In a Gambling with an Edge podcast, two card counters—“Joe” and “Semi-Pro”—tell the story of a chop disagreement. I am only a listener to the podcast, with no inside knowledge, so my comments will undoubtedly misstate their positions. Pretend this discussion is based on a fictional incident. My points still apply. Part of the difficulty in running an AP team or real-world relationship is disagreements over money. To recap the fictional scenario: During her play, Semi-Pro had gone to a table where a gambler asked her to wait a few hands before joining. When the gambler’s lucky streak ended, he thanked Semi-Pro by toking her $25. The senior teammate Joe, a grizzled veteran of the EV wars, thinks that the green chip should be part of the team chop. [At that point Marlo Stanfield called in to the show to relate his experience as a rookie counter on Joe’s team: “I wanted it to be one way, but Joe told me it’s the other way.”]
Now comes Semi-Pro, giddy at $25 of UV (unexpected value) derived from her unique skills (the skills that cause gamblers—especially older males—to say, “So you’re telling me there’s a chance”), outside the scope of the team mandate to count cards. By her position, it was only incidental that the $25 even came in a casino, and the profit should accrue to her the same as if a flirtatious barista had given her a free latte at the coffee shop earlier in the day. That chip has nothing to do with the team chop.
Sometimes I feel that we should have a forum called The APs’ Court to settle these disputes, or a private AP arbitrator (even a panel of three AP arbitrators), since we generally don’t have signed agreements, nor the ability to seek remedy in open court. For now, I don’t mind having these guys duke it out on GWAE radio. (I admit that I have attended a live taping of The Jerry Springer Show.)
If I were a trained online influencer, I would now make an ad-loaded, click-bait slideshow saying “6 Critical Things Joe and Semi-Pro Missed” or “You’ll Never Guess What Semi-Pro is Doing Now” or “When Joe and Semi-Pro Argued over a Chip, This is What Happened Next …” I’m an old-school programmer, so I’ll just enumerate paragraphs.
- Semi-Pro believed that her female, pleasant attractiveness allowed her to get that $25 that another player (like male, surly, and generally foul Joe) could not have. I wasn’t there, so I can’t say that her read of this particular situation was wrong. Maybe the gambler would not have toked a green chip to anyone else. However, I would in general question Semi-Pro’s ability to make an unbiased read. Assuming she’s been an attractive, young female for her entire playing career, she would tend to attribute such tokes to those features, and that would generally be more accurate than not. Ceteris paribus, don’t cute, friendly, female dealers make more in tokes (from a predominantly male customer base) than their male colleagues? Absolutely. BUT … it’s shocking how much and how often that’s NOT the case. I’m here to tell young Semi-Pro that in my decades of playing tables, I’m still amazed how much male players toke even unfriendly male dealers. There is definitely a gambler’s camaraderie that ignores gender, and is not based on flirtation. I myself have been toked a quarter for exactly the same thing—politely waiting while a gambler finished a hot streak. A few months ago, a gambler gave each player at the table a black chip after she hit a Royal Flush (thus adding $200 to my team’s win for the day). On Mississippi Stud a few months ago, a gambler toked me a quarter after I alerted him to a short bet on a lock winner. NHL Hall of Famer Denis Savard once tried to toke me a green chip to NOT split Tens (I declined the toke). A card counter who plays exclusively blackjack won’t see this gambler’s code as much, but it’s there, and very visible in the carnival pit. Gamblers used to regularly toke me for letting them bet my “Pairs Plus” in Three Card Poker. Loosely tossing around chips is part of The Code. We gamblers even lend each other money. Some APs even cultivate the “gambling-buddy” vibe at the table, to create scavenging opportunities. I hate to burst Semi-Pro’s bubble, since she must have felt at least a little bit flattered to have received that chip (“Why else would that guy have given me twenty-five dollars??”), but these are degens we’re dealing with, and those are just chips, not money. Semi-Pro’s feminine appeal is strong, no doubt, but it’s surprising how much we ugly dudes get toked, too.
- The team mandate to count cards is too narrow. Many APs started their career counting cards, not because there is anything special about that method, but because they heard about it, there are many books about it, and it can be objectively taught, tested, and then executed. Upon spending time in casinos, APs realize that opportunities abound. Counting, hole-carding, promotions, comps, machine-play, scavenging, mis-pays, and yes, tokes. Whatever the method, the money spends as well. Counting cards is our primary method, not our purpose. We’re going into a casino to make money, and tokes happen.
