PEEKERS are CHEATERS

Because some people choose not to CHEAT at bj and play an honest game, they are subjected to attacks by those who CHEAT. If a dealer peeks at the top card in order to deal seconds, it is cheating, so why is it NOT cheating when a player peeks at a card he isn't supposed to? Why the attacks on those who merely point out the truth? Because the CHEATERS are in the business of selling books teaching players how to CHEAT that's why. People who CHEAT will have no problem with also LYING.

A lady's ample bossom is partially hidden behind a generous decolletage. By sporting a generous decolletage, the lady intends that you see some of her bossom, but not much and certainly not all. The lady bends down to fix her stockings. Thank God for falling stockings! You get to peek at almost all the surface of her proud mastoglands. She didn't intend that you do, but still you got a bountiful peek!

Tell me what's wrong with any of the above, and I'll stop peekin' at 'em.

You've wrongly stated that straight counters do not face casino misconduct unless they "mouth off". I've cited a couple of well-known cases of straight counters being mistreated but you've failed to address this issue. Why is this? Are you not a serious player? Do you not know of these cases? And i'm the wannabe?

Please, be a good boy, take your red chips, and call it a day...

You merely bring up a couple of isolated and irrelevant cases (and expect us to believe you, a CHEATER, as to your version of what happened), in order to escape the basic point that I made... that PEEKING is CHEATING. Look up CHEAT in the dictionary. A peeker uses information that by the RULES OF THE GAME he is not SUPPOSED to have. THAT IS CHEATING. A counter uses information that is NOT illegal (as per the rules of the game) to posess. You cannot deny these facts and you cannot deny that that is what I said. You can flame and attack and troll all you want but you cannot talk your way out of that basic fact... PEEKERS ARE CHEATERS.

that it isn't cheating...just as if you're playing poker it is your reponsibility to protect your own hand (read the signs in the casino).

The player is entitled (and expected) to use any information about the dealers hand or potential hand that he can observe without the aid of a device.

If the dealer exposes a hole card and you see it it is the fault of the dealer and the casino's training methods...not the fault of the player.

How many times have you seen the casino provide a high limit player with tons of booze and try to take advantage of him/her when drunk. Often the house does other unethical things to take advantage of unknowledgeable players. Besides those points, if you can peek a card on BJ the dealer must be very weak and not following proper procedure. So all you are really doing is taking advantage of dealer errors. Would you also tell the dealer if he paid your push? In my opinion that is the same thing

Phil.

You merely bring up a couple of isolated and irrelevant cases (and expect us to believe you, a CHEATER, as to your version of what happened),in order to escape the basic point that I made...

You make no point but that is beside the point. Isolated and irrelevant, eh? Why as a supposed big-time cardcounter don't you already know about these cases? As you've already assumed I have a bias against cardcounters, why would "my version" champion the rights of cardcounters?

Look up CHEAT in the dictionary. A peeker uses information that by the RULES OF THE GAME he is not SUPPOSED to have. THAT IS CHEATING.

Again, why is it the Nevada Supreme Court disagrees with this?

A counter uses information that is NOT illegal (as per the rules of the game) to posess. You cannot deny these facts and you cannot deny that that is what I said.

How about a counter, bigplayer scenario? Is that cheating in your obviously drug induced mind? After all, the bigplayer is using information gathered while he was NOT at the table!

You can flame and attack and troll all you want but you cannot talk your way out of that basic fact... PEEKERS ARE CHEATERS.

J G, is that you? ;^)

As per nevada statute and case law: If you see the dealers card by no cause but by the dealers mistake you are not liable. If you persuade the dealer or are in league with the dealer; to wit: you conspire with him to reveal the card to you during the game; you are liable for cheating.

If you are debating this issue over personal moral values then have at it. Just rememeber all the time you are arguing over this your missing some primo time at the tables or that practicing time for observation methods to see that corner of the card.

In duplicate bridge, if an opponent exposes his card, you are entitled to use that knowledge.

I'm not a poker player, but it's the same thing.

There are better pastures. (nt)
Posted By: Frank Stanton

The search continues to find one to put you out to!

Chip

>>You merely bring up a couple of isolated and irrelevant cases (and expect us to believe you, a CHEATER, as to your version of what happened),in order to escape the basic point that I made...

>>You make no point but that is beside the point. Isolated and irrelevant, eh? Why as a supposed big-time cardcounter don't you already know about these cases? As you've already assumed I have a bias against cardcounters, why would "my version" champion the rights of cardcounters?

You assume I didn't hear about these cases. I'm going to post a message titled "Probability" to explain why you are wrong here.

>>Look up CHEAT in the dictionary. A peeker uses information that by the RULES OF THE GAME he is not SUPPOSED to have. THAT IS CHEATING.

>>Again, why is it the Nevada Supreme Court disagrees with this?

It doesn't matter what the courts say. The definition of "cheat" doesn't mention anything about court-approval of the action. See if you can follow this...

*If you peek at the hole card you are violating the rules of the game, as the player is not supposed to know the hole card.
*If you violate the rules of a game you are cheating at that game.
*Thus, if you peek at the hole card you are cheating.

Here's another one...
*Even John Patrick could understand what I'm trying to say.
*You don't understand what I'm trying to say.
*Thus, you're dumber than John Patrick.

