Is it:
"I can spread whatever I want because I'm invisible and I use good cover and I read "Burning the Tables" by Arthur Anserson."
or
"I got kicked out of every casino I play in and get arrested and back-roomed and my fingers smashed with a ball peen hammer."
So what is the truth because card counters and those considering being card counters need to know because I've heard both sides of thisa story presented here.
Sorry - couldn't resist using a good line from a movie. :-)
Gotta love Jack Nicholson.
Actually, the truth is quite easy to handle - it is somewhere in between the two extremes you have cited.
It's Ian Andersen, BTW.
Neither extreme is true for most of us. Of course, one cannot say for certain that there isn't someone out there who is counting cards, spreading to thousands of dollars a hand and not ever getting backed off or barred, but such a case would be rare in the extreme. There are no doubt plenty of small stakes counters who rarely, if ever, encounter real problems with the pit, but I would guess that their playing or betting cover has very little to do with that and any such cover they are using is probably a waste of money.
As for busting hands with ball-peen hammers, that's stuff for the movies. However, if you are playing for high enough stakes, there are casinos who will handcuff you, illegally detain you, and physically intimidate you. Some casinos will revoke comps, forcibly eject you from your room or even have you tailed to try to find out who you really are. They don't need to do that, of course. All they have to do is tell you that you are no longer welcome to play blackjack in their store, but some want to intimidate a card counter to the point where he is fearful of returning.
Odds are that if you are going to count cards, if you play for high enough stakes, and if you win enough money, you are going to be backed-off or barred. In the overwhelming majority of cases, this will be nothing more than being told you are no longer welcome to play blackjack. It goes with the territory and should not be a thing to be feared. I would guess that more counters back themselves off through the fear of being nailed by the casinos than are ever actually backed off by the casinos themselves.
"It's Ian Andersen, BTW"
I see THAT joke flew right over your head.
The CNN appearence of IA in one of his "real" names, about consulting on the Wells-Fargo/Norwest merger. At least it is one of the "real" names he has used and which he may have returned or bartered for still another AKA. So you never can be sure if it is really IA or....
He was involved in the Wedtech scandal very deeply.
But was ruled out due to insufficient evidence.
I see THAT joke flew right over your head.
Andersen's name is so frequently misspelled that, yes, indeed it did.
:-)
and he got away with it. He did it because Joe Demagio was pissed off they double teamed Norma Jean, and because he owed the mafia big gaming debts for his gambling in Cuba. Paybacks are a bitch......
"The rain in Spain......."
She said they left a "bad" taste in her mouth.
There is ample mention of Ian Anderson in real ID in the wedtech scandal and his edging toward a settlement offer in regard to Wells-Fargo's inheiritance of charter problems, mentioned just before the Norwest merger, where he was interviewed as one of the merger consultants (or someone using one of his well known AKAs was -jeesh!)-- where Norwest then renamed itself Wells-Fargo confusing!-- that required setting asside 1/3 of the common stock in the combined corporation to "settle charter questions arrising from prior aquisitions." He was mentioned, in both real ID and as IA in a San Francisco Chronicle article as being "universaly banned when mention of his past publishing and blackjack playing was made during sentencing along with company founders...."
But then to further specify one would have to post his real ID or AKA or well IA wrote that he changes names quite often. That violates guidelines. It is a real tribute he still gets game, despite such outings, but not a tribute that he has involved himself in some of these areas--- Wedtech or the Wells Fargo inheiritance of charter problems; which is big and involves 18 USC 335 admissions of violation by one of the banks bought by Wells-Fargo.
