Casino Cheating Tsunami!
Source: Waikato Times
Three people – one of them a SkyCity employee – have been charged with attempting to cheat a casino of more than $7000.
Bo Du, 32, worked as a roulette croupier at Hamilton SkyCity Casino when, police say, she deliberately spun her roulette wheel early – or slowly – to allow her two associates Xiaodong Lu, 27, and Zhuo Zhao, 31, to place last-minute bets as the roulette ball came to a stop.
The offending is alleged to have taken place earlier this month.
It is alleged that on April 4, Lu walked away with $1632 and eight days later she and her partner Zhao pocketed a further $5600.
Despite being remanded without plea on one charge of cheating and two of theft, a police summary of facts stated Du had made a full admission and told them she met up with the couple afterwards to collect her share of the winnings.
Lu also faces two counts of theft and one of cheating, while Zhao is charged with one count of theft and one of cheating.
The trio's appearance in the Hamilton District Court yesterday had lawyers scratching their heads as to what a charge of "cheating" entailed.
Justice Ministry figures released to the Times show there have been just seven charged with the Gambling Act offence between 2005 and 2010.
The Times has reported one similar incident in May 2007 when Jing Luo Yan, a 45-year-old chef, tried to cheat at a game of Caribbean stud poker at the Hamilton SkyCity and was convicted and fined $500.
Though rare, the recent alleged offending pales in comparison to an example from November 1998 when Tonga-based Chinese millionaire businessman Zhu Hua Yu and SkyCIty Auckland dealer Lei Zhang were convicted of cheating when Zhang used secret signals to help the punter amass $120,000 playing baccarat.
Internal Affairs gambling compliance inspector Derek Hartley said he and the Hamilton unit were still investigating and did not rule out further arrests or charges in relation to the latest alleged offending.
However, he would not comment on how frequently similar investigations took place or whether SkyCity could face sanctions.
SkyCity Hamilton general manager Arthur Pitcher refused to comment.
He refused also to discuss SkyCity's anti-corruption efforts or staff supervision policies.
It is not known whether Du has lost her job at SkyCity or how long she worked there.
SkyCity Casino has 23 playing tables, 339 gaming machines and revenues of $26.5 million – up 13.7 per cent in the last financial year.
Du, Lu and Zhao were all remanded on bail without plea to reappear in the Hamilton District Court next month.
Ad Feedback
INTERNATIONAL CHEATS
Previous casino scams both here and abroad make the winnings collected by Hamilton's three alleged casino cheats look like chump change.
November 2011: Three Italians are charged with cheating at a Cannes casino after French police alleged they used special contact lenses to see invisible ink on the marked cards.
The alert was raised when the gang won NZ$76,300 in an evening of stud poker against the croupier in a night and another $10,000 in a few hours later that week.
January 2007: Two men and a woman cheated at least six London casinos out of nearly $734,000 in a hi-tech poker scam using hidden miniature cameras and earpieces. The sting involved two of the gang playing poker while their accomplice sat in a van nearby.
A tiny camera, hidden up the sleeve of one of the players filmed cards being dealt, with footage beamed live to the van via a transmitter. The poker players were then told via earpieces how to bet.
December 2004: Three gamblers who used a laser device to win over $2.73 million in two nights at a London hotel casino are let off prosecution after police say they did nothing illegal.
The laser scanner measured the speed of the roulette ball as it was released by the croupier, identified where it fell and measured the declining orbit of the wheel.
A computer calculated which section of numbers the ball would land on and dropped the odds for the gamblers from 37-1 to 6-1, with the info flashed to a mobile phone just before bets closed.
November 1998: Tonga-based Chinese millionaire businessman Zhu Hua Yu and SkyCIty Auckland dealer Lei Zhang are convicted of cheating after Zhang used secret signals to help Yu win baccarat bets totalling $120,000.
April 1998: Nevada's premier poker machine cheat, Dennis Nikrasch, who raked in millions of dollars over 22 years, cuts a deal with prosecutors for a lighter sentence in return for telling how he did it. Nikrasch and his cronies' scams brought them about US$40m (then NZ$70m) a year and left officials baffled over how they did it.
Nikrasch was convicted in 1986 of scamming US$10 million from Las Vegas casinos by rigging poker machines between 1976 and 1979. He was freed on parole in January 1991.
My take: Heck, I didn't even know there was major legal gaming casinos in New Zealand! Looks like some pretty big cheating scams are going down there, usually the case with Pacific Rim casinos when they're new. This casino cheat wave kind of parallels what has been going on in Singapore.
Thursday, April 19, 2012
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
Greatest "Reverse" Casino Scam I Have Ever Heard...And Done!
First of all, if you don't know what a "reverse" scam is, it is simply a scam in which the primary victim thinks he is involved in a scam that is scamming somebody else and that he will share in the profits. He never has an idea that he himself is the victim.
I have been involved in many of these, and even once was the victim. You have probably seen some good reverse scams depicted in movies, but this one, which I helped devise with my partner in casino cheating Pat Mallery, may be the best.
It takes place on the casino's big baccarat table, not the mini-baccarat tables.
Basically the victim (expecting to receive 50% of the scam profits) is led to believe that we are going to scam the casino for tens or hundreds of thousands by obtaining credit from the casino by signing gambling markers at the table. The victim, who believes he knows the scammer's true ID, is shown false ID that that the scammer says he has used to obtain credit. The scammer tells the victim that he needs serious money to finance the scam at the table. The scammer tells the victim that before he (the scammer) signs the markers, he must first show large cash action to make the casino comfortable and believe that he is trully a high-roller worthy of obtaining credit, which is being worked on by the casino's credit department as the scam is actually taking place at the baccarat table.
The scammer may also take these following steps to enhance the scam:
1) Place $20,000 in the casino cage, against which he can sign markers. Most people do not know that you can sign markers at casino tables against your cash deposit in the cage the same way players sign markers against their credit lines. Anyone observing markers being signed at the table would not be able to tell whether the person signing them has a credit line or cash in the casino cage.
2) Actually sign markers against his cage-cash at the baccarat table to further enhance the credibility of the scam to the victim, which enables the victim to be reverse-scammed.
Since baccarat offers two wagers (banker and player) that cancel each other out (one wins while the other looses), the scammer tells the victim to bet approximately the same large amount as he on the opposite side, for example: the scammer bets $2,000 on player while the victim bets $1,850 or so on banker, not betting the exact amount to avoid casino suspicion that an offset is going on. The victim has financed this whole cash operation, usually for a minimum of $50,000 cash. During the play, the scammer is constantly speaking with the pit bosses to reaffirm that his credit is being approved, convincing the victim that he will soon be signing markers in $10.000 denominations. Then the scammer simply waits until the majority of the chips, usually $1,000 and $5,000 denominatons, shifts to him, which always happens because if the victim wins too many of the offset hands, the scammer and victim meet away from the table where the victim then hands chips back to the scammer.
At the opportune moment when the scammer has bt $30,000 and $50,000 in chips, which is all part of the victim's stake investment, two of the scammers cohorts dressed in suits looking like casino detectives come to the table, whisper "Would you please come with us" in the scammer's ear, all this in front of the victim, who is now scared shitless that he will be linked to the scam to bilk the casino out of money via obtaining credit under false pretenses. The scammer is then led away by the two plainclothes "detectives" (casino personnel notice nothing because it just looks like the two men are friends of the scammer). The victim is then left at the table by himself and soon gets scared and returns to the rented apartment where he is staying (leased by the scammers) and while there hears a knock on the door accompanied by a loud voice shouting "Open Up, FBI." Sometimes the victim does not open up, but when he does is then showed two fake badges by the same two cohorts who had taken the scammer from the baccarat table. He is then grilled with questions about the scammer, whom the FBI is now "aggressively looking for." The victim at this point is only worried about himself going to jail on a major crime, not even so much about his lost money, which he as of yet doesn't realized is lost.
Finally, he receives a call from the scammer, who tells him that he managed to escape from FBI custody and has split Vegas to avoid recapture, and doesn't know when he can resurface. Of course he tells the victim that his cash was confiscated by the FBI.
In most cases, the victim will not even know that he had been scammed but rather think he had the bad luck to get caught in an FBI sting.
