I played blackjack in Cairo, Egypt several years ago in 1995. The games were mediocre, casinos small and the city dirty. My Egyptian guide asked when I would return? I replied perhaps in my next life!
However, recently, a professional gambler whom I know that is of Sri Lankan heritage, whom I will call Y, planned to go to Cairo where he had been several months prior. I desired to test my improved blackjack skills (improved relative to what they were on my previous Egypt trip of eight years ago) and decided to go with him. Y arranged our hotel accommodations at a Marriott for $120 a night. This hotel was selected as he won the most from there on his previous card counting trip. I also invited LG, an American card counter friend of mine, to join in on the trip.
After landing and checking in, my girlfriend and I headed straight to the casino in short order only to find Y already playing. Y has counted cards for only five years but with great success, winning approximately three quarters of a million US$, benefitting not only from the good rules he’s found but also from his persistence. He would try very hard to get even when losing and would sometimes play over 30 hours straight.
The Marriott game was not too attractive and LG and I quit rather quickly with a small loss. The rules included 6D, S17, D9, DAS, no surrender, ENHC (dealer takes all on splits and doubles with a blackjack) and 75% penetration. The persistent Y, however, called us half an hour later with news of winning $1,600. LG, my girlfriend and I went to check other casinos, finding early surrender against all dealer up cards everywhere.
Interestingly, there were only two casinos with early surrender in Cairo when Y had played several months prior. It appeared that most casinos, including the London Clubs (at the two Hiltons) and one Austrian Group (at Semiramis Intercontinental Hotel) yielded to the competition and started offering the good game and rules to attract and cultivate customers. Basic strategy players in Egypt have a small advantage over these casinos with their good rules. An additional reason as to why these favorable rules might have been put in place could have been that the casinos had suffered from the Middle Eastern tension and since locals are not allowed to gamble, the casinos needed to attract tourists.
We changed some money to Egyptian pounds to pay for the inexpensive taxis. We had to bargain every time but $1.50 could take us to most places within Cairo. However, being frugal with taxi fares for multiple passengers later proved to be a mistake because in scouting casinos together some casinos would later bar us based on the play of another in our group scouting party.
The Semiramis Intercontinental Casino offered the best rules on their six-deck game that included S17, ES, DAS and re-split Aces up to 4 hands. The maximums were $200 and $500 and were played in US dollars. Some tables had 9 playing spots and one can play them all, if desired. Wanting to stay closer to the better game, we moved to this hotel and got a $108 casino rate, which was more expensive than the locals paid. However, the rooms were of higher quality.
When LG and I arrived at the Semiramis Intercontinental Casino on the second morning of our stay there, we found Y already playing. He had lost $5,000 there on the previous evening and, as per his style, had returned early the next morning where he got some of his losses back.
LG and I won $1,000 each and left for other targets. We found that the Ramses Hilton Casino in Egypt was run by the London Club and offered a bigger table limit of $1,000 maximum as well as good rules. The smaller Nile Hilton was also nearby. We also discovered the largest table limit of $1,500 to be at the Conrad, another Hilton property. Both Hiltons had 9 playing spot tables. I believe that these types of tables were reflective of the “good old days” before the 9/11 incident and the Iraqi invasion when the casinos in Egypt were much more heavily populated with Western visitors.
Three of the four Sheraton hotels in Egypt have casinos. Of those three, one, the El Gezira, does not have early surrender. LG won $2,000 from there with his special counting system which exploits some card combinations. The Casino Sheraton offers early surrender but doubling on 9, 10, 11 only. The Heliopolis Sheraton offers early surrender and double on any two cards.
LG’s counting expertise failed him at Cairo Sheraton where he lost $3,000, although he would win back $5,000 later. Y wanted to settle in and did not want to play only a short session so I left them playing at the Cairo Sheraton and went scouting on my own. They ended up playing about 15 hours there, winning a net of $6,000. After that session, none of us, my girlfriend and I included, were allowed to enter the casino.
My girlfriend and I went to check the Four Seasons hotel but found that they did not have a casino. All of the casinos in Egypt were at the bigger hotels. We then went to the Mena House Oberoi Casino where I played on my previous trip eight years ago. The hotel was near the Great Pyramid. When we told the taxi driver where we wanted to go, he signed us in without discussing the fare. I suspected we would be charged a very high fare later. Most drivers would negotiate the fare with us without even knowing the whereabouts of the destination. This particular taxi took us to the Mena House Oberoi Hotel for one-third of the usual price. In order to find this hotel our driver drove us all over town, stopped and asked three people for directions, and after our one hour adventure, charged us a fare of less than $1. The cheap gas price, about half that of gas in the US, obviously helped.
The Mena casino opened at 3PM and closed at 7AM. Most other casinos in Egypt are open 24 hours a day. It offers good rules with a bad cut. On my last session of the day, I won $2,000 from one table. The casino then asked me to change tables. I didn’t know if this was out of superstition or for some other reason. I went to see an Egyptian Museum while my friends were busy playing. Ancient Egyptians greatly valued their afterlife. The Book of Death says a deceased person’s heart is weighed against a feather. A person with a heart lighter than a feather is received by the Ruler of the Underworld. On the other hand, Ammut—who is described as a monster with a hippopotamus head, leopard claws, and alligator feet—would eat sinners, those with heavy hearts.
Also within somewhat close proximity was the tomb of Tutenkaman, as well as some gaming opportunities in the same vicinity. By seeing the treasures of this intact tomb, one could only imagine the lost treasures of other bigger Pharaohs. Ultimately, most of my friends only saw the casinos on this trip. My girlfriend and I won $400 from the nearby Nile Hilton after our sightseeing tour, which was 80 times the museum entrance fee.
I found another casino listed in a guide book and went there. The Sofitel Casino, which didn’t open until 5 PM, offered low limits with a $200 maximum bet but had good rules. We won $300 at this stop. We then went to the Heliopolis Sheraton. The casino, called the Kings and Queens, might be run by the Starwood Group, Sheraton’s parent company, as its chips carried the Sheraton logo. The casino managers there were very nervous about our play and wore long faces during our session. Like many other Egyptian casinos, they offered good rules. We decided to leave after winning several hundred dollars for sympathetic and humanitarian purposes to prevent several of the managers having heart attacks.
The Conrad Casino was the only one in Cairo that issued VIP cards, and immediately at that. We went straight for its buffet, which apparently offended a young pit boss. He sent a waiter over to ask whether or not we intended to play. I immediately went back to the tables and bought in $2,000 on one of his tables to demonstrate to him our sincerity to play and to put into motion my desire to take their money.
Y started playing while we ate. I finished my soup and went to join him. He told me the running count was minus 2 so I started out playing only one hand. Small cards poured out like waves in the ocean. The running count ran wild to a plus 15. We piled the bets up until they reached $500 on three different hands. The count dropped back to minus 2 but I still lost $200 in the process. I returned to the buffet for another very tasty soup and when I arrived back at the table, I was pleased to be told that I was being greeted by another plus 15 count. I back-bet Y’s two hands. We pushed the bets to the table maximum of $1,000, losing $3,000 in the process and had to obtain money from our friends in order to continue. The results of the hands finally turned, making us $3,000 richer by the end of the session.
My next stop was an Internet cafe. A friend asked me about the games in Cairo. I told him about the good rules but requested that he not share the details with others. Many people have expressed a lack of comfort regarding my writing of good games. Many have questioned my motivations for being so forthcoming. This list, most notably, includes my girlfriend and my good friend and travel partner Mark Dace. For the record, let it be known that I choose to write about the less sensitive parts of my tales. The better and more lucrative games I now keep private, primarily at the insistence of the above two mentioned individuals.
LG had played mostly hit-and-run, mostly in Las Vegas, using a big spread that attracted a great deal of attention at the much smaller Egyptian casinos. Counters can profit with small spreads when playing games with good rules such as those in Cairo and Moscow. His style of play affected us since we would arrive together and were all of Oriental heritage. He would also wong in, opening new boxes, then, after enjoying some large card production, wong out, leaving the less attractive cards for us. I informed him that such conduct was impolite. He acknowledged my words and made some adjustments. LG lost his big win from Cairo Sheraton to Nile Hilton. This play was not only costly from a financial standpoint in the short term but in the long term as well as this casino eventually started cutting 4 decks out of 6 on us. At about the same time, the Ramses Hilton gave us only a half a shoe between shuffles.
We next went to play in a casino near the Cairo Sheraton. The first shoe was very positive but we I lost $2,000 and, in the process, attracted much attention. The casino manager told the dealer to ignore Y’s fake attempt at surrendering with three cards. Although the manager portrayed himself as knowledgeable and he was pointed in his comments, we didn’t take his hint and recovered our loss. He came to the table again and commented loudly that, “You lost on small bets but are winning on big ones.” He asked us semi-jokingly to play smaller. We ignored him again, won $2,000 and left. We later discovered he sent a blacklist about us all over Egypt including to the Sinai Grand, a casino on the Sinai Peninsula.
After I won $9,000 in five days the casinos turned their backs on us beginning on the sixth day, which was an eternity compared to a Hong Kong counter’s fate. He survived Cairo only hours. The Cairo Sheraton stopped us at their entrance after checking a blacklist and refused our entrance. Additionally, the Ramses Hilton half-shoed us, the Semiramis Intercontinental Casino stopped me after I played several shoes, asking me not to play blackjack. Y was simultaneously barred at the Conrad. We certainly had made a mistake by scouting the casinos together.
Having been barred by most big casinos, we went to play the Movenpick Heliopolis Casino which opened at 8PM. The casino had only one $3 to $50 table. It had the same good rules as most other Egyptian casinos. We were given four decks to play out of six initially. Suddenly, the dealer moved the shuffle point up to two decks without the pit boss’s instructions, following a shoe where we had jumped our bets. The pit boss noticed the bad cut, and asked the dealer to cut deeper for us. I tracked a shoe successfully only to lose hand after hand even while the large cards were produced. We won the last hand betting nine boxes of $50 which gave us a small win of $125, much to the disappointment of the casino staff as we were the only customers all night.
We discovered three casinos in Sharm El Sheik, a beach town on the Sinai peninsula, and decided to give them a try. It was easy arranging a ticket and we made a decision to go there in the morning and flew there that evening. The 500 kilometer flight cost us $181 round trip. The town is on the shore of the Red Sea. We choose to stay at the Movenpick as it had a casino. A twin room cost us $110 although locals paid only $67. The casinos opened at 9 pm.
The Movenpick’s Royale Casino was affiliated with an Austrian Gaming Group. We were a little nervous about entering the casino given our experience from the Austrian-backed Semiramis Intercontinental Casino in Cairo. Nobody seemed to care about us. While we were entering, LG was on his way out. The game was poor with bad rules that included no surrender and only 66% penetration. I, however, found the game playable. I played one shoe then went to check other places.
We were stopped at entrance of the Sinai Grand Casino. Y went and chatted with the pit bosses, discovering that the casino received a flyer from Pyramisa on us. Accordingly, no play was available to us there. The last casino in the city was Sharm, an independent casino that was not tipped off as to our expertise. It sported bad rules and low limits with a $100 maximum wager versus the Royale’s $200 maximum. I left with small win from this trackable game for the higher limit at the Royale.
We were lucky at Royale, winning three rounds during which we wagered an aggregate of $500 (5 boxes of $100 each, having jumped from $20 on each hand). We quit after the win. It was 2:30 AM but the streets were lively with many tourists sipping water pipes at roadside cafes. I could even check the Internet at this hour.
The Vacation Village had a good buffet breakfast, which pleasantly interrupted our intended sleep time. The village was big. It provided carts that took guests to restaurants and the beach, a semi-necessity considering the 37 degree centigrade (99° F) heat. In view of the poor games, I tried to arrange for a flight to the Luxor through the nearby mall. A merchant invited me to his new shops that had opened that Friday, the Muslim weekend. The merchant lied shamelessly claiming that he painted the papyrus himself. I inquired about a glass perfume bottle. He asked for $25, claiming it to be crystal. I had bought the same one in Cairo for $2.
We went for a glass bottom boat ride. There are coral reefs very close to the shore. Swimmers could enjoy watching colorful fish easily. Amongst the travelers on the boat was a large Egyptian family who danced joyfully during the boat ride. Y and LG regretted wasting time here and leaving the big city in light of Cairo’s good games.
We went together to check the last local casino, Casino Aladdin at Domina Coral Bay Resort. We were pleased to find the casino offering ES10 and re-splitting of aces. Penetration was also acceptable at 75%. The table was in Euros, $5 to $200. We bought Euros from the MISR Banks counter in the casino at very bad rate (6% below the market rate). The bank clerk said we could buy our dollars back at a 2% fee. LG didn’t want to play but jumped in opening new boxes when the count shot up. We won close to $1,000 Euros in one shoe. The casino sent in an eagle-eyed manager. We used fake names entering the casino and weren’t looking for longevity so played aggressively. My partner and I moved to another table, thereby avoiding jumping bets in unison with Y and LG. I lost back most of my win rather quickly. Y won 900 Euros and quit. LG won 1,300. We borrowed their Euros before they left. The casino was not happy with their winning and instructed the dealer to half-shoe us. We still won 1,100 Euros with shuffle tracking.
On returning to exchange the Euros back, the bank clerk asked for a higher than the originally quoted 2% fee. I guessed that he might make more than his bank’s president with his powerful laundering position, since he gave no receipts for our transactions. On exiting this “chamber of cons,” we declined the taxi standing by at the casino exit that was asking three times that of the meter. At least the Egyptian people were consistent with their attempts to rip us off in all facets of their business dealings. On a more positive note, the resort was very romantic under moonlight.
We went to the Aladdin early on our last evening in the country. The eagle-eyed manager was waiting for us, and informed us that we were on Austria Casino Group’s blacklist and were no longer welcome. Aladdin had gotten the list from the Royale, obviously, as we were not allowed to enter that location. We went to the last playable joint, Sharm, and, with aggressive betting won $100. Then the casino half-shoed me. We left.
We headed back to Cairo for the last 10 hours before leaving the country. My partner had hidden some chips from the Hiltons, so we went chip cashing. We were barred there but able to cash the chips. I exchanged some money at the National Bank of Egypt. The clerk used 5.69 as the exchange rate instead of the posted 5.96 for me. On purpose? When I pointed this out to him, he said “Oops.”
That aside, I won $9,870, Y won $12,000, and LG $7,000 from casinos in Cairo and elsewhere in Egypt in 10 days. I am sure I will not play blackjack at casinos in Egypt again unless my heart is lighter than a feather! ♠
Some casinos in Ecuador offer full Early Surrender in addition to dealer stands on soft seventeen (S17), double after splits (DAS), double on any two cards (DA2), European no-hole card (with dealer blackjacks taking doubles and splits), on 6-deck games with 66% penetration. The limits are low, however, with most maximums in the $30 to $50 range. Card counting blackjack players should be able to cover travel expenses but not expect a big win.
Major Casinos in Ecuador
Quito Colon Hilton MRP Casino (MRP has been running casinos for over 50 years). There is only one MRP casino in Quito, the capital city of Equador, and it has a higher tolerance of winning players than other casinos here. There are three MRP casinos at Guayaquil, the largest city of the country. The Guayaquil casinos will react faster to card counters and will inform all other MRP properties about you. The other 10 casinos in Quito are not worthwhile to play.
Risks: Normal travel precautions should be taken as with any low-income country.
Foreign Exchanges: No control.
Transportation: Cheap taxis.
Accommodations: Can be easily arranged by the airport Service Center.
Blackjack Traveling in Quito and Colon, Ecuador
Equador is the smallest country in South America with 15 million people,1.5 million of whom live in Quito. Quito is the second highest elevation capital city in the world at 8,500 feet above sea level. The Galapagos Islands are the main attraction for foreign visitors because Darwin invented his theory of evolution there.
The airport Service Center arranged the Hotel Quito for us (my girl friend and I), for which we paid $54 a night including breakfast and airport transfer. Taxi fare costs less than $3 within the city. We went to a restaurant recommended by Lonely Planet and ordered the $6 seafood plate, only to have it cost us $11.50 (it was mediocre).
There was a rotten casino called Reynabel nearby the hotel that was not among those on the casino list I printed from Casinocity.com. There were but two small blackjack tables here with $10 and $20 maximums, but at 8 p.m. they still were not open! We took a bus to visit Saqisili market where they sold clothes, carpets and agricultural products. We were shocked to see a woman peeing on the roadside. We had dinner at Hong Kong Chinese Restaurant, spending $10.
Crown Plaza has the second largest casino here, but with poor rules (Early Surrender against 10—ES10–only) and penetration (66%). We then went to a very small casino called Tambo Real. It offered the same poor rules but the dealer mistakenly gave us $10 chips for $5! We left with a small win.
We headed for Colon, and though the table limits were low at $0.50 to $10, $1 to $25, and $2 to $50, we won $2,200 in 4 hours. We doubled A8 on our last hand, taking away the dealer’s 9 that would have made a dealer 21. One good thing is that the dealers seemed to be competing for the world speed-dealing championship. As a result, most dealt eight shoes an hour, giving us 60% extra play.
Colon is a world heritage site with many old churches and buildings. We walked into a small market that sells clothes. A woman cut my friend’s purse for her accomplice, while my friend caught her hand in the purse and yelled! The assailant ran away while waving a fruit knife at us. We went to three police stations to get a certificate (in Spanish) for insurance purposes. Later we learned that this Ipiales Market is very well known for pick-pocketing.
On our return to the casino, Colon welcomed us back warmly. We won $1,870 in five hours, a net figure after accounting for $55 in tips. In addition to Early Surrender, this casino offers Early Surrender after Doubling (basic strategy calls for surrendering stiffs against dealer’s 8 and up, and doubling on 11 against dealer’s 10). The rule gives an extra +0.15 EV for the player.
