Gambler caught marking cards

[Rain Man]

I'm not a gambler, but I know some people around here are into poker, so I'm curious how you think he might have been marking cards. It seems like such a thing would be very difficult to do in modern casinos. And could he have been cheating at the poker as well?

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/29/justic...t=hp_inthenews

Legendary gambler Archie Karas accused of marking cards in San Diego casino

By Emma Lacey-Bordeaux, CNN
updated 11:03 PM EDT, Sun September 29, 2013

(CNN) -- His was a rags-to-riches tale. A Greek immigrant who came to the United States and made it big. A waiter who gambled in his spare time. A poker prodigy who turned $50 into $40 million in just three years.

Archie Karas has described himself the "king of the gamblers," but authorities in San Diego are now calling him a cheater.

On Friday, police arrested the 62-year-old Karas, whose legal name is Anargyros Karabourniotis, at his home in Las Vegas, on allegations he marked cards during a blackjack game in San Diego in July. The alleged cheating was also caught on camera, according to authorities.

The alleged incident occurred at San Diego's Barona Casino. Karas won $8,000 playing blackjack, but San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis says video shows the gambler cheated with a technique known as marking cards.

Marking cards allows a player to identify the value of cards. If done correctly, neither the dealer nor other players notice the marks -- only the player who is in on the scheme.

"This defendant's luck ran out thanks to extraordinary cooperation between several different law enforcement agencies who worked together to investigate and prosecute this case," Dumanis said.

Karas is being held in Las Vegas without bail. He faces charges of burglary, winning by fraudulent means and cheating. He is expected to appear in court Monday for an extradition hearing.

It was not immediately clear if Karas has legal representation.

Karas' exploits are legendary in the poker world.

In 1992, he went to Las Vegas with just $50. He got a $10,000 loan from a poker buddy at Binion's Horseshoe, according to Poker.org. Karas tripled the loan in one game.

From there he went on to bet and win at pool, then poker.

"I was the best," Karas told ESPN in an interview broadcast in 2008. "Anybody who'd come to town I'd play them, I didn't care who they were and I'd win, too."

But he had a problem, he recounted to ESPN. No one would play him anymore; he had simply won too much.

He didn't quit. Instead, he changed the game.

"I had to play dice," he told ESPN. He said lines of people used to show up to watch him bet $1 million on each roll. "I ran it up to $40 million," he recalled. "It was a lot of money."

But as quickly as it came, the money left Karas. He said he lost $20 million in 10 days. Soon, it was all gone.

It took him three years to win the $40 million and only three weeks to lose it.

If the loss hurt Karas, he didn't show it in his 2008 interview.

"I consider myself the king of gamblers," he said, chuckling. "I made it, I lost it and like Frank Sinatra says, I stood tall and I took the punches and I did it my way."

[Third Eye]

There are countless ways to mark cards. More than likely he was probably doing something simple like nicking 10-valued cards with his fingernail. This could pay dividends in blackjack. It's doubtful that he was cheating at poker though. You would need a much more robust method that would not only identify the value of the card but also the suit to really be effective.

For what it's worth, there really is no such thing as a good gambler. Rather there are good cheaters and lucky gamblers. Cheaters get caught though, and the law of large numbers usually limits how lucky people are in the long run.

Edit: I'm editing this because everyone seems to be missing my point. If you know what you are doing poker is not gambling, and sports books are not gambling either. They both require skill to be successful in the long run. Black jack, craps, roulette, any table game with a specific probability of winning that is never in your favor is gambling.

[Ace Gunner]

Originally Posted by Third Eye

There are countless ways to mark cards. More than likely he was probably doing something simple like nicking 10-valued cards with his fingernail. This could pay dividends in blackjack. It's doubtful that he was cheating at poker though. You would need a much more robust method that would not only identify the value of the card but also the suit to really be effective.

For what it's worth, there really is no such thing as a good gambler. Rather there are good cheaters and lucky gamblers. Cheaters get caught though, and the law of large numbers usually limits how lucky people are in the long run.

yep

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by Third Eye

There are countless ways to mark cards. More than likely he was probably doing something simple like nicking 10-valued cards with his fingernail. This could pay dividends in blackjack. It's doubtful that he was cheating at poker though. You would need a much more robust method that would not only identify the value of the card but also the suit to really be effective.

For what it's worth, there really is no such thing as a good gambler. Rather there are good cheaters and lucky gamblers. Cheaters get caught though, and the law of large numbers usually limits how lucky people are in the long run.

There are absolutely good gamblers. That is why some games are games of skill and others are games of chance.

[Third Eye]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

There are absolutely good gamblers. That is why some games are games of skill and others are games of chance.

If it's a game of skill, it isn't gambling.

[cosmo20002]

Originally Posted by Third Eye

There are countless ways to mark cards. More than likely he was probably doing something simple like nicking 10-valued cards with his fingernail. This could pay dividends in blackjack. It's doubtful that he was cheating at poker though. You would need a much more robust method that would not only identify the value of the card but also the suit to really be effective.

For what it's worth, there really is no such thing as a good gambler. Rather there are good cheaters and lucky gamblers. Cheaters get caught though, and the law of large numbers usually limits how lucky people are in the long run.

You can definitely be "good" at poker, and someone with a sophisticated card counting system can actually turn blackjack odds slightly in their favor. But generally, yeah.

[Third Eye]

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

You can definitely be "good" at poker, and someone with a sophisticated card counting system can actually turn blackjack odds slightly in their favor. But generally, yeah.

Again, poker is not gambling when played correctly, and card counting is cheating according to the rules set forth by the casino, so my comment still stands.

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by Third Eye

Again, poker is not gambling when played correctly, and card counting is cheating according to the rules set forth by the casino, so my comment still stands.

