Thanks for the reply, what casino do you work at? I may want to try it out if it's not too far away.

No, All three dealers and all three managers clearly and distinctly used the phrase "as close as possible" It was very memorable because I couldn't believe that they phrased it that way. At least the first 2 managers.

Look, I know that people have a tendency to embellish, exagerate, and even lie to themselves. It's just human nature and I went through that phase just like everyone else. I learned long ago the I could never improve as a poker player unless I could be honest to myself as well as others whether it's a poker hand, a bad run, or anything like that.

I'm no saint, I still have to remind myself now and then and let my ego take a bruising.

If you review my posts, you'll find that when I see I'm wrong I'm very quick to admit it and offer apologies. Unfortunately you wouldn't need to dig that deep to find me eating crow.

Calendar date, folks.

It was a huge flag for what exactly?

Angus, have you worked in a casino when dealers were still doing hand shuffles? If you had, you would know that player/dealer collaborations were taken far more seriously than anything a player alone would do or even player collaborations for that matter. If caught, losing your job was the minimum you could expect and many were prosecuted for cheating, which in Nevada, you're probably better off committing rape. I think the stiffest penalties can include 20 years.

Dealers never took shuffles, cuts, or using cut cards lightly back then and the thought that management would take dealers security measures lightly is laughable. Even floating a players hole cards a little too high in the air when dealing could be pretty serious if they thought it was intentional.

Oh please. You can't say "something that is random, in other words something that is not random at all" and assume we know wtf you're talking about. That's not a semantics debate. That's reliance on our ability to read your crazy mind.

But let's try to attack this from another direction. Assume that pfapfap knows what he's talking about with regards to the purpose of the cut. Why wouldn't the dealers aim for the center of the deck? Really think about this question from a logistical and practical standpoint before reacting.

And this. I'll assume you're an April Fools joke until I'm shown evidence to the contrary.

Yes, try to get it in the middle somewhere.

Person A says to Person B: Aim for the middle.

Person B says to Person C: Cut close to the middle.

Person C says to Person D: As close as possible to the middle.

This isn't a conspiracy, I assure you. There's no financial motivation for this, and the cost and effort and coordination required to successfully pull it off is staggering. All so some random dude goes on a heater? What's our motivation here, to not only rig machines, but train dealers to be able to change surreptitiously change settings on the fly as the button moves and players enter or leave the game. And we're not talking just hole cards, we're also talking different flop textures, which means we need to know what hands to give to what people so they play them the way we want them to.

Or maybe we just aim for the center of the deck while cutting, and we emphasize "as close as possible" because dealers are often very simple creatures who need very simple directions, and otherwise they might just cut two cards off the top and think that's acceptable. Maybe the people talking to you don't quite understand themselves and are just parroting something they've heard. Maybe you're reading WAY too much into this.

Which of these is more plausible?

As long as the shuffle is random, the cut does nothing to affect the play of the hand. You can cut it everytime in the middle, 13 cards down, or 47 cards down.

Basic definition of "random".

/end thread


OP claims not to be a Shuffle Machine Conspiracy Theorist, but then continually refers to the Shuffle Master Conspiracy Theory.

I'd like to believe that this is just a stupid April Fool's joke thread, but based on his non 4/1 posting history...

No, it's just excessively bizarre that someone of your mature age and apparent extensive playing experience cares this much about something that is absolutely and utterly irrelevant in every way, shape, and form. You're spending most of a day posting on it, this after having told us that you verbally introduced the topic at THREE different locations. Seriously, it's the cutting of a deck, not the Manhattan Project. This is why people are looking down on your question.

albedoa, relax, I'm not trying to pick a fight. I'm just trying to respond and this is the third time repeating myself. I defined my intended meaning in my original post.

Let me try and explain it better with some history.

To divine a cuts purpose you need to look at it in the context of the home game for which it was first used. By "home game" I mean players deal, not a casino with a professional dealer.

In a home game the deal rotates and the players deal themselves. For this reason, methods were invented to make it difficult for any single player to cheat. To get the fairest deal tasks are divided to multiple players, the dealer would never cut the cards himself, thus the term "offer the cut", also a third player would often be responsible for washing (shuffling) the deck instead of the dealer.

Use multiple players:
So 1 player shuffles the deck in what you would know as the high jack or 2 off the button. He offers the cut to player 2 traditionally to right of dealer or CO. He cuts the top of the deck onto the cut card towards the dealer, then player 3 who's the dealer completes the cut and picks up the deck with the cut card on bottom to deal out the rest of the hand and cards always stay over the table and in view. It's a system of checks making cheating very difficult from any single player. A 3rd player for dealer wasn't always used, even cut cards were less common. However A cut was always used and was always between player to right of dealer cutting and dealer completing.

