Your instincts are correct. No, at a normal craps game you won't be arrested for failing to throw the dice properly, however, if the casino repeatedly voids you

Your instincts are correct. No, at a normal craps game you won't be arrested for failing to throw the dice properly, however, if the casino repeatedly voids your throws they will likely ask you to leave, especially if you're a healthy person who could easily make proper throws but are strangely setting the dice and sliding or dribbling them. The current case seems to be much less clear-cut, however. Normally, a craps game would be watched by a pit crew (and surveillance to an extent) and bad rolls would be immediately recognized and voided. It is unclear whether anybody was monitoring the rolls at the electronic table, and whether there is any specific direction that states the dice must be rolled a certain way. Your question about the casino's responsibility seems highly relevant -- responsible for monitoring the rolls, for observing any possible player collusion, and for clearly stating what an acceptable dice roll consists of. If they failed at any of those, it would be hard to claim that whatever the players were doing, right out in the open, was illegal. This case has parallels to Phil Ivey's ordeal with Borgata and Crockford's casinos. He and an associate won $20 million using a technique known as "edge sorting," which essentially is recognizing extremely small imperfections on the backs of the cards, to know the value of the next cards to be dealt. Whether or not this was actually cheating -- nobody touched the cards or manipulated the cards in any way -- was decided by the courts, but various US and UK courts had differing opinions so that decisions were often flipped on appeal. In this case, the casinos can claim "cheating," but if the players "rolled" the dice and the electronic table accepted those rolls as valid and no casino personnel objected and no written rules were broken, I'd say the players have a good case. Unfortunately we'll likely never know, $225,000 is a lot less than $20 million and I would expect if the casino legal teams realize they are in the wrong, they will simply offer the players $50, maybe $100,000 scot-free to keep their mouths shut and never visit again, and given the cost of legal fees and the possibility they could lose (or be charged criminally), I can't imagine the players not taking that deal. More info on Phil Ivey: https://www.uspoker.com/phil-ivey-lawsuit-borgata-guide/ https://www.uspoker.com/phil-ivey-lawsuit-borgata-guide/