The basic article:
http://www.businessinsider.com/video...ng-case-2013-5
The motion to dismiss (contains photos):
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/th...ane-MTD-56.pdf
Printable View
The basic article:
http://www.businessinsider.com/video...ng-case-2013-5
The motion to dismiss (contains photos):
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/th...ane-MTD-56.pdf
The Silverton....GOOD!
My opinion is that the player was playing the $1 denomination, he hit an $820 winner, he didn't play or win a double-up, so he is entitled to exactly that and no more. It's the same as if he were playing against a live dealer and the dealer made a stupid mistake by paying him ten times his win. If the eye-in-the-sky caught it, he would have been required to give the extra money back to the house. In this case, Kane knowingly & purposely exploited a house gaff that was never intended to be put in play on the floor that way, and is guilty of fraud for taking the money when his original bet could never have WON $8200.
Not sure I understand the glitch but if they put the machine out there to be played then play it. It's their problem, not the players.
The glitch is that if after a winning hand the double up option activates (which means you have to push the 1st card hold button for YES or the 5th card hold button for NO) and if you feed a bill or ticket into the bill acceptor, that does two things: It is the,same as saying you don't want to double up, and it allows you to change the denomination you were playing before it accumulates the win.
That means you had no right to such a win. You are entitled to $820 and no more.
Whats a double up option? I saw it once pressed no and don't prompt me for it again but I never did know what it is.(which is why I would not play it)
It's a common option, and one you can always ask and have activated on the machine you're playing.
You get a flush for 25 credits. If the option is activated, you can hit yes or no when it asks if you want to go double or nothing. If you choose YES, five cards are dealt with only the first one showing. To win 50 credits you have to beat that card by picking one of the four remaining cards. If it's lower you lose what you won on the flush. Push and it gives you another chance but you can say no if you want. And when you push NO for the first time, it does allow you to choose not to see the option again.
One of the hands that may have led to my being banned from playing vp at Harrahs on the Strip before all the conglomerates were formed, was when I was dealt a $2 royal, and suddenly, the double-up option appeared. It was odd because it never appeared on any other winner, but I later discovered it was only set to appear on automatically held jackpot hands. I thought that was pretty sneaky, and here's why. With all my discipline and experience, I was first shocked at a dealt royal, then the fact that the double-up option activated further discombobulated me. I was so surprised that for an unknown reason, I mistakenly rushed and hit YES instead of NO.
I of course called for a manager etc. to deactivate this, and after arguing for at least 20 minutes--and losing the argument while pissing off the bosses--I had no choice but to choose a card to beat the machine's 9. Well I pulled a face card and they had to pay me $16000 instead of $8000. I laughed at and mocked them when they paid me. On top of that, during the argument a crowd had gathered around us, and they were very sympathetic with my side of this. And after winning the double-up, cheers rang out.
The guy knew the machine was faulty and took advantage of it. No doubt about that. However, is that a crime? I've never heard of a law for taking advantage of another person's/company's mistake. If you walk up to an ATM and ask for $100 and it gives you $10,000, are you guilty of a crime? If a clerk at a store (or bank) gives you more money back from a purchase than they should have, are you guilty of a crime? I'll bet the latter situation has happened to every one of us.
In your ATM scenario, if the money isn't returned and it's known who took advantage of such a "mistake" it's felony robbery. You're funny arci. Trying to say the opposite of what I do makes you look just the opposite of that self-proclaimed "tested genius" label. Ask your wife,about it :)
Poor speedo is so upset he can't make a comment without bringing my wife into it. If anyone can't see the malignant narcissism in these comments they are blind. Right, Alan?
There are many instances of banks putting extra money into accounts in error and all that extra money is not a gift to the account holder for them to keep. In fact, here's the perfect storm that didn't turn out perfectly:Quote:
Originally Posted by arcimede$
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/atm-e...1#.UYUn_rUm4WM
Vic, you have to excuse arci's misguided ignorance here. I made fun of his special needs wife again, and as we've seen so often and to my delight, it disrupts him :)
If I am given incorrect change I always point it out to the clerk because I know they will be held responsible for the shortage later. The same thing when the bank puts extra money in my account. This happened to me about 14 or 15 years ago:Quote:
Originally Posted by arcimede$
My BofA statement arrives in the mail and my checking account didn't balance. It said I had an extra $200 in it. I went through my check register and I just couldn't find my error. So I called the bank. The bank told me that I made a $200 cash deposit at an ATM. Right then I knew the bank made an error. Back in those days I never put cash in an ATM. Remember, this was years ago when checks and cash would go into an envelope -- they weren't the ATMs like today that actually counted the currency.
I told the bank they made a mistake -- and that I would never put cash in an ATM. I said the money belongs to someone else. The BofA rep said they would investigate. Nine months later I checked back and they said they found no error. So I added the $200 to my balance.
Alan, I have corrected clerks many times myself. The point was, however, when is it a crime vs. when is it not. The purpose of my analogies was to get people thinking a little broader. Of course, speedo jumps in and demonstrates his jealousy once again. Quite humorous.
