Praying Mantis: Cut-Card Effect

[Praying Mantis]

Question as I need some help understanding this.

I was reading Bootlegger's book about this subject and his point is that you should NOT play a SD or DD that uses a cut-card. First off, if you only play games without the cut-card, you won't find too many DD games to play, period.

He states the player gets fewer rounds if a lot of low cards surface and more rounds if a lot of high cards come out. With more low cards, it will take more cards to make the player's hand and fewer rounds will be dealt and more rounds dealt if higher cards come out. Point is that the last round is disadvantageous to the player and should be avoided.

I can see this if big cards are firing out of the deck, but not with low cards. How do you KNOW that the big cards remaining in the deck for that last hand is BEHIND the cut-card? You don't, so to me, the deeper into the deck you get with a bunch of low cards coming out previously, will INCREASE your advantage...am I wrong? I mean, isn't that we want?

Now, on the other hand. I, personally, don't like games WITHOUT the cut-card because of PS.

Am I looking at this wrong?

Thanks in advance,

PM

[Don Schlesinger]

> Question as I need some help understanding this.

> I was reading Bootlegger's book about this subject and
> his point is that you should NOT play a SD or DD that
> uses a cut-card. First off, if you only play games
> without the cut-card, you won't find too many DD games
> to play, period.

That, in and of itslef, doesn't mean you shoul play the remaining DD games, but I do agree with you. If the game is acceptable and has a cut-card, go ahead and play it.

> He states the player gets fewer rounds if a lot of low
> cards surface and more rounds if a lot of high cards
> come out. With more low cards, it will take more cards
> to make the player's hand and fewer rounds will be
> dealt and more rounds dealt if higher cards come out.
> Point is that the last round is disadvantageous to the
> player and should be avoided.

Pretty good summary of the CCE. :-)

> I can see this if big cards are firing out of the
> deck, but not with low cards. How do you KNOW that the
> big cards remaining in the deck for that last hand is
> BEHIND the cut-card? You don't, so to me, the deeper
> into the deck you get with a bunch of low cards coming
> out previously, will INCREASE your advantage...am I
> wrong? I mean, isn't that we want?

The point is, all those low cards use up rounds, and, just when you are ready for those high cards to come out, the cut-card appears, and your edge gets shuffled away.

> Now, on the other hand. I, personally, don't like
> games WITHOUT the cut-card because of PS.

> Am I looking at this wrong?

Yes. The CCE is real and works against all players. That said, there's nothing you can do about it if the game is otherwise an attractive one. And, you're right: If, without the cut card, the dealer sometimes practices PS, you're better off with the cut card, provided he always deals down to it.

Don

[Praying Mantis]

> The point is, all those low cards use up rounds, and,
> just when you are ready for those high cards to come
> out, the cut-card appears, and your edge gets shuffled
> away.

He proposes we avoid that last hand by avoiding this game, entirely.

If we play it and if low cards are coming out, even that last hand has an advantage and we shouldn't avoid it. We can even spread to another spot to take advantage of it.

The floating advantage is giving us more edge the deeper we go and to avoid that last hand would be ignoring this. And if we avoid playing this game entirely, how can we take advantage of this situation when it does appear?

Is it possible he is trying to say that if we have a CHOICE between a game with or without the cut-card, we should choose the one without?

> Yes. The CCE is real and works against all players.
> That said, there's nothing you can do about it if the
> game is otherwise an attractive one. And, you're
> right: If, without the cut card, the dealer sometimes
> practices PS, you're better off with the cut card,
> provided he always deals down to it.

We all know that isn't always the case, right?

Don, I'm not trying to be combative here. Lord knows that you've forgotten more about blackjack than I will ever know. If you say it is real, I accept that fact. Thing is, it has my noggin screwed up trying to figure out what appears to me to be just the opposite of what actually is going on.

I really appreciate your help.

Regards,

PM

[Don Schlesinger]

> He proposes we avoid that last hand by avoiding this
> game, entirely.

He isn't talking about the counter. For a BS player, the last hand before the cut-card is, on average, disatrous and carries a much lower edge than the previous hands. Obviously, a counter knows his edge on every hand.

> If we play it and if low cards are coming out, even
> that last hand has an advantage and we shouldn't avoid
> it. We can even spread to another spot to take
> advantage of it.

You're missing the point. Dealing to a cut card EVERY shuffle means that, on average, you get more hands when the count is negative and fewer hands when it's positive. For a BS player, this is a big disadvantage. Obviously, for a counter, this doesn't help, either.

> The floating advantage is giving us more edge the
> deeper we go and to avoid that last hand would be
> ignoring this. And if we avoid playing this game
> entirely, how can we take advantage of this situation
> when it does appear?

See above. He's talking about a player who doesn't know his edge on every hand, prior to its deal.

> Is it possible he is trying to say that if we have a
> CHOICE between a game with or without the cut-card, we
> should choose the one without?

Among other things, of course.

> We all know that isn't always the case, right?

Not if, on average, the game without the cut card gives much lousier penetration. In general, knowing nothing else, you'd go for the game without the cut card.

> Don, I'm not trying to be combative here. Lord knows
> that you've forgotten more about blackjack than I will
> ever know. If you say it is real, I accept that fact.

It is very real.

> Thing is, it has my noggin screwed up trying to figure
> out what appears to me to be just the opposite of what
> actually is going on.

Keep thinking about it. :-)

> I really appreciate your help.

I'm trying. Write back with further questions.

Don

[Parker]

I have a lot of respect for Bootlegger, but this is just plain silly. As Don mentioned, if you only play DD games w/no cut card, you won't have many games to play.

Furthermore, you'll still experience the cut card effect.

Why? Single deck games are often dealt to a fixed number of rounds (rule of 6, etc.) when a cut card is not used.

This is not usually the case with double deck. Instead, most dealers deal until a certain point in the pack is reached, and then shuffle. Sadly, one very common procedure is to shuffle when there is less than one deck left. If a lot of hands with few cards are dealt early, you may get an extra round. Of course, the most common reason for those hands with few cards is because large cards are coming out, and the count is tanking.

Voila! The cut card effect, despite the fact that no cut card is actually being used.

I have seen the same thing happen in single deck games, where the dealer is normally dealing RO6, but deals an extra round if he/she thinks there are enough cards left. When this happens, more often than not you'd rather not have the extra round.

[Praying Mantis]

[Praying Mantis]

> I have a lot of respect for Bootlegger, but this is
> just plain silly. As Don mentioned, if you only play
> DD games w/no cut card, you won't have many games to
> play.

That was my point, as well.

> This is not usually the case with double deck.
> Instead, most dealers deal until a certain point in
> the pack is reached, and then shuffle. Sadly, one very
> common procedure is to shuffle when there is less than
> one deck left. If a lot of hands with few cards are
> dealt early, you may get an extra round. Of course,
> the most common reason for those hands with few cards
> is because large cards are coming out, and the count
> is tanking.

Yes, and we would know.

I guess I was reading as a counter and wasn't thinking of the non-counter where this info can probably help more.

Even without the card, like you said, dealers shuffle at basically the same point, anyway.

I just feel that it is more likely they won't PS on you if there is a card...of course, that isn't always the case...we all have had that experience too.

Thanks,

PM