3 ms·

Right, but the casino has a great opportunity to rotate the cards in every game. Can you definitively state that the dealer never rotated one of your face-up ca

Right, but the casino has a great opportunity to rotate the cards in every game. Can you definitively state that the dealer never rotated one of your face-up cards after a hand? We only have their word that they didn't know the deck was marked. They could have been cooperating in fraud for years. Let certain players win, especially against a troublesome high-roller. Save it to invalidate a huge win, etc. It's improbable that their anti-fraud team didn't catch the issue because it's so obvious. Do a manual shuffle and fan the cards. 1/32nd of 2.5 inches is 1/80th of the width. Greater than 1%. I used to manually grade gems. In the beginning I could hardly tell 3mm from 4mm, in the end I could spot a 3.05 in a tray of 3s, and gems don't sit flush in your hand while you compare them. (At any rate, they will check after this, and mechanically I hope!) The best way to deal with this is make the casino eat the loss. If they're innocent it'll teach them to be more careful.

jdmichal 10y ago
Baccarat is a purely mechanical game from the house perspective. Even if the dealer had perfect premonition and telepathy, the behavior of the house would not change. > Sun trained herself to identify aberrations along the left or right margins of the card backs, no wider than 1/32 of an inch, the Times reported. Also, the imperfection was 1/32 of an inch, not 1/32 of the card width. Though the wording is ambiguous; it may be that the margin was 1/32 of an inch, in which case the imperfections within the margin were even smaller.
- EdHominem 10y ago
  > Even if the dealer had perfect premonition and telepathy, the behavior of the house would not change. Yes, but we can't say nobody cheated before because they could have done it silently. All we can say is that nobody caught this method before. As for the house's motive, perhaps the hypothetical dealer is helping a confederate win in the same way as in this story, but just to a lesser amount. This also isn't the only card game this would work in. > the imperfection was 1/32 of an inch, not 1/32 of the card width. Right, I said it wrong but that's where I got 1/80th from. And yeah, it would be a fraction of a millimeter. But with proper technique (such as is used to check for marked backs anyways) of riffling through them, you'd see the shape move around. I also worked in something similarly finicky and know from experience that difference is easily within normal ability to spot. Anyways, the point is that there are two parties who are possibly hurt by marked cards - the house and its customers. The customers don't get the opportunity to inspect the game pieces so the responsibility should fall fully on the house. If they had skin in the game they'd try harder. But if they can rollback customer wins with it, it becomes a feature. Why look too hard, if at all?

jdmichal 10y ago

Baccarat is a purely mechanical game from the house perspective. Even if the dealer had perfect premonition and telepathy, the behavior of the house would not change. > Sun trained herself to identify aberrations along the left or right margins of the card backs, no wider than 1/32 of an inch, the Times reported. Also, the imperfection was 1/32 of an inch, not 1/32 of the card width. Though the wording is ambiguous; it may be that the margin was 1/32 of an inch, in which case the imperfections within the margin were even smaller.

EdHominem 10y ago
> Even if the dealer had perfect premonition and telepathy, the behavior of the house would not change. Yes, but we can't say nobody cheated before because they could have done it silently. All we can say is that nobody caught this method before. As for the house's motive, perhaps the hypothetical dealer is helping a confederate win in the same way as in this story, but just to a lesser amount. This also isn't the only card game this would work in. > the imperfection was 1/32 of an inch, not 1/32 of the card width. Right, I said it wrong but that's where I got 1/80th from. And yeah, it would be a fraction of a millimeter. But with proper technique (such as is used to check for marked backs anyways) of riffling through them, you'd see the shape move around. I also worked in something similarly finicky and know from experience that difference is easily within normal ability to spot. Anyways, the point is that there are two parties who are possibly hurt by marked cards - the house and its customers. The customers don't get the opportunity to inspect the game pieces so the responsibility should fall fully on the house. If they had skin in the game they'd try harder. But if they can rollback customer wins with it, it becomes a feature. Why look too hard, if at all?