A fascinating story: I'd never heard of this guy.
He did what most can only dream about.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFVX2yoJDko
Printable View
A fascinating story: I'd never heard of this guy.
He did what most can only dream about.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFVX2yoJDko
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3083433...f_=tt_eps_sn_1
Hustlers Gamblers and Crooks. This is kinda hohum in some areas but some are interesting enough. Some of these guys seem more storyteller than real to me but it is something to kill time watching .. at least as background.
There is even a card counter lol. He calls himself an "AP" .. turns out he is just a counter. Poker game host who I'm not so sure about.
Oh yea and that Micky guy with the face tats. What a crock of shit that dude is but lol he has sold his bullshit as good as anyone. I give him props for that.
Was going to post a thread about this but meh it isn't really worth its own thread.
Benter did what some gamblers say can't be done. He switched from one form of gambling to another. And, of course, they are wrong. Benter switched from a successful blackjack player to a successful horse bettor.
There are gamblers that say computer models using empirical statistics can't be used successfully in sports or horse racing. Enter Bill Benter. Benter used computer models in horse racing to become maybe the most successful gambler ever.
Considering having to overcome at least 15% house vig in horse racing, and the amount of money he made, Benter is better at the game than Billy Walters.
This story flies in the face of all the foolishness redietz spreads on these forums. Look for a condescending post laced with thesaurus-fetched words and weirdo undertones.
Benter was also a skilled card counter. So wait for kew to pop up and try to virtually attach himself to the guy, while adding in a little of his usual plagiarizing in posts to come.
Benter did well.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
Meantime, UNKewlJ's only claims to fame are faking his death and being caught in some thirty lies across these forums.
What that video proves too is that AxelWolf could never know Benter's story because someone socould never sit down long enough to watch it. Assuming he was sober long enough in the first place. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
In which ways is hard to tell from so little information about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
My basic theory about the super big winners is that, from so many gamblers world wide, there will be enough who bet big enough (too few times for the odds to catch up to even them) to hit something super big. Surely there were a lot more more horse-savvy people around than Benter, before and after him, who similarly worked with computer and/ or the old-school, methods. Poker player Doyle Brunson avoided game theory. Why did neither of them come even close to a billion in winnings? It all just sounds so hokey, especially without any proof, or independent replication. The horse races in Hong Kong, or Korea, weren't so fixed as elsewhere? For the horse owners to share the purses, to stay in business. And, what did Benter do after those few years of enormous betting success?
Haven't watched the video, yet, but the title, too, seems pretty hokey.
Garnabby, please.
Watch the video before you start criticizing and doubting on his accomplishments.
I wonder who makes those videos, and, what the motivation is. Besides that, I guess that it's only a matter of time until the MDawg puts one out. Ha.
MrV,
I need to review the video several times carefully before commenting, but if Hong Kong racing is part of the narrative, I hinted at some of this when commenting on mickey's posts regarding "BetFest" at Circa last August.
Thanks for posting this. I think regnis may have commented regarding Hong Kong also.
Now don't get me wrong. I know as much about horse handicapping as I do about three-legged giraffe races (I lifted that comment from a 1979 interview I did), but I have been schooled a bit on the layout and dynamics of Honk Kong racing. It is radically different from American racing and dwarfs American racing. And you gotta read the form backwards (like the Dead Sea Scrolls, I think).
I'm currently swamped but will get to this sometime. Thanks for posting.
Bill Benter was able to win because he was at the right time and right place. The information asymmetry and very early days of computers did it. The ability to scale. He had a lot going for him.
0 chance he'd have never the success today and very likely he would not even be able to beat today's races.
However if Redietz wants to tell us what is special about the horse racing maybe he can do it on Dan Druff's show.
But first Druff needs to move his show to Vegas into a studio, provide 5 star accomodations for 3 nights, travel shall be provided by hot air balloon from Tennessee, and daily monk shoe polishing.Quote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestion
The answer is he became a philanthropist. He runs Bender Foundation, a charitable organization in Pittsburgh where he's from. He's donated multi-millions:Quote:
Originally Posted by Garnabby
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Bill Benter
Born William Benter
1957 (age 66–67)
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, U.S.
Alma mater Case Western Reserve University
University of Bristol
Occupation(s) Professor
Businessman
Gambler
Years active 1984 –present
Spouse Vivian Fung
(m. 2012)
Children 1
William Benter (born 1957) is an American professional gambler and philanthropist who focuses on horse betting. Benter earned nearly $1 billion through the development of one of the most successful analysis computer software programs in the horse racing market and is considered to be the most successful gambler of all time.[1]
Benter has served as president of Hong Kong Rotary Club,[2] founded the Benter Foundation, is chairman and International CEO of Acusis LLC in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and occasionally lectures university students on subjects like statistics and mathematical probability.[3]
Benter is a philanthropist donating to charitable causes both in Hong Kong and the United States.[
Here is a comprehensive article on Bill Benter's gambling career:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/featu...se-racing-code
P.S. Benter wasn't the only horse betting success in Hong Kong. His onetime partner Alan Woods was worth 900 million when he died.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Woods_(gambler)
An Australian name Zeljko Ranogagec also made hundreds of millions betting the Hong Kong nags:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeljko_Ranogajec
They all did it with computer models.