Mark Dace wished to join us, so we made a quick visit to all the casinos on my list to decide whether Colon was the only playable one in town. It was. But Colon would not open a new table for us on our third casino assault, which took place on a busy Saturday night.
Instead, we were asked to play at a $0.25 table with a $50 maximum limit. So we played five boxes, winning $700 in two hours.
An elderly lady bet $1 on one of my boxes (I had a bet of $20 on the same box). She would not surrender “my” 14 against the dealer’s 10. The dealer said the elderly lady owned the box despite the fact that I had been playing the box for quite some time.
After much discussion, the elderly lady finally gave up and left. Almost immediately, a large man who appeared to be of Korean descent joined the game and started to play two boxes. He asked rudely for my fifth box after several rounds of play. I ignored him and kept betting $2 at that box. He reluctantly bet behind me.
When I attempted to hit my 12 against the dealer’s 7 up card, he opposed my decision, claiming that he was betting bigger with his $10 wager. The dealer backed him up and allowed him stand on “my” 12. He played $50 on the next hand on my box. I continued to bet $2. The dealer pushed my money away. I complained. The Korean man jumped up and scowled at me. I ignored him. While this situation was unfolding, I was giving serious consideration to getting a bodyguard. The casino manager came to comfort the other player as if I was their common enemy. The player collected his money and left.
I kept on playing. Another Korean guy then joined the game. He asked politely for my fifth box and I agreed. The first Korean man came back and watched as I played five boxes of $50 and won them all. He cheered for me. I pointed to the fifth box and said, “All I want is a please.” We shook hands and played together until 4 a.m., which was the casino closing time. I won $1,600. The total win from Quito (mainly Colon) had amounted to $6,200 so far.
We went to take the Cotopaxi Mountain train recommended by the guidebook. It allowed for passengers to sit on the train top, but we hadn’t worn clothes warm enough for such an adventure. Foreigners were charged five times more on fares than the locals. It took two and half hours one way and the train waited an hour for passengers going to the cloud forest only.
We went to the good rules casino, Reynabel, but it was still closed. So we could only go back to poor overworked Colon. The casino manager was surprised when he saw me shake hands with the Korean gentleman. While in the casino, we met a guy who would later go with us to the rain forest. You can arrange a rain forest trip from Ecuador for a price of $400 for 6 nights including airfare.
The casino manager encouraged small bettors to play at my table. An Israeli student, who was learning Spanish while there, was playing the minimum of $0.50. He liked to split 10s, which cost me dearly. I hinted to him that he shouldn’t be doing that but he claimed it was an advantage move for him. I pointed out that his $1 win cost us a few hundred. He left soon after. Almost immediately, a new player joined. I had been betting behind a local guy who played basic strategy. The new player invited me to do the same. However, after observing him standing on his 15 against dealer’s 10, I withdrew my initial vote of confidence in him. He lost hundreds while I won $2,220.
There was a craft market near Colon and a Sunday market with a park facing it. The markets here sold better goods than we had seen in other markets in the country. I also went to see the Natural Museum; however, in my humble opinion, it was not worthwhile.
I played higher at Colon on my next casino visit, betting $20 off the top of a freshly shuffled shoe. The night started with a $700 loss but I ended up winning $710. The casino manager seemed very disappointed. Luckily, from the casino’s bottom line standpoint, the Korean gentleman lost $5,000.
Blackjack in Guayaqil, Ecuador
Our next city stop was to be Guayaquil, a southern city with a population of about two million people—the largest in the country. I met a businessman from my home country who was going there and I decided to join him in order to give Colon a break. Between his party and mine, there were seven of us, including my friend’s local contact, so we rented a van. My fellow countryman arranged a surprise brunch at a trout farm. We fished and caught nine rainbow trout for the chef to cook. These trout sold for $18 a kilo in my country but cost only $3 here.
After our meal, we dove down from the high plain. This small country has twice the average number of bird species (1,600) of all of North America. We stayed at a villa adjacent to a golf course. The villa’s owner was a friend of our local friend. The 60 acres of land was worth, I was told, half a million dollars and had 350 kinds of birds within its boundaries. We dined with humming birds flying around.
Guayaquil was named after Guaya, the Mayan king, and his queen, Quil. It was lively, hot and wet. We got a $54 room through my friend’s connection but paid $5.60 a minute for international calls.
There were four casinos in Guayaquil. Three (Unipark, Colon, and Oro Verde) were MRPs. The independent Ramada had the best game: 6D, S17, ES (including after doubling), 2 to 1 on suited blackjacks, unlimited full double after double, 3 to 1 for 777, and 7 to 1 on 7-card 21s. All of that and the shuffle was trackable! Basic strategy players, of which we saw none in this city, had an edge of over 1% off the top on this game. The table maximum was $30 per box and up to 7 boxes could be played by one player. I played seven boxes at maximum bets trying for $130 an hour expected value but ended up down $2,066 for the first night.
My friend bought 24 crabs and brought them to a Chinese restaurant for cooking. The owner said he played often at casinos and believed them to be honest. He also said the city was safe.
There was a park near our hotel known as Iguana Park, with about 50 iguanas climbing around. Locals believe that iguanas change to humans at night and, as a result, leave them alone. Conversely, some Chinese people have been known to pay $1,400 a head to eat them.
Mark Dace, who has traveled to many destinations with me, finally joined me from Las Vegas. He brought more specific and intricate strategies on the Ramada game such as doubling 8 against dealer’s 4 and 5, doubling 9 against 7, and doubling A2 through 4 against 3 when the true count was equal to or higher than plus 1.
We played at Ramada together. The casino was a tad scary. For example, there was a sign at the front door requiring that everyone leave their guns before entering. There was a certain comfort in having another trusted companion with us. Outside of the Ramada game, which had only two tables, we then split for higher action. I won $1,000 early in the day at Oro Verde (the Ramada was only open in the evening). On day #2 at the Ramada, we both lost. My end of the loss was $1,300.
We agreed the casino did not cheat, and that the initial losses were simply a byproduct of standard deviation. Day #3 produced a total group win of $4,000 while we both played at the same table.
The casino paid us partly in $5 bills. We took that as a bad sign that perhaps they didn’t have much money on hand and that the ceiling on our upside was possibly lower than our potential downside. Even so, although we had planned to leave Guayaquil to fly to Galapagos, we decided to play more at the Ramada for as long as they could stand it.
On day #4, we won $4,000 again while playing at the same table together and through some nicely tracked shuffles. At this point, we were not sure whether to press our luck at the Ramada or to play at other casinos. Mark wanted to keep on playing, predicting that the casino would change rules. We continued to play but cashed in our excess chips more frequently.
On day #5, we lost $1,400 very quickly to a tough (non-busting) dealer. I called it quits for the day. Mark stubbornly kept on playing and lost $1,900. I had won $3,000 earlier in the day from the three MRPs.
On day #6, we went back for revenge. Mark lost doubling A2 three times. I doubled my A2 four times to form a 6-card hard 17. The next card was a 4! I would have had a 7-card 21 and won $7,000 if I had doubled again. I felt tired and left earlier with a $700 win. Mark won $850.
My girlfriend and I went to the new history park while Mark was busy at Internet gaming. There was a small zoo with piglets and three-toed sloths.
On day #7 dawned the first rule change. The Ramada canceled the 7-card 21 bonus sensing the $7,000 risk. The tough dealer was glued to our table for seven hours, resting only for toilet breaks. We lost $1,400 to him despite the fact that he was the most trackable shuffler.
Day #8 found us to be the only blackjack players on a Friday night despite the great rules. I won $1,750, while Mark lost $850 playing at the same table.
Mark had only two nights left. We went back to the Ramada Saturday night and won $4,000 in 6 hours. We decided to leave early (the casino closed at 4 a.m.), as there were many strangers milling around the casino and we had already received many small bills while cashing in that evening. When we (that is, Mark and I, as my girlfriend didn’t come out of a fear of being barred) left at 3 a.m., there was no taxi. This was very unusual. We left with close to $10,000. The casino security found a taxi for us that had no sign on it to designate it as such. We held the door handles on both sides and were ready to jump out at the first sign of a wrong turn.
Back to Colon for More Blackjack
On the last night I went to the Colon casino. Casino security tried to talk to me, but they were stopped by the casino manager before they could convey their thoughts. I thought perhaps I was not wearing formal enough attire. I lost $2,000, and then, while exiting, was told not to come back. Afterward, I wondered if I would have been paid had I won or, if I had started winning, at what point they would have stopped me. Once again, there was the risk of a big downside with a small or no upside.
With no more MRP casinos for us to profit from, we headed once again for Ramada. Here we found what we knew was inevitable. They had drastically changed the rules, canceling all favorable rules, and they limited our bets to a $20 minimum and a $40 maximum.
As Mark had shown an interest in the poker table at some point during the trip, the casino owner invited Mark to play Texas Hold’em with him that evening or the next day. Mark was leaving the next day but he did not want the owner to know so he stated that he would play him the following evening. However, Mark left without having joined the poker game as he didn’t like the “home field advantage” the casino owner had with his table, his cards and his own dealer. My girl friend and I left for the beach town of Salinas. There were two casinos there and an interesting 8,000-year-old “lovers’ tomb” at the “Las Vegas” area.
The Barecelo Colon Mirama, an MRP casino, was not open on Monday, so we played at the Calypsso Casino, which had the same good Ramada rules. We won a total of $30 with the table maximum of $10 per box. The casino would not raise the limits.
On the next session, we won $500 in three hours. The casino changed dealers frequently (like a bad bullpen that keeps trotting out another pitcher). We lost back our profits to the last of many dealers. The casino owner sat at our table’s third base position and started whistling along with the music that was playing as our profits for the day dwindled down to nothing. He stopped whistling as soon as we began to win again and decided to close the table early. My girlfriend was not keen on playing at such a small joint, fearing they might go over the edge and do something drastic. I didn’t think a $10 maximum casino would do something funny.
At the Colon Miramar, we were stopped at the entrance and forced to wait. We were not let in. With all of our options taken away in the southern part of the country, I went back to Quito, and the Quito Colon specifically, to change a $100 chip I had found. My girl friend would not go to the casino. Surprisingly, I was welcomed warmly. We won $50 and $1,200 in two nights. We stopped early the second night hoping to lengthen our playing life, which was a mistake as the news from the casinos in Guayaquil finally arrived in the form of a letter.
We ended up winning $18,500 from the country of Ecuador playing blackjack. That number is equal to approximately ten years income of an average Ecuadorian.
Two months later, Mark walked into the Bellagio poker room and was surprised to find the owner of the Ecuador Ramada casino there playing 20/40 hold’em. Mark joined the game and early on the two of them were in two pots heads up. Mark won both pots. The Ramada owner left $2 on the table to save his seat but never returned! Victory is sweet whether it be on foreign or domestic soil! ♠
Counting cards at blackjack is a fun, simple way to get an advantage over the house. But counting cards for a living is a tough row to hoe and for one simple reason—the casinos are fully aware of this technique and allow it to continue for their own selfish reasons.
They enjoy the word-of-mouth advertising that goes along with the “counter culture” but they don’t want serious winners taking up space at their tables. With the heat that inevitably results, if all you do is count, you’ll just b-a-a-a-r-e-l-y eke out a profit after expenses. You need more. You deserve more. You can get more by exploiting dealer error (DE).
However, some people in the “counter culture” object to accepting any of the fruits of dealer error. They take the position that this is akin to accepting change for a twenty at the supermarket when you handed the cashier a ten.
I feel this is a misguided analogy for several reasons, though I can respect that point of view. But these people must recognize they are relegating their play to amateur standing. Every advantage play in blackjack beyond simple card counting, from holecarding to steering to shuffle tracking, involves exploiting dealer or house error in one form or another.
Professional advantage players have few qualms about exploiting dealer error; it’s the part-timers that seem to object. Professionals seem to agree with Stanford Wong who wrote in Basic Blackjack: “When a dealer makes an error in the casino’s favor, speak up and get it corrected… When the dealer makes an error in your favor, overlook the error and forgive the dealer.”
In fact, most pros have a trick or two up their sleeves to unsteady the hand of the dealers they face on a daily basis. This can be quite lucrative for an alert player, and will be the subject of this article.
To Find Dealer Error, Pick Your Casino
The casino gets to choose their opponents. If they don’t think they can beat you, they’ll show you the door. When possible, you should exercise the same discretion. Here are some desireable traits in a casino:
Any casino less than a year old still has a few dealers in diapers.
Any casino that has recently undergone expansion in size, hours of operation, or number of table games will have more than its share of error-prone newbies.
Any casino that supports many different table games, and rotates dealers amongst the games—well, you have to feel sorry for those crazy, mixed-up nerf herders.
Any casino on the weekend or a holiday will have some part-time dealers working the extra tables.
In particular, a casino that stays open all night, just on the weekends, will have some tired unhappy dealers working those shifts. (How well do you function at 3:00 in the morning?)
Desireable Traits in a Dealer if You Want to Exploit Dealer Error
Once you’ve chosen your casino, and enter the belly of the beast, you still have several choices to make. You get to pick out your table, your seat, and your dealer. Perhaps 90% of dealer error earnings comes from choosing the right dealer. Try to choose a dealer with one or more of the following characteristics:
Dealers who seem unhappy in their work.
Unkempt or harried looking dealers.
Dealers who seem to be “steaming” after a confrontation with a supervisor.
Very young or very elderly dealers.
Dealers with hands that literally shake.
Very fast dealers.
Dealers who seem to be on autopilot. No “pace in the face.”
Dealers who seem pleased with big player wins (subconscious bias).
Dealers who are “yucking it up,” and having a lot of fun with the players.
Very attractive female dealers. (They may be extremely competent, but there’s also a chance they landed their positions for reasons other than skill on the job.)
Dealers who like you, personally.
Just plain crazy dealers.
Dealers with less than six months of blackjack dealing experience.
And (most important) dealers you’ve observed making errors in the past.
A word about fast dealers: Inexperienced counters may find rapid-fire dealing unsettling, but as you gain experience, you will find this a lucrative source of revenue. These people deal fast to escape from boredom, and often they are bored because the possibility that they could be making blunders right and left has never occurred to them. Here is my favorite story about a fast dealer:
Somehow, I found myself in this real dump of a casino. They have opaque covers over the shoes and the discard trays just to thwart card counters. They truly deserved this high and mighty dealer who pumped out about 700 hands a minute and honest-to-god believed she never made a mistake in her life.
The guy sitting next to me hits hard 13 and gets a 9. He waits for dealer to sweep up the cards, but instead he hears, “Sir, you have to make a hand signal.” The guy just replies “Look at the cards!” Dealer says “Yes, I know sir, but you have to give a signal.” … “What signal? Just add up the cards!” … “Sir, if you don’t give me a hand signal, I’ll have to call over the pit boss.” … At this point, I’m getting ticked off, because this is holding up the game. In unison, he and I together practically screamed “LOOK AT THE CARDS!!”
You guessed it—she didn’t look. She was sure it was 21. Instead, she called over her boss. I swear on a stack of bibles, neither pit boss nor dealer ever once looked down to add up the man’s hand. Boss looks this guy straight in the eye and intones: “Sir, the dealer can not move on until you give a clear hand signal.” He shook his head while making frustrated waves in the air, which they took to mean stand.
The dealer eventually broke and payed off the 22. Man said: “I don’t want this. I don’t deserve it.” They practically crammed that $20 down the poor man’s throat.
But whatever dealer you choose, if you sit there for thirty minutes and don’t observe a single error in any player’s favor, you’re at the wrong table. Professorial types may be surprised to learn this factor is even more important than penetration.
If you’re in an unfamiliar casino, you may be wondering just how to tell whether a dealer has been working there for three months or three years. There’s a less obvious way to ask besides just coming out with “How long have you worked here?” (although there’s no law against asking it like that). However, it involves telling a little white lie. I’ll leave it to you to figure out, and to decide whether white lies fall within your moral calculus.
While you’re picking out a dealer, you also get to:
Choose Your Table
Choose a table in the region of noisy slot machines and distracting sirens, or where the dealer must stare right across at blinking neon lights. Anything to distract her! You may be distracted as well, but remember—her job is much more difficult than yours.
Choose a table where the players themselves are distracting.
Attractive, scantily clad female players, with a male dealer.
Drunk players who are giving the dealer a hard time.
Players just generally raising a ruckus. Balloons, crazy hats, noise makers, the more the merrier.
One player who chatters constantly about everything under the sun except blackjack. You know the type—borderline schizophrenic. It’s best if this sad case talks in a loud voice and insists on engaging the dealer in dialogue. No normal dealer can maintain his equilibrium in this situation. If the guy starts talking to you, offer him five dollars to talk to the dealer. Explain that the dealer is having personal problems and “really needs to talk.” In fact, it might pay you to find such a person and pay him minimum wage to travel from casino to casino with you. (Untested by the author.
Choose Your Seat
The ideal seat is to the right of an attractive player, and to the left of an obnoxious player, or that flashing neon sign I mentioned before. You want the dealer to rush past you to attend to the hottie sitting next to you.
All else being equal, it’s generally best to sit at first base or third. It’s an uncomfortable viewing angle for the dealer, and he may be distracted by action at an adjoining table. Also, several DE ploys depend on sitting at first or third.
At The Table
Once seated, the general idea is to tally all your totals, plus every dealer total, and watch every payoff like a hawk to make sure no errors work against you. If you are very quick at this, you may save the dealer the embarrassment of calling over her boss to fix the goof. (A grateful dealer may be subconsciously motivated to make future errors in your favor. She may even relax a bit, if she has the impression you’re watching out for her.)
But just staying on your toes is only the tip of the iceberg. In Cheating at Blackjack, Dustin D. Marks (you gotta love that handle) describes a few “OEMs,” which stands for “Oh, excuse me.” He claims there are hundreds of them.