- Semi-Pro’s job description is too narrow. Semi-Pro may conceive her role to be a card counter, and earning a toke in a manner having nothing to do with counting may seem like side-gig money. I would argue that her job is to be a member of this AP team, and to that job she brings a variety of skills and assets, her counting being one, and her femaleness also being one. Each member of a team brings a unique skill set. If your skills exactly overlapped an existing team member, then we probably wouldn’t have brought you on board! We once encountered a drunk frat-boy in the lucky seat on a high-value, hole-card target. Needing that seat (easily worth five figures to us), we sent “miss brown” to acquire the seat by sidling up to him, playing with him for a while, flirting, and then inviting him to switch over to the adjacent table with her. The plan worked like a charm. No one else on our team could have acquired that seat, but does that mean we change the chop? Of course not. What if we have chips that require a player’s card to cash out? Does the one BP who has a clean name and ID claim that profit because none of us could have cashed those chips? What if I’m the only one who could have seen a particular hole card? What if I needed an Asian BP for a baccarat game, and we have only one Asian on our crew? Will he say, “I’m the only one who could have bet that.” Practically speaking, will we dissect every chip won in terms of which teammate could have won it? So Semi-Pro might feel that only she could have earned that $25, and I would say, “That’s why we’ve got you on the team! Good work!” She should take satisfaction in her unique contribution, but not an increased share.
- “It’s not the money; it’s the principle.” I’m guessing that at some point, either Joe or Semi-Pro uttered these words, and possibly they both did. I don’t disagree that it’s the principle, but they need to correctly define the principle! I’ll tell you what the principle is. The principle is: “When the amount of money is small, don’t worry about it—flip a coin, or let the finder keep it, or throw it in the chop.” See what I did there? I put the conditional right into the definition of the principle. By this properly defined principle, when a teammate buys the lattes for the team at the Starbucks, he doesn’t submit a bill to the team when it’s time to chop (assuming this is a small team of a few people). Maybe on the Boardwalk I saw a perfect hat for a teammate, and I bought it for him. It was $10 or something. Who cares? So by this principle, the instant Joe saw that Semi-Pro wanted to keep the chip, he should have let her keep it, and—and this point is critical—neither party should have any resentment or lasting irritation over the issue, regardless of the disposition of the chip. Wherever that chips ends up, provided its color was green, neither Joe nor Semi-Pro should feel that they had to concede anything, or that they made a sacrifice. It’s a coin flip. I am concerned that Joe and/or Semi-Pro might still feel some dissatisfaction over the issue (or that I’m now aggravating an old wound), and I’m here to say that the principle itself says that the chip can go either way, and no one has sacrificed anything.
- It is worth considering a catch-all rule that says that any grey area or disagreement (one or both parties will say “this isn’t a grey area—it’s obvious that I should get the chip!”) should always be resolved in favor of the team.
- After the exasperated teammates had to get separated by Steve Wilkos (I mean Bob Dancer), then Jerry Springer (Richard Munchkin) admonished them and all AP teams, “That’s why it’s good to spell everything out.” I disagree. If your goal is to ensure fairness of a one-time chop for a playing trip, then maybe that’s good advice, especially when dealing with people you don’t know, or people you recently teamed up with after meeting at a boot camp. For potential long-term relationships, I prefer to NOT spell everything out. I think it’s naïve to think that you can even do that. My goal would be to work with teammates who won’t screw me over when something unforeseen does pop up. As part of my selection process, I like to give a player some rope. If I see that time after time, a certain player resolves these situations in his own favor, and makes greedy cash grabs at every opportunity, then I’d probably prefer working with someone else. (I’m not saying Semi-Pro’s green chip is a “greedy cash grab”!) To impose a rule and then have team members follow it tells me nothing. I want to see what people do when there is no rule. Instead of saying, “You are required to play four hours per day,” I say nothing about work expectations, and then I see who is the self-motivated go-getter who puts in 18-hour days, and who is the slacker who puts in three hours and says, “No one said we have to put in four hours.” There are two particular scenarios involving bigger money that I think ARE worth spelling out: What happens if one team member has to face legal costs? What happens if a team member physically loses, or has stolen, a bunch of money or a bag of chips?