Here'a a Bill Benter quote I like:
"Gambling has always been the domain of wise guys from the wrong side of the tracks."
Benter had dozens of employee's to do the reading. They were just feeding the information into computers anyway. Benter worked his way up to 120 data points he collected.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
With the data you could hire any sort of relatively basic (but competent) data scientist and they could give you a program that would be super efficient. It is all about the data acquisition.
It would be very cool to see a list of those 120 data points.
I read his Wiki info, and a couple of other links. Very, very sparse. Almost KJ-esque, all that winning, and the supposed 100 million on a single ticket that he didn't even collect. Just couldn't bring himself to do it because he just knew that he would win 100's more millions, anyway. Lol. Desperate people gotta believe whatever's on the internet.
It was a very big story covered by dozens of news outlets. But you can always call the Hong Kong Racing Commission if you don't believe it. It'll be a great opportunity for you to rub mud in our faces.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garnabby
Redietz will get to the bottom of Hong Kong Horse Racing about the same time he reveals his credit score to Druff and appears on Druff's radio show. In other words, never.Quote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestion
I'm not the one who made the claim, so, you prove it. I simply pointed out that, for one thing, the chance of the supposed biggest winner winning on a 100 million dollar ticket is next to none.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmIt was a very big story covered by dozens of news outlets. But you can always call the Hong Kong Racing Commission if you don't believe it. It'll be a great opportunity for you to rub mud in our faces.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garnabby
Regardless, you, too, should have far better things to do than to dwell on it, and, say, the Redietz stuff (in thread after thread). Non-starters.
Prime example of why I barely read garnaby's posts.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmIt was a very big story covered by dozens of news outlets. But you can always call the Hong Kong Racing Commission if you don't believe it. It'll be a great opportunity for you to rub mud in our faces.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garnabby
Unlike the states, Honk Kong racing is the epitome of above board. Minimal drugs, no cheating, no wink-winks. If your horse underperforms, you are tasked with appearing before a panel to explain why, and it is a serious inquiry. Jockeys are not allowed to "ride rough," and must also explain themselves if they screw up during a race.
The states could learn a thing or three.
Red always talks about other stuff, and, A=0 IQ always talks about what he doesn't do. Hmm.
You don't believe I barely read your posts?Quote:
Originally Posted by Garnabby
I primarily meant what "turns you on". Posters spend decades on the forums without ever giving a reason for living. I live for a working TOE, one that fits in with the real data. However wacky it seems, and, which I at least mentioned a few times on long-defunct forums.Quote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestionYou don't believe I barely read your posts?Quote:
Originally Posted by Garnabby
LOL. And I live to get laid like Bond, turn green like Banner, and dance like Baryshnikov.Quote:
Originally Posted by GarnabbyI primarily meant what "turns you on". Posters spend decades on the forums without ever giving a reason for living. I live for a working TOE, one that fits in with the real data. However wacky it seems, and, which I at least mentioned a few times on long-defunct forums.Quote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestionYou don't believe I barely read your posts?Quote:
Originally Posted by Garnabby
I have the better shot, of course.
No fucking clue what you're going on about but at least you got Garnabby on your side.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzLOL. And I live to get laid like Bond, turn green like Banner, and dance like Baryshnikov.Quote:
Originally Posted by GarnabbyI primarily meant what "turns you on". Posters spend decades on the forums without ever giving a reason for living. I live for a working TOE, one that fits in with the real data. However wacky it seems, and, which I at least mentioned a few times on long-defunct forums.Quote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestion
I have the better shot, of course.
Winner.
My avatar doesn't involve Red, or Singer. But, as usual, A=0 IQ tries to evade the real question.Quote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestionNo fucking clue what you're going on about but at least you got Garnabby on your side.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzLOL. And I live to get laid like Bond, turn green like Banner, and dance like Baryshnikov.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garnabby
I have the better shot, of course.
Please make me aware of this real question so I can ponder answering it.Quote:
Originally Posted by GarnabbyMy avatar doesn't involve Red, or Singer. But, as usual, A=0 IQ tries to evade the real question.Quote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestionNo fucking clue what you're going on about but at least you got Garnabby on your side.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
No, not giving you my phone number or any identifiable personal information.
Benter announced before he bet that he wouldn't cash the ticket if he won. He bet 51,000 combinations out of 10,000,000 which cost 1.6 million. The award was 118 million. The biggest story to ever come out of Hong Kong Horse Racing. The winner not appearing to take the money was also part of the story.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garnabby
Guess what Hong Kong Racing does with money not collected by winners. By law it goes to charity. So Benter made a 118 million dollar donation.
