A BS card does none of these. It merely summarizes calculations made outside of the casino. Clearly that can't be illegal. Bringing a mainframe into a casino has to be illegal. Otherwise, you could ruin the game of Roulette. There is nothing wrong with bringing in a card that tells you the odds of various Roulette bets. But, a machine that can watch the ball and rotor in real-time and tell you when to bet would remove gambling from the picture. Casino games were designed for the capabilities of humans, not computers.
ultimate edge
- Thread starter daniel27
- Start date
Our heroes aren't necessarily criminals, but neither are they saints. One can idolize Babe Ruth without embracing alcoholism. Being casinos are mongers of addiction, I do not care if they are cheated and refuse to assign any moral penalty to they who cheat the casino.
I don't see the criminality of people like Taft being transferred to normal AP's, obviously because we don't use devices. It would be like comparing a regular skilled poker player to Steve Forte and his criminality. What an ordinary poker player does isn't anything like what Forte did.
I don't see the criminality of people like Taft being transferred to normal AP's, obviously because we don't use devices. It would be like comparing a regular skilled poker player to Steve Forte and his criminality. What an ordinary poker player does isn't anything like what Forte did.
Do you believe that whether or not a method of play, or a particular piece of gear brought into the casino by a player, is capable of "ruining" a game, is the test of legality either under Nevada's device statute, or under vaguely-worded general cheating statutes?
If I find a Three Card Poker game in which the dealer is showing me all three of her cards, which game do you think that I'll be able to more effectively "ruin"--the roulette game with the aid of a powerful computer, or the Three Card Poker game with the aid of nothing but my own eyes?
There's little doubt that the state COULD prohibit bringing basic strategy cards into casinos, if it chose to do so. The question is, what do the statutes actually say? The state is free to legislate in ways that you or I might consider to be arbitrary. We have to live with it.
Reasoning from your own sense of natural law gets you only so far in law. There's much in the law that defies logic. Your individual opinion of what should be illegal, or what "has to be" illegal doesn't make it illegal. A player could be using a method that offends your sense of ethics or morals, but that doesn't make the method unlawful. I respect your right to right to hold your own opinions of what is ethical or moral, but it's inaccurate to label someone who doesn't keep to those standards a criminal.
If I find a Three Card Poker game in which the dealer is showing me all three of her cards, which game do you think that I'll be able to more effectively "ruin"--the roulette game with the aid of a powerful computer, or the Three Card Poker game with the aid of nothing but my own eyes?
There's little doubt that the state COULD prohibit bringing basic strategy cards into casinos, if it chose to do so. The question is, what do the statutes actually say? The state is free to legislate in ways that you or I might consider to be arbitrary. We have to live with it.
Reasoning from your own sense of natural law gets you only so far in law. There's much in the law that defies logic. Your individual opinion of what should be illegal, or what "has to be" illegal doesn't make it illegal. A player could be using a method that offends your sense of ethics or morals, but that doesn't make the method unlawful. I respect your right to right to hold your own opinions of what is ethical or moral, but it's inaccurate to label someone who doesn't keep to those standards a criminal.
Sorry, but I didn't say any of this. First, I don't find the statute any more vague or arbitrary than most statutes. The state DOESN'T make BS cards illegal. I said NOTHING about "natural law." I said NOTHING about offending my sense of morals or ethics. I certainly don't think the law should be based on my opinion. I NEVER labeled someone a CRIMINAL for not keeping to MY standards.
Taft's crew cheated. They were caught, convicted, convictions upheld, jailed for felonies. What's this have to do with MY sense of ethics? We should not be claiming that convicted card cheats are our heroes by putting them in a "Hall of Fame." Nor should we be making excuses for obvious card cheats by claiming they should have beat the rap on a technicality or by somehow blaming the casinos or legislators for their crimes. There is nothing "vague" about putting a camera in your belt, transmitting images to a screen outside the casino, and having a confederate transmit the opponent's hidden cards to a player.
