Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Man Who Broke Atlantic City

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 93 posts

Re: The Man Who Broke Atlantic City

#71

Post by bmelton »

corin_ wrote: post #59
po wrote: post #2

This stuck out to me: 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. Card counting…

It's not illegal, but how do you define cheating - is it by laws, or by rules set by the game runner? For example, in football (soccer) it's cheating to punch the ball into the goal... but the associations that decide on the rules could make this perfectly fair play next year, just by deciding that they no longer define it as cheating.

There are rules set by the gaming commissions in each state that the casinos are fairly well bound to upholding. In Vegas, the legislation is more in favor of the casinos than in New Jersey, but both are pretty broadly pro-casino.

In Vegas, it's worth noting that a casino can eject any player for any reason, whether they are 'cheating' or not. If they are deemed to be actually cheating, they have the potential to sue for recompense, as well as blackball the gambler from that (and other) casinos. Nevada also has state laws that define what cheating is[1] and what recourse the casinos have.

Card counting is considered 'illegal' by the casinos, but most legislation only applies to physical tampering, such as marking cards or using illicit devices. That won't stop the casinos from ejecting or blackballing you for counting.

In Atlantic City though, they can't eject you for card counting, but they are allowed to change the table stakes on you. If you're at a $10,000 a hand table, and wiping out the casino in a way they don't like, they're perfectly allowed to change the table stakes to 25 cents at any table you sit down at.

It's crappy, but you're still welcome to enjoy the gambling experience, just without the potential to win anything significant.

[1] - http://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-465.html#NRS465Sec083

Re: The Man Who Broke Atlantic City

#72

Post by nikcub »

corin_ wrote: post #64

The line that annoyed me most in this was about card counting, saying > "The tactic requires both great memory and superior math skills." Not honestly true, at least about the maths skills. Memory... isn't how I'd describe it, though I suppose it's sort of right. In my opinion, the most difficult thing is concentrating on multiple things at the same time (1. Keeping the running count 2. Counting how many cards have b…

exactly. the best blackjack dealers (for the house) are those that can keep you distracted.

Re: The Man Who Broke Atlantic City

#73

Post by corin_ »

nikcub wrote: post #72
corin_ wrote: post #64

The line that annoyed me most in this was about card counting, saying > "The tactic requires both great memory and superior math skills." Not honestly true, at least about the maths skills. Memory... isn't how I'd describe it, though I suppose it's sort of right. In my opinion, the most difficult thing is concentrating on multiple things at the same time (1. Keeping the running count 2. Counting how many cards have b…

exactly. the best blackjack dealers (for the house) are those that can keep you distracted.

As far as I'm concerned they're the best dealers for players too - I don't try and count cards in the casino, and find that both winning and losing sessions are much more enjoyable with a friendly dealer.

Re: The Man Who Broke Atlantic City

#74

Post by TylerE »

zone411 wrote: post #51
TylerE wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The std. deviation of blackjack is quite low. 14,000 hands would be a fairly large sample for blackjack, for live hands. Now if we were talking about something like video poker, then yea, 14k hands would be nothing.

No, you are hugely underestimating variance in blackjack and the amount of hands needed to approach statistical significance. If you do the math, you should see that after 14,000 hands with 0.25% house edge, the chance of a gain is around 40%.

Given a chance of being up of 40%, the chance of being up (and this is ignoring the magnitude of the win) over 3 separate trials is 6.4%.

Re: The Man Who Broke Atlantic City

#75

Post by cityhall »

dustingetz wrote: post #40

hey guys, i actually think he might have positive expectation: he negotiated a .25% houe edge (roughly half of normal perfect play) and if he loses 500k he gets 20% back, each session independent. check this analysis. he is +EV by martingaling his wins - 7/8 times he loses 400k with a 20% discount (400k x 7 x .80 = 2 240 000), 1/8 times he wins 400k x 8 with no reverse-discount = 3 200 000, so that's a mil in EV. if…

It depends on how he expects to be taxed. If this is his only session during the year, he actually wins 60-70% of the money vs losing 80%. So he needs to either be way ahead or way behind from other gambling activity for this to work out the way you described (assuming he's a US citizen).

Re: The Man Who Broke Atlantic City

#76

Post by ap22213 »

It seems that every once in a while an enticing story comes out about a person (or team) who beats the house and wins big.