I’ve worked with a lot of other APs, and there seems to be unanimity in practice on this one. So, if I were the AP arbitrator in The Case of the Chopped Chip, my ruling is: This is a no-brainer, not even a grey area. Tokes are part of the game, not special or rare at all, and they go in the chop. If you’re good at generating those tokes, then we’re glad that that’s a skill you bring to the table for our team. Please generate more such tokes! That said, if Semi-Pro wanted to keep the chip, I’d let her have it, with no hard feelings. I wouldn’t even specify a new rule. Over time, I have every expectation that Semi-Pro will gain the same world-view that we old-timers have: she’s better at generating tokes than most or all of her teammates (and they might be better at certain other things), and she’s happy to throw those tokes into the chop. And that’s a great teammate to have.
[poll id=”1″]
The original podcast (they did a followup episode as well) is at https://www.lasvegasadvisor.com/gambling-with-an-edge/podcast-card-counters-joe-semi-pro/
It’s hard to have a definite opinion on this one.
However, when listening to the podcast, I remember clearly having thought that I wouldn’t have had the patience to discuss the $25 with Joe, who seemed somewhat “nittish.”
She thought she deserves to keep it? Good. Move on and if you like, make things clear for the next time in any way you feel is ok. Thank God it wasn’t a black chip…
I think it’s always difficult for a long-time player, who has generally encountered these issues and formed opinions on them, to argue with a rookie (or semi-pro), regardless of the topic. I’ve had vicious fights with teammates/gfs, and that’s playing games where we win every session. I think the thinner margins for card counting tend to magnify these issues–tokes, minor expenses, mistakes–and turn players into nits to some degree. I think success as a card counter probably requires some amount of nittishness, and I wish some of my non-counting teammates tightened up a bit (or a lot). No EV left behind. These issues are very difficult even for reasonable people to manage.
If you want to generate tokes from strangers in casinos, learn dice influencing in Aruze bubble craps. From my experience, craps players are some of the most generous strangers I’ve seen in a casino. It’s not uncommon for someone who can influence the Aruze bubble craps — it’s an electromechanical gaming device where you cannot touch the dice — and get large tokes.
The story goes a guy named Chan walks into Red Hawk casino with $300 one day and after 2 days is up over $17K playing Aruze’s bubble (smaller casinos would have shut the game down). Once you have over $10K in credits in the machine, the machine spits out the winning amount (over the $10K credit limit) in a ticket. On the second day, Chan was betting the max on each box number and tipping anyone who was a hot shooter (when machine’s LEDs turn red after 20+ consecutive rolls of no red 7; blue 7’s are fine). So Chan was tipping either hundred dollar bills (aka Benji’s) outright or a TITO voucher worth at least $100.
There are some people who figured out weaknesses in Aruze’s p-RNG algorithm. For example, using covariance (X,Y) divided by variance of X taught in principles of statistical inference, etc.
In summary, I know no other casino game where complete strangers will “consistently” toke $5, $10, $20, $100, etc because another player did well for so many “turns” or “actions”.
Great post James.
My favorite part of that show was one time where Semi-Pro showed she had a great understanding of EV and losing streaks and Richard told Joe, “Don’t let her get away!” The implication was that Semi-Pro was one-in-a-million and Joe should marry her.
A few months later, I asked Joe if he remembered that moment in the show and whether it had come up between them.
Joe definitely remembered. He said Semi-Pro hasn’t brought it up — yet. He said he had an answer ready, which he didn’t share with me.
It’s been a couple of years — and they are still together. Personally I’m rooting for them.
I’m rooting for them too, of course, but these things are so difficult. A young AP couple has to either endure the grueling travel together (which will probably lead to no small amount of bickering), or resign themselves to being apart. My suggestion is to broaden their AP game itself. With more available opportunities, they might not have to travel as much, or they would have a higher trip win percentage if they do. For instance, adding machine play could create an easy supplemental (or primary) income in an AP’s backyard. I understand the focus on EV, but I have to say that trip win % matters to humans. If most weekend or weeklong trips are winners, the travel is much more fun, perhaps even allowing some time to smell roses and such.
As you know James, I am older than you and although I always enjoy reading anything that you write, I really did not have to read past the first paragraph to know what the correct answer was on this issue (but out of respect of course I read the entire article). Of course that money goes to the team. Simply because that is the what the entity is. A team.
I have been on teams where if we found money on the floor, any denomination, while on the job, that money went into the team proceeds. Not because this was a team rule. Primarily because it was the right thing to do. Additionally because these kinds of actions can only add to the team adhesiveness. In fact, there was great pride and bragging rights for the person who would find the most added free money during the plays that lead up to a bank break. Added EV in many more ways than simply just the loose change or bills that we would find on the floor!