I have been involved in many of these, and even once was the victim. You have probably seen some good reverse scams depicted in movies, but this one, which I helped devise with my partner in casino cheating Pat Mallery, may be the best.
It takes place on the casino's big baccarat table, not the mini-baccarat tables.
Basically the victim (expecting to receive 50% of the scam profits) is led to believe that we are going to scam the casino for tens or hundreds of thousands by obtaining credit from the casino by signing gambling markers at the table. The victim, who believes he knows the scammer's true ID, is shown false ID that that the scammer says he has used to obtain credit. The scammer tells the victim that he needs serious money to finance the scam at the table. The scammer tells the victim that before he (the scammer) signs the markers, he must first show large cash action to make the casino comfortable and believe that he is trully a high-roller worthy of obtaining credit, which is being worked on by the casino's credit department as the scam is actually taking place at the baccarat table.
The scammer may also take these following steps to enhance the scam:
1) Place $20,000 in the casino cage, against which he can sign markers. Most people do not know that you can sign markers at casino tables against your cash deposit in the cage the same way players sign markers against their credit lines. Anyone observing markers being signed at the table would not be able to tell whether the person signing them has a credit line or cash in the casino cage.
2) Actually sign markers against his cage-cash at the baccarat table to further enhance the credibility of the scam to the victim, which enables the victim to be reverse-scammed.
Since baccarat offers two wagers (banker and player) that cancel each other out (one wins while the other looses), the scammer tells the victim to bet approximately the same large amount as he on the opposite side, for example: the scammer bets $2,000 on player while the victim bets $1,850 or so on banker, not betting the exact amount to avoid casino suspicion that an offset is going on. The victim has financed this whole cash operation, usually for a minimum of $50,000 cash. During the play, the scammer is constantly speaking with the pit bosses to reaffirm that his credit is being approved, convincing the victim that he will soon be signing markers in $10.000 denominations. Then the scammer simply waits until the majority of the chips, usually $1,000 and $5,000 denominatons, shifts to him, which always happens because if the victim wins too many of the offset hands, the scammer and victim meet away from the table where the victim then hands chips back to the scammer.
At the opportune moment when the scammer has bt $30,000 and $50,000 in chips, which is all part of the victim's stake investment, two of the scammers cohorts dressed in suits looking like casino detectives come to the table, whisper "Would you please come with us" in the scammer's ear, all this in front of the victim, who is now scared shitless that he will be linked to the scam to bilk the casino out of money via obtaining credit under false pretenses. The scammer is then led away by the two plainclothes "detectives" (casino personnel notice nothing because it just looks like the two men are friends of the scammer). The victim is then left at the table by himself and soon gets scared and returns to the rented apartment where he is staying (leased by the scammers) and while there hears a knock on the door accompanied by a loud voice shouting "Open Up, FBI." Sometimes the victim does not open up, but when he does is then showed two fake badges by the same two cohorts who had taken the scammer from the baccarat table. He is then grilled with questions about the scammer, whom the FBI is now "aggressively looking for." The victim at this point is only worried about himself going to jail on a major crime, not even so much about his lost money, which he as of yet doesn't realized is lost.
Finally, he receives a call from the scammer, who tells him that he managed to escape from FBI custody and has split Vegas to avoid recapture, and doesn't know when he can resurface. Of course he tells the victim that his cash was confiscated by the FBI.
In most cases, the victim will not even know that he had been scammed but rather think he had the bad luck to get caught in an FBI sting.
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Macau Casinos Continue to Suffer Baccarat Cheat Scams and Money Laundering Crime
Source: New Yorker
The United States government has come to believe that the cash changing hands on the tables in Macau is only a small part of the picture. “The growth of gambling in Macau, fuelled by money from mainland Chinese gamblers and the growth of U.S.-owned casinos, has been accompanied by widespread corruption, organized crime, and money laundering,” according to the 2011 annual report by the U.S. Congressional-Executive Commission on China. The place has emerged as the “Macau Laundry Service,” as U.S. diplomats put it in an internal cable in 2009. Juan Zarate was a senior counterterrorism official in the Bush Administration who worked on sanctioning a private bank in Macau that allegedly facilitated, among other things, the financing of nuclear proliferation by North Korea. “Anyone who knows anything about anti-money laundering understands both the inherent and the real risks in Macau,” Zarate said. “You have an admixture of commercial-financial activity, a way station for people and goods, a casino sector, all in a potentially volatile regional environment.” David Asher, who was a State Department senior adviser for East Asian and Pacific Affairs in the Bush Administration, calls Macau “a cesspool” of financial crimes. “It’s gone from being out of a James Bond movie to being out of ‘The Bourne Identity,’ ” he said.
Macau garners its share of creative casino cheats; last summer, local police arrested members of a gang accused of embedding miniature cameras into card-shuffling machines. Too much success can be cause for distrust. A casino’s advantage in baccarat—about 1.15 per cent—ordains that the chances of winning all but evaporate for a gambler after thirty thousand hands. A dedicated player can draw a thousand hands in a weekend and come out ahead, but after seven months almost nobody should go home a winner.
My take: Combine the Chinese Triads, Reckless Chinese Gamblers and Giant Las Vegas-Style Casinos and the formula you get out of it is money laundering+casino. Let the cheating scams and money laundering go on!
cheating=Macau
The United States government has come to believe that the cash changing hands on the tables in Macau is only a small part of the picture. “The growth of gambling in Macau, fuelled by money from mainland Chinese gamblers and the growth of U.S.-owned casinos, has been accompanied by widespread corruption, organized crime, and money laundering,” according to the 2011 annual report by the U.S. Congressional-Executive Commission on China. The place has emerged as the “Macau Laundry Service,” as U.S. diplomats put it in an internal cable in 2009. Juan Zarate was a senior counterterrorism official in the Bush Administration who worked on sanctioning a private bank in Macau that allegedly facilitated, among other things, the financing of nuclear proliferation by North Korea. “Anyone who knows anything about anti-money laundering understands both the inherent and the real risks in Macau,” Zarate said. “You have an admixture of commercial-financial activity, a way station for people and goods, a casino sector, all in a potentially volatile regional environment.” David Asher, who was a State Department senior adviser for East Asian and Pacific Affairs in the Bush Administration, calls Macau “a cesspool” of financial crimes. “It’s gone from being out of a James Bond movie to being out of ‘The Bourne Identity,’ ” he said.
Macau garners its share of creative casino cheats; last summer, local police arrested members of a gang accused of embedding miniature cameras into card-shuffling machines. Too much success can be cause for distrust. A casino’s advantage in baccarat—about 1.15 per cent—ordains that the chances of winning all but evaporate for a gambler after thirty thousand hands. A dedicated player can draw a thousand hands in a weekend and come out ahead, but after seven months almost nobody should go home a winner.
My take: Combine the Chinese Triads, Reckless Chinese Gamblers and Giant Las Vegas-Style Casinos and the formula you get out of it is money laundering+casino. Let the cheating scams and money laundering go on!
cheating=Macau
Wednesday, April 04, 2012
California Group Uses ID-Theft/Casino Credit Scam to Bilk State's Casinos Out of $1 Million--Ringleader Convicted--Scam Eerily Similar to Scam Portrayed on Richard Marcus Scam of the Month Page!
Source: LVTSG Business News
Following a two-week jury trial, a southern California man has been convicted of defrauding several local casinos of about $1 million by using recruits to obtain casino credit markers that were not paid back, announced Daniel G. Bogden, United States Attorney for the District of Nevada.
De Rong Shang, aka Jason Shang, 50, of San Gabriel, California, was convicted on Tuesday, March 27, 2012 of one count of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and 17 counts of mail fraud. Shang faces up to 360 years in prison and $4.5 million in fines and is scheduled to be sentenced by U.S. District Judge Roger L. Hunt on July 16, 2012.
