write?!
>
>I have great respect for Mike Caro but in all the tens of
>thousands of words I've read, he has avoided the topic.
>I would be anxious to see an artice in Card Player but
>I know that won't happen.
>
>
>
thomas goins
It was me. but they cant prove it. The dealer should have counted down
the deck before the hand if he wanted to prove anything.
PBO COP
I had a good time at Commerce this evening with Linda and some of her friends.
Linda is a good friend and I advised her that the newest topic on RGP was the
cheating incident at the Mirage along with the Maria Stern incident. You can
take my word for it that Linda does not review the RGP. She may get tidbits
from her friends and co-workers but she doesn't look at it herself. She was
very interested in it and I told her I printed it out for her to review. I
printed the latest ones as well and will give them before we set sail on
Sunday. Hopefully, she will find the urge to start reading RGP herself and
make the necessary posts. See ya...
Winner777
As for a casino protecting the poker players; it isn't going to happen, even in
the Mirage a lot of the big games are not on camera!!! A casinos' concern is
going to be protecting itself from being cheated, rightfully so I might add. I
know this sounds bad, but there are very few competent people that are capable
of catching cheats and the ones that are, are going to be paying attention to
the pit.
As for card shuffling machines; they are too expensive ( $5000 ) so they would
not be cost effective.
As for Linda Johnson not knowing what is being said in this
newsgroup....pleeeeeeeeeeeeeease. Mike Caro is in here all the time, do you
think that he is not going to keep her informed?
Let there be a major cheating scandal, have the casino tell Card Player that
they don't want to the news to get out and they intend to pull their add if it
is mentioned in the magazine. You will never see the story in print.
Ed Hill
James L. Perlowski
On 29 Nov 1997 11:35:11 GMT, winn...@aol.com (Winner777) wrote:
>As for a casino protecting the poker players; it isn't going to happen, even in
>the Mirage a lot of the big games are not on camera!!! A casinos' concern is
>going to be protecting itself from being cheated, rightfully so I might add. I
>know this sounds bad, but there are very few competent people that are capable
>of catching cheats and the ones that are, are going to be paying attention to
>the pit.
Hi Ed! Much of what you say in your first paragraph is true. In my
gaming classes I sometimes use an old time card mechanic who has been
around for years as an enjoyable alternative to boring internal
control. He can give you or other players any poker hand he so
chooses. However, his skill is a dying art if you wish to call it
that! The majority of poker dealers today will not invest the time or
effort it takes to perfect their talents in this area. Hence, I
believe the majority of the cheating comes from other players and not
the house. In my opinion, the house does an adequate job in
protecting players involved in lower limit games. Their concern for
the "rake", jackpot, etc forces more controls on the dealer and
players in general. Higher limit games are a different matter all
together. The house sells its space and let the player beware! The
partnerships via collusion are well known amongst the local players.
Whenever a tourist appears and wishes to play in a high limit game -
phone calls are made; and players fight among themselves to get into
the game. I wonder why??? <G>.
>As for card shuffling machines; they are too expensive ( $5000 ) so they would
>not be cost effective.
This is true. However, it would also reduce the human element. This
I believe would hurt the game of poker in the long run. Poker players
like the inter-action of watching the dealer shuffle giving them the
opportunity to reflect upon the previous hand, etc.
>As for Linda Johnson not knowing what is being said in this
>newsgroup....pleeeeeeeeeeeeeease. Mike Caro is in here all the time, do you
>think that he is not going to keep her informed?
He may not. Often, because someone writes for a magazine doesn't mean
it becomes their whole life. I know many free lance writers who
believe when they finish the article for the month; they are done. It
is not their responsibility to comment upon the editors right to do
what he or she wishes. Nor is it their place to voice an opinion when
not solicited.
>Let there be a major cheating scandal, have the casino tell Card Player that
>they don't want to the news to get out and they intend to pull their add if it
>is mentioned in the magazine. You will never see the story in print.
Maybe - maybe not. This depends upon many factors too numerous to
cover here. I would like to believe such is not the case.
