I wonder the legality problem of taping preferential shuffling... Is it legal to use the tape on the court?
The casino do tape your play, and you can get the tapes preserved if you have pending litigation. If you file a formal complaint, you can ask for preservation of tapes.
I do not think brining hidden cameras in is legal, but I do not know. It may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.
While we may despise the practice of PS, I do not think it is illegal in Nevada, and I do not think that a court would so find.
I do not know about jurisdictions like Indiana or Missouri. However, there I think the issue would be decided by the Gaming Commissions, and not by the courts.
Consider the following argument:
Prosecution: Is it illegal to remove cards from a deck in game of casino blackjack.
Impartial expert: Yes.
Prosecution: Is preferential shuffling mathematically equivalent to shorting a deck of cards?
Impartial Expert: Yes.
Prosecution: So is preferential shuffling legal?
Impartial expert: Yes.
Prosecution: So do you think it should be?
Impartial expert: Er,no.
That would work on a layman, and a judge with common sense. The latter are thin on the ground, but no so thin as people might think.
Whether this would be desireable is another matter. PF doesn't hurt counters, they just see it and leave. What would be used in place of PF-barring, and/or lousy conditions, is worse.
The problem is that argument is that it would apply to us. Suppose I play with the strategy of Wonging out in negative counts. From the perspective of the other players, this is also mathematically equivalent to shorting their Shoe.
I don�t see that you can argue that this is cheating when the house does it, but not when I do.
I would favor an explicit regulation that banned PS. I think the easiest would be to require the casino to deal to the cut card, or to specify at the outset of the shoe the number of rounds which would dealt. (This is only practical in NME games).
I believe this would require an explicit regulation from the gaming commission. However, I would be willing to give that up if the gaming commission had rules limiting barring, but allowed PS as an �approved counter-measure.�
It is unrealistic to expect BJ to continue with both barring and counter-measures to continue.
unless you are taping it to win a bet you've made with someone there isn't much point. States that allow gaming do so to collect big taxes and are effectively in the casino business. They have no incentive to help you win money against casinos.
I believe that the actions of other players does not constitute the shorting of a shoe. Even if that player should be an advantage player it still does not lie within the jurisdiction of a 'gaming commission'. Players are expected to make the best play available to them short of cheating (perfect basic strategy is simply using your brain and not cheating nor is counting or wonging for that matter). If the casino should use the same information to determine it's strategy it is most certainly cheating (imagine if a dealer were to decide to hit on a hard 17 because there were a whole bunch of little cards coming). Should a casino base their shuffle point policy based upon the deck composition it is cheating in just the same way. The casino is mandated to provide a stable and constant gaming environment to the public. When a player enters or exits a game it has nothing to do with the casino or the gaming commission, there is no provision for thwarting counter tactics at the expence of regular customers.
I agree with you that the only solution would be the legislation of the cut point (along with other rules) would be the only way to control this problem. This type of control would most certainly result in a drastic reduction of the quality of the Las Vegas game (similar to Atlantic City).
Hip Hop
I agree with the DD�s main point:
States that allow gaming do so to collect big taxes and are effectively in the casino business. They have no incentive to help you win money against casinos.
but I think there are exceptions.
Indiana is the most notable in my mind. I have a lot of respect for the IGC. They seem to have struck a fair balance between the legitimate interests of casinos and fairness to the gaming public.
I do not know what their policy is regarding PS. It wouldn�t surprise me if it was illegal there; I just don�t know. I have asked some Indiana players that question, but I don�t think anyone was aware of what the regulations are.
.
I don�t see that you can argue that this is cheating when the house does it, but not when I do.
This is the "sauce for the gander" argument Griffin makes. It is a reasonable viewpoint. Don makes a good counter-case in BJA. I have little to add to that.
Video taping is perfectly leagl anywhere where there is NO EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY! Audio is a different matter. Some States (Like NJ) allow audio taping with the consent of only 1 party to the conversation. So you, a pit boss and a dealer are having a discussion on why they shuffled up. You can record it without either of their knowledge as you are doing it and obviously consent to the recording. Other States require two or more party knowledge. You are stuck there, but a video and two witnesses would be a good start.
If you do videotape, be sure to use a transmitter to send the video to another friend who has the recorder and a wireless receiver and stays out of the confrontation. It won't do you any good to be arrested and have the tape seized.
I am an expert in audio/video surveillance equipment and proceedures. If you need help, just ask!!
Blackjack 3to2
