HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: messiah@nevada.edu (MHW)
Subject: Re: Chip diving
Organization: University of Nevada System Computing Services
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 01:14:20 GMT

In article <1992Aug21.003744.28950@lsil.com> mitch@lsil.com writes:
>In article 92Aug19163607@cells.cs.utah.edu, jacobs@cs.utah.edu (Steven R Jacobs) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug19.221214.10028@odin.corp.sgi.com> kubey@sgi.com (Ken Kubey) writes:
>>>In article <davem.36.714237009@county.lmt.mn.org> davem@county.lmt.mn.org (David Mackmiller) writes:

>>>>A friend of mine told me that her husband fished four $1 chips out of a
>>>>toilet at the Mystic Lake Casino.  *Someone elses* chips.
>>> You could always throw a $25 chip in there before going "diving in".
>>> No one here would give you a hard time about fishing $29 worth
>>> of chips out of a toilet.
>>Depends.  Frank might say he was a wimp if he didn't flush just before
>>diving in....

>At one joint I saw, the maintenance guys epoxied a $25 chip to the bottom
>of a toilet bowl.  There were marks and gouges in it but nobody ever broke
>it loose.  I think they had to replace the throne because the ceramic got
>cracked from so many people trying to get it.

Rather like the scene in the movie "The Magic Christian" in which Ringo Starr
and Alec Huiness (or David Niven -- I forget) fill a tank full of animal waste
in a public place, then throw paper money in it. The whole movie was about
what price people put on their self esteem (the price usually wasn't very
high).

As for rec.gamblers, how many havn't visited that absolute toilet bowl, 
the El Cortez, in pursuit of those gorgeous single deck rules they had
once upon a time. Sounds like fishing around in the crap for the promise of
riches to me... :-)  Btw - put the Continental on the list too, not as good
a game but easily as much of contender for the toilet bowl trophy.






Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: smlacke@isrc.sandia.gov (Scott M Lackey)
Subject: Vegas this weekend
Organization: Sandia National Labs, Org. 1600, Albq., NM
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 22:24:14 GMT

	I may be in Vegas this weekend, but will not be there at 2 AM
Saturday.  Any chance of finding out where people might be Saturday
Evening?

Scott Lackey

Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: howard@sinoda.ultra.COM (Howard Simonson)
Subject: Re: BJ: Shuffles (was Re: Vegas trip report, 8/7-8/9)
Reply-To: howard@ultra.com
Organization: Ultra Network Technologies
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 92 23:34:32 GMT

In article <1992Aug14.004644.27709@kronos.arc.nasa.gov>, hall@kronos.arc.nasa.gov (Michael Hall) writes:
|> 
|> Almost all published blackjack strategies assume the cards are randomly
|> ordered.  (The only exception I can think of is Patterson's New Blackjack,
|> which is almost certainly bogus anyway.)  My computer studies of simulated
|> shuffles indicate that real world shuffles are not random.  For shoes,
|> there is sufficient like-card clumping to be detectable with correlation
|> tests.  For single deck with a small (6 or less) number of riffs, the
|> cards do not have an equal probability of winding up at each location.

OK, so I'm happily playing (and winning) and Mr. Pitboss comes on over with
a fresh deck(s) and out go those nice clumped cards.  At least it seems that
way.  Given a "standard" shuffle by a particular casino with a new deck in
hand, can some predictability of the cards be derived?  Single or multiple
decks?  Do fresh decks tend to spell bad news for a player?
-- 
-------------  ----   ----   ----  ----  -----  -----  -- ---------------------
|J -------- |  |   \  |   \  |     |       |    |   |  || |
|  |/\=== | |  |   /  |   /  |     |       |    |   |  || |
|------------- |---   |---   ---   ----    |    |   |  || |    This space
||A          | |      |\     |        |    |    |   |  || |
||    /^\    | |      | \    |        |    |    |   |     |
||   /   \   | |      |  \   ----  ----    |    -----  [] |     for rent.
||  / /|\ \  |____________________________________________|
||  L/_|_\J  |                                            |
-|    )|(    | EM: howard@ultra.com/VM: (408)922-0600 x228|____________________
 |    ---   V| Ultra Network Technologies*101 Daggett Dr*San Jose*CA*95134-2132
 ------------- [ My disclaimer is on file in the main office ]
From: jacobs@cs.utah.edu (Steven R Jacobs)
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
Subject: Re: Chip diving
Date: 19 Aug 92 23:36:07 GMT
Article-I.D.: cells.JACOBS.92Aug19163607
	<1992Aug19.221214.10028@odin.corp.sgi.com>
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept
In-reply-to: kubey@sgi.com's message of Wed, 19 Aug 1992 22:12:14 GMT

In article <1992Aug19.221214.10028@odin.corp.sgi.com> kubey@sgi.com (Ken Kubey) writes:
>In article <davem.36.714237009@county.lmt.mn.org> davem@county.lmt.mn.org (David Mackmiller) writes:
>>
>>A friend of mine told me that her husband fished four $1 chips out of a
>>toilet at the Mystic Lake Casino.  *Someone elses* chips.
>
> You could always throw a $25 chip in there before going "diving in".
> No one here would give you a hard time about fishing $29 worth
> of chips out of a toilet.

