Action offered, action accepted. Next hand please

I want to preface this by saying to Palimax and Pfap that you guys need to chillTFO. I feel a little bit of sympathy for both of you.

Palimax seems to be experienced in information security and perhaps suffers from a bias that "everyone should already see what I view as obvious".
My favorite example is that most Algebra teachers will instinctively get frustrated by being asked how to do simple addition and subtraction. This stems from the subject being so fundamental to their own level of understanding. Try to see this in yourself and stop assuming that people have the same background/base of knowledge about the world.

Pfap, you have a reputation for being very straight to the point and abrasive with your delivery. I'm sure if you could vocalize your posts, some people would catch your sarcasm and understand you more clearly. Unfortunately, some people would think you're truly an ass and hate you more

Anyway, on to my post:

Maybe I'm an idiot (quite possible), but I don't see how knowing that "someone" is bringing in counterfeit chips is a useful bit of information. OK, someone's counterfeiting(good to know), but there is no obvious, defined manner of identifying who introduced the counterfeit chip into play. What additional layers of security would work well with UV markings to help us identify the counterfeiter with 100% accuracy? Without being able to discover their identity with 100% accuracy, you're creating false positives against honest, donating players.

Hypothetical situation that needs a (reasonable)resolution to legitimize the idea of UV marked chips:

1. Player 1 buys in for $100. The bill is checked and found to be authentic. Awesome! Player receives $100 in chips. All chips are pre-verified to be UV marked. (great start)

2. Player 1 plays 5 hands and wins $20 in each hand. (Each hand is very specifically remembered by all other players at the table to a point that action on all streets can be verified. He legitimately won $100.)

3. At the end of the night, Player 1 tries to cash out his stack of chips for $200.

4. Within his stack, two $20 chips are found to be counterfeit. (did he receive these chips as winnings from a dishonest player?, did he perhaps make change for someone and the person receiving change handed him a counterfeit?)

5. Do you, as a host, short this player $40? (cash them out for $160, sorry bub)

A. If you do not short them, do you offset the $40 until you can prove who brought the counterfeit chips?

B. How do you go about catching the actual counterfeiter?

C. How could you possibly expect Player 1 to ever want to play at our house again? Based on counterfeit chips being passed alone, I wouldn't want to play. Being shorted/effectively being accused of being a counterfeiter would certainly keep me from returning or saying anything positive about your game to fellow players.

D. If you were Player 1, would you wish to return to this game and would you feel cheated more by a counterfeiter or by the house?

Dr. Phil, in da HOUSE!

Sixmill (and others).

I've given examples of practical uses, explained security in depth, and explained how any added step in counterfeiting makes you a less attractive target (see posts #31 and #32, and #35). I've even posted where to buy inks and lights for a fair price.

I'm not trying to talk down to anyone, but I'm frankly at the end of my rope - repeatedly being told that I won't engage in discussion or that I won't explain myself. [I've got 3,500+ posts of me engaging in all sorts of discussions, and a fairly short list of haters.]

If there's something fundamental in my position that UV inks provide a small bit of extra security for a low investment that I haven't explained or am unwilling to explain, please let me know what it is.

I've been very clear that I don't think UV inks aren't the end-all be-all of security. It's a tiny countermeasure for a low investment that you might use as one one piece of a comprehensive security puzzle.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have smut to download...

What other supporting security measures would you implement to ensure you didn't cause false positives when cashing chips out? Please paint me a full picture of how differing layers of security at your home game actually contribute to rooting out problems instead of just shorting possibly honest players?

To be clear, I completely agree that UV marking chips will undoubtedly help you determine whether someone is counterfeiting your chips. Now, how we use that information in a constructive manner to find the counterfeiter still eludes me. I think it's safe to say that I'm not the only person that cannot see this from point A to point B.

Last part first...

To be clear, the first step in finding your counterfeiter is finding out that you have counterfeit chips in your game. If you're UV marking them not making this information public to your players, then you've perhaps accomplished the first step sooner than you would have. I understand that 1001 chips coming to you at the end of the night might immediately tip off some games; but a game large enough to have a counterfeiting problem might not always have all of its chips turned in. They likely have chips in people's pockets, games running for days while people come and go and return, etc. You'd know as soon as the cashier put them under the counter or as soon as you put them back in the locked room. So,

• Early Detection.

