You're assuming there's some basic aspect of "fairness" between the casino and the player. The innate unfairness of the statistical odds is obvious of course, but most people assume if someone
could somehow magically overcome the odds to win consistently without breaking any rules they'd be allowed to do so. While that's a reasonable assumption, and one casinos encourage, it's not the reality. A friend of mine who worked at a high-level in casino management once told me, "There are many documented rules but they are all governed by one unwritten rule: the house must always win in the long-run."
The net effect is that if you start to win meaningful amounts on a consistent basis, 'fairly' or not, the casino will simply ban you from playing. Players misunderstand the relationship between players and the house. Casinos however are under no illusions. The role of players, in the aggregate and over time, is only to lose. If you don't fulfill your role they won't let you play. Beating the house in the long-run isn't possible because casinos have no interest in losing.
Hypothetically, if you were somehow able to consistently win meaningful amounts at casino gambling games through some kind of fictional magic or psychic ability which could not be countered, the only way you'd be able to monetize that ability would be to either: 1) Win such small amounts you remain unnoticed (probably less than a couple thousand dollars a week), or 2) Continually travel the world seeking out new casinos that haven't yet banned you. As the article shows, casinos work together and word spreads quickly so neither option is very appealing. If you had such magical powers it would be dumb to monetize playing gambling games against casinos. Much better to either play games against other players or to pursue large open markets like stocks and commodities. Even then you'd have to put up with constant investigations by the SEC suspecting insider trading. You'd also need to meticulously pay all taxes and comply with every regulation due to all the attention you'd attract. It would probably be a good idea to create your own 'explanation' by operating as a hedge fund, investing in creating a large research department and hire a bunch of quants to devise proprietary algorithms. Even then, it would be smart to never "win" too much more than the best legit hedge funds. If you're too much of an outlier for too long, some people will take increasingly extreme measures to determine your "secret."