|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4 [Next] | ||||||||||
stoneunhinged![]() Inner circle 3067 Posts ![]() |
I second Tommy.
But don't use garlic as daub, because they'll smell it on your breath when you eat it to ditch the evidence. Probably. Whatever you do, don't chew it before swallowing. |
|||||||||
AMcD![]() Inner circle stacking for food! 3078 Posts ![]() |
I said "unless you really was bad". Performing shifts at a card table is what I call "bad".
It's not hard to know who brought the marked deck, just body search any guy ![]() Of course, if the deck is marked during play... Anyway, if you find a marked deck, you don't care who's cheating, you know the game is crooked. And that's enough for me. |
|||||||||
Mr. Z![]() Special user 818 Posts ![]() |
Paper got the money more than anything when it comes to card games, private, casino, or otherwise. It's interesting how this area of cheating is often relegated to "amateur" in the gambling books. Learning to read sophisticated shade is as difficult as mastering sleights. Some cheaters embark on structured practice regimens of several hundred hours learning to read shade at varying strengths. Then learning to read it and play it undetected is an art in and of itself.
The stuff continues to get even more sophisticated. It's my opinion that this stuff has a better chance of going undetected than trying some goofy table shift. Hell some of it can't even be read with the naked eye, you **** up a shift once or if someone gets hep to it and they know you're up to no good. The greater question is why do some continue to hold onto this notion of the lone cheater dealing himself winning hands and having to beat the cut? The most sophisticated shuffle work I've been privy to all allow for straight cuts.
"...if you have to say you is, you ain't."--Jimmy Hoffa
|
|||||||||
Clock![]() Elite user Los Angeles, CA 460 Posts ![]() |
Briefs. Briefs. Briefs.
When working with a partner, laying a brief is always the best way to go. Done well, you'll have the whole table asleep. It's exactly what a cut and carry looks like... because that's what it is! Even if you happen to be working single-o (which is a bad idea from the get go), lay a brief and hope for the best. Not a 100% strategy, but the odds can be in your favor. Leave shifts at the mirror. Just one accidental flash, glimpse, or unnatural move... and you'll have to find another game. |
|||||||||
AMcD![]() Inner circle stacking for food! 3078 Posts ![]() |
I'm so happy to read that so many people here think shifts are just [beeeeep].
|
|||||||||
tommy![]() Eternal Order Devil's Island 15717 Posts ![]() |
I am not altogether against shifts. I go with the Erdnase advise on shifts, which is that they should be done unobserved. Which sounds silly but it can be done in some games. I personally have used a bold shift in a game called Kalooki which has a moment in the procedure where they are not observing, its the moment when they are sorting their cards after the first deal as the cards are put onto the table. Its quite cool how well it works. So I agree with what has been said but I think a shift is something that can and ought to be done unobserved because it is easily nailed when not so, in my opinion. With anything its all about the application as Steve Forte puts it. Loosely speaking I would not advise using a shift and would rather use something safer. We also have to consider and look into what purpose the shift serves and all it entails. It seems to me the shift does nothing alone and other things have to be used in conjunction with it. For example, Erdnase says the purpose of the shift is to bring the cards to the bottom so to deal bottoms, which means you have to get the cards, do blind shuffles, and false deals and so on. These extra things amount to extra risk over and above the risk taken in doing the shift itself. The shift can serve many purposes of course but what in this college game were you thinking of using one for?
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
Robert//Livingston![]() New user Still learning after 97 Posts ![]() |
I was thinking of using a shift in conjunction with a riffle stack or overhand stack (depending on what everyone else at the table it using) to beat the cut. I would love if Mr. Z would elaborate on this sophisticated shuffling that can allow the mark to cut.
Even if I need to use it to keep a slug on the bottom, as we play Texas Hold'em and I'd only have to deal off the bottom twice. I've even resorted to copping the slug from the bottom, then allowing for the cut. If I can set up a double duke, and beat the cut, I'll be able to make a nice take in one hand. I've also thought about using a juiced deck, but haven't found one yet. I'm not too 'in the know' to be able to find the techniques I need.
"Being challenged in life is inevitable, being defeated is optional."
