Steve, thank you so much for allowing us to interview you about your new book: Casino Game Protection - A Comprehensive Guide. We bring to you a worldwide audience of casino dealers and floor supervisors.

Thanks Scott. I appreciate your interest in the book, and I welcome the opportunity to participate in this interview.

When described by others, you seem to hold the titles of "casino expert" and "game protection specialist." Who is Steve Forte and what makes you uniquely qualified to be an expert in game protection?

I would say that Steve Forte is dedicated student of the game protection field and one who has spent the greater part of my life actively researching the topic from every conceivable angle. If I have any unique qualifications to offer, it might be that I have experienced the business from so many different perspectives ... most notable would include many years working in the business, many years beating the games as a high-stakes professional player, and many years traveling around the world as a consultant specializing in game protection.

It seems that the duties of a game supervisor are leaning more toward customer service and away from game protection. Any lack of game protection will certainly cause loss of revenue. By having the floor cultivate new players as priority #1, do you feel casinos will overcome the loss?

Before I answer your question, please allow me to make a few important points.

Many gamers see the industry changing in this way, with more focus on customer service, but I'm not sure that much has really changed in this regard. If you talk with any respected operator, taking care of the customer and cultivating new players has always been the number one priority. Even if you go back fifty years the customer was always king. Talk with the older players and they'll tell you about the unconditional service they received back then, and how the "Mob always knew how to treat the player."

Today there is clearly a quest to quantify every player's complimentary worth with rating systems and hi-tech accountability systems, so there is more of a visible or vocal industry position on customer service. Although our rating systems sometimes get in the way of rewarding the deserving player, and there will always be those clubs where the player has to blow $10,000 and then go through five bosses to get a line pass for the buffet, customer service continues to get all of the attention, especially when compared to issues dealing with game protection, and rightly so!

I'm reminded of the following debate between a number of executives. One states, "Given a choice of staffing the pit with customer service oriented people, or game protection experts, I would take the customer service people every time. At least I'll have some business, and the reasonable expectation of making enough money from the masses of weak players to overcome leakage, theft, and losses from cheaters and skilled players." On the surface it sounds like a compelling argument, but you obviously need customers before game protection ever becomes a factor, so it has never made any sense to me to make direct comparisons, or create this illusionary competition between the two practices.

As to the duties of the supervisor having less to do with game protection, it's undeniable. As the games get safer and more difficult to cheat and beat, game protection plays less of a role in terms of actually protecting the bankroll. Most conclude that as the incidence of scamming decreases, so should the importance of game protection. They see game protection as synonymous with catching cheaters and quickly point to the scarcity of scams as a platform to question the value of game protection, and ask, "If scams are so rare, why educate our staff about the methods of cheaters?"

You educate your staff about these methods because game protection encompasses so much more than catching cheaters. From a study of these people we can learn and see the extremes that some will venture to beat our games; we see the psychology that's used to manipulate our staff and controls; we see the impact and dangers of inside collusion; we see the reasoning behind certain procedures and countermeasures, which helps us better choose and implement the best options; we see the many similarities of cheaters to card counters and advantage players regarding their training, organization, hierarchy, and differences between the pro and amateur; we see what areas of the industry the cheaters perceive to be our most vulnerable; and we see the evolution of scamming to the extent that it may help us predict what to expect in the future. The list goes on and on.

Don't get hung up on the rareness of scamming, cheaters have always been statistical outliers. Sure the games are safer today, but they were almost as safe 20 years ago, relatively speaking! It's like comparing a 50,000 to 1 shot with a 55,000 to 1 shot, they're both long shots. Scarcity of scams has never been a reason to ignore them. Outside scams like 'hand mucking,' internal theft, and advantage strategies such as 'playing holecard' may be rare, but I just returned from an overseas trip where I testified in court over a multimillion dollar mucking scam in big-table baccarat; not long ago a young female dealer was found to have stolen $700,000 from the inside over a three year period; and it's still costing casinos serious money in settlements and legal fees due to their misunderstanding of what playing holecard' is all about, as recent cases indicate.

