Cough... Cough.... Gag... Expert Opinion? Long

(Dead link: http://www.casinoenterprisemanagement.com/viewCem/viewArticle.php?id=178)

Skilled Blackjack Players - Part I
By Jim Goding

A good deal of controversy attends the subject
of how a casino should handle skilled players at blackjack. The debate is partially based on lack of knowledge or, worse, misconceptions on the part
of surveillance, security, and pit management.
A considerable amount of potential liability attends the issue as well, depending upon casino policy and its handling by personnel.
The handling of very skilled players should be a matter of policy in the casino, decided at the highest levels of casino management. Policy on this matter should be, at the very least, checked out by casino legal counsel. Depending upon the policy chosen, specific procedures should be devised for handling players who have attained a level of skill which makes them less than desirable as customers.
So, let's start off with what we are talking about:
* What is a skilled player?
* How does he affect the casino?
* What are the potential liabilities involved?
First off, we are not speaking about card counters alone. Skilled play involves the ability to count cards, change play tactics and betting patterns according to the value of the cards remaining in the deck, and maintain a level of discipline while doing so that negates the idea of recreational play. In today's casino, those who used to be called card counters seldom operate effectively as single players. Single players, by their level of skill and discipline alone, betray themselves. A skilled player stands out because his betting pattern and tactics (decisions on how to play specific hands) follow a pattern that cannot vary from a very predictable behavior, without the player losing the small advantage he gains over the house. Optimum betting, according to deck value, combined with the necessary decision variations and other tells, makes such a player stand out from the normal crowd of recreational and mostly unskilled players.
Thus, the successful players most often operate as teams, and it is only teamwork that can detect them, verify their action, document it, and effectively handle it.
Advantage play also includes playing according to errors made by staff, such as dealers who do not correctly hide their whole card. It can also involve skills such as key card location and shuffle tracking.

Not Cheating
One more thing needs to be said at this point. Skilled play at blackjack - while it can, at the highest levels, give the player a slight advantage over the house - is not considered to be cheating in any American jurisdiction.
Cheating as it is defined in Nevada, America's oldest gaming jurisdiction:
1) "Cheat" means to alter the elements of chance, method of selection, or criteria which determine:
a) the result of a game,
b) the amount or frequency of payment in a game,
c) the value of a wagering instrument, or
d) the value of a wagering credit. Nevada Revised Statutes
465.015
In addition, Nevada defines "fraudulent acts" for this purpose as:
2) To place, increase, or decrease a bet, or to determine the course of play after acquiring knowledge not available to all players of the outcome of the game or any event that affects the outcome of the game or which is the subject of the bet or to aid anyone in acquiring such knowledge for the purpose of placing, increasing, or decreasing a bet or determining the course of play contingent upon that event or outcome. Nevada Revised Statutes 465.070
The keys here are that the skilled player does not alter any of the elements of chance, method of selection or criteria, and that he or she does not acquire or use any knowledge of the elements of the game that is not available to all players.
It should be noted that these are the laws in Nevada and that the laws regarding cheating vary considerably from state to state. Federal laws as they apply to Indian gaming jurisdictions also vary. It is a very good idea for all surveillance, pit, security, and management personnel to become very familiar with the laws in their own jurisdiction.
There are exceptions to this:
1) when a player uses a device, such as a computer, to actually do the card counting, bet computation, and make strategy recommendations
2) when a player uses a video camera or similar device in order to film the standard shuffle for analysis
3) when a player actually marks the cards in order to either track them or determine information not available to other players
These are actual cheating moves, involving use of a device, and can be prosecuted under law if proven.
It is unlawful for any person at a licensed gaming establishment to use, or possess with the intent to use, any device to assist:
1) in projecting the outcome of the game,
2) in keeping track of the cards played,
3) in analyzing the probability of the occurrence of an event relating to the game, or
4) in analyzing the strategy for playing or betting to be used in the game, except as permitted by the commission. NRS 465.075
But a skilled player who operates from his own knowledge of the game and how the value of the remaining cards in the deck should affect the game decisions is not cheating. He is merely a skilled player.
However, a few other things need to be said regarding the desirability of such players. Some of them, especially those who operate within teams, consider themselves to be professional players. They attempt to make a living by their skill, which gives them a small but definite advantage over the house. It is common for some of these players to be ejected permanently from many casinos, to which they cannot return without being subject to arrest on minor charges.
As a result, many of these players operate under other names, and this puts the casino in a bad position. A player who is betting at the level of hundreds or thousands of dollars will soon run into the requirement of producing identification or be barred from further play. Nevada State Gaming Regulations, Chapter 6A.
So, the skilled player who is using a false name is, in fact, practicing fraud if he is doing so in order to avoid arrest, avoid reporting financial transactions, or to gain some advantage that he could not have under his own name. For example, many of the skilled players register for player's club accounts in order to be eligible for complimentary rooms and meals at the casinos. If a player is asked for identification in order for the casino to make its required financial transaction reports and produces false identification, another fraud results. It is unlawful for a person to possess, sell, or transfer any document or personal identifying information for the purpose of establishing a false status, occupation, membership, license, or identity for himself or any other person. NRS 205.465
Also, "crime related to racketeering" means the commission of, attempt to commit, or conspiracy to commit any of the following crimes: ... 23) Any violation of Subsection 2 or 3 of NRS 463.360 or Chapter 465 of NRS. NRS 207.360
This very specifically includes the regulations regarding reporting of financial transactions by casinos. Though the quotes are taken from Nevada Revised Statutes, similar laws and regulations exist in all gaming jurisdictions, including federal laws regarding financial transaction reporting.