It's not a "supposed story," Garnabby. Do your research. Not only did Hong Kong Racing Commision not deny the story, they kept trying to get the winner to come forward. Such a story cannot be fabricated and hold up to any scrutiny.
Instead of just saying the story is false why don't you dig up hard evidence that it is false and present it to us? Should be easy to do if the story is really false.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMj_FG8GISgQuote:
Originally Posted by Garnabby
Come on, Mickey, get your story straight. I very quickly found five-for-five fairly different stories. Ha.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmBenter announced before he bet that he wouldn't cash the ticket if he won. He bet 51,000 combinations out of 10,000,000 which cost 1.6 million. The award was 118 million. The biggest story to ever come out of Hong Kong Horse Racing. The winner not appearing to take the money was also part of the story.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garnabby
Guess what Hong Kong Racing does with money not collected by winners. By law it goes to charity. So Benter made a 118 million dollar donation.
It's not a "supposed story," Garnabby. Do your research. Not only did Hong Kong Racing Commision not deny the story, they kept trying to get the winner to come forward. Such a story cannot be fabricated and hold up to any scrutiny.
Instead of just saying the story is false why don't you dig up hard evidence that it is false and present it to us? Should be easy to do if the story is really false.
Quote:
Benter won 10 million dollars and wrote a letter to the organisers telling them that he had the winning ticket, but did not want to cash in on it.
This implied donating it to charity as winning no longer mattered to Bill, who just wanted to make it clear by now that his algorithm was almost infallible.
https://www.marca.com/en/lifestyle/2...99b8b458c.html
Quote:
In 2001 Benter’s increasingly accurate model led him to win the Triple Trio, a cumulative bet in which players must accurately predict the first three horses in three different races.
With more than 10 million possible winning combinations, the Triple Trio stood as the ultimate proof that Benter’s model was a sensational success.
His winnings for the Triple Trio alone totaled $16 million, a vast sum of money that he decided to leave unclaimed.
https://www.casino.org/blog/bill-benter/
Quote:
Triple Trio punter forfeits $118m win
Published: 12:00am, 9 Jan, 2002
A winning punter has missed out on a record $118 million jackpot after failing to claim on a Triple Trio bet placed last year.
Under Jockey Club rules the $30 winning ticket on the correct Triple Trio combination, which paid $38,577,504 for every $10 ticket, at the Happy Valley meeting on November 6 became void at the weekend after the 60-day claim period expired. The money will now go to charity.
'If someone has paid for their ticket with cash over the counter, as this one did, we have no way of knowing who had the winning bet unless they come to collect it,' said Jockey Club executive director of betting Henry Chan.
'Every day, every race meeting, we have unclaimed dividends, and under the rules those dividends are transferred after 60 days to the account which is paid to charitable organisations. So, although this is bad luck for one winner, it means there will be a lot of winners through the charities,' said Mr Chan.
Possible explanations for the failure to claim are that the holder of the winning ticket lost it or that the bet was marked by accident and the winner was not aware of having placed it.
But the punter was not just a small-time investor. With $30 on each of 1,350 combinations of runners, the winning ticket cost $40,500.
The $30 bet is believed to be the biggest amount ever placed on a winning Triple Trio combination. The winnings certainly became the record unclaimed ticket amount, dwarfing a $38 million Mark Six first prize forfeited in December 1998.
Quote:
Because Bill made so much money, the Jockey Club knew that if the word got out that a foreign-owned specialist computer team was gaining all the money from the betting pool to the detriment of the average bettor, it might discourage individuals to go horse betting. This is why they banned Bill Benter from the Jockey Club.
He didn’t even pick up the prize
Just after he had been banned, they placed their last bets on a record jackpot. They spent over $100 thousand to place 50 000 different bets. The odds of the jackpot were 10 million to 1.
They had 30 different winning bets including 1 which won the entire jackpot. They didn’t even pick up the $20 million prize, they did it to test how good their model was.
Final thoughts
Bill Benter truly changed the gambling industry. At the time, people were gambling randomly. But today there are computer teams all over the world trying to predict the future outcomes of games.
https://medium.com/illumination/the-...n-c4ad085e1cdc
In addition, no mention of Benter in the https://largest.org/misc/biggest-win...bling-history/Quote:
Bill Benter did the impossible: He wrote an algorithm that couldn’t lose at the track. Close to a billion dollars later, he tells his story for the first time.
By Kit Chellel
May 3, 2018 at 5:00 AM GMT-4
Veteran gamblers know you can’t beat the horses. There are too many variables and too many possible outcomes. Front-runners break a leg. Jockeys fall. Champion thoroughbreds decide, for no apparent reason, that they’re simply not in the mood. The American sportswriter Roger Kahn once called the sport “animated roulette.” Play for long enough, and failure isn’t just likely but inevitable—so the wisdom goes. “If you bet on horses, you will lose,” says Warwick Bartlett, who runs Global Betting & Gaming Consultants and has spent years studying the industry.