Even more importantly, there's another huge peripheral benefit to any property that educates their people in this field even in the modern casino environment. If I have learned anything at all from my work as a consultant, it's that there is a huge percentage of floor supervisors with a genuine desire to learn more. They are not content as administrators and hand shakers (not meant to undermine these skills) and some want to excel in their profession, not just exist. As a recent email expressed to me, some are frustrated every time they observe suspect play and wished that they knew more. So why not help them be more rounded supervisors with knowledge of all facets of the industry? When you educate the floor person in game protection, you build confidence, make them more aware, revitalize their interest in their day to day duties, and help them make better decisions with less doubt, sweating and paranoia (which only comes from the uninformed). What's wrong with that?

So, although it makes perfect sense to prioritize customer service, and I acknowledge the tighter, safer, more security minded environment, I believe that game protection should remain an integral part of our business, and game protection knowledge should be a worthy goal. You cannot get around the fact that the topics like cheating, skilled players, inside collusion and internal theft are all inextricably connected to this business ... always have and figure to be around for some time.

Finally, let me respond to the original question, for which the short answer is yes, casinos will overcome the loss. In fact, whether it be poor management or marketing, counterproductive procedures and controls, weak operational philosophies, or an indifference to the importance of game protection, they overcome everything. Some clubs win the money over and over again, and still end up on top. There are not too many things stronger, in terms of making money, than casino games, and it's easy for poor decisions to go unnoticed and completely absorbed by inevitable profit margins.

Dealing is the first line of defense. You write about this throughout the book, but on page 509 - 510 you discuss the lost art of dealing and the reasons. Can you highlight your thoughts here?

If I may, let me just provide some excerpts from that segment of the book. It's the consensus of many veteran gamers that the art of dealing has become a dying art. There was a time when the professional 'clerk' (top notch dealer) was respected; sought after; and was always guaranteed a job. Not anymore. Most clubs shy away from experienced help. It's a sad truth, but today, when it comes to the dealer, mediocrity is the norm and there are many reasons for this decline.

When the gaming business exploded throughout the country, the demand for dealers was huge, and inevitably, dealers were mass-produced creating a weak and inexperienced work force. Conditions worsened when inexperienced dealers were quickly promoted to the floor, as the demand for floor supervisors was huge, too. This series of events resulted in one 'soft spot' after another for the skilled cheater or player, as they often targeted the weaker help. Las Vegas may have had an advantage in this regard because, with its break-in houses, dealers had places to learn their craft before dealing in the better clubs with bigger limits. Some jurisdictions are not set up this way.

Once dealers haves been in the business for a few years, they reach a point where they think that they have mastered their trade, and as they say, "It can be tough to teach an old dog new tricks." Dealers are not subject to technical reviews once they advance past the break-in period, and just because a dealer has been dealing for ten years doesn't mean that he's immune from improvement. I've personally talked with many seasoned floor supervisors who have, at times, made a genuine effort to step in and critique a dealer's skills, only to have the dealer respond with "I've been doing this a long time," implying that he didn't need the help. More than one dealer has interpreted constructive criticism akin to harassment. And, it's well known that in some clubs, bosses are patently instructed to leave the dealers alone.

Incentive is another issue contributing to weaker help. If a blackjack dealer makes the same money whether he learns to deal roulette or not, where's the incentive? In many clubs, mediocrity is tolerated, and outside of self-pride and self-respect, there are no incentives for dealers to excel. The irony is that, today, the dealer's job is more secure than ever, and it's hard to get fired, due in large part to Human Resources. If you want your dealers to stand out, they must have a clear understanding of what is expected from them. The only way to accomplish these goals is with some form of an ongoing evaluation or review program. When the dealers are periodically reviewed for how they shuffle; how they present the deck(s) for the cut; how they pitch; how they protect the holecard; how they protect the top card; the basic goals of game pace; their understanding of all in-house procedures; their attitudes; and for their professionalism in regard to treating all kinds of players in all kinds of situations, competence levels can only improve. Significantly!

Some in the field say Steve Forte's approach sows fear and panic. After digesting the information in the book, will staff see ghosts? Will the book create paranoia?

First, there is no such thing as the "Steve Forte approach," nor was any such craziness outlined in the book. I think it's important to understand what the book is, and what the book is not. The book was written with the complete understanding that everyone prioritizes game protection differently, and never written to make a statement or create controversy. Nor was the book written as a response to any contemporary scam or winning strategy. I made no assumptions regarding the reader's workplace (premier casino, reservation, cruise ship, etc.), the level of security in his workplace, or the importance of game protection in his workplace. The book's purpose, plain and simple, was to chronicle the many different areas of game protection and overview the topic with some scope, accuracy, objectivity and historical perspective.

