jimmtech: Norm !

[jimmtech]

I have seen posts on other sites saying early CSMs were able to be beat because of the latency effect. Some have said that the newer CSMs can also be beat, but I have only found 1 specific reference to this: (bjrnet link)

It seems to make sense, but an advantage of a mere .4 to .6% seems a rather arduous grind (compared to Wonging in at TC3)! Sometimes dealers will let 1 deck or more pile up in the discard tray, but seeing the count go high is very rare. It seems 5 decks is common to load in a csm in this area.

I respect your expertise on shuffles and would appreciate your comments -

Is there merit to this post on bjrnet ?

Will CV Shuffle ever be able to accutately duplicate a CSM shuffle where recently played cards are again drawn from 1 of (19?) slots?

http://www.bjrnet.com/archive/BJTappendixB.htm

[Norm Wattenberger]

Problem is I've not yet seen definitive study of a CSM algorithm. The methodology with all variabilities must be known to sim the shuffle.