Slashdot Mirror


Computer-Based System To Crack Down On Casino Card Counters

An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt from Yahoo Tech outlining a system currently being researched: "Card counting is perfectly legal — all a counter does is attempt to keep track of whether the cards remaining in a deck are favorable to his winning a hand (mainly if there are lots of tens and aces remaining in the deck) — but it's deeply frowned upon by Vegas casinos. Those caught counting cards are regularly expelled from casinos on the spot and are often permanently banned from returning. But given the slim house odds on Blackjack, it's often said that a good card counter can actually tip the odds in his favor by carefully controlling the way he bets his hands. And Vegas really doesn't care for that. The anti-card-counter system uses cameras to watch players and keep track of the actual 'count' of the cards, the same way a player would. It also measures how much each player is betting on each hand, and it syncs up the two data points to look for patterns in the action. If a player is betting big when the count is indeed favorable, and keeping his chips to himself when it's not, he's fingered by the computer... and, in the real world, he'd probably receive a visit from a burly dude in a bad suit, too. The system reportedly works even if the gambler intentionally attempts to mislead it with high bets at unfavorable times." It's not developed in Vegas, though, according to the brief description (the other projects are also interesting) from the University of Dundee's release, but rather in conjunction with the Dundee Casino.

105 of 597 comments (clear)

  1. And things like this are why... by TheSpoom · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I will never play Blackjack in a casino environment, unless it's for negligible amounts of money.

    "How dare you attempt to win one of our games!"

    --
    It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
    - E. Debs
    1. Re:And things like this are why... by 42forty-two42 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Look at it from their point of view - all they want to do is win their games, too. The only difference is, instead of bet/no bet, their choice is bar/don't bar from the premises.

    2. Re:And things like this are why... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Fuck them.

    3. Re:And things like this are why... by wizardforce · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Casinos have an obligation to follow the outlined rules. They do not however, have any obligation to lose money.

      --
      Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
    4. Re:And things like this are why... by Garridan · · Score: 2, Informative

      Private companies have the right to refuse service to anybody. And if you're asked to leave, you're trespassing on private property if you don't vacate immediately.

    5. Re:And things like this are why... by EvanED · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If someone's able to use their ability to their advantage, why the hell wouldn't they?

      You mean like using the fact that you own the casino to your advantage by kicking people out who are counting cards?

      Personally, I think the present situation is eminently fair. You are free to choose to go to Vegas and play blackjack or not, and the casino is free to provide service to you. You are free to count cards, and the casino is free to kick you out.

      Put it this way: many swimming pools would probably kick you out if you were running around the deck of the pool. Because it's their ground, so they get to set the rules.

    6. Re:And things like this are why... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Although I'm not a gambler myself, I find the ban on "skilled" gamblers repulsive.
      The casinos themselves try to have croupiers that are skilled at tipping the odds in the casinos favor, so the fact that they go to such lengths to stop gamblers from doing exactly what they themselves do is quite off putting.

    7. Re:And things like this are why... by 1s44c · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The real question is; will casino's allow you to cash in your winnings to do they kick you out AND keep the money?

      Card counting isn't illegal. You get you keep what you have won so far. They can legally kick you out and ban you any time they like but they can't deprive you of property you legally own.

      Casino's love a few winners. They give the losers hope and keep them playing and the house always wins in the end.

    8. Re:And things like this are why... by 1s44c · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The "our house our rules" mentality is bullshit. They are taking peoples money, not offering a fair game. Whenever someone starts to win- they kick them out. That just simply isn't fair to whoever was winning.

      It's fair. As a gambler you also have the right to walk away from the game whenever you like to take your winnings or cut your losses.

      However if they didn't have a house edge they would not stay in business so gamblers always lose in the long term.

    9. Re:And things like this are why... by EvanED · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The "our house our rules" mentality is bullshit. They are taking peoples money, not offering a fair game. Whenever someone starts to win- they kick them out. That just simply isn't fair to whoever was winning.

      "People who come to win but cut short their stay if they start to lose is bullshit. They are taking the casino's money, not playing a fair game. Whenever the house starts to win, they just leave. That just simply isn't fair to whoever was winning."

      Not that I think that the tables should be necessarily even between the gambler and house, which is why things like minimum payout laws and such are probably a good idea.

      But I don't think that applies here. I agree with the sibling post: If the gambler can, at will, get up and leave, I think the casino should be able to as well.

    10. Re:And things like this are why... by lxs · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They also don't have an obligation to offer blackjack. If they can't make money on a game without throwing good players out, maybe they shouldn't offer the game in the first place.

    11. Re:And things like this are why... by Ost99 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This would not be legal everywhere.
      Discriminating based on mental abilities would be just as illegal as discrimination based on ethnicity, religion or sex in many European countries.

      --
      ---- Sig. gone.
    12. Re:And things like this are why... by aix+tom · · Score: 2, Funny

      He. Anyone with the ability to count cards and not doing it would basically be losing on purpose.

      So he would be a genius and a complete moron at the same time. ;-P

    13. Re:And things like this are why... by 91degrees · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's not a morality issue. They just try to spin it that way. It's a business decision.

      They don't want people playing that are costing them money.

    14. Re:And things like this are why... by Nerdfest · · Score: 5, Funny

      I absolutely love this story. It's been years since I've seen the word 'lose' spelled correctly so many times in a row.

    15. Re:And things like this are why... by GospelHead821 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's true, but casinos aren't there to provide a fair game and they never have been. They're there to provide the illusion of a fair game and to make money while doing it. The money you lose while gambling is the cost of the entertainment you're receiving from the casino. If you're successfully avoiding losses through something you're doing, then, to the casino, it's like you're trying not to pay them for their services.

      --
      Virtue finds and chooses the mean.
      Aristotle, Ethica Nichomachea
    16. Re:And things like this are why... by jonadab · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > Casino's love a few winners.

