Posted on Leave a comment

Blackjack Around the World

Interview with the Blackjack Traveler

by Richard W. Munchkin

(From Blackjack Forum Volume XXIII #2, Summer 2003)
© Blackjack Forum 2003

[Note from Arnold Snyder: Richard W. Munchkin is a member of the Blackjack Hall of Fame, and author of the book Gambling Wizards: Conversations with the World’s Greatest Gamblers .]

[Note from RWM: Who is Blackjack Traveler?

When I read the blackjack message boards I often see players bemoaning the state of blackjack. The casinos have gotten smarter, they have software to evaluate your play, and after only 25 years they have snapped to the “Big Player” approach.

The players who write these things have one thing in common—they’re Americans. It’s a big world out there, and there are about 100 other countries that have casinos. Blackjack Traveler would like to visit them all. You won’t find a copy of The Big Player in the casino gift shop in Rumania, or Blackjack Survey Voice in Cambodia. Blackjack is alive and well for this professional gambler, and living outside the United States.

Blackjack Traveler spends about 48 weeks a year on the road to get an edge. For this professional gambler, it’s an endless series of visas, plane rides, and customs stops.

Most of the time he finds games that are hardly worth playing. Still, the trip will provide material for the column he writes in a Taiwanese magazine. But every once in a while he will wander into a casino and find that they pay 2-1 on blackjack and have early surrender, and have a joker in the deck that gives you an automatic win, but if the dealer gets the joker they just burn it.

Games that will make any professional gambler salivate; these are games that will make you say, “That’s not possible. No casino would do that.” But they can, and do. BJ Traveler says, “It would be easy to visit 30 countries in a year, but when I find a good game I stay.”

All this travel is not without risk. In his pursuit of a higher edge, Blackjack Traveler has gone to countries I would consider quite dangerous: Russia, Columbia, Cambodia, Sri Lanka.

Is he not worried carrying 100 years salary for the average person in those countries? Even though he spent 76 days in a Southeast Asian prison, he laughs at me, “The higher the risk, the better the profit. In the end I think I am a risk lover.” I guess this answer comes easier to a professional gambler who has won more 1.5 million dollars playing basic strategy. – RWM]

Interview with Blackjack Traveler: A Professional Gambling Career Starts

RWM: Where did you grow up?

BJT: Taiwan.

RWM: How did you become a professional gambler?

BJT: When I was in my twenties I went to Las Vegas just for fun. I was afraid of gambling. I lost 25 cents in a slot machine. I like to read, so I went to a bookshop and found there was a section about gambling. I picked up one book, and took it to Taiwan.

RWM: Which book?

BJT: Beat the Dealer It was the second edition from 1966. I thought; this counting is very hard. There are no casinos in Taiwan. I went abroad to the Philippines, and America. I went to casinos and played very small. After several years I could play basic strategy.

My major in college was economics, and I have an MBA from the University of Chicago. After I graduated I went back to Taiwan. I worked at some banks and security companies. When I was 31 years old I became the president of a security brokerage company. This was a very early success.

Unfortunately, after one year the Taiwan stock market crashed, and I lost about two million dollars. My income had been good, but it was related to the market, so my income shrank. I had borrowed a lot of the money I lost. I owed $100,000 per month on the loans, and I couldn’t afford to make the payments. I needed a way to make money.

When I was working they opened many casinos in Korea on Cheju Island. Koreans can not play in the Korean casinos. Only foreigners can play there. They had to go to Japan and Taiwan for customers. They had a junket program for Taiwanese and Japanese, and someone invited me to play there. Since I knew basic strategy I thought, “Why not?” I didn’t think I could lose much.

At that time it was very difficult for them to get players from Taiwan, because the Taiwanese players were afraid they would be cheated. The casinos said that there was no cheating, I would be treated well, and if I would introduce customers to them they would give me a commission. The program was to go on Friday and come back on Monday. Everything was free—hotel, airfare, food—but they wanted you to play 12 hours. You had to bring $30,000 US dollars, and play $400 minimum. If you did they would give you $2,100 as a commission.

At that time they had ES10 [early surrender versus ten] and all the other good rules. The disadvantage was about 0.1% off the top. If I played 12 hours, that is about 1,000 hands. If you go to the toilet, maybe less. If you play 1,000 hands you expect to lose $400, but they will give you $2,100.

At that time I was president of the company, and I didn’t want to get people to gamble. In Taiwan that would be bad, because most people lose. I went to play, and had small wins, and small losses. When I lost my job I thought, if I bring six people with me and we all sit at the same table, I can help everybody play basic strategy. The seven of us will lose $3,000, but I can get $14,000 in commission. I got some friends. I told them, “Come on a vacation with me in Korea. Everything will be free.”

RWM: But you have to put up $210,000?

BJT: Yes. I would put up the money. Everyone would play under my instructions, and I would take all the wins or losses. Seven of us went to Korea. At that time there were about 10 casinos, and all the casinos had similar programs.

The first week we went and played. Wow, I made money. The second week I went—I made money. My friend had a trading company. I asked him how many employees he had. He said, “Ten.” I said, “Tell them to bring their wives, and have a company vacation in Korea.” I got twenty people.

Now I had three tables of people. I made a basic strategy manual, and I gave them to everyone. I told them, “You are going to be playing for 12 hours. It’s no fun unless you learn basic strategy.” Very soon many people wanted to go. When we went on the plane, I was sure many people had not learned basic strategy. I gave a quiz on the plane. People who scored best became table leaders. We had three tables, and I would jump around. Now with 20 people I could make $30,000.

RWM: How long did this go on?

BJT: Three years. Maybe 30 weekends a year.

RWM: How much did you take out in those three years?

BJT: $1.5 million. That was from Korean and Philippine casinos. The Philippine casinos learned from the Korean casinos how to recruit players, so I started bringing my people to the Philippines. Then I took my people on cruise casinos out of Singapore. I used over 400 people during that time.

Bringing Card Counting to the Casinos in Asia

RWM: When did you finally learn to count cards?

BJT: After a year I bought The World Greatest Blackjack Book by Lance Humble, and I learned Hi Opt 1.

After three years the casino found out. Every week those casinos would have about 30 customers from Taiwan. Maybe 20 would play baccarat, and 10 would play blackjack. So the casinos didn’t know they were losing money to me because the baccarat players lost enough money to cover the blackjack players.

But I was barred after the first year in Pusan at Paradise Beach. The Paradise Group is the largest casino company in Korea. They own six or seven casinos, including Walker Hill in Seoul. The reason I was barred was not for card counting. I took a group, and all my people played blackjack. Most other people play baccarat. I was worried that if we kept making money the casino would suspect, so I hid chips.

I took eighteen $1,000 chips back to Taiwan. We changed casinos every week. After two months I went back to that casino. When I got there I found they had changed all the big chips. I took out one, and changed it. They came and said, “How many of these chips do you have?” I said, “Eighteen.” They said, “Why did you take these chips out of the casino?” I said, “Because there is a currency control leaving Korea. If I win money I can not take it to Taiwan. I know I am coming back anyway so I just kept the chips.”

They said that 34 of these chips were missing. That is why they changed the chips—to find out who had them. They allowed me to cash my chips, but they now watched me very closely. By that time I knew how to count cards. I was playing two hands of about $120, and the count went good. I jumped my bet to two hands of $1,200. The dealer busted three times in a row. Then the count dropped, and I went back to two hands of $120.

They barred me. I had never been barred before, that is why I had just jumped my bet. I did not use any camouflage. The interesting thing is that they did not inform any of the other casinos within the Paradise Group. I played another two years in Korea at the other casinos.

At the casino in Inchon it was very easy to win. I won $50,000 each trip for three trips. Then they barred me. This was such a good game, so I still wanted to play there. I found two friends, both girls. We went to the casino, and we pretended we didn’t know each other. I took off my glasses, and I bought a fake mustache. We sat together and I signaled them how much to bet, and how to play. In one hour they won $10,000.

We stopped and went out to eat at a restaurant outside the hotel. The casino manager was suspicious, and came to the restaurant and saw us together. He was Korean/Chinese. He said, “Why are you here? You are not allowed to play.”