I spent a short time in the 'gaming' industry building electronic slots and other types of games. The word on the street was that the industry encouraged these types of stories. And, while maybe they didn't directly sponsor them, they looked favorably on them. These types of stories perpetuate ideas of the little guy beating the house.

The profit of the gaming industry comes from the average person thinking that they can beat the house, when, the fact they can't. When the average person begins to believe that they can't win, casino profits go down. As such, casinos put billions of dollars into R&D and marketing to give the average person the illusion that they can win.

I wasn't involved long enough in the gaming industry to be an expert, and I'm sure there are some exceptions. But, generally, to average people, of which I would classify 99.9% of the population, even those of us terribly smart people, the house advantage always wins.

Re: The Man Who Broke Atlantic City

#77

Post by maeon3 »

Calling card counters cheaters is like calling people who get good grades on tests cheaters because they discovered the solution to the problem during the test with their mind by eliminating the wrong answers using statistics and probabilities.

Card counting is a code phrase that translates to "if you don't let the house win, we won't let you play".

Re: The Man Who Broke Atlantic City

#78

Post by jurre »

dantheman wrote: post #5
po wrote: post #2

This stuck out to me: 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. Card counting…

I thought card counting was legal, and according to wikipedia it is( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Card_counting ) As of January 2012, there are no federal, state or local laws which prohibit card counting in the United States as long as no external card counting device or person assists the player in counting cards. BUT: In all parts of the United States, with Atlantic City being the sole exception, casinos may ban a…

Yes I think you're right, it is legal but it can hardly be used anymore because most casino's use an automatic shuffling machine where they refill the cards after every deal and that continually shuffles.

Re: The Man Who Broke Atlantic City

#79

Post by glenra »

corin_ wrote: post #64

The line that annoyed me most in this was about card counting, saying > "The tactic requires both great memory and superior math skills." Not honestly true, at least about the maths skills. Memory... isn't how I'd describe it, though I suppose it's sort of right. In my opinion, the most difficult thing is concentrating on multiple things at the same time (1. Keeping the running count 2. Counting how many cards have b…

There's also remembering your strategy index tables. True, that's not a lot of numbers - some might use as few as 18 indices - but still: You're keeping in mind at the same time (a) the count, (b) a set of basic strategy rules appropriate for your specific game (c) a table of strategy variance index numbers appropriate for your specific game, (d) a deck depth estimate. And probably a few other relevant numbers.

(here's an example of the "Illustrious 18" set of strategy index numbers for one counting system: http://bjmath.com/bjmath/tcindex/i18index.htm )

Re: The Man Who Broke Atlantic City

#80

Post by dustingetz »

cityhall wrote: post #75
dustingetz wrote: post #40

hey guys, i actually think he might have positive expectation: he negotiated a .25% houe edge (roughly half of normal perfect play) and if he loses 500k he gets 20% back, each session independent. check this analysis. he is +EV by martingaling his wins - 7/8 times he loses 400k with a 20% discount (400k x 7 x .80 = 2 240 000), 1/8 times he wins 400k x 8 with no reverse-discount = 3 200 000, so that's a mil in EV. if…

It depends on how he expects to be taxed. If this is his only session during the year, he actually wins 60-70% of the money vs losing 80%. So he needs to either be way ahead or way behind from other gambling activity for this to work out the way you described (assuming he's a US citizen).

that's interesting, but i'm not sure i follow or agree - i can't put numbers on it, but intuitively his variance feels a bit like, but less than, poker's variance. Poker graphs look like a sawtooth of small losses and big wins. This means he would have to get spectacularly unlucky to be down after 50 sessions, given his positive pre-tax expectation[1].

so it depends how he structures his taxes. if he can get his taxes calculated yearly instead of per session, taxes make him a bit less of a winner. if his taxes are calculated per session, he is -EV. this is the same problem that poker players face, IIRC the precedent there is that if you file as a small business you can sum your wins and deduct your losses annually.

(/me used to be a small-time poker player)

[1] expectation in blackjack is computable because perfect play is deterministic, expectation in poker is harder because it depends on human factors like your mood and your opponent's skill level and his mood. you can only measure past expectation. A lot of players think they are winners but are really breakeven or losers, but blame it on bad luck.

Post reply on HN