I've never figured out the fun of poker. It seems like it's reasonably easy to assess one's odds and draw cards accordingly, but if you get a terrible hand there's not much you can do. And the luck in drawing a hand is about 100 times more powerful than your skill in assessing the odds and drawing cards (which themselves will be luck).

So it seems like a really good player can occasionally know the odds and get lucky to turn a bad hand into a good hand, but luck still is the predominant factor by a large margin.

[mr. tegu]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

I've never figured out the fun of poker. It seems like it's reasonably easy to assess one's odds and draw cards accordingly, but if you get a terrible hand there's not much you can do. And the luck in drawing a hand is about 100 times more powerful than your skill in assessing the odds and drawing cards (which themselves will be luck).

So it seems like a really good player can occasionally know the odds and get lucky to turn a bad hand into a good hand, but luck still is the predominant factor by a large margin.

You don't have to have a good hand to win. Conversely, the best hand doesn't always win.

[GloryDayz]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

I've never figured out the fun of poker. It seems like it's reasonably easy to assess one's odds and draw cards accordingly, but if you get a terrible hand there's not much you can do. And the luck in drawing a hand is about 100 times more powerful than your skill in assessing the odds and drawing cards (which themselves will be luck).

So it seems like a really good player can occasionally know the odds and get lucky to turn a bad hand into a good hand, but luck still is the predominant factor by a large margin.

I'm with you... I've been to many a gambling facility to include Monaco (just to sya I was there!!), and I don't get it. I see the allure of the high-stakes places like Monaco and the places where the truly wealthy and skilled ply, but when I go to "the boats" it's just kind of sad. From the elderly folks dragging o2 bottles from slot machine to slot machine, to the others who are sitting at tables and just don't look like they're having fun (by the looks on their faces). And it's not a poker face deal, it's just the look like they're there because it's a little better than being at home watching infomercials.

So I could be wrong, but more than 20 minutes at a blackjack table and I'm kind of bored.

But alas, if that's what they want to do, have fun, I'll go to the comedy shows or watch some little oriental folks fly through the air. After all, I love NASCAR and most folks find that to me tantamount to watching cars on the highway. So obviously I'm just missing something when it comes to cards and board ("bored" as I say) games..

[cosmo20002]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

I've never figured out the fun of poker. It seems like it's reasonably easy to assess one's odds and draw cards accordingly, but if you get a terrible hand there's not much you can do. And the luck in drawing a hand is about 100 times more powerful than your skill in assessing the odds and drawing cards (which themselves will be luck).

So it seems like a really good player can occasionally know the odds and get lucky to turn a bad hand into a good hand, but luck still is the predominant factor by a large margin.

The skill is not just knowing your odds and the chances of improving your hand, but winning despite not having the best hand.

[Lex Luthor]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

I've never figured out the fun of poker. It seems like it's reasonably easy to assess one's odds and draw cards accordingly, but if you get a terrible hand there's not much you can do. And the luck in drawing a hand is about 100 times more powerful than your skill in assessing the odds and drawing cards (which themselves will be luck).

So it seems like a really good player can occasionally know the odds and get lucky to turn a bad hand into a good hand, but luck still is the predominant factor by a large margin.

The fun part is learning how to read the other players and make your decisions based upon the cues they provide. If you get good enough at doing that, you can be competitive without ever looking at your own cards.

[Third Eye]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

I've never figured out the fun of poker. It seems like it's reasonably easy to assess one's odds and draw cards accordingly, but if you get a terrible hand there's not much you can do. And the luck in drawing a hand is about 100 times more powerful than your skill in assessing the odds and drawing cards (which themselves will be luck).

So it seems like a really good player can occasionally know the odds and get lucky to turn a bad hand into a good hand, but luck still is the predominant factor by a large margin.

Given what I've picked up from you over the years, this sentiment really surprises me. I think it would be right up your alley.

You hit on two points above: profitability and fun.

As far as profitability goes, keep this in mind: there is a really wide gap in the skill level and intelligence of any given player at the table. As you pointed out, probability dictates a lot of what happens. Well, a lot of people don't understand probability, at all. That can be exploited. Think of it in terms of financial management. Based on the pot and the relative size of the bets one can overvalue and undervalue their hand. Your goal then is simply to maximize value. Now this is just a basic part of the overall strategy, but it's essential to understand and is key to consistently beating bad players. Hell, in the day a number of people made a lot of money just being math players and you can still be fairly successful at lower levels.

Since the poker boom of a decade ago, there are a lot more people that understand the math of it, at least fundamentally, and this is where the fun comes in for me. There used to be, and this is a simple generalization, math players and feel players. These days you have to be both to be consistently successful at higher levels. If you play strictly by the rules of probability then other players are going to recognize nice that and adjust their play to manipulate that. So sometimes you have to make decisions that are incorrect according to the math. Once you start getting deeper and deeper into the meta game, it becomes really fun. It is really quite deep.

[Dartgod]

Originally Posted by Third Eye

Again, poker is not gambling when played correctly, and card counting is cheating according to the rules set forth by the casino, so my comment still stands.

This is incorrect.

[mr. tegu]

Originally Posted by Third Eye

There are countless ways to mark cards. More than likely he was probably doing something simple like nicking 10-valued cards with his fingernail. This could pay dividends in blackjack. It's doubtful that he was cheating at poker though. You would need a much more robust method that would not only identify the value of the card but also the suit to really be effective.

For what it's worth, there really is no such thing as a good gambler. Rather there are good cheaters and lucky gamblers. Cheaters get caught though, and the law of large numbers usually limits how lucky people are in the long run.

That is silly. There are plenty of good sports bettors.