Slashdot Mirror
Optical Recognition System To Foil Card Counting?
Adair writes "Wired is running this article about a new Optical Recognition System by MindPlay being evaluated by some casinos to keep constant track of table game play in order to identify card counters by their patterns of play. The software, using 14 digital cameras around the table, can keep track of every card played, amounts bet, and even tell the difference between your drink, napkin, cards, chips, and ashtrays."
Why not track the cards? Simply shuffle when the odds favour the player too much.
Reminds me of the Alan Parsons-based musical "The Gambler" that reveals that the "Eye in the Sky" is merely one of those monitors over casino tables.
The lyrics in the original become more ominous:
"i am the maker of rules
dealing with fools
i can cheat you blind "
This development is sure to turn Ocean's 11 into Ocean's 0.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
As one who has played blackjack as both a nickel-dimer ($5-$10 bets) and as a high roller, I have noticed that pit bosses have an uncanny ability to tell how much you are up or down. I often ask pit bosses to guess how much I am up or down. They can usually tell within about $100.
So, I have a hard time swallowing that this is a device to figure out how to comp players.
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
Casinos don't like to lose. Casinos are setup on the premise that you are basically stupid, that you basically are going to spend wayy more money than you win. The odds in every game except for one favor the house: blackjack. That's where you get the most card counters because that's where counting cards makes the most sense. And card counters tip the odds further in favor of the player. If casinos can't eliminate card counters they will simply eliminate blackjack.
My journal has hot
Face it, just because there's a computer there now, doesn't mean they're not screwing you every time anyway. The house always wins.
What is interesting about this is that they are adding a cold precision to the perks they offer to big gamblers, in order to further increase their margins. What they appear to really be doing is tracking who's betting what and when. Forget the card counting part, anyone who gets a system that works will be tracked sooner or later and booted out. This may seem kind of unfair - you can't profit from genius in Casinos - but then the house can't afford to make a big loss consistently. Still, they can't take your winnings away before detection, so this system is tipping the scales back to the house's favour.
Think more about the fact that Joe Gambler who drops a bit less each time he comes and demands more perks will get away with it for a while, but now he'll be tracked. I can't believe the opposite is true, where quiet but big losers will suddenly be allocated perks... but maybe they will, because it could be good for the casino business.
To conclude : gambling is one of those things where you know the odds beforehand, and if you bet more than you can afford more than once against the odds, you're a sucker. What does need to be clear, with all this technology, is just what those odds are. Rigged odds are fine if they stay rigged the same, but I don't like the thought that a croupier could suddenly tell you, as the odds swing ever so slightly in your favour and you are ready to cut your losses, that your bets are no longer welcome. You want to know the solution? Don't bet at all, and invest your money in a guaranteed return scheme. That's the only way you can be sure to win. Then go get your thrills for much less money doing something like freefall parachuting.
Conversion Rate Optimisation French / English consultant
If the casinos can get me so drunk on free booze that I can't recall whether I've bought in for $200 or $2,000, I can use my powers of observation to eke out a tiny advantage.
Besides this, many casual gamblers (and a few serious ones) don't recognize the need to walk when they achieve a small gain. They read a book on counting, and think they're going to double their buy-in each time they hit the casino. Frankly, when you get a 20%, 10%, or even 5% gain, you should GET UP AND WALK. Get your troops off the field and fight another day for another few yards of ground. (And as a counter, you'll look a little less suspicious, assuming you haven't been hiking your bets from 1 chip to 20 each time the count gets positive.) Walk with small gains, and adhere to your loss limit, and you'll have a greater chance (YMMV) of keeping that bankroll in the green over time.
.... there's nothing really wrong about counting cards. Not like it's some kind of morally sickening activity. It simply gives the player a better chance to win.
On the one hand, the article points out,
which is interesting, because casinos could always use the human-operated PTZ cameras that watch everything (even the players) on the gaming floor, and of course dealers and pit bosses are always on the lookout as well, but this does raise the bar into questionable territory if only because, like a red light camera, it is operating against you on its own and you really have nobody to "fight" if it decides you are nailed. Perhaps they might review the video of your 100 allegedly-counted hands?