From about December 2006 to April 2007, Shang conducted a conspiracy and scheme to defraud casinos in Las Vegas. Shang and co-defendant Yuli Eaton, 47, of Redlands, California, who pleaded guilty to conspiracy before trial, recruited persons to open bank accounts that were funded by Shang. Shang then helped the recruits apply for lines of credit at several Las Vegas casinos. Once the lines of credit were approved, the recruits transferred the money from their accounts to Shang’s account. The recruits then withdrew chips from their lines of credit (“markers”) and played baccarat at the casinos. The recruits were instructed to use a process known as rolling the chips to make it look like they were actually losing money, when they were actually just hiding chips and transferring them to other co-conspirators. The recruits then applied for higher lines of credit and played baccarat, again using the rolling process to make it look like they had lost. In actuality, they gave the chips to Shang, who cashed them in. The recruits then left Nevada or the country and were paid a small percentage of the total amount of credit under their name, generally $300 per $10,000 line of credit. The casinos attempted to collect the unpaid markers, but by that time, the accounts had been drained or closed. Using this scheme, Shang and Eaton defrauded three local casinos of $1,011,400.
The investigation was conducted by the FBI, and the case was prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Andrew W. Duncan and Brandon C. Jaroch.
This law enforcement action is sponsored by President Barack Obama’s Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force. President Obama established the interagency Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force to wage an aggressive, coordinated, and proactive effort to investigate and prosecute financial crimes. The task force includes representatives from a broad range of federal agencies, regulatory authorities, inspectors general, and state and local law enforcement who, working together, bring to bear a powerful array of criminal and civil enforcement resources. The task force is working to improve efforts across the federal executive branch, and with state and local partners, to investigate and prosecute significant financial crimes, ensure just and effective punishment for those who perpetrate financial crimes, combat discrimination in the lending and financial markets, and recover proceeds for victims of financial crimes.
My take: Sounds like they got the idea right off this website! If you don't believe it, look here.
and scroll down to "Casino Credit/Identity Theft Scam.
Following a two-week jury trial, a southern California man has been convicted of defrauding several local casinos of about $1 million by using recruits to obtain casino credit markers that were not paid back, announced Daniel G. Bogden, United States Attorney for the District of Nevada.
De Rong Shang, aka Jason Shang, 50, of San Gabriel, California, was convicted on Tuesday, March 27, 2012 of one count of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and 17 counts of mail fraud. Shang faces up to 360 years in prison and $4.5 million in fines and is scheduled to be sentenced by U.S. District Judge Roger L. Hunt on July 16, 2012.
From about December 2006 to April 2007, Shang conducted a conspiracy and scheme to defraud casinos in Las Vegas. Shang and co-defendant Yuli Eaton, 47, of Redlands, California, who pleaded guilty to conspiracy before trial, recruited persons to open bank accounts that were funded by Shang. Shang then helped the recruits apply for lines of credit at several Las Vegas casinos. Once the lines of credit were approved, the recruits transferred the money from their accounts to Shang’s account. The recruits then withdrew chips from their lines of credit (“markers”) and played baccarat at the casinos. The recruits were instructed to use a process known as rolling the chips to make it look like they were actually losing money, when they were actually just hiding chips and transferring them to other co-conspirators. The recruits then applied for higher lines of credit and played baccarat, again using the rolling process to make it look like they had lost. In actuality, they gave the chips to Shang, who cashed them in. The recruits then left Nevada or the country and were paid a small percentage of the total amount of credit under their name, generally $300 per $10,000 line of credit. The casinos attempted to collect the unpaid markers, but by that time, the accounts had been drained or closed. Using this scheme, Shang and Eaton defrauded three local casinos of $1,011,400.
The investigation was conducted by the FBI, and the case was prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Andrew W. Duncan and Brandon C. Jaroch.
This law enforcement action is sponsored by President Barack Obama’s Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force. President Obama established the interagency Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force to wage an aggressive, coordinated, and proactive effort to investigate and prosecute financial crimes. The task force includes representatives from a broad range of federal agencies, regulatory authorities, inspectors general, and state and local law enforcement who, working together, bring to bear a powerful array of criminal and civil enforcement resources. The task force is working to improve efforts across the federal executive branch, and with state and local partners, to investigate and prosecute significant financial crimes, ensure just and effective punishment for those who perpetrate financial crimes, combat discrimination in the lending and financial markets, and recover proceeds for victims of financial crimes.
My take: Sounds like they got the idea right off this website! If you don't believe it, look here.
and scroll down to "Casino Credit/Identity Theft Scam.
Micro Video Camera Baccarat Scam Hits Korea...Prime Casino Cheat Suspect Flees to China
Source: Dong-a Ilbo
A person suspected of getting a hidden camera installed at Kangwon Land Casino to cheat at games is known to have fled to China, said police in Jeongseon, Gangwon Province on Monday.
The suspect departed for Shanghai from Seoul Thursday last week, police said. Two casino workers who were arrested informed investigators of the suspect`s mobile phone number while identifying him through surveillance camera footage, but the suspect had fled.
Police also said, "Though an extradition treaty with China took effect in April 2002, we have yet to request Chinese cooperation with the investigation. We`re urging the suspect`s acquaintances to help him return."
The probe is expected to be prolonged due to the overseas flight of the suspect. Known to have been the middle man between scheming gamblers and casino workers, he is suspected of ordering the two staff members to move a card box with tiny video cameras installed to a baccarat table, promising them 10 percent of profits.
Police are also probing 21 players who were at the game tables when the card box was found a week ago. After questioning eight of them, investigators found that one player won 1.6 million won (1,421 U.S. dollars) but found no suspicious circumstances.
Two gamblers who said they saw a red light coming from a card box initially agreed to face police questioning, but did not show up as scheduled Wednesday. Police said they will ask them how they found the card box in addition to asking about other situations.
Despite news of the scandal, the casino was packed with customers Monday, with more than 6,000 going there weekdays and 8,000 weekends. Immediately after the casino opened at 10 a.m., most of the seats were taken except for certain machine games.
At the most popular baccarat and blackjack tables, people had to stand behind seats that were occupied. All of them seemed unaffected by the hidden camera scandal.
A man in his 50s who was waiting for a seat at a blackjack table said, "I don`t care because the cheating gamblers did no harm to other gamblers. You lose money as you play casino longer. Does this mean that gambling is a legal act of fraud?"
My take: Seems like a big to-do about a sophisticated high-tech baccarat cheat scam that garnered little money.
A person suspected of getting a hidden camera installed at Kangwon Land Casino to cheat at games is known to have fled to China, said police in Jeongseon, Gangwon Province on Monday.
The suspect departed for Shanghai from Seoul Thursday last week, police said. Two casino workers who were arrested informed investigators of the suspect`s mobile phone number while identifying him through surveillance camera footage, but the suspect had fled.
Police also said, "Though an extradition treaty with China took effect in April 2002, we have yet to request Chinese cooperation with the investigation. We`re urging the suspect`s acquaintances to help him return."
The probe is expected to be prolonged due to the overseas flight of the suspect. Known to have been the middle man between scheming gamblers and casino workers, he is suspected of ordering the two staff members to move a card box with tiny video cameras installed to a baccarat table, promising them 10 percent of profits.
Police are also probing 21 players who were at the game tables when the card box was found a week ago. After questioning eight of them, investigators found that one player won 1.6 million won (1,421 U.S. dollars) but found no suspicious circumstances.
Two gamblers who said they saw a red light coming from a card box initially agreed to face police questioning, but did not show up as scheduled Wednesday. Police said they will ask them how they found the card box in addition to asking about other situations.
Despite news of the scandal, the casino was packed with customers Monday, with more than 6,000 going there weekdays and 8,000 weekends. Immediately after the casino opened at 10 a.m., most of the seats were taken except for certain machine games.
At the most popular baccarat and blackjack tables, people had to stand behind seats that were occupied. All of them seemed unaffected by the hidden camera scandal.
A man in his 50s who was waiting for a seat at a blackjack table said, "I don`t care because the cheating gamblers did no harm to other gamblers. You lose money as you play casino longer. Does this mean that gambling is a legal act of fraud?"
My take: Seems like a big to-do about a sophisticated high-tech baccarat cheat scam that garnered little money.
Saturday, March 31, 2012
Have Online Poker Cheats Moved Over to Brick and Mortar Tables?
As online poker sites continue to make advances against the flocks of online poker cheats cheating your pants off by way of collusion, bots, hand-trackers, etc, some of the cheats working the online field have indeed begun plying their skills at brick and mortar poker tables, both in live games and in tournaments. One question you might have about this is "Well, how to online poker cheats meet up with live partners to cheat the real poker world?...Or do they work alone?"