Now, being a crook, Marks has a guilty conscience and instictively gravitates to the illegal types of OEMs. He describes them as “a con game” where you “play the part of a beginner.” But for most OEM, there is a perfectly legal, moral variation (advantage ploy?), assuming you agree with the court rulings that say it’s legal to take advantage of dealer error.
I don’t have a guilty conscience. I never say “Oh, excuse me.” I say “Oh, I noticed the dealer made a mistake, but I didn’t want to embarrass him.” For example, Marks describes a con where he places a large bet half-in/half-out of the first base betting circle. Then, if the dealer mistakes this for a bet and the first card isn’t to his liking, he claims he “asked for change.”
There’s no need for that. What you do (while sitting at first base) is wait until the dealer seems distracted, then place the large bet clearly outside the circle, but also outside her viewing angle. Then when you get a bad card, you’re clearly entitled to bow out of the hand completely (though it would be a courtesy to place a minimum bet, so the next player isn’t stuck with your bad card). And if you get an ace or ten, there’s a chance your dealer will call over her boss. But whether she does or she doesn’t, there’s an excellent chance you’ll be able to bet whatever you like—even more than the change amount—on that hand.
There’s no need to lie; no need for a guilty conscience. Merely placing the bet outside the circle constitutes a request for change in every casino I’ve played. It certainly doesn’t constitute a bet. If asked, you honestly, legitimately reply that you never intended to bet that amount.
I’m not sure there are “hundreds” of ways to encourage dealer error, but I have have dozens on file in my computer. I will only list those executed successfully by myself or other advantage players I know.
Dealer Error and Getting the Dealer on YOUR Side
Give the dealer an extravagent compliment after you play for a few minutes. Make her blush!
When it fits into the conversation, stress that everyone makes mistakes, and how we all hate people who claim to be perfect. (Give the dealer a subconscious excuse to screw up—but don’t buy your own spiel.) This comment isn’t about this dealer in particular, of course.
Ask the dealer how he can work when it’s so hot/cold/dry/humid/nice outside—whatever! Anything to give the dealer an excuse for lapses.
Assure the pit boss that this dealer is quite efficient. (Reduce perceived or real pressure on the poor girl to perfect her skills.)
React with anger toward the pit boss if you witness a dealer reprimand. “Who does he think he is, yelling at you like that? How do you get to be a pit boss, anyway??”
If there is no job-related acrimony, it might pay to create a little. Mention you heard about the personnel cutbacks. “How can they cut five dealers, like so-and-so said, and still keep all their tables open??”
Ask about work rules for dealers. “You mean you’re not allowed to have a drink at the table?” (Subtle message: dealers are good; the house deserves little consideration.)
On the other hand, if the dealer seems like a total house lackey, mention what a great place this is, what a nice guy the pit boss is, etc. Obscure the line between the cowboys and the Indians.
It helps if others at the table mention that you deserve a break, with all the bad luck you’ve been having. To say it yourself out loud draws too much attention.
It’s ok to say “now be good to me!” once per dealer.
There are recent experiments from Princeton, Edinburgh and elsewhere that suggest there may be an unexplained form of communication between humans. Here is a fairly thorough popular exposition: http://www.dichotomistic.com/mind_readings_psi%20ganzfeld.html
It may simply be poor test design, but in any event it can’t hurt to project the thought, the image if you will, that you deserve the benefit of dealer error.
Blend In
Although you’re a nice guy(irl), you’re not so obviously great that the dealer wants to spend all his(er) time on you. You don’t need the attention.
Don’t be loud or abrasive. Elicit sympathy when you lose, but don’t swear. Give off good, friendly vibes when you win.
Don’t let the dealer add for you. Release the dealer from this “obligation” by intoning “I know” if she announces your total.
Avoid heat like the plague. Even before getting “the word” from the boss, your dealer will sense heat and tighten up.
You don’t need to telegraph the fact you’re a big winner with huge mounds of chips. Color up often. Keep blacks and above in your pocket. Everyone knows they can be snatched right off the table.
Sit at a high rolling table with slightly higher limits than you’re accustomed to.
You can afford to bet a little more when the dealer is a dufus.
Your bets will seem small to the dealer, not worth special attention.
If a player points out an error by the dealer to your spot, it’s probably time to move on to another table.
On the other hand, if a dealer catches her own error to any spot, stick around! You know she’s prone, but she’ll be giving herself big strokes for catching the goof.
Increase Your Chances of Valuable Dealer Error
Play toward the beginnings and ends of shifts (but not through a shift change), when dealers are likely to be fresh, or tired.
In head-to-head play, try to quicken the pace to increase DE (but maintain your own accuracy).
Sit at a table where the cards are “sticking”. This can disrupt a dealer’s natural rhythm and enhance DE.
Playing on humid days enhances the sticking possibility. (It’s especially nice if the air conditioning is on the fritz.)
Every dealer has a certain amount of time/energy she habitually devotes to mental arithmetic. Get the dealer busy calculating anything other than your total. Eg. ask how much profit the average blackjack table pulls in for the house per month. Or how much she made in tips last week.
At the end of a hand with many hits, as dealer is making payoffs and before hands have been collected, point at another player and say “Wait, she has X, doesn’t she?” (where X would win), forcing the dealer to add up that total a second time. Time/energy again. In my experience, the time/energy factor outweighs the extra attention you receive—as long as the dealer continues to like you. Don’t do this when the total is really wrong. That can slow down the dealer and make her more cautious.
Cap your bets with two reds or a red and a green, so you need to color-up often. The red on top makes your spot look less important, at first glance. And more color-ups means more chances for DE on color-ups. The impact on time/energy is inexorable. Most dealers are under pressure to deal a certain number of hands per hour.
Every time the dealer’s total comes within one point—plus or minus—of your 4 or more card hand, quietly express satisfaction (smile and exhale). The idea is to get the dealer to have faith in your reaction, on the minus hands, so she pays off pushes, or pushes one-point losers, on the plus hands.
At a loose, happy table, try adding the dealer’s total for her. Announce her first hit correctly, but one point low thereafter. This technique can draw the wrong kind of attention, so discontinue immediately when it fails (and it usually will fail).
On a round where there’s a fair chance for DE in your favor, look like a winner—subtly smug, and pleased with yourself. Whatever you do, don’t look chagrined when you lose by one point.
One $1 tip, along with the question “is there any way I can give this to you, personally?” will have more positive effect than two $2 tips. It’s usually not advisable to place bets for the dealer. It draws extra attention to your hand.
After one or two hits, ask for a card that would make 22. If you actually get that card, the dealer may think you have 21.
With three or more cards that add up to 12 vs. a 2 or 3 upcard, jokingly ask for a ten without giving a hand signal. If the dealer gives you a ten, truthfully explain it was a joke. After all, the dealer is supposed to wait for a hand signal. For any card other than a ten, ignore the dealer’s error, unless you happen to be sitting at third base, and the card would make the dealer bust.
When dealer is making payoffs, and you think she might push your one point loser, stare intently at the hand to your left. Deepen the impression your own hand holds little interest.
If you think dealer may push your one point loser, act like the winner you normally are. For example, stretch out your hand as if you’re getting ready to pull back those chips!
When you do get payed on a push, or push a loser, always withdraw your money immediately after the dealer passes you—especially if some do-gooder is pointing out dealer error that hurts the house. Save the dealer some embarrassment; remove the evidence.
Many people realize that odd sized bets can increase the chance of certain payoff errors, but it’s also true this can decrease your odds of getting paid on pushes. Adjust your approach to the dealer before you.
Strategy indices should be adjusted with an error-prone dealer. Doubling and splitting numbers can be lowered two points or even more versus a 2 through 5 (more likely to force multi-card arithmetic) and especially versus an ace. Double that hard eleven!
When the dealer makes an error in favor of the house, do NOT touch your chips. Speak up immediately. If you wait two seconds too long, you may wind up waiting a half hour for them to rewind the tape.
Any subtle odor the dealer doesn’t care for may cause her to move her nose (which happens to be a fixed distance from her eyes) quickly past your position, increasing the error rate. There are several possibilities … a touch of garlic … a hint of musk. I don’t suggest you take up smoking for DE sake. This is a game—not life and death.
If you get the cut card deep in a juicy shoe, cover it up with your hand or some chips. (Hey, you have to put your chips in neat stacks, don’t you?) Dealers seem to use the cut card as a visual cue to remember to shuffle, but that’s not your fault! I’ve seen dealers go all the way to the end of the shoe.
DE deja vu: If the dealer makes a mistake on a particular color-up, wait until you have that exact combination of chips, and color it up again! If the dealer pays too much on a natural with a $40 bet, bet $40 all the time, or if you have a strong count, try $140! If the dealer paid off once on your 3-4-5-T, you should be hitting your three and four card twelves vs. 4, 5 or maybe even a 6. You get the idea.
Some people consider this to be cheating. I don’t do it, but it’s between you and your conscience: In a pitch game, don’t throw in your four or more cards totaling 22. Especially if the dealer busts, there’s a fair chance he’ll just scoop up your hand netting you a 200% profit.
This one is even closer to the edge. I call it “Surrender for less.” If you decide to use it, use it only on your last day in a given casino for several months. With an even sized bet out, if you would normally surrender, remove half the bet while the dealer is occupied with players to your right. When it’s your turn say “surrender” and if the dealer only takes half the remaining chips, according to one guy I know, proper etiquette is never to point out an error unless it hurts you personally. (Any lawyers in the house?)
Types of Dealer Error: Misdeals
Any time the dealer deals an extra hand, or misses a hand, or any of a number of other things, the pit boss will be called over, and generally you will have the option to play your hand, or call it dead. Over half the time, your hand will be a net loser, so you should drop out.
This is like surrender without having to surrender anything. Many people are surprised to learn any hard 17 is a loser, even against a 5 or 6 (so toss it in!). Any 18 should be abandoned vs. a 9, T or A, and soft hands below 18 should generally be dropped unless basic says to double down. And other than T-T and 5-5, pairs that aren’t supposed to be split should be abandoned. Also abandon 8-8 vs. 8, 9 T and A. The precise strategy for handling the dead hand decision is given in Basic Blackjack.
Exposed Cards
Any cards exposed during the shuffle, the cut, or the play of the hands other than player hands and the upcard is a dealer error. There are strategies for playing exposed cards in several places, such as Basic Blackjack by Wong, Beat the Dealer by Thorp, and Beyond Counting by Grosjean. It’s possible to get an edge over 10% with optimal hole card play.
One card that’s often neglected is the bottom card after the shuffle and just before the cut. For example, if you know the bottom card is a ten, in a 1d game, and you can cut exactly in the middle, you know the 26th card dealt will be a ten — and that can be very precious knowledge. Even if you can only cut to within one or two cards of center, you could profit handsomely.
Occasionally, the dealer will expose the hole card in plain view for all to see. In this case, don’t be shy about hitting your hard 19 vs. the dealer’s 20! If the dealer’s two-card total is eleven or less, you should follow basic strategy for the corresponding upcard. Eg. if the dealer has 2-3, then you should play as if he has a 5 up. And if the dealer is stiff (total hard 12 – 16) you have only yourself to blame if you bust.
Much has been written about hole card play. James Grosjean has determined that perfect hole card play can net you +13% against the house, but that assumes you have perfect knowledge of the hole card 100% of the time, and you never make cover plays. If you forego the obvious giveaways, like hitting hard 17 or higher, you should net around 10% with perfect play.
If you know the top card of the deck or shoe you also have extremely valuable information. For example, if you’re sitting at third base, and you know the next card is a ten, there are many counter-intuitive situations where you should stand, rather than hit.
Broken Equipment
Any faulty equipment can put the dealer off kilter and increase errors. My favorite is a broken card reader—often advertized by tape over the hole. You may have thought the information in Read The Dealer by Forte was obsolete, but the first thing I look for as I case a casino is that tape.
You have a dealer with zero experience in hiding her reactions, manually peeking at hole cards. They won’t know the procedures, so you can be quite brazen. If you have a questionable play after a peek, look them straight in the eye and say “what do YOU think?” They won’t tell you, but if they like you and their hand is poor, they will look pleased. More likely they will hate you, since you’re a counter, so if they think you’re in a spot, they won’t be able to supress a slight grin.
Competent Dealer Incompetence
There are many players with a good knowledge of basic strategy who aren’t professional card counters. The dealer begins fitting you into one of her pigeon holes the minute you sit down to play. But you are going to be a square peg. Once the dealer has you down as a nice guy … knows his way around the table … unlikely to cause any problems … she will relax.
Here are some plays you should try only after the dealer has you categorized. They involve a higher level of deception than previous ploys, and may have more serious legal and moral implications. We list them for purely educational purposes without recommending them. They can work only once per dealer.
The ambiguous hit: While playing two hands, or with split hands, when you are done hitting the first one—or even if it’s stiff with a high upcard—don’t wave it off. Instead, wait half a second after the dealer gets distracted then make your next hit signal exactly in the middle between the two spots. If it looks good for hand #1, claim it was intended for hand #1. If it’s good for hand #2 … get the picture?
The hit/stand: To perfect this move you need to imagine what it looks like to the eye in the sky. It should clearly look like a hit to the camera, but like a probable stand to the dealer. You’re on third base. The dealer knows you. She knows you’re going to stand on that hand, and barely looks at you. She’s still talking to somebody on first base about that thing that happened day before yesterday. She hits her hand and it’s the seven that would have turned your 14 into 21. “Hey wait! I signaled for a hit!!”
The double/hit: This is a dealer on speed. He hits your hand the instant you give a signal. You have a few chips in the palm of your hand equal to the bet in the circle. You signal for a hit and simultaneously let go of the palmed chips, which fall in the vicinity of the circle. The instant you see the hit, if it’s no good you say “Oops!” If it’s a nice one, shout “Double!”
The quadruple down: All chips in the betting circle are the same color. You plan to double down. While the dealer is preoccupied with players on your right, add your doubling amount to the top of your bet. When it’s your turn, incompetent little you asks “how much more do I need to bet to double down?”. If the dealer says anything other than “zero,” you follow his instructions. He is, after all, the boss. [There are specific laws against “capping your bet” in many jurisdictions, so this play is included only for completeness. Not recommended.]
Summary
In general, every picayune procedure, every little nit you observe in the most paranoid of casinos, has a reason borne out of experience with the small con artist. If you think about those reasons, you will know what to do when you encounter a dealer who takes short cuts.
There’s not much in the literature on DE because mathematically it’s, well frankly it’s uninteresting. It’s also uninteresting if someone just hands you $25 an hour because you look pretty, but that’s no reason to turn it down. Nor is it a reason to stop shaving.
Over time, maximizing dealer error can have quite a salutary effect on your bankroll. In general, the win rate is increased with little negative consequence in the variance column. In fact, if you know for sure the dealer is a klutz, you may be justified in increasing your bets by 20 – 50% across the board.
Christmas comes early when the dealer is on your side. Always remember: “If the boss didn’t see it—it didn’t happen.” ♠
The most surprising thing for a blackjack player about the transition to roulette is the culture shock. Blackjack has had a few staid decades now since the transition to corporate casinos and shoe games and auto-peek devices. (It’s getting less staid again with all the new hand-held games that have been launched since the invention of bad payouts on naturals).
But roulette is like going back to the days when dealers peeked and Mickey MacDougall had to be at the table to protect Thorp from card mechanics. The thing to remember is that those were also the golden days before Beat the Dealer had been published, when the handful of people who had figured out how to beat the game had the opportunities all to themselves.
One way that roulette differs from modern blackjack is that at most U.S. casinos there is either no fixed dealing procedure for the game, or whatever procedure is in place is never enforced, except when it comes to payouts. Casinos are universally strict about procedures for roulette payouts. But everything else is up for grabs.
In recent weeks of looking at roulette in Las Vegas, I’ve seen dealers who were clearly trying to aim for players give the ball less than three spins. Most dealers have been giving the no-more-bets wave 3 to 4 spins from the time the ball falls off the wheel track, but it hasn’t been unusual to see dealers waving off bets ten or twelve spins out, even when big action players are still trying to get their bets onto the layout.
These dealers seem to have no awareness at all that many players prefer to bet after the spin and that this is a long-standing tradition in the game. The reason it’s a long-standing tradition is that players believe dealers can steer the ball and worry that dealers will try to steer against them. Dealers who wave off right after the spin seem to have no clue that action roulette players will keep chunking out chips on the layout as long as they are allowed to, and that dealers who wave off such players ten or twelve spins out are costing the house money. Inexplicably, the house allows this.
Between spins, some dealers remove the ball from the wheel and set it on the table, while others leave the ball in the wheel and only pick it up again when it’s actually time to launch the next spin.
Some dealers spin the wheel by giving the rotor edge a light nudge with their fingertips; other dealers grab a fret (the divider between pockets) and shove it to boost wheel speed.
Dealers are allowed to spin the wheel at any speed they want, even when the wheel speed is causing the ball to fly out of the wheel and off the table repeatedly during their shifts. No one in the pit seems to care about delaying the game to hunt down the ball and respin. When players at the table (typically Europeans) complain about the wheel speed, they are ignored.
To summarize, in the U.S. every roulette dealer seems to have his or her own idea of how the game ought to be run, and, with the exception of payout procedures, every one of them is allowed to deal the game however he or she wants.
To get an idea of how bizarre the lack of procedural uniformity is for U.S. roulette, imagine a world in which blackjack games were dealt with a similar lack of standards. Some dealers would be dealing one deck of a six-deck shoe, others would be dealing three decks, and others would be dealing every last card to the bottom. Some dealers would deal the game face up, while others, at their own discretion, would allow players to pick up the cards with one or both hands.