*A Cold deck is a stacked deck so that the cards are cards pre-arranged to deal 2 monster hands and beat a player in a very big pot. This is actually where the term came from. The idea was that a deck swapped into a game is colder than a deck that's been held and in use for a while. Any player who handles the cards can make the switch.

How it works
If player 1 tries to manipulate the deck or swap in a *cold deck, the cut from the next 2 players prevent it. If player 2 tries to swap the deck, the cut divided between dealer and CO keeps deck in view and difficult to switch. The cut card prevents players from seeing the bottom card but also prevents a mechanic from dealing from the bottom of the deck. Now the dealer completes the cut and deals the cards again always deck in veiw so he can't introduce a cold deck. Note that the cut is key in preventing the cold deck. Now we can see how one player working alone could be blocked from most forms of cheating. False shuffles, dealing 2nds, dealing off the bottom, cold decks, etc. But even so if not careful, a cold deck could still get swapped from any of the 3 players and you can see that most actions are specifically meant to stop the cold deck. Cold decks don't require a mechanic and any one can do it. Duplicate playing cards could easily be purchases. They would always involve a huge pot. Only 1 cold deck would be needed so, only 1 chance to catch a cheater. It can do the most damage, and for all reasons stated above was a popular form of cheating.

False Cuts are often associated with Cold Decks:
Now, since a cold deck can be arranged anywhere in the deck. A "False cut" can be employed to simply cut right to the top of the cold deck. This could be done by shaving the top card of the cold deck so a cut could cleanly remove all cards above the shaved card, bending a card, or even putting a bit of salt between cards. This is why I don't like false cuts. It's cheating pure and simple and it's been around forever. If you see a false cut, It's a huge flag because there is really no good for any cut designed to go to a specific spot in a deck except when it's a cold deck. I'm no expert, just been around, so if I know about it, I'm can guarantee that others do as well. If I were going to design a rigged game, it would definitely involve a false cut.

Are you saying that a cut near the center of the deck is a "False cut"?

Also, your entire argument is predicated on the belief that the deck is fixed, rigged, stacked, or in some way non-random.

If the deck is random, I will let you cut it anyway you want.

You didn't need to explain to us how people cheat at home games by manipulating the deck so that certain cards come out. We're all regulars in B+M and Home Poker and are aware that there are procedures in place to prevent someone from cutting to a certain spot in the deck in order to direct cards certain places. You just wasted several paragraphs of typing to tell us something we all know already.

Please answer a specific question. What are you alleging to be going on in the casinos? If it's not rigged, then it's random like Angus said just above me. If it's random, then you can cut it wherever you like and it's still random. Thus, why the hell do you care so much?

OP is not albedoa, I am.

I mentioned shuffle machines once only as a hypothetical to illustrate one example of how a false cut is used.

I never claimed any opinion either way about shuffle machines. Just that this thread is about false cuts not shuffle machines.

My mature age is exactly why I see this as a huge threat. I actually started playing poker in home games at the age of 10. As I got older and into other games that weren't always with close friends I learned what I could about spotting cheaters because you were your own security. False cuts were one of the biggest threats to look for because a cold deck could wipe you out.

Cheating can come in many forms and like I said, I'm no expert so I can't see every potential problem. Just that cuts are the most important defense. That's always been the case since poker began. When false cuts are used, they defeat the most important feature in the game to stop cheats leaving it vulnerable at minimum and at worst are a signal that some form of cheating is going on.

Players count on the cut, it's their best insurance to ensure that a game isn't fixed from what ever direction. So when a casino knowingly defeats a cut but only uses it to make it appear like it's actually serving it's purpose, that's just ethically wrong.

If your auto insurance company cuts off your insurance while telling you you're covered, saying it's ok as long as he doesn't get in an accident is wrong.

Again, it is abundantly clear that you do not know what a false cut is.

And again, answer the question. If the shuffle is random, why does the place/consistency of the cut matter?

In the past, a false cut needed to be more precise because it generally only had 1 chance to work with a cold deck unless you go to the bathroom and stack another.

However, yes, the more narrow your parameters for a cut the more dangerous it is. If you always cut within 3 cards, and attempt something 10 times, chances are 33% to hit your cooler and so likely to work multiple times.

Again it's the potential threat as well as perceived threat. And with machines the potential goes way up. If or when a machine is used to setup decks, it could set it up every hand. Therefore even cutting to within 10 cards can still beat any player when they are always 10% to hit a cooler. I know, I know, I said it again. But I think most agree that the potential is there.

Another problem. You see that the game is vulnerable and something fishy is going on that you know about, maybe there's cheating going on, maybe not. Even if your 90% sure nothing is going on, that 10% doubt can be severely detrimental to your game. If you happen to hit a bad run, that 10% doubt may fester even more but if you "Knew" the game was fair, you could just patiently wait it out knowing you can play for the long run.