Bottom Line
Skilled players at blackjack - though a minor danger to the bottom line of the blackjack pit in most casinos - can become a greater liability if they are practicing fraud through use of false names. Another possible liability is that many cheats mask their actions by adopting the betting and playing patterns of card counters.
Single card counters are relatively easily detected, and as such, their impact on income from the pit is relatively minor. However, skilled team players, because they actually risk very little money and only place large money at risk when the deck is very favorable to players, can impact the pit income very heavily if allowed to operate unimpeded, especially in a casino with high betting limits.
The greatest liability that skilled players pose, however, is that the casino itself, through having no specific policy on their handling, or through unskilled handling by staff, can mishandle such players, causing poor public relations with other players or creating the potential for lawsuits by treating such players as criminals. Thus, it is vital that informed management set policy and that such policy be implemented through procedures designed to minimize both public relations problems and potential legal risks.

Jim Goding has spent 15 years in the casino industry as a Games Dealer and Supervisor, and Surveillance Investigator, Supervisor, and Consultant. He works as a training consultant for casino surveillance, security, and gaming personnel, as well as maintaining full-time contact in the industry by working as a surveillance investigator in Las Vegas. Jim maintains a widely-respected newsletter and Web site, www.casinosurveillancenews.com, and his material as published on the Web site is now being used as a text in the Surveillance curriculum at University of Nevada Las Vegas, as well as a basis of surveillance training in casinos across the United States.

Comments?
JWP
 
Looks like a pretty good article. He's right in pointing out to the casinos the differences between us and cheaters and that we shouldn't be considered as such or treated as such. I disagree that a single counter is easier to detect than a team, but I don't think a team of 8 counters will cost the casino much more than 8 individual counters. I've heard that on most shoe games surveillance concentrates on finding teams and doesn't sweat individual counters too much. That's fine by me!
 

gehrig

Well-Known Member
"most casino surveillance concentrates on"...

internal theft.

the initial post in this thread begs another subject. casino game protection staff, on up to senior management, are merely employees with assigned responsibilities. i was amused when yars back, a noted author would constantly "curse" pitstiffs for 86-ing suspected, skilled players. otoh, that same author adulated certain upper management because they were such "nice guys". i'm lucky to view the biz from both sides of the fence. these upper managers are the fellows who devise the 86 policies, duh. to curse the feldwebels while applauding the generals is foolish.

though the casino people vary in skill and exuberance at their positions, none that i've met beat their kids or would intentionally run over the puppy in the driveway. bottom line is each employee should perform his/her assigned task with all the skills at their hand. casting some vitriol is short sighted indeed, and absolutely inconsistent with a pragmatic attack of this game.

that stated, the issue reduces to understanding not if or why the dog bites, but which end has the teeth. the skilled player must learn to pet that dog while retaining one's hand. kvetching about the dog's teeth don't fly. "playing" the game adequately includes playing the game protection staff, seen and unseen.
 

Sonny

Well-Known Member
I agree

> Looks like a pretty good article. He's right in pointing out to the casinos
> the differences between us and cheaters and that we shouldn't be considered
> as such or treated as such.

I agree. His only real concern seems to be players "fraudulently" using fake names in order to play. Everything else seems on the level to me. He even goes into great detail to point out that advantage players are not cheaters.

-Sonny-
 

ND

New Member
Re: I agree

What everyone fails to realize that it is irrelevant what percentage advantage play affects the bottom line. When working in Surveillance the last question you want to have to answer is "how did you miss this person, or team that just beat us for $10,000, $20,000 or more?". They don't care how much they lost in a session, but only what they won. So your main objective is to protect yourself, not necessarily the property. Even the smallest grinder at smaller houses might need justification to a $2,000 win and you don't want to have to say that they were an advantage player.
 

Bomb

New Member
ploppies win too.

"Even the smallest grinder at smaller houses might need justification to a $2,000 win and you don't want to have to say that they were an advantage player."

Yeah, especially if it's a real ploppy. Amazing how the sweaty casinos think anyone who wins is a card counter,you know. The funny article talks about "skilled" players. He uses it losely...anybody who wins is skilled,it's quite a funny read.
 
Top