Imagine playing blackjack at a table where the cards dealt regularly flew past the table edge and landed on the players’ laps or the floor, or at a casino where every dealer could deal from either the top of the deck or the bottom of the deck on any hand, and use the auto-peek device or peek manually according to her mood. Think of what it would be like if every dealer was permitted to design his own shuffling procedure, or just move the cards from the discard tray into the dealing shoe without a shuffle whenever he felt like it.
That would be the rough equivalent of roulette as it currently exists in the U.S., especially Las Vegas. At no other casino game that I’m aware of does the dealer wield such absolute control over dealing procedures. Blackjack players familiar with standardized dealing procedures and dealers whose attitudes toward the players don’t affect the outcome of the game will be amazed by the loose roulette dealing culture.
I haven’t scouted roulette in Europe or elsewhere in the world, except for parts of Canada, so it may be different elsewhere. This article will focus on roulette as dealt in the U.S.
Roulette Culture from the Players’ Perspective
I’ll discuss the debate over roulette dealer signature and section shooting (or ball steering) directly below, but for the purposes of discussing roulette culture from the players’ perspective, I want you to just assume, for the moment, that some skilled roulette dealers can steer the ball accurately enough, frequently enough, to alter the house edge on the game, either in favor of the house or player.
All hardcore roulette players believe that dealers can “section shoot”—meaning steer the ball to the area around a desired number. Squares who get to Vegas only once or twice in a lifetime bet birthdays, anniversaries and other lucky numbers—typically one chip per number. There’s often no way for the dealer to aim for a table of these types—if there are two or three of them at table, they may cover every number on the layout with a single chip. It never occurs to such players to team up on a number and give the dealer something to aim at. These players bet before the spin and sit there placidly, waiting for luck to strike them or not—the ideal casino customers. They play small and, when their buy-ins are gone, they leave the table.
Hard core roulette players, by contrast, not only stack up their chips on a sector for the express purpose of giving the dealer something to aim at, but expect the dealer to deliver. I get the feeling from European roulette players that dealers in Europe are more widely competent at steering than dealers in the U.S.. European players get really pissed off when a dealer seems unable to hit a big sector.
Sometimes you’ll see a conflict at the table—one action player betting a sector around zero, for example, while another action player bets a sector around the 17. But usually one of these players will concede the battle fairly quickly, so everyone can team up and avoid diluting their results. If they don’t team up on one sector, they all tend to start betting both sectors. They all want to be in on the win if the dealer should start to aim.
I don’t mean that action players at roulette actually expect to win—they don’t, because they virtually never do. One reason they never do is because they bet too big of a sector (or too many sectors) for any dealer, no matter how skilled, to hit frequently enough to be able to overcome the house edge on all those bets.
Another reason such players lose is because it never seems to occur to them that what the dealer giveth, either through luck or skill, the dealer will soon taketh away. After these players get a few hits, they stack the chips higher or spread out on more numbers, and they quickly give their winnings back, plus some. Action roulette players seem comfortable with this arrangement. All they seem to expect is that the dealer will give them a decent amount of play and excitement for their money—significantly more play and excitement than they are likely to get without help at a game with a house edge of 5.26%.
At casinos or on shifts or in pits where virtually all of the dealers do seem to follow a strict house dealing procedure, or where none of them can steer, a crowd of hardcore action roulette regulars never seems to form. That’s because hardcore action roulette players tend to test dealers before they’ll commit any significant amount of money at their tables. Action players who buy in, stack up their chips in a sector, and get wiped out in two or three spins leave the table or the casino in disgust for a dealer who knows what he’s doing.
The Debate Over Roulette Dealer Signature and Steering
As I mentioned above, hardcore roulette players tend to believe that dealers can steer the ball to the area around a desired number. This belief is shared by many dealers and casino personnel.
Casino management consultants and gambling experts, on the other hand, have almost universally denied the possibility. Let me first lay out the recent history of the debate, and then I’ll provide my response to each aspect of the argument.
As I pointed out in “The Roulette Debate Heats Up” (Blackjack Forum Vol. XII #1, March 1992—link at the upper left) John Scarne, in his 1978 revision of Scarne’s Guide to Casino Gambling, states in response to a reader’s question about roulette dealer steering:
The modern wheel, with its obstacles on the bottom track of the bowl, together with the fact that the croupier must spin the wheel and ball in opposite directions and must spin the ball from the last number into which it dropped, makes [steering or section shooting] an impossible feat even for the greatest of all Roulette croupiers. I once heard a lady friend of mine ask a croupier in a Las Vegas casino if he could drop the ball into any slot he wished. “Lady,” he said, “if I could do that I wouldn’t be working here. I’d have been worth millions years ago.”
In some makeshift casinos throughout the country you may, however, find croupiers who can drop the little white ball into any predetermined group of 12 adjacent numbers on the wheel. Doc Winters, an old-time crooked Roulette dealer, could even drop the ball into any six-numbered section he desired. But this can only be done by spinning wheel and ball in the same direction and using a wheel that has no obstacles. You can guard against this sort of cheating by not placing your bets until after wheel and ball are spinning, just before the croupier announces that no further bets are allowed.
Russell Barnhart, in his 1992 book Beating the Wheel, has a chapter titled “Can the Croupier Control the Ball?” He describes a meeting between himself and a couple of European gambling experts and says this:
There was one point on which we all agreed. No croupier can ever consciously influence, even in the slightest degree, the ultimate destination of the ball as it circles the roulette wheel. Indeed, no croupier can get it into even a predesignated half of the wheel, let alone into 1, 2, or 3 favored numbers.
Barnhart goes on to quote Alois Szabo, one of the people at the meeting:
In theory it seems not impossible that an adroit croupier with tremendous experience might succeed in directing the ball according to his wish, but he could do so only if he could spin as he wanted and if there were no obstacles to divert the ball on the border of the roulette machine.
Szabo goes on to say that numerous roulette dealers had told him that directing the ball was impossible. He wrote, “One of them told me that in the Roulette School he and his colleagues tried countless times not to spin but simply to drop the ball into a certain number, and even in this they succeeded very rarely.”
Szabo also wrote that the most experienced croupiers, after a lifetime of practice, agreed “that only under the following conditions could one possibly succeed in spinning the ball into a predetermined section of the wheel:”
If the spinner could throw from a fixed point in every instance.
If, each time he does so, the wheel were turning in the same direction as the ball.
If the wheel were always turning at the same speed.
If he could always spin with the same hand.
If, and this is most important, there were no obstacles [canoes or ball stops] on the machine.
Ironically, Barnhart says later in his book that he believes in dealer signature (the unconscious creation of an exploitable pattern in spin results, based on fixed dealing habits), which strikes me as illogical. If the obstacles and other factors that he identifies actually worked to randomize results too much to allow conscious dealer steering to a predictable number, they would also randomize results for ball spins that weren’t consciously aimed.
In any case Barnhart refers to Stephen Kimmel as a recent proponent of the idea of unconscious dealer signature. In fact, he says Stephen Kimmel came up with the term “dealer’s signature.” The basic idea of dealer signature is that a person who deals roulette eight hours a day 50 weeks a year will tend to develop routines that would create predictable results for the dealer’s ball spins. Kimmel published his views on roulette in an article titled “Roulette and Randomness” in the December 1979 issue of Gambling Times.
Kimmel suggested scouting for dealer signature by looking for a series of results a similar number of pockets apart. If you’re walking by a roulette wheel, for example, and you see on the reader board that the last five results are 1-19-23-30-34-27 (on an American wheel), you are looking at results that are all eight pockets back from the previous result (an extremely unlikely occurrence). Kimmel said you’d need to see at least 50 spins before you started to bet, but he tracked 199 spins before betting on a dealer in Las Vegas.
Barnhart says many more spins than that would be required. I will quickly point out that the number of trials required to ascertain exploitable dealer signature would depend on how strong the signature was—a weaker pattern of results would require more results to confirm an exploitable signature than a strong, consistent pattern of results.
Ed Thorp on Dealer Signature and Steering
Ed Thorp addresses Kimmel’s dealer signature article in the roulette chapter of his book, The Mathematics of Gambling (Gambling Times, 1984). He writes that for dealer signature to be exploitable three factors must be consistent from spin to spin: rotor speed, ball revolutions, and the position of the rotor at ball launch.
Thorp also provides a formula for statistical analysis of roulette that has since become key in the arguments of all gambling experts who maintain that dealer steering and signature cannot occur. Thorp instructs analysts to gather data on the number of revolutions the ball makes between release and crossing onto the rotor, and to state the results as the “average number of revolutions plus an error term.”
Next, the analyst should count the number of revolutions the rotor makes during each of these ball spins, and again compute the average number of revolutions, plus a second error term. Finally, Thorp instructs roulette analysts to “count how far the ball travels on the rotor after it has crossed the divider between the rotor and the stator.” These results should again be summarized as an average distance (in pockets or revolutions) plus an error term.
To tie it all together, Thorp says that for a dealer’s “signature” to be exploitable, “it is necessary that the square root of the sums of the squares of the error terms be less than 17 pockets.” In other words, if the dealer’s average ball spin is 10 revolutions, plus or minus 10 pockets, and his average rotor spin during each ball spin is six revolutions, plus or minus 19 pockets, and the average ball roll is 19 pockets, plus or minus 19 pockets, you square each error term and add them up: (10 x 10) + (19 x 19) + (19 x 19) = 100 + 361 + 361 = 822. Now take the square root of 822, which is 28.7.
Thorp provides a table that shows the rate of return given various root mean square errors (“Typical Error E”). This table is reproduced below. If you look at Thorp’s table, a Typical Error E of 28-29 pockets would have you betting at a disadvantage of 5.26% (the house edge on an American wheel) if you were trying to exploit dealer signature in this situation.
Percent Advantage Betting on Best:
Typical Error E (No. of Pockets)
Pocket
Octant
0
3500.00
620.00
1
1278.53
611.06
2
610.69
467.86
3
376.52
328.65
4
258.12
236.98
5
186.76
175.71
6
139.09
132.62
7
105.00
100.89
8
79.41
76.65
9
59.54
57.60
10
43.77
42.38
11
31.19
30.18
12
21.24
20.52
13
13.54
13.03
14
7.73
7.37
15
3.47
3.24
16
0.46
0.30
17
– 1.62
– 1.72
18
– 3.01
– 3.07
19
– 3.90
– 3.94
20
– 4.46
– 4.49
21
– 4.81
– 4.82
22
– 5.01
– 5.02
23
– 5.13
– 5.13
24
– 5.19
– 5.19
25
– 5.23
– 5.23
26
– 5.24
– 5.25
27
– 5.25
– 5.25
28
– 5.26
– 5.26
29
– 5.26
– 5.26
30
– 5.26
– 5.26
31
– 5.26
– 5.26
∞
– 5.26
– 5.26
Thorp goes on to explain that his own observations of roulette dealers in action indicate that the error terms at each stage will be too large to make dealer signature exploitable.
My own observation is that the dealer error in the number of revolutions for the ball spin is about 20 pockets for the more consistent dealers; it is much larger with a less consistent one. I also noticed that the rotor velocity is not nearly as constant as Kimmel would like…
It is also true that the deflecting vanes on the sides of the rotor add considerable randomness to the outcome [of the ball travel after it has crossed onto the rotor], as do the frets or spacers between the pockets. The upshot is that I don’t believe that any dealer is predictable enough to cause a root mean square error of less than 17 pockets.”
Thorp uses the same formula to dismiss the idea of roulette dealer steering. He believes, based on his own observation and data, that the variance in dealer ball spin, wheel speed, ball launching point and ball roll upon entering the rotor will be too high for the dealer to either steer the ball or have an exploitable dealing signature.
Steve Forte, in his excellent book Casino Game Protection (Las Vegas: SLF Publishing, 2004), relies heavily on Thorp’s formula when he concludes that it’s impossible for dealer steering to exist (see his subchapter titled “The 17 Rule” in his chapter on roulette). He argues that it will be impossible for any dealer to meet the requirement of Thorp’s formula:
I don’t believe that section shooting exists on any level, and here’s why…Many gamers believe that section shooting is an acquired skill, a manipulative skill that one can learn through arduous practice. Juggling, golfing, typing, what so different about learning to section shoot versus many other difficult eye-to-hand manipulative skills? The answer lies in the limits of human capabilities. Has anyone ever learned to juggle 100 balls, hit nothing but holes-in-one, type 500 words a minute?
Although there’s no reason to doubt that muscle memory may result in dealers releasing the ball with similar velocities, that’s not enough precision to accurately control the speed of the ball. On the first revolution the error may only be a half-pocket; after the second revolution, experience has shown that the error can jump to one pocket, then two, then four, and so on. As you increase the revolutions, a significant margin of error compounds. With only ten to twelve revolutions, which is considered very slow, it’s not just ten to twelve times harder, it can quickly become impossible.
Another factor regarding the alleged skill, and, curiously, one that many seem to overlook, is that section shooting is an act comprised of three questionably attainable skills, not just one, and they must occur simultaneously. The dealer must push the rotor to a predetermined speed, spin the ball with a predetermined force, and then factor in the impact of the ball’s bounce, in order to have any chance of controlling the outcome. Compare these actions to those of professional bowlers, golfers, pool players, and similar athletes. They only aim once and can take as much time as they want to warm up, evaluate, and calculate their actions. A baseball pitcher might be able to throw a variety of pitches, all at different speeds, and all with incredible accuracy, but he doesn’t have to throw three strikes at the same time!
Forte further writes that steering and signature are made impossible by “the capricious nature of the wheel,” or purported changeability in drop and roll according to minute changes in conditions (experts have suggested humidity, barometric pressure, and phase of the moon as factors, among others). He stresses that this information is based on discussion with many experts who have told him that drop and roll and bounce characteristics of wheels are highly variable from day to day.
The final argument made by gaming experts against roulette steering and dealer signature is that they’ve simply never seen it, and further, that if such skills or traits existed, modern casinos could not survive.
Barnhart quotes Szabo saying that dealer steering would bring ruin to all the casinos of the world.
Darwin Ortiz, in his “Letter Regarding Nevada Roulette” (Blackjack Forum Vol. XI #4, December 1991—link at the left), says that dealer steering is “rather like Bigfoot or flying saucers.”
I’ve met people who know people who know people who can do it. I’ve met people whose brother-in-law can do it. I’ve even met people who could do it on every day except the day that I happened to meet them. But I have yet to meet one dealer face-to-face who could reliably do it when challenged by me.
Regarding the idea that skilled roulette dealers would bankrupt the casino industry, Ortiz says:
The fact is that if dealers could actually [steer], the game of roulette would have been destroyed long ago. Dealers would, indeed, have used their talents at every opportunity to bankrupt the house by helping agents win.
Regarding a claim by Laurance Scott, in his article “Nevada Roulette” (Blackjack Forum Vol. XI #3, September 1991—link at the left) that roulette dealers would use steering for job security, Ortiz responds: “The money-making potential of such a skill makes the whole issue of job-security irrelevant.”
And here is Steve Forte on this point:
I asked a close friend and triple sharp, all-around gaming executive … to help me find the top wheel dealers in Las Vegas. Our research led to a couple of Cuban dealers who worked together in a major casino. This was no surprise, since the best roulette dealers in the world come from Cuba, the Dominican Republic, and Puerto Rico.
Having spent time in the casinos of the Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico, and having watched the Cuban dealers work here in the states, I can vouch for their incredible mastery of and dedication to the wheel. With a combined 75 years of dealing experience between them, both in Cuba and in the U.S., they were asked for their opinions regarding the recent controversy. They laughed and said, “If we could do that, do you think we’d still be working?”
Laurance Scott is pretty much alone in the serious literature on the other side of the debate. In his article “Nevada Roulette,” which he says is based on his own experience at the tables, he portrays a roulette scene in which dealers are not only able to steer the ball to a sector, but do so routinely to bust out players for themselves and the house. He does take care to limit this claim to dealers on the old-fashioned, deep-pocket wheels, of which there were a number still in action at the time his article was written:
How can anybody cheat at roulette? Well, first of all let me qualify the statement by saying that not all Nevada casinos cheat. Some casinos run a fair game. They use modern wheels which tend to yield truly random results. However, other casinos still use older style equipment which is quite beatable. Why would a casino use beatable equipment when modern non-beatable equipment is available?
When I first published Scott’s article in Blackjack Forum I got quite a response, but the only correspondence I received in support of Scott’s assertion that it was possible for roulette dealers to steer the ball came from pit bosses and roulette dealers, none of whom claimed to be able to steer the ball themselves.
So, to sum up the case against dealer steering or signature we have the argument that there will always be too much variance in ball speed, rotor speed, and ball drop and roll for steering or exploitable signature to be possible.
According to section-shooting detractors, part of this variance will be due to the design of the wheel itself, with its deflectors in the path of the ball as it crosses the apron to the rotor. Part of this variance may be caused by dealing procedures that require the dealer to launch the ball in alternating directions or vary rotor speed on each spin or perform a blind spin without looking at the wheel during the launch. Part may be due to simple human physical limitations. More variance may be due to the effects of weather and other physical conditions on wheel and ball behavior.
And finally there is the argument that none of the experts have seen a dealer with such skills, and that if such skills actually existed the casinos would all be broke.
Laurance Scott, on the other hand, believed that such skills could exist for the same reason that wheel predictors could exist—if there’s not too much variance for a roulette computer or visual predictor to get an edge (and all of the experts agree that roulette prediction by computer or visual methods is possible, at least on some few deep-pocket wheels), there’s no reason to assume there’s too much variance for dealer steering to exist.
Further, Scott and the pit personnel, dealers and players who believe that dealer steering and/or exploitable signature is possible usually believe they have seen it.