In the vast majority of cases they do not work alone. Poker cheating is always more effective with multi-players doing the cheating...I wouldn't say exponentially so, but certainly enough to make a big difference. Online poker cheats simply hook up with other willing online poker cheats via chatting, and when the time is right and to their liking, they meet in person and form their brick and mortar poker cheat teams.
The big disadvantage to them is that they will have to cheat in the open, but in virtually all collusion-cases of poker cheating, there is no risk of getting arrested and charged with a poker-cheating crime, and very little risk of even getting barred from a brick and mortar poker room.
The trend is that we will probably see a slow but steady increase in these "poker-cross" cheats, with more arrving to the brick and mortar tables when the online poker sites are most vigilant, and with more retreating back to their computers when online poker security is lax.
In the vast majority of cases they do not work alone. Poker cheating is always more effective with multi-players doing the cheating...I wouldn't say exponentially so, but certainly enough to make a big difference. Online poker cheats simply hook up with other willing online poker cheats via chatting, and when the time is right and to their liking, they meet in person and form their brick and mortar poker cheat teams.
The big disadvantage to them is that they will have to cheat in the open, but in virtually all collusion-cases of poker cheating, there is no risk of getting arrested and charged with a poker-cheating crime, and very little risk of even getting barred from a brick and mortar poker room.
The trend is that we will probably see a slow but steady increase in these "poker-cross" cheats, with more arrving to the brick and mortar tables when the online poker sites are most vigilant, and with more retreating back to their computers when online poker security is lax.
Thursday, March 15, 2012
The Man Who Beat Atlantic City out of $15 Million!
![]() |
| The $20 Million Blackjack Man |
Some call it cheating...I call it finagling!
Source: Atlantic Magazine
Don Johnson won nearly $6 million playing blackjack in one night, single-handedly decimating the monthly revenue of Atlantic City’s Tropicana casino. Not long before that, he’d taken the Borgata for $5 million and Caesars for $4 million. Here’s how he did it.
Don Johnson finds it hard to remember the exact cards. Who could? At the height of his 12-hour blitz of the Tropicana casino in Atlantic City, New Jersey, last April, he was playing a hand of blackjack nearly every minute.
Dozens of spectators pressed against the glass of the high-roller pit. Inside, playing at a green-felt table opposite a black-vested dealer, a burly middle-aged man in a red cap and black Oregon State hoodie was wagering $100,000 a hand. Word spreads when the betting is that big. Johnson was on an amazing streak. The towers of chips stacked in front of him formed a colorful miniature skyline. His winning run had been picked up by the casino’s watchful overhead cameras and drawn the close scrutiny of the pit bosses. In just one hand, he remembers, he won $800,000. In a three-hand sequence, he took $1.2 million.
The basics of blackjack are simple. Almost everyone knows them. You play against the house. Two cards are placed faceup before the player, and two more cards, one down, one up, before the dealer. A card’s suit doesn’t matter, only its numerical value—each face card is worth 10, and an ace can be either a one or an 11. The goal is to get to 21, or as close to it as possible without going over. Scanning the cards on the table before him, the player can either stand or keep taking cards in an effort to approach 21. Since the house’s hand has one card facedown, the player can’t know exactly what the hand is, which is what makes this a game.
As Johnson remembers it, the $800,000 hand started with him betting $100,000 and being dealt two eights. If a player is dealt two of a kind, he can choose to “split” the hand, which means he can play each of the cards as a separate hand and ask for two more cards, in effect doubling his bet. That’s what Johnson did. His next two cards, surprisingly, were also both eights, so he split each again. Getting four cards of the same number in a row doesn’t happen often, but it does happen. Johnson says he was once dealt six consecutive aces at the Mohegan Sun casino in Connecticut. He was now playing four hands, each consisting of a single eight-card, with $400,000 in the balance.
He was neither nervous nor excited. Johnson plays a long game, so the ups and downs of individual hands, even big swings like this one, don’t matter that much to him. He is a veteran player. Little interferes with his concentration. He doesn’t get rattled. With him, it’s all about the math, and he knows it cold. Whenever the racily clad cocktail waitress wandered in with a fresh whiskey and Diet Coke, he took it from the tray.
The house’s hand showed an upturned five. Arrayed on the table before him were the four eights. He was allowed to double down—to double his bet—on any hand, so when he was dealt a three on the first of his hands, he doubled his bet on that one, to $200,000. When his second hand was dealt a two, he doubled down on that, too. When he was dealt a three and a two on the next two hands, he says, he doubled down on those, for a total wager of $800,000.
It was the dealer’s turn. He drew a 10, so the two cards he was showing totaled 15. Johnson called the game—in essence, betting that the dealer’s down card was a seven or higher, which would push his hand over 21. This was a good bet: since all face cards are worth 10, the deck holds more high cards than low. When the dealer turned over the house’s down card, it was a 10, busting him. Johnson won all four hands.
Johnson didn’t celebrate. He didn’t even pause. As another skyscraper of chips was pushed into his skyline, he signaled for the next hand. He was just getting started.
The headline in The Press of Atlantic City was enough to gladden the heart of anyone who has ever made a wager or rooted for the underdog:
BLACKJACK PLAYER TAKES TROPICANA
FOR NEARLY $6 MILLION,
SINGLE-HANDEDLY RUINS CASINO’S MONTH
But the story was even bigger than that. Johnson’s assault on the Tropicana was merely the latest in a series of blitzes he’d made on Atlantic City’s gambling establishments. In the four previous months, he’d taken $5 million from the Borgata casino and another $4 million from Caesars. Caesars had cut him off, he says, and then effectively banned him from its casinos worldwide.
Fifteen million dollars in winnings from three different casinos? Nobody gets that lucky. How did he do it?
The first and most obvious suspicion was card counting. Card counters seek to gain a strong advantage by keeping a mental tally of every card dealt, and then adjusting the wager according to the value of the cards that remain in the deck. (The tactic requires both great memory and superior math skills.) Made famous in books and movies, card counting is considered cheating, at least by casinos. In most states (but not New Jersey), known practitioners are banned. The wagering of card counters assumes a clearly recognizable pattern over time, and Johnson was being watched very carefully. The verdict: card counting was not Don Johnson’s game. He had beaten the casinos fair and square.
It hurt. Largely as a result of Johnson’s streak, the Trop’s table-game revenues for April 2011 were the second-lowest among the 11 casinos in Atlantic City. Mark Giannantonio, the president and CEO of the Trop, who had authorized the $100,000-a-hand limit for Johnson, was given the boot weeks later. Johnson’s winnings had administered a similar jolt to the Borgata and to Caesars. All of these gambling houses were already hurting, what with the spread of legalized gambling in surrounding states. By April, combined monthly gaming revenue had been declining on a year-over-year basis for 32 months.
For most people, though, the newspaper headline told a happy story. An ordinary guy in a red cap and black hoodie had struck it rich, had beaten the casinos black-and-blue. It seemed a fantasy come true, the very dream that draws suckers to the gaming tables.
But that’s not the whole story either.
Despite his pedestrian attire, Don Johnson is no average Joe. For one thing, he is an extraordinarily skilled blackjack player. Tony Rodio, who succeeded Giannantonio as the Trop’s CEO, says, “He plays perfect cards.” In every blackjack scenario, Johnson knows the right decision to make. But that’s true of plenty of good players. What gives Johnson his edge is his knowledge of the gaming industry. As good as he is at playing cards, he turns out to be even better at playing the casinos.
Hard times do not favor the house. The signs of a five-year slump are evident all over Atlantic City, in rundown façades, empty parking lots, and the faded glitz of its casinos’ garish interiors. Pennsylvania is likely to supplant New Jersey this year as the second-largest gaming state in the nation. The new Parx racetrack and casino in Bensalem, Pennsylvania, a gigantic gambling complex, is less than 80 miles away from the Atlantic City boardwalk. Revenue from Atlantic City’s 11 casinos fell from a high of $5.2 billion in 2006 to just $3.3 billion last year. The local gaming industry hopes the opening of a 12th casino, Revel, this spring may finally reverse that downward trend, but that’s unlikely.