I said, “When you barred me you said not to come without other players.” That was because I had come before with a player who lost $100,000 at baccarat. He said, “These girls are not players. They are figureheads. They play for you.” They were two Taiwanese girls betting thousands of dollars. It did look strange.

He told me to look for him after my meal. I went to see him. He asked what I was going to do. I said that I wasn’t doing anything illegal, and it is my right to play. I was afraid they would inform other casinos. I said to him, “I’ll only take half of my win.” The owner and the casino manager went to discuss it. He came back and said, “We will give you all your winnings, but you have to show your passport, and we will make a copy of it.”

They had given me a deposit receipt for my $10,000 capital and $10,000 winnings. My passport was at Walker Hill in Seoul. I went to Walker Hill to get the passport, and I realized that I had the right to collect on the receipt for six months. I thought, “Why hurry?” I played a lot during that six months, and then went back to collect. When I returned to Walker Hill after collecting the money I was stopped at the entrance. They had received a fax from the casino in Inchon. I didn’t know how many casinos would get that fax, but after I was stopped at Walker Hill I was still able to play in Cheju Island.

After my barrings in Korea I started playing the Singapore cruises. I played a cruise for 11 days and won $110,000. After the cruise, the cruise manager barred me. Then I went to the Philippines, and the same cruise manager was running the VIP room at a Philippine casino. He recognized me and barred me again. The Philippine casinos are run by a government company, and he informed them so I was on a blacklist in all the casinos there. I didn’t know they had sent out a memo to all the Philippine casinos.

I went back to Taiwan and started working. After several months of working at a securities house a new casino opened in the Philippines. I went there, and no one recognized me.

At the same time, the job at the securities company was not working out well. I wanted to leave that job, and just play in the Philippines. I went back to the Philippines, and one casino manager recognized me. He asked me to go to the office with him. He was very polite. He said, “Give me face.” He didn’t want me to argue with him in the casino.

There were five security cops in the office with us. He showed me the memo, which said that when I played, the casino was at a disadvantage. Therefore they had barred me, and they recommended that all casinos bar me. The Pavilion Casino had issued the memo, and I was at the Silahis casino.

I asked if I could have a copy of the memo. He said, “No, because it is possible you will use this to promote yourself in some publications.” I said, “How about if you write a certificate to me so I can show my friends.” He said, “Okay.” He wrote that I had been barred in this casino on this date. Then he used the casino chop, and signed it. There was a picture of me attached to the memo, but it is very dark because it was taken from the eye in the sky. After that the security people said, “Okay, the official business is finished. Now will you please teach us how to count cards?”

Traveling the World to Play Blackjack

RWM: At some point you decided to travel the world.

BJT: After the first three years I was barred in Korea and the Philippines. At that time I thought that Las Vegas must be difficult. Card counting had been seen there for too many years. I went back to work at a securities company. I thought the fun was over. At that time I bought many books from Las Vegas, and one of them was The International Casino Guide.

I thought in other countries I could still play and profit. I thought that maybe there are some other casinos that will not be as sophisticated as American casinos.

RWM: I would think that the most natural place for you to go would be Macao.

BJT: Yes, I went to Macao many times. But Macao did not have a good game, or a good rebate program.

I looked in the book to pick which countries I should try my luck. I wanted to find a city with more than ten casinos. I also wanted it to be a country with medium economic development. I found Egypt and Turkey. I decided I would try the casinos in Cairo and Istanbul. If I could win money there, then I would try France and Britain. If I could not make money in Egypt and Turkey, then I would forget France and England.

RWM: Why?

BJT: Because the more developed the country, the more experience the casino has.

RWM: Don’t you think it is important that the casino is earning a lot of money? If they are earning well they can afford to lose to you. Isn’t that why Korea was good?

BJT: At that time I thought if the country was well developed, the casino would have more experience and be able to recognize card counters. I went to Egypt and Turkey. It was okay, but it was not so easy. In Cairo the casinos were very small. There were not many players, so they watched very closely. In Turkey there were too many players.

RWM: Did you have any problems taking money in and out of those countries?

BJT: No. I did not win much there. So I went back to my book, and said, “How about Romania and Hungary?” I went to Bucharest, and Budapest. In Bucharest I said, “Oh, early surrender against ace.” That was good, but after one week I was barred in most casinos in Bucharest. Then I went to Budapest to play. A German company ran the casinos, so the game was not good.

Then I read a newspaper that said there were 200 casinos in Moscow. I went to Moscow, and I said, “Wow, great games.” That was 1996. It was very difficult to get a visa because I’m Taiwanese. I went back to Taiwan, prepared the paperwork, and went back to Russia in 1997. I lived there in Moscow for a year, and played every day.

RWM: Did you feel it was dangerous when you were there?

BJT: Gypsies robbed me several times. I lived at the Kosmos hotel. First I was pickpocketed by Gypsies, and they got about $1,000. Now they knew I had money. Every time I would walk out of the hotel they would follow me.

I recognized them one time, and as soon as I saw them I went into a metro station. It was winter, so I was wearing a big coat. I I was waiting for the train, and when the train came, and the door opened. I couldn’t move. Two people grabbed my left arm, two people grabbed my right arm. I struggled, and finally they released me. I went into the train, and I saw eight or nine gypsy girls. They were all about 15 years old, and every one of them was carrying a baby. They got into the next car, but just before the doors shut they all got out. Then I realized my wallet was gone.

RWM: Weren’t you carrying a lot more money than $1,000?

BJT: Yes, but it was hidden under my clothes.

RWM: Did you feel in danger in Moscow?

BJT: No. In 1997 the casinos were not so alert at that time. I felt a bit protected because the Russian Mafia owned the casinos. Maybe they protect their customers.

RWM: Unless they don’t like you as a customer anymore. Did you eventually get barred?

BJT: I was barred by 12 casinos in Moscow. When I made the money in Korea I repaid my debts, so I wasn’t betting as much.

RWM: Your goal is to play in 100 countries. How many have you countries have you played in?

BJT: 32 so far. The reason for not playing more already is that when I find a good place I stay. It is easy to go to 30 countries in one year if you want. When I left Moscow I planned to go back, but I wanted to spend some time in Taiwan with my son. At the same time my father had a friend whose company was going public. He asked me to help him finance the company, so I went back to work. Also, my father hates that I have become a professional gambler.

RWM: Still? You are quite successful.

BJT: Kind of… still. He feels that a well-educated person should be doing something that would benefit society. My father is very uncomfortable with this profession. When he first recognized that I was a professional gambler he did not talk to me for one year.

My father never went on a trip with me, but my mother went maybe 100 times. He did not approve of what I was doing. So I went back to Taiwan to work for two years. I worked for the largest Cable Company in Taiwan. After two years I really did not like the job. Because I had been living freely it was very difficult for me to adapt, though many people thought I adapted remarkably well.

After two years I decided to go back to the gambling life. I went to live in Las Vegas for three years. I found that I could play hit and run. I formed a small team. I had given a speech in Taiwan, and two of the guys who heard that speech came to Las Vegas and asked if they could play with me. I said okay, and arranged for them to stay at my apartment. Every day we would go out, and they would watch me play.

RWM: Were they spotters for you?

BJT: Not yet. After several months of them learning, they were counting well. Then I formed a small team. We got a girl to be our big player. We would sit at three different tables and signal her to jump in.

RWM: How much was she betting?

BJT: From $1,000 to $3,000.

RWM: The casinos didn’t find it odd that a woman was betting that much?

BJT: I’m not sure. We had no problems the first month. She was young, pretty, and Chinese. We won $66,000 the first month. I thought we should give Las Vegas a rest. Then we went to New Orleans, Biloxi, and Tunica. Our BP couldn’t come because she was a student. She had to go to classes.

In New Orleans we would jump into each other’s tables. One day, before playing I checked their money, and it was gone. They lost it all playing roulette. I said, “Why would you do this? You can count cards now.” They said, “Counting cards is no fun now.” They thought roulette was more exciting. Especially with other people’s money. That is the end of my team story.

We went back to Las Vegas, and I was trying to get my money back from these two guys. The problem was that they started as gamblers. Good card counters are not gamblers. If I didn’t know how to count cards, I would not be a gambler. I still used them as spotters, but I didn’t give them any money.

