Q. I was told I could no longer play at a casino where my wife and I have played a long time. They were nice about it, and told me I could play other games or "enjoy our other amenities," but that I was too tough for them at blackjack. Still, it made me mad. I only spread $10 to $50, and play about a break-even game. When we got home, I e-mailed marketing and told them they were not only losing my play, but my wife’s penny slot play, too. It’s her play that takes us to an upper tier on a club program, not mine. Does this make any sense?

A. This isn’t the first time I’ve heard of a casino shooting itself in the foot by losing the play of a slot-playing spouse by banning a counter. In my view, it’s counterproductive to eject a low-limit counter with a small spread like $10-$50. You’d think the operator would rather have that player going home and telling friends how he beat the casino out of 25 bucks rather than have others watch the process of having the player walked from the table.

Coupled with the effect of losing a slot player, it’s a head scratcher. You didn’t say how much your wife was wagering, but since you say you’re a break-even player, we know she was contributing more to the bottom line than you were taking away. Wagering one penny per line on 25-line games, for 25 cents a spin, a relaxed pace of 400 plays per hour would mean $100 an hour in wagers. With pennies, depending on individual casino and jurisdiction, paying 85 to 90 percent, evening a one-cent-per-line bettor loses $10 to $15 an hour.

Those who bet 2 cents per line multiply that to $20 to $30 an hour, and the potential is there for much more with big players who bet as much as $3 to $5 a spin on penny games. It doesn’t seem worthwhile for a casino to lose that business along with a break-even blackjack player, but what do I know?

If gaming chips are embedded with RFID chips, with different frequencies for different denominations, then surveillance should be able to detect and correct mistaken payoffs without delay. It also would become more difficult to counterfeit casino chips if the counterfeiter must also embed RFID chips at the proper frequency.

The RFID chips also enable the casino to get an exact count of every wager. For generations, comps have been awarded based on time of play and an estimate by floor personnel of average bet size. If a casino uses RFID chips coupled with software to tally all your wagers, it can award comps based on actual dollars risked instead of an estimate.

That in itself makes RFID technology tough on one kind of advantage player: the comp hustlers, the players who use the methods Max Rubin detailed in his book "Comp City" to make average bet size seem larger than it is. If you buy in for $500, make an opening bet of $50 while the pit supervisor watches, then drop down to $25 when he turns his back to go about other duties, you’re not going to get credit for an average bet of $50. You’re going to be credited with what you actually wagered.

RFID chips and card-reading shoes are not cheap, and most casinos are making do without them. And for those willing to spend the money, your executive host was not lying. There are uses for RFID chips other than spotting advantage players. That doesn’t mean zeroing in on advantage players isn’t a prime reason for their use.

I’ve seen similar promotions come up from time to time. I once played in a casino that had a "Black Jacks" promotion that paid 2-1 on either an Ace of spades paired with a Jack of spades, or an Ace of clubs paired with a Jack of clubs. That accounts for only two of our 64 possible two-card 21s per deck, so the bonus combos occurred only half as often as all-diamond blackjacks.