Banned from Blackjack in Casinos for Card Counting - Should Casinos Have That Right?

I don't understand how counting cards can still be an effective strategy for playing blackjack at a casino. They now use 4-8 decks and reshuffle half way through, or they have a machine that constantly shuffles the cards.

How can you even prove someone is counting cards? I used a betting strategy that was very effective, and guess what? I was thrown out for counting cards at an auto-shuffle table. Lol.

Those big fancy casinos aren't built on the backs of winners.

a reply to: Jennyfrenzy

Card counting isn't how the game is played as it gives an unfair advantage to the person counting the cards. It's unfair to the other players at the table, I could care less about him ripping off the casinos honestly.

But why is it not part of the game??
It is only not part of the game cause the casino say's so. The other players know what they are getting them self's into.
Playing the game wrong can be a disadvantage to the other players. and that happens WAY more the card counters.
Sit at a table and hit on a hand that one in the world would hit on, I bet the guy/gal next to you gets mad for taking a useless card.

The game is about chance, if you know how to make your chance better then you are just playing it right, not exploited or cheating, but playing the game the most logical way.

originally posted by: buster2010
Of course the casinos should have a right to not allow card counting. As long as it isn't based on discrimination they have the right to refuse service to whoever they please. If people do not like the rules of a casino then don't go there it's that simple. Card counters cut into their profit and no company likes to lose profit.

Who do you work for....MGM Grand....
Card counting is the challenge that you mentally set for your brain when you sit at a blackjack table to play....
You are trying to figure the odds instinctively...which is OK....but just try a little scientific method and look out you have to leave.....while the casinos stack the decks six ways from sunday with their games....
How about a little fair play in gambling for a change.....buster...

When I was in Vegas last time playing blackjack with some friends at the Cosmopolitan, I started joking (and it was totally obvious - even the dealer knew and laughed) I kept going "+1, -1, etc..." as the cards were being dealt, saying it out loud as a joke and the pit boss and security came by to give me a hard time over card counting, which I obviously couldn't have done in my drunken state. I was just messing around like in the movie 21, but man they really don't have a sense of humor with it...Glad I still had all my 10 fingers after that confrontation

Lots of folks here saying they have the right to ban for counting, therefore it's okay, but few addressing why. It's not just that the player wins. The real issue is: If you "win" every time, are you playing a game of chance? Card counting is very much like having the proverbial ace up your sleeve.

As to how someone can be caught, many card counters can't prevent their "tells." Except for the truly excessively intelligent or idiot savants, counting cards is difficult, so people make up mnemonic devices to help themselves out. When a certain card has passed through they may move their foot a certain way, hold a finger down or up--anything that they can refer to as a reminder. But no matter how subtle you THINK you are being, these signs are being looked for by the casinos, who are adepts at spotting them. I've known card counters who do it all inside their head, but they are intelligent enough to know when to quit BEFORE they win astounding amounts, so they don't get caught.

It is possible to count cards in other games. My father taught me Conquian when I was a lad and he was very good. I got to the point where I was counting the cards, probably because it was easier for throwing out the 8 8-9-10's before play. I knew what he had; he knew what I had, so after I learned it the game rested on skill of manipulating the resulting chance. Rummy is a similar game, and my grandmother knew what everyone had in bridge. But those are people vs people games where you have some more leeway.

originally posted by: Bassago
I say card counting should be allowed. If someone has the mental capacity to track the trends within dealt hands then too bad for the house.

That's what I'm thinking. It's a game put forward by the casino. So they discriminate against smart people by saying that those who can win the game, can't play. Only those not smart enough to win can play.

So, after 3 pages the clear consensus here is that the casino can have astronomical odds against its players, but a player can't level the odds just a smidge... Fyi- card counting isn't a guarantee, and just cause the number you have determined states that there are a lot of face cards left in the deck doesn't mean you are the only one who will get them. That means there's more face cards for the dealer too... Think about it..

originally posted by: Jennyfrenzy
Card counting isn't how the game is played as it gives an unfair advantage to the person counting the cards.

How is it unfair if that person plays the game well? Isn't it just like any other game .. some play well and some don't play well? Is it unfair to other swimmers if Michael Phelps wins a swim meet ... or is it his own ability that takes him there and it deserves to be recognized?