I went back to Taiwan for a vacation for a week. When I returned one of the guys told me that the other guy had broken into my room and stolen my money. It was $10,000. He was afraid what would happen when I found out, so he called his sister in Taiwan. He told her that he had a car accident, and the guy he hit threatened him with a gun. He told her he needed $10,000 to pay for that. She sent him the money, and he replaced what he took. I didn’t know this had happened until the other guy told me.

Blackjack in South America

RWM: Last year you toured South America. How was that?

BJT: I went to Columbia, Peru, Ecuador, and Venezuela. I have been to Columbia seven times. I first went there in 1996.

RWM: You didn’t feel Columbia was dangerous?

BJT: [laughing] Once I was interviewed by television. They asked me, “You go to so many dangerous countries. Don’t you have fear?” I said, “I was bankrupt in the stock market crash. I will do anything for money. The higher the risk, the better the profit.” In the end I think I am a risk lover.

RWM: I guess so. Did you go to Panama, and Honduras?

BJT: I went to Panama, but the game is not good. I haven’t been to Honduras.

RWM: Aren’t the limits very low in Columbia?

BJT: Yes, but they had very good rules. They had early surrender, and some casinos have a joker. [A joker makes the hand an automatic 21.] At one casino with a $50 limit I won $10,000 in one week. I have a friend that one time found a game on a small island. The table maximum was $50. He won $600,000 in two months. I don’t think low limits are a big problem.

In ’96 I went to Columbia for one week. On the second or third day I got very dizzy. The altitude is very high so I had a problem with a lack of oxygen. I canceled my Ecuador trip because Quito is even higher than Bogata. Two years ago I went again, and this time I went to Ecuador first. This time it was no problem. I don’t know why.

RWM: When you go on one of these trips, how much money do you take with you?

BJT: Usually I take about $30,000.

RWM: Some of these countries have currency controls. How do you deal with that?

BJT: I always declare the money.

RWM: And that has never been a problem?

BJT: Never in South America. It was a big problem in Asia.

RWM: Tell me about that.

Blackjack Traveling in Nepal

BJT: I went to Nepal. When you enter the country you are required to declare your money if you are carrying more than $2,000. There is a form to declare the money, and I did. When I cleared customs they asked me why I was bringing so much money. I said I came to gamble in the casino. The custom officer stuck his tongue out at me. Then he smiled and said I could go.

When I went out of the country they found my money. They asked if I declared it when I came in. I said, “Yes.” They said, “Where is your certificate?” I said, “What certificate?”

When you enter and declare, the customs officer is supposed to give you a certificate. On the form it didn’t tell me that, so I didn’t know. I had just come from Australia where there is no certificate. In America when you declare there is no certificate. I told them I was not given a certificate. They sent me to the police.

The police asked the customs people to get the certification book. The original declaration form from when I entered the country was missing. People who have a certificate, there is a copy in the file. They brought the file, and there was no record of my declaration. They said, “There is no proof that you declared.”

Because I was sure that I declared, and I was sure that I was innocent, I was afraid to propose a bribe. I was afraid that would get me into more trouble. I assumed that if the original form was found that everything would be settled. I was sent to customs custody. I was with my girlfriend, and she went back to the casino to find some help. This was on a Friday so the conditions in custody were very bad. It was one small room with eight people. They were there for drug cases, or drunk fighting. There were no beds, no blankets, and no lights.

RWM: Were there cots or something to lie down on?

BJT: No, just lying on the floor. After three nights, I counted 70 bug bites on just my right leg. On Monday I was sent to the big jail. I had played in the casino for one week and won $4,500. My friend had played baccarat, and lost. So in total I wasn’t trying to take more out of the country than I had brought in. The casino people came to see me in the jail, and they sent a lawyer to help me. The casino paid the lawyer, and they gave my girlfriend a room for three months while she waited for me.

RWM: You were in jail for three months?

BJT: I was there 76 days.

RWM: Did there ever come a point where the lawyer said, “If you pay a bribe you can get out.”

BJT: No. We found out later that if customs catches you with illegal money they can get 20% as a reward. I think when I entered the country the customs officer deliberately did not give me a certificate. When I was caught 18 officers put their finger print on my report. They could all share the money.

RWM: What was the prison like?

BJT: The big jail was designed to hold 150 people. There were 250 in the jail. There were five big rooms. In my room we had 70 people. It was not separate beds. They had a long wooden platform, and everyone slept next to each other.

RWM: Are there mattresses?

BJT: You can bring your own mattress, or buy one. There were eight Tibetans there—three were monks. They had gone to India to see the Dalai Lama. They were caught because they didn’t have passports. China will not issue passports to Tibetans to see the Dalai Lama.

They helped me. They gave me a sheet and blanket, but there was no space on the platform so I had to sleep on the floor. There were maybe a dozen of us who slept on the floor. There was a separate area for the toilet—four toilets for 250 people. There were no bars. When you enter the jail it is like a garden with the rooms around it. But there are no bars. While you are there you can do whatever you like. You can walk around the garden. The living conditions there are basically okay. The average income in that country is $230 per year. You can do some small jobs at the jail for 30 cents per day.

When I came in there was a big boss at the jail. He said that newcomers had to do some work. He wanted me to wash the toilets. I told him I didn’t want to do that. I asked what was my alternative. He said, “No problem. If you don’t want to do it just pay $12.” $12? Keep the change.

RWM: You had some cash with you?

BJT: Yes. When customs caught me they let me keep my small cash. My girlfriend had money also. After a week some people were sent to a bigger jail, so there was an opening on the platform bed. I got a spot on the bed, but each person only had about two feet of space.

I gave the boss some cigarettes, and then I got a bigger space—maybe three feet. If you have money you can do anything in this jail. There was a British guy with Cable TV. There was a Czech guy who was getting out shortly after I arrived. He left me his mosquito net, which was important. He also left me a small table light, so I could read at night.

There was a small library with some English books. I read some of the English novels, and I also started writing. I kept a diary, which is in my fifth book. I had so much time I didn’t know what to do. I would brush my teeth for 20 minutes. I lost 15 kilos while in there. [33 pounds] I was thinking that when I got out I would tell my story. Go to Asia if you want to lose weight.

RWM: I take it the food was not good.

BJT: The meal allowance was 30 cents per day. You don’t get money—that 30 cents went for rice and the people who cook. They would buy some vegetable, usually potato. You can have as much rice as you like, and some potato with garlic.

Every day my girlfriend brought food to me from the casino restaurant. She also brought me some English novels. Books were very cheap. I never read English novels before, because English is my second language. I read much faster in Chinese. I would finish a book every two or three days. My fifth book was written while I was there.

I was not allowed bail. The law said I could be sentenced to three years if found guilty. It was possible that I would be sentenced to one year. The casino lawyer fought for me, but every day I thought I might be in there for one to three years.

I went to court to fight my case, and I showed that I had a certificate from Australia. This showed that when I left Australia I declared my money. From there I came to this country. My argument was, if I declared my money coming out of Australia why would I not declare it coming here? They lost my original form, and I implied that they did that purposely. I was very lucky because during that period the director of customs from the airport was sent to jail. They searched his home, and found 200 years worth of his salary. Everyone knew the customs people were corrupt. Finally, after being there 76 days I was declared not guilty.

I got out of jail, and my visa expired. I had to go to immigration to get a new visa. The court ruling was at five o’clock, and the customs office closed at that time. I had to go back to jail one more day because I had to report back to immigration. The next day I went to get the new visa, but my passport was in the investigation bureau. I went to get the passport, but the officer wasn’t there. I went the next day, and now they fined me for being two days late. The first day was because the court ruling wasn’t until five o’clock. The second day was because the investigation bureau kept my passport. That is the way this country operates.

The casino was very helpful to me. I won money from them, but they were very generous and helped me.

RWM: Have you found that carrying money in the US is more of a problem since September 11?

BJT: It is not a problem for me. I always declare my money. I don’t look like a drug dealer. Many American counters don’t want to declare their money because they don’t want to explain their income source. There is no income tax for me.

