-
brandnewtobj: Card clumping?
I just read an article about card clumping in the multi-deck game. That one can run into a clump of low cards, raising the count sky high, only for more low cards to come. Raising one's bet in this situation could be disasterous.
Is this a real issue that lowers the counter's edge in the multi-deck game or is the effect of this not so bad?
-
Trapper: Re: Card clumping?
> I just read an article about card clumping in the
> multi-deck game. That one can run into a clump of low
> cards, raising the count sky high ....
Sure. If, for example, there is a section of low cards at the top of the deck it will raise the count. You may lose a few hands but (assuming you are counting) you will take that information into consideration as you play subsequent hands. Conversely, If there is a concentration of high cards on the top of the deck you will win a few extra bets. It all evens out over time.
> .... only for more low
> cards to come. Raising one's bet in this situation
> could be disasterous.
And how do you know more low cards are coming out? Casino shuffles rarely put the deck back into a random order but without real knowledge of the composition of the deck in the shoe, how would you know that more low cards are coming out? There are phony systems out there that are based on "card clumping". They are mostly voodoo. On the other hand there is a mathematically based strategy of shuffle tracking. Trackers rarely use the term "card clumping" to describe non randomly distributed sections of the deck because of association with the bad systems. There are a couple of books in the catalog here on shuffle tracking. It is an advanced strategy and much more difficult than card counting.
> Is this a real issue that lowers the counter's edge in
> the multi-deck game or is the effect of this not so
> bad?
Stanford Wong and others have done studies on the effect of non random shuffles on basic strategy players and card counters. They have found no evidence that "card clumping" adversely effects the players or works in favour of the house.
-
brandnewtobj: Re: Card clumping?
> Sure. If, for example, there is a section of low cards
> at the top of the deck it will raise the count. You
> may lose a few hands but (assuming you are counting)
> you will take that information into consideration as
> you play subsequent hands. Conversely, If there is a
> concentration of high cards on the top of the deck you
> will win a few extra bets. It all evens out over time.
My concern is, if I hit a section of high cards and win a few extra bets, I will be winning minimum bets, but, the high concentration of low cards could cause me to lose some big bets. It doesn't seem like an even trade off.
> Stanford Wong and others have done studies on the
> effect of non random shuffles on basic strategy
> players and card counters. They have found no evidence
> that "card clumping" adversely effects the
> players or works in favour of the house.
But, his finding was that this phenomenon doesn't adversely effect one's long term expectation?
-
Parker: It happens
The high cards will often be unevenly distributed throughout the shoe. After all, if this did not happen, card counting would not work.
Sometimes, we end up with "clumps" of high cards in close proximity to each other. Sometimes, this "clump" ends up behind the cut card. When this happens, the count keeps rising, we keep chunking out big bets, and (more often than not) we get killed.
Card counters lovingly refer to this phenomenon as "The Shoe From Hell."
Of course, there are also times when the "clump" of high cards will be located just ahead of the cut card and we experience nirvana. Or, the cut card comes out in the middle of the clump.
Several years ago, a formerly respected authority started espousing a system that claimed to exploit this. Because of this, the effect has been thoroughly studied and analysed.
Bottom line: The effect is random. While it may produce some harrowing sessions (and some memorable ones as well), in the long run it has no effect on expectation.
-
Trapper: Re: Card clumping?
> My concern is, if I hit a section of high cards and
> win a few extra bets, I will be winning minimum bets,
> but, the high concentration of low cards could cause
> me to lose some big bets. It doesn't seem like an even
> trade off.
My example was a concentration of high cards at the top of the deck but this "clump" could occur when you have a positive count giving you a string of wins bigger than your count indicates. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, you should play the game as though it was randomly shuffled. Sometimes you win. Sometimes you lose. That's blackjack.
> But, his finding was that this phenomenon doesn't
> adversely effect one's long term expectation?
Yes. I believe that the study is in Wong's Professional Blackjack. Many others have done studies and come to the same conclusion. Here is a link to an article by Arnold Snyder.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
Bookmarks