a reply to: StallionDuck

the people who are targeted/thrown-out for being 'card counters' should immediately nullify the Casino accusation by stating they are not 'card counters' but actual 'Psychics"...
~~~a person that is a self-proclaimed Psychic being forced out of playing ---> is an act of discrimination ~~~

settle it in Court


besides... is it basically only '21' where card counting is supposed to be effective... poker of whatever form cannot be 'massaged' with the
discipline of card-counting can it ??

originally posted by: buster2010
Let the counter prove that the casino is discriminating against them because they are doing what the casino considers cheating.

The casino calls playing the game smart - 'cheating' - so that it will look bad for the smart person playing and beating the casino at their game. How is being smart, cheating? I'm trying to see it. I can't.

originally posted by: ParanoidAmerican
a reply to: FlyersFan
It is against the rules to alter game play or adjust odds, should the casino be able to adjust the odds as well mid action?

How is a person playing the game well 'adjusting odds'?
Isn't he just playing the game ... playing the cards as the casino deals them?

I understand both sides of this, but in the end, the casino can't lose too much money, or they go out of business. One way to deal with this is to say that if you win x amount of money or higher, you have to give a percentage of it back to the house. Kind of like how fishing licenses work -- you are allowed to keep 3 fish (or whatever the number is) and any other fish you have to throw back. People like Affleck don't do this because they need the money - he does it cuz it's fun and challenging.

Can someone please explain how the advantage goes up for the player when there's more face cards/Aces left in the deck? The players and the dealers pull from the same deck, so wouldn't that mean the dealer has just as good as odds as pulling those high cards too??? I gamble and I know my way around a casino, but I never understood this...

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

...how can they prove someone was card counting? Other then winning more often then most, really can they prove it?

Hmm, yeah. No burden of proof? Seems like the deck is truly stacked in the casino's favor.

...When I first learned to play cards I was told I was supposed to count the cards. Still think it's the smart thing to do.

a reply to: jhn7537

You and me both... I've watched 21 a few times now, since my wife loves it, and I still can't fully grasp the odds balance which shifts to make betting big money worth it to a near certain outcome. Not THAT sure....but I'll just be big enough to admit this too. I flat out don't have the math skill within me to fully grasp everything going into card counting as a semi-professional effort.

I mean the guys who are walking in with a total they are working to walk out with, and it's a job..nothing about having fun or even caring about the atmosphere or experience. Just count the cards, run the table, cash out and leave. That level of doing this? It's like how my DVD player works inside. I don't need to know why or how..just that it does.

originally posted by: jhn7537
Can someone please explain how the advantage goes up for the player when there's more face cards/Aces left in the deck? The players and the dealers pull from the same deck, so wouldn't that mean the dealer has just as good as odds as pulling those high cards too??? I gamble and I know my way around a casino, but I never understood this...

If you know the deck has a higher proportion of face cards and Aces, you can draw, stand, and bet accordingly. The Dealer must hit on 16 or less, and stand on 17 or more. If you have 16 or less, you can stand pat if you expect face cards to come up. If the if both you and the dealer have 20 or 21, you don't lose money. Essentially, there are more opportunities for the dealer to go bust if there are a lot of face cards coming up. This gives you more chances to increase your profits with splits, insurance, and doubling down.

Yeah, I used to count cards.

a reply to: FlyersFan

Yes and no. Casinos do not gamble for their money- only players do. That is normal and fair, no different from a lottery. The majority lose a little, the minority win a lot, the house takes a percentage of the redistributed wealth for facilitating the transaction.

Therefore, any flaw in a game which reduces the odds for the house to less than 50.1% must be corrected. Card counting is such a flaw. It is adequately correctable by playing multiple decks and shuffling before the deck gets thin.

HOWEVER, the rules of the game must not change in the middle, and action from outside the game must not interfere with whatever the odds are going to do. This means not interrupting the action because someone is winning or because you've got enough money from them and don't want to risk them winning it back, among other things.

I believe the answer is to regard the entire gambling session as a single proposition, rather than as a series of them.

You should sit down and hand over your money, and agree on a length of play (for example "to the exhaustion of your bankroll, doubling of your bankroll, or exhaustion of the playable part of the deck, whichever happens first") and then the game must be played by the rules for the entire duration of the proposition.

If either side makes a single departure from the rules- withdraws early, makes a single misdeal, makes a single inappropriate touch of the cards, anything at all- then the entire session is void, you get your initial bankroll back, and unless it is mutually agreed in writing that it was an honest mistake you are no longer legally able to place bets with that establishment. No forfeiture of funds on either side should result from fraudulent or disputed play before a court has convicted them of such fraud.

Yes this means that you could lose 999 of a thousand dollars then act a fool and be 86'd forever, which isn't ideal for the casino. However, this only should happen if the amount of money at stake is worth more than the total entertainment value of the casino over a lifetime, which I would argue is a sign of a problem gambler. The obvious answer is to cap how much a player can bet in one session until they have a track record. So your first deck they might only take 50 bucks, and if you lose you can do it 100 more times as far as they are concerned, because you can never get back more than 50 since that's the session, and as a bonus you have to pause and think about what you're doing every time you go 50 more bucks down. That would be a fairly reasonable system if you ask me.

a reply to: VictorVonDoom

Actually a really good explanation that makes total sense... And as a degenerate gambler I totally get it now... Thank you sir!

I'm more of a poker/craps player, but I dabble in blackjack depending on who I'm at the casino with...

originally posted by: FlyersFan
a reply to: benrl

I agree ... they have the right. But SHOULD they have the right? The person is just playing the game that the casino set out for people to play. And he's playing it well. So ... why should the casino have the right to ban them?? I can understand banning someone who is spewing obnoxious language or is a mean drunk, etc etc .... but why should the casino be able to legally ban someone who hasn't broken the law and hasn't done anything except play the game the casino set up for people to play?

Yea, they should.

Don't like it, don't participate.

They have rules, He violated them, he couldn't even do it hidden.

He was using the chips on the table to count, so he wasn't even skilled at it in the first place.

They told him to stop, he didn't.

Its a private business, they have rules, they reserve the right to refuse service, and in this case, hes banned from the tables, not the rest of the casino.

Its a business designed to prey on stupid, Fair doesn't enter into it.

If you are going to violate their rules, at least be smart enough to try and hide it.


When you enter into a business, you agree to certain conduct, things like the Business can tell you to wear shoes, or how to play THEIR game.

originally posted by: jhn7537
a reply to: VictorVonDoom



Actually a really good explanation that makes total sense... And as a degenerate gambler

I totally get it now... Thank you sir!



I'm more of a poker/craps player, but I dabble in blackjack depending on who I'm at the casino with...

Beat the Dealer: A Winning Strategy for the Game of Twenty-One

Stick to the low limit tables, don't attract attention, and you might be able to support your craps habit.