“It doesn’t matter how many casinos there are,” Israel Posner, a gaming-industry expert at nearby Stockton College, told me. When you add gaming tables or slots at a fancy new venue like Revel, or like the Borgata, which opened in 2003, the novelty may initially draw crowds, but adding gaming supply without enlarging the number of customers ultimately hurts everyone.
When revenues slump, casinos must rely more heavily on their most prized customers, the high rollers who wager huge amounts—tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of dollars a hand. Hooking and reeling in these “whales,” as they are known in the industry, can become essential. High rollers are lured with free meals and drinks, free luxury suites, free rides on private jets, and … more. (There’s a reason most casino ads feature beautiful, scantily clad young women.) The marketers present casinos as glamorous playgrounds where workaday worries and things like morality, sobriety, and prudence are on holiday. When you’re rich, normal rules don’t apply! The idea, like the oldest of pickpocket tricks, is to distract the mark with such frolic that he doesn’t notice he’s losing far more than his free amenities actually cost. For what doth it profit a man to gain a $20,000 ride on a private jet if he drops $200,000 playing poker? The right “elite player” can lose enough in a weekend to balance a casino’s books for a month.
Of course, high rollers “are not all created equally,” says Rodio, the Tropicana’s CEO. (He was the only Atlantic City casino executive who agreed to talk to me about Johnson.) “When someone makes all the right decisions, the house advantage is relatively small; maybe we will win, on average, one or two hands more than him for every hundred decisions. There are other blackjack players, or craps players, who don’t use perfect strategy, and with them there is a big swing in the house advantage. So there is more competition among casinos for players who aren’t as skilled.”
For the casino, the art is in telling the skilled whales from the unskilled ones, then discouraging the former and seducing the latter. The industry pays close attention to high-level players; once a player earns a reputation for winning, the courtship ends. The last thing a skilled player wants is a big reputation. Some wear disguises when they play.
But even though he has been around the gambling industry for all of his 49 years, Johnson snuck up on Atlantic City. To look at him, over six feet tall and thickly built, you would never guess that he was once a jockey. He grew up tending his uncle’s racehorses in Salem, Oregon, and began riding them competitively at age 15. In his best years as a professional jockey, he was practically skeletal. He stood 6 foot 1 and weighed only 108 pounds. He worked with a physician to keep weight off, fighting his natural growth rate with thyroid medication that amped up his metabolism and subsisting on vitamin supplements. The regimen was so demanding that he eventually had to give it up. His body quickly assumed more normal proportions, and he went to work helping manage racetracks, a career that brought him to Philadelphia when he was about 30. He was hired to manage Philadelphia Park, the track that evolved into the Parx casino, in Bensalem, where he lives today. Johnson was in charge of day-to-day operations, including the betting operation. He started to learn a lot about gambling.
It was a growth industry. Today, according to the American Gaming Association, commercial casino gambling—not including Native American casinos or the hundreds of racetracks and government-sponsored lotteries—is a $34 billion business in America, with commercial casinos in 22 states, employing about 340,000 people. Pari-mutuel betting (on horse racing, dog racing, and jai alai) is now legal in 43 states, and online gaming netted more than $4 billion from U.S. bettors in 2010. Over the past 20 years, Johnson’s career has moved from managing racetracks to helping regulate this burgeoning industry. He has served as a state regulator in Oregon, Idaho, Texas, and Wyoming. About a decade ago, he founded a business that does computer-assisted wagering on horses. The software his company employs analyzes more data than an ordinary handicapper will see in a thousand lifetimes, and defines risk to a degree that was impossible just five years ago.
Johnson is not, as he puts it, “naive in math.”
He began playing cards seriously about 10 years ago, calculating his odds versus the house’s.
Compared with horse racing, the odds in blackjack are fairly straightforward to calculate. Many casinos sell laminated charts in their guest shops that reveal the optimal strategy for any situation the game presents. But these odds are calculated by simulating millions of hands, and as Johnson says, “I will never see 400 million hands.”
More useful, for his purposes, is running a smaller number of hands and paying attention to variation. The way averages work, the larger the sample, the narrower the range of variation. A session of, say, 600 hands will display wider swings, with steeper winning and losing streaks, than the standard casino charts. That insight becomes important when the betting terms and special ground rules for the game are set—and Don Johnson’s skill at establishing these terms is what sets him apart from your average casino visitor.
Johnson is very good at gambling, mainly because he’s less willing to gamble than most. He does not just walk into a casino and start playing, which is what roughly 99 percent of customers do. This is, in his words, tantamount to “blindly throwing away money.” The rules of the game are set to give the house a significant advantage. That doesn’t mean you can’t win playing by the standard house rules; people do win on occasion. But the vast majority of players lose, and the longer they play, the more they lose.
Sophisticated gamblers won’t play by the standard rules. They negotiate. Because the casino values high rollers more than the average customer, it is willing to lessen its edge for them. It does this primarily by offering discounts, or “loss rebates.” When a casino offers a discount of, say, 10 percent, that means if the player loses $100,000 at the blackjack table, he has to pay only $90,000. Beyond the usual high-roller perks, the casino might also sweeten the deal by staking the player a significant amount up front, offering thousands of dollars in free chips, just to get the ball rolling. But even in that scenario, Johnson won’t play. By his reckoning, a few thousand in free chips plus a standard 10 percent discount just means that the casino is going to end up with slightly less of the player’s money after a few hours of play. The player still loses.
But two years ago, Johnson says, the casinos started getting desperate. With their table-game revenues tanking and the number of whales diminishing, casino marketers began to compete more aggressively for the big spenders. After all, one high roller who has a bad night can determine whether a casino’s table games finish a month in the red or in the black. Inside the casinos, this heightened the natural tension between the marketers, who are always pushing to sweeten the discounts, and the gaming managers, who want to maximize the house’s statistical edge. But month after month of declining revenues strengthened the marketers’ position. By late 2010, the discounts at some of the strapped Atlantic City casinos began creeping upward, as high as 20 percent.
“The casinos started accepting more risk, looking for a possible larger return,” says Posner, the gaming-industry expert. “They tended to start swinging for the fences.”
Johnson noticed.
“They began offering deals that nobody’s ever seen in New Jersey history,” he told me. “I’d never heard of anything like it in the world, not even for a player like [the late Australian media tycoon] Kerry Packer, who came in with a $20 million bank and was worth billions and billions.”
When casinos started getting desperate, Johnson was perfectly poised to take advantage of them. He had the money to wager big, he had the skill to win, and he did not have enough of a reputation for the casinos to be wary of him. He was also, as the Trop’s Tony Rodio puts it, “a cheap date.” He wasn’t interested in the high-end perks; he was interested in maximizing his odds of winning. For Johnson, the game began before he ever set foot in the casino.
Atlantic City did know who Johnson was. The casinos’ own research told them he was a skilled player capable of betting large amounts. But he was not considered good enough to discourage or avoid.
In fact, in late 2010, he says, they called him.
Johnson had not played a game at the Borgata in more than a year. He had been trying to figure out its blackjack game for years but had never been able to win big. At one point, he accepted a “lifetime discount,” but when he had a winning trip he effectively lost the benefit of the discount. The way any discount works, you have to lose a certain amount to capitalize on it. If you had a lifetime discount of, say, 20 percent on $500,000, you would have to lose whatever money you’d made on previous trips plus another $500,000 before the discount kicked in. When this happened to Johnson, he knew the ground rules had skewed against him. So it was no longer worth his while to play there.
He explained this when the Borgata tried to entice him back.
“Well, what if we change that?” he recalls a casino executive saying. “What if we put you on a trip-to-trip discount basis?”
Johnson started negotiating.
Once the Borgata closed the deal, he says, Caesars and the Trop, competing for Johnson’s business, offered similar terms. That’s what enabled him to systematically beat them, one by one.
In theory, this shouldn’t happen. The casinos use computer models that calculate the odds down to the last penny so they can craft terms to entice high rollers without forfeiting the house advantage. “We have a very elaborate model,” Rodio says. “Once a customer comes in, regardless of the game they may play, we plug them into the model so that we know what the house advantage is, based upon the game that they are playing and the way they play the game. And then from that, we can make a determination of what is the appropriate [discount] we can make for the person, based on their skill level. I can’t speak for how other properties do it, but that is how we do it.”