Depends.  Frank might say he was a wimp if he didn't flush just before
diving in....
--
Steve Jacobs  ({bellcore,hplabs,uunet}!utah-cs!jacobs, jacobs@cs.utah.edu)
"Never teach a card counter to sing.  It wastes your time and gets the card
 counter barred."
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: s8818037@spectrum.cs.unsw.oz.au (Matthew James Leayr)
Subject: Card Machines.
Reply-To: s8818037@spectrum.cs.unsw.oz.au (Matthew James Leayr)
Organization: none
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 18:27:56 GMT

I'm brand new to this group, so forgive my ignorance.
I'm not sure you have them overseas, (no doubt you do) but practically every
hotel in Australia has "card machines", which are a type of video poker machine.
Operation is fairly simple:
You pay for credits at the bar, usually 20c each which are electronically placed
on the selected machine. You can bet up to five credits at a time, and are dealt
five cards like normal poker, from which you select the ones to keep.....
When betting 1 credit for example, two pairs wins 1 credit,
three of a kind wins 2 credits
a straight 4 credits,
and so on, up to a royal flush which wins 500 credits. 
When you win, you have the option of double or nothing by choosing either red
or black cards. The win can be doubled a maximum of five times.
What puzzles me is how are these machines programmed??
Are they set to give a certain return to the player?
Does the computer know in advance, which cards are to be dealt next?
If the program realises that it is paying out too much, can it correct this by
just "bumming" the next few players?
It seems to me that what we may think of as a fairly "random" game of chance
could simply be an illusion created by the machine. BTW, these machines are 
extremely addictive. I've watched people put every last cent into them.
Also, they don't seem to pay out very much - this isn't helped by the fact that 
most players automatically press the "double" button EVERY time they win I guess

Another question: whats the chance that the programmers of the machines left
some coded "trapdoor" in the machine to allow themselves to win ie. some
intricate (?) key sequence which triggers a winning streak in the machine.
I suppose the code would come under close scrutiny by government bodies when the
machines are being manufactured, but this could probably be circumvented.
A devious thought, I know.............

Matt.			(s8818037@spectrum.cs.unsw.oz.au)
			University Of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
From: mitch@lsil.com (Mitch Sako)
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
Subject: Re: fair bet/ intelligent gamblers
Date: 12 Aug 92 20:11:22 GMT
Reply-To: mitch@lsil.com
Organization: LSI Logic Corporation

In article 8702@kronos.arc.nasa.gov, hall@kronos.arc.nasa.gov (Michael Hall) writes:
>IF you
>were to keep your unit size constant, and played a decent single deck game,
>you'd have to play 200 hours to "typically" (one standard deviation) show
>a profit or 800 hours to "very often" (two standard deviations) show a
>profit.  How many rec.gamblers.counters.whining.losers have even played
>800 hours?!  But you *shouldn't* keep your unit size constant, you
>should adjust it according to your bankroll, which means you have to
>play *considerably* longer than 200 or 800 hours to be fairly confident
>of showing a profit in terms of dollars.  (And I shudder to think how
>long it would take on shoes rather than single deck.)

Just curious.  How many hours/year do you manage to get in?  Even 100
hours of play is alot.

---

====================================================================
Mitch Sako	LSI Logic Corp.		Phone	408-433-4187
internet:	msako@lsil.com		FAX	408-433-8796
uucp:		lsil!msako
RIME:		->REDBARON, conference=POLITICS
Disclaimer:	Opinions expressed are mine and only mine and do
		not reflect the opinions of my organization, my
		management, or my mother
From: jacobs@cs.utah.edu (Steven R Jacobs)
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
Subject: Re: even bets question...
Date: 13 Aug 92 20:40:21 GMT
Article-I.D.: cells.JACOBS.92Aug13134021
	<12913@inews.intel.com> <1992Aug12.175153.21702@redbrick.com>
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept
In-reply-to: jfr@redbrick.com's message of Wed, 12 Aug 1992 17:51:53 GMT

