Blackjack player beats 3 Atlantic City Casinos for $15.1M

[Pekelo]

Quote from The Big D:

It's basically impossible to count in an environment like he was playing

All you are trying to prove is that he wasn't counting. That doesn't mean he didn't have some other skills or strategy.

On the other hand you can't explain why no other blackjack player ever come close to the feat he accomplished. I guess it was luck....

What was strange is the miscommunication between the casinos. After the 2nd casino went down, they should have their guard up and pictures of the guy at every high stakes places....

 

[bearmountain]

Quote from jrlvnv: She lost her entire credit line of 500k in a matter of 20 or so hands trying to make a few hundred a day.

+1
good post jrlvnv, thank you for sharing your experience.

I posted this earlier about martingale betting systems...sooner to later the math will catch up to you. Same with trading, one could average down on losses, but one day it will wipe out your account...

"With these win/loss proportions, the odds against losing 10 consecutive decisions are only about 500-to-1. Now 500-to-1 may seem nearly impossible to many people, but realistically, at any given time, a series of losses equivalent to yours is happening to dozens of players in Atlantic City, and to hundreds of people every day of the year in U.S. casinos. It’s happening right now to one out of every 500 people who are playing. How many tens of thousands of people are playing blackjack right now in U.S. casinos? "

"The martingale is a systematic method of chasing your losses. There’s no other way to describe it. This is about the most foolish way to gamble. You violated the single most important rule for gamblers: If you can’t afford to lose it, don’t bet it. "

 

[euclid]

Quote from The Big D:

- the house computer and blackjack guy continue observing play to ensure the player hasn't suddenly improved and to keep and eye open for cheating.

Doesn't the fact that the casinos no longer welcome him and offer him a 20% rebate suggest that his play did suddenly improve?

Surely if it was just luck they would welcome a chance to get their money back.

 

[Pekelo]

Quote from Pekelo:

That doesn't mean he didn't have some other skills or strategy.

I think in a way he was lucky, since if you martingale, your streak will eventually run out and the numbers will catch up to you, as jrlvnv's story showed.

My best guess (and why the casinos allowed him to play for months) is this:

1. He was martingaling.
2. He had a big bankroll that allowed him to do so.
3. He had the balls/willingness to play big and keep averaging down.

This article explains that he took Ceasars down 3 times, and they still allowed him to play. I assume they analized his play, figured out what he was doing and they knew the strategy eventually will bust. This way Johnson indeed was lucky, that he never ran into an extended period when the cards were against him.


“By Johnson’s account, he won $4.23 million at Caesars Atlantic City in December. Next, he conquered Borgata Hotel Casino & Spa, winning about $998,000 in December, then $1.8 million in March and April and $2.25 million over two nights later in April. Most remarkable was his haul of $5.8 million during a 12-hour spree at Tropicana Casino and Resort in April, a record loss for the casino."

This would explain why nobody other did such a feat before. Most blackjack pros don't have such a huge bankroll, don't play such a high stakes and even if they do, they don't have the willingness to play such a strategy....

 

[The Big D]

Quote from Visaria:

Again, is this something you made up or is it something you have real inside or first hand knowledge of?

I've been around gambling long enough and watched this scenario play out enough times to know how it works. But I have no first hand knowledge of the dealings described in the article. I just know what the procedure is.

Incidentally, for those who think this is unique, Archie Karas had a much bigger run at craps at various vegas joints in the mid '90s.

 

[The Big D]

Quote from euclid:

Doesn't the fact that the casinos no longer welcome him and offer him a 20% rebate suggest that his play did suddenly improve?

Surely if it was just luck they would welcome a chance to get their money back.

Typically the management at any given casino is a battle between the hotel people and bean counters vs. the gamblers. It's very common that after a big loss due to luck the hotel people will gain management clout and change policies to get rid of high stakes action even when the house knows they have the best of it. That's probably what happened here.

If you want a well known example of this phenomenon, Harrahs barred Richard Brodie (the author of MSFT Word and a major whale) from playing at Caesars Palace Las Vegas because he had hit 3 or 4 VIDEO POKER jackpots in a relatively short period of time. No joke.

 

[The Big D]

Quote from Pekelo:

All you are trying to prove is that he wasn't counting. That doesn't mean he didn't have some other skills or strategy.

That's the only strategy that applies. He can't be martingaling because the min and max bet are too close to permit it. He can't be first basing off the dealer's down card because the house would be instantly suspicious if a multi-hand whale wanted to sit at first base. In theory he could be marking cards, but any high stakes operation worth its salt knows how to spot that.

All the evidence points to one conclusion: he got lucky. Nothing to see here.

 

[Appleseed]

Quote from Nine_Ender:

Are you really that old ??? Wow, I don't know many seniors who still trade professionally, but I commend you for that.

"Pompous" ??? Hmm, I've seen a lot of posts from you and they tend to be short and negative. But now I understand, at your age typing up long well spoken critiques would take a lot of energy. Again, I commend you for your efforts though.

He did sound pompous to me and also ignorant as you do.
The games that offer a near mathematical chance are well known
and BJ is not one of them. You don't build $1B casinos $200k
chandeliers comped $1k a nite rooms and a host
of othe perks with 1% BJ wins .
If we sound negative its your perception

Another senior
cheers
john

 

[scorpion]

if we read a story about a gambler that lost millions playing bj in the casino we would call him a idiot .. Now the guy that wins millions is called only lucky.. that does not make sense . luck plays a part in everything in life you can say. Not many people know what his style of play is or his win & loss swings in the game were. With his experience & bankroll to play with confidence that help put the odds in his favor to be profitable. being a skilled player with money makes the world of difference on how a person plays & the end results. it takes money to make money people always say. this was not your average dumb player with scared money trying to make a few dollars. this guy was willing to risk a few million to play his strategy at the game. If gambling is a 50/50 proposition how the player handles his win & losses makes the difference. this guy is Not a lucky high roller but rather someone that followed a strategy & earned his money with his talent. No different then any of the top poker players out their with the skillset of the game. he actually made more money in short order then the best poker players that play these days. people should give him credit for what he accomplished in winning at the game & beating the casino 3 times . a rarity. we don't know his strategy & can only speculate about his approach. you can call it luck & skill . he is a great blackjack player that knows how to win. hopefully we will hear more about. .. one sharp player ..

 

[dunleggin]

Quote from The Big D:

All the evidence points to one conclusion: he got lucky. Nothing to see here.

Has my vote.

For those on the other side of the debate, I'd say the burden is on you to disprove that it could not be a chance occurrence.