Card counters

[Baywatch]

I do not think they evaluate my game but as i am on a list on their computer due to that old story i am already on a waiting barring list.
Not sure on what basis they bar me after only few visits, it seems they wait for me to win twice consecutively.
My last visit last year, the dealer kept busting and won 2500, this time they were running like headless chickens looking at me, one on my left, one behind me writing.
I felt uneasy and left, did not even do my method but still end up winning 600 on practically level stakes in 3 shoes, luck of course but to them god knows what they thought?
It was in the afternoon and no one played with me, like you Leo, i would like to get the real reason but it keep getting back to the fact that i am on some kind of black list and thats sufficient to them.

[Leo]

Could be that due to all the Media attention and bad publicity you created they have decided it's all gone too far and out of hand, had you classed as an undesirable customer then Barred. Regardless whether they were convinced you are a legitimate card counter or not.

[Baywatch]

It seems to be the case but then why allow me in in the first place?
And why did the gaming board imply that i was barred for counting?
On the method i used i do increase too if i win my hand against a big card, for example, got a 6, dealer a 10 and won then i increase.
It will only be guess work, these people are very bizarre , i told my stories in another casino i go too, they are laughing about it.
At the end no one can understand their reasons if any.
The most obvious one is their bad publicity of 10 years ago but how is it once more that I am allow in then out i go after winning twice?
Maybe "they" are looking at these threats,unlikely for "them" to answer though.
A question to some UK members, which one of these groups are "likely" to have treated me in this way?,Gala, Grosvenor,Stanley(am a member of the three),was for one of them.
If you choose one more than the others,there must be some reason, would not it be something if the majority choose the one i always had trouble with,if this is the case questions could be asked about their competence.
I know for a fact one of them in the province bar an awful lot of people;not surprising from what i am told, the place is nearly always empty.

[Baywatch]

I meant threads, sorry.

[retro22]

was it Baywatch that created the "bad publicity" or
the casino? glad to hear you picketed- it had to hurt
and questions had to be answered by those that did
the barring.

[Baywatch]

This morning , i Received another letter of barring from the other casino of that group, the one i mentionned before where i was or at least seems to be well considered.
BUT, guess what, IT IS MY WIFE whose membership was withdrawn, unless of course next week my letter will come too.
My wife only play roulette at that club, little i must add.
Next year going to London with some high rollers friends of mine, who is going to lose business?
I must also said that no less than 3 letters was send from the first club when one was sufficient.
This is getting hilarious.

[Baywatch]

I know , i tend to go on about it but i feel my reputation is at stake here and now my wife being barred without me being barred in that second club makes me more puzzled than ever unless of course as i said another letter will come next week.
Surely there must be some managers from UK casinos reading this and yet apart from countryman suggesting that there must be another reason for this ban than my 600 pounds win.
So, club number one ban me and inform club number two of this fact, club number two follow suit without any questions asked.
In the same club last year, i played as a guest of one of their vip customer, a good friend of mine, member there for decades.
We both lost heavy at bj.
I was a member the following visit few days later, played roulette on 11 numbers for over 500 pounds a spin but only lost relatively little.
They send me invitation for free meal soon after my return but did not go back until this year.
Big losing session first visit back, the host introduced himself and treated us for a meal.
We went there everyday, everytime had a meal , came with 2 guests, one applying for membership.
Overall despite winning on occasion, not a winner.
So, my question to you in the trade,how is it possible to bar such a player as myself considered valuable only because someone somewhere decided to ban me, can not they see my previous record in THEIR club and decided that ban is a mistake.
It seems so idiotic, by the way it is the STANLEY group.
Any comments welcome to put some light into their way of doing things.

[jhn]

baywatch,

You have perhaps answered your own question by naming the company.

Their provincials are what the Americans would call grind joints and i mean grind.They do not want players that can win big and screw up their percentages.

The type of money you would have been playing is simply too much for them to handle.£500 per spin over 11 numbers is an awful lot higher than they would be used to.

.You may have heard of the term top heavy.That is when a small number of players with bigger bankrolls control whether a casino has a win/loss as the winnings from regular players cannot cover losses to a big player.Big is relative to small i.e if the average loss per player is £20 then you winning £600 means that the casino needs 30 players to get that money back.

It is not that you have done anything wrong.You were simply in the wrong type of Casino.

You really should be going to a club that has more high value customers where that type of action will be welcomed.