RWM: Have you been to Cambodia?

BJT: I’ve been to Malaysia, Cambodia, Laos, Burma, Sri Lanka…

RWM: Are there casinos in Vietnam?

BJT: Vietnam has three casinos in North Vietnam but I haven’t been there. One of my books has a map that shows all the countries I have visited.

RWM: What is it like in places like Cambodia and Laos?

BJT: There is only one casino in Laos. They give you a 1% rebate on your play, but the maximum is low—$20. The rules are okay, like Las Vegas, but no surrender.

RWM: What I was getting at is: Cambodia or Laos are places I would be nervous about going. My sense is that it would be dangerous to carry a lot of money in those countries. Is there any country you have gone to where you thought, “Oh, this is dangerous.”

The Dangers of Blackjack Traveling

BJT: When I played in Ecuador, in Guayaquil, I played with Bradley Peterson. There was one casino with great rules. Now it is burned out, but then they had early surrender including after doubling; S17, DAS, same suit bj paid 2-1, 7 card 21 paid 7-1, three 7s paid 3-1 and more. It was at least +1% off the top.

The maximum bet was $30. We played for one week and won $15,000. One night we won about $4,000, and we had started with $5,000. So we were carrying $9,000. The casino was very small and nobody played blackjack. Everyone knew we had all this money. It was three in the morning, and when we went outside there were no taxis. The casino security found us a taxi, but there was no sign. It was just an ordinary car, and in very bad condition. We got in the car, but we were both ready to jump out at the first sign of trouble. We got back safely.

In Bogata there was a new casino opening. For the opening ceremony they put two jokers in the shoe. If you got the joker it was an automatic win. If you got the joker with an ace or ten it was a blackjack and paid 3-2. If the dealer got the joker, they burned it.

It was only on Monday and Tuesday, and only until ten p.m. When I found the game it was Tuesday night at midnight. I had to wait one week for the game. I made a trip to Medillion, and came back on Monday. The first night I won $5,900. It was a $200 maximum. They didn’t have US dollars, so they gave me local money. This made a pile of money the size of a basketball. I left the casino about midnight with this money. The taxi waiting outside I didn’t want to take. I found another taxi.

I was in Moscow last year. One night I had about $10,000 and it was three a.m. There was a shopping center in Red Square that had an Internet café. I was a little nervous walking there with all that money, but I am a risk lover.

RWM: How much time do you spend traveling? Where is home now?

BJT: I return to Taiwan about 4 times a year. I stay at my parent’s house, usually for a week. Hotels are my “home” now.

RWM: How many books have you written?

BJT: Five. Traveling Around the World Gambling, Beat Macao, Beat the Casino, How to Win, and Blackjack Traveling.

My nom de plume is three Chinese characters. The first word is son. The name means, the gentleman who carries his son. I divorced when my son was three years old. He was with his mother, and I missed him very much. I put my son’s photo on some shirts. When I went to the casinos to play, I would often wear those shirts.

There is a Japanese comic book about a Samurai who carries his son wherever he goes, and he fights with many people. The meaning for me was that I carry my son to fight with many casinos. When I started writing, that is the name I took.

RWM: When did you write your first book?

BJT: When I was playing in Korea I read a lot of magazines. There was nothing new. Every issue had similar articles. I thought what I was doing was interesting. Professional gambling is interesting. I proposed to several magazines in Taiwan that I write a column about gambling. One magazine said they were interested, and I started writing a regular column called “Famous Gambler talks about Gambling.” The magazine chose that title. Every two weeks I wrote a column. That was in 1994.

RWM: Was this about all different games in the casino, or just about blackjack?

BJT: In the beginning it was about all the different games. That is when I started buying books. When I started I had maybe 30 or 40 books about gambling. Every time I went to Las Vegas I would buy 40 or 50 books. Now I have over 400 gambling books; 100 of them are blackjack books. I like to read.

I thought I would buy books with the money I was earning from writing. Using the material I read I could write more. If I find one thing in a book to write an article about then I have covered my cost. When I was in high school I wrote an article that was in the newspaper, and I was happy. But I didn’t write again until this gambling column. Then I went to Turkey, Rumania, Hungary, and I started writing about these trips.

RWM: I wish your books were in English. I’d love to read them.

BJT: I thought about that, but there are so many gambling books already.

RWM: But there aren’t many travel gambling books. The only one that comes to mind is Blackjack Autumn by Barry Meadow.

BJT: There is also The Gambler’s Guide to the World, by Jesse May. He learned a bit about card counting, but he is really a poker player. I asked Bradley Peterson to cowrite a book with me, but he is very busy. My writing in English is not very good.

RWM: Was the first book a collection of your columns?

BJT: All my books are collections of my columns.

RWM: You’re still writing your column?

BJT: Yes. It appears in Firsthand magazine in Taiwan. Now it is called, “Diary of a Gambler.” [He pulls out a Chinese magazine.] Here is a column about a casino. It has pictures of the beach, and the casinos, and this section is about shuffle tracking in that casino.

RWM: You write about that in your column?

BJT: Yes. That is what is good about Chinese writing. Here it says, “How to track shuffle in some casinos.” What is good about Chinese writing is that it does not spread the information to casinos. I can write about anything. Sometimes I tell my readers, “You are lucky. Here I write all the secrets without any disguise. If you read an American book they will not tell you this because it will burn the games.”

Blackjack Traveler’s Advice for Other Players

RWM: You read the blackjack message boards—what do you think is the biggest mistake people are making.

BJT: So many people are saying that blackjack is dying. Blackjack is alive and well in foreign countries. Why don’t people travel?

RWM: Do you think blackjack is getting better?

BJT: It’s not getting worse. When I was in Russia I thought, “This game is not going to last.” Well, it lasted. It’s alive and well.

When I left Moscow I left one of my books for a friend. He didn’t believe in card counting, so he gave it to someone else. That guy was a programmer. He ran some simulations and saw that it was real. He started playing, but he couldn’t count very well, and he only had $100. He had two people sit with him. One would count plus, and the other would count minus. He sat in the middle and added them together. He made $70,000 in one month. The big mistake is to concentrate on American games, which are dying.

RWM: You are here in Los Angeles for the Chinese Book Fair. Is this a yearly event?

BJT: Yes. Last year was the first time I came to give a lecture, and people were fighting to get in. Before that my books had in ordinary sales America. Last year my book became the best selling Chinese book in the U.S. Every year I will come for this.

RWM: What do you think you will be doing in ten years? Do you think you will still be playing?

BJT: I have become very fond of writing. I started writing a science fiction novel. I’m also working on a screenplay. There are a lot of Chinese movies about gambling. The people who write Chinese movies are not gamblers, so what they write is no good. What I am doing now is perfect for me. I like reading, writing, and traveling. When I go out I usually play four or five hours a day. Then I can read, and write.

RWM: You have been all over the world, so this is an important question. Where are the secret games?

BJT: Oh, for that you have to turn off the recorder. ♠

Posted on Leave a comment

Blackjack Tournament Strategy

By Stanford Wong

(From Blackjack Forum Vol. XV #III, September 1995
© 1995 Blackjack Forum

Arnold has asked me to write something on casino tournament strategy, so I thought I would share a typical application of my new Tournament Blackjack software.

Here is a situation I encountered in a mini blackjack tournament I entered at Isle of Capri in Biloxi, Mississippi, a few weeks ago. Only one person was advancing in the tournament from my table. The maximum bet was $300.

It was the 29th round out of 30, and I was BR1 (meaning I had the largest bankroll at the time) with $900. Several other players were still in close contention. I was betting second. I bet $300, and my opponents all made bets around $100.

Then we got our cards. The dealer showed 10, I got eleven, and the other players ended up with totals of eighteen to twenty.

The decision I had to make was should I double down? The argument for doubling down is if I won I would have a commanding lead going into the last round of the tournament, perhaps even a lock. A lock would be especially nice because on the last round I would be betting and playing first. The argument for not doubling down is that I would still have a chance to win the table if lost only one bet, whereas losing a doubled bet would knock me out of contention.

