Nicely done, Jerry
Saw the show, pretty cool story, only him & a MIT student figured it out!
@"Kentis" said: Saw the show, pretty cool story, only him & a MIT student figured it out!probably because most people who are good at math avoid the lottery.
Watched that Sunday night, great story!
Probably coming to us all again through the eyes of Hollywood, could be a fun movie.
That's cool. You know the whole MIT card counting thing was kinda funny to me. I guess it was because they were coordinating their efforts that made it wrong. It should never be wrong though to be smarter then who you're betting against.
@"suncoastvike" said: That's cool. You know the whole MIT card counting thing was kinda funny to me. I guess it was because they were coordinating their efforts that made it wrong. It should never be wrong though to be smarter then who you're betting against.exaclty, i never understood how the casinos use odds to fleece the lazy and ignorant out of their money, but if somebody is able to use their minds to beat those odds... well thats cheating and will get you a beat down or worse.
@"greediron" said:I know, I’m one of them... B)@"Kentis" said: Saw the show, pretty cool story, only him & a MIT student figured it out! probably because most people who are good at math avoid the lottery.
@"suncoastvike" said: That's cool. You know the whole MIT card counting thing was kinda funny to me. I guess it was because they were coordinating their efforts that made it wrong. It should never be wrong though to be smarter then who you're betting against.It's not wrong. It is just that the house can find ways to not take your action. The house is a business and it is about winning long-term against a player. I am a blackjack dealer out of state. In Missouri we can't kick people out for counting cards. But we can make it where it doesn't benefit them ie. shuffle after every hand on double deck. I'd say that of the people that think they can count cards 1% are actually effective and good at it. And honestly it is very difficult to mask it and get a full benefit of a good count. The coodinated efforts is the best way to mask it because you have a person that allows the big player to play during a good count and the house can't really know they are counting the cards because they are not alternating there bet or just alternating it a little bit. But another way to combat that is in high limit games you can do a mid-shoe entry.
@"matt4787" said:I think if I remember right it was the coordinated stuff that got them in trouble. Using several players stationed and that sort of thing. I know next to nothing about gambling or casinos.@"suncoastvike" said: That's cool. You know the whole MIT card counting thing was kinda funny to me. I guess it was because they were coordinating their efforts that made it wrong. It should never be wrong though to be smarter then who you're betting against. It's not wrong. It is just that the house can find ways to not take your action. The house is a business and it is about winning long-term against a player. I am a blackjack dealer out of state. In Missouri we can't kick people out for counting cards. But we can make it where it doesn't benefit them ie. shuffle after every hand on double deck. I'd say that of the people that think they can count cards 1% are actually effective and good at it. And honestly it is very difficult to mask it and get a full benefit of a good count. The coodinated efforts is the best way to mask it because you have a person that allows the big player to play during a good count and the house can't really know they are counting the cards because they are not alternating there bet or just alternating it a little bit. But another way to combat that is in high limit games you can do a mid-shoe entry.
@"suncoastvike" said:What do you mean by in trouble I suppose? Because it wasn't illegal. There was also an incident where Phil Ivey and another person were edge sorting on Baccarat for an advantage. The backs of cards had a discrepency with the faces and the borders were shorter than the other cards. So they would allow the dealers to deal out the 4 cards and they allowed Phil Ivey and his partner to bet after the cards were out and they were allowed to look at the back of the cards. Apparently the casino won a lawsuit against them on this but it is bullshit. The casino offered them to bet after cards were out and to look at the back of the cards. They allowed this to occur. All Phil Ivey and his partner did was also use there mind to see the slight difference of the back of the cards.@"matt4787" said:I think if I remember right it was the coordinated stuff that got them in trouble. Using several players stationed and that sort of thing. I know next to nothing about gambling or casinos.@"suncoastvike" said: That's cool. You know the whole MIT card counting thing was kinda funny to me. I guess it was because they were coordinating their efforts that made it wrong. It should never be wrong though to be smarter then who you're betting against. It's not wrong. It is just that the house can find ways to not take your action. The house is a business and it is about winning long-term against a player. I am a blackjack dealer out of state. In Missouri we can't kick people out for counting cards. But we can make it where it doesn't benefit them ie. shuffle after every hand on double deck. I'd say that of the people that think they can count cards 1% are actually effective and good at it. And honestly it is very difficult to mask it and get a full benefit of a good count. The coodinated efforts is the best way to mask it because you have a person that allows the big player to play during a good count and the house can't really know they are counting the cards because they are not alternating there bet or just alternating it a little bit. But another way to combat that is in high limit games you can do a mid-shoe entry.
@"matt4787" said:You do remember it much better then me. So it seems the only thing they were guilty of was being smarter then the house. Good for them. There's a reason I don't do casinos or even gamble. I'm smart enough to know I'm not smart enough.@"suncoastvike" said:What do you mean by in trouble I suppose? Because it wasn't illegal. There was also an incident where Phil Ivey and another person were edge sorting on Baccarat for an advantage. The backs of cards had a discrepency with the faces and the borders were shorter than the other cards. So they would allow the dealers to deal out the 4 cards and they allowed Phil Ivey and his partner to bet after the cards were out and they were allowed to look at the back of the cards. Apparently the casino won a lawsuit against them on this but it is bullshit. The casino offered them to bet after cards were out and to look at the back of the cards. They allowed this to occur. All Phil Ivey and his partner did was also use there mind to see the slight difference of the back of the cards.@"matt4787" said:I think if I remember right it was the coordinated stuff that got them in trouble. Using several players stationed and that sort of thing. I know next to nothing about gambling or casinos.@"suncoastvike" said: That's cool. You know the whole MIT card counting thing was kinda funny to me. I guess it was because they were coordinating their efforts that made it wrong. It should never be wrong though to be smarter then who you're betting against. It's not wrong. It is just that the house can find ways to not take your action. The house is a business and it is about winning long-term against a player. I am a blackjack dealer out of state. In Missouri we can't kick people out for counting cards. But we can make it where it doesn't benefit them ie. shuffle after every hand on double deck. I'd say that of the people that think they can count cards 1% are actually effective and good at it. And honestly it is very difficult to mask it and get a full benefit of a good count. The coodinated efforts is the best way to mask it because you have a person that allows the big player to play during a good count and the house can't really know they are counting the cards because they are not alternating there bet or just alternating it a little bit. But another way to combat that is in high limit games you can do a mid-shoe entry.