Second, numerous books and videos have been written that expose cheating, card counting and advantage play, so you can add my book to the group, but there's no reason to single it out.

Third, for any dealer, boss, or surveillance person with a genuine interest in game protection, you can bet that if they buy my book, it's not the first they own that deals with the subject. Dedicated gamers have a way of finding quality information in an effort to educate themselves.

Fourth, if you have issue with the fear and/or panic factor perceived to be caused by exposing staff to this kind of information, you can't just knock books and videos, you'll have to knock most casinos around the world, too! Almost all of them have conducted some form of game protection training, either in-house or with the help of outside consultants, and they continue to do so. There is only one reason for this. There is value to exposing staff and surveillance to such information. But the 'fear and panic' contention is a short sighted view for many other reasons. When was it concluded that the exposure to the methods of cheaters, card counters and advantage players instills fear. Perhaps this information instills confidence, fulfillment and awareness. Perhaps it educates the gamer making him/her less afraid of what they don't know.

The only fear ever expressed to me from readers of the book occurred in the first few minutes they browsed through their copy. They were intimidated by the size and scope of the research. But once they started to digest the material, they see the book as a genuine effort to present the research in an informal, yet constructive, comprehensive format. They were smart enough to know the difference between what was relevant to their job duties and responsibilities, and what was provided as historical perspective. They appreciated the effort to make the research available and most believe that Casino Game Protection - A Comprehensive Guide fills a void in the industry literature. We have wonderful books on management, dealing the games, surveillance, casino math, customer service, accounting, and marketing, but none, until now, has ever been devoted to casino game protection.

Nothing in the book was presented to instill fear, and nothing in the book was presented to instill paranoia. Just the opposite is true, and I went to great lengths to make this point, not once, but many times.

Why would someone have to write a 600-page, $200 book to impart the nutshell game protection message of ... "Pay attention to your duties, follow procedures and encourage those under you to do likewise - OR ELSE?"

Actually, this book was edited down from almost 1000 pages, and I could have written much,much more with almost every chapter expanded significantly, but that's another story. As to the core message in this statement/question, it suggests that game protection is all about paying attention, following procedures, and getting everyone on the same page. Unfortunately, if it were that easy, there would never be any cheaters, card counters or advantage players.

You can pay attention all you want, if you don't know what you're looking for, your efforts mean little. 

If you believe that game protection is all about following procedures, I'm afraid you have missed the true purpose and value of procedures, and that is of control, uniformity, openness, and predictability. Don't get me wrong, every effective procedure will help the pit run more smoothly and efficiently, but even the best procedures do little to stop the best cheaters and players. In fact, the very best scams and ploys have circumvented our procedures for decades.

Paying attention doesn't protect the games, following procedures doesn't protect the games, and running the pit with an iron fist doesn't protect the games. It's the combined, all-around knowledge of your manager, pit, floor and box supervisors, and the surveillance staff that protects the games.

Finally, as to the $200 price tag, my apologies ... I wish I could have kept the retail price more reasonable for many. I understand that $200 is a lot to expect from anyone working for a living. Unfortunately, the project was expensive, and although there is a back story and motive for writing the book, and it has nothing to do with money, my hope was that there would be enough game protection enthusiasts out there who would consider making the $200 investment, and that over time, the project would pay for itself. Had I known how many copies would sell in the first 24 hours (enough to pay for all costs), I would have considered a change in pricing. But with almost half the inventory sold in the first few weeks, it's too late to make changes now since so many have already paid the asking price.

How many crossroaders do you really think are out there and what kind of damage do you think they do? What is the likelihood of one being on our game?

The 'crossroader' is a dying breed of cheater who once specialized in many of the older scams, notoriously known for being gutsy, bold and direct. For these reasons their methods don't fare well in today's environment. So the likelihood of one being on your game is very small, as is the damage you can expect from these types of cheaters. This said, we can still learn a lot from their methods and thinking, as many of the modern scams are just variants on moves and scams that have existed for decades. This is especially true in regard to the psychological aspects of how these cheaters once operated. The modern cheater,advantageplayer and card counter all use similar ploys to some degree.