In the actual tournament I had to make a decision quickly, and could not ask for time out to run a simulation. I doubled down, ended up with a twenty for a push, and so achieved the same result as if I had hit instead of doubling.

But was my double down correct? Tournament Blackjack can give the answer.

Blackjack Tournament Solutions

I do not recall the rest of the details of the actual situation—how many other players were left, their bankrolls, their bets, or exactly what their hand totals were—so I will use numbers that seem reasonable. I will use five other players with bankrolls of 825, 800, 750, 775, and 850. I will give them bets of 100 each. I will give them hand totals of 20, 19, 18, 19, and 20.

I boot up Tournament Blackjack. In the rules I ask for six players, minimum bet of 10, maximum of 300, double any two cards including after splitting, and dealer stands on soft seventeen because those were the rules I faced in Biloxi. I ask for one winner only. Then I close the rules box. I set the game to play hand 29 of 30. I set the bankrolls to the appropriate amounts, putting my own bankroll in the sixth position. I put the puck by the fifth player, meaning that player bets first this round.

So now we are ready for the bets. I want to control the bets of all the players this round, and an easy way to do it is to set all the players to manual (as opposed to automatic). Then I press F5 to start. The computer asks how much the fifth player wants to bet. I type in 100. Then I type in a max bet for me, the sixth player. Then I enter bets of 100 each for the other players.

Oops! Placing a bet for player 4 is automatically followed by dealing of cards. (I could have specified the bets by a different method, in which case the computer would have waited for me to assign cards.

But, no problem. I use Deja Vu to pick up all the cards and bets, and go back to the beginning of the round. Then I hit F1 six times to reconstruct the six bets. Now the computer waits for me to assign cards.

Assigning cards is easy. I deal myself a 5 and everyone else a 10 as the first card, including the dealer. Then another 10 to the fifth player, a 6 to me, 10-9-8-9 to the first four players, and 10 for the dealer’s hole card. (What I give to the dealer for a hole card does not matter if I am going to run a simulation; a new hole card will be randomly assigned each pass through.)

OK, each player has two cards totalling what I want each player to have, and the dealer has a 10. Now I hit F5 to start live play. The computer asks me how I want to play hand 5, and I stand on it. Now it asks me how I want to play my eleven. I want to simulate both hitting it and doubling down on it. So I select Simulate from the Run menu. I select double for 300 and hit as my two options. Then I hit the OK button and the simulation is on its way.

The simulation works this way. First the tournament is finished with my hand doubling down. I win the tournament. Then it is finished with my hitting the eleven. I win the tournament again. Then it is finished with me doubling down. I win again. Then it is finished with me hitting. Player 5 wins the tournament.

And so it goes time after time, finishing the tournament with me doubling on my eleven alternating with finishing the tournament with me hitting my eleven. Each pair of finishes takes eight seconds on my 586-66. After 50 finishes with each play, doubling down has won the tournament 42% of the time and hitting has won 35% of the time.

The program tells me that difference is not significant, and that the standard error applicable to each number is at most .071. A much larger sample size is going to have to be run, so I leave the room to attend to other business. (Actually, it is 9:30 pm as I write this, and the other business is drinking a beer while I read Newsweek.)

…later…

Now it is 10:30 pm. The sample sizes are up to 500. Doubling down is ahead, 44.9% to 31.6%, and the significance box shows five stars. This means the difference between the two sample means is greater than four standard errors. The standard error applicable to each number is down to .022.

We can say with certainty that doubling down was the better thing to do in this casino tournament situation. ♠

Posted on Leave a comment

An Interview with Julian Braun

by Arnold Snyder

(From Blackjack Forum Volume I #2, June 1981)
© 1981, 2005 Blackjack Forum

Julian Braun, author of How to Play Winning Blackjack (Data House, 1980), IBM computer programmer extraordinaire, and blackjack pioneer whose programs have provided the strategies of numerous card counting systems since the early sixties, made a recent trip to California. I took the opportunity to meet with him over dinner, during the course of which I conducted and taped an interview. Right from the start, Braun cast aside my preconceived conservative notions of him. I arrived in coat and tie. He was in his shirt sleeves. I suggested a quiet restaurant where the subdued atmosphere would be conducive to an interview. Braun had other ideas, suggesting a Moroccan restaurant where our dinner would be accompanied by music and an exotic belly dancer. We ate Moroccan style, in dim lighting, seated on cushions on the floor.

AS: Can you tell us about your original contact with Edward Thorp and how you started your blackjack analyses?

Braun: When Thorp came out with his book, I was very fascinated that he was able to do this kind of work with a computer and come up with a counting system. At that time, I had relatively free access to high speed computers. I wrote to Thorp and told him of my interest and asked if he would be kind enough to send me a copy of his computer program, which he did — with absolutely no documentation whatsoever — just a program written in Fortran which he had developed and run at MIT. I studied the program and figured out exactly how it worked.

He had an interesting algorithm that he had built into his program for cycling through the various combinations of cards. The computers back in those days were comparatively primitive to what we have now. Thorp had written what he called an Arbitrary Subset program, where he could feed into the computer any combination of cards he wanted, and the computer would crank out ten pages of information — one for each of the ten dealer up-cards. It would list on each page each of the fifty-five two-card player combinations, and the expectation if you stood or hit until you achieved the indicated standing number that was also computed by the program. It also showed what would happen if you doubled down — even on ridiculous combinations like two tens. It gave a complete analysis regardless. It summarized at the bottom the best strategy for any combination, and what the expectation was for that combination.

I wrote an improved version of the basic strategy program which did essentially the same sort of thing, but with a lesser degree of approximation. That’s the program I used to develop some of the count strategies that were subsequently developed. It’s the program that was used to develop the data which was used by Revere to develop his strategies, and by Lance Humble to develop the Hi-opt strategies. That same program was used to develop quite a variety of count strategies. I also used it to develop the indices for the Hi-Lo strategy. I also wrote an exact program for any basic strategy situation in blackjack except pair-splitting.

AS: Peter Griffin claims he has computed an exact single-deck pair-splitting basic strategy.

Braun: I’m not sure how Griffin can say he has an absolutely accurate strategy — an absolutely accurate program for doing this. It can be done theoretically, but I’m wondering if he actually has that much computer time to run it. I think he probably has a nearly exact program, rather than a completely exact program. My guess is that he has developed his program to consider what happens with one card of each pair, analyzing precisely what happens with all the possible combinations of the cards that can be gotten on it, interactively with the dealer’s hand. He probably assures that the second hand would on average be about the same as the first hand. That’s a fairly accurate approximation, but it’s not completely accurate. To be completely accurate, you’d have to interact every combination of the first hand with every combination of the second hand with every combination of the dealer hand. That involves such an enormous amount of computer time, I’m somewhat dubious that Griffin actually did that. If you really want to be accurate, most casinos allow you to resplit pairs, so you would have to go down to the next level as well.

AS: Stanford Wong is one of the few systems developers who has computed a single-deck basic strategy using his own algorithms. His strategy differs from yours on one decision. You say to split 2-2 vs. 3, and he says to hit. Peter Griffin informed me that on this discrepancy, your decision is the correct one.

Braun: AH! Then I’ve been vindicated.

AS: Griffin sent me his data on this decision, which shows the player’s expectation from splitting 2-2 vs. 3 carried out to 4 decimal places. It seems to me that Griffin considers his strategy to be exact. A couple of casinos in Las Vegas have recently introduced a one deck game of double exposure. Do you imagine that if you use the multi-deck double exposure strategy for the one-deck game it would be similar to using a multi-deck strategy for regular blackjack in a single-deck game?

Braun: No. It would be close, but the differences are more significant.

AS: Do you know Stanford Wong personally?

Braun: I’ve met him. I happened to have a business trip to Los Angeles a couple of years ago. I told Wong that I was going to be there, and he drove up from La Jolla to meet me. We had dinner together and a fairly pleasant conversation. I would not say that he exactly interviewed me, but we just chatted about things in general.

AS: Why is Wong so negative towards you now?

Braun: Well, I think it’s just like anybody else in business; they don’t like competition, and that’s the way it is.

AS: Do you think it stems from your remarks in one of the versions of your “Development and Analysis” papers that Wong’s Hi-Lo strategy tables were not quite accurate?