It may not be illegal to count cards, but I am sure the stories of the casinos having the shit kicked out of the "cheats" are not entirely untrue either.
I had a uncle that was a dealer at mystic lake and he assured me that the house will always win if they want to....he also said to make sure and treat the dealer well...and to pay attention to those that dont.
..meaning they had ways to make you lose.
The biggest rackets in the world are casinos: a fool and his money. A city rose from the bleak desert on the backs of gamblers and organized crime in Las Vegas.
@"StickyBun" said: The biggest rackets in the world are casinos: a fool and his money. A city rose from the bleak desert on the backs of gamblers and organized crime in Las Vegas.C'mon now...You calling Vegas a cultural wasteland???
![]()
@"purplefaithful" said:Lol... As a history buff I wouldn't mind if the History Channel actually showed some history. Now their idea of history is buying and selling. They try to mix a little in the deal. This show I hated since day one. Let's glorify pawn shops. I've seen them. Not much glorious stuff going on inside. I once even had to buy back some power tools taken from my garage. I had to pay the price they gave the theif. Thank God they do rip people off. 5 years later after I forgot about it I got a check from the court. Restitution payment. Guess the punk wanted off probation and I was the last thing to do. Good thing I keep serial numbers. I even knew the guy. He used to hang out with my son.@"StickyBun" said: The biggest rackets in the world are casinos: a fool and his money. A city rose from the bleak desert on the backs of gamblers and organized crime in Las Vegas. C'mon now...You calling Vegas a cultural wasteland???
@"JimmyinSD" said:Their card counting method works in real life. We had a company "casino night" back when the movie came out. I had also read up on how they actually did it. It wasn't hard to do as long as the amount of cards were lower then what casinos use. Once you get into the +8 deck shoes it was well over my desire to play along.@"suncoastvike" said: That's cool. You know the whole MIT card counting thing was kinda funny to me. I guess it was because they were coordinating their efforts that made it wrong. It should never be wrong though to be smarter then who you're betting against. exaclty, i never understood how the casinos use odds to fleece the lazy and ignorant out of their money, but if somebody is able to use their minds to beat those odds... well thats cheating and will get you a beat down or worse.I think the casino night was using 2-4 decks. Something small like that is easy to count. I had won quite a bit of fake money that night just by doing simple math.
@"suncoastvike" said:The understatement of the century. What I don't understand is I can't think of a single program that IS history anymore.@"purplefaithful" said:Lol... As a history buff I wouldn't mind if the History Channel actually showed some history.@"StickyBun" said: The biggest rackets in the world are casinos: a fool and his money. A city rose from the bleak desert on the backs of gamblers and organized crime in Las Vegas. C'mon now...You calling Vegas a cultural wasteland???
@"AGRforever" said:what about the science shows doing the theatrical scare shows.... they hyper dramatize what could potentially happen and make it sound like its imminent.@"suncoastvike" said:The understatement of the century. What I don't understand is I can't think of a single program that IS history anymore.@"purplefaithful" said:Lol... As a history buff I wouldn't mind if the History Channel actually showed some history.@"StickyBun" said: The biggest rackets in the world are casinos: a fool and his money. A city rose from the bleak desert on the backs of gamblers and organized crime in Las Vegas. C'mon now...You calling Vegas a cultural wasteland???
@"JimmyinSD" said:You talking Science Channel or SyFy Channel? Don't mess with my Sharknado man.@"AGRforever" said:what about the science shows doing the theatrical scare shows.... they hyper dramatize what could potentially happen and make it sound like its imminent.@"suncoastvike" said:The understatement of the century. What I don't understand is I can't think of a single program that IS history anymore.@"purplefaithful" said:Lol... As a history buff I wouldn't mind if the History Channel actually showed some history.@"StickyBun" said: The biggest rackets in the world are casinos: a fool and his money. A city rose from the bleak desert on the backs of gamblers and organized crime in Las Vegas. C'mon now...You calling Vegas a cultural wasteland???![]()
@"suncoastvike" said:nope.... the actual science networks that have to do shows like Super Volcano, and Super Hurrican, and Super Earthquake... science can be scary enough without them making it into some kind of horror movie.@"JimmyinSD" said:You talking Science Channel or SyFy Channel? Don't mess with my Sharknado man.@"AGRforever" said:what about the science shows doing the theatrical scare shows.... they hyper dramatize what could potentially happen and make it sound like its imminent.@"suncoastvike" said:The understatement of the century. What I don't understand is I can't think of a single program that IS history anymore.@"purplefaithful" said:Lol... As a history buff I wouldn't mind if the History Channel actually showed some history.@"StickyBun" said: The biggest rackets in the world are casinos: a fool and his money. A city rose from the bleak desert on the backs of gamblers and organized crime in Las Vegas. C'mon now...You calling Vegas a cultural wasteland???![]()
Edit Post (mod action — author will see a notice)
Warn Poster
Suspend User (3 days)
The user will be suspended for 3 days and will receive an email with the reason and information about how to appeal.