How often are gaffed dice and marked cards being discovered on a game?

It's no secret that scams involving gaffed dice are exceedingly rare; I can only document five cases over an approximately thirty year period. I can, however, document numerous scams where the gaffed dice were not discovered, although I'm referring to scams that occurred many years back. Nonetheless, just because certain scams aren't 'discovered,' doesn't make them extinct. 

Marked cards are an entirely different animal, especially when we talk about the resurgence of hand-held games where techniques such as 'playing the bend' are not as uncommon as many believe. 

But more importantly, with all questions along these lines there is an inference to a much broader question. How important is it for gamers to have knowledge about gaffed dice and marked cards?

Let me answer this question with a number of questions. Where is the downside with expecting our supervisors to have a little knowledge about the tools of our trade: dice and cards? For example, why shouldn't all dice supervisors and box persons have a basic working knowledge of gaffed dice? How many have ever seen 'light percentage weight' on a polished, flush spot casino cube? How many have ever seen what a light bevel looks like? How many recognize just how easy it is to duplicate serial numbers, or introduce gaffed dice where no duplication of the serial number or logo is necessary? How many have a handle on what is deemed to be an acceptable variance in the manufacturing process, and what is not?

I submit to you that only a small percentage of dice supervisors and box persons can accurately and confidently respond to many of the most elementary questions about the piece of equipment at the heart of their profession and at the core of every decision? The same goes for marked cards! Knowledge in these particular areas is not important because of any pressing threat, it's important because it simply makes good common sense, it makes good business sense.

Is there any way a shooter, that hits the alligator with both dice, can throw a controlled shot? Are all these people writing books and conducting seminars just ripping people off?

I don't believe it's possible to hit the back wall with both dice and control them to the extent of generating a winning edge. This a perfect example of an alleged skill, like many we often hear about, where it's easy to quickly voice an opinion for, or against, without qualification. But a scientific opinion requires much more. In the book I document a test consisting of 12,000 rolls. Actually, I dropped two dice from 10" above the table, same configuration, straight down, and with no obstacles. The results did not indicate a statistically significant presence of control. Even the slightest bounce appears to be an adequate randomizer.

An interesting development in this area is a new book by Stanford Wong, but since I haven't looked at the book yet, I don't know if his work looks at hitting the back wall with both dice' most dice setters are looking to throw the dice short of the back wall). Even with Stanford Wong stepping into the controversy, and considering his impeccable reputation and his remarkable body of work, I'm not ready to change my mind. I have trouble seeing past the results of my own test, which is why I state in my book "Until I see evidence to the contrary, I remain a non believer."

How proficient do you think a floor supervisor should be at counting cards and in your opinion which system should we use? Do you agree that it's the floor's responsibility to count cards, or is this more of the function of surveillance?

I believe that all floor people watching 21 games should be well versed in the science of counting cards. After all, day to day, they'll be exposed to more suspect card counters than all other cheaters and advantage players combined. The best and most practical card counting system for the floor supervisor is the Hi-Low, where the 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 are counted as (+1); 7,8, and 9 are neutral (0); and the 10, J, Q, K and Ace are counted as (-1).

To be truly proficient, however, requires a deeper understanding of the game that goes way past the basic fundamentals of basic strategy, counting cards, playing deviations, etc. But when this proficiency is acquired, the floor person will feel less of a burden participating in the evaluation process, despite being responsible for watching many games and being overloaded with administrative duties.

Here are a few examples of proficiency past the 'fundamentals' stage. Every floor person should know what actually constitutes a beatable game in their property. This is a function of bet size, bet spread, and game conditions (cut card placement, speed of game, number of players, etc). When the bet size, bet spread, and conditions don't meet this criteria, the player can safely be ignored, which is likely to be most suspect players. Remember, the industry is loaded with 'card watchers' and 'imitators,' so it's important to have a plan for weeding out all of the non-threats quickly, to have the time to occasionally focus on a real player.

Another example pertains to working with win rates in dollars. If I ask how you feel about a card counter playing with a 1.0% advantage, no club wants their business. But what if I tell you that the same player only has a theoretical win rate of about $2 an hour, now how do you feel? Since the player never attains the theoretical win rates published in the books, the player poses no threat. It's amazing how much time we spend watching red and green check players on games where there is no theoretical win for the player.