Braun: Yes, that’s one bone of contention that seems to irritate Wong — the fact that I made a statement that he had a good system with good indices that were… “close enough” was the phrase that I used. Wong, in one of his writings, came back and said that they are not only close enough, they are better — or something to that effect. At the time, I thought I was trying to be kind by saying they were close enough. In some areas, I now think his figures might actually be better. I think his method for developing indices may have been better than mine. Whether his indices are more accurate or not is a debatable point. I still contend that neither set of figures are completely accurate. A closer result to complete accuracy might be obtained by averaging where the two figures differ.

AS: How long does it take you to run off a one million hand simulation in order to test a system, such as you used for your “Development and Analysis” paper?

Braun: With the program that I have, and an IBM 370 model 155 or 158 computer it takes approximately three minutes. There are faster computers that would do it in less than a minute.

AS: In the March issue of Gambling Times, Stanley Roberts published a reassessment by you of estimated win rates for various count systems, including Uston’s Advanced Point Count. Did you use your simulation program recently to obtain these results, which Roberts reported he obtained from you by phone?

Braun: I never evaluated the Uston count on the computer I think I just mentioned to Roberts what I thought the Uston count would do. I’ve never run it on the computer, so I don’t have precise statistics on it. I can evaluate what I think the Uston count would do simply by looking at Griffin’s work.

AS: Did you ever consider making money as a card counter?

Braun: There was a time when I was playing more frequently, and was even barred in one casino. Some years ago, I spent four weeks in Reno and played here and there. The Nevada Club had the best rules at the time. They were still dealing a single deck all the way down to the bottom. In addition, they allowed you to double-down on 9, 10 or 11, rather than just 10 or 11 like most of the other Reno casinos.

AS: How long ago was this?

Braun: At least ten years ago. I haven’t played any serious blackjack for years now.

AS: What sort of stakes were you playing for then?

Braun: Very mild. I generally bet from two to ten dollars. I played at the Nevada Club rather regularly. After about a week, even though I wasn’t betting real big or winning any tremendous amounts of money, they decided the fact that they weren’t beating me out of my money was indicative enough. So I walked in one day and a pit boss motioned to me and very politely said, “The owner has observed you playing, and he has decided that he doesn’t want your action anymore.” I didn’t argue.

AS: What system were you using?

BRAUN: I was using the Hi-Lo system.

AS: You wrote to me that the “Money Management” chapter in your book, How to Play Winning Blackjack, which advises the player to watch for “hot streaks” and use betting progressions, had been written by Harry Fund, your publisher. Were you aware, prior to its being published, of the contents of that chapter, and have you spoken to him personally about your feelings about it being included under your name?

Braun: Yes, but he wanted to get his two cents in and he was the publisher.

AS: In that chapter, he writes as if he were you.

Braun: I know. He was writing under my name because he’s using my name to sell the book. He wrote a lot of the other stuff too. I don’t claim to be a book writer, per se. He wrote all the colorful stuff and the background, and I wrote all the technical stuff for the book. The only thing I got in on the Money Management chapter was the footnote at the end.

AS: That footnote seemed to be the only intelligent part of that chapter.

Braun: I wrote the footnote because I was trying to play down what he’d written in the rest of the chapter. The thing is, there are a lot of people who like to play that way.

AS: Do you mind all the back-stabbing and name calling that’s going on in the blackjack scene?

Julian Braun: Not particularly, but I wish it wasn’t there. FLASH! Just received Ken Uston’s latest newsletter… As of May 28, 1981 the New Jersey Casino Control Commission will permit the A.C. casinos to abolish early surrender! Uston is organizing a group called CHIPS — Committee to Have the Industry Preserve Surrender. They will be leafletting, making bumperstickers, T-shirts, and picketing the casinos. Yes, marching! Is this the beginning of a card counters’ union? United Pit-workers Local 21? ♠

Posted on Leave a comment

Beyond Wong: Professional Casino Tournament Tips

by Anthony Curtis
(From Blackjack Forum Volume XV #3, September 1995)
© 1995 Blackjack Forum

One evening in late 1985, my phone rang. It was a call that I look back on as one of the most important of my life. Stanford Wong was on the other end, and as is his custom, he came straight to the point.

“I’m forming a tournament team,” he said. “There are four of us and I think five would make a nice, efficient group. You came to mind. Would you like to play with us?”

I was shocked. Wong was one of my earliest gambling heroes. We’d had a brief correspondence, and we’d met once. Now he was calling me at my one-bedroom apartment, asking me to join his team. It was like a football hopeful getting a call from the 49ers. A dream come true…

“N-n-n-o,” I stuttered.

“Why not?”

“I’m a good blackjack player, but casino tournament play is another world. I don’t know anything about it.”

“Neither do I,” said Wong, “but I have some ideas. We’ll all learn together.”

And so began an incredible experience that made me a lot of money (and even a little fame).

By now, many of you know the story. Recognizing an opportunity, Stanford Wong constructed a computer model to analyze the tournament blackjack end game. He compiled his findings in spiral notebooks and passed them out to me and the others on the team. (The information in those secret spiral notebooks can now be found in Wong’s 1992 Pi Yee Press book, Casino Tournament Strategy).

For about two years, we traveled extensively to play tournaments-Reno, Tahoe, Atlantic City, the Bahamas, and Aruba. Three highly successful years later, the team dissolved. It should be noted that Wong wasn’t the first to figure out tournaments. When we came on the scene, players were already utilizing these concepts. I learned later that they had dominated the tournaments for years, during a time when the prizes were much larger than they are today.

Wong knew going in that he would only devote a couple of years to serious tournament play. He wanted to write the great book on the subject, then go on to other things. I, on the other hand, saw tournaments as a deep well (of profits) that I would be able to go to for a long time to come. A few of the other guys and gals coming at the time saw it the same way. We formed friendships, talked a lot, played together, and elevated the art.

Being young and impetuous, my buddies and I wanted to rule the tournament world. We stayed up late into the night discussing the day’s rounds if we’d played, or general strategy if he hadn’t. We picked apart everything that might add up to our advantage, and the conversations got more esoteric as the free-drink tally rose.

Among the topics of discussion: end-game, middle-game, secret bets, playoffs, adjustments for format, positional considerations, pros and cons of correlating, creating swings, techniques for counting chips, tendencies of opponents, shuffle-tracking in tournaments, hole-carding in tournaments, tells in tournaments (by dealers and players), time-management in timed tournaments, how to exploit a player’s rules infraction, how to exploit a dealer’s error, how to exploit our reputations, how to play if we were unknown, how to play with more than one of us on a table, how to deal with another expert on the table, how to secure a good table position at the draw, how to make an opponent bet out of turn, how to influence opponents by betting out of turn, and of course, how best to get a date with the good-looking tournament director’s assistant (a skill I never quite mastered). Keep in mind that I’m talking blackjack tournaments only; there were whole other sets of topics for craps tournaments, keno tournaments, etc. The point is, we spent a lot of time outside the pages of Wong’s tournament manual.

These days, I don’t play the tournaments nearly as often as I used to, so I don’t mind letting you in on a few of our conclusions. Don’t get too excited, though. Compared to the value of the information in Casino Tournament Strategy, and the strength of the singular tactic of betting your money (see “Bombs Away” below), this information is of marginal value. Then again, you just might pick up a tidbit that will get you through an extra round or two.

Choose Casino Tournaments Wisely

One easy way to improve results (regardless of skill level) is to be choosy about which tournaments you enter. Several factors are involved here, but equity is the fundamental measure of playability. Equity is the percentage of entry fees collected that is returned in the form of prize money. It’s an important consideration. Any time the prize pool returns less than 100%, you have a decision to make. Namely, are you superior enough to the average player in that tournament to make up the shortfall? I don’t care who you are, there is always a point where the answer has to be “no.” The better you are at pegging that percentage, the better your results will be.

I find myself laying off of more and more tournaments these days because of the dramatic increase in the public’s skill level. If the average player is nearly as skilled as I am, then even a tournament that pays close to 100% equity offers too small a return on my investment to make it worth playing from a purely monetary standpoint.