>Ed Hill
Jim Perlowski
Winner777
Dear Jim:
Linda Johnson sold Sycuan the cover two months after they were caught cheating.
To refresh your memory, Sycuan used marked cards in the player backed 21 game
and sent it's own people in to take off the bankers. When was the story in Card
Player, I missed it?
Which brings me to another cheating problem, Indian Casinos. They are allowed
to cheat, there is no gaming commission, they are totally unregulated.
The Indians can spread games that regular casinos are not allowed to spread.
They are also allowed to have slot machines. What would stop them from putting
a computer chip in their slot machines to make it 5 times harder to hit the
jackpot? If a casino did this and was caught, they would lose thier licence.
Nobody is ever going to examine the Indians' machines.
The Indians don't pay taxes and are unregulated. This is bad for the economy
both ways. The government is going to have to be more enlightened in the ways
of gaming so that they can pass more resonable laws. Gambling has never been
more popular, we have to make sure that it doesn't get a bad reputation like it
always has in the past, or we will again kill the goose that laid the golden
egg.
Ed Hill
Dave Horwitz
Paul Westley wrote:
> Wow, that was one fantastic post Abdul, thanks, and many thanks to Mr.
> Anonymous. I'm going to try to find out about cameras and counting down
> where I play, I'd really like to hear from anyone else who finds out
> what goes on at their clubs.
Garden City has a fixed camera over *every* table in the room
as well as a few articulated cameras. I've never been at a table
where the camera wasn't live (indicated by the little red light)
and I've never a request for checking the tape denied because there
wasn't one (I've also never seen a request for checking the tape
denied for any reason).
-Quick
Spiney Norman
Winner777 wrote:
> We were playing $75-$150 in the Mirage and played an entire half
> hour with 2 brown cards in a green deck. This got by the dealer and 9 players.
> The deck didn't have two extra cards, I guees when it was put together the
> person that did it didn't pay attention to what color the cards were.
I had a similar experience at the Mirage with a brown card in a green
deck.
Which makes me wonder why the fascination with the brown and green
decks. I used to remember seeing red and blue decks, I rarely see
them today. In San Diego they seem to be nonexistent. Now I'm not
current on the effects of color blindness, but to me it would seem much
easier for a dealer and nine players to distinguish a red card in a blue
deck and vice versa than it is to notice a error with brown and green
cards.
signed,
Spiney Norman
spi...@pacbell.net
James L. Perlowski
On 29 Nov 1997 21:43:35 GMT, winn...@aol.com (Winner777) wrote:
>Dear Jim:
>
>Linda Johnson sold Sycuan the cover two months after they were caught cheating.
>To refresh your memory, Sycuan used marked cards in the player backed 21 game
>and sent it's own people in to take off the bankers. When was the story in Card
>Player, I missed it?
You got me there Ed!!! I have no idea why the story wasen't covered.
>Which brings me to another cheating problem, Indian Casinos. They are allowed
>to cheat, there is no gaming commission, they are totally unregulated.
Indian casinos are regulated by the Department of Interior - Bureau of
Indian Affairs. It is true their regulators are not as knowledgable
involving gaming as they should be. I am sure, over time, with proper
instruction and education they will get better. From what I understand
many indian casinos do try to comply with reporting requirements
(1099, W2-G, etc.) even though they may not be required to do so.
Perhaps the Govenors should negotiate better compacts involving State
auditing of procedures, controls, etc. To say they are totally
unregulated is not exactly correct. Remember, a player is on Indian
land and therefore subject to indian law.
>The Indians can spread games that regular casinos are not allowed to spread.
>They are also allowed to have slot machines. What would stop them from putting
>a computer chip in their slot machines to make it 5 times harder to hit the
>jackpot? If a casino did this and was caught, they would lose thier licence.
>Nobody is ever going to examine the Indians' machines.