In article <1992Aug12.175153.21702@redbrick.com> jfr@redbrick.com (Jon Rosen) writes:
> In article <12913@inews.intel.com> bhoughto@sedona.intel.com (Blair P. Houghton) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug11.054400.23686@redbrick.com> jfr@redbrick.com (Jon Rosen) writes:
>>>  Just to show that the guys in Vegas are WAY ahead of you, here is a
>>>  quote from Bill Friedman's book Casino Management (written in 1974,
>>>  by the way) on this kind of ploy (p. 137 - Junkets):
>>
>>Is it in print?  Does it have an ISBN?  Can I get
>>an order FedEx'ed back to me from the publisher
>>before the Big August rec.gambling Excursion (BARGE!)
>>to Vegas next week?
>>
>>				--Blair
>>				  "Okay, gimme a bag on the
>>				   hole and four for the peanut..."
>
> Down Blair, down boy :-)  The ISBN is 0-8184-0151-6.  I have no idea
> whether it is still in print.  You might want to try the Gambler's
> Book Club in Vegas.  I believe they Fed Ex stuff with a credit card.

It is listed in the GBC catalog, at least in the 1990 edition, at the
low low price of just $125, but that price may have changed by now.
Hey Blair, can I borrow your copy? :-)
--
Steve Jacobs  ({bellcore,hplabs,uunet}!utah-cs!jacobs, jacobs@cs.utah.edu)
"Never teach a card counter to sing.  It wastes your time and gets the card
 counter barred."
From: jacobs@cs.utah.edu (Steven R Jacobs)
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
Subject: Re: Betting both sides to get Comps
Date: 13 Aug 92 19:07:29 GMT
Article-I.D.: cells.JACOBS.92Aug13140729
	<1992Aug13.162035.16529@kronos.arc.nasa.gov>
	<JACOBS.92Aug13113351@cells.cs.utah.edu>
	<1992Aug13.185345.19674@kronos.arc.nasa.gov>
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept
In-reply-to: hall@kronos.arc.nasa.gov's message of 13 Aug 92 18:53:45 GMT

In article <1992Aug13.185345.19674@kronos.arc.nasa.gov> hall@kronos.arc.nasa.gov (Michael Hall) writes:
>In article <JACOBS.92Aug13113351@cells.cs.utah.edu> jacobs@cs.utah.edu (Steven R Jacobs) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug13.162035.16529@kronos.arc.nasa.gov> hall@kronos.arc.nasa.gov (Michael Hall) writes:
>
>>>Michael Hall            \ Variance... can't make money with it, can't make
>>>NASA Ames Research Center\ money without it.
>>>hall@ptolemy.arc.nasa.gov \ 
>>
>>Very cute, but show me a game with positive e.v. for the player and zero
>>variance, and I'll show you how to generate a huge bankroll very quickly.
>>Variance does nothing but impede the optimal growth rate of your bankroll.
>
> There aren't any good investment opportunities with positive expected
> value and zero variance that I can think of.  To make significant money
> you have to take a significant risk (of losing money at least in the short
> run).  It's one of those laws of life.  You just can't have your cake
> (big expected value) and eat it too (zero variance).  That's what I
> meant by "can't make money without [variance]."

Well, if you could find a large group of really dumb BJ players and offer
to act as an "insurance company" for them by insuring their blackjacks...

> But there is at least one game with a positive expected value for the
> player and no chance of losing money even in the short run.  The game
> is called "savings account up to $100,000 at a Federally insured banking
> institution".

Hah!  That assumes the FDIC will survive when congress finishes trashing
the economy.

> It is easy to play, has a positive expected value, and
> if you want zero variance you can always give yourself just 1% annual
> interest and light cigars with the variable amount above that.  Now
> show me how to generate a huge bankroll very quickly with this game :-)

You have a warped definition of the word "game", but we knew that -- fits
in with "beatable" and all the other words for which you have your own
private definitions :-)  But OK, put your money away at 1% interest that
is compounded annually, and in 70 short years you double your bankroll.
Starting with $1, you only have to play this game 20 times to become
a millionaire!!  Or, just put your bankroll away for 1400 years and you
multiply your bankroll by over a million EACH AND EVERY TIME YOU PLAY!!!
Granted, you'll be older that both JRs combined by the time you're
done, but in terms of geologic time, that's pretty quick...