Why do we insist on giving the casinos ammunition in their quest to convince the world (including the jury pool and legislators) that APs are card cheats?
Taft's crew cheated. They were caught, convicted, convictions upheld, jailed for felonies. What's this have to do with MY sense of ethics? We should not be claiming that convicted card cheats are our heroes by putting them in a "Hall of Fame." Nor should we be making excuses for obvious card cheats by claiming they should have beat the rap on a technicality or by somehow blaming the casinos or legislators for their crimes. There is nothing "vague" about putting a camera in your belt, transmitting images to a screen outside the casino, and having a confederate transmit the opponent's hidden cards to a player.
Why do we insist on giving the casinos ammunition in their quest to convince the world (including the jury pool and legislators) that APs are card cheats?
ultimate edge ramblings
beyond a doubt, imho, the crux of these discussions is one of the most important considerations for any AP.
i'm not sure what label to use for the 'crux' in question, be it law, ethics or what ever, lol.
one of the Wizard of Odds ten commandments of gambling states, Thou shalt have good gambling etiquette.
i'll just say, break this commandment at your peril, been there, done that and it's not fun.
Grosjean in Beyond Counting mentions that 'we are what we eat'.
that's something to think about for those of us who spend much time in the upside down world that casino's are. lol.
what ever, gambling, is well if not taboo, it at least flirts with being taboo, what ever the heck that means but it definitely means something if your an AP of any sort and know at least more than one other person, lol.
just as an example, well i'm not a particularly religious sort of guy but i have been in a few church's. it just so happened that the other night while working a local joint i received a cell phone call from one of my religious friends, an old gentleman pushing eighty, lol. a very, very, very religious guy, to put it mildly, lol. so i answer the phone with you know all this loud a$$ music playing, people screaming and the slot machine bells and whistles going off, lmao.
in short let me just say, this gentleman just would have never been able to understand this AP world we live in guys.
maybe just me, but i think the AP world is not such an easy world for even AP's to understand, lol.
it's complicated to the point, imo, to where it isn't all that difficult for one in all innocence, but perhaps a bit of incompetence and a measure of ignorance to stumble into some artificial for what ever reason camouflaged pit laden with the sharp spikes of the law or other forms of our fellow man's (including our own) judgment and condemnation.
but a crazy world the gambling world is no doubt. just an example, it's not ok to gamble on land, ya gotta go out in a boat and do it, lol.
or it's illegal to gamble in some state, but oh wait, now the people voted on it and it's some how now just fine to do it, lol.
or it's ok for casino's to set up an unfair playing field, but us AP's better be darn careful, should we figure out a way to tilt that field the other way. lol.
what ever, yadda, yadda yadda.
the world outside casino walls has it's own crazy stuff of course and maybe sometimes us AP's can learn a lesson from that.
like we've mostly all seen how a business will change some mode of behavior that is really just fine ethically and with regards to the law, but they will change that behavior simply to not be seen in the light of impropriety.
so what ever, as AP's we want to be comfortable in our own skin and we want to steer clear of trouble and just enjoy making some good ole money.
so many things, so many things, lol.
beyond a doubt, imho, the crux of these discussions is one of the most important considerations for any AP.
i'm not sure what label to use for the 'crux' in question, be it law, ethics or what ever, lol.
one of the Wizard of Odds ten commandments of gambling states, Thou shalt have good gambling etiquette.
i'll just say, break this commandment at your peril, been there, done that and it's not fun.