Translation: after another exhaustive search on the Internet with no results to post, arci comes on with his bbbbbut....a-humma a-humma so he can think he doesn't look as dumb as everyone sees him as.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcimede$
Again, absolutely HILARIOUS! :)
Another comment by speedo ... another lie. No internet searches were involved ... gnaw, gnawQuote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
No need to try and explain. I can clearly see who is ignorant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Haha! Talk about wounding two birds with the same stone....And along with the fun of watching Bob Dancer's life being ripped apart by video poker while having every observation I've ever made about him and his sales-oriented BS come to logical fruition--this is like hitting the
gambling TRIFECTA....The PERFECT STORM!!!
Resurrecting this old thread for an update.
Nestor & Kane cleared of all federal charges:
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...eo-poker-case/
Did you happen to go back on this thread and look at who said what?
Yes, I have. Since the federal prosecutors admitted they were "overplaying their hand" by going after Nestor & Kane, it looks like the final scoreboard for this thread turned out to be:Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
arcimede$: 1 (for saying they shouldn't be charged, and the feds agreed)
quahaug: 1 (ditto)
Rob Singer: 0 (for saying they should have been charged, but legal professionals saw otherwise)
My question to you, Alan and others, is do you believe Rob's story about the $2 dealt royal and the accidental double up? Maybe we can give Rob a point for this one to make this a three-way tie?
I have no reason to doubt the story, because no one that I know of has ever said to me it isn't true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Count Room
I think the reality is that someone who has played so much video poker can have all of these various experiences. I will say this -- I find it hard to believe someone who played only a limited amount of VP could experience so much. So the more "stories" I hear, the more I have to think that Rob did a lot more playing than he admitted to. Especially his recent run of big wins and royals.... I doubt they all happened in just a few hours of play.
Actually, I think they should have been charged and convicted -- but not of either hacking or wire fraud.Quote:
Originally Posted by Count Room
They should have been convicted of theft.
Indeed, they were not "hacking" anything. That charge was ridiculous.
Wire fraud was also ridiculous, as the fraud did not occur through mail or telephone communication.
They were guilty of theft, as they were knowingly using a glitch in a machine to cause it to pay out 10x the intended amount. Similarly, if you notice an ATM is spitting out $200 when you try to withdraw $20 (and only removing $20 from your account), you are committing a crime by repeatedly going to that ATM and requesting $20, knowing you'll receive $200.
That's basically what these guys did. They didn't create the bug, but they definitely took advantage of it in order to steal.
This is MUCH different than noticing a machine with incorrect payouts that make it hugely +EV for the player.
For example, if a Jacks-or-Better video poker machine was set to pay 50 for a flush instead of 5, you would not be committing a crime by playing it and winning huge. It is not the player's responsibility to provide the casino with an edge. If the casino wrongly prices their payouts, they have to eat it.
However, this was a different situation. The machine's payouts were set correctly, but a separate bug made the machine exploitable to where it could be stolen from after the hand's conclusion. That was definitely theft.
I heard of a player who was at a machine that had a glitch and was awarding too many "comp points" for play. If you were the one playing that machine and you knew the machine was awarding you too many comp points would that also be theft?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
What if you knew the floorman at your blackjack table was awarding too many comp points to the players or was "over rating" them. Would that also be theft?
I think the situation with an ATM is entirely different. However, I don't know what the law is about an ATM that spits out too much money.
No, too many comp points would be in the same category as a machine with mistakenly set high payouts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
It is not the player's responsibility to determine the "fair" payout of machines, either in real money or comps. Even if the player can be proven as an expert who knew the machine was incorrectly set, there is still no requirement that the player only stick to losing games.
However, intentionally exploiting a bug where a machine pays you too much by a factor of 11 is a different story. Here you are not simply playing a profitable machine, but instead exploiting a bug in the system to steal from it.
Interestingly, there was a case in 2001 where a guy exploited severe overcomping machines, and he was both arrested and backroomed.
He sued the casino, and actually won a fairly large settlement. It was determined he was unlawfully detained and arrested, as he was simply playing the machine as set, and did not do anything differently to exploit them. There was no violation of the law on his part by simply recognizing the best-comping machines and choosing to play them.
I'm going to remain neutral as to whether this should be considered theft. I wanted to draw attention to another story that was far more widespread back in the 1940's. After World War II, Las Vegas casinos lost hundreds of millions of dollars (in 1940's dollars, no inflation adjustment!) to large crowds of people called "rhythm players" that took advantage of a faulty mechanical lever in slot machines. The procedure required some precise timing maneuvers with the slot handle to artificially create jackpots. All of this got started with a discovery by an Idaho farmer and it eventually became taught in formal classes. If this could also be considered theft, it made the Nestor & Kane case look like small potatoes (no Idaho pun intended). The situation was eventually quashed by a new item called a variator for the gears in the slot machines.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
I think I read about this incredible story from an old edition of "Scarne's Complete Guide to Gambling" that my dad had in his library, so information from Google may be scarce. "Rhythm Players", "Slot Machines", "Variator", "1940's", etc. may be promising search terms if interested in a little known fact of history that once shook Las Vegas' slot revenues to the core.