[123]

Wasn't he playing in London? That action would make him a big player in the provincial clubs but not in London. Which particular clubs did you play in baywatch?

[Baywatch]

Clubs were the Colony, i should be a small fish there but they were the one who sweated me from day one and ban me.
They let the Cromwell mint know about it, thats where i Play big at roulette last year.
This time, only play BJ in their vip room, last night there,won around 1300 playing BEHIND some high rollers , they won over 10000.
So i am NOT a BIG player there; overall not winning.
My friend who sign me up as a guest last year can not believe it, he too must think i must have done something wrong, i fail to see what apart from 1995 story.
At the end, i certainly do not wish to be reinstated in any of these clubs, they do not desserve to be called casinos but people should know the way they are able to treat their patrons is outrageous.
123, I agreed with you about their provincial casinos, thats where it all started to go wrong for me and as i said in a previous posts they have being barring an awful lot of people.
Few years before i was banned a local councellar(my spelling is wrong here) was banned too and he was also in the local paper protesting like i did.
If more people like him and myself were doing so, maybe just maybe they would take notice and use their brain cells instead of recklessly barring people.

[Baywatch]

Meant agreed with jhn about their provincial casinos;123 rightly pointed out that i did play in London.
Thanks for your answers but still very much in the dark on the real reason behind all this.
More details,in 1995 i did mention that the other local casino part of another group did not bar me and was always,up to now, well received there .
The manager of the stanley used to work in that club before and when question was asked by a senior staff about the reason for my ban ,his answer was"we though he was up to something, better safe than sorry".
So, sure a grind joint, but how can such a completely idiotic decision STILL follow me after so many years is beyond comprehension especially in a club receiving really high rollers.
So the way i play can not have being analysed by someone very clever,in their computer i was a suspect from either the first or second barring.
I play as a hobby and every year put money aside for it, i am not a winner apart from 10 years ago but i can afford it.
Its absolutely amazing that i am scaring them but its seems to be the case.
but WHY is it only the STANLEY that i put the fear into?
They really must hate me for the bad publicity of 10 years ago, press, television plus cheeky letters to their head office saying that i have got a winning system(I did believe it then...).
There can be no other answers as if i was as good as they think ,other casinos too would ban me.

[Baywatch]

Yes, its seems it will never stop and get more funny everytime.
I was a member of CROCKFORDS but never set foot in the place and obviously they just follow procedures and it never came in their little minds to question the idiot(s)who took the decison of banning me not only from the COLONY but from the whole STANLEY group.
The funny part is their last phrase" as you are aware, we are under no obligation to give a member a reason for suspension and it is very difficult, when writing to a member to advise them of this, to put it in words that are non-offensive".
I certainly would be less offensive to know the reason instead of guessing as i am, this last phrase seems to suggest in fact that i have being up to no good.
I would strongly advise anyone i know to avoid these casinos from that group and believe you me, indirectly it will cost them to treat a perfectly honest and fair gambler in such a way.
All this is nothing compare to the drama hitting London now, all my sympathy goes to the Londoners.

[chancer]

Baywatch,

I'm surprised you bother coming to the UK to play BJ, when you have such a good game in Belgium. Not sure if that is true anymore, it’s been a while since I was there. I remember Dinant had an exceptional game, and it’s a beautiful town. I believe they use Csm's, like Holland now, but Csm’s don’t affect the BS player like you, apart from making them lose quicker, and everyone else of course.
I to have had some barrings in the UK, but you have to move on. I don’t value the UK game so I don’t care. UK rules and conditions are some of the worst I have ever come across, and winning is very difficult, even for a good advantage player.
I suggest you try the LCI casino group. They take big action extremely well, and their casinos are probably among the best in the country for luxurious surroundings, apart from the Golden Nugget of course.
Being a progressive player, I would have thought the casinos would have a car to pick you up at the airport and all your expenses taken care of. They would in Las Vegas, no doubt about it at all. But that’s another story…..

Chancer.