My Response to the Debate on Roulette Dealer Steering and Signature
I will first address the claims that variance is inevitably too high to allow dealer signature or steering. As Thorp pointed out, variance in ball landing results can come from variance in dealer ball launch, variance in launch location relative to the rotor, variance in rotor speed, and variance in drop or ball roll after the drop. I will address each type of variance separately.
Variance in ball launch location relative to the rotor
Thorp’s biggest objection to the idea of dealer steering or signature was his belief that a dealer would be unable to launch the ball at a consistent place relative to the moving rotor because the dealer would be unable to respond precisely enough to the visual cue of the targeted launch number. There are related casino procedures mentioned by Steve Forte in both his book and his article “The Myth of Roulette Dealer Signature and Section Shooting” (Blackjack Forum Vol. XII #2, June 1992—link at the upper left), described as follows in his article:
There are two procedures that effectively stop any possibility of the roulette section shooting or steering myth from becoming a reality. They are the “blind spin,” where the dealer spins the ball without ever glancing into the rotor, and the “last pocket spin,” where the dealer picks the ball out of the winning pocket, waits one revolution and spins from the same position the ball last landed.
My response is that a dealer needn’t rely on a visual cue to launch the ball. Instead a dealer may rely on timing for his launch, or a fixed set of ball pick-up and launch acts carried out the same way, with the same timing, every spin.
At one casino on the Las Vegas Strip where I believe we observed dealer steering to agents, there was a house policy in place that required dealers to do a blind spin. (The policy was apparent in the dealers’ behavior, and I was able to confirm it with casino personnel there.) The dealers adjusted the wheel speed, then looked away from the wheel while feeling for the ball with their fingertips. When their fingertips made contact with the ball, they picked up the ball and launched it with a fixed routine. They were able to maintain a remarkable consistency of launch position relative to the ball pick-up point with no visual cue, based solely on consistent timing.
Regarding Scarne’s idea that steering requires the ball and wheel to be rotating in the same direction
As I pointed out in Part 1 of this article, “How to Win at Roulette: Traditional Visual Prediction” (Blackjack Forum Vol. XXVIII #1, October 2012—link at the upper left) the length of ball spin merely sets the length of time the wheel will be rotating before the ball drops onto the rotor. The speed of the rotor determines how much of the wheel will pass any given point during that amount of time. There’s no requirement that the ball and wheel be going in the same direction to calculate how much of the wheel will pass in a given amount of time.
Regarding house procedures that require alternating direction for each spin
A dealer’s only got two hands, and a roulette wheel only has two directions. If a dealer is required to change hands or directions for each spin, and there is a difference between the number of ball spins when launched by the right and left hands, or in the rotor speed when spun in one direction versus the other, all you’d have to do is adjust for the difference in your prediction, or bet only on those spins launched in the preferred direction, or by the preferred hand.
Regarding variance in roll due to deflectors
It’s true that the ball deflectors (obstacles) on the apron have an effect on how far the ball will roll after dropping off the track, and cause variance in ball roll that leads to variance in results. This makes it impossible for a dealer, no matter how skilled, to hit a single target sector of consecutive numbered pockets every spin.
But because wheels tend to have drops (caused usually by tilt, sometimes by wear), the variance in results is often not too great to eliminate the possibility of gaining an edge from steering.
I don’t agree with the assertion that small changes in weather and other conditions lead to significant changes in the wheel itself, or a wheel’s drop. Based on my data, I believe that the changes that experts say they have observed are mostly due to normal, ongoing variance in the drop unrelated to weather and external conditions. The exception would be when there is a sudden rapid change in barometric pressure. It’s not that the wheel changes due to such barometric pressure changes, but that you can get extreme changes in normal ball behavior at such times.
Regarding inability to drop the ball into a specific number
My reply to Szabo’s story of the roulette dealers who had tried, unsuccessfully, to drop the ball into a particular number would be that simply dropping it from above would leave lots of energy to be dispelled by the ball in a very random manner. That’s very different from a ball launched into a particular direction in a spin, for which you’d expect inertia to carry the ball in basically the same direction until its energy was dispelled.
Regarding variance in rotor speed
Let me just say that we have clocked wheels—that is, taken measurements of their speed using reliable instruments—sufficiently to confirm that some dealers are able to maintain a consistent rotor speed if they choose, or hit a chosen rotor speed consistently.
Regarding house requirements to vary the speed of the rotor
First, as I have mentioned at the beginning of this article, very few U.S. casinos enforce any kind of fixed dealing procedures on roulette.
But even at casinos where a fixed dealing procedure seems to be enforced (at least on some shifts), we have found roulette dealers who are able to steer the ball using various combinations of wheel speed and ball speed. In other words, a dealer doesn’t need to maintain a single rotor speed to steer, because the multiple factors involved in steering a ball allow for multiple ways of getting a ball to a targeted number. If you are forced to change speed each spin, you can compensate for the changed speed by changing ball speed or launch location relative to the rotor.
In fact, one of the ways we confirm that a dealer is steering the ball is by watching for the dealer to use these factors in multiple combinations to achieve a specific goal.
I’ll go even further and say that a dealer who attempts to steer by always launching from a specific number, while maintaining a consistent wheel speed, is probably a dealer who can’t steer very well. We see this type of kindly dealer all the time in casinos, when the players have all joined together in betting the area around the 17, for example. The dealer strives to maintain a constant wheel speed and tries time and again to hit the 17 by adjusting his launch point, only to miss the target on every spin and quickly wipe out the players he’s trying to help.
But what about Thorp’s formula?
I don’t have any problem with Thorp’s formula per se, or with the data he provides (which are similar to my own), but I partly disagree with the factors used in the formula, I disagree with the way his formula has been applied, and I disagree with conclusions that have been drawn from these applications of the formula. I can’t discuss all of these disagreements within this article because casino personnel will be reading but, for example, I disagree with the way Thorp measures ball roll (as well as other factors). One problem I can discuss briefly in this article lies in the calculation of mean error terms.
Let’s say that a particular wheel has a drop which half of the time causes a ball roll of three pockets plus or minus two pockets, and half of the time causes a roll of 41 pockets plus or minus two pockets. (You will never find such a wheel—this example is simplified to make it easy to follow.) To assume that the 41 pocket roll is a 38 pocket error term would be unhelpful (if you look at a picture of a wheel, you’ll understand why).
It would also be unhelpful to calculate that the average roll was 22 pockets, with an error term of 21 pockets. Average roll might be a relevant factor if the roll was as likely to roll any number of pockets between 3 and 41, but if the actual rolls center around 3 pockets and 41 pockets, with a large gap of pockets mostly unhit, then using the average roll as a factor in this calculation is not helpful.
Or let’s say that half of the time the ball roll is 5 pockets and half of the time it’s 24 pockets, each plus or minus 2 pockets. You don’t have to regard the 5-pocket roll as correct and the 24-pocket roll as an error term of 19 pockets. Nor do you have to regard the average roll as 14 ½ pockets, with an error term of 11 ½ pockets. Instead, you’d want to adjust your betting sector and consider the error term of the ball roll very small.
As I mentioned in Part I of this series, there’s no reason a betting sector in roulette has to be comprised of consecutive numbers. A sector for a particular wheel could be a couple of adjacent numbers and another number twelve pockets away. Optimal betting sectors can take on many different configurations on modern wheels spun at modern speeds.
There are similar problems with error term measurement for other factors in Thorp’s formula.
And what about the argument that all casinos would go broke in a year?
After watching an awful lot of professional gamblers now for over three decades, many of them with enormous bankrolls, it’s never seemed to me that the casinos were in any particular danger from us. If the Hyland team, the MIT team, the Greeks, the Czechs, Al Francesco, Zeljko, and a few thousand other high stakes blackjack pros couldn’t kill off the casino industry, I don’t see how a few steering dealers could do it.
For one thing, there truly aren’t that many dealers who can steer well enough to get an edge steering to an agent, and it’s unlikely many will learn because of the difficulty of understanding the natural variance in spin results. For example, it would be difficult for a dealer who was trying to learn to steer to know whether a bad result was due to variance or to his poor skill. He would lack the kind of consistent feedback most people need to learn.
And any dealer who could steer would be restrained in the use of his skill by the rational desire to extract the maximum possible lifetime gain from his hard-won skill rather than burn out a great play in a couple of sessions for a much smaller total win. It’s true that a steering dealer without a big bankroll of his own could play at a much higher level if he involved an investor, but it’s also true that the investor would demand the bulk of the win for his cut, and involving an investor entails other risks, such as the risk of the investor training other dealers, or the risk of the investor revealing the play. I’ve never known a professional gambler to prefer giving away the bulk of his win when he could afford to keep it all to himself simply by taking a play more slowly.
Also, card mechanics of varying skills have worked at blackjack tables for as long as the game has been dealt, and many have used these skills for decades without putting the casinos where they work out of business. Cheaters who have spent years developing special skills have no desire to kill the golden goose.
Another huge factor in protecting the casinos from bankruptcy would be the steering dealer’s fear of going to jail for cheating—I would think that fear would be huge in the case of a casino employee who was steering a roulette ball for the benefit of an associate.
Another limit on how much a skilled dealer can take from roulette in a short time if he is concerned about avoiding discovery is the behavior of the average roulette player. No gambler at roulette who actually manages to get ahead ever seems to leave with his winnings. Instead, what they do is continue playing until their winnings and buy-in are gone, plus any other amounts they may have available for buy-ins. In other words, they play until they run out of money, and all they really hope for, if they believe in dealer steering, is for the dealer to give them a longer playing time.
Again, in our experience, roulette players don’t get angry because they’re leaving the table broke. (They’re accustomed to leaving broke.) They only get angry if they’re leaving the table broke after receiving a very short period of play. People want some fun for their money.
So a dealer who is steering for an agent, and who is concerned about getting enough money out of other players to keep up appearances, probably has natural limits on how fast he can extract money from the game. While a dealer who was steering against players might take their money faster, I don’t believe that he’d necessarily get more money from them. Again, players who lose their money quickly at a roulette table tend to leave that table quickly.
As for a dealer who says, “If I could steer, why would I still be working here?” I would say, “Where else would you be working?” A dealer who can steer would probably choose to practice his skill as long as possible.
To those who say, “Why wouldn’t they take out millions?” my answer would be, “What makes you think they haven’t?”
Response to Scott’s claim of widespread dealer cheating
Scott’s claim of widespread dealer cheating at roulette (that is, steering against players) doesn’t fit what we have actually seen at the tables. But Scott was describing conditions he encountered over two decades ago, on wheels that are seldom seen on today’s roulette tables.
That isn’t to say we’ve never seen dealers steering against players. We have seen what we believed to be dealers steering against players in three kinds of situations.
First, we’ve seen dealers steering against players after periods of steering for those same players, essentially taking back the house money they had passed out. This has occurred with a small percentage of the dealers we’ve observed.
Second, we’ve seen dealers steering against players they seemed to dislike. Again, this has occurred with only a small percentage of the dealers we’ve observed.
Third, we’ve seen dealers steering against players after steering for different players that we believed were agents. This has been extremely rare, and in each case, it has been a number of years since we’ve seen any of these dealers working in Las Vegas.
How I Came to Believe that Roulette Dealers Can Steer
I came to believe that a small percentage of dealers can steer well enough to get an edge at roulette by sitting at the table of a particular dealer and recording enough spin results to ascertain that his frequency of hitting a particular sector had gone beyond three standard deviations.
We were at a large Strip casino one week when we observed what we believed were possible signs of a biased wheel. Specifically, the ball was landing in a small sector of the wheel too often for it to be likely that it was due to chance.
We sat at the table placing even-money bets and recorded the results of enough spins to reliably calculate that the edge on betting the sector would be roughly 20%. All of this play was on the same shift, and almost all of it was against the same dealer. Some of the play was against a relief dealer.
Then we returned to the casino for one last session of data collection—this time on a different shift. To our surprise, the results for that session, when taken alone, indicated no bias whatsoever. We went back to record more data against dealers other than our original dealer, and none of it showed a bias.
We went back to observe our original dealer over the next year or so, and we learned a lot about roulette by observing him. (Thanks, man.) We also began to notice that we would observe certain behaviors of his used by other dealers who appeared to be steering, while we didn’t see these behaviors used by average dealers.
With time we found a collection of dealers we believed could steer. We could often tell whether a dealer was steering before we even got to the table just by observing her behavior as we walked around the casino. Occasionally it would seem to us as we returned to one of these dealers that we had arrived in the middle of a play.
One skilled dealer at a Strip casino had unusual and distinctive facial features—black eyebrows shaped like sharp upside-down v’s and earlobes that were fleshy and elongated. (All details have been changed to protect any players and dealers described in this article.) Sitting at this dealer’s table, however, was a guy about the same height and weight, with the same black sharply pointing eyebrows and the same elongated fleshy earlobes. He was betting a small sector and doing well, with the ball landing in his sector at an unusually high rate. My first thought was, “This guy’s steering for his brother.”
After the next spin, we placed some bets in the same sector and had a win, but right after the dealer had paid us all off, the other player asked to be colored up. On the next spin the dealer changed to a wheel speed different from the ones he had used on the other spins we’d observed.
Other times we believed we’d stumbled onto a play just because it had that play look that you recognize quickly if you’ve ever been part of team gambling efforts yourself. Participants make eye contact for no seeming reason, and then sustain it for an unusual length of time. You hear certain words repeated when they don’t really fit the conversation, or the conversation seems strained. Strangers at the table get angry with each other, or look surprised with each other, when the emotion doesn’t seem to fit.
On one dealer/agent steering play, the agent was posing as a square who always bet the same adjacent numbers, always before the spin. He had the seat next to the wheel, but he never looked at the wheel. Then, late in the play, toward the end of the dealer’s shift, after a bit of a drawdown of his profits, he stared at the wheel intently as the ball drew near the end of its spin. On the final spin before the ball fell off the track, as the ball passed the drop-off point for the last time, this “square” pumped his fist and yelled “Yes!” The ball came around to hit the drop deflector, rolled beautifully, he got a hit, and the dealer got tapped out by his replacement. The player left a few spins later.
At another casino, after observing what we believed were multiple occasions of dealer steering for agents, we saw a steering dealer engaged in what we believed was a deliberate bust-out of a player. This player was a regular at the casino—a high-roller, a classic action player, and a memorable character, both because of his fashion sense (Steve Martin’s “wild and crazy guy”) and his unusual companions (Jodie Foster in Taxi Driver). We had observed him playing many times, always using the same system. He seemed to have a few preferred dealers at the casino, and every time we saw him playing one of them, he would get a long play on his buy-in.
But on this occasion, the dealer appeared to be steering against him from the very first spin. The reason we believed this dealer was steering against this player was because he used a different set of wheel and ball speed combinations than he used during the plays when we believed he was steering for a player. Based on my wife’s read of the speed, we would have been betting an area of the wheel where this player had no bets at all. This player bought in multiple times for large amounts and lost it all quickly. It was a massacre.
We’ve even run into dealers who openly discussed with us what they were doing. Early in our roulette learning process we ran into a dealer off-Strip who appeared to be steering for the players on his table. We started to bet on the target numbers, but only after we had a read on the spin to confirm that the dealer was still steering. The dealer watched us watch the wheel, then after we had bet he said something like, “You sure about that? I’m going for the six this time.”
That was a shocker. He made these kinds of comments for the next few spins. I was not comfortable with the situation. After one spin, our read indicated that the optimal bet was outside of the former target sector. I bet and he said, “Really? You sure?” My wife answered, “I’m sure.” He stared at the wheel a moment and said, “Looks like you’re right about that.” He and my wife openly discussed the next few spins, then I cut the play short. When we left, he said, “Come back any time. That was fun.” We never went back.
Again, though I could tell you more stories of this type, this kind of thing is not the norm. And, although we ran into other situations in which dealers appeared to be steering, we did not rely on the appearance of steering to determine whether steering was possible and exploitable in casinos. To determine whether or not a particular dealer could steer, we collected data.
How to Win at Roulette Using Dealer Tell Play
It’s virtually impossible to beat modern roulette as dealt in the U.S. with the old-style visual prediction methods I wrote about in Part I of this series. Even computer play (which is illegal in Nevada anyway, as well as in every state and country that has copied Nevada’s cheating statutes) is problematic on modern roulette, because of roll variance and other factors. All other methods of beating the game are either illegal or very difficult, requiring much research, scouting and practice.
Betting on dealers who are steering is potentially the easiest way to beat the game if you can learn to identify dealers with that capability and learn how to tell when they are turning the steering on and off. Further, observing dealers who are steering is the best way to learn visual prediction methods that will actually work on the modern game. The easiest way to do these things is by learning to read dealer tells.
The first person I’m aware of to suggest exploiting dealer steering and emotions at roulette was Laurance Scott, once again in his article “Nevada Roulette.” He wrote:
I also believe that it may be possible to get an edge at Nevada roulette without any predictive skills just by using an applied psychology approach. First, assume that the game is rigged (which it is) and that an experienced dealer can hit a section with alarming accuracy.
Next, develop an act such that the dealers can’t stand the sight of your face and start pre-betting sections with 25-cent chips. Have a co-conspirator bet $5 chips (at the opportune times) in the opposite section while hiding at the end of the table.
Now, though I do not recommend the specific tactics suggested by Scott, I can confirm that roulette tell play works.
In early 1986, I served as an expert witness for the defense in a case where a blackjack dealer had been accused of colluding with a player. This was back when blackjack dealers still manually peeked under tens, and I had just learned about tell play from Steve Forte’s manuscript of Read The Dealer.
When I reviewed the surveillance tapes of the dealer, it was clear to me that the dealer was not colluding with an agent, but simply had a strong unconscious tell that any player could exploit. I explained tell play to the judge and jury, and taught them how to read the dealer’s tells on the tape. Everyone in the courtroom spent the next ten minutes watching video of the dealer and correctly guessing her hole card. The verdict was “not guilty” but that tape and trial transcript got around. I’d just published Forte’s book, and soon auto-peek readers were being installed on blackjack tables all over Nevada.