Often there are ancillary considerations. In my case, I have the unique luxury of being able to play in tournaments where I have a small edge thanks to the publicity value I derive from winning. When I calculate equity, I sometimes assign double or triple value to the prize pool because of the increased credibility that winning the championship gives my career as a gambler-writer. A professional, for example, might assign added value for the hard-to-come-by practice he gets by playing. A novice might justify his entry by considering the vacation value-he makes up the difference with a free room, comps, parties, drinks, and other perks that go with tournament entry. I know of many people who just plain love to play tournaments. For them, the enjoyment factor lessens equity requirements.

Here are two other realities that literally leap out at you when you examine extensive records of tournament results. First, early-entry discounts are available. Be sure to plan far enough ahead to take advantage of the savings they represent. Second, over-the-table losses represent a huge cost of doing business. Tournaments contested with funny money are usually best of all.

Don’t Count Cards In Blackjack Tournaments

I always rub my hands together when I run into card counters on a tournament table. Why? Because they’re so predictable. A powerful play in tournament competition is to create the opportunity for a swing when you’re behind. That usually means betting big when your opponents bet small (or vice versa). This can be problematic when the key opponent bets after you because he can simply mirror your bets to the degree that he chooses. Since some card counters would rather be publicly caned than raise their bets into a negative deck, you can create the potential swing any time you want just by betting contrary to the count.

The most remarkable example of this I’ve come across occurred in a big tournament in the Bahamas. I was on a table of five and all of my opponents were dyed-in-the-wool card counters. A third of the way through the round, the shoe went positive and the four others jumped on it. Having already drifted a few maximum bets down, I was happy to let them go, hoping that a few good hands by the dealer would bring them back to me. But by the time the shoe was finished, I was too. The four were in a dead heat for the lead some eight max bets ahead of me. Given the one-person-advance format, I was all but sunk.

The next shoe, however, quickly went negative. I made a max bet while everyone else bet the minimum. I won and gained a bet. As we played on, I didn’t even worry about what I was dealt. I was busy praying that the count would stay negative so I would continue to be the sole big bettor. It did, I was, and on the last hand I had only to win my bet to advance to the four-man final for $250,000. (Alas, my remarkable comeback wasn’t consummated.)

After the round, one of the players who knew me as a card counter came up and said, “Nice comeback, but why were you betting so heavily into that huge negative count?” The question was even more ridiculous than is obvious-we were playing with funny money!

Though a vivid example, it’s by no means the main problem with counting cards in tournaments. If you know how to count, you’ll do it while you play, and there’s nothing wrong with that in the early stages. In fact, in one-advance formats where it’s almost certain that you’ll have to make at least one (preferably uncorrelated) big bet sometime during the round, making that bet early and according to the count will improve your results over the table. But in the last five to ten hands, you’re out of your mind if you maintain the count at the expense of all the more important things there are to be aware of, like an accurate accounting of the threatening bankrolls.

The Importance of Position In Casino Tournaments

Few players give position the consideration that it merits. It’s important to base your total game plan on the last-hand betting order, especially in the one-advance format. In a nutshell, the worse your position on the end, the more aggressive you need to be before you get there. If position is determined by a dice roll or a draw at the table, you must immediately calculate where you will bet on the last hand (if everyone makes it that far), then play accordingly. You must also be prepared to recalculate and switch strategies when players bust out and change the last-hand order. Positional considerations, by the way, are much more important (and complicated) in tournaments other than blackjack, like craps.

It’s Better When The Casino Likes You

The most successful card counters spend a lot of time making sure that the welcome mat remains out. You’d expect that tournament players would do the same, but they don’t. For some reason, the typical tournament expert can’t resist flaunting his talents, not so much to the casinos or other customers as to one another.

Tournament players congregate in groups and cliques, openly analyzing every move they and their cohorts make during play, and making not-so-subtle jokes about the non-optimal play of the less informed. The tournament pros need to realize that the very players that they’re exploiting are often the casino’s best customers. Antagonize them enough and they’ll eventually complain to casino management, and there goes the welcome mat. The casinos won’t risk losing their good customers for the sake of a few entry fees.

Some of those esoteric discussions I mentioned earlier had to do with how much leeway to give the regular casino customers when they make mistakes (rule infractions, receiving overpayments, etc.) before raising an objection that might make an enemy. Don’t underestimate this consideration. Some of the most successful long-term tournament winners I know are also among the most likeable people I’ve ever met.

Bombs Away–Casino Tournaments Are About Betting

If you’ve done any studying of tournaments at all, you’re probably already aware of what I’m about to say. But it’s so important that I just can’t imagine discussing tournament play without mentioning it. No other strategy is as powerful as this: Bet your money when you’re behind. A tournament is a gunfight, and the chips are your bullets. You must shoot those bullets until you either win the gunfight or run out of ammunition. If the heat is on and you’re not sure what to do, employ this rule: When in doubt, put it out. I do. Betting the max may not be the best play, but it’s rarely the worst.

I once played in a mini blackjack tournament where the whole table had the betting bug. It was a frenzied affair with five of us turning a $500 buy-in into more than $2000. When the smoke cleared in the tournament, I had advanced along with a young airman from Nellis Air Force Base who was playing his first blackjack tournament ever. The airman had caught on quickly, making max bets every time someone’s stack of chips exceeded his. After the round, the excited airman jumped out of his seat, ran over to his girlfriend and shouted: “That wasn’t about playing cards. That was about betting!” Truer words… ♠

Posted on Leave a comment

A Nevada Court Victory for Card Counters

By Robert A. Loeb, Attorney at Law
(From Blackjack Forum XX #1, Spring 2000)
© Blackjack Forum 2000

On March 9, the Nevada Supreme Court ruled in favor of a card counter and ordered the return to him of $40,400 in winnings which had been seized when a casino discovered that he had used false identification at the blackjack table.

This is an extremely important case, because there are very few decisions from the Nevada Supreme Court that affect counters, and because it deals with many important issues related to card counting.

Ultimately, the court found that the player did not commit fraud, because he had not cheated in the play of the game, and so the court ordered that the seized chips be returned to him.

The Legal Facts of the Card Counting Case

In order to analyze what the case means and doesn’t mean, we have to go back, look at the facts, and review what happened at the blackjack table, at the cashier, at the gaming board and in the lower court.

Card counter Richard Chen bought in for $29,000 at a blackjack table at the Monte Carlo casino in Las Vegas in April, 1997. As a known card counter, his picture was already in the Griffin book, so when the casino asked for identification (presumably to fill out a cash transaction report, as required by the government), Chen presented a purported passport from Burma (which does not exist anymore) in another name. Later that evening he bought in for an additional $15,000, but no identification was requested at that time.

Chen then played blackjack, apparently for several hours. At some point, pit supervisor Dave Schugar recognized him as a card counter, stopped Chen from playing more, and asked Chen to accompany him to the cashier to cash out. At the cashier, Chen produced $84,400 in chips, and when asked for identification, produced the same false passport.

Schugar noticed the irregularity and notified casino security and the Gaming Control Board.

Chen admitted to Carl Vidano, the Gaming Board agent, that the passport was false; he provided his true identity and the casino filled out a corrected cash transaction report (the Nevada 6A version of a CTR). Vidano directed the Monte Carlo to retain the chips and to give Chen a receipt for the full $84,400, pending a review of surveillance tapes and a criminal investigation.

A few days later, the Monte Carlo informed Vidano that the tapes showed card counting but no cheating. Vidano directed the Monte Carlo to release the money to Chen, and the casino refused. Vidano initiated a patron dispute case and issued a formal decision directing Monte Carlo to pay Chen the $84,400. The casino again refused, and appealed the agent’s decision to the full Nevada Gaming Board. Vidano did note that Chen did not commit any criminal violation, other than the misdemeanor crime of possession of false identification.

Three months later, the casino returned $44,000 to Chen (the total of the buy-ins), leaving the $40,400 in winnings as the subject of the dispute before the gaming board.

On the Legality of Card Counting: The Gaming Board and Lower Court Decisions

After hearing the evidence, the Nevada State Gaming Board ruled in favor of the Monte Carlo, allowing it to retain Chen’s winnings.