One last example, although this is more a decision made by management, the floor supervisor should understand the problems associated with evaluating the suspect counter too quickly. We routinely overestimate the earning power of these players and rarely appreciate the difficulties and obstacles they face. We also failed to see how much it costs when we back off the wrong player (one with no chance to win long run!). The financial ramifications, along with many other concepts are discussed in the book. 

As to who should be responsible for running down card counters, I'd expect the best results when both departments contribute to the evaluation process. One advantage from the floor is that it can provide a much more intimate evaluation (watch the eyes, see emotion, hear comments, etc.) while the sky has its obvious advantages: it never blinks, it can review; it's a dedicated observer, and it may be utilizing sophisticated evaluation software.

One disadvantage from the floor is the difficulty of supervising many games while attending to many administrative duties. But there are also disadvantages to watching from the sky. For example, against a real tough player who will throw you one curve ball after another, surveillance may see an intentionally bad play and not realize that it was a reactionary play to a boss. Surveillance sees the play, not the boss, and may put too much emphasis on what appears to the' incorrect play.' Even in clubs where the responsibility lies heavily with surveillance, for real time evaluations, surveillance isn't always there to watch every suspect card counter, as they have plenty of other responsibilities, too. In these situations, knowledgeable floor supervisors are invaluable.

When decisions were made to market your book, why do so many websites that cater primarily to the gambler offer it for sale? Who exactly is the intended market?

The best place for any gamer to buy quality casino books, magazines, videos and software has always been those retail outlets and websites catering primarily to the gambler. The Gambler's Book Shop and the Gambler General Store, two Las Vegas landmarks, both carry more titles for players than for the industry, but they also offer the best selection of products for gamers, too! Even respected retailers like Pi Yee Press and RGE, who focus primarily on selling to the player, still derive a ton of business from the industry.

If you could peek at the library of the most knowledgeable casino managers and surveillance directors in the world, I'll bet you that you find more books specifically written for the player than those specifically written for the gaming business. The best books written for the player, have also proved to be our best source of knowledge, and the sharpest gamers know it! 

In regard to the intended market for Casino Game Protection - A Comprehensive Guide, I believe the market is any gamer with a desire to explore the casino game protection topic.

Surveillance is a secondary internal control that encourages compliance with primary internal controls and procedures. Surveillance exists to encourage employee's to comply NOT to catch cheats. A floor employee's duty is to comply with the law, internal controls and procedures, NOT catch cheats. If a casino/jurisdiction could devise a set of laws, internal controls and procedures, surely aren't they expert enough to enforce those laws and procedures without outside help?

For the record, the first cat walks and surveillance rooms were conceived specifically for the purpose of catching cheaters and internal theft; their invention had nothing to do with a means for encouraging employees to comply with procedures and controls. I recognize that things have changed significantly over time, but I'm still puzzled by the rigid, inclusiveness of these statements leading to the question. They seem to suggest that the floor and surveillance are only responsible for following the rules. Who then is responsible for evaluating suspect play?

As to the point of this question, I'm not sure. As to my answer to this question: Sure casinos are expert enough to enforce their own laws and procedures without outside help! Where has it ever been suggested otherwise?

The effective pit boss not only has the ability to oversee staff, but also has the ability to watch players switch from one table to the next and has a better overall perspective than floor supervisors who may be monitoring five or six games. Recently, many large high volume casinos have eliminated the pit manager position and box in dice. This has many of us perplexed. Was this action in the best interest of giving quality customer service, or are yet more services denied to the customers? And how on earth can game protection fit into such decisions?

These are interesting decisions--to say the least--that have many traditionalists scratching their heads. As we all know, it's clearly a decision motivated by money (payroll, insurance and benefits). I don't see how these decisions can be in the best interest of customer service. With less employees around to accommodate the customer, and to help run smoother more efficient games, you would expect customer service to falter at some level. 

As for how game protection fits into such decisions, it obviously wasn't a factor. Someone is betting that the money saved from eliminating these positions will overcome any leakage attributed to the reduced supervision. And the irony is, due to the rareness of scams and the fact that when they do occur, most are for 'short money,' they're probably right. It will be interesting to see what happens when the first major scam surfaces that targets this new format, and it will. It's just a question of time.

Are you ready to answer some questions from the dealers and floor supervisors?

I will do the best I can.

CLICK HERE