      Casinos love *occasional* winners, people who spend thirty thousand dollars a year on a gambling habit but get very excited and act like winners when they turn three hundred dollars into a couple thousand dollars on a particular day. Woot!

      And if somebody just happens, by pure chance, to win the first time he ever gambles, hey, it's once, no big deal. It all comes out in the wash.

      But they don't like *consistent* winners, like card counters for instance. They show those people the door and ask them not to come back.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    17. Re:And things like this are why... by jonadab · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > They are taking peoples money, not offering a fair game.

      Well, duh. These are *casinos* we're talking about, not Milton Bradley.

      The only reliable strategy for winning casino games is to run the casino. Anybody who hasn't figured that out is an idiot and deserves to lose.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    18. Re:And things like this are why... by phoenix321 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, it is their house, isn't it? Would you keep guests at home that you don't like? Guests that overextend their stay, cost you money and steal the booze? Who would NOT throw them out?

      The fact that you invited them in doesn't change a bit. Everyone could invite anyone at their home but kick them out a second after they've arrived. It's not going to win any friendships, it's pretty crazy and probably immoral - but we already knew casino owners were an immoral bunch, didn't we?

    19. Re:And things like this are why... by anagama · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I have a lifetime $1200 positive average at roulette (I don't bet large amounts) in my local tribal casino. I've never been to vegas, but I'd imagine the casinos have better resources there. When I play roulette, I look for wheels that aren't level or on wobbly tables (tilt reduces randomness), watch for croupiers with a habitual spin pattern (also reduces randomness), and observe for a long enough time to feel reasonably comfortable with the pattern. Then, and this is the absolute most important part, I walk away when I hit my goal, usually $50 or $100. I've failed to walk away letting the emotion of winning overcome me, and have usually lost my winnings that way.

      The thing is, it turns out to be so much work that it feels more like a second job than an entertaining Friday night. As a result, I think I've only played twice in the last two years. Gambling is about a mental state where one thinks about "easy money". When you have to work at it, the easy money glitter goes away and it quickly becomes boring repetitive work. Anyway, to your question, a skilled croupier could easily destroy all the work a player makes at observing wheel/croupier patterns. I know there were certain croupiers I simply would not play against.

      As for the math, if a croupier is dropping the ball on one half of the board 75% of the time, and playing every number in that sector gives you a 47% chance of winning (double zero wheel), you'd be an idiot not to bet. But it takes a while to find the lazy croupiers and you have to watch over many visits to make sure it wasn't a fluke. Toward the end, Friday morning began to feel almost exactly like Sunday night does when you hate your job. So I quit.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    20. Re:And things like this are why... by RenderSeven · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is nonsense too. You saying you can open a bar in New York and stick a 'No Blacks' sign in the window?

      A fair point. But I think it has less to do with restrictions on businesses and more about having established protected social and racial classes, the latter meaning that rules can be unevenly applied. For example you cant open a men-only gym but you can open a women-only gym (IANAL/IIRC the case law said men didnt need protection from women but women needed protection from men). More to the GP post you can throw out smart people all day because you're a private business and smart people aren't in a protected class; you cannot throw out stupid people because they fall into a 'disadvantaged/protected' class.

      And what intolerant morons modded you 'troll' because you used the work 'black'? I agree with Shakrai and dont care for legislation creating protected classes, but you are absolutely correct that they exist and do establish restrictions on private businesses.

    21. Re:And things like this are why... by CraftyJack · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And why exactly shouldn't you be allowed to do this? Your business won't last long -- the community will see to that -- so why do we need the Government to force you to let blacks into your business when the marketplace will see to it that you don't have a business for very long?

      Wow. You might want to read up a little on the history of civil rights in the United States. Your faith in "the marketplace" is cute.

    22. Re:And things like this are why... by virg_mattes · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, keep in mind that in the world of today and the place of New York City, Shakrai is right. What (s)he lacks is historical perspective. In NYC in 2009, any business that put up such a sign would indeed be driven out of business posthaste, but that's because the racial climate is very different than it was forty years ago, and NYC is racially progressive (compared to other parts of the U.S.) to begin with. Shakrai, the reason the law exists is because when it was written, it needed to exist because the marketplace did nothing to prevent racial discrimination, and the attitude of the general public was much more accepting of such discrimination. In fact, in the '60s such signs did exist and businesses survived just fine, which is why the laws got put into place to begin with. I consider it a very good thing that you don't see the point of such a law, because it means that we've progressed as a society to the point where at least some of us have never been exposed to systemic prejudice that would show you the worth of anti-discrimination laws. That said, if you think that a sign like you describe would be a death sentence for a business, you should take a trip to Georgia. There are lawsuits filed there constantly because business owners blatantly discriminate based on race and have to be forced by the courts to stop because "the marketplace" doesn't apply any such force on them.

      Virg

    23. Re:And things like this are why... by Hognoxious · · Score: 2, Insightful

      it would be impossible to make money (it is really hard to pay employees, build facilities, etc when your net income is zero).

      And yet we expect musicians, authors and inventors to do so.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  2. If they don't want people to play the game... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Then they shouldn't have the game on the casino floor. Don't get all pissy when people figure out how to put the odds in their favor.

  3. You're too good, stop playing by QuantumG · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In a much fairer way, this is what I think they should do with FPS games.. there should be a ladder, at the top are the absolute best players, they get there by starting at the bottom and scoring more than a standard deviation of points over all the other players. That way the rest of us average (or, in my case, terrible noob high ping bastard) players don't have to put up with being continually schooled. In the case of blackjack, they should just cap your bets. You wanna count cards? Sure, but you don't go off the $10 table ok?

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  4. Continuous Shufling Machine by tangent3 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The few casinos I have visited (around East Asia) use continuous shuffle machines with multiple decks. Seems like a far cheaper method of defeating card counters without having to confront them with big burly dudes and earning bad PR.

