Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Interesting case, on which I cannot pontificate, since I am not familiar with the law in question. But I think a casino should have some culpability, since the house determines which cards they use, and they should have taken due diligence to ensure the cards were uniform.
If the players were cheating, why should the law be on their side? Having an accomplice employed by the house is a common method of cheating, and of all kinds of white collar crimes.
If the players were cheating, why should the law be on their side? Having an accomplice employed by the house is a common method of cheating, and of all kinds of white collar crimes.
The problem is, we have no idea whether they were cheating. The article didn't tell us what the applicable laws were.
If the players were cheating, why should the law be on their side? Having an accomplice employed by the house is a common method of cheating, and of all kinds of white collar crimes.
The two players in questions did not commit any crime. They exploited a method to gain an advantage against the house. They were only able to do so by asking special request to the dealers that the house didn't catch until later on. During these incidences, the house played a role in allowing this to happen by allowing these special requests.
This is the 2nd casino that this technique was used on.
The bottom line is that that court ruled that they can't keep their winning because they changed the odds of the game of chances to their favor using a method to exploit the inconsistencies in the playing cards.
The two players in questions did not commit any crime. They exploited a method to gain an advantage against the house. They were only able to do so by asking special request to the dealers that the house didn't catch until later on. During these incidences, the house played a role in allowing this to happen by allowing these special requests.
This is the 2nd casino that this technique was used on.
The bottom line is that that court ruled that they can't keep their winning because they changed the odds of the game of chances to their favor using a method to exploit the inconsistencies in the playing cards.
The real question is whether the courts would rule that the casino would have to return money to the players if they lost...
If the players were cheating, why should the law be on their side? Having an accomplice employed by the house is a common method of cheating, and of all kinds of white collar crimes.
They weren't cheating. But they did have an unfair advantage (per state regulations) due to the cards. You are making the mistake in assuming that every violation of regulations is a criminal act, but that is hardly so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hbdwihdh378y9
The problem is, we have no idea whether they were cheating. The article didn't tell us what the applicable laws were.
By 'we' you mean those of you who couldn't be bothered to spend a few seconds googling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gene Starwind
The real question is whether the courts would rule that the casino would have to return money to the players if they lost...
No. Because that would make no sense at all. Why would the casino be under an obligation to return losses to those who failed to exploit a defect in the cards? In fact, presumably many patrons lost with those same card-types. Also, some patrons probably won, but are not known to have done so by the edging technique, and therefore have kept their winnings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dude111
Yea they should go OUT OF BUSINESS if they dont like paying out!
Educate yourself, for God's sake. State gambling regulations prevent the use of the edging technique that the players used to win.
The house, in fact, does not always win. But the regulations are tailored so that it will, on balance, win more than it loses. The fact that this seems to be news to some people is rather sad.
Post was edited and doesn't reflect orginal post, so deleted.
Moderator cut: .
Last edited by Gene Starwind; 12-26-2016 at 06:16 PM..
Reason: TOS - deleted personal attack
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
*
