Hacker News Reader

Comment by downandout | Hacker News Reader

For those of you that don't know, the primary character in this piece, James Grosjean, isn't just any advantage player, he is the advantage player. He wrote what is often referred to as the Bible of advantage play - Beyond Counting - and its sequel, Exhibit CAA: Beyond Counting. Both of these books are incredibly hard to find, and when they do come up for sale, often sell for thousands of dollars. Here's a current listing for the original book, at the low price of $1600:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Beyond-Counting-Exploiting-Casino-Ga...

Here's a link to his Beyond Numbers blog:

http://beyondnumbers.lvablog.com

View on HN

I know it might be judgmental and possibly hypocritical, but I can't help but think that kind of intellect and education is wasted on trying to beat a casino.

If money is the end goal, wouldn't there be a bigger opportunity in pursuing investment strategy ideas (i.e. market inefficiencies), or working on making some process more efficient that could disrupt some industry (i.e. spam/phishing detection, or deep learning) and have better chance of long term gains. I'd think casino strategies once discovered can be mitigated over time so all that hard work will payoff temporarily?

People like this do what they do because they enjoy the challenge of a sophisticated adversary. The only other place this guy would be happy is crypto.

I'm not familiar with James Grosjean, nor am I a gambler, but I would guess that James became addicted to gambling, and then used his intellect and education to make money doing what he loved.

> I would guess that James became addicted to gambling, and then used his intellect and education to make money doing what he loved.

I'd be a little careful with terminology there. Gambling addiction can be a very serious problem, while a passion/love for gambling can be fine even if you're a losing player.

Right. I think though it takes meeting someone truly addicted to gambling before this really sets in, how devastating a true addiction to gambling is.

A completely fair and pretty objective analysis from my perspective.

On the other hand, everyone has a calling or personal interests. These may be formed under any number of formative life experiences which shape an individual's personal bias.

Perhaps in the case of this guy, it's less about the money and more about the "game". The game being the cat and mouse chase of outsmarting the casinos, winning when the odds are stacked against you.

Could this person be doing something that is better value for time for himself or society? Probably, but maybe he'd never fulfill his full potential without the right motivation/inspiration...

I think it's hard not to like what you like... When a problem space gets under your skin I bet it's pretty addictive.

I have often thought the same of guys like this. Ed Thorp, who was the first to write about card counting in blackjack, eventually took his math skills to the markets and made hundreds of millions of dollars. Bill Benter, arguably the world's most successful horse race bettor, has also created a nine figure net worth by betting into horse racing pools - i.e. not playing against the house, but against other players, in a very scalable way.

So it isn't just the money that motivates people like Grosjean to personally show up to dark casinos, often in the middle of nowhere, to take on the house. As you said, his earning potential would be far greater in other venues. I've met a few of these people, and while some just like "easy" money, many of them view casinos as thieving, malevolent enemies that need to be beaten by someone. The fact that they can make money at it is almost secondary.

Part of it is the thrill of the chase and beating casinos at their own game. As the saying goes, "it's a hard way to make an easy living"

You could say the same thing for derivatives traders. At least with beating the casino, you're usually comped swanky rooms and perks (since you're wagering so much money).

If you're good, you get comped a lot more than swanky rooms. A friend of mine has done this for a couple decades. He gets comped cars. Nice ones. He sells them. He's always selling stuff like $1,000 Saks gift certs online.

He gets what they call RFB (room, food, and beverage) out the wazoo. He's drank more expensive wine that most sommeliers. At one point it was hard to find an expensive restaurant in Vegas I hadn't eaten at, and I only saw him a tiny fraction of the time.

He gets his plane trips to basically anywhere with a casino paid for, often in a chartered jet. A guy with a sign with his name meets him at the airport.

In most parts of the country, if you ask enough girls if they want to go with you on a private jet to a luxury suite at the Wynn, one will say yes. Not a direct perk, of course, but an attractive indirect one for a single guy.