So I don’t feel it would be wise to talk about specific tells in this article. Tells tend to vary a lot from dealer to dealer anyway—they did in blackjack, and they do at roulette. Suffice it to say that a dealer who is attempting to steer for players and feels confident in his ability to help them win money tends to exhibit behaviors that are different from the average roulette dealer. The average dealer who can’t or won’t steer goes through his work life stripping people of their money while giving them very little in return. It’s depressing, shameful work for any dealer with any feeling for other people, and a dealer’s demeanor may reflect that.
Similarly, a dealer who has steered some hits to players but who has decided to take the money back has significant changes in appearance and behavior. He’s changed himself from a host and benefactor into an executioner, and it affects how he feels about himself and the players at his table. These feelings often show up as tells and can be used as indicators of when to get in or out of the game.
Dealer tell play at roulette is similar to the old dealer tell play at blackjack, except that blackjack dealer tell play didn’t involve conscious help from the dealer. Roulette tell play only works if a dealer is consciously steering for you, but if he suspects even a little that you are aware that he can steer, he will usually end the steering immediately.
If you’re actually watching the wheel to ascertain whether the dealer is steering, he will usually recognize that very quickly. (Camouflage is essential at all times!) And if a dealer suspects you of trying to get an advantage over him that he hasn’t chosen to bestow, he can and will make it very difficult for you to play.
The other thing to remember is that even if a dealer is rooting for the players and steering for the players, at some point the dealer will stop. Friendly dealers seem to enjoy giving customers a few big payoffs. But when your chips start stacking up, or the pit boss starts hanging around, they seem to feel you’ve been given enough, and they either go back to random or, more typically, start steering against the players they helped. Again, this only occurs with a small percentage of dealers.
I suggest you read “Stalking the Elusive Tell” by Dog-Ass Johnny (Blackjack Forum Volume VIII #2, June 1988)—to get an idea of how to keep dealers rooting for you, understand when they are rooting for or against someone else, and get the hell out when their good will disappears. Get your hands on a copy of Steve Forte’s long out-of-print Read The Dealer (Oakland, CA: RGE Publishing, 1986) if you can and read that as well. Some of the most useful information for roulette in Forte’s book will be the material on “ghost tells” and creating dealer tells, which are as valid at roulette today as they were at blackjack when the book was written.
A ghost tell is information you pick up from a dealer’s reaction to another player. Ghost tells are ideal for scouting purposes and, as Forte points out, they are simply easier to read than tells you pick up based on a dealer’s behavior toward you, because the dealer’s attention is focused elsewhere. Forte preferred looking for ghost tells between a dealer and a big player who had already established a friendly relationship with the dealer that usually included liberal tipping. That works at roulette as well.
If there’s no friendly big player and tipper around to provide you with ghost tells, you may have to encourage tells yourself. You can do this by cultivating the dealer’s good will. Be friendly, complimentary; toss him a tip on your first hit.
Don’t try to cultivate her ire. Be aware that a dealer’s hatred does you no good unless she can steer against you, which means your pre-spin bets are a goner, and even if you start seeing tells that a dealer is steering against you, that doesn’t tell you what numbers are most likely to hit, only what numbers are not likely to hit. Dealer hatred tells work best when they are ghost tells and the disliked players are really covering the felt, leaving only smallish groups of consecutive numbers without bets on them—something for the dealer to aim for—and where you can get some money down after the spin. (And tip when he hits you!)
For example, I once had a terrific opportunity for tell play at a large Strip casino where an experienced female dealer was trying to cope with a group of obnoxious French players. The French players were betting sectors, but their sectors were huge—there were only a few small sections of the wheel that they hadn’t covered with stacks of chips. The dealer disliked them because they all smoked and, despite the dealer’s hints that the smoke was bothering her, they refused to put out the burning cigarettes in their ash trays and took no care to prevent the smoke from drifting into her face. They even exhaled smoke directly into her face. You should have heard the outpouring of French when she started hitting the few numbers they weren’t betting and swept all those stacks from the table.
Here are some more tips on tells from Forte’s Read the Dealer. I’ve added my own adjustments to his comments (in parentheses) to make them more relevant for roulette:
It is important to be natural when trying to read the dealer. Peripheral vision can be a great asset… You can’t just lean back in your chair and stare at the dealer.
The first thing to always look for in a dealer is his base or normal behavior. Where do his eyes normally look… (immediately before and after spinning the ball? How about near the end of the spin? When does he normally wave players off?)
When trying to analyze a new tell, I find it easier if I mentally ask myself questions. Would a dealer make a comment like that… (if he knew he was steering for me)? Absence can be a key word. Instead of asking myself what would I expect to see in this situation that might give me a clue, I say what didn’t the dealer do or what’s missing that I would expect to see in this situation? (Your first hint of an exploitable opportunity will always be some small behavior out of the norm.)
If you play in smaller clubs, tokes will carry more weight…
Sooner or later you will run into the dealer who is always smiling and seems to be extra courteous and helpful. In reality, he’s trying to win every dollar you have, your watch and your socks if they’re worth anything. This dealer wants the best of both worlds…It doesn’t make any difference how much you toke or how friendly you are. This is a perfect example of the “house dealer…” This dealer is not on your side and will attempt to deceive you by acting opposite to his true feelings …
Learning to play tells can be difficult. For the most part, every tell you read on paper is clear and easy to learn. When you look for these same tells in a casino, they will be extremely subtle, disguised and at first seem almost invisible. The best way to begin learning tells is to get into the casino and observe. Walk up to a game and get a feel for the level of involvement. Then any time you see the dealer deviate from his normal behavior, force yourself to try to find the motive behind the action.
Finally, [tell play] is 100% legal. So long as you don’t pay off the dealer to (steer for you)… or otherwise alter the “criteria of selection,” the law specifically states you can take advantage of any information that is available to all players. What exactly is the information that is available to everyone? The entire spectrum of subconsciously generated human behavior that takes place anytime you put a dealer behind a (roulette) table, pay him minimum wage so that he really must earn his living from tokes, treat him like dirt, have a pit boss sweat the game, then bring in the players who want to win so bad they can taste it. Skilled tell players simply exploit these facets of human behavior and turn this information into an advantage…
To learn more about reading dealer tells, even books on poker tells will be helpful. Two excellent books include Caro’s Book of Poker Tells, by Mike Caro, and Peter Collett’s Book of Tells. I also recommend Joe Navarro’s book on body language, What Every BODY is Saying: An Ex-FBI Agent’s Guide to Speed-Reading People. One important point made by Navarro is that while some tells are fairly common and usually mean the same thing, other tells are unique to a person, or can mean opposite things depending on how a person feels about a given situation.
And remember that you need two sets of tells—one that lets you know that the dealer is capable of steering, and another that lets you know whether or not he is steering right now, either for or against you. That first tell is critical, and you will be better off if you can confirm it over time with some hard data. Just because you get a tell that says the dealer is trying to steer for the players, that doesn’t mean you can automatically bet the numbers you think he’s trying to hit. Sometimes a dealer with poor steering skills will be exploitable, but usually not by betting the numbers you believe he’s targeting. I’ve often seen friendly dealers with poor steering skills wipe out the players they were trying to help.
Another thing to remember about any form of tell play is that you can expect your ratio of scouting time to playing time to be very high—in the hole card scouting-to-playing range, or higher. (Skilled hole card players may spend twelve hours scouting for every hour playing.) Once you have a collection of reliable tell dealers, your scouting time will go down, but you still have to find the dealers in situations that are good for tell play.
Lastly, you need to keep in mind that no dealer can steer the ball to a target number or sector on every spin. It’s impossible because of inevitable variance in the ball roll and other factors, and, again, that variance can make it difficult to discern in a short time whether or not that dealer can actually steer. That’s one reason it’s easier to play dealer tells at roulette than to learn to read wheels yourself. A roulette dealer who has spent many hours on a wheel will know a lot more about the normal variance in the drop than you can find out without many hours of clocking the wheel. ♠
[Note: When this article was published in 1988, many dealers were still manually peeking under their tens and aces, making tell play possible for the astute observer. I know of no casinos in the US where dealers still peek, so this article is published more for historical than practical purposes. – A.S.]
About eighteen months ago, pursuant to a long-abiding but generally profitless interest in playing dealer tells, I began trying to apply the principles in Steve Forte’s Read The Dealer. Happily, after an uneven start, I eventually learned to turn a profit with these techniques.
In what follows, I hope to help you, the prospective tell player, avoid a few of my early mistakes, thereby saving plenty of cash. [Editor’s note: A tell is any subconscious mannerism of a dealer that indicates whether his hand is pat or stiff.]
As with card counting, your chances for successful dealer tell play will increase substantially if you have some time to invest beforehand. Think back to when you were first learning to count – remember how the excitement of being in real casinos, playing for real money, interfered with your ability to concentrate? How it could make you forget your index numbers, or the count itself, even though you could handle these things easily at home?
The hard truth is that, for most of us, only those skills that can be exercised reflexively figure to survive the awful crucible of casino play. By acquiring these talents before you go out to seek your hole-carding fortune, you’ll avoid many costly errors. In other words, you have to practice.
I suggest you begin by practicing at a place where the dealers donít peek. This will give you a chance to experience basic dealer behavior in the abstract, plus you wonít be tempted to bet real money on your nascent abilities. Don’t distract yourself by trying to win; rather, just play basic strategy, bet the minimum, and enjoy being a gambler for a few days. Your purpose should be twofold:
1) Develop some systematic way of evaluating each element of the dealer’s behavior. Try to carry out a specific sequence of observations on every hand. If you don’t work out a methodical approach, then you’ll tend to become fixated on one or two areas, overlooking other possibilities. (The material on pages 81-83 of Read the Dealer should point you in the right direction.)
Practice until you can execute your routine quickly and automatically. If you’re not quick, then you’ll miss a lot, and if it’s not automatic then your counting efficiency will be adversely affected.
2) Learn to become aware of the dealer’s attitude toward the other players. Counting does not adequately prepare you for this; optimally, as a counter, you would prefer to have no awareness of the outside world at all – just keep the count, play basic strategy, and occasionally do the calculations for a potential departure play.
As a tell player, however, you’ll have to pay attention to everyone else’s hand as well as your own. One reason for this is that you need to know what a given tell is based onówhere it’s coming fromóto protect yourself from giving it undue weight when circumstances change.
For example, you notice a dealer who seems involved in the game. You sit down and immediately spot a good, strong basic tell. Great, you think – here’s a nice-guy dealer who wants the players to win.
You prime yourself to deviate from your count-related strategy – i.e., to make the wrong play – just on the basis of this dealer’s behavior. And yet your understanding of the situation may be quite mistaken; often the dealer just wants some particular customer to win, usually a toker, or maybe a cute girl.
When the toker loses a few tough ones and starts to complain, this dealer’s tell may begin to flicker; when the cute girl brutally rejects his pathetic advances, it will probably go out entirely. And if her drunk boyfriend were to show up, this tell, which just twenty minutes ago looked like it was going to make you rich, might actually reverse itself and puncture your lungs before you can get out of your seat.
Few Tells Last Long
Few tells are enduring. Few profitable situations are there time after time, waiting to pay off on demand. Until you’ve learned to absorb what’s going on between the dealer and the other players – thereby acquiring the means to identify situations like the one above – you would be unwise to assume that a particular dealer’s mannerisms are going to represent the same thing from shift to shift, or even from hand to hand.
In my case, I spent countless wasted hours at the tables, chasing various long-vanished tells that had once been so strong I was unable to accept that they had somehow become null and void. Eventually, more or less by accident, I wised up. Why stick your head in the propeller? Practice until your grasp of whatever player-dealer interaction is going on becomes second nature to you.
Beginning Tell Play
So, now you’re ready to play for real. The first thing I think you should do is to establish yourself in one or two well-scouted, high-probability casinos as a player the dealers are glad to see. In distinction to card counting, where most players aim for anonymity, tell playing can thrive on notoriety. If you play every day for a few weeks in the same small or mid-sized casino, word will spread to all the dealers on the shift that you’re a desirable player – that’s the sort of thing they talk about in the dealers’ break room.
Of course, some dealers are robots who will be unaffected by anything you do, but many others will be happy to see you sit down at their table, even before you’ve toked your first dollar. One dealer at Dog-Ass Johnny’s favorite casino strongarmed the first hand Dog-Ass Johnny ever played at that table. You will never get this sort of benefit if you spread your play around town, card counter style.
How to make the desired impression? Dog-Ass Johnny’s tactics, hardly revolutionary, are to lose well, sympathize with the dealer’s problems, and, of course, toke. You do not need to toke lavishly, but you must toke at least minimally.
Additionally, while you are introducing yourself to the selected casinos, limit your card counting behavior so as to avoid arousing any defensive sensibilities among the dealers; you’ll be able to get a fabulous spread once you’re established – after all, you’ll be playing against dealers who want you to win. Whenever you feel you’ve gotten across especially well to a dealer, be sure to play through his break, so he’ll have a chance to communicate your wonderfulness to the relief dealer.
And losing well is a must. Should you feel yourself on the verge of violating this commandment, leave immediately, lest you poison one of your primary venues. If coping with bad losing streaks is tough for you, don’t worry; I think you may find it surprisingly easy at a casino where you feel known and liked. The usual emotions when losing big – hostility, anger, and paranoia – are a function of your perception of yourself as an unwanted felon in enemy territory. You will find yourself much less prone to experiencing these feelings when playing with a dealer you know is on your side.
Donít expect to get rich quick. Try to regard the first few weeks as a time for undergoing painful learning experiences and laying the groundwork for future success. Be satisfied if you can win, on balance, one bet per day that you would have lost with counting alone.
Above all, over your first fifty hours or so, you absolutely must limit acting upon your predictions to those cases where the evidence is extremely compelling. I suggest that during this time you favor a tell play over what’s indicated by the count only when the tell is a ghost or strongarm tell (Editor’s note: ghost and strongarm tells are defined below). Reading accuracy for these tells is quite high. In fact, even if you never go beyond this relatively easy-to-achieve level, you’ll have made a major improvement in your game.
And you can expect to acquire this nifty ability without making a lot of expensive errors. Indeed, you’ll positively enjoy your leisurely stroll up the pleasantly-shallow learning curve. Here’s an idea of what to expect.
Ghost Tells
[Editor’s note: In Read the Dealer, Steve Forte defines “ghost tells” as tells you can pick up from the reactions of the dealer to another player at the table. To employ dealer ghost tells profitably, you must sit to the left of whichever player(s) the dealer might be reacting to, so that you do not have to play your hand until after you’ve seen the tell.]
All you need to do to play ghost tells properly is keep your attention on the game. By this, I mean that you must be able to maintain a background-level awareness of what the other players are doing and how the dealer is responding to them. If you had practiced more diligently, you’d already have this ability. You’d be right there inside the dealer’s head, reading his mind. But nooo!
Fortunately, you can expect very good reading accuracy when playing ghost tells, even if you are a beginner. This is partly because you are under no pressure to act on your own cards at the time, and can thus devote all your attention to the play of the other hands. But primarily it arises from the fact that many otherwise careful dealers don’t see any harm in commenting on an already-completed hand; they assume that only the player of that hand can understand their cryptic remarks.
The information you acquire as a result of their innocence is as pure as the driven snow. Read The Dealer contains examples so common that you’ll find it difficult to believe you never grasped their meaning before.
Naturally, you should begin by trying to spot a high-roller. These players offer the greatest potential for success. For various reasons, however, you won’t get much tell playing done if you rigorously insist upon such advantageous circumstances.
First, there just aren’t that many big bettors around, especially during the day. Then, if you do find one, he may be playing against a robotic dealer, or the dealer’s responses may be inhibited by a pit boss at her elbow.
Finally, when at last you manage to sit down to a promising situation, you’ll invariably lose your first hand (despite getting a clear read and successfully executing the required departure play), at which point the high-roller will angrily leave, claiming that your foolish play has ruined the order of the cards.
A more common situation for ghost tells is a crowded, talkative table with a friendly, slightly dull-witted dealer, and happy, talking players who are winning. To get a seat at such a table, of course, you will need to fight off several prospective TARGET players, so remember to bring some sort of bat or truncheon.
Always sit in the last available position, maximizing the chance of catching a hint before you have to act on your own hand. You’ll want to monitor the biggest bettors first, of course, but I have found that the relative size of the bet can be more important than the absolute size of the bet; that is to say, dealers are generally aware of the bet structure of most customers, and many will react more strongly to a $25 bet made by a $5 player than to a $100 bet made by somebody who’s been betting black on every round.
Strongarm Tells
[Editorís note: In Read the Dealer, Steve Forte defines “strongarm tells” as the most blatant, reliable dealer tells, in which the dealer virtually plays your hand for you prior to your having indicated how you intended to play it. You may still receive strongarm tells from dealers with the ability to deal seconds. We’ve run into a couple of these dealers who used their ability occasionally for the good of players. Always listen when such a dealer tells you to walk.]
In distinction to ghost-telling dealers, strongarm dealers seem to be brighter than average, and will generally appear to be more in control of the game. While the degree to which these dealers are aware of their revealing mannerisms is a topic on which much could be written, suffice it to say that some which are quite blatant are nevertheless not intentional.
No matter how obvious a tell may seem to you, never mention it to the dealer, and do not attempt to socialize with such a dealer away from the tables. This is elementary. If you find yourself wanting to inform the dealer of how impossibly clever you are, you’re probably playing more for ego than for money.
Strongarm dealers especially shine when dealing a face-up game. As you wander about the casinos, always check the face-up games carefully. You’ll be amazed at what a helpful dealer can do for you when he knows your cards – in the best cases, you need only give an ambiguous signal, and the dealer will hit or pass your hand as necessary.