    1. Re:Continuous Shufling Machine by moogsynth · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That seems just as snide as catching the counters with machines, possibly worse. People like to play Blackjack because they know it can be beaten. Whether they actually will beat the house is another matter entirely (and most probably won't). Having enormous, permanently shuffling decks completely blows that illusion away. I can see it turning more people away than bringing them in.

    2. Re:Continuous Shufling Machine by Edmund+Blackadder · · Score: 3, Funny

      Gambling? At a casino? You don't say.

  5. The article by CoolGopher · · Score: 3, Funny

    If you're new to slashdot, don't bother reading the article. Especially in this case, where the article is already contained in the summary here.

  6. Pointless in Vegas by evel+aka+matt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Las Vegas has made card-counting a non-factor. Between high deck-count shoes, variant games with unfavorable rules ("Super Fun 21"), and early shuffle thresholds, even a player keeping a perfect count cannot create a significant edge. And the million people who show up to try their hand at it and fail far make up for the cost of the few who can eek something out anyway.

    1. Re:Pointless in Vegas by jjohnson · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I've also heard Vegas bigwigs say that they love card-counters because very few of them do it well enough to actually make money. A lot of money is made off of gamblers who think they have a winning system.

      --
      Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
  7. False positives by razvan784 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Do they say something about the reliability of the method? Percentage of false positives? Those can mean angry customers and lost business.

  8. This is not what gaming should be by QuoteMstr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The very premise of a casino is that it's a business that plays games for money. These games are conducted fairly and have public rules set out in advance. The profit comes from structuring these games such that the casino has a slight edge. Everyone knows that.

    The problem comes when the casino breaks its own rules. It's a fundamentally deceptive business practice in any field to tell public that one set of rules applies, then to actually enforce another. If Blackjack is not profitable, the game should be modified or dropped. "You are not permitted to win" is not a fair rule, especially when it's a hidden rule. It's no different from rigging the odds of slot machines, and there are laws against that.

    1. Re:This is not what gaming should be by ztransform · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "You are not permitted to win" is not a fair rule, especially when it's a hidden rule.

      After all, if the computer is keeping a count of when conditions are favourable, the casino could quickly expel any winners even if they are not counting cards.

      Thus there is no more element of chance in the game. The casino will accept all bets that lose, and eject any winners.

      Sounds like the insurance industry to me (who never deny an insurance application, but always investigate the application when you make a claim).

    2. Re:This is not what gaming should be by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This.

      The point of a casino is that they make money by running games of chance where the odds are in favor of the house. Card counters are just a scapegoat used by casinos to get rid of anyone they want with an accusation that can't be disproven.

      All this system does it automate the already extremely easy process of detecting someone that doesn't fail miserably at blackjack and give them an even better "computers don't lie" excuse to get rid of that person.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    3. Re:This is not what gaming should be by Jay+L · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "You are not permitted to win" is not a fair rule, especially when it's a hidden rule

      True, but why worry about small-time scams like casino gambling? There are larger issues at stake; this is a matter of principle.

      I say we take on the thermodynamics lobby. Who's with me?

    4. Re:This is not what gaming should be by QuoteMstr · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes. As I explain in that other post of mine, I don't think our world, in which companies can arbitrarily refuse to do business with people, is the best of all possible worlds.

  9. Punk*** Casinos by dUN82 · · Score: 2, Funny

    They really don't give God a chance to prove its existence, do they?

  10. White trash Re:And things like this are why... by mrmeval · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They use 8 damed decks for blackjack. Poker is a joke. The perpetually spinning roulette wheel is an abomination. Video slots are stupid. It does not pay to play at all.

    There are two reasons to go. For the whores...oh wait Vegas can't stand the competition so you have to drive an hour north for that. So the only reason to go there is so you can say you've been there and paid 8 bucks for a V8.

    A friends wife sums it up nicely:

    "Vegas is like Monte Carlo as re-imagined by white trash." --blkkitty mzmadmike's wife
    http://mzmadmike.livejournal.com/

    --
    I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
    1. Re:White trash Re:And things like this are why... by Phurge · · Score: 4, Funny

      Monte Carlo is like Vegas as re-imagined by Euro-trash

      --
      I'll see your hokum and raise you a boondoggle.
    2. Re:White trash Re:And things like this are why... by dargaud · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There's actually one very good reason to go to Vegas: to climb the excellent sandstone of Red Rocks, just a couple miles off the city. But for all I care you could nuke the city; it would certainly lower the amount of car break-ins while we are out climbing.

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
    3. Re:White trash Re:And things like this are why... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Those for inherited it, instead of working for it, for example.

      So, it's performing a beneficial social service by helping to remove hereditary wealth?

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    4. Re:White trash Re:And things like this are why... by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I've visited Vegas a couple of weeks ago... Lots of fun! No need to gamble either, we put a buck or two in the 1c video poker machine and played a bit for a couple of free beers. But there's plenty to see outside the astounding tackiness of the Strip. Trips to Red Rock, lake Mead, Hoover Dam, the Grand Canyon, etc. Some very good restaurants there, and there's plenty of shows to go to in the evening.

      Monte Carlo (or Monaco in general) is a playgfround for the rich... you are allowed to walk around and gape at a 90 year old corpse clambering out of a Ferrari with his young blonde trophy wife going for a night at Baccarat, but that's it. Oh, it's interesting to see the roads where they have the F1 race, and there's a nice botanical garden. For the rest it's boring as hell. If I had a choice to spend a week in Monaco or Vegas, I'd pick Vegas any time.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    5. Re:White trash Re:And things like this are why... by EdIII · · Score: 2, Informative

      For the whores...oh wait Vegas can't stand the competition so you have to drive an hour north for that.

      You are so very very wrong. Two Words: Happy Finish

      Get it?

      Oh, and it's not an hour. 45 minutes tops.

    6. Re:White trash Re:And things like this are why... by FatAlb3rt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Do you really think that someone needs to push a button to let the machine know what happened?