If this is part of comprehensive security, e.g. a camera or security system with playback, now you can go to the tapes sooner, and have a smaller window of time in which to try to figure out what happened.

None of this is particularly useful in a game where you've got one box of chips and it sits in the chair next to the host and he hands people money and chips. That game's only security is the chips themselves. UV for them might only be useful in finding the fake chip. It might go unnoticed - or undetectable anyway - in the haystack. Being able to identify that chip -- ooh, it IS different after all -- quickly with the UV might be helpful in spotting the fakes by a different physical characteristic next time they come into play. Again, it's simply a quick detector.

Either finding out sooner helps you, or it doesn't. I think in some cases it would. I think, for the cost of entry, it couldn't hurt much.

The "comprehensive" solution is likely checking chips at the table. In the dealer's tray is a $5 UV flashlight and he "wands" over the racks that enter play. While a counterfeiter can duplicate your mark in time, it at least lets him know that you're watching for him. It's perhaps the equivalent of posting a Neighborhood Watch sign in your yard, but given choice in targeting, your game probably moved down the list. I understand that, psychologically speaking, this might dissuade some players - but I think you could present it properly to players as: "We're serious about your security."

---

I'm not entirely sure how to answer the first question (not because I'm not sure what you want, but because it's not something I spent all day prepping to answer). I suppose the answer is something like: I take care and pride in my equipment. I use good chips and one person (and one person only) banks exactly so we don't run into this sort of problem. I assume you're suggesting that chips might go out as fakes, and then I'd refuse to honor them when they came back in - thus shorting a player. To that, I can only submit that you'd have to be vigilant on both sides - and that having a higher standard of chip security makes it that much less likely that you'd be giving out fake chips or getting them back. I think a UV-marked-and-checked set would have an overall lower rate of fakes -- but, yes, a higher rate of caught fakes (relative to the potential number of fakes, anyway).

And to the middle question -- Short answer? Having better security (in general) keeps everyone safe. It's that much less likely that the bank is short at the end of the night or that you have someone dealing from the bottom, or that - god forbid - someone robs your game.

There's about 2,000 words here trying to make a case for something that I think is fairly minor. I think you get your money's worth using UV inks on chips - but not much more.

---

If I were to UV ink my chips, the likely outcome would be that someday, I'd flash a $5 UV flashlight over them and people would go: "Oooh, that guy's serious." Maybe that's all I need to increase my security. Maybe my UV stamp would have my name, address and a finder's fee on 'em. Not only would my security mark be on them, but they'd be recoverable in case of theft.

$30 well spent if you ask me.

---

And, finally - if this were a post about building a ladder to the moon, I'd be much more likely to discuss it with someone who actually wanted to work towards solutions in making it practical - not with people going BUT IT DOESN'T WORK, WHY WON'T YOU ENGAGE ME! I can deconstruct people's idea's all day, telling them how much they suck -- but I much prefer making things work.

I think more than enough has been said about the fake bills and chips issue regarding OP's post so I'll just add that another negative of not being vigilant about whom you invite to your game is robberies. Quite a few Austin games in the last year that were doing a poor job of vetting their players have gotten robbed, some involving serious injuries.

Palimax, you give some awesome explanation. Sorry I had to pry it out of you

What UV marking is truly good for is early detection of a problem that could grow to be incredibly costly to a host that may feel obligated to pay the value of a chip that didn't originally belong in your set of chips.