Playing in such a game will also serve to remind you to make sure that friendly dealers know what you’re holding whenever you need help. Don’t be shy; you need to get the most out of each potentially profitable situation as a hedge against the inevitable hard times to come.
One familiar subgroup among strongarm dealers are those extremely other-directed types, usually males, who are always entertaining their players, as though the table were a miniature night club, with the dealer as master of ceremonies. Invariably, they give you a lot of advice on how much to bet and how to play, often grabbing some of your chips and adding them to your bet, refusing to give you a card or demanding you take one, and so forth. You are supposed to follow their suggestions as Revealed Truth, ring up a handsome win for the first time in your drab, uneventful life, and in return, shower them with love and admiration (and tokes).
Clearly, your mission – should you decide to accept itóis to play out your assigned role in the dealerís scenario, while at the same time ignoring or minimizing all his “help” except when he’s showing a ten. This is not difficult if you are sufficiently theoretically inclined as to have a good grasp of how much a given deviation from proper strategy figures to cost you.
Alternatively, if you’re a jovial, gregarious sort – or if you’re not but can induce this behavior with, say, alcohol or powerful drugs (Editor’s Note: We assume, of course, that Mr. Johnny is referring to legal drugs such as No-Doz or Jolt Cola), then you should be able to get into a bit of friendly one-upmanship with this kind of dealer, indirectly challenging him to make you a winner. Within this framework, you can periodically question his advice, daring to match your opinion against his. When your play turns out to be correct, project a sense of relief at having tempted fate so foolishly and surviving; when your play turns out to be a loser, bewail your dunderheaded stupidity and vow that you’ll never again ignore this fine dealer’s sagacious counsel.
Among the most blatant strongarm dealers are some who will admire your perceptivity and tell you so. More than one such dealer has explained to me the comic frustration of trying to get across to players who are too opaque to grasp that when the dealer shows a ten he always knows the right move.
[Editor’s Note: This was true only back in the days when dealers peeked under tens to see if they had a natural. Now dealers slip their hole card into a card reader, and most no longer know how strong or weak a hand they have. Still, this article is of great value in other casino situations, so we recommend you keep reading.]
You will generally have little trouble settling into a mutually agreeable quid pro quo with such a dealer, though at some point it becomes appropriate to ask whether this activity really qualifies as tell-playing. A side benefit with these dealers is that you can expect them to be frank about whether you should sit down at their table or not. Consider that some strongarm dealers may have helped you on the assumption that you were a weekend tourist they’d never see again; they may not be interested in a long-term association. Others may have been losing all week and can’t afford you for a while.
Whatever the reason, you can be sure that if a dealer who has knowingly helped you in the past warns you not to sit down (ìBetter watch out, I’m really hot today!), it’s a good idea to follow his advice.
Finally, you should be aware that many strongarm dealers correctly perceive themselves as not giving away a lot. Some are simply hustling tokes, and know they can control your advantage to whatever degree they might find necessary, just by giving an occasional misleading signal (avoid them, toke less, or find a way to squeeze out a little more information).
Some, generally the more empathetic types, will help you if you’re losing but not if you’re winning. (Hide your winnings). Others, aware when holding twenty that they figure to win no matter what you do, will groan and roll their eyes theatrically with a ten in the hole, but will give conflicting signals or no signals at all with nineteen or less (only play against dealers who get a lot of twenties).
In all these cases, you must weight your prospective costs (tokes, time, exposure) against your anticipated gains, as your advantage with these dealers is considerably less than with the kind of strongarm dealer who’s actively trying to build you up. Still, I advise you to take what you can get, and to remain alert to the possibility that dealers who like you enough to give you a little overt help may be unintentionally telling you a lot more on a more subtle level.
In closing, I must remind you that the sun is setting now on the golden age of hole-carding and reading dealer tells. The shadows lengthen and the purple twilight looms, as with each passing moment another casino goes no-peek forever. Some say that somewhere in this wide, mysterious world of ours, there will always be casinos with dealers that peek. Others, less optimistic, point out that these are the same people who accept dualism, posit a deterministic universe, and think that Charlton Heston still has all his real hair.
Whatever the truth of these matters may be, dealer tell opportunities certainly do exist right here and now. Why not get yours while you can? ♠
Can roulette dealers steer or “aim” the ball with enough precision to help or cheat players? Laurance Scott, author of How to Beat Roulette, says they can (see “Nevada Roulette,” by L. Scott, BJF XI #3). Renowned expert on cheating at gambling, Darwin Ortiz, author of Gambling Scams, says Scott is all wet (see “Letter on Roulette Dealer Section Shooting,” BJF XI #4).
We’ve gotten an avalanche of mail on both sides of this subject since Scott’s article and Ortiz’s letter. Here’s a sampling of the pro-Scott, anti-Ortiz opinions:
Letter from a Former Nevada Roulette Dealer
I just wanted to comment on your letter from Ortiz. I agree 100% with all he has to say about the position of casinos and their management in regard to cheating. I really have no stake in whether he and Steve Forte believe a dealer can place a ball in a section, but I would ask these questions:
How long do you suppose it would take to learn to spin a roulette ball so that it made exactly four revolutions before dropping?
If the wheel head were spinning very slowly and you picked a number (say zero) and a fixed point (say the 12 o’clock position) and spun the ball so it made four revolutions and dropped, do you think if you picked up the ball and waited for the zero to be at 12 o’clock again and spun it four revolutions again that it might end up close to where it landed before?
Do you think you could maybe land it in half the wheel head?
If a player can clock a moving roulette ball, couldn’t a dealer?
I believe that Mr. Ortiz could learn to spin a roulette ball to make four revolutions within one hour. In a few more hours I bet he could make it go five revolutions, or six or seven. If they are really interested in this, why not take an hour and give it a try?
Letter from an Atlantic City Pit Boss
“Section shooting” is not a myth. This was proven to me in a proficient demonstration by a person who had dealt the game of roulette for more than two decades. This person was many years my senior and my teacher. Section shooting is a common sought after skill in the realm of roulette dealers. For this reason dealers who are supervised in professional gambling casinos are not permitted to hawk stares into the roulette wheel.
Mr. Scott’s methods of winning are valid. However, should a pit boss like myself identify such a skilled player, we would instruct the dealer to call “no more bets” prior to the ball launch, and Mr. Scott’s edge would go out the window. I can personally tell you that pit bosses and other casino management alike do not value “section shooting” dealers or any other skilled dealers of this degree because of (the possibility of) collusion.
Mr. Ortiz asks for such a skilled section shooting roulette dealer… to come forward and demonstrate their ability to him. Mr. Ortiz has about as much chance of that happening as the trigger man in the JFK assassination coming forward. No one is going to display that ability to a layperson…
Letter from Harry McArdle
One of the tricks employed by casino managers in hiring cheats without admitting it even to themselves is to hire “experienced dealers” and to hold them responsible for the results at their table. Did you ever start winning a lot and see the dealer become nervous? That’s for real. His job is on the line. If you win big, they might just go out and hire a “more experienced dealer” unless they have one right there in the casino whom they can call over. Chances are they do.
Laurance Scott was not the first person to suggest that a roulette dealer could place his ball in a section of the wheel. John Scarne in his Complete Guide to Casino Gambling, published in 1961, asserted that “A good croupier can place his ball to within six holes.” This is not an affirmation that I’ve blindly accepted out of faith in John Scarne. Rather, I’ve seen it reinforced repeatedly in my 33 years of casino gambling.
In an afternoon, during the summer of ’66, I recall playing roulette at the table of a young female croupier who was practicing her skills. She would roll the ball slowly so that it would go around the wheel about two times before settling in a hole. Clearly, she was aiming for 0 or 00.
I bet 1 and 27, which are next to 00, if she was aiming for 00, and 2 and 28 if she was shooting for 0. On one occasion I almost won. She looked with alarm at the pit boss who was standing at her elbow. He, in turn calmed her down and had her continue what she was doing. “You almost got her that time,” he said to me. Whereupon, he continued to root for me while I stayed for a few more bets.
What Darwin Ortiz and others are thinking of when they say they are skeptical of a croupier’s ability to place his ball is probably the idea of the dealer achieving it while rolling the ball at top speed…
I don’t know how many times a mechanic can roll his ball around a wheel and still place it with some reliability. This much I do know. It can be done and it is done.
Thoughts from Arnold Snyder on Roulette Dealer Steering
What it really comes down to is whether or not a professional roulette dealer can train himself to launch the ball such that it makes a specified number of revolutions prior to dropping.
I don’t doubt that a dealer can launch a ball from a chosen point on the wheel, or that many wheels are biased such that the ball tends to drop onto the wheel more frequently from the same area of the track. But roulette dealers typically launch the ball so that it makes many revolutions (not 4 or 5) and the wheel, which is not spinning at a truly constant speed, is revolving in the opposite direction of the ball.
In Scarne’s 1978 revision of his 1961 book, titled Scarne’s Guide to Casino Gambling, he states emphatically that no roulette dealer can section shoot with accuracy on modern roulette wheels. He also expounds some on the dealer who exhibited to him his ability to aim the ball accurately within a 6-number section, as mentioned by Harry McArdle. This dealer, according to Scarne, was able to do this only on an obsolete wheel that had no ball deflectors, and only when he launched the ball in the same direction as the ball was spinning.
With both Darwin Ortiz and Steve Forte also of the opinion that roulette dealers cannot section shoot with accuracy, I still find the arguments that section shooting is a learnable skill to be less than compelling. Although Scarne was not the greatest mathematician, no one has ever refuted his vast knowledge of cheating at gambling.
Darwin Ortiz has conducted literally hundreds of seminars on cheating for casino security personnel in the past decade. Steve Forte spent many years in Las Vegas as a dealer, then floorman, then pit boss, then casino manager, prior to opening his own dealing school, and then producing his card and dice cheating videos, and acting as a consultant to the industry on casino cheating techniques.
The most convincing arguments that I have seen that section shooting may be more than a myth have come from Laurance Scott, who is attempting to arrange a confidential meeting with an industry insider who could not only explain to me the techniques to section shooting, but who could also demonstrate the ability to do it. I hope to follow up on this controversy soon. ♠
[Note from Arnold Snyder: Laurance Scott was never able to arrange this meeting.]
After first reading “Nevada Roulette” by Laurance Scott (Blackjack Forum Vol. XI #3, September 1991), I was left with a number of puzzling observations. There were so many inaccuracies regarding Nevada roulette versus roulette played elsewhere, modern wheels, dealer job security, the roulette “hold,” system players, countermeasures, hustling for tokes and the overall general conduct of the industry.
The thrust of the article had little to do with the controversial idea of dealer aiming, or “section shooting,” at roulette, but described Scott’s beliefs about supposedly common countermeasures used against winning players. I find it difficult to believe these practices could get past a real expert roulette player more than once, nor would I consider the practices “cheating.”
Laurance Scott is probably more qualified than most to describe the physics, technical factors and methods he believes would be used to section shoot. But aside from the ridiculous “Jane gets cheated” scenario, and the statement: “…the characteristics that make the wheel beatable from the player’s standpoint are the same characteristics which allow experienced dealers to cheat players by ‘aiming’ for sections,” there isn’t even a brief description or possible theory as to how it’s actually done.
It’s been over 15 years since I dealt the wheel and first heard the stories about roulette section shooting. I remember trying to spin the ball the same way from the same starting point and tracking my results. There never was any correlation.
Years later I learned that this “same spin, same starting point, fall into the groove” reasoning was fallacious, and just one of many traps you fall into when you try to convince yourself that this “skill” is possible. I also witnessed my first demonstration of roulette section shooting from a 20-year veteran, and it was far less than convincing. After years of listening to the debate I’ve found that those who support such claims seem to fall into one of three categories:
Those who believe roulette section shooting (or steering) is a manipulative skill that can be acquired with practice.
Those who contend that if beating the wheel by eye is possible then section shooting must be possible as well.
Finally there’s the group that has either heard about it, claim to have seen it done or believe they can do it themselves.
Interestingly, these views are all apparent in the article by Scott, and the subsequent letters submitted to Blackjack Forum by the ex-roulette dealer, the pit boss and Harry McArdle.
For example, in the letter from the former roulette dealer, the dealer asks: “How long would it take to learn to spin a roulette ball exactly four revolutions before dropping?” The implication is that if one can perfect the skill at this level, then one can master the technique for actual casino conditions.
I don’t believe you can rationalize in this way. Even with only one revolution and a super slow rotor, a significant margin of error still exists. As you increase revolutions (eight and nine revolutions are rarely seen, and 10 to 12 are considered very few) and pick up rotor speed, the margin of error will compound quickly eventually wiping out the skill factor.
The former roulette dealer also implies that the “skill” is easily attainable and the methodology is very straightforward. I believe these views to be a gross understatement of the difficulty. There are too many factors that move section shooting past the point of attainable manipulative skills.
Factors Against Dealer Signature or Section Shooting
Consider the capricious nature of the wheel. It is an undeniable fact that the characteristics of a specific wheel that may theoretically make it beatable one day can change the next day, or even the next minute, making the game unbeatable. Even the same dealer, same equipment and similar measurements of ball and rotor speed will yield different results at different times.
I proved this phenomenon to myself some years back after spending 17 days on the road scouting, evaluating conditions, and recording data on hundreds of wheels. Laurance Scott states the same opinion in How to Beat Roulette. He cautions: “…there are inherent factors of the game that cause wheels to phase in and out of predictability,” and: “I have scouted over 300 wheels and only a handful exhibit consistent behavior day after day.”
Many people will argue that roulette dealers after time develop “signatures” to their spins. They argue that roulette dealers “fall into a groove” and that a typical spin tends to produce similar results. I disagree. These same typical spins, produced with the same force (whether deliberately or by habit) will produce different results from day to day! How then could roulette dealers ever possibly develop “signature” spins?
What causes the unpredictable nature of a roulette spin? Basic wear and tear on the wheel. A tilted wheel, high spot(s) on the track, oil or dust on the track, temperature, oil and dust on the ball, and air density are a few of the many forces that represent the real nemesis of roulette computer teams and visual players.
Are the balls perfect spheres? Is the composition (weight) even distributed? Many experts say no and believe that these flaws are responsible for some of the strange results that one commonly encounters. I believe this phenomenon was first mentioned in the Romeo Project, a book that detailed an algorithm for roulette computer play.
Interesting side note: Don’t try to find this book, as every copy was purchased by a serious roulette computer team before it ever reached the public.
Finally, the most obvious factor, and remarkably, the one that many seem to forget: Roulette section shooting or steering would require the perfect correlation of two questionably attainable skills, not one. The roulette dealer would have to aim twice! He would first have to push the rotor to a perfectly pre-determined speed, and then spin the ball with a perfectly pre-determined force.
And the actions would have to be executed naturally to avoid suspicion. Compare these actions to those of professional bowlers, golfers, pool players and similar athletes. These pros only aim once and can literally take as much time as they want to warm up, evaluate conditions, and calculate the effects of their actions.
These are just a few of the many factors that contribute to the unfeasibility of section shooting. I hope to show that section shooting or steering would be infinitely more difficult and complex than most believe.
The ex-roulette dealer also comments, “If a player can clock a moving roulette ball, couldn’t a dealer?” This is a little like comparing apples to oranges. Just look at the mechanics involved.
A section shooting dealer must first push the rotor perfectly to a practiced, pre-determined speed. The ball must then be placed into the track perfectly at a pre-determined starting point. The ball spin would then have to begin with the same practiced initial velocity, carrying the ball perfect around the track a consistent number of revolutions before drop off. These are the physical skills that would have to be perfected. It would not at all be just a matter of interpreting observations of events that had already occurred.
When you read the views of the former roulette dealer and pit boss in Blackjack Forum, it becomes clear that these people really believe what they say is fact. This is not surprising. It seems that after people work in gaming for a short time they fall victim to the “I’m a Pro” Syndrome. After performing the same actions repeatedly, day in and day out, they convince themselves that they “should have” and therefore “must have” control over these actions.
Ask blackjack dealers what they do when players start “running over” the game. Most will change their shuffle in some way. They feel that by adding an extra riffle, an uneven break or perhaps a thinner strip, these changes may help get the game turned around. Then, when it does turn around—and it always does—they take the credit. They convinced themselves they can control the uncontrollable instead of simply realizing that normal fluctuation is alive and well.
In roulette, I believe every wheel dealer has at one time or another probably tried section shooting. Since very few players walk away from the roulette table a winner, the dealer takes the credit. He seems to forget about the 5.26% house advantage.
There are two procedures that effectively stop any possibility of the roulette section shooting or steering myth from becoming a reality. They are the “blind spin,” where the dealer spins the ball without ever glancing into the rotor, and the “last pocket spin,” where the dealer picks the ball out of the winning pocket, waits one revolution and spins from the same position the ball last landed. Both the pit boss and Harry McArdle point to these procedures as proof that roulette section shooting or steering exists.
After all, the logical question is, “Why do you think they have procedures like these?” As it turns out, the procedures are excellent, but the benefits realized by the industry have nothing to do with the prevention of “section shooting.”
They do, however, create good control and uniformity, and minimize the most annoying, ludicrous, unprofessional reality in gaming, which is dealers and pit bosses who sweat every dollar as if it was their own. Roulette dealers of this type visibly and with emotion try to “place” and “aim” the ball as if trying to steer, and mistakenly believe they can affect the outcome.
I also decided to give the accused a chance to tell their side of the story. I asked a close friend and triple sharp, all-around gaming executive, Gary Saul, to help me find the top wheel dealers in Las Vegas. Our research led to a couple of Cuban dealers who worked together in a major casino. This was no surprise, since the best roulette dealers in the world come from Cuba, the Dominican Republic, and Puerto Rico.
