8 ms·

This particular one is about sliding dice - throwing them in a way that they don't tumble. I'm sure it's understandable that that's outside the acceptable way

by dmbche 3y ago

This particular one is about sliding dice - throwing them in a way that they don't tumble. I'm sure it's understandable that that's outside the acceptable way to play a game - counting cards, for example, is done while respecting the rules of the game. I kind of see this one as stealing from the casino, rather than players getting an edge. But I'm cool with casinos getting robbed!

amrocha 3y ago
IMO the casino is responsible for enforcing the rules of the game. If the players sliding dice didn't trigger some sort of detection, that doesn't make it a crime to slide the dice.
- angry_octet 3y ago
  Exactly, it's up to their dealer or put boss to stop it when it happens, not some kangaroo court criminal charges months after the fact.
- bluecalm 3y ago
  Why do you apply this standard to cheating at games and not for example stealing? I find the view ridiculous. "If not a crime if you didn't catch me red handed" kind of ridiculous.
  - amrocha 3y ago
    Because stealing is against the rules/laws of the game/society. The article is scant on details, but it sounds like this happened at an auto table. If the auto table allows dice sliding, and they weren't warned by a dealer that they were not allowed to slide the dice, then they were playing by the rules. To flip it around, why is the casino allowed to stack the odds in its favor, but not the player? If there's an exploit in the rules that players can use to gain an advantage, then it's on the casino to update its rules
    - kelnos 3y ago
      Right: if you go up to a regular "manual" table and try to slide the dice, the dealer/stickperson/boxperson/pit boss will call "no roll", tell you what you did wrong (likely with some level of annoyance in their tone), and have you roll again. (Keep doing it and you might get kicked out, though.) It's up to the casino employees to ensure the rules are followed. (But if they miss something, IMO that's on them.) And to your point about warnings from dealers, many people walk up to a craps table for the first time not knowing what they're doing, expecting to learn on the go (and most craps dealers are happy to help, if you ask questions nicely and not while they're in the middle of counting payouts). There's no rule that says you can play a casino game only after first memorizing the rule book for that game. If you go up to an "auto" table, and there's no one supervising it (or, say, just one person who can't possibly watch everything), then the casino is implicitly saying that the software on the table is good enough to help ensure the rules are followed. If it's not, then that's on them. I do think that card counting and dice sliding aren't quite in the same league, though. Making a rule against card counting seems itself unfair; the game is about probabilities, and card counting is an integral part of determining those probabilities (given a hypothetical naive casino that'd give you single-deck blackjack these days). But a rule for craps that says "you can't roll the dice in a way that lets you determine the outcome before rolling" seems... pretty reasonable to me? The game would be pretty pointless if the shooter could just call out the numbers they want, and that'd be the roll. Either way, criminal charges for dice sliding is messed up. If the person supervising the auto table (or the auto table itself) didn't enforce the rules properly... welp, maybe the supervisor needs better training, or the table needs better software.
      - amrocha 3y ago
        I guess in my mind the argument is that the entire allure of a casino is that there's an illusion of skill to the games. Nobody wants a pure chance game, and the casinos know this, so they make games that allow for some degree of skill to influence the outcome. The idea here is that if you think you're above average, you can win 55% of the time, and the casino allows that because most people win 40% of the time so they come out positive. In fact, casinos promote that, and poker and blackjack are great examples where beginners who don't have the skills to beat the odds are more likely to gamble (and lose money) because they think they're better than they actually are. To me, that's what makes this case and card counting the same thing. The players used their skill to outsmart the casino. The casino can then update their rules to account for that: using multiple decks for blackjack, or adding an obstacle the dice must trip. What the casino shouldn't be allowed to do, is go cry to the government and throw the players in jail. That being said, if the players were going against guidance or violating the rules then I agree, that's illegal and they should return the money and be banned from the casino. Still no prison though haha.

by dmbche 3y ago

amrocha 3y ago

IMO the casino is responsible for enforcing the rules of the game. If the players sliding dice didn't trigger some sort of detection, that doesn't make it a crime to slide the dice.

angry_octet 3y ago
Exactly, it's up to their dealer or put boss to stop it when it happens, not some kangaroo court criminal charges months after the fact.
bluecalm 3y ago
Why do you apply this standard to cheating at games and not for example stealing? I find the view ridiculous. "If not a crime if you didn't catch me red handed" kind of ridiculous.
- amrocha 3y ago
  Because stealing is against the rules/laws of the game/society. The article is scant on details, but it sounds like this happened at an auto table. If the auto table allows dice sliding, and they weren't warned by a dealer that they were not allowed to slide the dice, then they were playing by the rules. To flip it around, why is the casino allowed to stack the odds in its favor, but not the player? If there's an exploit in the rules that players can use to gain an advantage, then it's on the casino to update its rules
  - kelnos 3y ago
    Right: if you go up to a regular "manual" table and try to slide the dice, the dealer/stickperson/boxperson/pit boss will call "no roll", tell you what you did wrong (likely with some level of annoyance in their tone), and have you roll again. (Keep doing it and you might get kicked out, though.) It's up to the casino employees to ensure the rules are followed. (But if they miss something, IMO that's on them.) And to your point about warnings from dealers, many people walk up to a craps table for the first time not knowing what they're doing, expecting to learn on the go (and most craps dealers are happy to help, if you ask questions nicely and not while they're in the middle of counting payouts). There's no rule that says you can play a casino game only after first memorizing the rule book for that game. If you go up to an "auto" table, and there's no one supervising it (or, say, just one person who can't possibly watch everything), then the casino is implicitly saying that the software on the table is good enough to help ensure the rules are followed. If it's not, then that's on them. I do think that card counting and dice sliding aren't quite in the same league, though. Making a rule against card counting seems itself unfair; the game is about probabilities, and card counting is an integral part of determining those probabilities (given a hypothetical naive casino that'd give you single-deck blackjack these days). But a rule for craps that says "you can't roll the dice in a way that lets you determine the outcome before rolling" seems... pretty reasonable to me? The game would be pretty pointless if the shooter could just call out the numbers they want, and that'd be the roll. Either way, criminal charges for dice sliding is messed up. If the person supervising the auto table (or the auto table itself) didn't enforce the rules properly... welp, maybe the supervisor needs better training, or the table needs better software.
    - amrocha 3y ago
      I guess in my mind the argument is that the entire allure of a casino is that there's an illusion of skill to the games. Nobody wants a pure chance game, and the casinos know this, so they make games that allow for some degree of skill to influence the outcome. The idea here is that if you think you're above average, you can win 55% of the time, and the casino allows that because most people win 40% of the time so they come out positive. In fact, casinos promote that, and poker and blackjack are great examples where beginners who don't have the skills to beat the odds are more likely to gamble (and lose money) because they think they're better than they actually are. To me, that's what makes this case and card counting the same thing. The players used their skill to outsmart the casino. The casino can then update their rules to account for that: using multiple decks for blackjack, or adding an obstacle the dice must trip. What the casino shouldn't be allowed to do, is go cry to the government and throw the players in jail. That being said, if the players were going against guidance or violating the rules then I agree, that's illegal and they should return the money and be banned from the casino. Still no prison though haha.