I've been to a few home games and host my own. I'm in no way a great host, but I'm a decent and improving host.
I challenge everyone who hosts a game to know:

The exact count of your chips (if you didn't know you started with 200 chips and 201 chips come back, you can't catch the counterfeit chip until it's too late)

The complete value of your entire chip set should all your chips make their way onto the table during a game.(if all your chips are on the table, you should be able to count the cash and have it match an exact value that equals the value of your set)

If you don't know these then you're exposing your game to the possibility of counterfeit chips. Take the largest denomination chip that regularly makes it into play and compare its value to how much it would cost to implement UV marking and you'll likely be surprised at how few counterfeit chips would need to be found before breaking even. A 5/10 game that issues out $50 chips would only need to have 1 counterfeit pass to make UV marking a break even investment. WELL worth the money, IMO. Just don't think it's a comprehensive solution to stop the counterfeiting.

My earlier post in this thread was right in the middle of the blowout, so I decided to just shut up and wait until it wound down. I try to stay fairly neutral in this ongoing thing that Palimax and pfapfap have, because I get a lot out of their posts. IMO they are two of the most important contributors to this forum, and it's unfortunate that they just seem to rub each other the wrong way so often.

Palimax, I think your last post was your best explanation of how UV marking can be useful. I have a non-custom set of cash game chips that are readily available online. I'm probably going to have a custom name & phone number stamp made and use it on these chips. Security plus traceability for lost chips - I like it a lot.

As I typed it, I thought about how nice it'd be to have some sort of "If lost, return" stamp on my chips. It'd be interesting to see how much resolution I can get on a custom stamper (any office supply house - online or in person) and how well "permanent" UV inks hold on ceramic chips that get a good deal of play.

Well, that depends on what you do when/if you catch the single $50 chip - and none of us have actually tried to do UV marking -- again, I brought UV lights up primarily as a bill-validator.

...but I think we agree. It's got a low cost of entry, and it puts another tool in your tool-belt.

Some sort of solvent-based UV ink is probably where to start:

http://cgi.ebay.com/1oz-UV-Neon-Blue...item5638f24a8f

I'll gladly be a guinea pig, and stamp a few chips from my giant pile of samples (including many, many samples of my own chips I made during design and testing) and report back. I'm bank-cash-poor few a few days though, so, nobody hold your breath

Well, Paypal locked me out of my account for a few days (I changed mobile numbers, blah blah...), so now that I can freely buy junk on the interwebs again:

The following items are coming to live at my house:
http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.15456 (I've already got 18650 batteries and chargers).
http://www.directglow.com/Permanent_...m?1=1&CartID=1 (Including 5% coupon "ebay5%")

I'll visit local Office-Store for an uninked stamp pad and a customizable stamper, and I'll post some photos of inks on various sample chips shortly.

Update:

[✓] Solvent-based UV Ink from DirectGlow
[✓] 1W UV Flashlight
[] Uninked Stamp Pad
[] Stamper

It came as quite a shock to me that neither Stapes nor Office Max in my town carry un-inked stamp pads. After visiting too many stores, I've been forced to order them from Amazon. I got tired of chasing a $3 uninked pad around town. When it shows, I'll pick up the stamper.

The flashlight is obscenely powerful. I need eye protection with this one. It has considerable bleed into the violet realm (as a "completely" UV flashlight wouldn't be blue at all), but MAAAAN do things glow like a sonofabitch. [Interesting note: One of my red Mandalay Bay $5's glows a VERY VERY bright orange under the light. That's intentional. Paulson markets UV edges in their promotional and security material.]

I've made some Q-tip swipes across some sample chips with the ink, and it glows nicely. In my ham-handed tests, I leave a visible-to-the-eye snail-trail of ink on un-labeled smooth chips, almost like nail polish would -- but only if you can catch glare on the chip. It is almost impossible to see on a labeled DPCM or even on the otherwise smooth Mandalay Bay "picture" inlay Paulson.

I'll have to see how the stamper does.

I'll post photos once I work out lighting and capturing the UV glow nicely. My "good" camera has poor UV sensitivity, so... ...we'll see.

I'm looking forward to the pics, and I'm glad you didn't break all of those DPCMs in half.

Luckily the guy who runs our game works for the federal government and background checks everyone before they even get invited.

The day I feel it necessary to scan every bill as it comes in and every chip that goes in an out, I think I will quit hosting games.