What if that wasn’t true? What if there was one person who masterminded a system that guaranteed a profit? One person who’d made almost a billion dollars, and who’d never told his story—until now?
In September, after a long campaign to reach him through friends and colleagues, I received an email from Benter. “I have been avoiding you, as you might have surmised,” he wrote. “The reason is mainly that I am uncomfortable in the spotlight by nature.” He added, “None of us want to encourage more people to get into the game!” But in October he agreed to a series of interviews in his office in downtown Pittsburgh. The tasteful space—the top two floors of a Carnegie Steel-era building—is furnished with 4-foot-tall Chinese vases and a marble fireplace, with sweeping views of the Monongahela River and freight trains rumbling past.
Benter, 61, walks with a slight stoop. He looks like a university professor, his wavy hair and beard streaked with gray, and speaks in a soft, slightly Kermit-y voice. He told me he’d been driven only partly by money—and I believed him. With his intelligence, he could have gotten richer faster working in finance. Benter wanted to conquer horse betting not because it was hard, but because it was said to be impossible. When he cracked it, he actively avoided acclaim, outside the secretive band of geeks and outcasts who occupy his chosen field. Some of what follows relies on his recollections, but in every case where it’s been possible to corroborate events and figures, they’ve checked out in interviews with dozens of individuals, as well as in books, court records, and other documents.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/featu...se-racing-code
Or, specifically in horse racing at, https://sports.betmgm.com/en/blog/ar...acing-history/
But, still, going by only the stories above alone, with a 1 in 200 chance of winning, especially if he tried that bet only the one time, and, so, without any thus advantage to speak of. Much, much more likely that something else went, and is going, on.Quote:
The Biggest Win From a Single Bet
Conor Murphy wasn’t your typical high-roller or millionaire mogul; this man spent his life working with horses, understanding their every twitch, their every breath. He wasn’t one to bet often, but on a day in December 2011, he felt a spark, an intuition. He decided to place an accumulator bet on five horses that were performing exceptionally well. The horses belonged to the stable of Murphy’s boss, Mr. Henderson.
He placed a £50 bet on all five horses, even though the odds were stacked against him. The tension was palpable as the races began. One by one, each horse crossed the finish line in first place. Can you imagine the thrill, the adrenaline rush, the sheer disbelief?
Murphy’s small £50 bet had turned into a fortune of £1.2 million. It was the biggest win from a single bet in horse racing history. He was no longer just a stable worker; he had become a legend in the horse racing betting community. And the most amazing part? His life was forever changed by the horses he had worked with and cared for.
Garnabby Garnabby is online now
Gold
Garnabby's AvatarJoin Date
Aug 2020
Posts
840
Thanks for proving my claim. Pay attention to the Jockey Club press release and not the mistakes of journalists. Learn to determine what is signal and what is noise.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garnabby
The story above has ramifications and connections to other people and events. Do you remember what I asked you regarding one of the Sports Gambling Hall of Fame entrants when you posted regarding the Circa pre-season conference?
He had been MIA from Las Vegas for a decade...working on "stuff." Guess what stuff.
Now you're making as much sense as old Red, but with even fewer links. Ha.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
One would think a dude working on a Theory of Everything would want to find his own links.Quote:
Originally Posted by GarnabbyNow you're making as much sense as old Red, but with even fewer links. Ha.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
And surely a TOA guy realizes that doing your own research (including finding your own links) improves your memory of the information gleaned. Plus it forces you to at least follow a relationship chain regarding the information. Completely different mental process from point-and-click.
Look it up. LOL. And find your own links. I'm surprised, flabbergasted really, that someone as erudite as Garnabby hasn't read up on the intellectual/memory/processing drawbacks to point-and-click reading. Even things as simple as writing on a legal pad versus composing on a laptop fire very different neural patterns. Catch up, Barnabby, catch up. Don't become a point-and-click retard.
Again, it's not my claim to prove, but, a few counter examples (with links, and lucid reasoning) went a long way to allay any doubts.
It's not my point to prove either. You can believe it or not. I don't care which.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garnabby
To lazy to give the person's name?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmTo lazy to give the person's name?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
That must be it. Typing fatigue. I notice you missed an "o" in "Too." We both should rest up.
You should remember what I said last week? It checked out.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmTo lazy to give the person's name?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
That must be it. Typing fatigue. I notice you missed an "o" in "Too." We both should rest up.