[anin1]

Baywatch

Your posts have reached the stage where you appear to be attempting to use the forums to wage a vendetta against the casinos and the group that refused your action. If you wish to discuss the mechanisms and possible mistakes that you believe happened in your case that is good and welcome, but this forum is not a vehicle for an attack on them.
If you want answers ask those who can give them, if they are not prepared to enter into a discussion then it would appear to be their loss.
Please do not use the forum as a vehicle to vent your frustration and bitterness.

anin

[Baywatch]

I am sorry if that happened to be your opinion, i rather felt it was them who were having a vendetta against me.
I feel too that there is to much passivity about that type of situation and if more people like myself were letting go and tell their story like i am doing, maybe just maybe this type of things would not happened.
Its far too easy for them in their cocoon not to answer your letters as they know they have got a blueprint which allow them to be petty and arrogant
Yes, the game in England stinks and winning there is practically impossible but i only did go there once a year and i only make my points across so more people knows about it.
If some stanley staff are reading this, they should ask themselves few questions and think twice about treating people this way.
Bitterness is a very big word and i am angry against these proceedings and let the majority of people knows about it, thats my aim and its stop at that.
If ever i was allowed back, there is no way i would and i will make my utmost to stop people going to these casinos by telling them my story.
If that is called vendetta, so be it, they started it all.

[Baywatch]

Having said that, this will be my last message on this board concerning my story as you may think that i am bitter and frustrated when in fact i simply pointed out the unfairness of it all.
Of course i will move on and forget about this particular group.
As far as gambling is concerned, i did go twice to Vegas and was completely comped, room and food for 4 hours play a day.
This is why i am angry against this group(not bitter), frustrated of them not answering letters and sending comments such as i could be reinstated if circumstances changes not precising what are these.
So, there we go i am kind of frustrated but i am not the type of man which would not let his opinion known in a situation such as this.
The majority of posts here are casino people who might think "what a pain he is",if they are gamblers they are 100% behind me, I KNOW.
If there is a moral to this story it might be this ,you should treat people as you would in any other type of business and not send standard letters with words not meaning anything.
And of course ANSWER letters.
Is that too much to ask?i suppose it is .

[chancer]

Baywatch,

I believe you are being naive if you think the casinos care anything about you. There are some pretty sleazy & nasty people in the casinos, on both sides of the table. Casinos are very two faced, they are your best friend when you are losing, but if you start winning a little they will make things as difficult as they can for you. Don't think it is just the Stanley group, it's all of them.
Casinos don't want winners. Casinos want clueless losing drunks, and you see them day in day out. The poor croupiers have to deal with them, and the execs upstairs are laughing all the way to the bank. That's the way it is I'm afraid, so you have to deal with it.
Look up the famous gambler Billy Walters, and then you may understand. He had a similar gripe as you, but he did something about it........

It's nice to think you see the good side of people, but when it comes to casinos, you are wasting your time.

Chancer.

[Baywatch]

Yes, i suppose i was naive as always being well treated and it was a shock their attitude but all i want to do is to tell the public of what they are capable of because the run of the mill gambler DOES NOT KNOW they can be like that.
Comments such as " surely they are not allow to do such things" or " come on tell the truth what have you being up to ", a slur on your reputation.
Sorry i said my last post would be the last but this is just an answer to you Chancer, it look that you are on the same side of the table as myself.
I agreed, falsity seems to be rife amongst these "people", however,i never though they would act in such irrational manner, dont they get some type of training how to deal with people, what about thinking of me as a threat?.
Just imagine what they do to a real card counter, but do they really win in the UK as you pointed out, an awful game with no surrender etc... so why this paranoia?

[anin1]

Baywatch

There are many many thousands of people who earn a living in the casino industry, your comments lumping them all into the same basket are not only insulting but are in my view offensive.
Your attack on the casinos and operations where you have had problems in an open forum is both futile and pointless. If there are members or visitors here who are in a position to give you the specific answers you are looking for they would be absolutely stupid and highly unprofessional to get involved in an exchange with you in a forum such as this.
All casinos are businesses and if the operator does not maintain high values the bottom line will usually reflect this. You as a customer have the ability to take the ultimate step and vote both with your feet and your bankroll. You yourself said that the GBGB said that they would not interfere and that the resolution of your problem was between yourself and the casino group. If your approaches to them has been as confrontational as the content of some of your post have been I for one am not surprised that they have maintained the position that they have.
I for one take great pleasure in this forum where I am able to exchange information and views on the industry I have worked in for many years. I have worked with countless fine human beings who do not deserve to be slandered in the manner you have. Your problem is with one group not with the members of this industry or this forum. May I suggest you join a few of the Black Jack forums you might find a few likeminded posters there.

anin

[Mzamba_Slim]

Thanks Anin

I am bored to death with Baywatch's complaints - although, from his rhetoric on this thread, it may not be that odd that he has found himself 'persona non gratis'.

Stanleys are running a business - not a soapbox - perhaps he should try Speakers Corner.