I'll see if I can manage pictures tonight. Not sure how my UV photography is going to turn out

My uninked stamp pads showed up - thanks Amazon and $3. I went out and bought a type-set style stamper. I set the stamper to read:
And then I went about stamping.

Now that I'm about $65 into this experiment, I can offer the following:

• On reasonably non-porous surfaces (Paulsons, Progen/Nexgen, Ceramics), the ink leaves a shiny snail-trail that has a visible glare like clear nail polish.
• On porous surfaces (stickers, labels) the "nail polish" effect is fairly minimal, but someone inspecting chips under direct lighting would notice them.
• It was difficult to get a "clean" stamp with a double-line stamp. Even from the pads, ink was uneven. Some chips look like "GENUI▒▓ / 6▒▓▒▒5▓▒▓▓" A single line stamp would have improved this greatly, and I could have struck the chips cleanly.
• Since the ink itself is invisible (minus the nail polish effect), you'd want to stamp them under a UV light to check your work to minimize uneven stamping.
• The ink itself is quite permanent after just a few minutes of drying. If I were doing a lot of chips, I'd invest in a heat lamp, or at least a box fan and a big table
• I will still likely stamp something to the effect of * GENUINE * on my $100 chips. Perhaps doing a single-line phone number on the obverse.
• The ink is visible even when lit by cheap flashlights. A keychain UV light would suffice on a bank bag. Considering the benefit of checking cash (and frankly, having a nice toy), a sub-$5 UV flashlight like this one would do the trick: http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.4014 (My flashlight above requires a special battery and charger -- which I use for other flashlights I own.)

I'll try to get photos tonight. So many projects, so little time.

Same thing happened to us. We started with about 8 guys. Every week. It eventually has grown to about 16-18 people weekly and we ran into about 4 fake 20's (1 buy in) one time.

We mentioned it to everyone the following week, and it never happened again. Just bring it up. If the person realizes that you know, they wont try it again. Also, there is always the possiblity that they didn't know they were fake and had them somehow passed onto them.

*The one's we had were extra shiney when placed next to an actual bill. We threw them away and took the hit. No reason to stress over it. If you run a game its a risk you take I guess.

It's almost still "tonight," right?

Below are a few chips I inked. They include several varieties of "Great Wall" Progen/Nexgen-based chips, some live casino chips, some ceramic samples (no edge spots, bad color test of my "5" chip), etc.





On an un-labeled smooth chip, you can see the "snail trail" left by the ink. This was a fairly clean strike, and it's visible to the naked eye. Again, this ink is NO JOKE. Permanent, not for skin, etc.



It is not nearly as obvious on a labeled chip - especially paper. I didn't have a vinyl chip to sacrifice to this particular inking. All of my vinyl chips for the league are in use.



You can see my quality issues. I'm sure that I'd get cleaner strikes with practice or with a single line stamp. Some chips are sharper than they appear in this photo, but the narrow focus of the UV light and the short depth of field of the photo make it hard to show.



This is particularly obvious on a well-stamped chip.




...and not nearly as obvious on a not-so-well stamped chip. This one had too little ink, I think, but again, with so few under my belt.

In conclusion -- I stand by my argument that UV inking has a low barrier to entry. You can get everything you need for $50, and even for $30 or under if you have a small number of chips to do. It provides a minor deterrent to chip counterfeiting and the ink/UV gear is suitable for other marking tasks (tools, etc).

The 4oz of ink I ordered is A LOT of ink. ..think how little ink is in your inkjet cartridge... I could have done with a lot less. Similarly the $5 flashlight does 90% of what the $15 flashlight does.

Enjoy.

fleshlight.

it does.

I agree with kitty that the problem isn't detecting fake chips or money. The problem is finding out who's the cheat. No way you can compare home games to The Venetian (lol, wtf?) and stiff people at the cage.

Strange - I posted a reply earlier and it isn't here.

Thanks for the photos, Pali. I bet that with a little practice, you could get consistently clean stamps on most of those chips.

Given the low cost, the fact that I use non-custom chips in my games, and the multitasking options (security markings for other valuables, use the UV flashlight for checking currency), I may just drop a few bucks on this idea myself.