(From\u00a0Blackjack Forum<\/em>\u00a0Vol. XII #2, June 1992) After first reading \u201cNevada Roulette\u201d by Laurance Scott (Blackjack Forum<\/em> 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 \u201chold,\u201d system players, countermeasures, hustling for tokes and the overall general conduct of the industry.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The thrust of the article had little to do with the controversial idea of dealer aiming, or \u201csection shooting,\u201d 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 \u201ccheating.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n 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 \u201cJane gets cheated\u201d scenario, and the statement: \u201c\u2026the characteristics that make the wheel beatable from the player\u2019s standpoint are the same characteristics which allow experienced dealers to cheat players by \u2018aiming\u2019 for sections,\u201d there isn\u2019t even a brief description or possible theory as to how it\u2019s actually done.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It\u2019s 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.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Years later I learned that this \u201csame spin, same starting point, fall into the groove\u201d reasoning was fallacious, and just one of many traps you fall into when you try to convince yourself that this \u201cskill\u201d 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\u2019ve found that those who support such claims seem to fall into one of three categories:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Interestingly, these views are all apparent in the article by Scott, and the subsequent letters submitted to Blackjack Forum<\/em> by the ex-roulette dealer, the pit boss and Harry McArdle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For example, in the letter from the former roulette dealer, the dealer asks: \u201cHow long would it take to learn to spin a roulette ball exactly four revolutions before dropping?\u201d The implication is that if one can perfect the skill at this level, then one can master the technique for actual casino conditions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I don\u2019t 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.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The former roulette dealer also implies that the \u201cskill\u201d 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.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 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.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 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.<\/em> He cautions: \u201c\u2026there are inherent factors of the game that cause wheels to phase in and out of predictability,\u201d and: \u201cI have scouted over 300 wheels and only a handful exhibit consistent behavior day after day.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many people will argue that roulette dealers after time develop \u201csignatures\u201d to their spins. They argue that roulette dealers \u201cfall into a groove\u201d 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 \u201csignature\u201d spins?<\/p>\n\n\n\n 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.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 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,<\/em> a book that detailed an algorithm for roulette computer play.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Interesting side note: Don\u2019t try to find this book, as every copy was purchased by a serious roulette computer team before it ever reached the public.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 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.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 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.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 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.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The ex-roulette dealer also comments, \u201cIf a player can clock a moving roulette ball, couldn\u2019t a dealer?\u201d This is a little like comparing apples to oranges. Just look at the mechanics involved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 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.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When you read the views of the former roulette dealer and pit boss in Blackjack Forum,<\/em> 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 \u201cI\u2019m a Pro\u201d Syndrome. After performing the same actions repeatedly, day in and day out, they convince themselves that they \u201cshould have\u201d and therefore \u201cmust have\u201d control over these actions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ask blackjack dealers what they do when players start \u201crunning over\u201d 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\u2014and it always does\u2014they take the credit. They convinced themselves they can control the uncontrollable instead of simply realizing that normal fluctuation is alive and well.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 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.<\/p>\n\n\n\n There are two procedures that effectively stop any possibility of the roulette section shooting or steering myth from becoming a reality. They are the \u201cblind spin,\u201d where the dealer spins the ball without ever glancing into the rotor, and the \u201clast pocket spin,\u201d 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.<\/p>\n\n\n\n After all, the logical question is, \u201cWhy do you think they have procedures like these?\u201d As it turns out, the procedures are excellent, but the benefits realized by the industry have nothing to do with the prevention of \u201csection shooting.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n 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 \u201cplace\u201d and \u201caim\u201d the ball as if trying to steer, and mistakenly believe they can affect the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 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.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 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, \u201cIf we could do that, do you think we\u2019d still be working?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Their response suggests two very important contradictions to Scott: \u201cWhy would anyone develop this skill to cheat players when you could work with outside accomplices to cheat casinos?\u201d and, \u201cIf, in fact, this skill was real, you might just have the perfect crime as far as gambling scams go.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n 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.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Just ask yourself these questions:<\/p>\n\n\n\n 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.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Then ask, \u201cHow many dealers work in the same casino, with the same equipment, long enough to develop these questionably-attainable \u201cskills\u201d? 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.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Finally, how many roulette players are then vulnerable? You can\u2019t cheat any player who bets after the ball is released, skilled or otherwise. You can\u2019t 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\u2019s 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?<\/p>\n\n\n\n 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.<\/p>\n\n\n\n He did not express these views about roulette section shooting or steering. He stated: \u201cNevada casinos cheat their roulette customers,\u201d and \u201c\u2026experienced dealers cheat players by aiming for sections of the wheel,\u201d and, \u201cNevada roulette is really nothing more than a carny game,\u201d and you can \u201c\u2026assume the game is rigged (which it is).\u201d I couldn\u2019t disagree with him more. \u2660<\/p>\n\n\n\n Note: Steve Forte is responding to Laurance Scott, author of Professional Roulette Prediction<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n The Myth of Roulette Dealer Signature and “Section Shooting” by Steve Forte (From\u00a0Blackjack Forum\u00a0Vol. XII #2, June 1992)\u00a9 1992 Blackjack Forum Roulette Dealer Section Shooting After first reading \u201cNevada Roulette\u201d 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 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":29,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_exactmetrics_skip_tracking":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_active":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_note":"","_exactmetrics_sitenote_category":0,"spay_email":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false},"categories":[],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\n
\u00a9 1992 Blackjack Forum<\/p>\n\n\n\nRoulette Dealer Section Shooting<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
Factors Against Dealer Signature or Section Shooting<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
![\"Facebook\"](\"https:\/\/www.lasvegasadvisor.com\/gambling-with-an-edge\/wp-content\/plugins\/social-media-feather\/synved-social\/image\/social\/regular\/96x96\/facebook.png\" "\\"Follow")
<\/a>![\"twitter\"](\"https:\/\/www.lasvegasadvisor.com\/gambling-with-an-edge\/wp-content\/plugins\/social-media-feather\/synved-social\/image\/social\/regular\/96x96\/twitter.png\" "\\"Follow")
<\/a>![\"youtube\"](\"https:\/\/www.lasvegasadvisor.com\/gambling-with-an-edge\/wp-content\/plugins\/social-media-feather\/synved-social\/image\/social\/regular\/96x96\/youtube.png\" "\\"Find")
<\/a>![\"instagram\"](\"https:\/\/www.lasvegasadvisor.com\/gambling-with-an-edge\/wp-content\/plugins\/social-media-feather\/synved-social\/image\/social\/regular\/96x96\/instagram.png\" "\\"Check")
<\/a>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"