I call BS on Dirty Poker
 

I happened to be in a bookstore last week with a little time to kill, so I picked up Richard Marcus' book Dirty Poker. My impression from reviews I've read here was that it may be of some passing interest to me, but it wasn't worth buying.

I got through the first 90 pages pretty quickly (1/3 of the book), and I concur with the two main points I've read in this forum - he's not a very good writer, but it is a fast read.

However, I am going to have to question the veracity of the book after reading the section on Marking Cards. In this section, Marcus describes how he and his cohorts would mark big cards with a substance which was odorless, invisible to the naked eye (they wore special contact lenses), and did not affect the texture of the cards. This quote is from page 69, near the bottom of the page for those following along at home.

"Similar to the chip-placements on the cards used in the collusion scam, we marked the aces on the left of the card slightly above center, the kings on the right of the card slightly above center, the queens on the left of the card slightly below center and the jacks on the right of the card slightly below center."

Does anyone see a problem with that method of marking cards? I felt it was so interesting that I wrote it down to show my fiancee later. She and I arrived at the same conclusion:

Cards are symmetrical. Along two axes.

Let's say Marcus and I are sitting at a table and he marks an ace "on the left of the card slightly above center," as per his strategy. I am later dealt that card and Marcus observes this fact. However, I then proceed to TURN THE CARD UPSIDE DOWN. The marking he made is now on the RIGHT of the card, slightly BELOW center, in other words, how he expects the jacks he marked to look. Imagine his confusion in playing against me. Perhaps the lesson to be learned here is that if you fear you are up against a card marked, you should constantly be turning your cards upside down.

So I guess I'm led to a few possibly conclusions:
1) The whole book is BS.
2) Marcus is incompetent as a card marker and / or cheater.
3) Marcus is an extremely bad writer and has poorly described his strategy for marking cards. For example, he could mark the aces high and left, but the jacks right of center - these would actually look different, but at some point the lack of space on the card back would present a problem. Furthermore, the markings would sometimes be obsured by people protecting their cards with a chip, their hands, or another object.
4) Marcus does not want to divulge his secrets (i.e. his real strategy for marking cards). For example, he could actually put a circle on the aces, a polka dot pattern on the kings, and the anarchy symbol on the queens.

Regardless which of the above conclusions is correct, it calls the value of the book into question. If Marcus won't actually reveal his secrets, the book has no value. If he reveals his secrets poorly, it's as if he has not revealed them at all.

Re: I call BS on Dirty Poker
 

I have not read the book, but your logic seems right on about the marking placement. The whole contact lense thing is very interesting. Did the book mention if they marking the cards with the stuff called "the juice"???

Im going to check it out next time im at Borders/Barnes.

Re: I call BS on Dirty Poker
 

[ QUOTE ]
Did the book mention if they marking the cards with the stuff called "the juice"???

[/ QUOTE ]

I know what people mark cards with. I’m not going to say here, & I don’t think anyone else should either. If people already know, I can’t do anything about that... but I don’t think it’s wise to educate 56269 registered users, some of witch don’t know.

Slightly OT... I saw a show on history channel once about how people cheated at poker in the 1800's. It was quite interesting. “Wild West Tech” was the name, I think.

Re: I call BS on Dirty Poker
 

ummm, the cards may be symmetrical, but most casino card rooms have print on the back of their cards. This is how you would tell which side the marks were on.

Re: I call BS on Dirty Poker
 

Small point: the means described in the excerpt would render the aces indistinguishable from jacks, and kings indistinguishable from queens. That does seem stupid, and makes you wonder why they'd bother marking Qs and Js in the first place. The reason not all four look alike is because you never reflect a card image (top-to-bottom or left-to-right) in the real world. You could take a photo of a card and reverse the image, but you wouldn't just swap the card. You could certainly turn it left to right.

I do wonder, though, if the author got caught simplifying things in a sloppy way. Maybe he meant:

-------
A K
Q J
J Q
K A
------

wherein you divide each HALF card into four corners. That would make more sense -- but that doesn't appear to be what he wrote, so who knows? Maybe your hypothesis is right and he's full of [censored].

Re: schwerd2: casino card backs, as well as standard poker decks such as Kem, Copag, or something cheap like Bicycle or Aviator, are always symmetrical. Elegant bridge decks often aren't, although I'd have to guess that bridge tournaments use symmetrical backs. Otherwise a cheater could turn the deck facing one way, turn all the aces upside down, and easily tell who had aces.

Interestingly, at a home game I saw a supposedly high-quality Kem (I think) deck that had some poker site's only once, hence asymmetrically. I think it was PokerStars, and must have been some freebie signup bonus. I don't think the host was cheating, but I was stunned that PS (?) wouldn't demand the same quality standards as a $3 deck of Bicycle. Maybe they've spent too much time in the online world. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: I call BS on Dirty Poker
 

Is it possible the markings themselves were asymmetrical? That way if your mark looks like a P in the upper left corner it's an A, but if it looks like a P in the bottom right corner, it's really an upside down K with a d on it, for example.

Re: I call BS on Dirty Poker
 

After Mike mentioned it was top secret, I had to look up what Juice was...lol. I found it sold in small kits, usually for magicians, but I guess cheaters can use it too. Here is a little of the ad for it:

What is the juice? The JUICE! is a special liquid. When it is touched to the back of a deck of cards, it leaves invisible markings. What good are invisible marks? Though an audience can not see these markings - even under bright lighting and close inspection - they will stand out to you as if they were neon signs! No special glasses or other device is needed. You will be able to easily identify any card from its back - even across the room!


Anyway, if anyone else was curious, there you go. The real cheaters either already know about it or will get their hands on it anyway. The rest of us may as well have a clue what is out there as well.

Re: I call BS on Dirty Poker
 

[ QUOTE ]
After Mike mentioned it was top secret...

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]