So how did all these casinos end up giving Johnson what he himself describes as a “huge edge”? “I just think somebody missed the math when they did the numbers on it,” he told an interviewer.
Johnson did not miss the math. For example, at the Trop, he was willing to play with a 20 percent discount after his losses hit $500,000, but only if the casino structured the rules of the game to shave away some of the house advantage. Johnson could calculate exactly how much of an advantage he would gain with each small adjustment in the rules of play. He won’t say what all the adjustments were in the final e-mailed agreement with the Trop, but they included playing with a hand-shuffled six-deck shoe; the right to split and double down on up to four hands at once; and a “soft 17” (the player can draw another card on a hand totaling six plus an ace, counting the ace as either a one or an 11, while the dealer must stand, counting the ace as an 11). When Johnson and the Trop finally agreed, he had whittled the house edge down to one-fourth of 1 percent, by his figuring. In effect, he was playing a 50-50 game against the house, and with the discount, he was risking only 80 cents of every dollar he played. He had to pony up $1 million of his own money to start, but, as he would say later: “You’d never lose the million. If you got to [$500,000 in losses], you would stop and take your 20 percent discount. You’d owe them only $400,000.”
In a 50-50 game, you’re taking basically the same risk as the house, but if you get lucky and start out winning, you have little incentive to stop.
So when Johnson got far enough ahead in his winning sprees, he reasoned that he might as well keep playing. “I was already ahead of the property,” he says. “So my philosophy at that point was that I can afford to take an additional risk here, because I’m battling with their money, using their discount against them.”
According to Johnson, the Trop pulled the deal after he won a total of $5.8 million, the Borgata cut him off at $5 million, and the dealer at Caesars refused to fill the chip tray once his earnings topped $4 million.
“I was ready to play on,” Johnson said. “And I looked around, and I said, ‘Are you going to do a fill?’ I’ve got every chip in the tray. I think I even had the $100 chips. ‘Are you guys going to do a fill?’ And they just said, ‘No, we’re out.’”
He says he learned later that someone at the casino had called the manager, who was in London, and told him that Don Johnson was ahead of them “by four.”
“Four hundred thousand?” the manager asked.
“No, 4 million.”
So Caesars, too, pulled the plug. When Johnson insisted that he wanted to keep playing, he says, the pit boss pointed out of the high-roller pit to the general betting floor, where the game was governed by normal house rules.
“You can go out there and play,” he said.
Johnson went upstairs and fell asleep.
These winning streaks have made Johnson one of the best-known gamblers in the world. He was shocked when his story made the front page of The Press of Atlantic City. Donald Wittkowski, a reporter at the newspaper, landed the story when the casinos filed their monthly revenue reports.
“I guess for the first time in 30 years, a group of casinos actually had a huge setback on account of one player,” Johnson told me. “Somebody connected all the dots and said it must be one guy.”
The Trop has embraced Johnson, inviting him back to host a tournament—but its management isn’t about to offer him the same terms again. (Even so—playing by the same rules he had negotiated earlier, according to Johnson, but without a discount—he managed to win another $2 million from the Tropicana in October.)
“Most properties in Atlantic City at this point won’t even deal to him,” Rodio says. “The Tropicana will continue to deal to him, we will continue to give aggressive limits, take care of his rooms and his accounts when he is here. But because he is so far in front of us, we have modified his discounts.”
Johnson says his life hasn’t really changed all that much. He hasn’t bought himself anything big, and still lives in the same house in Bensalem. But in the past year, he has hung out with Jon Bon Jovi and Charlie Sheen, sprayed the world’s most expensive bottle of champagne on a crowd of clubgoers in London, and hosted a Las Vegas birthday bash for Pamela Anderson. He is enjoying his fame in gambling circles, and has gotten used to flying around the world on comped jets. Everybody wants to play against the most famous blackjack player in the world.
But from now on, the casinos will make sure the odds remain comfortably stacked against him.
Tuesday, March 06, 2012
Blackjack Card-Counting Christians...Please!!
I didn't go to church to find this but did pray that it isn't so!
Bryan Storkel’s Holy Rollers: The True Story of Card Counting Christians focuses on the Church Team, an organized crew of predominantly Christian blackjack card counters. Ben Crawford and Colin Jones’s crew are bankrolled by independent investors, and they head out into the casinos to turn a profit through their card counting skills.
As the documentary unfolds, we get a good luck at the ups-and-downs of card counting, as the crew faces streaks of both good and bad endeavors. At the same time, casinos aware of these “advantage” players are ever-vigilant, “backing off” players from the blackjack table, and sometimes the casinos; if the casino refuses to allow them to play, their card counting skills become far less effective. And considering the card counting technique can require hours spent at a table losing before the deck turns and the player can start winning, a proper “back off” can out-cheat the cheaters.
Additionally, just because the crew is known as the Church Team, and many share the same Christian beliefs, the same problems that occur in any group, and any group involved with the pursuit of cash, rears their ugly heads. Are all the players doing the work correctly? Is anyone stealing from the group? Do personalities gel?
If you’re looking for a documentary about a bunch of devout Christians who entirely justify their card counting behavior via their religion, you’re going to be disappointed. While the Christian aspect is an important one (it is in the title after all), this is more about a group of card counters who just so happen to be Christian too. Substitute the “Christians” in the title with “golfers” or “spelunkers” (or other types of people) and you’ll get an idea of what I mean; it’s a common trait of this particular crew, but it is not the defining characteristic of this film. This isn’t a case of a bunch of Christians seeking card counters, but card counters who realized that they share the same faith, so why not group together?
And you’re probably not going to watch this and suddenly understand card counting and go out and make thousands upon thousands of dollars. While it makes the technique somewhat more understandable (and takes it out of the realm of otherworldly and superhuman to something you can learn if you dedicate time and money to it), you’re going to need to do much more outside research and practice. Plus, after seeing how much goes into it, is it really worth it at all?
Between the casinos backing off players to the sheer amount of time and money flow required to make a huge payoff, it’s like cheating… as a job. I mean, as far as get rich quick schemes go, card counting is more like a longtime study group that may or may not pay off huge dividends. Given enough time, and the right moves, sure, you run a probable chance of coming out on top… but everything has to be done just right. Meanwhile, if it even looks like you might have an advantage, all it takes is a casino employee with a hunch that you may be a card counter to disrupt your dreams.
Holy Rollers looks slick for a documentary, and despite utilizing the talking heads-style approach, it does so with an eye for interesting composition; Ben’s interview segments are set up primarily with him sitting at a table covered with children’s toys while he smokes a cigar, for example. The editing flows well, and the film remains entertaining throughout, even when the crew hits its rough patches.
While there are definitely informative aspects to this film, Holy Rollers is mainly the journey of the Church Team, warts and all. It’s an entertaining film that presents everything as upfront and objective as one can, and while some of the more dramatic aspects of the story beg for a bit more information or investigation, you can understand if those involved didn’t want to directly address certain things. So an ambiguity remains, but that works with the film because the entire affair is questionable; is cheating, regardless of the justification, or where the money eventually ends up, the most Christian of activities? You could argue in circles if you wanted to, and the best part of this documentary is its ability to keep things that open, without turning into propaganda for the Church Team.
My take: Jesus Christ! The count was "plus heaven!"
Bryan Storkel’s Holy Rollers: The True Story of Card Counting Christians focuses on the Church Team, an organized crew of predominantly Christian blackjack card counters. Ben Crawford and Colin Jones’s crew are bankrolled by independent investors, and they head out into the casinos to turn a profit through their card counting skills.
As the documentary unfolds, we get a good luck at the ups-and-downs of card counting, as the crew faces streaks of both good and bad endeavors. At the same time, casinos aware of these “advantage” players are ever-vigilant, “backing off” players from the blackjack table, and sometimes the casinos; if the casino refuses to allow them to play, their card counting skills become far less effective. And considering the card counting technique can require hours spent at a table losing before the deck turns and the player can start winning, a proper “back off” can out-cheat the cheaters.
Additionally, just because the crew is known as the Church Team, and many share the same Christian beliefs, the same problems that occur in any group, and any group involved with the pursuit of cash, rears their ugly heads. Are all the players doing the work correctly? Is anyone stealing from the group? Do personalities gel?