The hearing examiner felt that both parties agreed that had Chen provided his true identity, he would not have been allowed to play, although, I think it would have been more accurate to say that Chen could have begun playing; his session just wouldn’t have lasted as long.

The Gaming Control Board found that Chen’s use of false identification was a fraudulent act to gain admittance to the blackjack game. The Gaming Board also found that if Chen had provided his true identity, he would not have been allowed to play.

The District Court in Las Vegas considered the briefs and arguments of both sides, and it upheld the Gaming Board’s decision to allow the Monte Carlo to seize and retain the winnings. Chen appealed the case to the Nevada Supreme Court.

The Player’s Side of the Case

The Nevada Supreme Court is a court of review. This means that, like most appellate courts, it does not hear testimony or substitute its own view of the facts of the case. Its job is to accept the testimony given in the lower courts and determine if any legal mistakes were made, such as improper admission of evidence or erroneous legal conclusion.

In this case, the primary issues were whether or not the District Court made a mistake in reaching its conclusion that the casino had the legal authority to confiscate the chips, and whether Chen had committed fraud in acquiring the chips.

Chen’s contentions are contained in the brief which his attorney (John Hawley) filed with the Nevada Supreme Court. They took the position that no law or administrative rule gave a casino the legal right to seize and confiscate chips in this manner, and pointed out that Agent Vidano agreed that there was no such statute or regulation to authorize impounding the chips by either the casino or by the Gaming Board.

Chen and Hawley also took the position that the profits resulted not from the use of the false passport, but rather from Chen’s legal blackjack play according to the rules set by the Monte Carlo. Finally, they pointed out that a CTR is not a prerequisite to playing blackjack.

The Casino’s Side of the Case on the Legality of Card Counting

In the brief filed by the Monte Carlo, the casino framed the issues in different and perhaps chilling terms.

The casino stated that the issues were: “Whether a gambler can present false identification under a false name in order to play blackjack? and Does the Nevada State Gaming Control Board have the authority to use common law principles to protect the integrity of gaming in Nevada?”

If the Nevada Supreme Court had ruled in the casino’s favor on the first issue, casinos would be allowed to compel legal identification from any player.

If the Court had adopted the casino’s argument in the second issue, it would be fraud to give the casino a false identification, allowing for the seizure of profits after detecting a fake ID.

In the absence of a statute or rule authorizing confiscation of chips, the Monte Carlo was asking the Court to rule that the commission of common law fraud gave the casino such authority.

The casino’s choice of words in its brief is interesting. For instance, the Monte Carlo claimed that Chen “is a self-admitted card counter.” (What a humiliating admission to make!)

The Monte Carlo then describes his play as “he would observe a blackjack game for a few minutes, then begin to play and bet heavily and win several hands in a row…This style of play is consistent with the techniques employed by card counters.” (If only it was that easy!)

Finally, the Monte Carlo would characterize Chen’s winnings as unjust enrichment because of the use of the false passport.The casino made its case by claiming that the commission of fraud would allow for confiscation even without a specific statute or rule, and that Chen’s actions constituted fraud.

The elements of fraud are discussed in the next section. The Monte Carlo’s brief ends by asking that the Nevada Supreme Court “send a message to casino patrons that the use of any type of fake identification when engaging in legal wagers will not be condoned.”

The Decision: Why Fraud Was Not Proven

While this case was pending, I feared that it had the potential to be the most catastrophic court finding ever for card counters.

That is because if this decision had gone the other way, it had the potential to allow the casino to seize the profits of a card counter using an alias but to let the player lose at his own risk. In other words, the casino could let that counter play; if he won, the casino would seize the chips he had won. If he lost, the casino would certainly not return any money to him. There would be no risk to the casino.

Conceivably, it might even apply to players who had been previously backed off under one name, played later under a different name, but never even used false identification.

It was with a great deal of trepidation that I awaited the decision in this case. The court noted that to establish fraud, the Monte Carlo had to show that (a) Chen provided a false representation of a material fact, which he knew to be false; (b) that Chen intended the Monte Carlo to rely on the misrepresentation; (c) that the that the Monte Carlo detrimentally relied on the misrepresentation; and (d) that the misrepresentation proximately caused damages.

It is pretty clear that Chen in producing the fake passport, provided a false representation of a fact which he knew to be false; that representation was material when made in that it helped provide him the opportunity to play. It can easily be inferred that Chen intended that the Monte Carlo relied on that misrepresentation. Thus, as the court found, the Monte Carlo successfully proved the elements in (a) and (b).

But the court found that the Monte Carlo did not prove element (c), that the casino detrimentally relied on the misrepresentation. The identification requirement was to comply with Regulation 6A dealing with the government requirement of cash transaction reports; the identification requirement was not a prerequisite to the purchase of chips.

In addition, the casino had no policy instructing casino employees to cross-check the player’s id with a list of counters who might not be allowed to play. If the casino had such a policy, and had taken that step in this case, then element (c) would have been proved, according to the court.

The most important element in this case was (d), and the court perceptively found that the false passport was not the proximate cause of Chen’s winnings. The court stated, “The false identification allowed Chen to receive $44,000 in chips, but it did not cause Chen to win. Thus, we hold that the Gaming Control Board’s determination that Chen committed fraud is contrary to law because the Monte Carlo did not establish all of the elements of fraud.”

Other Observations of the Case on the Legality of Card Counting

The issue of the legality of tendering a false identification was not before the court, and accordingly, the decision does not deal with that issue.

Instead, the court was deciding whether the seizure of the chips was proper or not.

No police agency brought a criminal charge dealing with the false identification, and the court did not discuss that aspect. It would be wrong for a player to conclude from this decision that the use of false identification is legal just because no charges were brought.

It is important to note that since March 9 when the decision came out, Hell has not frozen over, and there have been no sightings of flying cows. Both of these phenomena had been predicted to occur before the Nevada Supreme Court would ever rule in favor of a card counter, but the predictions were wrong.

Additionally, this case was not a slam dunk for the player, in that the casino came close to establishing the legal elements of fraud. But a different decision may have even been detrimental to Nevada casinos, because it could have given the appearance that Nevada games are rigged in favor of the casino, an image that would have been far more costly to the casinos than the $44,000 which was at issue.

In any event, a player-friendly decision from the Nevada court system is worthy of recognition.

Finally, a different decision in this case could have given semi-official status to the Griffin book. If the use of an identity different from that which was in the Griffin book had been found to be fraudulent, then Griffin book entries would gain the imprimatur of law enforcement to the point where it would be considered fraud to give identification different from that in a Griffin book, regardless of Griffin’s accuracy. This might have been a longshot, but it was not impossible that a court would so find.

Implicit in the decision is that the legality of counting cards is again recognized. It’s not that there was any question as to that issue, but it’s reassuring to see that reaffirmed.

Three justices of the Nevada Supreme Court recused themselves from the case; this means that they did not participate. Three justices joined in the decision.

The final justice (Maupin) disagreed with the decision, and wrote that “neither card counting nor the use of a legal subterfuge such as a disguise to gain access to this table game is illegal under Nevada law. I conclude, however, that the misrepresentation here, the use of a fraudulent passport for identification, was not a legal subterfuge and enabled [Chen] access to high stakes play for the purpose of frustrating legitimate attempts by [Monte Carlo] to prevent this from occurring.” ♠

Posted on Leave a comment

General Blackjack

Here We Go Again . . .
by Arnold Snyder

The Key to Success as a Gambler (read me first)
by Arnold Snyder

The World’s Foremost Blackjack Authority
by Arnold Snyder

The House Edge at Blackjack
by Arnold Snyder

Blackjack Reality vs Blackjack Hype
by Arnold Snyder

Graduating from Red Chips to Green
by Barfarkel

Four Simultaneous Blackjacks
by Arnold Snyder

Exploiting Dealer Errors
by ETFan

Losing Money on “Good” Rules?
by Arnold Snyder

Disappearing Spots at the Blackjack Table
by Arnold Snyder

Toking Guidelines
by Arnold Snyder

Blackjack Routes of Las Vegas
by G.K. Schroeder

Accommodations in Las Vegas
by G.K. Schroeder