🤑 Jerry Patterson's Break the Dealer: Arnold Snyder Responds

Most Liked Casino Bonuses in the last 7 days 💰

Filter:
Sort:
A67444455
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
30 xB
Max cash out:
$ 200

Just got a call from someone working for Doug Grant saying that I'm being sued. I think this makes over times Doug Grant has threatened to.


Enjoy!
Boris On Blackjack - Boris IN The NEWS - Fractals R Us PublishingT
Valid for casinos
Visits
Likes
Dislikes
Comments
doug grant blackjack

A67444455
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
30 xB
Max cash out:
$ 200

refute testimony by theplayers' experts, Doug Grant andE. CliftonDavis. Curtissaidthe player was claiminghe shouldhave won hundreds of thousands ofdollars.


Enjoy!
Valid for casinos
Visits
Likes
Dislikes
Comments
doug grant blackjack

A67444455
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
30 xB
Max cash out:
$ 200

Grant is still furious that in Arnold Snyder publicly panned. Doug Grant's blackjack system as being "seriously flawed." Q3: What are the.


Enjoy!
Valid for casinos
Visits
Likes
Dislikes
Comments
doug grant blackjack

🔥

Software - MORE
A67444455
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
30 xB
Max cash out:
$ 200

The corporate plaintiffs are corporations associated with plaintiff Doug Grant, Inc., Blackjack is the one casino game in which a player's skill may increase his.


Enjoy!
Valid for casinos
Visits
Likes
Dislikes
Comments
doug grant blackjack

🔥

Software - MORE
A67444455
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
30 xB
Max cash out:
$ 200

nodownload.amarant-ural.ru › › Blackjack Main.


Enjoy!
Valid for casinos
Visits
Likes
Dislikes
Comments
doug grant blackjack

🔥

Software - MORE
A67444455
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
30 xB
Max cash out:
$ 200

about 20 years ago i took a black jack course from a guy by the of Doug Grant, his concept was different from anything else i've ever seen.


Enjoy!
Valid for casinos
Visits
Likes
Dislikes
Comments
doug grant blackjack

🔥

Software - MORE
A67444455
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
30 xB
Max cash out:
$ 200

Blackjack reports and studies on basic strategy, card counting, shuffle tracking, (aka Douglas Grant Von Reiman) The Doug Grant Advanced Dominant Group.


Enjoy!
Valid for casinos
Visits
Likes
Dislikes
Comments
doug grant blackjack

🔥

Software - MORE
A67444455
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
30 xB
Max cash out:
$ 200

Just got a call from someone working for Doug Grant saying that I'm being sued. I think this makes over times Doug Grant has threatened to.


Enjoy!
Valid for casinos
Visits
Likes
Dislikes
Comments
doug grant blackjack

🔥

Software - MORE
A67444455
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
30 xB
Max cash out:
$ 200

I do not believe card counters can beat the game of blackjack despite the fact that These posts by Alex sound an awful lot like those by DOUG GRANT thAT.


Enjoy!
Valid for casinos
Visits
Likes
Dislikes
Comments
doug grant blackjack

🔥

Software - MORE
A67444455
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
30 xB
Max cash out:
$ 200

Ron "Boris" Fitch and Doug Grant have formed Fractals R Us Publishing and have simultaneously announced a breakthrough in the development of winning.


Enjoy!
Valid for casinos
Visits
Likes
Dislikes
Comments
doug grant blackjack

The Court determined that casinos were not authorized to exclude card-counters. The greater number of cards they are able to view, the easier it is for them to determine whether the remaining cards in the shoe are player-favorable or dealer-favorable. If the dealer decides to reshuffle prior to reaching the cutting card, then the card-counters' opportunity to bet high on a shoe with a remainder of mostly player-favorable cards is eliminated. They allege that they have been threatened in person while at the casinos by both known and unknown casino employees and that they have been threatened and sent pornographic materials over the Internet by unnamed John Does allegedly connected to the casinos. The complaint also asserts an assortment of personal injury claims.

Saravay, John J. The complaint alleges that the schools and mock casinos were forced to close down in as the result of the Casino Doug grant blackjack alleged illegal countermeasures against card-counters and because of bomb threats, break-ins, destruction of property, theft of student lists, stalking and other intimidation tactics.

After the first player or players is afforded an opportunity to visually inspect the cards, the cards are turned face downward on the table, mixed thoroughly, shuffled until "randomly intermixed," and then placed into a stack.

Markind, Richard L. The casinos view iphone share information about suspected card-counters through defendant Griffin Investigations and other similar agencies.

The new regulations, which the New Jersey Supreme Court urged the CCC to adopt in lieu of allowing the casinos to exclude card-counters, balanced the statutory goals of casino viability and fair odds to all players, N. Rosenberg, Bart Q. This helped the casinos combat card-counters by increasing the number of cards card-counters doug grant blackjack have to be able to track in order to determine whether a shoe was player-favorable.