  11. Well of course by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Casino's would go broke if the odds weren't in their favour. The whole way they stay profitable is because the odds are for the house. Not a whole lot in most games, and what the odds are is tightly regulated (at least in Nevada), but they are ALWAYS in favour of the house. Even if they were slightly in favour of the players, even 1%, the casino would lose money in the long run.

    If you gamble in a casino with the belief you can win in the long run, you are an idiot. Winning is an anomaly, it has to be for the business to work.

    1. Re:Well of course by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you gamble in a casino with the belief you can win in the long run, you are an idiot.

      Well, not exactly. If you have an infinite supply of money, then you can always win in the long run, but you can only win a small amount. The strategy for doing this is to double your bet every time, and eventually you make a profit of your initial stake. Then you stop playing.

      In a game like roulette, if you place a bet on red, for example, then there are 18 winning positions and 19 losing ones, so your probability of losing in the first round is just over 0.51. Bet $1 and if you lose, you double your bet. The probability of losing both rounds is now 0.26. If you lose, double again, but the probability of losing 3 times in a row is only 0.14. After ten rounds, the probability is down to 0.0013, but the stake will be $512, so if you lose your total loss will be $1023, but if you win then your total winnings will be $1.

      By the way, casinos love people who play this strategy on tables with a limit. If they win, then they've won a tiny amount, and if they lose then they lose whatever the limit is.

      My point is that, over an infinite time period, the casino will win. On average the casino will win. At any given point, the player may be winning, and cashing out at this point lets you walk away with more money than you started with, although the effort to reward ratio for this is generally much lower than a minimum wage job. Of course, the only good long-term strategy for gambling with a casino is to buy shares in the company that owns the casino...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:Well of course by selven · · Score: 2, Informative

      Technically that strategy gives finite gains (ie. 0% return on investment). If you have a finite amount of money, however, the steady gains will be (in a fair game exactly, in a casino game more than) counterbalanced by the slim possibility of losing everything.

    3. Re:Well of course by Tyler+Durden · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I do understand this. The reason I replied is that you said "The probability of losing both rounds is now 0.26" after mentioning losing the first. So I thought that you were implying that the outcome of the first result affects the probability of the second, which (of course) isn't the case. The probability of losing two rounds in a row is always 0.26. The probability of losing any one round is always 0.51. Sorry if I misunderstood what you were saying. Thanks for not being a dick about it or anything...

      --
      Happy people make bad consumers.
    4. Re:Well of course by mindstrm · · Score: 2, Informative

      The probablity of losing 2 rounds in a row is .26. but that doens't mean if you lose the first round, your odds of losing the second round are .26. Your odds of losing the second round are still .51.

  12. Burly Dude by _newwave_ · · Score: 5, Informative

    Um, casinos don't send burly dudes anymore. This isn't the 70's. In fact, if they suspect you of counting they simply politely ask you to stop playing. If you are caught playing again, then they may ask you to cash out your chips and walk you out.

    1. Re:Burly Dude by hab136 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In fact, if they suspect you of counting they simply politely ask you to stop playing.

      The person politely asking is usually burly. Or at least well-muscled.

      I would not take on any of the security folks I saw in Vegas.

    2. Re:Burly Dude by Imsdal · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The person asking you to leave often isn't burly. However, that matters little. The three people he will call on if you don't follow his directions will be. And you are right that it is a supremely bad idea to try to "take them on".

    3. Re:Burly Dude by bigbigbison · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Then you are trespassing and they call the cops who take you away.

      --
      http://www.popularculturegaming.com -- my blog about the culture of videogame players
  13. I'm calling "Bull" on the whole thing... by Joce640k · · Score: 2, Insightful

    FTA: "By comparing the cards and gambling patterns, the computer can identify a card counter inside 20 hands - even if the gambler starts off with a run of high bets to confuse the system."

    Yeah, right...

    --
    No sig today...
    1. Re:I'm calling "Bull" on the whole thing... by mwvdlee · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I thought blackjack cart counting schemes only worked when you already had a significant number of cards pass by? How could a computer identify a card counter inside 20 hands when a card counter hasn't even started using their count by then?

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    2. Re:I'm calling "Bull" on the whole thing... by Imsdal · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So? Most times through the decks, there will be no opportunities to exploit the count. Thus, it could easily take five or ten turns through the entire shoe before a card counter would play differently from someone who just plays each single hand statistically correct. I call BS on the claim in the article.

  14. Why don't they just get it over with? by mcrbids · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why don't they just get it over with, and just take your money?

    It's not like making a game, with rules and all, really makes that much difference if they just decide that because you are playing the game by the rules, that you are somehow bad because you succeed? So, you can play the game by their rules, so long as you lose?!?!?

    This is retarded. I've given the casinos less than $10 of my money for gambling. I'll never give them more than $20. Fuck them and their stupid "you can play by our rules so long as you lose!" mentality. Nevermind their billion dollar profit margins...

    --
    I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    1. Re:Why don't they just get it over with? by captainpanic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They basically only want stupid people to play.

      The game has been carefully designed to statistically create a profit for the casino, assuming that the deck of cards is too complex for players to memorize.

      For really smart people who can count really well, assumption is false, so the system fails.
      But for stupid people, the assumption is true and the system works.

      So, they want only stupid people.

      ~I prefer to spend my money in the bar: enter being smart, and become stupid as a result of spending money.

    2. Re:Why don't they just get it over with? by jimicus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Fuck them and their stupid "you can play by our rules so long as you lose!" mentality. Nevermind their billion dollar profit margins...

      Little secret for you - in most reasonably respectable businesses (and yes, I know the gambling industry is frequently far from respectable), a "billion dollar profit margin" requires a trillion dollars of turnover.

      In other words, while your gross profit may be huge (which it would be for a casino - the product essentially costs nothing so every penny you get out of your customers is gross profit), your expenses (staff, "complimentary" drinks which aren't because you're hoping to get at least that much money back out of the customer, maintenance of machinery, heating & lighting) quickly bring it right down. You shouldn't be too surprised to find that many businesses make a net profit of around 5%.