"Experience is a hard teacher because she gives the test first, and the lesson after" - Vernon Sanders Law |
|||||||||
AMcD![]() Inner circle stacking for food! 3078 Posts ![]() |
You don't need a shift with riffle stacking.
|
|||||||||
The Dowser![]() Special user Canada 761 Posts ![]() |
Quote:
On 2010-05-24 22:37, Robert//Livingston wrote: Then lay off the "hard evidence" (readers) until you are more "in the know". These guys can argue all they want but no one can deny that readers are hard evidence... and sleights are difficult to challenge, much less prosecute. If you are caught using readers it will likely not end with the "ash tray to the face." As for paper getting the most money: Perhaps but in the casino I would say that the daily attempts at capping and pinching are the most common form of cheating. That doesn't make it the best form. It just shows how many idiots there are out there. Back in the day, while dealing BJ, I had a kid change a fifteen dollar bet to a fifty dollar bet adding another fifty double down... his bet changed from red to green! Then he asks me "what are all those black domes on the ceiling?". The rest is a funny story for another time. I still maintain that if you have skill enough, you avoid hard evidence... of course every rule has it's exceptions. I'll take Erdnase's advice on the subject... dated or not. |
|||||||||
The Dowser![]() Special user Canada 761 Posts ![]() |
Having just read my own post, I would be remiss if I did not admit that readers are not always hard evidence. I am reminded of a story about case in the 60's where juice was originally (supposedly) exposed. The case was dismissed because the judge could not see the marks.
|
|||||||||
tommy![]() Eternal Order Devil's Island 15717 Posts ![]() |
We can deny that readers are hard evidence of cheating and I am confident that you will come to realize that is possible if you think about it a little more than you have.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
The Dowser![]() Special user Canada 761 Posts ![]() |
Ok, that's a good plan... If I get caught I'll just claim I was unawares that the deck was marked... or that it isn't my deck. Just as many undesirable possibilities can be entertained when discussing sleight of hand as when discussing use of gaffs.
MARKED CARDS (if detected) ARE HARD EVIDENCE. Are you saying they are not? |
|||||||||
tommy![]() Eternal Order Devil's Island 15717 Posts ![]() |
I am saying, it ain’t necessarily so.
Here is a clue: Sometimes, the card backs can become defaced by accident or through normal wear and tear. If any of the players or the dealer sees any rouge markings or defacements while the hand is in play, they may request a replacement from the floor man. When the floor man is called to the game because of a bad card, he may replace the defaced card with a clean one, or change the deck out entirely, at his discretion. To protect the players, each player is allowed to request that a new deck be put into play if they see or suspect that anything is wrong with the current deck in play. This can be accomplished by asking the dealer for a “deck change,” or to “change the deck.” Then lay off the "hard evidence" (readers) until you are more "in the know". ![]()
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
Smellawine![]() New user 8 Posts ![]() |
Readers??
ive been practcing the SME shift for a while now. Good for at the table work. Who invented it?? Will upload vid soon. -Jeff |
|||||||||
tommy![]() Eternal Order Devil's Island 15717 Posts ![]() |
![]()
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
Maitre D![]() Veteran user 339 Posts ![]() |
The SME Shift? Never heard of it - I must be new.
|
|||||||||
Smellawine![]() New user 8 Posts ![]() |
SWE shift. Sorry.
|
|||||||||
Maitre D![]() Veteran user 339 Posts ![]() |
S.W. Erdnase published it on his DVD in 1902.
![]() |
|||||||||
Robert//Livingston![]() New user Still learning after 97 Posts ![]() |
^^ Haha, nice.
How is this shift good for table work? Your hands would be in an awkward position, and I'd love to see you keep the break while putting the cards in that position as natural as possible. There's a reason it's under legerdemain and not artifice. The creator? The place you should have learned this from tells who created it. I believe the name of the creator is on the cover page as well.
"Being challenged in life is inevitable, being defeated is optional."
"Experience is a hard teacher because she gives the test first, and the lesson after" - Vernon Sanders Law |
|||||||||
ein_doppelganger![]() Loyal user 213 Posts ![]() |
Ignore him, he is a troll.
|
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » The Gambling Spot » » Shifts, practical at the table? (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2025 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.02 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < ![]() ![]() ![]() |