Very true. You see it on the casino side as well. Even though dealers pool tips (generally), dealers who bring in a lot for the hour will have some bragging rights in the break room. I’m glad you concur, because I do sometimes wonder if there are crews running around doing things radically different from what I’m used to and what I’ve seen. While I’ve seen and worked with a lot of people, you might have worked with even more, and been on more teams where there was actually a team bankroll with rules, goals, managers.
Bradley Peterson wrote:
I have been on teams where if we found money on the floor, any denomination, while on the job, that money went into the team proceeds.
Humm… Say you are in a casino as a repairman for slots machines. On your way thru the casino you find a $100 bill on the floor. Do you bring it back to your employer’s coffers cause you found it while being paid by him?
Any chip, money, voucher, etc left or abandoned by guests are to be turned in to security.
As an employee, if you don’t turn in that hundred dollar bill, expect to lose your job since surveillance (eye in sky) is watching employees (especially against inside jobs). Everyone is watching everyone.
This is what Grosjean was talking about: thinking about the team first.
At Sam’s Town in Tunica (over 20 years ago), I was playing alone in the high limit pit. A suit from inside the pit walked out, came around behind me, and then whispered, “Hey, buddy [pause for eternity], I think you dropped a chip.” I turned to see a black chip on the floor which had been dropped by the previous player on the other table. All the personnel in the pit didn’t like that player, and they seemed to like me (and had some sympathy for my losing at that point). Knowing that he couldn’t keep that chip, the boss let me claim it. That’s the downside of taking away individual incentive. He let a player take that $100, instead of forking it over to the casino. In the case of an AP team, the individual gets a chop share of any such UV, and all team members are presumably generating some UV here and there, so it is, as Bradley Peterson commented, a bit of a fun side game for the team members.
“ Knowing that he couldn’t keep that chip, the boss let me claim it. ”
Mr Grosjean:
Not only are you considered the leading AP in the US but your animal magnetism is also unrivaled.
Some AP have unbelievable amounts of charisma or charm. That female player pulled off a green chip while you pulled off a black chip (non-inflation adjusted for 20-year difference).
Missing a point
Semi Pro is part of a team
She is expected to work a certain period of time as all the other team members
When she was waiting for the fellow to finish his hot shoe she was on team time
Any money made while she was on team time belongs to the team
nycpro
But team time doesn’t necessarily start in the morning and end at the end of the day. There can be gaps. For instance, if we go to check on a game at 10am, and there’s nothing on, and now we have to wait for the next shift starting at 2pm, what happens during that 4 hours? Someone on the team might go into the poker room. Are the poker results part of the chop? How do we know whether the player has an edge in any particular game? What if the person pulls out his laptop and does some online gaming, or airbnbing, or ticket selling, etc.? What if a team member goes into the sports book to make some bets? For our team, those sports bets would definitely NOT be part of our chop. Our team faces the issue of what to do with counting action. While we’re waiting for our main target, if a team member blasts a shoe supposedly on a good count, is that action part of the chop? In practice, sometimes it is, and sometimes it isn’t. Personally, I usually don’t want a piece of counting action. While I’m in a casino, I might have a move that I can execute that has nothing to do with our primary target, and which is a move unknown to my teammates. What if I see that opportunity, but I don’t want to explain to my teammates what I did? Some teammates might not want a piece of any of that “black-box” action. Also, we don’t necessarily measure hours whatsoever. I have been on chops where I put in 18 hours per day, and someone else put in 4 hours per day, and we got the same share. Only once can I even recall a chop that involved hours (shifts played was the metric), and I was not a fan of the arrangement, and the team dissolved shortly thereafter. I don’t know how Joe and Semi-Pro count their hours, or if time even factors into their chop. So I think that there are many different teams and scenarios, but this one–with the quarter toke–is pretty cut-and-dried, partly because it’s a small amount, a common scenario, and tokes could and do derive from any team member. But yeah, in their story, Semi-Pro is definitely at the casino working, on the clock and presumably “billing hours,” making money for the team in whatever way possible, which is my point #2.
While James was clear about this in the original post, some of you keep forgetting that Joe and Semi-Pro are a couple. Boy friend girl friend. Romantically involved. However you want to phrase it.
THAT’S A DIFFERENT TEAM.