The value of the perks is substantial. You could buy them, but it would cost a lot.

How much did he loose in casinos? I am sure all those perks should cost significanlty less than casino's profit?

If he's "good", he must win money. If he wins money, the casino loses. If the casino loses, why on earth would they comp him anything beyond the first couple of times he turns up?

Sorry, but I don't believe you. Either your friend has a chronic gambling addiction and is filthy rich and the casinos love him as he's a walking ATM, or he or you is talking nonsense.

unless it's poker?

> If the casino loses, why on earth would they comp him anything beyond the first couple of times he turns up?

Because there are inefficiencies in how the casinos comp players just as there are inefficiencies in the games themselves?

Example from another industry:

In the 1990s, I flew cross country many times and racked up 5000 air miles round trip each time. Every 15 round trips, I'd cash in my air miles for a free international flight. The airlines loved me as walking ATM and were rewarding a big spender like me. Makes sense?

But guess what: All of my flight were the absolute cheapest economy class flights I could get. I had the luxury of booking my flights well in advance, and I'd tolerate bad connections to get the lowest price. A business class passenger would have paid 10 times what I paid, yet he and I would both get the same 5000 air miles.

The airlines certainly knew how much I had paid. Why were they rewarding me the same amount as the far more profitable business class passenger? As far as know, it is an inefficiency in the system (which seems to have been corrected by the airline industry in recent years).

It's poker. You aren't playing against the house. You're playing against other players. And the house always gets a cut from the overall proceeds (so the higher the stakes, the higher the cut).

Most career gamblers are making money in poker. In big money games, you play against other players and the house takes a rake. If players have stacks in the millions (which they do), the rake is pretty damn big. Not to mention, players will win a million in poker, then go play Baccarat or something. Gamblers don't gamble just to make money...

I remember a quote from somewhere: "If you are winning it's not gambling". If you beat the rake and have an edge over the other players it's just a mind game of dealing with variance.

Most of the professionals I ran across when I played poker seriously weren't the kind of people that achieve great things. You can't make it as a pro unless you're very intelligent, but there's usually a reason they settled on a job with no boss and no customers. They really, really don't like to be told what to do, say, or have very short time horizons.

> If money is the end goal, wouldn't there be a bigger opportunity in pursuing investment strategy ideas (i.e. market inefficiencies), or working on making some process more efficient that could disrupt some industry (i.e. spam/phishing detection, or deep learning) and have better chance of long term gains. I'd think casino strategies once discovered can be mitigated over time so all that hard work will payoff temporarily?

Tbh, I'm pretty sure poker is easier for the individual and investing strategies require the support of an institution willing to stake you 8 figure sums to do so.

The other part is, there is no hiring barrier to winning at poker. Some people are going to be antisocial enough (or come from a background that is disadvantaged) to be unable to gain the kind of access/support that would permit you to play for long term stakes. (i.e. Substantial improvements in spam/phishing detection is a multiyear effort and ultimately an ongoing battle. I'm pretty sure poker is fundamentally quicker than that.)

For many people who do this, money is not the end goal. It's just a way of keeping score.

There's another subset of people who do this who simply enjoy playing games (and poking holes in them). There's not much money in, e.g., writing bots in attempts to find optimal play for board games, but people do it anyways.

Money isn't the end goal. It's just the scoreboard. You do something like that because it's thrilling.

But yes, if money were your end goal, someone smart enough to pull that off could probably make more elsewhere.

There's a thrill in figuring out a system, and there's some satisfaction in optimizing and executing it, but for the most part, if you're doing it right, being a professional gambler is pretty boring.

Your ideas seem a lot harder than learning the odds of casino games.

"Both of these books are incredibly hard to find, and when they do come up for sale, often sell for thousands of dollars."

I'm sure someone has scanned it in PDF form somewhere..

I've been looking for a long time and have yet to find it.

Original copy should be available as a reference copy in the UNLV library. Was years ago.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com