Red, you're a confirmed deadbeat who prostrates himself to the gambling gods, by stunts like pictures of you having a coffee with Munchkin, which was, very likely, arranged, however, by Mickey.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzLOL. And I live to get laid like Bond, turn green like Banner, and dance like Baryshnikov.Quote:
Originally Posted by GarnabbyI primarily meant what "turns you on". Posters spend decades on the forums without ever giving a reason for living. I live for a working TOE, one that fits in with the real data. However wacky it seems, and, which I at least mentioned a few times on long-defunct forums.Quote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestion
I have the better shot, of course.
The wife and I watched this, not bad at all. Thanks for the recommendation.Quote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestion
I agree, this Mikki dude seemed the most full of shit... he beat baccarat out of millions but can't tell you how... typical. Strikes me as a rich kid whose parents let him do whatever he wanted and wants to brag about his hedonistic excesses. I wonder if he's an attorney too??
My favorite was the two college kids who lived at a casino on comps while they were too broke to pay the water bill... great story... but possible.
Mikki is well known on poker streams and there are whole threads about him. Just deep family money. He gets to go around looking super cool to idiots acting like an AP. (Sound familar). Maybe hustle people a bit here and there. At one point he tries to claim he was in the online pharmacy game. Nothing suggests successful business guy. Tats or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by jdogThe wife and I watched this, not bad at all. Thanks for the recommendation.Quote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestion
I agree, this Mikki dude seemed the most full of shit... he beat baccarat out of millions but can't tell you how... typical. Strikes me as a rich kid whose parents let him do whatever he wanted and wants to brag about his hedonistic excesses. I wonder if he's an attorney too??
My favorite was the two college kids who lived at a casino on comps while they were too broke to pay the water bill... great story... but possible.
Another Las Vegas cheat...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkXT0ULjN4s
I didn't watch the video, but, that guy sort of looks like the first one, from the first video, about Benter. Ha. Seriously, no time.
Sort of like the internet music, more and more, comes with a lot of fakes to sing the songs.
This is an old famous story. American Coin was a slot route operator for Las Vegas dive bars with video pokers in the bar tops. Larry Volk was paid to gaff chips so that the royal flush never hit. That would be about an extra 2% profit on the machine the wager. Which is pretty big considering the games were around 97 to 98% to start with.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
When they got busted Volk agreed to testify against the owners of AC. So they paid someone to kill him. The killer was found not guilty. But years later, having become a Christian, he confessed to killing Volk. But because of double jeopardy he was not charged. The owners were never tried.
Ron Harris was a Gaming Control Board agent that went bad. He was in charge of keeping machines gaff proof but wound up gaffing them himself.
I'd heard of the second but not the first. Thanks for the story, going to look it up.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmThis is an old famous story. American Coin was a slot route operator for Las Vegas dive bars with video pokers in the bar tops. Larry Volk was paid to gaff chips so that the royal flush never hit. That would be about an extra 2% profit on the machine the wager. Which is pretty big considering the games were around 97 to 98% to start with.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
When they got busted Volk agreed to testify against the owners of AC. So they paid someone to kill him. The killer was found not guilty. But years later, having become a Christian, he confessed to killing Volk. But because of double jeopardy he was not charged. The owners were never tried.
Ron Harris was a Gaming Control Board agent that went bad. He was in charge of keeping machines gaff proof but wound up gaffing them himself.
Sure sounds like American Coin was mobbed up.
What a brazen contract hit...plus incompetent (or crooked?) follow up by law enforcement.
Glad sin city is run by corporations now and not gangsters: now they sue rather than shoot people in the back of the head.
This is an old, classic, and under-publicized story. It undercuts the argument that discovery of cheating would lead to any kind of death knell in terms of income for the properties directly benefiting or for properties offering video poker in general. None of that happens.
The story gets sewn up and characterized as some rare event with specific individuals being the evil-doers. Of course, what the story actually demonstrates is how easy it is to pull this off. If caught, negligible blowback occurs, as long as the evil doers are offered up as sacrifice. The funny thing is, those evil doers can go hire on with Native American casinos the next day, either officially or as silent consultants.
The problem, as was expounded on in an old edition of American Casino Guide by a former Control Board investigator, is that machine inspections in Las Vegas are always months, and sometimes years, behind schedule.
All that's required to compromise the entire Control Board "authority" is a leaked schedule of what's being inspected when. The entire process makes swiss cheese look impermeable.
Interesting... I knew the Harris story but not much about Volk. A couple of the commentors said only 30% of the chips were gaffed, so somewhere between 30-50%. They were smart enough not to modify all of the machines (and only max bet Royals) so this means they only brought in probably 1% at most. Seems pretty stupid and they didn't get away with it for very long. Mickey, do you think there are still gaffed VP machines around?
From LVA:
On October 1, 1990, Larry Volk, a 49-year-old former computer programmer for the American Coin Company, was gunned down in his backyard. Volk, the quintessential "man who knew too much," was dead long before paramedics reached the scene.