      It doesn't take a mathematical genius to realise that a few mistakes in the arithmetic and suddenly the net profit of 5% becomes a loss.

    3. Re:Why don't they just get it over with? by TerribleNews · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's not like making a game, with rules and all, really makes that much difference if they just decide that because you are playing the game by the rules, that you are somehow bad because you succeed? So, you can play the game by their rules, so long as you lose?!?!?

      I'm sorry, I got a little confused there; were you talking about casinos or the entire financial industry?

    4. Re:Why don't they just get it over with? by jonadab · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > Why don't they just get it over with, and just take your money?

      That's what they're doing. That's what casinos have always done.

      But they can get *more* of your money if they can get more of you playing and/or keep you playing longer. (By "you" I of course mean people who are bad at math; people who are good at math, as a rule, don't buy lottery tickets or play casino games.)

      So in order to get more of you playing and keep you there longer, they take your money gradually, a little at a time, while maintaining an illusion that "you could win". They work very hard at maintaining the pretense that you can win, because it takes your guard down and allows them to rob you blind.

      Like I said, people who understand math don't play casino games much.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
  15. Re: their choice is... by SigNuZX728 · · Score: 2, Informative

    No what they do is put 6 decks in the shoe but then play 4+ (they will reshuffle somewhere in the middle of the 5th deck). I had heard before that for the most part they don't care about people trying to count cards because it's hard to do correctly, and if you don't do it correctly then you're going to lose in the long run anyway. I suppose this system is one way to weed out the people who are doing it correctly.

  16. Discipline by br00tus · · Score: 2, Insightful
    From a technical standpoint, they probably DO have a winning system. In a real world implementation, they don't.

    I know someone who did this seriously, and I looked into it for a while. If you really dedicate yourself to it, and can follow the system, you can succeed. One thing to remember is it is all mathematical. Theoretically (although not in reality), you can place bets only when odds are in your favor! When the first hand is put out of a new deck, the odds are against you. Let's say for the first few hands of that new deck, most of the 4s, 5s and 6s from the deck have been dealt out, and none of the 10s or Aces. The odds swing into your favor, and get better and better as that pattern continues. Theoretically, you can watch the game, and only sit down and start betting when the odds turn in your favor. In reality, this will mark you as a counter, especially if you place large bets when you sit down.

    The initial problem with counting is, you dedicate many, many hours to getting good at counting, but as soon as you start making money, you go in the "face book" and are banned from casinos (or at least banned from playing blackjack).

    So you have to get a team together. Most teams have a lot of low level counters who bet small and when a decks odds turn in the player's favor (or when a deck turns significantly in the player's favor) they signal a "big player" on their counting team, who sits down and starts making big bets. If your team is betting big money and is successful, eventually they'll figure this out as well, but if you keep trading players out and are clever, you can keep it going, and make some money.

    The problem is it takes a lot of discipline. With a team, you need good discipline from a lot of people. You need to trust everyone with large amounts of money. One person screwing up can blow your whole team's security. It is not an easy thing to do. On top of it all, even if you succeed in getting a disciplined team, once you get rolling, Griffin will begin figuring out who you are. Remember, you have dealers, pit bosses, floor managers there not to mention the cameras which have film saved for quite a while and then Griffin investigating. If you can get a competent, disciplined team like that together, why not start a company or something, without having the pain of all that security breathing down your neck once you get good? Ultimately, you have to do it for enjoyment as much as the money. Because it takes a lot of work, discipline, and relations with regards to the team.

    1. Re:Discipline by silentace · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You just got done watching "21" didn't you... it's alright, you don't have to lie.

    2. Re:Discipline by jimmyharris · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Can you explain what version of Blackjack you are playing when you can possibly have 3 x 10 value cards and not be bust?

    3. Re:Discipline by garompeta · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He probably read "Bringing Down the House", which is a real story, he knows more than what it is shown in the movie.

    4. Re:Discipline by jorghis · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I read that book, but I have a very difficult time believing it is true. The numbers just do not make sense. You will burn an awful lot of money betting the minimum over and over again waiting for that rare opportunity when your odds improve to about 50.5% or so. And then for a couple of hands you can make a .5% return after waiting around and burning money all night. So for a couple of hands a night you bet thousands of dollars a hand, risk a huge amount of money, for an expected rate of a few tens of dollars per hand. And this is after all your teammates burned their money betting the minimum for hours on end. Oh, and you have to somehow win enough to pay for all the overhead of a vacation to Vegas. It is all garbage. The casino does not spend gobs of money employing elite security teams to track down card counters. (and lets not even think about how ridiculous the idea of a multi-billion dollar organization exposing itself to lawsuits by roughing up a customer who scammed them out of a few bucks is)

      I can believe a story about guys who went to Vegas, played basic strategy and managed to get some nice comps. But there is no way they were bringing down millions in net profit. At least not until they started doing book/tv/movie deals. That I can believe is profitable.

    5. Re:Discipline by jaffray · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Option 1: Your analysis is incomplete and inaccurate.

      Option 2: Countless media portrayals and first-hand accounts of card counters making money are all wrong. Media reports of expensive anti-counting technical measures are part of a casino conspiracy to make people believe blackjack is beatable. Books and conferences on blackjack game protection are hoaxes. People who've been barred from multiple properties based on information in the Griffin book are making it all up. Lawsuits against casinos whose security guards have roughed up card counters are actually filed by insiders as part of this elaborate theater they're putting on to increase public interest in blackjack.

      You're pretty smart. Can't be #1. Must be #2!

    6. Re:Discipline by ThisIsForReal · · Score: 3, Funny

      And a knight. Are you sure you were playing blackjack, or did you really just spend the night playing Magic:The Gathering?

