Does anyone have first-hand experience of how Indiana casinos are handling perps since the Donavon ruling? Half-shoes, shuffling, targeted maxes for ID'd counters? Any general change in conditions? I would be grateful for reports.
Feel free to email me at josh [at] axelrad.net if you'd rather not post. Many thanks.
changing the limit signs to $100-$100 and early shuffles are the countermeasures of choice. Horseshoe in Hammond's cuts are so bad that half shoeing wouldn't be much of a difference. The law requires them to cutoff no more than 25% from the end of the shoe but doesn't disallow them from shuffling early if they wish.
They don't sweat the lower limit players...but then at lower limits you're forced to play 8 deck h17 games with 2 cutoff.
Now that the IN Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case, is the previous ruling suspended?
and bigplayer - thank you.
Meanwhile, fading a last-minute wave of Litigation Phobia in light of the not-always-kind-but-always-recognizable depictions in there of certain surveillance staff. And shift bosses. But what can I do about it now?
If they didn't want to be represented in blackjack memoirs as half-wit lawbreaking scum, they should not have unlawfully detained us, assaulted us, threatened violence, refused (in violation of statute) to cash chips on demand. It's their foul.
If they didn't want to be represented in blackjack memoirs as half-wit lawbreaking scum, they should not have unlawfully detained us, assaulted us, threatened violence, refused (in violation of statute) to cash chips on demand. It's their foul.
Looking forward to your book.
Ordered your book through Amazon. Wife and I were at Barnes and Nobles earlier today so I got a chance to read it for a bit. Good luck!