>>A counter uses information that is NOT illegal (as per the rules of the game) to posess. You cannot deny these facts and you cannot deny that that is what I said.

>>How about a counter, bigplayer scenario? Is that cheating in your obviously drug induced mind? After all, the bigplayer is using information gathered while he was NOT at the table!

It is NOT against the rules of the game for a player to share the count with another player. Your continued insults will not change the fact that you are wrong.

>>A lady's ample bossom is partially hidden behind a generous decolletage. By sporting a generous decolletage, the lady intends that you see some of her bossom, but not much and certainly not all. The lady bends down to fix her stockings. Thank God for falling stockings! You get to peek at almost all the surface of her proud mastoglands. She didn't intend that you do, but still you got a bountiful peek!

And you're still a pervert for peeking at her boobs, whether a court would agree or not.

I'm not "debating" the issue on either legal or moral grounds. I merely stated that by definition peeking is cheating, and that cheating in a casino can be a dangerous occupation.

that cheating is okay as long as it is legal cheating. Many consider preferential shuffling to be cheating. But it is legal. So it is okay, as is hole card information obtained by a player legally seated at the table without the use of devices.

Legal definitions and dictionary definitions are not always the same thing. It seems most logical to use legal definitions in discussions here. It may be better to just say that you feel that a practice is unfair, unethical, or perhaps even immoral.

I never said anything about the legality, morality, ethics, or fairness of peeking. I merely stated that it was against the rules. But certain trolls with drug obsessions (LVHCM/J Morgan/Grosjean) don't want people to know that the methods described in the books that they sell can get a player in very hot water. I stated that I don't believe it is right that someone could get arrested (falsely or not) but that the player who uses these methods should know what could be in store for them should they be caught. But since these authors can no longer play (and not even fake IDs can help them) they have to harass anyone who speaks the truth and threatens their book sales. Or they harass other authors like John May. Look at every single post by LVHCM... trolls, insults, and lies... all meant to harass anyone who is a threat to them.

Las Vegas Hole Card Mafia... and MAFIA is a perfect description.

mostly because of lies and fabricated evidence by casinos, Griffin, paid off gaming agents, etc. But these guys do continue to take lots of money from casinosl

Or they harass other authors like John May. Look at every single post by LVHCM... trolls, insults, and lies... all meant to harass anyone who is a threat to them.

This is where the discussion ceases to be serious. No serious money is made writing books. And I doubt that they worry about anyone being a threat to this trivial amount of money.

Elsewhere, I characterized with the term "immoral" your take on practices such as holecarding. You disputed that you find the practice immoral and claimed that it is simply "wrong". Well, that's why I brought up the ladies' bossom example and you have fallen right into confirming what you previously denied : that you find all cases of peeking where you're not supposed to "immoral"!

"You're still a pervert for peeking at her boobs, whether a court would agree or not."

If your characterization is correct, then all cinema-goers, cinema being an elementary case of voyeurism, should be considered perverts! But, since the whole world can't be wrong and you right, it follows that your characterization of the practice of peeking is mistaken.

Moving away from the darkened thatres of sin and into the bright lights of the casinos, there are myriads of opportunities to peek, everywhere you look. It's a veritable feast for the eyes! There, a cocktail waitress is fixing up her decolletage. Nearby, a man is in the process of losing his last dime. At the baccarat table, a very old and obviously loaded man is getting hot advances by a petite and very young lady who must've been smitten. On the other side of the pit, it's the critter who's ogling the foxy dealer's derrière. As to dealer herself, she's sporting the newcomer's professional smile and flashing us her hole
card.

Where are we supposed to look, O Lord? We are not perverts. But Sin is everywhere, even inside a casino. (Who would've thought?) We can't glance anywhere without committing a sin, seems like. Better fix our stare on the hole card, seems like the least obscene or perverted thing to do.

There seems to be confusion on the difference between advantage play and cheating. Let me explain it the way I see it, so that at least it will be at least a completely understood rationalization.

The Deck of cards is the complete set of information.The Casino, the table, the dealer, the other players ie (the Enviroment) is the channel through which this information runs. You are the recipient of the information.
The object of the casino is to have you misjudge or misevaluate the significance of this information for their monetary gain and it is your objective to correctly anayze this information for your monetary gain. This is what makes it a contest, Diametrically opposing objectives.
If the Casino were allowed to give you a lobotomy they would, if you were allowed to lift the top card to see what the next card was going to be you would. Neither of these things are allowed to either side.
The area in between is the information buffer zone.
Inside this information buffer zone it "seems" that anything goes.
The Casino seems to have no problem with use of alcohol to diminish the reliability of your neural network for analyzing the information stream and players have no qualms about using mathematics as a tool to increase the reliability of their information processing.
The objective of the Casino is to have you make the least favorable analysis from the least possible information.
The objective of the player is to make the most favorable decision from the most possibily complete information.
Neither side is responsible to assist the other side in its objectives.
If you look at the use of " morality " by societies you will see that it has always been a "leash" to restrict the freedom of action of individuals. Here the Casino is using it against you to diminish the amount of information you have available to you for processing for the purpose of increasing the magnitude of their objective within the information buffer zone.
This is like a boxing match " keep your hands up and defend yourself at all times" It is not against the rules to punch you opponent just because he isn't looking.