      --
      -THE END-
  17. The myths about card counting... by dgun · · Score: 4, Informative

    make casinos plenty of money. Every time I hear about bullshit like what is reported in this article, I always suspect that the casinos are behind it. I wasted years playing blackjack, counting cards, and losing money (great recreation, losing money), and I never once witnessed anyone being banned at the blackjack tables. The idea that this is common is a lie. So, get good at counting cards, go to the casino, count your way to a measly fraction of a percent advantage over the house and still watch your money burn. Too bad you didn't consider risk of ruin. Give me a 100x more bankroll and I'll give anyone a fraction of a mathematical edge.

    --
    FAQs are evil.
  18. Re:really? by Roland+Deschene · · Score: 2, Informative

    > Card counting is illegal?

    From the, second sentence of the summary: "Card counting is perfectly legal."

    This place is getting more and more like the comment boards on the newspapers. Noise to signal ratio rising by the minute.

  19. Re:Judging by all the roulette "systems" on the we by Thanshin · · Score: 3, Funny

    Great shows.

    I watched the various games rules explanation in the hotel tv and laughed at the atrocious stupidity one must suffer to even consider playing with the objective of winning money.

    During the small part of my honeymoon I was there, I spent the considerable quantity of 0$ in games. However I did spend several hundreds of your cheap (at that point) bucks in fantastic shows.

    I plan on going back soon (EUR-USD parity willing). I know I won't play a single chip and I know I'll still have a wonderful time with the shows.

    About the whores. They are, by a large margin, better this side of the pond. Not that I'd even consider one, taking into account they give even worse odds than a casino.

  20. Re:If you play enough, you will ALWAYS lose. by Imsdal · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Only if the casinos don't reshuffle often enough. I can't for the life of me understand why they don't use eight decks and reshuffle after four or five. Then the card counting edge will almost never be big enough to give the counters an edge. And for the non-counters it obviously makes little difference.

    Does anyone know why the casinos don't do this? It seems so fantastically obvious to me, and the casino operators are not stupid.

  21. Re:If you play enough, you will ALWAYS lose. by Dorsai65 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The last time I was in Atlantic City (around 1980), they were using multiple decks and had a "shuffle now" card. When it was "dealt" to a customer, the current hand finished, the multi-deck shoe was shuffled, and the customer fit the "shuffle now" card randomly into the shoe.

    If I recall correctly, the shoe looked like it held 6 or 8 decks (LOTS of cards!).

    Personally, I gave up on casinos when I realized that they couldn't afford all that glitz and glamor unless they were winning a whole lot more than they were losing.

    --
    --- Asking inconvenient questions for over 30 years...
  22. Re:Judging by all the roulette "systems" on the we by wvmarle · · Score: 3, Informative

    Well then your chance should come soon... I don't know when you went, but the EUR is nearing all-time highs against the USD again. And has been rising for months on end now. So assuming your money is in EUR and you want to buy USD then it's getting pretty cheap by now.

    Or of course you could consider Macau. Their currency (the pataca) is coupled to the Hong Kong dollar, which is coupled to the USD. And casinos there just use HKD all the time. No idea if it's as good as Vegas, it is at least very different. I like the city - especially it's historical Portuguese-looking centre.

  23. Re:So, don't be stupid, don't bet in casinos by ledow · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm a mathematician. I find the whole concept of gambling quite hilarious - people actually expect to come out better off? It's craziness.

    That said, the only time I've ever "gambled" was on a very exclusive cruise ship where they had a "free night" (they were in port, so the laws said you couldn't play for real money). You were given $50 worth of chips but obviously couldn't take your winnings home with you or cash them in.

    Myself and my wife sat at a few poker tables out of interest and played for several hours on that measly sum on the low-cost tables. Obviously, we lost all of the "money" but then we realised - we'd just had several hours of fun for $50. Sure, there are cheaper ways, but it was actually quite pleasant, no worse than putting some money into a pool table while in a bar, etc. It *seemed* good value for money, that's the point. We knew we wouldn't win, but it was fun whenever we did win, it was a good social event and we only "lost" $50 (of someone else's money, admittedly, but I've spent more on that quite a few times and had much worse evenings). It'd also been an intellectual exercise for me because I *was* trying to work out the best odds for myself, and that made it a little more interesting.

    So I can get the attraction, but still have never gambled with my own money, and I can also see why those who *don't* understand the basic concepts of probability enjoy it even more and feel compelled to spend money on it. Yes, most of the people in a casino are stupid - but look at the edges on the low-stake tables - you'll see the people who have fun *knowing* they are going to lose $10, $20, $50... they factor that in from the start. But they still have a good time, usually for several hours, cheaper than they could in many modern entertainment venues.

    And I once had a driving instructor try to explain his "super-theory" about gambling - wait until there's a long run of losses and the next one *has* to be a winner! Great. You go do that. Don't call me when you're bankrupt.

  24. Here's what happened when I tried counting cards: by nuckfuts · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It doesn't take any real skill to "count cards". There are easy-to-learn systems that only require incrementing or decrementing a running total in your head. They're by no means perfect, but given a favourable shuffle they can give you an edge. The strategy is to sit there making minimum bets until a favourable shuffle occurs.

    In practice, here's what happens: Casinos deal from a multi-deck "shoe", which has a "cut card" inserted toward the bottom of the stack after shuffling. The cut card is there to ensure they never deal to the bottom of the stack. (If they did, there could be times that a player could bet with absolute certainty). However, they are under no obligation to keep dealing until they reach the cut card. A competent dealer can recognize a shuffle that would play out in your favour, just as well as you can. So whenever the count starts to swing in your favour, there's no need to "send over a burly dude in a bad suit". They simply shuffle the cards!

    This is what a couple of friends and me learned when we tried to play a card-counting system in Reno back in the 80's.

  25. Re: their choice is... by EdIII · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I had heard before that for the most part they don't care about people trying to count cards because it's hard to do correctly

    That seems to be true with most casinos in Las Vegas. My friend would tell them he was going to count cards and most of the time the pit bosses actually come over smiling. They want to see if you can actually pull it off.