There was a machine at Sam's Town that used to kick out more coins than there were credits. I played it occasionally but did not play it any differently than I played any other machine. However, there was this one guy who used to continually put in money, play a short while and then cash out ... over and over again.
I bring this up as a point of debate since it tangentially relates to this topic. Occasionally a sports book will put out a reversed line or wrong line. Somebody makes an error, and the line is there which does not match any other book's line. Now an online book always has the option, if it catches its error, of canceling the wager up to the start time of the event. I don't believe an LV book has that same option, but I will check.
Now here's my question -- Is taking advantage of a wrong or reversed line illegal, immoral, or just being smart? And the followup: if you do it, should you take maximum advantage?
This question popped up recently as an offshore had a wrong line for a prop. It's kind of surprising, given the number of prop bets these days, and the fact that sometimes there is no obvious "right" line, that more errors aren't made. I knew the prop bet line was wrong; it was +172 instead of -172. Although I am usually merciless when it comes to attacking books, I actually do not go nuts when this occurs. I made a very modest wager, and understood I was at risk for having the wager canceled before the event began. My ideas are (1) I don't want some monster bet to draw attention to the error, (2) I don't want a book closely monitoring my large bets or my action, and (3) I want them to understand that I could have whacked them but I didn't, so they should bend over backwards for me down the road.
I'm curious as to what the various forum folks would have done.
Redietz consider this: there are many retailers who make an error in the pricing of their merchandise and still honor the incorrect price. Are the customers doing something immoral, illegal or wrong when they buy an item that is priced too low? Do the stores honor the price for the sake of good customer service?
Redietz: Your actions regarding the sportsbook sound like the smartest moves to make at the time. I most likely would have done the same.
When I look at the Kane and Nestor case, it appears those guys got greedy and started winning too much in one sitting. Regardless of how one may feel whether it is theft or not, they just simply drew too much attention to themselves. They could have done this quietly with small winning hands for many years to come and this story would never have come to light.
This is turning into a fascinating debate as to when it is immoral to take advantage of another entity's error.
In this adult Social Darwinist world, people are generally expected to pay full price for the financial errors they make (unless you were an investment bank back in 2008).
Happy Thanksgiving!
Apologies for the double post.
This thread has become interesting enough for me to bring forth the Omar Siddiqui case.
Through a kickback scheme with vendors in the late 2000's, Mr. Siddiqui stole more than $60 million from his employer, Fry's Electronics, to gamble and lose as a whale in Las Vegas.
General Case Story
6 years in prison for stealing $60 million
Is it OK for the casinos to keep that $60 million since it would be considered taking full advantage of the the moral failings (or perhaps a moral "glitch") of a compulsive gambler? If so, then why wouldn't it be OK for Kane and Nestor to take full advantage of a software glitch by the casino (and perhaps IGT) to the tune of a relatively paltry $400,000 or so?
Sometimes I have to wonder whether these "moral rules" only apply to the little people, but not large, powerful entities (which helps to keep those big entities big!).
PS. 6 years in prison for a $60 million heist is also a crazy light sentence, but that's beside the point here.
PPS. OK, now I go. Happy Thanksgiving!
This would actually not be theft, whereas the Nestor & Kane one should be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Count Room
Using timing, you are simply using your own skill to beat the game under its own rules. (There are no requirements in slot play that you have to pull the arm at a given time. It's your choice!)
Nobody could be convicted of anything by using this exploit today, and I am assuming it was the same in the 1940s. (It would, however, be a crime to use an electronic device to help you determine the exact timing!)
The Nestor & Kane one is different, as they were actually NOT playing by the machine's set rules, and rather exploiting and obvious bug to force it to pay a winning hand 11 times.
The bigger risk of doing this in the 1940s would be getting discovered and killed by the mob!
The casino can't be expected to investigate where the guy is getting his money to gamble. That's not reasonable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Count Room
If they knew he was embezzling and still let him gamble with it, then they would be at fault.
I'm not a defender of casinos, by the way. For example, I think the law that allows them to CONFISCATE chips when a person cashes them in and admits they belong to someone else is TERRIBLE. For example, if you carry a 5k chip to the cage, and they ask, "Where did you get this?", and you answer, "Oh, a guy I knew owed me some money, so he paid me with this", they will take the chip and give you no money. This is LEGAL!
Guess where the chip ends up? Yup, they keep it. They don't attempt to find the "rightful owner" (in this case, the guy who gave it to you) and return it to him. Nor can he go back and claim it himself. They just keep it.
The MGM did this to longtime poker community member Nolan Dalla in 2007.
I think there is a requirement under the Nevada gaming regulations that the casinos must stop players who they know are addicted or have other problems and should not be gambling. The casinos are also not allowed to help money laundering, and gambling stolen money is money laundering.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff