Thread Rating:
wroberson
- Ocean Downs is about 10 minutes outside of Ocean City. When you start to see the billboards, you'll know you're going the right way. If you're expecting table games or a Vegas/Atlantic City style experience - this is not the place for you. EVERYTHING here is electronic, from roulette, blackjack, craps, and slots. There's also racetracks as well.
- Casinos like the CSM because they make the game move quicker. The more times a game with a house edge is dealt, in theory, the more profitable it will be. One of the problems blackjack players have with the CSM is the speed. There’s never a break in play since the cards are continuously shuffled.
- Continuous Shuffling Machine is the hardest obstacle for a player to crush in blackjack. Some casinos do not use it while some do. Card counting seems useless with CSM as the cards are continuously being shuffled. The last event has absolutely zero influence on the upcoming event.
On the main floor 8 decks 2 colours used in shufflemaster MD3. 6 deck in the One2Six continuous shuffler. 6 decks hand shuffled in the high limit room but, even those new cards arrive at those tables in the same pre sh. ” This device is, indeed, the perfect instrument to thwart any players who are skilled in a counting system that can be used at a blackjack table. The advantages for a casino of using a Continuous Shuffle Machine are at least three: 1. It eliminates card counting; 2.
I have made my last trip to Winstar Casino in Thackerville in Oklahoma. I have played blackjack for 30 years all over the country, but never at the Indian Casinos. I have won and lost, and admit to being somewhat of a sore loser. I have come to the conclusion you simply cannot win there. When I sit at a table, eventually everybody ends up disgusted from losing over and over and leave. It seems like know one wins. I wander if there are any former pit bosses from Vegas that work there and through their years of experience can see that something is just not right. It is uncanny how many blackjacks, aces up in a row that the dealers get. They crack me up when they put on what seems to be an act that they are so suprised by all their blackjacks, standing 20's, and hitting and not busting. I wish I had kept statistics on the percentage of hands I win. What I am sure of is that I can play 75-150 hands and maybe win three hands in a row during that stretch of playing. I can play 50 hands and never see a two-card 20 until the dealer has the samething. It does not matter if I am playing at a table with six decks or tables where they re-shuffle once they get through about two decks.
I cannnot go there and even play a leisurely game at the $5.00 minimum table. We just seem to lose and lose and lose. I want to repeat that I am a very experienced player, aware of bad streaks and the possibility of losing 10,15 or more hands in a row. But this is rediculous. I wrote the gaming commission, but I am already aware of the setup in Oklahoma and know it will fall upon deaf ears.
Could the machines be set up where once 'card-rich' hands that lean towards the house began to be shuffled into the machines in away that really increase the houses chance of winning. I play almost 99% by the mathmatics of the game.
i truly believe that one day it will be proven that somehow those shuffling machines are rigged.
Not one more .50 cent ante from me. I am done.
I cannnot go there and even play a leisurely game at the $5.00 minimum table. We just seem to lose and lose and lose. I want to repeat that I am a very experienced player, aware of bad streaks and the possibility of losing 10,15 or more hands in a row. But this is rediculous. I wrote the gaming commission, but I am already aware of the setup in Oklahoma and know it will fall upon deaf ears.
Could the machines be set up where once 'card-rich' hands that lean towards the house began to be shuffled into the machines in away that really increase the houses chance of winning. I play almost 99% by the mathmatics of the game.
i truly believe that one day it will be proven that somehow those shuffling machines are rigged.
Not one more .50 cent ante from me. I am done.
The machines can be programmed for different games. That's enough to keep me away. Why risk it'
Buffering..
Tanko
The notion that for a blackjack game to be rigged by the order of the cards is not as ridiculous as someone might think. And I'll explain why:
If you notice, the casinos that are the hardest to beat are the ones that makes sure the tables are full all the time, even if they have to close as many tables as possible to make that happen they will. The theory in this is that the more people playing then more hands are in play for the house which means the more money. But with an auto shuffler, this would make sure that if cards of similar values (highs and lows) are grouped tighter together, then they would produce more stiff hands across the table. Remember, it doesn't matter if the dealer gets a bad hand as long as the players get them also, it's still in his advantage. with a full table it is easier to create bad hands by clumping more cards together, and I'm not talking just highs and lows, add the neutrals in the mix. And you think well, that means I have an idea of what card I might get? No, you don't, that's the beauty of it.
So lets see what happens if a new shoe comes out, is cut and then 5 of the six people get up and leave only one to play. Again it doesn't matter, because you're at no advantage to the dealer with a pretty even count all the way through.
My solution is for everyone to just refuse to play anything but a hand shuffled shoe. Even if it means going elsewhere to play. That way, we all know what we are presented with.
Those are just a few excerpts from the most informative post that I have ever read.
It very much describes my recent stiff hand marathon experience at two AZ casinos.
In both casinos the cards were only auto shuffled.
Never again.
djatc
I don't think dealers properly shuffle the cards, especially in poker games
Game protection seems to be weak for live poker. You can see many cards being flashed before a shuffle and during the game. Could be huge if you know a Queen is on the bottom of the deck.
'Man Babes' #AxelFabulous
KB1
Of Course,didn'tyou watch Ocean's 13?
Hunterhill
'Those are just a few excerpts from the most informative post that I have ever read. '
If thats the most informative post you have ever read,you really need to read more.
That post is filled with voodoo nonsense. Even if what lacasinoman said were true,there would be so many ways to overcome it.
Also as Ibeatyouraces said the machine does not know how you will play your hand. Just as an example you are dealt a pair of fours,are you going to split them or hit
them or double down? The machine can`t know.
If thats the most informative post you have ever read,you really need to read more.
That post is filled with voodoo nonsense. Even if what lacasinoman said were true,there would be so many ways to overcome it.
Also as Ibeatyouraces said the machine does not know how you will play your hand. Just as an example you are dealt a pair of fours,are you going to split them or hit
them or double down? The machine can`t know.
AcesAndEights
I'm sure most of you guys know this but the shuffle machines have been 'tracked' successfully (even thought he algorythms have since been fixed) AND shuffling machines can be counted.
It is not a very high +EV game. There are two large advantages though...
1) Nobody will question you if you spread 20 units or larger as 'it is a shuffle machine, nobody can beat it'
2) The technique is not very well proven but it is incredibly easy.
I don't think you could make a living from it but you could enjoy a few hands and spread your bets without worrying about heat?
I'm not sure if this is reallyw aht this thread is about, I just thought I would give my penny's worth :)
It is not a very high +EV game. There are two large advantages though...
1) Nobody will question you if you spread 20 units or larger as 'it is a shuffle machine, nobody can beat it'
2) The technique is not very well proven but it is incredibly easy.
I don't think you could make a living from it but you could enjoy a few hands and spread your bets without worrying about heat?
I'm not sure if this is reallyw aht this thread is about, I just thought I would give my penny's worth :)
You are confusing CSM with ASM.
CSM: Continuous Shuffling Machine. Continuously shuffles the cards as they are played, yielding a game that is impossible (or highly unprofitable) to count, since it's effectively a game with half a deck or so penetration (depending on how long the dealer lets the discards pile up).
ASM: Automatic Shuffling Machine. Automates the process of shuffling a full 6-deck shoe (or 4-deck, or 2-deck, or whatever). Resultant shuffled cards are placed into the shoe and dealt like normal, to a preset cut card. Just as countable as a traditional hand-shuffled game, but not shuffle-trackable for the 'advanced' APs.
Most of this thread is about ASMs and the possibility that they are 'stacking' the deck in favor of the house via any number of nefarious, and yet unproven schemes.
'So drink gamble eat f***, because one day you will be dust.' -ontariodealer
beachbumbabs
Administrator
Administrator
I worked at shufflemaster for several years. The shufflers are not nor can they be rigged. I had all of the internal passwords to set up the software, firmware, etc. and there is nothing there that can be altered to gain advantage either way. They are exactly as u see them.
I haven't run all the way back through the thread, but it's one that has interested me before, and I thought this was worth bringing forward. It was posted more than 2 years ago.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
BizzyB
I haven't run all the way back through the thread, but it's one that has interested me before, and I thought this was worth bringing forward. It was posted more than 2 years ago.
No. It's a paranoid myth that causes casinos to have to offer shoe games to customers who do not trust machines. So casinos can't get rid of the counters because these paranoid people draw conclusions with no reason, yet casinos will not educate the public cuz they don't want a bunch of professors at the gambling table. Machines are sometimes preceived as rigged because there is no manual shuffling; therefore, people lose X dollars in less time at a machine than at a shoe game.
beachbumbabs
Administrator
Administrator
No. It's a paranoid myth that causes casinos to have to offer shoe games to customers who do not trust machines. So casinos can't get rid of the counters because these paranoid people draw conclusions with no reason, yet casinos will not educate the public cuz they don't want a bunch of professors at the gambling table. Machines are sometimes preceived as rigged because there is no manual shuffling; therefore, people lose X dollars in less time at a machine than at a shoe game.
I'm not sure that you and I are talking about the same thing. In reference to whether the SHFL machines sort hands to benefit the house (the OP), and only on that question, someone with a fair amount of knowledge weighed in. I, perhaps in error, did not read the entire thread before bringing this information forward, which is why I made the comment I did. No other reference to where it has gone in the present is intended.
Now having read the entire thread, I think it is pertinent to the discussion still, but you appear to be addressing a different point of that same discussion.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
Tomspur
You are confusing CSM with ASM.
CSM: Continuous Shuffling Machine. Continuously shuffles the cards as they are played, yielding a game that is impossible (or highly unprofitable) to count, since it's effectively a game with half a deck or so penetration (depending on how long the dealer lets the discards pile up).
ASM: Automatic Shuffling Machine. Automates the process of shuffling a full 6-deck shoe (or 4-deck, or 2-deck, or whatever). Resultant shuffled cards are placed into the shoe and dealt like normal, to a preset cut card. Just as countable as a traditional hand-shuffled game, but not shuffle-trackable for the 'advanced' APs.
Most of this thread is about ASMs and the possibility that they are 'stacking' the deck in favor of the house via any number of nefarious, and yet unproven schemes.
CSM: Continuous Shuffling Machine. Continuously shuffles the cards as they are played, yielding a game that is impossible (or highly unprofitable) to count, since it's effectively a game with half a deck or so penetration (depending on how long the dealer lets the discards pile up).
ASM: Automatic Shuffling Machine. Automates the process of shuffling a full 6-deck shoe (or 4-deck, or 2-deck, or whatever). Resultant shuffled cards are placed into the shoe and dealt like normal, to a preset cut card. Just as countable as a traditional hand-shuffled game, but not shuffle-trackable for the 'advanced' APs.
Most of this thread is about ASMs and the possibility that they are 'stacking' the deck in favor of the house via any number of nefarious, and yet unproven schemes.
I am most certainly not cunfusing the two, in fact I know both very, very well.
There was a case a few years back in Macau where a gentleman of South African decent (I believe he was a musician) managed to track how the cards would come out in a CSM (Continuous shuffling machine) by listening to the machines internal workings. He apparetnly practiced at home (he had one) for a while and managed to find out how the sequencing of cards went with that particular brand of CSM. He figured out that, due to a defect with the algorythms of the shuffle machine, the same two cards always preceeded the dealing of an ACE. He sat in first base and when he knew the first card dealt would be an ACE he would increase his bet. Obviously this gives him a substantial advantage over the game.
He was caught but he didn't cheat, he was simply a skilled AP.
SHFL has in the interim recalled those shufflers and fixed the faulty algorythm.
Also CSM's can be counted too.......
In closing I know what an ASM is as well, they save the casino on time and motion issues but i have never seen one shuffle in a way that would stack the deck either for the house or against the house, then again I have not yet investigated all brands and all types.
I do have a little bit of experience in this field you know :)
“There is something about the outside of a horse that is good for the inside of a man.” - Winston Churchill
Wizard Recommends
- €1500 Welcome Bonus
- 100% Welcome Bonus
- €100 + 300 Free Spins
What is your opinion of the continuous shuffle machines now being used at the blackjack tables in Las Vegas? Do these machines give the house more of and edge even when a person is using basic strategy?
For those who don't understand what you're asking, there are new machines that take the blackjack discards and place them randomly back in the deck after each hand. If you are using basic strategy, then the shufflers actually lower the house edge slightly, due to the omission of the cut card effect. It is my understanding that they do provide an honest random shuffle. However, the shuffling machine allows the dealer to waste less time shuffling and spend more time dealing. This means you will spend more time playing, and thus more hands for the house edge to grind you down.
For more information on the mathematical effect of continuous shufflers, please see my blackjack appendix 10.
For more information on the mathematical effect of continuous shufflers, please see my blackjack appendix 10.
When playing online blackjack, how do you tell when the deck is shuffled? I play Microgaming casinos (which you report as using 1 deck), but I do not know if each time I play if it is a new deck, and there are no signs of knowing when the deck is shuffled.
Most online casinos shuffle after every hand. Others shuffle at random times but do not indicate exactly when to the player. I have noticed Microgaming casinos flash the word 'shuffling' about one hand in four.
However, if you track the cards between these announcements you will sometimes see the same card twice, which is impossible in a single-deck game, assuming you believe them about when they shuffle. As far as I know, they actually shuffle after every hand, but for reasons I do not understand, only indicate a shuffle occasionally. If I remember correctly, Cryptologic casinos do indeed indicate when they are shuffling their eight-deck shoe.
However, if you track the cards between these announcements you will sometimes see the same card twice, which is impossible in a single-deck game, assuming you believe them about when they shuffle. As far as I know, they actually shuffle after every hand, but for reasons I do not understand, only indicate a shuffle occasionally. If I remember correctly, Cryptologic casinos do indeed indicate when they are shuffling their eight-deck shoe.
What do you know about the randomization process that online casinos use to simulate shuffling? How closely does it approximate the actual manual shuffling of cards in a casino? And finally the obvious: wouldn't it be fairly simple to write a randomization (shuffling) program that would give the house a bigger edge -- sort of stack the deck? Enjoy your site. Thanks.
I know that one software company randomly picks two cards in the deck and reverses them, and repeats this numerous times. Since learning of this technique, that is also how I shuffle in my random simulation programs. As long as any method of shuffling is done enough times the deck should be properly randomized.
Manual shuffling is more vulnerable to a biased shuffle and consequently some players try to exploit this by shuffle tracking and card clumping. There are numerous ways an online casino might cheat, but a bad shuffle I don't think is one of them.
Manual shuffling is more vulnerable to a biased shuffle and consequently some players try to exploit this by shuffle tracking and card clumping. There are numerous ways an online casino might cheat, but a bad shuffle I don't think is one of them.
Best online casino games usa. (Oak Harbor, WA). (Airway Heights, WA). (Lakewood, WA). (Auburn, WA).
I was wondering if you thought continuous shufflers have an effect on basic strategy? I know they speed up the number of hands per hour which is usually bad for the player, but is basic strategy still effective in this instance? Doesn't basic strategy slightly change depending on the number of decks?
I first addressed this topic in my December 1, 2000, newsletter. For those who missed it I just added blackjack appendix 10 to my site, which explains the effect on the house edge under both a cut card and continuous shuffler game. To answer your question, no, the basic strategy does not change. Basic strategy is always developed based on a freshly shuffled shoe, which is always the case when playing against a continuous shuffler.
I’ve noticed that the CSM (Continuous Shuffler Machine) at the blackjack table does not shuffle ALL of the cards at the end of each hand. There are a few cards left in the shoe part of the machine (anywhere from 1 to 20 or so) that are not shuffled. Is there any way this can be used to advantage? For example, I was thinking that there is a lower (but still not zero) probability of having a card repeated two hands in a row. Sit out if there were a lot of high cards last hand . . . bet higher if there are a lot of low cards last hand. The CSM I saw used four decks so, on a full table, there are actually quite a few cards played each hand and you could potentially get a true value of plus/minus one if you made the simplifying assumption that none of those would repeat. Maybe enough to skew the odds?
You’re right, the discards are not mixed among all the cards but can not be placed close to the top of the shoe. I don’t know the exact size of this buffer but it is about 10-20 cards I think. As a card counter it would probably be safe to use a true count from just the last hand played and off the top of a shoe. When converting to the true count you will rarely get anything far from +/-1. If you’re any kind of counter at all I would forget about playing against a CSM, it isn’t worth the bother.
On a CSM blackjack game, 5 deck, what would be the effect of the dealer not putting discards back into the machine every hand if 24 of 52 cards in the discard rack were face cards? What about 48 of 102? What would be the effect if 44 of 52 cards were non-face cards? Can the odds be heavily skewed? I have a feeling that the odds skyrocket in the casino’s favor if the dealer leaves face cards in the discard.
The exact numbers would be difficult to calculate and I won’t get into that. However your speculation is right that the odds favor the dealer if he leaves a lot of high cards in the discard rack yet will put back into play a lot of small cards. This would be the same kind of thing as preferential shuffling, in which the dealer of a hand held game shuffles when the count is good but deals another round on a bad count. Preferential shuffling is something that definitely does happen here in Las Vegas so what you describe would not surprise me either.
I was just wondering if Las Vegas Video Blackjack reshuffles after every hand or after all the decks are played. I know the tables in Las Vegas do it after all the decks are played because if they did it after every hand no one would play. Are the odds that you’ll win worse if there is a shuffle after every hand? Is this even legal or necessary?
I don’t know when they shuffle but I would speculate after every hand. From my blackjack appendix 10 you will learn that the player’s odds improve slightly if the dealer plays exactly n hands between shuffles (including one) rather than playing to cut card, finishing the hand, and then shuffling.
First, thank you for the great site. I went to Las Vegas for this first time this past summer and I played double-deck blackjack at the Orleans. I noticed that after a dealer shuffled both decks, the dealer asked the player to cut the deck. Most players refused. I did not mind, so I cut the deck. Is there a blackjack cut superstition that I am not aware of, or is there a better reason why?
I would say about 1/3 to 1/2 of players would at least initially decline to cut. However if everyone initially declines somebody has to rise to the occasion and do it. Sometimes when players who refuse to cut will say something like 'I don’t want the blame for a bad shoe' or 'I’m unlucky.' I’ve never seen it put into words but there does seem to be a superstition that the cut is critical to the flow of the shoe, and thus the act should only be done by a competent cutter. Of course this is nonsense. For recreational play it doesn’t make any difference whom cuts or where they cut.
Playing blackjack on a continuous shuffling 5-deck system, are the odds of winning different than playing the dealer with 1 deck or 2 decks?
Is Ocean Online Casino Blackjack Continuously Shuffled
For the beneit of other readers, my blackjack appendix 10 explains, the house edge in a five-deck game is 0.028% less if a continuous shuffler is used, as opposed to a hand shuffle. The difference between five decks and two decks, all other rules being equal, is 0.18%. So the two-deck game without a shuffler would be much better. Let’s compare a 5-deck continuous shuffler game to a 4-deck hand shuffled game. As my blackjack calculator show difference in house edge between four decks and five decks is 0.0329%. So the benefit of a continuous shuffler is worth less than removing a single deck.
While playing blackjack at a locals casino in Las Vegas, a dealer from another locals casino sat at my table. While making small talk, she told me that she could wipe out any player using what she called the 'house shuffle.' The lady dealing to us, who claimed to have been a dealer for 25 years agreed with her telling me that it’s 'all about the shuffle.' They were both referring to games dealt by hand as opposed to from a shoe. Is there a way to shuffle that lowers the players chances of winning, and if so wouldn’t this be a form of cheating? Have you ever heard of anything called the house shuffle?
I don’t believe it. Dealers are not the most skeptical group, often believing all the usual gambling myths. Usually the term 'house shuffle' refers to the way the dealers are supposed to shuffle. For example, shuffle twice, riffle, and shuffle again. In this context, she seems to be saying she could alter the shuffle to the player’s disadvantage, which I doubt.
I absolutely love your site. I enjoy the strategies and probability discussions as much as, or more than, the actual gambling! I was playing six-deck Blackjack in a St. Louis casino recently. After playing a shoe, the cards were returned to the auto shuffler, which indicated a card was missing. The dealer proceeded to deal the next shoe while the floor person inspected the returned set of cards. Upon completion of this shoe, the missing card from the previous shoe (a king) was found in the un-dealt portion of the second shoe. Assuming this King was the bottom card and was left in the shuffler, it would have been in play in this first shoe (the cut was in rear portion of the deck). How much of an additional advantage did the house gain on me with this mistake?
Thank you for the kind words. I’m going to assume the dealer hits a soft 17, and double after a split is allowed. According to table D17 in Blackjack Attack by Don Schlesinger, removing one ten per deck increases the house edge by 0.5512%. Dividing that by six, for the six-deck game, the effect is an increase in house edge of 0.09%.
Just like Kenny Rogerssang in the movie The Gambler, it's all about knowing when to hold 'em,and when to fold 'em. Poker OddsPoker Game OddsWithout a doubt, poker is one of the casinogames in which understanding the odds can bring playersa sizable advantage over opponents. Poker card odds. The odds in the game of poker are similar to those of blackjack in that they are constantlyshifting as the cards are dealt.
For recreational blackjack players, who use basic strategy, and don’t count, does the house advantage increase as the penetration increases? I believe it does because the deeper you get into the shoe, the greater the absolute value of the count will tend to get, which should trigger count-based strategy changes. Since the non-counter wouldn’t know when and how to make such changes, he would be making more mistakes as the count gets further away from zero. Thus, wouldn’t a non-counter be better off at a table with shallow penetration?
In a non-cut-card game, the house advantage is always the same for the non-counter. Clumps of high or low cards are just as likely to appear at the beginning of the shoe, as the middle, as the end. Just because the count is zero at the top of the shoe doesn’t mean you’ll have an exact balance of high and low cards. You seem to be suggesting that the cards are more clumpy at the end of the deck. However, if that were true, then the odds would change if the dealer dealt the cards in reverse order. Surely that is a ridiculous notion.
Let’s say the basic strategy player has 16 against a 10 late in the shoe, and hits. If the count were high, standing would be the right play, resulting in what would look like an error to a counter who was watching. However, if the count were negative then hitting would be all the better. In the end, it averages out, for the basic strategy player.
For reasons I explain in my blackjack appendix 10, the basic strategy player should prefer a game with a continuous shuffler, if his goal is to minimize the house edge. Aside from that, the house edge is not affected by penetration. I should add that with a shallower penetration there will be more time spent shuffling, and thus a lower expected loss on an hourly basis.