    99/100 dumbasses that say they can do it are full of shit, screw it up, and ultimately look foolish in front of the casino. That was straight from the pit boss. They really don't seem too worried about it.

    My friend was the 1/100. He kept it small though and we just ending up getting comped into a couple of shows and buffets since he was bringing a lot of other action to the table.

  26. Re:If you play enough, you will ALWAYS lose. by jaffray · · Score: 2, Interesting

    the casino operators are not stupid.

    You haven't spent much time in casinos, have you? They're among the most inertia-driven bureaucracies you'll ever see.

  27. Re:If you play enough, you will ALWAYS lose. by GraemeDonaldson · · Score: 2, Informative

    Card counting is used when playing blackjack and similar games, it has nothing to do with poker.

    --
    I think, therefore I am. I think?
  28. Re:crooks tag obviously applies to the casinos by chrisG23 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Since you have no legal "right" to be allowed to play a gambling game that a privately owned company is legally offering, your proposal of a law makes no sense. You being allowed to gamble in a casino is a privilege the casino confers on you, not a right granted by the constitution or other laws.

    If you are upset that the casino offers no games where they do not have an advantage and thus lose money, then don't go to the casino. If you want to make money gambling, play poker. You don't play against the house, you play against other players (so its purely skill vs skill.) You pay the casino a relatively small percentage of each pot (called the rake) for basicly "renting" the table you play on and the safety (try coming up a few tens of thousands of dollars in a game at Bob's house downtown and not getting robbed on your way home.) Also casinos attract people who want to play, so you are paying for the ability to always have people to play against, many of which have huge bankrolls for you to win (or to lose to. Depends on your level of skill at the game).

  29. Re:crooks tag obviously applies to the casinos by maxume · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why not just say that you don't think casinos should be allowed to offer blackjack?

    No one would bother running a blackjack table if they had to face ridiculous shit like that. I mean, you didn't even put anything in there for people that are being disruptive (say they are ripping drunk or whatever); I imagine you would be fine with such a provision, but once you split the hair, it is a matter of where you stop, not whether you are going to split the hair.

    --
    Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  30. Re:If you play enough, you will ALWAYS lose. by lorenlal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I was in Vegas recently for a wedding... And before anyone asks: No, not mine. And yes, it was planned.

    We were hanging around up at the top of the Stratosphere, looking at Las Vegas Blvd. My cousin said to me, "Looks awesome doesn't it? Just remember, that wasn't built on winners."

  31. Re:If you play enough, you will ALWAYS lose. by bytesex · · Score: 2, Funny

    This is slashdot. We would assume the wedding wasn't yours. You're being verbose. /oblig

    --
    Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
  32. Atlantic City laws say you can't be kicked out for by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Atlantic City laws say you can't be kicked out for being a card counter.

  33. Re: their choice is... by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Casino's explicitly make it possible to do card counting ... they make more money convincing the people who are bad at it to try while banning the people who are good at it than they would be simply introducing continuous shufflers. Like everything else in a casino, the non prevention of card counting is a carefully calculated strategy to optimize profits for the casino.

  34. Re:If you play enough, you will ALWAYS lose. by gv250 · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... We were hanging around up at the top of the Stratosphere,

    In a balloon?

  35. Re: their choice is... by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ummm ... if they have this computer thing then why don't they count the cards too?

    Because they can't. House doesn't play like a player does; that's why the house has an edge. House always plays by a set of fixed set of rules, generally hit on 16 or less, stand on 17 or more, no hand splitting, doubling down, or insurance. However, the house doesn't start playing until you decide to stand, or go bust. If you go bust, the house wins without playing.

    Besides, I thought Casinos only played half the cards in the deck these days (ever since the MIT card-counting club) to avoid the counters from getting any real edge.

    A casino may do this as a defensive measure if they suspect card counting, but they don't like it. It slows down play and cuts into their profits.

  36. It's the numb3rs by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They brought back a lot of single deck last time I was there years ago, but in single deck a blackjack now pays 5:4 instead of 3:2. Sounds subtle to the amateur, but it's a huge hit to the player. A lot of the player's side of the math is that occasional 3:2 payoff. I can still do well with double deck with a modified single deck system, but Blackjack is pretty dead now. Cripes, they used to have prime time promotional hours where they'd pay 2:1 for blackjacks.

    The whole place has lost its identity anyway. First they tried catering to families for a while, and then they went after the "high end" market- whatever. I make nearly $200K a year and the place feels ridiculous now. Vegas used to be a place where Joe Average could feel like a champ. In my dad's day they'd comp you stuff if you just stood still long enough. He once got a coupon for a free buffet at a casino he walked into just to use the rest room. True story.

    Now I would not be surprised if you told me they started charging for the air in the rooms. I knew it was really over when I was walking through the Hard Rock Casino (*gag*) and saw a big crowd of people looking at something, and there was Paris Hilton in a shop (excuse me, a Shoppe- no, wait, a Boutique) trying on hats. Also true story.

  37. Re:If you play enough, you will ALWAYS lose. by Imsdal · · Score: 2, Funny

    Yes, and that is why no one plays roulette or slots. No, wait a minute...

  38. Re:If you play enough, you will ALWAYS lose. by Gorm+the+DBA · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Why people play with their money against clearly unfavorable odds is beyond me" It's called entertainment. I can go to Atlantic City, be treated like a King for 3 days, staying in a top class hotel room I didn't pay for, with people tending to my every whim, simply by being willing to risk some cash at the tables. And the games themselves are fun as well. There is a group energy behind a winning craps table, or the tension of the moment the roulette wheel is about to drop, or even the (generally) goodnatured cutthroated competition of a poker table. And yes, I generally drop 2-300 bucks over the course of the three day trip. But I got three nights in the hotel, food, drink, and fun for that $300. Or I could go to a MLB game, drop that same amount of money, with no possibility of getting it back, and emerge a mere 3-4 hours later.

  39. A system guaranteed to beat the odds by Bobtree · · Score: 2, Insightful

    is to not gamble at all.