Grosjean in Beyond Counting mentions that 'we are what we eat'.
that's something to think about for those of us who spend much time in the upside down world that casino's are. lol.
what ever, gambling, is well if not taboo, it at least flirts with being taboo, what ever the heck that means but it definitely means something if your an AP of any sort and know at least more than one other person, lol.
just as an example, well i'm not a particularly religious sort of guy but i have been in a few church's. it just so happened that the other night while working a local joint i received a cell phone call from one of my religious friends, an old gentleman pushing eighty, lol. a very, very, very religious guy, to put it mildly, lol. so i answer the phone with you know all this loud a$$ music playing, people screaming and the slot machine bells and whistles going off, lmao.
in short let me just say, this gentleman just would have never been able to understand this AP world we live in guys.
maybe just me, but i think the AP world is not such an easy world for even AP's to understand, lol.
it's complicated to the point, imo, to where it isn't all that difficult for one in all innocence, but perhaps a bit of incompetence and a measure of ignorance to stumble into some artificial for what ever reason camouflaged pit laden with the sharp spikes of the law or other forms of our fellow man's (including our own) judgment and condemnation.
but a crazy world the gambling world is no doubt. just an example, it's not ok to gamble on land, ya gotta go out in a boat and do it, lol.
or it's illegal to gamble in some state, but oh wait, now the people voted on it and it's some how now just fine to do it, lol.
or it's ok for casino's to set up an unfair playing field, but us AP's better be darn careful, should we figure out a way to tilt that field the other way. lol.
what ever, yadda, yadda yadda.
the world outside casino walls has it's own crazy stuff of course and maybe sometimes us AP's can learn a lesson from that.
like we've mostly all seen how a business will change some mode of behavior that is really just fine ethically and with regards to the law, but they will change that behavior simply to not be seen in the light of impropriety.
so what ever, as AP's we want to be comfortable in our own skin and we want to steer clear of trouble and just enjoy making some good ole money.
so many things, so many things, lol.
Ultimate Edge Book
I liked the book also.
I don't know about Taft's legal case, but I believe the book about the Roulette hidden computers is what really got the device laws passed.
There were several versions of the blackjack computers. The Taft "David" computer was a card counting one and a there was a different version for shuffle tracking using the same type of toe switches as David. The ST one was used by many famous teams and even when the device law came in it remained legal to use hidden computers in other jurisdictions including Europe and the Caribbean. My friend who used to play on a big team told me he never had so much fun playing blackjack than when using the ST computer as the casino had absolutely no clue as to what was happening and why they were winning.
sagefr0g said:
ok, i'm a bit confused.
as i understand it Taft developed his devices in the mid 70's.
i had also heard the device laws in Nevada were the result of casinos discovering Taft's activities, where upon the device laws went into effect around 1985.
so did Taft and his child engage in this illegal cheating activity after 1985?
as i understand it Taft developed his devices in the mid 70's.
i had also heard the device laws in Nevada were the result of casinos discovering Taft's activities, where upon the device laws went into effect around 1985.
so did Taft and his child engage in this illegal cheating activity after 1985?
I don't know about Taft's legal case, but I believe the book about the Roulette hidden computers is what really got the device laws passed.
There were several versions of the blackjack computers. The Taft "David" computer was a card counting one and a there was a different version for shuffle tracking using the same type of toe switches as David. The ST one was used by many famous teams and even when the device law came in it remained legal to use hidden computers in other jurisdictions including Europe and the Caribbean. My friend who used to play on a big team told me he never had so much fun playing blackjack than when using the ST computer as the casino had absolutely no clue as to what was happening and why they were winning.
My software has supported shuffle-tracking, ace-prediction. hole-carding, warped card play, tournys and other techniques for over a decade. My book supports hole-carding, tracking, team-play, and next-carding. Where would you get the idea that I have stated "anything other than straight counting would classify as cheating" and "Qfit Has Problems with any AP other than Counting?"
Edit: Forgot, also AP methods for Video Poker, Pai Gow Poker and Roulette.
Edit: Forgot, also AP methods for Video Poker, Pai Gow Poker and Roulette.
Nowhere in the rules of Blackjack does it say that you cant use information about the remaining shoe composition (card counting) or obtain information about the current shoe from the previous shoe (shuffle tracking). However one of the most fundamental rules of the game is that you cant see the dealer's hole card. If you accidentally see the hole card, you should use that information. But planning your entire strategy around finding ways to gain info that the intrinsic rules of Blackjack say you should not have is not beating the game of Blackjack.
