The links provided by others to the Wikipedia article were helpful to me in responding. The Wikipedia article lists only two black books related to gambling -- the Griffin book (I had forgotten the name of the "detective" agency that maintained the book) and one kept by the gaming commission. The latter is for those with criminal records or ties that are prohibited from involvement in the industry under NV law, but the former, the Griffin book, indeed includes card counters. That was the one I was talking about.
I'm not sure "cheats" (those caught doing something illegal against a casino) go into the gaming commission black book, but it certainly seems likely that these would qualify as individuals that the state does not want employed in the casino industry - and it's interesting that you report a relative being in that book! While I was aware of the NV law barring certain criminals or those with certain criminal ties from the gambling industry, this was the first time I learned that the gaming commission kept a list of them. Makes sense, of course, or how else can they enforce that law.
Also, to show how old my info is, I didn't know that Griffin had filed for bankruptcy in response to a lawsuit. Are they back in operation, either as Griffin or under another name?
I know the last time that I was barred from a casino for counting cards, I was sufficiently tired of it happening that I was ready to quit blackjack -- so I asked the pit boss that barred me some questions, rather than my usual response of acting innocent (I always wanted the pit boss that barred me to go home wondering if maybe they'd barred a non-counter by mistake). I asked what made them suspicious (no response) and whether I'd be able to play at "sister" properties (this was Treasure Island, and Mirage still had good games at the time) -- and the latter question got the answer "they'll know". At least within that particular group of properties, they shared information (no surprise) about card counters. I always assume that, at that point, I was probably in the Griffin book.
As I recall, the Griffin book did not distinguish why you were in it, so being in the book meant you were an advantage player or a cheat, with no distinction -- which was what was offensive to me.
Today's technology really would make it easy for all casinos to participate in sharing such information, which would be in their mutual interests. Also, I've heard stories, and have no reason not to believe them, that current technology no longer requires the "old way" of identifying card counters -- i.e., first of all, someone gets suspicious (a dealer or a pit boss, perhaps, and for a variety of reasons that can generate suspicion), then someone observes the play through the "eye in the sky" and counts cards, watches the player's betting and playing, and makes a judgment as to whether they are sufficiently likely to be a counter that they should be barred. In the old days, if it looked like you were being watched too closely by a pit boss, you just left, especially if you saw a couple of them glancing toward you, talking to each other, and/or calling someone (presumably upstairs) on the phone -- you'd leave before they could prospectively observe your play and confirm their suspicions.
Today's technology (and I've heard this is done) could feed info from the "eye in the sky" directly into a computer, which could track every card and every bet and every bet variation and every playing decision, and determine, with a pre-assigned level of certainty, the statistical likelihood that the player is counting cards, and then alert management for the appropriate intervention. The only question is whether it's worthwhile to do this for every single player, or only select players, e.g. those "suspected" (back to the pit boss) or those playing higher stakes. If the "pre-assigned level of certainty" is high enough, they could be sure that when they bar someone from play, there is an acceptably small chance that the bets / plays / etc. matched those of a card counter by chance alone.
Clearly the same technology could theoretically be used to track every playing decision made by a video poker player and assign a level of expertise to them, giving the casino reliable data on which to base their decisions to comp or not, and how much, and if it's their inclination, to bar a player from playing video poker at their casino. I don't know that central computers are indeed collecting hand-by-hand playing decisions at video poker machines, but it could easily be done.
Finally, facial recognition software could foil any plans, by either a blackjack or a video poker player, to use an alternate I.D. and/or disguise to advantage-play either game (or any other game that comes along) after being barred. Technology has definitely given the casinos the upper hand over advantage players, and while I am only a recreational player who accepts as little disadvantage as I can, but will still play with a disadvantage sometimes, the "real" advantage players will not be around much longer, I expect, except to exploit the occasional and progressively less common mistake by a casino in offering a machine or a promotion that can be beaten.
--BG
==================
2e. Re: "Greatest Gambler of All Time" Busted
>both cheats and card counters can end up in the black book.
You might be confusing the Black Book with other books by detective
agencies, such as the Griffin book. I don't believe any card counter
is in the Black Book. People in the Black Book are thereby barred
from every casino in Nevada. One of them, a relative of an
acquaintance of mine, was a line producer for "The Cotton Club."