At the behest of American Coin’s owners, Volk gaffed the computer chips on 500 or more of the company’s video poker and video keno machines. Volk's rigged programs prevented royal flushes from being hit when players bet the maximum number of coins, so the slot route operator wouldn't have to pay off the big jackpots. The cheating "resulted in $17 million in fraud," according to the Las Vegas Review-Journal, and ran undiscovered from 1986 until 1989, with upwards of 500 of the company's 1,000 video poker machines affected.
The Nevada Gaming Control Board was already running a sting on American Coin for illegal interstate sales of slot machines when the gaffed chips were brought to its attention in June 1989. After chips were pulled from American Coin machines in a half-dozen Las Vegas bars, regulators discovered that they didn’t match the "master" chips on file with the state. Still, they probably couldn’t have nailed American Coin, but then Volk rolled on his employers, Rudolph LaVecchia and his son Rudy, and paid the ultimate price.
In a 1999 interview, an anonymous Metro detective called the American Coin case "a frustrating situation. We thought the LaVeccchias were involved, but we could never build a case against them."
The LaVecchias weren’t completely out of the woods. Rudolph and Rudy neglected to pay the million-dollar fine imposed by the Gaming Control Board over the scandal. On Jan. 15, 2001, a District Court judge handed down a $1.24 million judgment against the twosome, effective closing the book on the American Coin case.
No casinos were involved, as American Coin serviced only Las Vegas bars.
As for it happening today, we'd say that the Enforcement Division of the Gaming Control Board is 30-plus years more experienced than it was in 1989, with more agents providing more oversight. Also, American Coin seems to have been an anomaly, at least as far as history is concerned; why risk a good business, huge fines, and jail time when running gambling games is so profitable to begin with? But in gambling, as in life, anything can, and does, happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
According to google American Coin Company was "seized and closed by the Gaming Control Board for rigging programs". And presumably they were facing criminal charges because they took the risk of having the cooperating witness assassinated.
So what would non-negligible consequences be?
The royal rig is the obvious path of optimal gain. No individual, unless he camps there for years, is going to accumulate enough hands to be able to say anything definitive about whether the games are rigged. Bob Dancer couldn't make a definitive call.
You have two ways of looking at this: American Coin and these guys were anomalies, or they were anomalous only in the sense that they had a rat in their midst. Glass half full or half empty. Your choice.
The problem is, without a rat somewhere, the Gambling Control Board schedules checks every 18 months or so at best, and if those schedules for checking are leaked, the entire process is potentially bullshit.
By the way, there is a famous LV casino that, when royal frequencies were checked after the first couple months of operation, the results were mind-blowingly different from machine to machine. But that never became public knowledge because, hell, no crime had been committed. Or there was no rat.
Oh, say for someone like MGM caught rigging drawings, I'd say half a million fine and a couple of firings would be acceptable. Especially if those firings didn't preclude future employment with Native American casinos.Quote:
Originally Posted by smurgerburgerQuote:
Originally Posted by redietz
According to google American Coin Company was "seized and closed by the Gaming Control Board for rigging programs". And presumably they were facing criminal charges because they took the risk of having the cooperating witness assassinated.
So what would non-negligible consequences be?
That how statistics works. There's even a name for that mathematical phenomenon. Ha.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Garnabby
Garnabby is online now
Gold
Garnabby's Avatar
Join Date
Aug 2020
Posts
900
Here's a fun thought experiment. Try to figure out how many people are capable of doing what was done in this case. We'll say just in the U.S.
Would you say 500? A thousand? Maybe 10,000?
Garnabby, the person who told me this was a casino administrator who worked with an administrator of the property involved. I think they all understood likely distributions of outcomes.Quote:
Originally Posted by GarnabbyThat how statistics works. There's even a name for that mathematical phenomenon. Ha.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Garnabby
Garnabby is online now
Gold
Garnabby's Avatar
Join Date
Aug 2020
Posts
900
Why do you insist on commenting as if you know what you're talking about? Oh right, you're The Theory of Everything dude. Carry on.
But you said this story demonstrates "negligible blowback" occurs if caught. How does it demonstrate that?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzOh, say for someone like MGM caught rigging drawings, I'd say half a million fine and a couple of firings would be acceptable. Especially if those firings didn't preclude future employment with Native American casinos.Quote:
Originally Posted by smurgerburgerQuote:
Originally Posted by redietz
According to google American Coin Company was "seized and closed by the Gaming Control Board for rigging programs". And presumably they were facing criminal charges because they took the risk of having the cooperating witness assassinated.
So what would non-negligible consequences be?
One of Lemons' co-conspirators only got probation... how the hell do you get probation for conspiracy to commit murder??
https://lasvegassun.com/news/1999/se...or-hire-case//
Apparently they wanted this Bruno instead, he got 10 years:
https://lasvegassun.com/news/1999/de...mer-gets-10-y/
I mean yeah the owners lost their business, gaming license and got a big fine. But seems pretty light considering they murdered someone over it and only one guy, out of everyone involved, got significant prison time.