However, if a system like this does roll out into real use, it should be presumed that every MIT kid on their counting team read this,
and is already scheming. I would be to, and I don't even count cards. It's as though Mr. Soltys is looking right at the reader while he says, "Bring it on!"
I knew a guy who counted cards and used chip-palming techniques to keep his chip count reasonable. Switch tables and even casinos frequently, be patient, and if possible play with a team. The camera system doesn't seem to have that stuff covered. I predict the primary way of catching rule-breakers will remain the old fashioned way... half instinct, half suspicious and watchful eye.
I think card counting is one of those things that some people just have a knack of. Of course you can practise, but some people have a fantastic memory for this sort of thing.
I used to know a guy who was one of those people who could do numerical calculations to 10 significant figures faster than a calculator (couldn't do algebra/calculus, but he could sure count!). He was able to count cards with 8 decks, and I'm not talking about the simple system described by the parent - he counted the entire deck, including suits.
This isn't your average person though, just someone with a knack for this sort of thing. As far as I'm aware he never actually went to a casino, but I can imagine others would.
"Because it's there." - George Mallory, when asked why he wanted to climb Mt Everest, March 18, 1923 (New York Times)
Actually, yes. For some people, card counting isn't that hard. For others, it's damn near impossible. They're kinda like a miniature idiot savant (no, not mini-me you fools...)
The problems with your analogy is that the GOOD cardcounters walk out with much more than $1k if they're not caught. Think in the schemes of $100k minimum. I've actually counted 5 decks shuffled together before. It sucked major bungs for sure, but I did it fairly accurately, and not at a slow pace either. And I'm what would be considered an amateur by the casinos. Consider this, and think what a good person could do.
The loss adds up for the casinos. They're not worried about losing $5k or even $25k to a rookie. It's the big fish who pooches them for lots. That's what this system is out for (note that they seem to indicate that 100 hands are needed for a super-positive match...) The $25k cardcounters inspire. The $100k cardcounters though are a loss.
See the post above you for a GREAT thought... Group cardcounting. Just rotate the team positions, and you'll take the house, based on the current system. I'd actually never thought of it before, and now I'm fascinated.
We don't need no Net Explorer We don't need no Thought control
In Austria, a regular player sued a casino and got back half a million euros after losing 2 million. Apparently there is a law in Austria which states the casinos can't let a player to play games if the player can't allow it. In this case the player asked the casino to ban him from playing and the casio complied. Later, the player asked to lift the ban which the casino did, but it should not have. The casino should have investigated the matter first.
Government cannot make man richer, but it can make him poorer. - Ludwig von Mises
Okay, first there's the human factor, which is everpresent in any situation involving humans. Perviously casinos would have to suspect someone before they tried voice activated tracking software on them. Now they will be tracked by default. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, although it could be annoying to counters.
The thing is, especially if the system works (which they often don't), once it gets a reputation people will begin to rely on it more and more instead of gut instinct. What could easily evolve from this is an over-reliance on the computer. A pit boss might suspect that something's fishy but the higher-ups will think he's full of it because "the computer says no".
This system won't really work against one of the most popular methods of counting (as has been mentioned in a couple previous posts and I think the article) called "back counting". This is where the counter doesn't even enter the game until the deck is favorable. Of course, some casinos are banning mid-shoe entry as a result.
Either way the thing to remember is that there will always be a way to fake out the casino personnel. The other thing to think of is that it could prove advantageous to "advantage" players who primarily rely on counting as a means to a free or paid vacation. The idea is that the little that they would normally lose while earning comps is offset by the counting advantage. These players routinely get shafted on comps because most casinos limit the "hands per hour" figure to 100. Many counters and just regular players routinely average 150. This means that they are supposed to be losing 50% more money; not insignificant.
There are other well known methods that would beat tracking this way. Beating machines is almost always easier than beating people.