Though effective against card-counters, the use of these shuffling regulations increases shuffling time and thereby causes the casinos to lose revenue. Doug Grant, Inc. Madden, Haddonfield, NJ, for F. However, neither of these practices come completely free of cost to the casino: the more often the dealer must undertake the meticulous shuffling process, the shorter the actual time of play and the smaller the profits. Because these claims do not form part of the same case or controversy as the CCC regulation claims and because, in any case, we have discretion to decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction, we will remand them to state court. According to the plaintiffs, successful card-counting contains several basic elements. The Casino Control Act, N. The stack of cards is then inserted into the dealing shoe for commencement of play. The casinos, on the other hand, prefer to decrease the card-counters' opportunity to bet high on a player-favorable shoe. Therefore, it is in their interest to decrease the card-counters' chances of determining whether a shoe is player-favorable by playing with fewer cards in the shoe placing the cutting card as far away from the back of the stack as permitted by the regulations. Currently before the Court are motions by all of the defendants to dismiss the plaintiffs' complaint pursuant to Fed. Before blackjack games are commenced, the dealer receives one or more, usually between six to eight, decks from the casino supervisor and inspects them in the presence of the floorperson. These agencies allegedly keep dossiers containing the pictures of suspected card-counters which casino employees then use to spot card-counters for purposes of knowing when to implement countermeasures. Finally, plaintiffs allege that they have been threatened, assaulted and stalked because of their suspected card-counter status. Fourth, plaintiffs claim that the Casino Defendants denied them "comps" [5] after identifying them as card-counters. The cards behind the cutting card will not be used during the game. Jurisdiction over plaintiffs' remaining claims is based upon the Court's supplemental jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U. For this reason, card-counters prefer that the dealer places the cutting card toward the end of the shoe, leaving the fewest number of cards behind the cutting-card and increasing the overall number of cards in play. Second, plaintiffs claim that the casinos utilize what they term the "cheating-at-will" preferential shuffle and which, as codified by the regulations, is generally known as the "shuffle-at-will. In order to have the most success, card-counters need to be able to view, through the rounds of play, as many of the cards in the shoe as possible. As plaintiffs have withdrawn their claims under the Fourth and Eleventh Counts, we will also dismiss these claims. Bets are placed before each individual round of blackjack and are generally based on the approved minimums and maximums for the table. The individual plaintiffs in this matter are blackjack players who frequent the Atlantic City casinos operated by the Casino Defendants. The 7, 8, and 9 are neutral. The Court suggested that, if the CCC wanted to approve measures to neutralize the card-counter threat, regulations to that effect, short of violating possible constitutional and statutory limits by fully excluding card-counters altogether, could be adopted. See N. It is also in the casinos' interest to reshuffle prior to reaching the cutting card when the remaining cards in a shoe are player-favorable. Another approved shuffling countermeasure, known as the "shuffle-at-will," was approved by the CCC to allow the casinos to shuffle after any round of play. Card-counters also prefer to have the entire shoe of cards played. They claim casinos define card-counters as 1 any patron who increases a bet during a player-favorable count, or 2 any patron who knows or is related to someone who has increased a bet during a player-favorable count. Once the cutting card has been inserted by the player, the dealer takes all the cards in front of the cutting card and places them at the back of the stack. The CCC amended the existing shuffle regulation by adding language regarding the casinos' ability to shuffle "after any round of play:". Several of these countermeasures involved the manner in which casinos could shuffle the blackjack cards. In fact, prior to Uston, the CCC had already codified a practice originally not intended as a card-counter countermeasure but eventually used by the casinos for that purpose. The dealer then takes the entire stack of cards that was just shuffled and cut and aligns it along the side of the dealing shoe which has a mark on the side that enables the dealer to insert the cutting card so that it is in a position "at least approximately" one-quarter of the way from the back of the stack. The CCC is very aware of the card-counter controversy. The corporate plaintiffs are corporations associated with plaintiff Doug Grant, Inc. It reasoned that the Act gave the CCC exclusive and plenary authority to set the rules and methods of play of casino games and that the CCC had not authorized exclusion as a countermeasure. Plaintiffs challenge these practices as violations of the "cheating games" statute which provides that it shall be unlawful "knowingly to deal, conduct, carry on, operate or expose for play any game or games played with cards First, they claim that the identifying process is fundamentally flawed because it tends to unfairly misidentify non-card-counters as card-counters. They then vary their bets, betting high when the shoe is player-favorable and low when the shoe is dealer-favorable. They allege that they were treated in this manner while other non-card-counting players were not. The gravamen of plaintiffs' complaint is that the Casino Defendants undertake certain "illegal" countermeasures to eliminate the advantage a skilled card-counter may be able to gain over the casinos in the game of blackjack. Caplan, Sharon Morgan, Michele Davis. After the cards are inspected, the dealer takes them to his table and spreads them out in a fan, face upwards, for visual inspection by the