If you read the second story I linked: Apparently Volk wasn't too bright and didn't get the message when his home was bombed a couple weeks before Lemons shot him.
I would guess he got probation for being a cooperating witness.Quote:
Originally Posted by jdog
The murder issue is separate from what redietz was suggesting though. If you murder all the witnesses to a crime and they don't get you on the murder, you can get away with anything.
In fact without bothering to dig into the story I'd say the fact that they had the guy killed suggests they were facing serious charges for the gaming offense.
Good for APs for sure but almost positive the LV experience is far below what it'd be mobbed up.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
Look at how homogenous the food court situation is. Even if mob cheated the odds would likely be better overall.
Correct, and correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzGarnabby, the person who told me this was a casino administrator who worked with an administrator of the property involved. I think they all understood likely distributions of outcomes.Quote:
Originally Posted by GarnabbyThat how statistics works. There's even a name for that mathematical phenomenon. Ha.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Garnabby
Garnabby is online now
Gold
Garnabby's Avatar
Join Date
Aug 2020
Posts
900
Why do you insist on commenting as if you know what you're talking about? Oh right, you're The Theory of Everything dude. Carry on.
No mathematician told you any such thing.
There is capable meaning you have everything lined up perfect. Or capable in purely a technical sense. Many many 10s of thousands could do it technically. The time required would vary immensely by skill level.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Having all the other situations lined up? Quite rare.
Modern games would likely be considerably different and more complicated. It is all locked down in code with cryptographic keys I'm sure.
As far as VP, you could just as well gaff it in all sorts of ways. Since you are detecting a royal + coinin and presumably it displays something else.. then you could trim %s off the lesser payouts. People don't even keep track of that stuff. Royals could be caught by some bad ass autist. Trim the straight, flush, and boat .. no one logs all that.
Quite possibly. Since Lemons waited so long to come forward, maybe the statute of limitations had expired on any fraud (or other) charges.Quote:
Originally Posted by smurgerburger
I actually met a guy in AC who was doing just that, logging absolutely everything. He had been doing it for years.Quote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestion
I couldn't possibly say no to that question with such a lack of information. But if there is it's probably extremely rare.Quote:
Originally Posted by jdog
In the United States the knowledge of the paybacks of slot machines is proprietary information so most casinos don't publish anything about it-there are exceptions.
But think about a slot machine sitting out on the casino floor. What's the payback? 85%, 90%, 95%? Why would the casino illegally gaff a game? If they don't want the public to get a 95% return they can legally put a 90% chip in the game. If they don't want a 90% return they can legally put an 85% chip in it. They would be stupid to illegally gaff the game when they can cut the payback legally.
As Mickey suggests the financial incentives do not necessarily favor rigging, even assuming there were zero risk. If they did all casinos would at least set all slots to the worst legally allowable RTP, which they don't even do in LV strip casinos (CET in LV is very close to doing this, but Venetian for example does not, or didn't last time I was there.)
According to FraudJ they're still breaking bones :DQuote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
I agree with what you guys are saying about machines in general. Why illegally modify a machine to lower RTP? But a VP machine is not a slot in critical ways. The main difference is RTP is advertised, and it attracts a different type of player. We already know casinos dislike VP because of it's high RTP and low volatility variants. But most operators understand they must have some around to keep certain players. Since they can't lower the advertised RTP too much or risk losing VP enthusiasts, and they're stuck with keeping some of these games, I think it would be attractive for them to gaff the payback.
Definitely riskier in a state like Nevada but AFAIK Indian casinos essentially regulate themselves. So what would be the downside for them? Of course it would be bad press if something got out, but who's actually going to investigate and report it? I would think an Indian gaming regulator would just be more interested in their cut.
And the idea it would be harder to do in modern times may be naive. It might be even easier to hide something like this considering games run on exponentially more lines of code than they used to.
I'm not against the idea, I was just responding to someone throwing around insinuations without having thought through the topic sufficiently.Quote:
Originally Posted by jdog
If you are talking about me: I did not know Volk's story, but on the topic in general you can see I have thought through and arrived at my own conclusions already.Quote:
Originally Posted by smurgerburger
I was just curious as to Mickey's opinion on the matter because I know he spends just as much time in Indian casinos as anybody.
I was talking about redietz. He's posted about this before.Quote:
Originally Posted by jdogIf you are talking about me: I did not know Volk's story, but on the topic in general you can see I have thought through and arrived at my own conclusions already.Quote:
Originally Posted by smurgerburger
I was just curious as to Mickey's opinion on the matter because I know he spends just as much time in Indian casinos as anybody.
Back in the 80's there wasn't much known about video poker paybacks. Video poker software had not been invented yet. In Volk's time there was Jacks or Better and Deuces Wild. Bonus Poker didn't come out until the early 90's. Tamper proof seals were not used when placing chips in machines.