If you’re looking for a documentary about a bunch of devout Christians who entirely justify their card counting behavior via their religion, you’re going to be disappointed. While the Christian aspect is an important one (it is in the title after all), this is more about a group of card counters who just so happen to be Christian too. Substitute the “Christians” in the title with “golfers” or “spelunkers” (or other types of people) and you’ll get an idea of what I mean; it’s a common trait of this particular crew, but it is not the defining characteristic of this film. This isn’t a case of a bunch of Christians seeking card counters, but card counters who realized that they share the same faith, so why not group together?
And you’re probably not going to watch this and suddenly understand card counting and go out and make thousands upon thousands of dollars. While it makes the technique somewhat more understandable (and takes it out of the realm of otherworldly and superhuman to something you can learn if you dedicate time and money to it), you’re going to need to do much more outside research and practice. Plus, after seeing how much goes into it, is it really worth it at all?
Between the casinos backing off players to the sheer amount of time and money flow required to make a huge payoff, it’s like cheating… as a job. I mean, as far as get rich quick schemes go, card counting is more like a longtime study group that may or may not pay off huge dividends. Given enough time, and the right moves, sure, you run a probable chance of coming out on top… but everything has to be done just right. Meanwhile, if it even looks like you might have an advantage, all it takes is a casino employee with a hunch that you may be a card counter to disrupt your dreams.
Holy Rollers looks slick for a documentary, and despite utilizing the talking heads-style approach, it does so with an eye for interesting composition; Ben’s interview segments are set up primarily with him sitting at a table covered with children’s toys while he smokes a cigar, for example. The editing flows well, and the film remains entertaining throughout, even when the crew hits its rough patches.
While there are definitely informative aspects to this film, Holy Rollers is mainly the journey of the Church Team, warts and all. It’s an entertaining film that presents everything as upfront and objective as one can, and while some of the more dramatic aspects of the story beg for a bit more information or investigation, you can understand if those involved didn’t want to directly address certain things. So an ambiguity remains, but that works with the film because the entire affair is questionable; is cheating, regardless of the justification, or where the money eventually ends up, the most Christian of activities? You could argue in circles if you wanted to, and the best part of this documentary is its ability to keep things that open, without turning into propaganda for the Church Team.
My take: Jesus Christ! The count was "plus heaven!"
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Cheating Casino Keno Via Paint on the Keno Balls??
Well, the last time I heard anything about major keno cheat scams was the one engineered in Atlantic City by disgraced and ex-con former Nevada Gaming Control Board employee Ron Harris, who rigged the Random Number Generators to produce keno jackpots for his accomplices. Now we are hearing about a keno scam that might be using extra or lesser paint on some of the keno balls to make them more or less likely to get sucked up through the vacuum tube into the winner's tray.Article:
"It is not often discussed these days in an era of RNGs (random number generators) and automated ball selection devices, but back in the day there used to be theories advanced that the way keno balls were painted might have some effect on the outcome of the selection, either unintentional or intentional (cheating.)
The idea of unintentional effect comes from the fact there is, of course, a different amount of paint on each ball, at least it appears that the number "1" for instance might have maybe 1/3 the amount of paint as the number "80." Since paint is not weightless, what’s colored on ball number 80 will necessarily weigh three times as much as the ball marked 1.
Assuming, of course, the depth of the paint layer is constant, etc.
Now, a heavier ball tends to get selected more, at least that is the theory. The theory (I call it a theory because it is plausible but never to my knowledge proven) is that heavy balls sink to the bottom in a mechanical cage and the ball selector is at the bottom of the mechanical cage.
Similarly, in a blower the theory is the heavy ball sinks to the bottom, where the jet of air blasts it straight up the tube.
So if you subscribe to this theory (I don’t) you would play numbers with a lot of paint on them and avoid those digits with less color. This theory was obviously difficult to test back in the day, but now anyone with access to enough actual game draws can do a statistical analysis of the occurrence of 1-9 vs. 10-80.
If the statistical analysis of real life occurrences indicates the weight of the paint makes any difference, you will find it there.
The real scientific question is, "Is the effect of differences in paint weight significant?" I say probably not. I think the differences in weight from ball to ball are probably just as great from imperfections in material and production process as they are from paint.
This is just my opinion though. It would be interesting if someone with a very sensitive scale could weigh a set of balls and we could actually see some results.
So the unintentional effect of paint is ruled out but there is also concern with the use of paint to tamper intentionally with the game’s results. In other words, the use of paint as a cheating device."
Saturday, February 18, 2012
Drew McIlvain and Seth Palansky Speak on Major Poker Cheat Chip-Dumping Incidents at Harrah's Tunica World Series of Poker Event!
![]() |
| Chip-Dump Poker Cheats? |
During the last level of play on Day 1a of the World Series of Poker Circuit Main Event at Harrah's Tunica, the PokerNews Live Reporting Team was told that Drew McIlvain was disqualified for collusion. In the days following the event, a thread was started on TwoPlusTwo, and Mcilvain himself posted an explanation.
We reached out to McIlvain to get the full story, and we also spoke with Seth Palansky, the Vice President of Corporate Communications at Caesars Entertainment, to learn more about the hand in question, and the appeals process.
Can you first explain what happened?
Drew McIlvain: I’m sitting at Table 26, Seat 9, and I’m doing decent. I’m picking good spots, and my opponents are basically just giving me their chips. I’m literally running them over. A friend of mine comes to the table, and he re-raises the guy to my right — we’ll call him Terry — and Terry re-raises my friend Andrew. Andrew raises all-in, Terry calls. Terry has pocket kings, Andrew has pocket aces, there’s a king on the flop and Andrew is eliminated. Terry is excited.
In another hand, I have pocket nines and make it 2,200. There’s a guy in Seat 4 who calls and the flop comes king-king-seven. I check, he bets 2,200, and I call. The turn is a nine — it brings a third club — I check, gets bet 7,000, and I call. The river is the , I lead for 7,000, he quickly goes all-in, and I call. He has pocket aces, and I win.
Then, Terry tells me that I played the hand very well and he was very surprised that that’s what I had, and I think that I heard him say that I was a good player — or maybe that it was a good play. One of the two.
There’s a hand that — I wasn’t watching much of it — but Terry has on a queen-high board, and I think there’s a nine on the flop. The turn is nothing, and a bigger fellow goes all-in on Terry. Terry calls. The guy had and the river was a jack to give him a straight. So Terry is down to right around 15,000, and within the next five hands — while I’m standing and stretching — Terry comes up to me and taps me on the shoulder. I turned, and verbatim his words are, “Next time I’m in the small blind, and you’re in the big blind, I’m going to go all-in, and you call.”
So this wasn’t during a break?
DM: No, there we’re probably 25 minutes left in the day. So he says what he said, and I say like “OK, whatever.” And I’m thinking to myself, 'what the f**k?' A) Why would he want to get rid of his chips? B) Why is he choosing me? and C) Is he telling the truth? Is he bluffing?
I’d like to definitely make it clear that had I known that if someone had told me that they would be giving me their chips, that I needed to go to the floor and make it clear that that was the case, I would’ve done that. Nevertheless, I didn’t know, and I didn’t do that. But how do you believe him? How do you assume that a short stack is going to donate you their chips?
So then we talk again, and he’s like, “How should I do it?” And I’m like, “Man, I don’t know.” And he mentioned something about raise, re-raise, and as soon as he said that I walked back to the table and he was still talking. That’s where I would assume a few people could have heard him say something, because I’m walking back to the table and he’s still talking.
At that point, why didn’t you go to the floor?
DM: I guess because I just didn’t know that he was serious. I still believe, in my eyes, that he just wants a cheap double-up. I’m still confused about why I’m the one he wants to give his stack to. Honestly, I just didn’t know that that would’ve been the proper ruling. I just didn’t know that I needed to make the floor aware that this guy was now convinced that he was going to give me his chips.
So the guy’s game plan was to give them to me when I was in the big blind and he was in the small blind. Well, that never was an option because under the gun I have pocket eights, I make it 3,000, it folds all the way to him, he makes it 6,000, I go all-in, and he calls with . The flop is . The turn is a — giving him a straight draw — and he bricks. He busts out, shakes my hand, tells me good luck, and he quickly — I mean I’m getting the chips and someone at the table comments about how fast he’s leaving — and I turn to look and I see his wife either has him by the arm and is pulling him, or he’s trying to catch up with her. One of the two, but he was in a hurry to get out of there.