Not exactly correct Ed. It is true the law has been interpreted very
liberal when it comes to what games the indians may provide. However,
I again place responsibility upon the Govenors who negotiate the
compacts with very little knowledge of gaming in general, and controls
in specific. As far as computor chips - lets be honest, nothing
prevents Nevada casinos from doing exactly what you said. Gaming is
not present when a house changes programs, machines, pay-outs etc. It
has happened here in Nevada; and probably will happen again. Our
Commision relies upon the fear of a house having its license revoked
if it should be discovered as the main deterrent to cheating. Other
areas of the country lien upon the gaming labs here in Nevada and the
one in Atlantic city to help them discover "bad" chips. Indian slot
machines are no different. If a Department of Interior agent wanted
to "audit" a machine he would have to "drop" the program the same way
ANY gaming establishment would.
>The Indians don't pay taxes and are unregulated. This is bad for the economy
>both ways. The government is going to have to be more enlightened in the ways
>of gaming so that they can pass more resonable laws. Gambling has never been
>more popular, we have to make sure that it doesn't get a bad reputation like it
>always has in the past, or we will again kill the goose that laid the golden
>egg.
The last thing I want to see is the Federal Government regulating
gaming. My God!!!! Look what they have done to any program they get
their hands on or in. It is true, the tribe does not pay tax.
However, indians who work in the casinos do pay income tax as well as
any other non-indian employees. The playing field is not even; but Ed
I do not believe we have to pass the hat for the non-indian gaming
establishments. The problem can be fixed if the state Govenors knew
what they were negotiating. Lack of gaming knowledge, proper
enforcement procedures, and what to do with them are the real culprits
in this discussion. I spent the last years of my career traveling
around the country training IRS agents and State agents as to how to
audit and maintain control of the situation. I hope it wasen't for
nothing.<g>
My best to you Ed
Jim Perlowski
Ed Hill
>
>
>
>
>
Tom Hoeber
> Maverick wrote:
> > I think she does read this newsgroup. Why? Because it's in her best
> > interest to. She's running a magazine that needs to be informative and
> > keep in touch with the readers. Reading this newsgroup would seem
> > a mandatory step in doing so. I think the reason she says she doesn't
> > read this newsgroup is to attempt to discredit the importance of this
> > newsgroup. The fact is RGP has a tremendous impact on cardplayer
> > magazine. She knows it. She can't stop it. She can only attempt to
> > lessen our impact by "poo pooing" the newsgroup. Linda Johnson
> > may be one great gal. But, you start threatening her pocket book by
> > criticizing her Magazine and she's gonna go on defense.
Like most people involved in the Internet some posters to this newsgroup
have an extremely exagerrated idea of their own importance and impact.
The idea that a successful magazine publisher would pay attention to a
few blowhards chattering endlessly amongst themselves in a simple
newsgroup is truly laughable. Let alone that it would "threaten her
pocketbook".
Tom
Maverick
On Sun, 30 Nov 1997, Tom Hoeber wrote:
> Like most people involved in the Internet some posters to this newsgroup
> have an extremely exagerrated idea of their own importance and impact.
> The idea that a successful magazine publisher would pay attention to a
> few blowhards chattering endlessly amongst themselves in a simple
> newsgroup is truly laughable. Let alone that it would "threaten her
> pocketbook".
Tom, before you blather any longer, please cite your evidence that
this newsgroup doesn't affect Cardplayer magazine? I can cite dozens of
examples of where it does. Besides that, if you had any common sense, you
could see the absolute logic in it.
Barbara Yoon
Tom Hoeber:
>> ...some posters to this newsgroup have an extremely exagerrated
>> idea of their own importance and impact. ...a few blowhards
>> chattering endlessly amongst themselves...
Maverick:
> Tom, before you blather any longer, please cite your evidence that
> this newsgroup doesn't affect Cardplayer magazine? I can cite
> dozens of examples of where it does. Besides that, if you had any
> common sense, you could see the absolute logic in it.
Yeah -- and while you're at this "proving of negatives," your evidence too
that you DON'T beat your wife... And the "logic" here is like that of the
rooster believing the sun rises only because of his "cock-a-doodle-doo"...
Maverick
Barbara...rather than go through the pointless effort of trying expose a
logical fallacy of "proving a negative" that didn't exist, you could have
noticed the original posters baseless generalization that this newsgroup