  40. Re:If you play enough, you will ALWAYS lose. by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Just remember, that wasn't built on winners.

    Did you toss him off the Stratosphere for that? Honestly, I have little patience for people who think pointing out most people lose at gambling is some sort of deep and wise utterance.

    The answer is "so what?" People are entertained. What other form of entertainment has at least a chance of winning money back?

    The thing that's bizarre to people like me, people who win at gambling because we choose out battles carefully, is that the casinos are going to such lengths to go after what is really nothing more than a chimera. There's no massive threat from good players. In fact, a guy having a good run at a table was once considered free PR for the casino. The noobs would figure the table was "hot" and start gambling there. These places must spend more on cocktail napkins in a day than a busload of counters could hope to take out of them. And as some other posters said, the idea of there being a beatable game draws in a lot of amateur counters who just wind up contributing to the napkin budget.

    People make the "it's a business" argument to excuse all sorts of douchebaggery these days, but let's go with that. Are these systems ever going to pay for themselves, or just start alienating people even more as word of false positives get around? It's like the ridiculous extremist stuff Homeland Security comes up with that sounds all high tech and cool but won't actually accomplish anything positive.

  41. Re:If you play enough, you will ALWAYS lose. by adamstew · · Score: 2, Informative

    There exist continuously reshuffling card machines. They just pull cards out of it. When they are done with a hand, they put the used cards back in to the machine, and it will continuously shuffle the deck.

    Card counters are thwarted completely and there is no time lost for reshuffling. Although, I don't think these machines are legal in vegas. I have seen them on cruise ships and other casinos.

  42. Re:Everyone "counts" cards, or not? by HEbGb · · Score: 2, Informative

    This is completely, totally untrue. They do NOT have to have the same payout rate, and there is no legal requirement for backing off counters at all.

    I don't know why you think this, but it's wrong. The strip casinos vary quite a lot in house edge and blackjack rules. House edge with perfect strategy ranges from 0.20% to about 2%, depending on house rules, a factor of 10! You'll even find the same casino offer vastly different rules/edge depending on bet level and pit location.

  43. Re:Here's what happened when I tried counting card by HEbGb · · Score: 2, Informative

    This is totally untrue.

    The dealer does NOT have the ability to decide to shuffle early. The dealers are not allowed to make any decisions at all.

    If they're doing this, they're cheating, and can lose their gaming license over it.

  44. Re:If you play enough, you will ALWAYS lose. by The+Night+Watchman · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What it says is that everyone has a different idea of fun. The parent said nothing about addicts. Contrary to your belief, not everyone who goes to casinos is an addict. Some, yes, but not all. Most are there just to have a good time.

    As for throwing money away, the parent made it pretty clear that he is spending money on an experience that he enjoys. It's pretty likely that there are people who consider the things you call fun to be a waste of money and time. It's all relative.

    --
    "Every jumbled pile of person has a thinking part that wonders what the part that isn't thinking isn't thinking of"-TMBG
  45. This is not new, nor is it a threat. by HEbGb · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Systems like this have been around for many years, and have been used commercially in various casinos. There really is nothing new or unique about it. I also see no evidence at all that it's reliable enough to use in a real casino environment, or to be of any help at all.

    Remember, this is just some kid's college project. I'm sure he's enjoying the attention, but this is not an innovation.

    The commercial units combine video tracking with RFID for measuring chips and betting. These systems are very expensive, and don't work all that well. They're also easily defeated by skilled card counters using various techniques. This system is too.

    As for card counting itself, there is really a lot of misinformation on here, but here's the gist:

    - It's totally legal, and it's totally legal for the casino to ask you to leave if they don't want your business.
    - They don't do this often, because most people are losers, even if they're trying to count cards.
    - They don't care if you win a ton, if you're just lucky.
    - It only gives you about a 1-2% advantage overall. That's really not a lot.
    - The MIT team didn't invent any of it, including team play. Nor were they all that successful or profitable overall. Disregard the movie, guys.
    - It's not that hard to learn, but it does take practice, a strong stomach, and a huge bankroll to ride out the inevitable swings.
    - Expected earning is around 1-2 units per hour. So if you're playing $25 units, you'll make $25-$50/hr in the long run.
        Not bad, but not great either. And you should have at least $25,000 (1000 units) as a disposable bankroll to do this, or you risk going broke fairly easily.
    - Lots of people think they can do it, but few really can. The ones who think they know what they're doing are subject to lose a lot of money in short order, so the card counting hype is of benefit to the casinos. They've known this since Thorpe's day.
    - Casino rules vary wildly from location to location, even with a casino. Same thing for card counting conditions.

    Yes, I've studied this quite a lot. Anyone have any questions?

  46. Why Do They Call It Gambling? by tunapez · · Score: 2, Funny

    If they called it losing, nobody would play.

    --
    Imagination drew in bold strokes, instantly serving hopes and fears, while knowledge advanced by slow increments...
  47. Re:If you play enough, you will ALWAYS lose. by FunkSoulBrother · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Have you been to a casino before? Even in rural America, they somehow manage to attract a ton of non-americans and first generation immigrants. This really ain't an American thing.

  48. Re:Atlantic City laws say you can't be kicked out by jedidiah · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...sounds remarkably enlightened.

    I never really understood how it could be considered legitimate
    to kick out counters. They are just good players. A casino
    shouldn't be able to kick out people "just because they win".
    If the mark has no chance of winning then the whole enterprise
    is a total con and should be treated like such.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  49. Re:If you play enough, you will ALWAYS lose. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Bullshit. Casinos will not treat you like a king for a measly $300 spend...well, maybe in their darkest days, but I doubt it.

    Maybe if you drop $300 every weekend?

    Come on dude, you know your math ain't right.

  50. Re:If you play enough, you will ALWAYS lose. by tieTYT · · Score: 2, Informative

    You're treated like a king in vegas for only dropping 2-300 bucks? What hotel is this?