"He's more machine now than man, twisted and evil."
Yep there is no doubt that Card Counting is about skill and strategy, but Casinos like to suggest that it is somehow cheating and illegal or fraudulant.
They have been know to illegally detain (kidnap) ard counters, even take back (i.e. steal) their winnings. It is the Casinos that are usually crooks, many owned and operated in conjunction with organise crime and are involved with money laundering, fraud and deception.
Isn't outlawing card counting kind of like outlawing a certain thought process? I mean even with kiddie molesters we still wait till they make take some kind of action the actual thinking about it isn't illegal (yet). It's like if someone can count cards they have to play stoopid to do it lawfully, "yeah I know there's lots of tens left, but I'll stand anyway don't want to cheat you guys". Maybe it should be casino policy that u has a sub 90 IQ or submit to a lobotomy before you can enter the casino.
Anybody who has been to the casino more than a few times knows that you need to make sure the dealer is good before you stop paying attention to the dealer.
Then show me the rules that say card counting isn't allowed in blackjack.
Hint: not here, not even in the rules according to the Casino Control Act 1992. As far as I know, no official ruleset says card counting is prohibited, its the casinos that add those "rules".
I enjoy playing blackjack, but I don't count. I am expert-level (99% accuracy) on the basic strategy tables, which can make a big enough difference over the short run. I play for fun and just want my money to last as long as it can; I don't expect to win.
Anyway, I was playing one night in the Tropicana, listening to a pretty decent cover band. It was a Thursday night and the limit was still $5, which is good for low-rollers like me.
I'd been playing for an hour or two, alternating between bottled water and the occasional beer. A tall, thin, Asian guy sits down to my left with a pile of assorted-colored chips, all of them mixed and disorganized.
He doesn't speak to anyone, just pushes his red ($5) chip into the circle. Wins a few, loses a few, but always playing five. On one hand, he rolls out two green chips ($50) and wins the hand. The very next hand, he dropped right back to $10 and loses. Next hand, $5 and loses. $25, wins. Another $25, wins. $5, loses.
I realize he's got to be counting cards. However, if I could recognize it, you could be damn sure the dealer, the pit boss, and the eye in the sky recognized it too.
Anyway, I decide to piggyback this guy a little. He bets $50, I bet $15. He's playing to my left, which makes it awkward, since I've got to wait for him to wager before I can. We did this for a few hands and I may have won a few more chips than I would have normally, but I wasn't betting with the swing that this guy had.
It was about this time that I noticed the heat. A pit boss in a shiny suit standing over the dealer's shoulder. Another guy in an equally shiny suit immediately behind me. I switched back to $5 bets and ordered a gin and tonic, pronto. I've seen "Casino" and I don't want them thinking me and this guy are a team.
They frightened him off simply by offering him a comp (buffet). The poor guy was so rattled by the attention that he scooped up his chips and bailed, without taking the comp. The bosses smirked and went about their rounds.
So, if you're gonna count, don't be so damn obvious about it. You've got to be good enough to count while laughing with the other players, chatting with the dealer, drinking club soda or water, whatever. But if you wildly fluctuate your bets while concentrating so hard the veins bulge out of your forehead, you're toast.
ObGamblingAnecdote: Winter of 1997. In town for CES. Horseshoe Casino, $25 single deck table. Me and three others playing at around 2am. Second deal after a new shuffle.
All four of us get Blackjacks.
I wasn't positive how many cards got dealt in the first hand after the shuffle (in a basic count system, you add or subtract their count values into a running total as fast as you can, so you don't really keep track of the raw number of cards played), but I figured a rough estimate of the four Blackjacks being a 40 million to one shot.
But... there's probably millions of hands per day in Vegas, so I guess it had to happen somewhere.
--- Ban humanity.
He had to concentrate to NOT count cards. It was a reflex for him. In a game where he wasn't trying, after a few hands, he could tell as many as five people what their hands were with better than 50% accuracy based solely on what cards had been played and when.