Ground Control to Major Tom
Excuse me? Maybe I just returned from Mars, but I pretty clearly remember a thread where you clearly insinuated HCing ranks up there with cheating. You even made a comment to the effect that your software includes it, but you still won't do it...it is "unethical".
Now...am I wrong? If so, I will gladly apologize, but maybe I'm just a little off-track? Please clarify EXACTLY what you DID say and what your position is on hole-carding...I believe we all would like to know.
Regards,
PM
Excuse me? Maybe I just returned from Mars, but I pretty clearly remember a thread where you clearly insinuated HCing ranks up there with cheating. You even made a comment to the effect that your software includes it, but you still won't do it...it is "unethical".
Now...am I wrong? If so, I will gladly apologize, but maybe I'm just a little off-track? Please clarify EXACTLY what you DID say and what your position is on hole-carding...I believe we all would like to know.
Regards,
PM
My position on Taft is stated in this thread. Nowhere did I say Taft should be removed for hole-carding. As ICountNTrack said, there is nothing wrong with using information that you have legally acquired, and that includes hole card identification. But, yes I see a problem with the actions of some people. For example, a non-handicapped person using a wheelchair, or hiring "little people," to obtain a view not normally available. Or leaning back in your chair so far that you are about to fall over. And rather obviously, Taft's "belly-cam." To me, this is like a Poker player who places a silver cigarette case or lighter on the table to see reflections of the cards as they are dealt. This is obvious cheating.
Claiming that I believe "anything other than straight counting would classify as cheating" and "QFIT has problems with any other AP than counting" is completely at odds with my book, software and hundreds of posts. There are numerous legitimate AP methods other than "straight counting," including: coupons, bonus-whoring, shuffle-tracking, ace-prediction. hole-carding, next-carding, warped card play, back-betting, hand interaction, tournaments, banking PGP, Roulette visual prediction, positive EV Video Poker, Keno payoff table errors, sports betting, Poker, track handicapping, team play, and others.
Claiming that I believe "anything other than straight counting would classify as cheating" and "QFIT has problems with any other AP than counting" is completely at odds with my book, software and hundreds of posts. There are numerous legitimate AP methods other than "straight counting," including: coupons, bonus-whoring, shuffle-tracking, ace-prediction. hole-carding, next-carding, warped card play, back-betting, hand interaction, tournaments, banking PGP, Roulette visual prediction, positive EV Video Poker, Keno payoff table errors, sports betting, Poker, track handicapping, team play, and others.
Cheating?
I've thought a great deal about what constitutes cheating. My personal conclusion and rule of thumb is any technique or information used or aquired using only the gifts and faculties given you by the good Lord or aquired through work and study, is perfectly acceptable to employ WHILE PLAYING any game. I also believe it is ok to garner other information, outside of actual play using various techniques, as long as it is legal. (read not playing while aquiring the info)
I hope that made sense. Lol
-DB
I've thought a great deal about what constitutes cheating. My personal conclusion and rule of thumb is any technique or information used or aquired using only the gifts and faculties given you by the good Lord or aquired through work and study, is perfectly acceptable to employ WHILE PLAYING any game. I also believe it is ok to garner other information, outside of actual play using various techniques, as long as it is legal. (read not playing while aquiring the info)
I hope that made sense. Lol
-DB
Quite right. Which is why I linked to Nevada Gambling Laws which provides the legal definition in Nevada.
Yes, it always struck me as bizarre that Taft didn't appreciate this. I'm not aware of teams deliberately hiring little people; that doesn't strike me as "cheating". However, I can appreciate the position of a colleague who regarded hole carding as unethical because it violated the spirit of the game. I don't know how he would regard shuffle tracking or sequencing.
Grosjean's strategies for carnival games were original and added something beyond hole carding. To me that makes a difference.
Grosjean's strategies for carnival games were original and added something beyond hole carding. To me that makes a difference.