Every successfully married man knows there are times to shut up and let her have her way. Life works a lot better when you do that. (My level of expertise is correlated with how many times I didn’t do this and the relationship ended.)
this was $25 bucks! This is not worth going to war over. It might even be a case where Joe says something like, “you can keep it this time, but in the future all such tips go to the team. okay?” That way they can both win and have a better chance at emotional harmony.
I would actually prefer to forget about that fact. Unless the entire ploy was a promotional stunt. If this was not a promotional stunt and there is truly debate between these two as to what is right and wrong and they are a couple, then I am pleased to not be in such a taxing relationship.
I actually felt I DIDN’T make it clear that they’re a couple, as I did NOT want the decision to be based on that. As an AP matter, I think it’s a no-brainer that the chip gets chopped, and the disagreement on the podcast was presented in AP terms. As a practical matter, If I were in Joe’s shoes, I’d let her keep the chip, and for all I know, that’s exactly what Joe did. I can’t remember if the podcast stated the final disposition of the chip, and I didn’t care to re-listen to find out, since it’s not pertinent to the discussion. (But why shouldn’t Semi-Pro just “keep her mouth shut” and let HIM keep the chip? Hmm.) This clash between AP protocol and personal protocol is what makes their entire situation challenging, and what the podcast discussed at greater length. It’s also what I like about Rounders. In the opening scene, Mikey has to ditch his gf to go hit a game, and later has arguments with her about his poker. The strain on the personal relationship is a major issue, and having a partner who also plays doesn’t necessarily make it easier in every scenario.
Bradley Peterson wrote:
I have been on teams where if we found money on the floor, any denomination, while on the job, that money went into the team proceeds.
Humm… Say you are in a casino as a repairman for slots machines. On your way thru the casino you find a $100 bill on the floor. Do you bring it back to your employer’s coffers cause you found it while being paid by him?
I do not know nor care what civilians do nor how they settle such issues. I only know how things work in my world where I have my partners back, and they have mine.
“I do not know nor care what civilians do nor how they settle such issues. I only know how things work in my world where I have my partners back, and they have mine.”
Doesn’t mean it’s the only way to do business.
Our policy is whenever you’re playing for the team (in an actual “session) all money goes in the chop. Whenever you’re “in between sessions”, whatever you do (Jacks or Better, Sports, etc.) is your personal win or loss. And finally, anything that “comes from your table play” (drawing, invitations to tournament, etc.) is a split 75% in the chop and 25% for the player who generates and took his time to play that opportunity.
You are correct Mr. G Man (is using Mr. and Man like that being redundant? I think doing so is just respectful). Team protocol can be set up in any way that is agreed on.
What I was responding to with the statement of mine that you highlighted and quoted above in which I borrowed from the word that James coined to refer to players in the casino who are not like the three of us (you, James and I), civilians, was a direct response to your hypothetical example involving “a repairman for slots machines” only. A civilian. Thusly, “I do not know nor care what civilians do nor how they settle such issues. I only know how things work in my world where I have my partners back, and they have mine”.
Of course there are many different ways to draw up the contract. Bottom line is, in my opinion, for maximum efficiency, all members work together as a team, and watch each others backs.
When I read this post, I believed the most important issue was trust, not necessarily determining what was right. Sure, the green chip should be shared, but it was early in their teaming venture, so it was a little more complicated. This is why I agreed with JG’s preference for fewer rules. Rules may guide behavior, but they don’t change the heart, and most people would prefer to team with someone they truly trust. Put another way, which is better – having a person grudgingly follow a “share everything” rule (i.e. split the green chip), or having a person who knows/realizes/learns sharing everything is better (i.e. keep the green chip this time but later realize sharing is best)? For me, I’ll take the second. The problem for Joe and Semi-Pro (and other teams) is it takes time. Thankfully, it appears the experience was good for their partnership. A well-thought out rule may create order, but it doesn’t necessarily create trust, and partnerships operate best with trust.
I’m very late to the party but I’m enjoying reading your blog since your book is impossibly priced. I’m a somewhat new counter and am considering teaming up with some AP friends as a team so it’s great seeing this type of perspective. My inclination is that she should definitely add the toke to the team chop. Like you said there are opportunities abound in the casino, and if that one toke goes into her pocket, where does the line get drawn then? I found a guy who refused to double down on anything, and let me double every hand. I made over $600 (a nice swing for a small BR), and if I were on a team would that count as MY money separate from the team BR since it was not my hand? Of course not! When I set out to make money at a casino and DO, that should be team money no matter how it comes. I hope the blog starts up again soon.