What happened then? Did the floor come up to you? Did someone at the table call the floor?
DM: Bill Bruce immediately taps me on the shoulder and says, “Why don’t you come with me for a second.” So know I’m thinking, “Great, did he really set me up? What the f**k just happened?”
He says, “That hand looked awfully suspicious” — he may have mentioned colluding — then he asks, “What just happened there?” I explained to him the hand, and he asked if we talked before the hand. I said we did. I explained to Bill how everything happened, and he started to walk away. I asked him what’s going on, and he told me I was on a penalty. I asked him for how long, and he said potentially for the rest of the tournament.
At this point, I’m thinking, “Great. I just told Bill the truth, and now somehow I’m going to get f**ked.”
The security guard, or someone from Mississippi Gaming, comes in and they tell me to follow them. I assume that we’re going to look at the footage and listen to the audio of me and Terry’s conversation, that [in] no way, shape, or form, says that I’m helping him synchronize this or like I’m paying him under the table. I'm hoping — I’m praying actually — that they’ve got the audio, and if someone can convince [me] that I cheated with this guy, then I’m a terrible person.
When I get back there the first thing the guard does is make a phone call and say, “Andrew McIlvain is disqualified from the main event.”
I don’t know if someone told him that I was disqualified, or if he made the judgment, but I knew nothing about what happened.
Were you escorted off of the property at that point?
DM: Well, when the guard left the room, I told him this was a misunderstanding, and that I did not cheat and I did not collude. He leaves for like 30 minutes, and I literally have my head buried in my hands praying to Christ — I don’t go to church, I pray more than the people who did. I just didn’t understand. I was so confused. I was in shock.
As soon as the guard returned, he asked me about the conversation I had with Terry. And again I explained to him Terry’s game plan, and that he was going to donate his chips to me because I’m assuming he was so impressed by my nines play and — I didn’t mention this to you — but in the first conversation he told me it doesn’t make sense for me [Terry] to get another room for another night to come back so short-stacked.
Never did I say no, but never did I fully agree that this was going on or I couldn’t wait to get his chips.
The security guard told me I had been caught cheating, and he had paperwork for me to sign. He read a little bit of it, then I started reading the rest, and he asked me why wasn’t signing it. I told him I was reading it — truthfully I don’t even remember what the paperwork said — and I signed it, and they 86’d me from the property.
Can you return to the property?
DM: I cannot. I’ve been calling Harrah’s, and I’ve been emailing Harrah’s. I’m just trying to figure out what kind of evidence they have that I didn’t know about. I’ve also contacted Mississippi Gaming just to get a little information about whether or not I’m completely banned from the entire state of Mississippi or what. Most importantly, I’d like to hear the audio of me agreeing with this guy that we’re going to be chip dumping.
I’ve heard reports that my table was interviewed, and at first I wondered how my table could turn on me? How could they say they heard something if they didn’t? Why would they want me gone? And then I thought to myself, “I’m running them over. Why would they want me to stay?”
Not all poker players are good people. Probably a lot of the people that play poker are terrible people, so they would quickly want me gone as fast as possible. I’m not saying that I’m a great person, but if there were somebody at the table, and there was a potential collusion going on, I would be like, “Get him the f**k out of here, I’m not playing with him.”
Would you say that the way you play could be seen as confrontational?
DM: Absolutely. It has a lot to do with my personality — I’m very outgoing. Truthfully, there’s been times where I’ve said things that I know I shouldn’t have said. I have a few African-American friends, and from time-to-time and I’ll say like, “Hey n***a.” I know I shouldn’t say that around some people, but I guess it’s just natural for me to say things. But yes, I definitely like to be in the conversation, and I like to be heard. Maybe that’s why I won a ring. I had quite a few chips going into the mishap, if you will.
You played in a number of events in Tunica. Did you receive any penalties before this incident?
DM: Yes, there was one. I can kind of give you rough around the edges. I went up to a table where a friend was sitting behind a few girls, and ultimately I was asking him if any of the dealers had dealt him a really crappy hand and he lost a lot of chips. But, what I really said was, “has anyone blanked your sister.”
So Kevin [a floorman] comes up to me and tells me that he heard this, and I told him that was 45 minutes ago. I ended up blinding out of the satellite I was in. I should’ve got a penalty then, as opposed to 45 minutes later.
Are you in the middle of an appeals process right now?
DM: To tell you the truth, I don’t know. No one will respond. Yes, there will be an appeal. It’s literally a nightmare that I walked into. I don’t know if it was God’s way of punishing me or what is was, but I got absolutely n*****ed.
Is there anything you would like to add?
DM: The real questions that I have are: If there was such a big possibility that this was going to happen before it did, why didn’t somebody stop Terry? Why am I the only one that’s being investigated? Maybe Terry has been talked to, and maybe Terry has leaked some false information, but I don’t know.
I’m truly disappointed in the way things went down. This is not what I expected coming into trying to make this a career. It’s the sickest beat I’ve ever taken. If you think getting aces beat by kings is bad, try getting disqualified from the main event for colluding with someone that you don’t even know.
PokerNews also sat down with Vice President of Corporate Communications at Caesars Entertainment, Seth Palansky to discuss due process in instances like this and the appeals process.
The PokerNews Live Reporting Team in Tunica wasn’t provided very many details regarding the hand in question. Can you tell us anything more than, “he was disqualified?”
Seth Palansky: After a review by the security team, he was escorted from the property. There were only 20 minutes left in the day at the time the incident occurred, and therefore the tournament staff was still gathering information when security looked into it.
The evidence included both video and audio. He bagged his chips for the night, but obviously didn’t come back to use them. Technically was he disqualified? He was banned from the property, and therefore couldn’t come back to play his chips. Ultimately, all of the evidence showed that in no way would he have continued in the event anyway.
What happens with the unknown player who “dumped” his chips?
SP: Last I heard, they have his information and they are reaching out to him. He faces discipline, as well.
What happens in these situations beyond the hand in question? Is there any further investigation?
SP: In most cases, there’s surveillance and the corroborating evidence is overwhelming. If we’re going to go through the process, not allow a player to continue playing, and escort them from the property, it’s because it’s very cut and dry that an offense was committed.
My understanding is that Tunica has banned him from the property, and at that point there’s a denotation in his records and it is investigated and discussed further to see whether or not that ban extends company-wide. It’s still in that process now.
Is there any kind of appeals process?
SP: Sure. Anyone is welcome to plead their case, and this gentleman in question did admit some things during his interview process that affected the result in this case. Ultimately, in cases that involved alleged cheating or collusion in our poker events, you can say all you want, but the video doesn’t lie.
We care more about the integrity of the tournament and ensuring that our players don’t have to worry about that entering an event. At the end of the day, it’s hard for an individual to get re-instated when they’ve committed an act that is in violation of our rules, but we do accept a review and go through the process to see if it makes sense to lift the ban.
According to Drew, the “dumper” came to him and told him what was going to happen. What would have been done if Drew then relayed that information to the floor?
SP: It’s hard to hypothetically determine that, but obviously it’s against the rules to collude, so his proper course of action is to notify the tournament staff that someone has attempted to collude with him.
The definition of collude in the dictionary that I have in my hands, is two words: conspire together. He admits to having more than one conversation with the gentleman about it. Clearly by conversation number two, he had the ability to tell the guy, “I’m not interested, let’s play poker.”
At the end of the day, an act took place that was collusion, and any party involved in colluding is not tolerated in our events.
Is there anything else you would like to add?
SP: In general, for readers to understand, this happens from time to time. No one is suggesting that anyone entered the tournament with a scheme to chip-dump, collude, or cheat. You don’t have to be the instigator to find yourself in a situation that affects your standing in an event or at our properties. It’s not about intent.
I want to caution people: surveillance is so good these days, and these cameras are so well-equipped. There’s audio, and everything is being recorded and can be reviewed. It’s not the old days where everything is on VHS. It’s all digitally recorded, easy to file, and easy to find. It’s just not wise to put yourself in a situation where you gain chips dishonorably.
We have to ensure that this doesn’t occur — whether it’s intentional or not is not the bar.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)







