Sam: double deck changes

[Sam]

Over the nearly six years of its existence my local casino has changed the rules of its double deck several times because "they were getting killed." The rules currently are S17, d9,10,11. Split once, no das, 50% pen, no surrender. The word now is that the hold is down to 4% and changes must be made. So I'm thinking the only change left is H17 or to change the bj payoff but there's been no mention of that. Rather they're changing the shuffle by adding the stripping that they use on the 6d game. I've seen this change made impromptu to counteract what they thought were shuffle trackers but I can't see how this could impact the day to day game. Anyone have an explanation? Usually before a rules change was ever mentioned, they'd say they were getting rid of the game entirely and then they'd relent and change the rules "because you guys love your dd so much." No mention of that this time. Maybe the shuffle change is the lead in to the rules changes I mentioned. Any other rules changes left that they could make? Thanks.

[Parker]

> Over the nearly six years of its existence
> my local casino has changed the rules of its
> double deck several times because "they
> were getting killed." The rules
> currently are S17, d9,10,11. Split once, no
> das, 50% pen, no surrender. The word now is
> that the hold is down to 4% and changes must
> be made. So I'm thinking the only change
> left is H17 or to change the bj payoff but
> there's been no mention of that. Rather
> they're changing the shuffle by adding the
> stripping that they use on the 6d game. I've
> seen this change made impromptu to
> counteract what they thought were shuffle
> trackers but I can't see how this could
> impact the day to day game. Anyone have an
> explanation? Usually before a rules change
> was ever mentioned, they'd say they were
> getting rid of the game entirely and then
> they'd relent and change the rules
> "because you guys love your dd so
> much." No mention of that this time.
> Maybe the shuffle change is the lead in to
> the rules changes I mentioned. Any other
> rules changes left that they could make?
> Thanks.

Their hold is down because, between the 50% pen and the complex shuffle, the dealers spend more time shuffling than they do dealing.

Their concerns regarding shuffle tracking are also unfounded. Any decent shuffle will render a double deck game virtually untrackable, which is why trackers concentrate on shoes.

The rules you describe give the game a house edge of .47%, which is a little worse than the typical Las Vegas DD game (H17, DOA, DAS) at .44%. With 50% pen the game is borderline unplayable from a counter's viewpoint. H17 would bump that up to .68% (assuming the other rules stayed the same), which would make it completely unplayable (and worse than most 6D shoes).

You need to spread at least 1-8 to beat this game, and the lousy pen means you must be willing to jump your bets ruthlessly when the count dictates it. This should make counters (at least those playing a winning game) easy to spot for even the most brain-dead pit critter.

If management at your casino had any sense, they'd stop worrying so much about counters, trackers, etc., and start finding ways to increase the total hands played/hour.

If they do get rid of the game entirely, you really haven't lost much.

[Brick Waller]

Let's see, speaking of-----,you're asking us if we know any other rule changes that your casino can make to WORSEN conditions? Yeah,I can think of one,dealer wins all ties,how about it?

[sam]

Thanks Parker. One wonders if the guys making casino decisions have ever seriously played BJ. One other change mentioned is to reduce the number of betting spots on the dd tables. Another was to drop the minimum bet to $10 from $25. It seems they're just fishing for answers rather than understanding the game's dynamic. It'll be interesting to see what happens.

> Their hold is down because, between the 50%
> pen and the complex shuffle, the dealers
> spend more time shuffling than they do
> dealing.

> Their concerns regarding shuffle tracking
> are also unfounded. Any decent shuffle will
> render a double deck game virtually
> untrackable, which is why trackers
> concentrate on shoes.

> The rules you describe give the game a house
> edge of .47%, which is a little worse than
> the typical Las Vegas DD game (H17, DOA,
> DAS) at .44%. With 50% pen the game is
> borderline unplayable from a counter's
> viewpoint. H17 would bump that up to .68%
> (assuming the other rules stayed the same),
> which would make it completely unplayable
> (and worse than most 6D shoes).

> You need to spread at least 1-8 to beat this
> game, and the lousy pen means you must be
> willing to jump your bets ruthlessly when
> the count dictates it. This should make
> counters (at least those playing a winning
> game) easy to spot for even the most
> brain-dead pit critter.

> If management at your casino had any sense,
> they'd stop worrying so much about counters,
> trackers, etc., and start finding ways to
> increase the total hands played/hour.

> If they do get rid of the game entirely, you
> really haven't lost much.

[sam]

Current min/max is $25/$1000. Going to $50/$500.

> Let's see, speaking of-----,you're asking us
> if we know any other rule changes that your
> casino can make to WORSEN conditions? Yeah,I
> can think of one,dealer wins all ties,how
> about it?