first player or players to arrive at the table. As both plaintiffs and defendants have recognized, the CCC has carefully considered and addressed in both proposed and adopted blackjack regulations the effect card-counters can have on the game and the ways in which casinos should be permitted to respond to professional card-counters. The CCC regulations authorize the casinos to use certain countermeasures to prevent professional card-counters from overcoming the statistical advantage that is necessary to ensure the casinos' financial viability. As recognized by the New Jersey Supreme Court, "[i]t is no exaggeration to state that the Commission's regulation of blackjack is more extensive than the entire administrative regulation of many industries. When there are more player-favorable cards, the players' chances of winning are increased. After the shuffle is completed, the dealer asks the player seated at a certain position at the table, as defined by the regulations, id. The dealer-favorable cards are the 6, 5, 4, 3, and 2. After Uston, the CCC held a series of hearings on the issue of card-counters and decided to enact regulations authorizing certain measures casinos could use to neutralize the potential negative effect card-counters could have on their financial viability. The dealer then deals the cards to the players in a series of blackjack hands until the dealer reaches the cutting card. Finally, plaintiffs assert claims against nine lawyer and law firm defendants "Lawyer Defendants" for legal malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, breach of contract, and negligent supervision. As already noted, when the cards are reshuffled continuously or prior to reaching the cutting-card, card-counters lose their potential advantage over the casinos because they can no longer begin betting high wagers only when they know their chances of receiving player-favorable cards have been increased. The regulations governing blackjack are exhaustive and set forth in great detail the rules for the conduct of the game. See Campione, N. These counts are all based on the plaintiffs' central allegation that the casinos' implementation of Casino Control Commission "CCC" regulations violates various federal and state statutes, the common law, and the United States and New Jersey Constitutions. When there are more dealer-favorable cards, the dealer's chances of winning are increased. These include: the assignment of a point value to each card, maintaining a running total of those points during play, betting strategies, playing strategies, money management, a sufficient bankroll, and "the intangible ability to consistently apply these interrelated strategies under fast-paced casino conditions. See, e. Blackjack is the one casino game in which a player's skill may increase his chance of winning to the point of eliminating the winning odds in favor of the "house. According to plaintiffs, no casino has ever responded to such complaints by admitting to counting cards and shuffling during a player-favorable count. A short discussion of Atlantic City blackjack and the practice of card-counting is necessary to assist the reader in better understanding the plaintiffs' allegations. Among the matters that the Act delegates to the CCC are the promulgation of regulations regarding the rules of casino games, including blackjack, id. They also claim that the shuffle-at-will can be abused and used to the disadvantage of non-card-counters because dealers and pit bosses can use it to increase their revenues even when there is no suspected card-counter playing at a table. Adamar of N. The player cuts the deck by placing a plastic cutting card in the stack at least ten cards from either end. Blackjack must be played with decks containing fifty-two cards of four suits hearts, diamonds, clubs and spades with each suit containing thirteen cards Ace, King, Queen, Jack, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2. The defendants are also in the process of filing a motion for Rule 11 sanctions, Fed. This regulation provided that: "[a] casino licensee may permit a player to wager on more than one box at a Blackjack table. After dismissing all these federal and related claims based on the CCC regulations, we decline to retain subject matter jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims alleged in the Eighth, Ninth, Tenth and Eleventh Counts and the state law malpractice claims against the Lawyer Defendants. Card-counters attempt to "count cards" so as to determine whether and when a shoe is player-favorable. We will reserve all issues relating to the Rule 11 sanctions for consideration at a later date. See Uston v. For the reasons that follow, we will grant the defendants' motions to dismiss under Fed. At any given point during the play of a shoe, the shoe might contain more player-favorable cards or it might contain more dealer-favorable cards. The shuffling regulations, particularly the most commonly used shuffle-at-will, enabled the casinos to lessen the card-counters' ability to determine whether cards remaining in the shoe were player-favorable. The CCC also authorized one non-shuffling countermeasure after the Uston decision an increase in the number of decks casinos were allowed to use in blackjack play. In the game of blackjack, where the object of play is to reach as close to a total card value of "21" without exceeding that value, certain cards are more favorable to the player and certain cards are more favorable to the dealer. Whether and when a shoe will turn out to be player-or dealer-favorable is purely random. Del Duca, Patrick J. At issue in Uston was whether or not casinos had the authority to exclude card-counters from their premises. Resorts Int'l Hotel, Inc. Plaintiffs recount specific instances in which individual plaintiffs allegedly were subjected to shuffling-at-will by specific defendants throughout the past ten years. Third, plaintiffs, allegedly because they have been identified as card-counters, complain about being limited to one wager, being refused a deal, having bets pushed back, being forced to bet below the original posted limit, and having "shills" [4] occupy all seats at tables at which they wished to play.