There are certainly a lot of DefCon attendees who think that this describes them. In my observation they are all very incorrect, usually humorously so fortunately.
Not really, no card counter goes unnoticed forever. It's about making sure you get enough time to play when the count is high that you manage to earn money. If you're curious about the life of card counters I can't recommend this YouTube channel enough: https://www.youtube.com/stevenbridges
…because it’s actually extremely difficult to do with the countermeasures casinos now use, more decks and random cutoffs. Letting you try is very profitable though.
The whole environment part is of course not useful. None of the monitoring happening where you can see.
Which they rarely do now because the number of people able and willing to count a 7 deck shoe with a random cutoff is extremely small and it benefits them to let people try.
Do they still exist? They have closed most of the gaps previously exploited by card counters, and continuous shufflers are everywhere.
I think the only ones who can make money are those playing poker and are really good at it. That's because they are playing against other players and not the bank. They still have to beat the rake.
I'm not even sure comp players, that is those who play to get non-cash rewards like travels, restaurant and hotel stays while minimizing their losses can still have an advantage. I heard that casinos calculate comps by expected losses, making sure they stay on top (statistically).
And they are cheaters, but it is like saying thieves can make money.
> And they are cheaters, but it is like saying thieves can make money.
Absolutely not. Using your brains to keep track of cards is not cheating in any way, shape or form. They are simply using all the available information and some pretty basic math to them to gain an advantage.
Calling card counters cheaters is like calling chess players with better knowledge of patterns than their opponents cheaters. They are not cheaters.
The post you are responding to addressed card counters at the top, claiming the casinos have closed most of the loopholes that enabled card counting to be profitable.
The cheating it mentions at the bottom is not card counting (technically legal), but genuine cheating.
Card counting is cheating.
Thinking before playing is cheating.
Also, knowing the rules of the game is cheating.
You should only play at random and never ever think
I'd be willing to be that the intersection of people who think this and then choose to engage in gambling anyway, is probably one of the highest grossing demographics that exist.
Not just statistic. There are plenty of smart defcon people who understand statistics but don't understand that if you start winning they'll just kick you out.
I am very doubtful. Outside sports betting (where you can actually outsmart the house) we loved winning players when I worked in online gambling. Winning players are much more likely to return and lose more than they ever won.
Not sure that's true, actually. The usual strategy appears to be to comp the gambler with generous stays at the casino they're a patron of, with the expectation that they'll dump their winnings back in the next day.
Taken with a grain of salt, as my only knowledge of this is via Hollywood movies. It does make sense from a game theory perspective though.
My first thought was that GP was saying DefCon attendees would be counting cards, which is an effective and legal way to beat the house[1] (until you're caught and banned from the casino).
This is not true. Besides continuous shuffler machines, most casinos have 6 or 8 deck games that have plenty of 'penetration' (card counter term for depth into the deck that the cut card is placed) to offer an edge if you properly card count. There's also a big game to be played where rubes think they can card count and instead lose tons of money attempting to do so.
The problem with card counting generally is that the casino has infinite money and never runs out, thereby they can sustain large expected value swings... whereas you need an enormous bankroll to handle those swings, assuming they don't throw you out before that happens.
There's plenty of doubledeck blackjack with good penetration in Vegas, especially in high limits rooms. The problem nowadays is that the casinos are also counting, and the patterns are simple and easy to track with the tech we all have. Changing your bet even a couple times based on the count can have the pit boss getting a call to remove you.
There’s a huge difference between: “if you do X, you will be asked to leave” and “if you do X, the police will arrest you”
Like, when I invite someone over to a dinner party, it is against my policy to insult my dog. If you do that I will kick you out (not actually, he’s a dumb klutz, you can insult him all you want), but that doesn’t make it illegal to insult my dog.
True but not relevant. Police and legality do not need to be involved with certain kinds of casino justice. Security may just offer to beat your ass if you won't cease and desist, avoiding the paperwork. Could be bluff but they know where cameras are and have cop friends..
You need to check a calendar and see the current year - the days of Casinos' roughing up card counters is long long long gone. Might be great for your screenplay or fan fiction but doesn't match reality.
Strange that you can be so confident about this with private security when even actual police are sometimes involved in cases of excessive force, corruption, coverups. Besides, whatever your personal knowledge/experience is it can't be vast enough to prove a negative here, and only one counter example is needed.
Regardless of the year I think you might want to reconsider your overly confident notions about fiction/reality or at least the condescending tone. I don't know what is institutionalized in what places, but have been threatened by casino security. Fuck around and find out I guess
From where I stand, you'd need to show it's systematic. One single instance is not enough for me. Because your claims are general, as if they applied to many casinos.
I'm kind of perplexed by the blanket assertions here as if private security everywhere will never offer either threatened or actual violence in either official or unofficial capacity.
Nevermind casinos, do people think every bouncer at every bar is merely for show? Since "management reserves the right", trespassing, threats and assault are not really a huge due-process kind of thing, and local establishments/insiders rank higher than outsiders. Within reason they know what is allowed and that isn't always going to be exactly and only whatever the law technically says.
Edit for even more context. For people that don't know already, not every casino or bar is owned by some megacorp who gives a shit about PR, has tons of cameras, has some HR department to educate staff on doctrine, etc. Many casinos are literally in sovereign territory of indigenous peoples also. Not that summary execution for offenders will be status quo there, but come on folks. The world is large and complicated, so simple stories about it are usually incomplete
I mean, I think you're making up blanket assertions where there are none. I haven't made a blanket assertion. I specified the difference between policy and legality.
I then said "I don’t think most casinos have private security that will beat you any more" That's not a blanket assertion. It specifically says "most casinos".
I have never asserted that it NEVER happens and can NEVER happen.
So, I think your confusion is a product of your own assumptions.
Fair, you're as careful to use qualified language as I think I have been. Guess I wasn't really replying to you but just frustrated by the thread in general.
