Card counter wins lawsuit

Curious what you guys thought about the Indiana Supreme court lawsuit and an Indianapolis man filled against the Grand Vic (Rising Sun) casino that banned him from counting in 2006?? Living in Indy as well its been on the news several times and i have seen articles in the paper talking about counting, and it said casinos are taking another special look into counting. I wonder if this will have a negative effect or will it just blow over. The Indianapolis guy won the lawsuit (atta boy) What do you guys think????

And limit you to one hand. Same effect as barring.

They can limit your max bet, but they are required to give you a minimum of a 1-10 spread.

I was once playing a $50 min game where the PC pulled out another limits placard that said $5-$50 and said it applied only to me.

here is a link:

http://www.theindychannel.com/news/21476302/detail.html

final effects of this ruling are hard to anticipate. some IN casinos were already reluctant to 86 counters and seemed to act as if they were not certain they had the right to do so. others were eager and happy to do it. so in some of the toilets in that miserable state there won't likely be any change.

overall the effects will depend on what comes out of the gaming commission's review. what sorts of countermeasures will be allowed in IN? if i were a casino manager looking at this article i would not be certain i had the legal leeway to take any steps at all to discourage card counters. if this is the current environment there (i would not assume it is) it won't stay that way for long; certainly the casinos will get their regulators either to allow 86ing or to designate acceptable countermeasures. brave counterly souls might want to rush into action right now and test the waters.

if the casinos truly feel threatened, and find themselves with fewer available countermeasures than they think they need, i would expect game quality to deteriorate. this is what happened in atlantic city. from a counter's perspective it's desirable for casinos to feel they have the freedom to restrict counterly behavior on a case-by-case basis. otherwise they shittify the games for all comers.

However, I left. Did they let you play at the $50 min table with a $5-50 spread? Other players must have asked why. What did you tell them? A 10-1 spread is not ideal but not terrible either. Did you leave or sit out on negative counts?

I played about 5 hands then realized it was silly to stay, so I left and went elsewhere.

The most amazing thing was the other players didn't say a word and didn't ask any questions. I was tempted to say something like "hey guys, when I bet $50 the cards are in our favor so you should bet big." However, I figured it was best to walk out quietly rather than give them a reason to remember me. I went back about 6 months later and no problems whatsoever.

They can give you a sign saying 25 min, 25 max

I see that was changed. Big deal. They still shuffle up on you or move the cut card up.

I'm pretty surprised but not totally shocked that nobody would say anything. They are in the own little word. I would have the same inclination as you to say something but would also have held back. Interesting that you weren't entered in to the computer...or maybe you didn't give in a comp card.

I gave them a card the first time and that's what prompted the "back-off." As soon as they swiped my card, the PC picked up the phone. I am 99.9% sure they got the info from the casino next door. When I went back, I played anon.

For anonimuss, this is the only time I was ever bet restricted. Any other time there was an issue, I was half-shoed.