--
Steve Jacobs  ({bellcore,hplabs,uunet}!utah-cs!jacobs, jacobs@cs.utah.edu)
"Never teach a card counter to sing.  It wastes your time and gets the card
 counter barred."
From: leary@bozo.sdsc.edu. (Bob Leary,,45123)
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
Subject: Re: Blackjack in San Diego
Date: 17 Aug 92 17:01:01 GMT
Reply-To: leary@bozo.sdsc.edu.
Organization: San Diego Supercomputer Center @ UCSD
NNTP-Posting-Host: bozo.sdsc.edu

I also checked out this game yesterday at around 1:00 p.m..  There
were two tables operating, one with 5 players, the other with 3.
The rules are so bad , particularly the 50-cent/hand collection,
that the only possibly reasonable proposition is to bank the game.
However, the banker must also pay the collection fee, but only
at 50 cents per dealer hand, or about 10 cents per hand against
each of 5 players.  Assuming a 3% player disadvantage, not counting
the collection, the game would appear to become profitable for
the banker at the rate of $17 action/round.  I watched for about
an hour at the 5-player table, and the action appeared to average
$30/round.  During this time, the bank netted about $40.  Interestingly,
the banker does not need to be physically present at the table - he
just leaves enough chips there and the house supplied dealer manages
all the payouts.  At least at this table, none of the players indicated
any interest in banking (according to the rules, the bank rotates
at the end of each shoe among the players who want to bank), and the
absentee banker held the bank for the entire time I was there.
From: hundal@math.psu.edu (Hein S. Hundal)
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
Subject: Trip Report Atlantic City
Keywords: Blackjack, Atlantic City
Date: 18 Aug 92 17:58:20 GMT
Organization: Penn State Department of Mathematics



Hello,  I'm new to rec.gambling so I thought I would introduce myself before
giving this trip report.  I'm a grad student in Mathematics (focusing in 
Numerical Analysis) at Penn State University.  My other interests include:
wargames, bridge, scuba diving, and massage.  I played blackjack for the
first time in Las Vegas last March and started reading rec.gambling shortly
thereafter.  Last weekend I tried counting for the first time in Atlantic
City (AC).

The rules in AC are more or less the same at all the casino's 
                     6-8 Decks
                     Double after split
                     Dealer stands on soft 17
                     Late Surrender
                     Resplitting to three hands  (?)
                     (at the Claridge if there was another spot available
                     resplitting to four was allowed)

On Friday from 10PM to 12A, we visited Ceasers, Claridge, and Bally's.  There 
were no $5 tables.
    Ceasers:  $10 min, 6D, 75% penetration. (Friendly dealers)
    Claridge: $10 min, 6D, 75%.
    Bally's:  $10 min, 6D, 65%. 

On Saturday we visited Ceasers, and Trump Plaza.
    (9A - 12P) Ceasers: $5 min  (6 tables), 6D, 75%. ($5 tables closed 12P)
    (12P- 5P)  Trump P: $5 pit (9 tables), 6D, 65%, crowded.

On Sunday we visited Ceasers, and Claridge.
    (9A-11:30) Ceasers: $5 min (5 tables crowded), 6D, 65%.($5 closed 11:30)
    (12P-1:30) Claridge: $5 min (4 tables), 8D, 75%,       ($5 closed 1:30)
              6-7-8 same suit pays 2-1
              7-7-7           pays 3-1
              A-Q of Harts    pays 3-1.

We ate twice at a place called Eggo's between Bally's and Trump Plaza.  The
place was a dive but the food was inexpensive and good.

I had a good time.  I found counting to be taxing so mostly I played basic
strategy.  This is my first trip report so any suggestions are welcome.

Hein Hundal ( hundal@math.psu.edu )
From: Eugene M. Shekhtman <unknown@garnet.berkeley.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
Subject: Re: Basic strategy modifications depending on the count
Date: 13 Aug 1992 09:21:32 GMT
Organization: U. C. Berkeley
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: gpb1mac24.berkeley.edu
X-UserAgent: Nuntius v1.1a2

In an article on Fri, 7 Aug 1992, Rick Busser writes:

>I was playing blackjack in Black Hawk, CO the other day and learning how
to
>count.  I already knew basic strategy.  I found myself wanting to play
>differently depending on the count. Are there any modifications to basic
>strategy if the count goes really high or low?  I'm using a basic count
>where 3,4,5,6,7 =  +1 and faces and aces = -1.

Of course there are! And not just for when "the count goes really high or
low". Most playing situations have a certain count value associated with
them, above which you make one decision and below which you make a
different one. Why don't you get yourself a book on BJ card counting and
learn all about it.