Gaming kept improving regulations. All eproms that go in the machines must be delivered to Nevada Gaming Control Board by the manufacturers. The Nevada lab runs chi-squared and correlation tests to test the randomness of the chips. An approved chip has to be installed with a tamper proof seal and a Gaming Agent must witness it.
There are state auditors in every casino. They don't trust the casinos to count correctly. The auditors are pouring over the coin-in/coin-out numbers everyday.
How much does the average video poker player know about payback? For oblivious players you could just put in 8/5 Jacks instead of 9/6 Jacks, a 2% difference.
It would be the knowledgeable players that the house would be looking to fool. But the knowledgeable players are not going to be fooled for long just like poker players and the ultimate bet cheating. There is something wrong if nobody is winning.
I know of a lot of cases where casinos put on promotions that didn't last as long as they said it would. They cancelled when they seen they were getting shellacked. VP pros would also cancel if they seen they were all getting shellacked.
If a poll were taken of video poker pros as to whether they think they've been cheated at any time I don't think there would be many that would say yes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
According to the theory of cognitive dissonance, there shouldn't be. I heartily recommend, as a starting point, Leon Festinger's Theory of Cognitive Dissonance.
https://books.google.com/books/about...d=voeQ-8CASacC
My life advice is, if you'd prefer to believe A, and A and B appear to be a toss-up, best to believe B.
I found this interview about American Coin on GWAE. They were gaffing progressives which were big in Las Vegas in those days. All the bars had them.
Players from those days told me you could find a good number to play everyday because the progressives were everywhere.
The teams were just forming in the late 80's. But knowing the high numbers they played, and after listening to this interview, I think they weren't affected much by the gaffing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvSR...Y2FuIGNvaW4%3D
Like "racism" the term "cognitive dissonance" is thrown around by those with narcississtic personality disorder to denigrate those with different views. In his mind, the narcissist believes he is right in every argument, those with different views are inferior.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
According to the theory of cognitive dissonance, there shouldn't be. I heartily recommend, as a starting point, Leon Festinger's Theory of Cognitive Dissonance.
https://books.google.com/books/about...d=voeQ-8CASacC
My life advice is, if you'd prefer to believe A, and A and B appear to be a toss-up, best to believe B.
The narcissist denigrates others thinking it makes the narcissist look superior. When in actuality the narcissist is exposing himself as a pitiful pathetic figure.
You are right. Evidence has nothing to do with it. Only what you believe is correct. You're a fucking brain surgeon. Not!Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
According to the theory of cognitive dissonance, there shouldn't be. I heartily recommend, as a starting point, Leon Festinger's Theory of Cognitive Dissonance.
https://books.google.com/books/about...d=voeQ-8CASacC
My life advice is, if you'd prefer to believe A, and A and B appear to be a toss-up, best to believe B.
I'm thinking more specifically about VP coding modifications that could be done outside of Nevada.
But how many VP pros would be in places like the larger Chickasaw properties? The simple answer is probably not many, because we both know there are few high demom VP games available. All I can say is I've played more VP at WinStar than I've probably played anywhere and I've never hit a Royal, nor have I ever witnessed a Royal hit above a 25c denom. Of course this doesn't mean anything, it's not like I'm there every weekend. But it is starting to make me wonder what the chances are that the casino is not playing fair...Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
I holed up at Winstar and played their $1 9/6 Jacks and Deuces Wild progressives, .5% meters, in the London Bar and the Rome Bar a few times. They used to comp me the rooms there. I considered it a little vacation. But they took it all out.Quote:
Originally Posted by jdogI'm thinking more specifically about VP coding modifications that could be done outside of Nevada.
But how many VP pros would be in places like the larger Chickasaw properties? The simple answer is probably not many, because we both know there are few high demom VP games available. All I can say is I've played more VP at WinStar than I've probably played anywhere and I've never hit a Royal, nor have I ever witnessed a Royal hit above a 25c denom. Of course this doesn't mean anything, it's not like I'm there every weekend. But it is starting to make me wonder what the chances are that the casino is not playing fair...Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
I used to get pissed there anyway. That joint had the worst maintenace of their bartops I've ever seen anywhere. Barstops get a lot of sugary drinks spilled on them so you have to regularly clean them inside and out. Talking to those people about it was like talking to the wall. They never did anything and people wouldn't play, or it vastly slowed them down.
When I would first get there it might take me a dozen machines before I found one that was fully operational.
BTW, I made more money off the Choctaw casinos than any of the others in Oklahoma.
So I was just thinking back to when the last time I had a losing month in the casinos was. I think it was 2006. I know that people don't know how it's done. Axel knows how it's done. Maxpen knows how it's done.
It's been going on for years. Making money is routine. The debate over whether the casinos gaff machines can rage on. But's it the last thing on my mind.
Why would someone that's been showing a consistent profit for 2 and a half decades even think about the machines are gaffed?