Yawn, Yawn, Yawn.

[Baywatch]

Well, Chancer we better shut up, casino staff are the greatest.
We know better.

[123]

If you care to read back through the posts you will recall most here were sypathetic to your situation. Most are managers and agreed that if your version of events were accurate then the company concerned had made a bad decision.

You were advised to let it go as there was nothing that could be done, right or wrong that is how it is. You have chosen to continue your complaints to an audience that had originaly tried to answer your questions with objectivity. Is it so surprising that you lost that support? As other have said what was perhaps a valid complaint has become a whine.

You said

"The majority of posts here are casino people who might think "what a pain he is",if they are gamblers they are 100% behind me, I KNOW."

As I said most were sympathetic, most agreed the decision seemed to be flawed. No one thought or said "what a pain he is". No one likes to hear someone continuing to complain about a situation. What else do you wish us to say, or do you just wish to continue venting your frustration. If so, as Anin suggested perhaps you should visit a site where your fellow gamblers may be prepared to listen.

[Baywatch]

123 you are one of the few casino guy not being arrogant like that Mzemba.
If you read all my posts, you will find out that i mentionned more letters being send, one of these banning my wife but not myself, found that ever so strange, it sound a whine to you and the casino staff, fair enough but when i had trouble with these people 10 years ago, i "whine" even more and the gambling public was 100% behind me, even had letters of support after i was on the press and on TV.
Contrary to Mzemba suggestion , i am a very quiet sort of guy in real life but if "certain" casino people think they can get away with such attitude , they will not with me, end of the story.
I will not go to other side to vent my anger, maybe just do what Mzemba suggested...lol
I do however not agreed with him about stanley being a business, i am a businessman myself in the "real" world and running a business in such a way would have made me bankrupt, but then it is the real world...

[Corleone]

Just to get back on topic, statisitically it is indeed possible for a counter to gain a 1% advantage. Many factors go into this, including the number of decks and most importantly the rules of play of the game in question.. (ie.. splitting or doubling limitations imposed by the casino). I am not aware of the rules of BJ play in England so how the percentages would translate over there I can not determine. If these houses in England are "grind joints" as posted earlier, I suspect some of the play options will reduce this possible advantage.

Gettng back to being banned, I recently trained some of my staff here on Card Counting. My front line staff who never worked anyhere else knew strategy perfect, as they were trained on that when they started. The one who transferred from the floor with 8 years experience as a dealer and floor sup had the most troubles with strategy. At a large casino in North America, we did a class with Pit Managers and once again, a lot of the basics were missing.. (this is not intended to slam floor staff... floor staff are trained to deal.. and move up the ladder from there.. ) Strategy training is not given for those positions in most places. It is nice to know, but not essential for most floor staff to get trained on this. (FYI, I have read it takes 1000 hours of training to be "ready" as a card counter if trying to win at a casino.. we are talking about true professionals... Do you think any casino will spend that amount of training time for their employees? Even a crash course taking 10% of that time and training for 100 hours is not cost efficient ... This happens infrequently, if at all)

Back to the "grind" joint, I suspect there was not a highly trained surveillance department to run a proper count sheet and perform an analysis on your play.. especially since this is going back a number of years. To make a short story long, I suspect some over zealous floor person made that assesment prematurely, and apparantly improperly. To determine someone is counting without analysing atleast 3 complete shoes is pointless. Many times players without knowing it bet following the count just by pure coincidence for a short period of time. If this was the case, there would be nothing as far as paperwork, etc to trace back other than... "person X watched your play and determined he was counting".

I think it may be as simple as that. Someones word was treated as gospel and you made it to a list from there. It happens...

On a positive note, hopefully the UK will deregulate and you can try your luck in new places and can move on. If you are not counting as you say, I'm sure some of these new places will weclome your business and treat you according to your level of play.

[Victoria]

For years we have had evaluation programs. The pit personel really do not need to know that much, a few basic tells and they call to have the program run on a player. It also takes about 3 shoes, but more often than not a counter is identified who is not gaining enough to get an edge. The large majority of people who seem to try counting either do not bet enough when they have an advantage or do not change their strategy according to the count enough to win. We tended to let the player play and then evaluate him upon future returns to see if he is more efficient. These people are really unimportant unless they are big players (grind joints excepted) and the program is as useless as things like Mindplay, when it comes to the real counter threat of teams. To stop a team your staff, both pit and eye, need a very different form of training compared to identifying the lone counter.
Victoria