Viktor Nacht: BJF, Trackjack Discounts & Pen

[Viktor Nacht]

Because of the printing problems and hence vast lateness of the current issue, the information about trying Trackjack was out of date. We will be posting instructions for how current BJF subscribers can get their 3 months free in the form of a 25% discount for a year long subscription, and how anyone who subscribed for $50 can get a free extension.

For those of you who didn't get a chance to try Trackjack live we've added an extensive collection of screenshots that give you a nearly complete idea of how cool interactive conditions reports can be. I can also assure you that everything you find in BJF and CBJN is in Trackjack, plus much more on a more timely basis.

There has been some problems on our end with miscommunication rolling this product out, for which we apologize. The smartest thing we ever did, based on your feedback, was bring on Michael as the full-time editor, and he's been doing an amazing job. This added some serious overhead, but with many hundreds of updates already processed, Trackjack has bloomed like a butterfly.

We are planning on expending the way Trackjack reports penetration by allowing for much smaller, specific ranges and more. We won't ever report exact numbers, that will always be a philosophical difference between CBJN and RGE. No casino, even with cut slots in the shoe, has 1.5 pen every shoe, every dealer, every day. However there is a freeform notes field associated with each report for people who insist on attaching specific depth to their report.

Again, we'll be posting special links for Trackjack users to get their special subscription rate and also account for those that already subbed at $50 sometime today. This will be for a limited time, so please watch closely.

Good Cards,

V

[Don Schlesinger]

> We won't ever report exact numbers, that
> will always be a philosophical difference
> between CBJN and RGE. No casino, even with
> cut slots in the shoe, has 1.5 pen every
> shoe, every dealer, every day. However there
> is a freeform notes field associated with
> each report for people who insist on
> attaching specific depth to their report.

When a number, such as 75% would be reported, no one expects that this means every dealer on every game cuts precisely 75%. That would be silly. But, the reporting of, say, 75% could easily mean that this is the average level of penetration one can expect, most of the time, for the games being reported.

In this fashion, one can calculate a SCORE for the game(s) being considered. On the contrary, when pen is reported as a letter, it leaves the user wondering just what percentage pen to enter into some tool, such as CVCX, BJRM, or SBA, to get a good estimate of what the earnings potential of such a game will be.

Just my two cents.

Don

[Viktor Nacht]

There's a lot of semantics here that I don't want to draw out into a lengthy discussion yet. Ultimately we want to be much more specific with pen, regardless of whether we use a code that means "75-85%" and another code that means "80-85% consistent" in order to save space.

The important thing is that the specificity of the report becomes more important as the pen become more attractive.

In regards to SCORE and other sims, it was suggested to me, and I like the idea, that once we add better pen reporting, each game can be linked to a page that reports the SCORE for that game in 5% increments of the reported range. A report that reported "75-85%" would show SCOREs for that game at 75%, 80% and 85%. This gives players a best and worst possible scenario for this game at this casino.

For sims, the player has the option of plugging in the best number or anything less they prefer.

Michael and I have discussed creating a separate, temporary forum to have a kind of "Penetration Symposium" to argue this topic once and for all. I would actually create this on the open forum to invite BJ21.com and other people into the discussion. If anyone else likes that idea let me know.

V

[Joe Miner]

I support the idea of a specific penetration number. As Don said, we all know that this number is in fact not specific. The specific number reported will always have a tollerance.

I am glad to learn that you and Michael are open to changing the way pen is reported. Do you have any idea when this may happen? If it is relatively soon, I will reconsider my subscribing to Trackjack.