                                          Eugene
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: guido@island.COM (Guido Marx)
Subject: Re: Betting both sides to get Comps
Organization: Island Graphics Corp.  San Rafael, Ca.
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 23:15:56 GMT

In article <183121@pyramid.pyramid.com> breid@pyrhard2.eng.pyramid.com (Bill Reid) writes:
>Which is the "hold"/"drop".  When you get chips at the table, 
>they put your cash in the "drop" box.  Every hour or so, the guard comes 
>by, removes the cash-stuffed "drop" box, and he and the pit boss count 
>the chips in the rack.  Then they set up the rack with a predetermined 
>amount of chips, and remove the chips in excess of this amount.  These 
>chips removed are the "hold" (what the players lost).  So ONCE AGAIN, 
>HOLD/DROP=WIN PERCENTAGE.   

Actually, they don't remove chips, they add them.  The only way 
that the number of chips in the rack can grow is if people bring
them from another table.  SOME people will win (or leave before
they lose all their buy-in).  These chips will be taken to the
cashier.  Only ONCE have I ever seen the pit remove chips from
a rack, and this was after one REALLY drunk guy lost a bunch of
black chips at a $2.00 table right after they had filled up 
the rack.  The dealer was in danger of running out of room in
her rack.


Guido
From: davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen)
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
Subject: What games
Date: 13 Aug 92 18:19:35 GMT
Reply-To: davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corporate R&D Center, Schenectady NY

Someone posted recently looking for new games. Here are two we use:

Jacks or back

  5 card draw, jack or better to open, if no one opens game changes to
worst hand wins (lo-ball, but straights and flushes count). Saves
redealing if no one opens.

hi-lo roll your own

  The only wildcard game we play. This is a seven card game, ou get
three cards down, and have to roll one every card but the last, and the
low hole card is wild (and all like it). Last card is choice up or
down, although some play it must be down. Typically a straight flush
wins, although four of a find may be enough. Five of a kind is pretty
common.

  The low part of this is the low five cards, no wildcards, making this
a "half-wild" game. We play seven card games with low counting straights
and flushes.

Ex-lax (okay, this is three games)

  Similar to murder, a hi-lo game. Piles are 3-2-1 rather than 3-1-1.
Each player get 4 cards, and gets to see the flop. Then the player must
discard two cards or buy them. Typically in a $1 game the cards are $5
each. Betting on the 2nd pile occurs before the buy process, but the
2nd pile is not turned up until the buys are complete.

-- 
bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
    I admit that when I was in school I wrote COBOL. But I didn't compile.
From: hou@hertz.njit.edu (Edwin Hou fac ece)
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
Subject: Pai Gow poker at AC
Date: 17 Aug 92 18:11:07 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.
Originator: hou@hertz.njit.edu

I was in Trump plaza (AC) and played a couple of hands of PaiGow poker.
In one hand I was dealt QAAxxxx and set it up as Qx AAxxx,
the dealer had K7788xx. 
He first set it up as Kx 7788x and then when he
turned over the first player's cards, he looked puzzled, checked
with the pit boss, pit boss looked puzzled too and checked
a card and changed the hand to 77 88Kxx. I wonder if anybody
knows what are the rules governing how the dealer play his hand.
I was lucky but the first player had a push changed to a lost.
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: jacobs@cs.utah.edu (Steven R Jacobs)
Subject: Re: Betting both sides to get Comps
In-reply-to: breid@pyrhard2.eng.pyramid.com's message of 18 Aug 92 22:46:27 GMT
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept
	<1992Aug18.111300.22804@trl.oz.au> <183121@pyramid.pyramid.com>
Date: 19 Aug 92 08:34:29

In article <183121@pyramid.pyramid.com> breid@pyrhard2.eng.pyramid.com (Bill Reid) writes:
>In article <1992Aug18.111300.22804@trl.oz.au> emmerik@titan.trl.OZ.AU (Mike VanEmmerik) writes:
>>Sure, variance lets the average player win almost half of the time, but
>>typically players just bet it all back again until the next downswing
>>wipes it out, and they never get to the theoretical expectation because
>>they have insufficient bankroll.
>>
>Yes, that's the ticket...what we really need is a "log optimal" roulette 
>strategy.  It will be developed soon, not long after Steve Jacobs 
>perfects the "log optimal" craps strategy (right after the "log optimal" 
>BJ strategy is finished, sometime in the year 3067).

Rather than jump all over Bill on this one, I'm going to pretend that
I've already left for Vegas and that the article expired before my return.
However, new readers should be warned that Bill can barely distinguish a
logarithm from a biorythm, and his idea of "log optimal" is the shortest
path from the wood pile to the fire.  As for the log optimal BJ strategy,
I'll have that finished by 2067.  Easily.
--
Steve Jacobs  ({bellcore,hplabs,uunet}!utah-cs!jacobs, jacobs@cs.utah.edu)
"Never teach a card counter to sing.  It wastes your time and gets the card
 counter barred."