The Great Hole-Carding-Cheating-or-Not-Cheating-Debate.

Flashing a hole-card

This argument is even older than the Phil Ivey Edge-Sorting debate which asks whether or not the practice of edge-sorting is cheating or not cheating. I have written loads of articles on Ivey's case and am clearly convinced Ivey was cheating, but edge-sorting is cheating ONLY when the edge-sorter(s) influences or alters the dealing of the game to achieve the possibility to edge-sort.

The debate around the hole-carding-cheating-or-not-cheating-issue is similar to the edge-sorting case but not at all the same. Most experts and game protection people say it is not cheating, and I certainly agree with them.

There are, however, two instances that make for good argument that hole-carding is indeed cheating.

The first is when the individual hole-carder or hole-carding team does something to influence the dealer's dealing of the cards that causes the dealer to flash his hole card in blackjack or any card or cards in carnival games. To me, that would be cheating. Just like Ivey convinced the dealers to deal the baccarat games the way he wanted and against normal dealing procedure in order to make the edge-sorting possible, anyone coercing dealers, either mentally or physically, to flash hole-cards is the same type of cheating in my opinion.

But if a dealer is giving up hole-cards only through fault of his own, there is no way that hole-carders reading the hole-cards can be construed as cheating. NO WAY!

The second scenario is the signalling between hole-carders that gives them a bigger advantage against the casino because they can get more money on the layout when they have knowledge of the dealer's or other players' hole-cards.

Is that cheating?
 
Well, even if it is, it isn't.

Am I trying to sound like a pompous idiot? No. What I am saying is this: Hole-carding may be morally cheating but it can never be construed as real or legal cheating.

Why? Well, I will tell you this: No one would EVER be convicted for passing signals to other players at the table concerning the value of the dealer's hole card.

Why do I say that? Well, the reasoning, if you agree that basic hole-carding without the hole-carders influencing the dealers, is not cheating or illegal, how can passing signals related to a legal act be considered illegal?

After all, any lawyer could easily argue that since the act of hole-carding by itself is completely legal, how can passing signals about something legal be illegal? The "conspiracy" in question would be nothing more than conspiring to commit a legal act!

OK! I am tired of writng and hypenating the word or words "Hole-Carding"!!!