My impression from prior coverage was that the rotation occurred as the cards were revealed during play, so that on each next shoe, more and more (potentially all ) of the intended cards were reversed.
Usually you'll start play by breaking the seal on new decks which will be fanned out to check them: it's effective and efficient to get the dealer to turn a few sequences of cards here while they're still in the right order.
Otherwise, you have a lot more work to convince the dealer to rotate the cards one-by-one: "rotate that 9 of clubs, not the other 9 of clubs" is way more suspicious.
Having said that, it is a bit surprising that "dealer collusion" spidey-senses were not tingling. This is the first thing that casinos should watch out for. Maybe they realised something was going on but couldn't figure out what, or how it would be effective, in time.
Whereas, making requests during the game, that seem a bit erratic (or triggered by in-round results, like "let's flip that one so it doesn't burn me again!"), seem like they might escape scrutiny longer.
FWIW I think almost anyone could gain an exploitable edge by recognizing the direction in which specific cards are returned into the deck if they took it seriously and practiced... it just sounds like a lot of work, and a way smaller edge. I personally think it's more impressive that he socially engineered the dealer.
It's kind of like "good artists copy, great artists steal" only for statistical edges. maybe "good gamblers work hard for an edge, great gamblers have an edge before they sit down"
"it just sounds like a lot of work, and a way smaller edge." If you read Ben Meizrich's Bringing Down the House, you wouldn't believe the degree to which these guys work to get an advantage over the house. There's a part in the book where he talks about how members of the MIT Black Jack Team so thoroughly practiced cutting a deck that they were able to cut stack of decks exactly 52 cards from the bottom. A seemingly improbable feat to do regularly but one that they perfected to the point that it became an integral part of their strategy.
If you haven't read Ed Thorpe's The Mathematics of Gambling I think you'd love it. It's about finding these edges regardless of the game. Thorpe is fascinating too -- he invented one of the early blackjack counting systems, and figured out how to beat the game of roulette (as crazy as that sounds). He was also one of the first stat arb guys, figuring out how to price warrants and making a killing for the UC Irvine retirement fund.
Also, if you haven't heard of the Kelly criterion, I think it'll basically blow your mind. I think it's the least appreciated house edge there is, and a very cool piece of math.
"It's with Shannon that Thorp would revisit a question he had considered years earlier: whether he could apply mathematics to beat the game of roulette as he had done with blackjack. Thorp and Shannon would develop a friendship and, in the process of answering that question, build what is widely regarded to be the first wearable computer."
http://www.engadget.com/2013/09/18/edward-thorp-father-of-we...
Additionally, Phil Ivey is an astonishingly good poker player (20M+ club, 8 braclets), but is known more as a degen on other games.