Having spent time in the casinos of the Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico, and having watched the Cuban dealers work here in the states, I can vouch for their incredible mastery of and dedication to the wheel. With a combined 75 years of dealing experience between them, both in Cuba and in the U.S., they were asked for their opinions regarding the recent controversy. They laughed and said, “If we could do that, do you think we’d still be working?”
Their response suggests two very important contradictions to Scott: “Why would anyone develop this skill to cheat players when you could work with outside accomplices to cheat casinos?” and, “If, in fact, this skill was real, you might just have the perfect crime as far as gambling scams go.”
After all is said and done, I will admit, I believe there could be a set of circumstances and extremely hard-to-find conditions that might possibly allow section shooting to exist for extremely limited periods of time. But even attempts under such theoretically perfect conditions seem futile after analysis on a practical level.
Just ask yourself these questions:
There are approximately 300 wheels in Nevada, but how many must be excluded from even the possibility of dealer steering or section shooting due to the procedures in place at the casino (the blind spin, etc.)? How many casinos use the best old-time wheels with the most favorable features? How many of even these old wheels will exhibit manageable rotor decay rate and predictable bounce? Less than thirty, if even that.
Then ask, “How many dealers work in the same casino, with the same equipment, long enough to develop these questionably-attainable “skills”? How many are able to identify the right conditions? How many understand the physics involved and know exactly what it is they are trying to accomplish? A handful? I doubt it.
Finally, how many roulette players are then vulnerable? You can’t cheat any player who bets after the ball is released, skilled or otherwise. You can’t cheat the majority of system players or typical players who spread multiple bets across the layout with no preference for specific numbers or sectors. So who’s left? The occasional player who makes one straight-up bet or a few bets in a specific section? When you do find these roulette players, what happens when other players are betting the other side of the wheel?
If Laurance Scott had stated that he believed a possibility existed that, with exceptionally favorable conditions, an extremely knowledgeable and skilled dealer might theoretically be able to section shoot on a temporary basis, I might have agreed with him.
He did not express these views about roulette section shooting or steering. He stated: “Nevada casinos cheat their roulette customers,” and “…experienced dealers cheat players by aiming for sections of the wheel,” and, “Nevada roulette is really nothing more than a carny game,” and you can “…assume the game is rigged (which it is).” I couldn’t disagree with him more. ♠
Ortiz’s letter is a response to Laurance Scott’s article Nevada Roulette, in which Scott asserted that there was widespread dealer ball steering at roulette games in Nevada casinos, chiefly to the disadvantage of players, and discussed methods of beating roulette.
I want to take a moment to disagree with one point Darwin Ortiz makes in this letter, where he states that “no casino management will keep a dealer who they believe has the ability to cheat” out of fear that the dealer will use the ability against the house. I know for a fact that lower levels of casino management have kept on dealers whom they knew could cheat–deal seconds, and the like–in order to use the talents of these dealers against players.]
Darwin Ortiz on Dealer Sector Shooting
I see that the latest issue of Blackjack Forum has an article (“Nevada Roulette,” by Laurance Scott) reviving the old myth that roulette dealers, through years of practice, gain the experience to place the ball in whatever sector of the wheel they wish. I’ve had enough experience in the field of gambling scams to have learned to be careful about labelling anything impossible.
However, dealers who can “section shoot” seem rather like Bigfoot or flying saucers. I’ve met people who know people who know people who can do it. I’ve met people whose brother-in-law can do it. I’ve even met people who could do it on every day except the day that I happened to meet them. But I have yet to meet one dealer face-to-face who could reliably do it when challenged by me.
However, placing aside the difficult question of whether there is any dealer anywhere who can section shoot, one thing that I can safely say is that Mr. Scott’s suggestion that such talent is widespread is utterly ridiculous. Hustlers who have worked at beating roulette through computer predictions by measuring wheel speed and ball speed can tell you that even something as minute as a breeze blowing across the wheel can negate the predictions. Yet, we are supposed to believe that dealers can take these countless variables into account and control the results.
Even more ludicrous is the claim that casinos highly value such dealers because they improve the hold. Perhaps most absurd is the claim that casinos will look the other way if a dealer with the ability to section-shoot helps a confederate win as long as he maintains a high enough hold.
Mr. Scott obviously knows nothing about the casino management mentality. First, no casino boss is going to under any circumstances look the other way while a dealer gives away even a dollar of house money (unless that boss is getting a cut–and that’s another matter, and one which Mr. Scott does not allege.)
Second, no casino management will keep a dealer who they believe has the ability to cheat because they realize he may at any time decide to use that ability to cheat the house. For example, I’ve met twenty-one dealers who were amateur magicians. They always keep that fact a secret for fear that they will be fired if management finds out they have even a modicum of sleight -of-hand skill. The house’s policy in these matters is, don’t wait for it to happen–get rid of the liability.
According to Mr. Scott, the casino has a dealer who they know can section-shoot, yet they keep him because he uses his ability to increase the hold. They’re not worried that he might decide to use that ability to help a friend win a huge score at one sitting that would more than outweigh whatever he might have helped the house win in the past, and his share of the profits would be enough so that he wouldn’t be the least concerned if the house fired him right afterwards.
Nor would management fears of such a scam be unfounded. The fact is that if dealers could actually do what Mr. Scott believes they can, the game of roulette would have been destroyed long ago. Dealers would, indeed, have used their talents at every opportunity to bankrupt the house by helping agents win. Mr. Scott is naive enough to believe that a dealer with this skill will use it for job security. The money-making potential of such a skill makes the whole issue of job-security irrelevant.
Some years back, Lance Humble discovered that he and his blackjack students weren’t winning as much money as his calculations predicted. He might have concluded from this that they weren’t really playing as well as he assumed. Instead, he concluded, and claimed in his book, that blackjack cheating was rampant in Las Vegas. (He didn’t win tons of money, therefore, he must have been cheated!)
[Note from A.S.–some big teams have kept records of their results at hand-held blackjack games vs. shoe games, and found their results at hand-held consistently below their results at the shoe games. At least one big team concluded that there was dealer cheating at hand-held games, and chose to limit their team play to shoe-dealt games.]
A close reading of Mr. Scott’s article suggests that he has gone through the same rationalization process. He hasn’t won tons of money. It couldn’t possibly be that his system isn’t as strong as he thinks. No, he must have been cheated! Once he settled on that theory it was, no doubt, easy to find many self-proclaimed insiders in Las Vegas willing to feed his fantasy.
I don’t know of any dealers who have ever made money for the house or themselves by their ability to section-shoot. But I do know of some who have made money off the willingness of players to believe they could.
Here’s a scam I ran across in a casino in the Orient. A dealer would approach a high roller and explain to him that, through years of practice, he had mastered the skill of placing the ball in any sector of the wheel he wished. It didn’t work every time, but often enough to affect the odds. All the player had to do to win was consistently bet a set of nine numbers in a particular sector of the wheel during the dealer’s shift. The dealer would do the rest by aiming the ball at that sector. All he asked in return was 50% of the winnings. A rendezvous was arranged to split the profits after the shift.
The dealer would then approach another high roller with the identical story but giving him a different set of nine numbers. This process was repeated with two other suckers, so that almost every number on the wheel was assigned to one player or another.
The dealer, of course, did nothing to help anyone win. Nevertheless, at least one player was bound to show a profit and he would be convinced that it was all due to the dealer’s aid. The dealer would then meet that particular player to receive his share of the winnings while avoiding the other players. The victims could hardly complain to the management, “One of your dealers was supposed to cheat to help me beat you guys and then he didn’t do it.” Who knows, maybe some of Mr. Scott’s ‘sources’ had some such idea in mind.
Snyder replies: I received a barrage of letters on Scott’s article, one of the most interesting from an alleged former dealer who claimed that section shooting at roulette was not only possible but was a common talent that most dealers possessed. He claimed that it did not take five years, but more like five hours, for a dealer to acquire this skill.
On the other hand, prior to receiving the letter from Darwin Ortiz, I had a phone conversation with Steve Forte (author of the Gambling Protection DVDs), whose opinion of Scott’s article is identical to Darwin Ortiz’s. I highly respect both Darwin Ortiz and Steve Forte, Is there a dealer out there who can demonstrate the ability to section shoot? ♠
There are two roulette universes that exist on planet earth: Nevada roulette, and roulette as it is normally played throughout the world. Most people who purchase my How to Beat Roulette system seem to be interested in how to beat Nevada roulette, so it is important to understand exactly how the game is different in Nevada than in other parts of the world.
First, a little recap for those of you not familiar with the techniques of beating the game. First you must find a wheel with a predictable ball fall-off point. Second you must be skilled at identifying an exact point within each ball spin at which to make your prediction–generally three to four revolutions before the ball actually drops from the track. Third, you must make your prediction based upon a visual observation of the ball in relation to both the position and velocity of the wheel. Finally, you must place your bets on the layout.
As a general rule, about one out of four wheels throughout the world can be beaten to some degree with edges ranging from 5% to 40%, depending upon the playing conditions. In Nevada roulette, however, you can throw out all of the rules.
I recently spent a week scouting and playing roulette wheels in Reno. It had been a long time since I had visited Nevada for serious play, and on previous occasions I was troubled by the fact that I always seemed to get big edges on paper, but whenever I played the edge diminished. I now realize why this is so: Nevada casinos cheat their roulette customers.
What? Cheat at roulette? How can anybody cheat at roulette? Well, first of all let me qualify the statement by saing that not all Nevada casinos cheat. Some casinos run a fair game. They use modern wheels which tend to yield truly random results. However, other casinos still use older style equipment which is quite beatable. Why would a casino use beatable equipment when modern non-beatable equipment is available?
The answer lies in the fact that the characteristics that make a wheel beatable from a player’s standpoint are the same characteristics which allow experienced dealers to cheat players by “aiming” for sections of the wheel which would cause a player to lose a big bet. On some wheels I observed, an experienced dealer could maintain an edge of up to 30% over the majority of the players at the table.
Why Roulette Dealers Cheat
Job security is, in my opinion, the main reason dealers cheat. Roulette just doesn’t get that much action and in order to survive many casinos require that a dealer produce a hold percentage above 40%. A totally random roulette game will produce a hold percentage of around 25% for the house. A dealer who cannot maintain an increased hold percentage for the casino is history.
The second reason is greed. As long as the casino gets its 40% it will look the other way when the dealer “helps” a confederate or hustles high rollers for tips (as long as it doesn’t get too out of hand).
Any dealer experienced enough to hit sections (it takes about 5 years to learn this skill) and who can produce a 40% hold percentage is worth his or her weight in gold. These dealers have essentially free reign to do whatever they want to.
How Roulette Players are Cheated
First of all, as a player you must realize that the casino’s objective is to wipe you out. Here is how the “average” player is hustled:
Jane buys in for $40 and starts to play her numbers. The dealer looks for any section pattern in the numbers and does one of two things:
If Jane is a person the dealer wants to get rid of (i.e. she doesn’t have any more money in her purse), he will do his best to wipe her out as fast as he can by aiming for sections which she hasn’t bet.
If Jane is a person he feels will “dig in” for more money, he will start to play the hustle. Jane will lose about $30 and then win. Jane will press up and possibly win again. A feeling of winning and euphoria will be induced. The dealer will also console and encourage Jane when she loses. Jane will then reach into her purse and keep pulling out money until she has lost it all.
As a player, you are continually encouraged to play straight up numbers. Outside bets, corners, streets and splits are discouraged. This is because the dealer cannot aim for randomly distributed bets such as red or black. He will tell you that you can’t win any money by betting the outside. He will belittle and ridicule you for your stupid play. I have even seen some dealers go so far as to move players’ bets from spits to straight up saying, “You can’t make any money that way–why don’t you go for it?”
Make no mistake. Some of these dealers have been in the business for over 30 years and most are real seasoned pros. They are in the business of sizing up a player and then playing them for every nickel they have.
Enter the Roulette Prediction Player
Casinos that cheat do not like system players. They will ridicule you as a system player by telling you that they love your action because system players lose faster. But the fact is that most system players who play a red/black/even/odd system will lose at the normal 5.25% rate rather than the 30% rate preferred by the dealer. System players who play a section system (pre-betting sections trying to follow the dealer) are wiped out in an instant. Their section never comes up.
Prediction players are another matter. The casinos really don’t like prediction players and apparently have had to deal with them for many years. Prediction players wait until the ball has been set in motion before placing a bet on the layout, and most prediction players are of a “dealer signature” variety. Here is how an experienced dealer handles a prediction player:
Sleight of Hand Ball Switch
A prediction player is allowed to get a “read” on the dealer and maybe even win a bet. But the dealer knows exactly when the signature player is correctly reading the dealer’s intent and it is at this instant that a ball switch is made.
It is a sleight of hand move. The new ball is palmed from behind the wheel and switched just before the spin. Why is it sleight of hand? Because most signature players realize that a different ball means a different signature.
The signature player will start to press his bets thinking that nothing has changed. The new ball, however, does not react the same. Generally, the switched ball comes up 1/2 or 1/4 wheel opposite from the predicted section. This is usually enough to wipe out a signature player, and the dealers generally have an arsenal of three balls from which to choose, all of which look identical but have different physical characteristics.
Roulette Wheel Speed Change
Should a prediction player solve the ball switch (which usually can be recognized by the sound of the ball), the next move is the speed change. The dealer will alternate from fast to slow trying to confuse the prediction player. Combined with the ball switch this is a pretty effective maneuver. Only the very best predictive players (e.g., me) can handle varying rotor speeds combined with ball switches.
Wheel Rotation
Should a predictive player keep winning, the next step is to actually pick up the wheel and turn it 90 degrees. This is quite an event, and happened to me twice during my week in Reno. Both times the dealers said they were doing it to change my luck! I hadn’t had a hit for a few spins and I guess they were trying to help me out, even though I had all of the chips in front of me!
Bold-Faced Cheating
When all else fails the dealers actually stick their hand into the wheel during the spin and alter the speed of the wheel. At times this has been done when my back was turned as I was placing bets. Sometimes it has been done when I was looking at the wheel. This is about as close as you can get to out and out cheating, and presents one of the final stages of a player’s welcome at the roulette table.
“Get Your %@#(^*! Out of Here”
The final countermeasure I encountered was having a dealer lean on me and say, “How do you politely tell someone to Get Your Fucking Ass Out of Here?”
How to Counter the Counter Measures
For the first few days in Reno, I fell victim to many of these countermeasures. I’m good, but these 30 year pros are out for blood. I dropped about $800 playing $1 and $5 chips. Every time I would press I would lose. Every time I thought I had narrowed in on an edge I would lose. I was going nuts. I was keeping meticulous wheel statistics and, on paper, could show a whopping edge of 30% significant to the 4th standard deviation.
But then I noticed the ball switch. At first I could tell by the sound and then I confirmed it by looking into the ceiling mirrors (spy vs spy!). I then gathered statistics on each ball/speed combination.
I then realized that sometimes they were altering the wheel speed after I started making my bets. As a result, I made it a point to never turn my back on the wheel and only play the numbers in the first dozen.
What finally worked was a high variance strategy betting 1 to 5 numbers in the first dozen only. For those of you not familiar with high and low variance strategies, a high variance strategy is where you bet fewer numbers, but with higher amounts per number.
You win fewer times and have a higher variance in your bankroll, but given enough trials with the same action your result will be the same as if you were betting more numbers. For example, if you have a 10% edge you will win the same amount of money in the long term by betting $10 on one number as you would by betting $1 on each of 10 numbers.
The high variance strategy served several purposes: 1) It confused the dealers for a while, because they don’t usually see sections bet in this manner. 2) The wins were scattered far enough apart so that the dealers were “lulled” into complacency. 3) I could get the bets down and there was never any question of betting too late. I never pressed after a win. This is usually when conditions are at their worst. Instead, I retreated after wins and slowly let optimum conditions return. Sometimes under optimum conditions I would press after a series of losses.
My end results were several wins which netted me $1200. I came away an overall $400 winner betting $1 to $8 a spin. I played over 800 trials and my edge was about 25%. I stuck with $1 chips because this was the action that was normally tolerated. Did they like it? Not a bit. They sweated every dollar. But there was really nothing they could do except ask me to leave (which they politely did–after I camped out at the table for over 8 hours on my last session).
How to Beat Roulette
I have shown where a polished high variance prediction strategy can beat Nevada roulette. There is really nothing they can do about it except ask you to leave. You can predict the section they aim for when they try to aim. And when they try to go random, you can predict the section anyway! If you can learn to predict, learn to spot the ball switches, and bet in a smooth manner (never turning your back on the dealer) then you can get a substantial edge at Nevada roulette.
I also believe that it may be possible to get an edge at Nevada roulette without any predictive skills just by using an applied psychology approach. First, assume that the game is rigged (which it is) and that an experienced dealer can hit a section with alarming accuracy.
Next, develop an act such that the dealers can’t stand the sight of your face and start pre-betting sections with 25-cent chips. Have a co-conspirator bet $5 chips (at the opportune times) in the opposite section while hiding at the end of the table.
This act won’t last for long but there are many variations which could keep it going maybe for days.
Will Nevada Roulette Continue?
One of the fears professional roulette teams have harbored throughout the years is that all of the opportunities will disappear because of more knowledgeable casinos, modern equipment, etc. However, this just hasn’t been the case–not only in Nevada but throughout the world. Roulette teams generally don’t worry about Nevada because devices are illegal and because casinos seem to sweat every dime. There are easier pickings elsewhere.
Favorable Nevada roulette conditions will apparently last forever. This is because the house is maintaining ideal conditions so that they can exact an edge over unsuspecting players. Nevada roulette is really nothing more than a carny game in the truest sense. However, this is one carny game that an be beaten by knowledgeable and skillful players trained in the art of predictive roulette. ♠