Has Playing Cover Been Obsoleted By Technology?

Finn Dog

Finn Dog

Well-Known Member
Back when I first read Burning The Tables In Las Vegas, I thought Ian Andersen's Ultimate Gambit was the ultimate weapon against the casinos.

I figured unlike my Hit and Run brethren, I'd automatically be under less suspicion for two reasons:

(1.) Because of the bonehead cover plays, the Pit would see me as someone who couldn't possibly be a threat (because I didn't even know basic).

(2.) My betting pattern would mimic that of a normal progression gambler and not that of a counter.

I'm now leaning toward the viewpoint that Andersen's Ultimate Gambit was indeed ingenious for its day (1999), but with the technology now of Voice Survey, I'm coming to the unfortunate conclusion that both of his Gambits (either the toned-down Green level version or the full-blown Black version) may indeed be useless in today's computer world (not to mention unnecessarily costly to EV, if true).

Therefore: has gambit play indeed been obsoleted by technology--or do you believe it's still worth the cost to EV--or is it better in today's environment to just Hit and Run without any cover?

Best regards,

FD
 
Last edited:
Finn Dog

Finn Dog

Well-Known Member
Pro21 said:
See Exhibit CAA for discussion of Mindplay and BJ survey voice.
Click to expand...
Pro21: Looks like it's required reading and a book I should order; in the meantime, are you (or anyone else) able to give us a paraphrased version as it relates to the question posed here?

Best regards,

FD
 
Last edited:
1

1357111317

Well-Known Member
On a side note. How many places use these technologies? And do the techniques in that book render that technology ineffective?
 
Finn Dog

Finn Dog

Well-Known Member
1357111317 said:
...do the techniques in that book render that technology ineffective?
Click to expand...
A Skills Check would still show the player playing with an advantage.

Interestingly, Andersen's techniques were so successful in the late 90s, that he stayed and played rated. He developed close personal relationships with not only his Host, but the entire Pit as well as the Casino Manager. He'd play five sessions a day split between all three shifts in the same joint and concentrate his play on whichever crew cut him the most slack. The red carpet was laid out for him till cume wins of $150,000 to $250,000 would ultimately spell his demise.

Sounds like the good old days. Unfortunately, the type of cover that would generate that kind of welcome is most likely fantasy in 2009 (because of technology).

My question relates to the same level of cover (but without the play and stay): would it work today for longevity--or would the player be nailed by technology long before any cume win; therefore, is gambit play a waste of money in 2009 and should one just hit and run instead?

Best regards,

FD
 
Last edited:
sagefr0g

sagefr0g

Well-Known Member
i can't really answer this stuff. just i would say that the other night when the surveillance guy was guest in the chat, i came to one conclusion. that being, sooner or later they are going to get you.
that said as a recreational player, i'm just trying not to rub their noses in my action, trying to be as discreet, low profile and not obvious about what i'm doing. still, that said, pretty much go for it, none the less. but yeah, try and hit and run, that sounds good.
 
moo321

moo321

Well-Known Member
Ultimately, someone is going to nail you as a counter, somehow, some day. However, I don't think camo is necessary. There are literally thousands of casinos in the US. If you wanted to, you couldn't even burn out a tiny fraction of them.

Losing scares me a lot more than heat. And if you have a decent act, you should be able to get away with playing without camo for reasonable sessions. As a counter, you'll have enough problems getting the money while playing with absolutely no camo.

I'm sometimes quite surprised at how far people are going out of their way just for "camo" and then I find out they're playing red chips in shoe games.
 
Finn Dog

Finn Dog

Well-Known Member
moo321 said:
I'm sometimes quite surprised at how far people are going out of their way just for "camo" and then I find out they're playing red chips in shoe games.
Click to expand...
So true. Indeed, Andersen had no Red-level gambit (for obvious reasons)...and if an uptight Riverboat runs someone at that level, they sure don't need them anyway.
 
Last edited:
R

rukus

Well-Known Member
it is not even worth it at the green chip level most times as long as you keep your sessions short.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top