The hole thing is just incredibly bad poker.

I did. It's not about if it is random. It's about if there is any chance that it may not be. Or if it could be fixed tomorrow, next week, no one can guarantee no attempts to cheat will ever be made.

Again, when there's a lot of money to be had, there are a lot of minds cooking up new angles. Just off the top of my head. Maybe some player riggs their own machine and has a maintenance guy swap it in on a high stakes table. Is it posible? how should I know.

The real question is should I be the one that has to worry about it just because I know management is doing something wrong?

It's poker slang, pre-internet poker terms often varied widely depending on part of country. I take a false cut to mean any cut that doesn't do what it's intended to do. Some may just take it to mean a slight of hand move made to look like a cut but really wasn't.

which gives me more opportunities to cheat as a dealer ..... having to cut to the center or being allowed to cut to wherever I want.

Why do we shuffle by a certain procedure? Why do we deal clockwise? why not in an order selected each hand by the dealer? because this way if we are going to cheat we must come up with a way to cheat within the parameteres of the procedures. If we can just change the procedures at will then we can find a easier way to cheat ...

Actually I think this is probably more a function of repetitive behavior. Dealing thousands of hands, I could see how this could happen without the dealers even being aware of it. As I mentioned, elsewhere, no system is perfect.

Still I don't see it as a big problem. Each dealer doing their own thing is actually good in that at least the casino isn't telling them all to cut exactly to the same spot in the deck.

Every system is flawed in some way. We learn to live with it. On the other hand deliberately defeating a system and making it appear as if it's still working is another matter altogether.

Since you're not asking it, I'll ask:

If the shuffle is random, what does it matter where the cut is performed?

I'm no mechanic but I do love a good puzzle.

Intuitively dealers choice would give you more opportunities.

But when the dealer has no control over the shuffle and with a one handed cut using a cut card, it seems negligible either way. Even if you could manipulate the deck, you would still need to know something about the order of the deck. Hmmm, maybe with marked cards but still what would a cut have to do with marked cards?

oooh wait, I know. Trick question. If the casino is enforcing a center cut and they would consider a non center cut cheating, than I'd have to say wherever you want gives you exactly 1 extra opportunity!

Bottom line, you do each procedure that way because it fulfills their intended function in the best way that someone could come up with. Although it depends on how you define intended function. For example I do know that the shuffle sacrifices optimal randomness for rake, but really it's mostly about the wash anyway.

This is totally inconsistent with cutting the cards to a required point in the deck because that minimizes the intended function the most that someone cold come up with.


I'd like to keep going guys but I'm tired and starting to get a little silly.

Peace!

OK one more, asked and answered at least 3 times. I'll let you find it.

Yes. You say it doesn't matter if the shuffle is 100% honest and random.

You want even more "protection".

A belt and suspenders.

We've answered all your points and you choose to ignore or twist them.

Pardon me if I worry about the important things instead.

"This is totally inconsistent with cutting the cards to a required point in the deck because that minimizes the intended function the most that someone cold come up with."

The "intended function" is to satisfy tradition. The ORIGINAL function was to attempt to alleviate cheating via a stacked deck. Now, with an auto shuffler, it's tradition. UNLESS you buy in to the rigged shuffler theory.

You are confusing something which had a specific function at one time which is now largely simply a tradition. It's akin to shaking hands, the point was to show that your dominant/weapon hand was empty. You could go on a tirade about how shaking with the right hand only is stupid because someone could be harboring a weapon in their left...but the entire argument is silly because it's moved from something which once had a purpose to something which is purely tradition in the context you're describing it.

The cut means nothing coming out of the auto shuffler, it's a tradition, it's done to satiate the superstitious and those clinging to meaningless symbolism. It's done to a specific point in order to keep those same superstitious people from getting angry and blaming their losses on something superstitious like the cut. It's done to save dealers from themselves, what dealer wants to get lambasted for cutting thin when a regular likes a thick cut? Protocol for casino employees should rarely, if ever, include "ya know what, just do it however you want to".

I'm sorry, I did miss it.

Again, I say you're arguing about something that doesn't exist.

CUTS ARE RANDOM.

You're taking "aim for the middle" as "cut exactly in the middle". And even if a couple of dealers and managers misinterpret that, everything else that makes you paranoid isn't even close to a reality.

You can relax. You're not being cheated by a conspiracy between the maintenance crew, the security crew, and the dealers. Even if it were possible without these people risking their jobs, what's their motivation? Dealers are swapped out every 30 minutes, and this would require additional hardware be installed so the dealer could manipulate the deck to account for the proper number of players.

You're not making any sense. You may as well be asking why it is that the purple dragons are only allowed to breathe green fire. Your question is based in fantasy, not grounded in reality.