How do I simulate a vulnerability in Blackjack?

**seriousplayer** · 05-21-2014, 10:43 AM

I have been playing blackjack in the Pennsylvania Casinos. The Pennsylvania casinos offer good rules (S17, DAS, LS) for their blackjack games as everybody in this forum might have known. However, the bad part is that most blackjack games are 8 deck games. Beating an eight deck blackjack game is hard because there are fewer positive expectations situations. I've notice a common vulnerability for most blackjack games in Pennsylvania. The 8 deck games allows mid-shoe entry.

The vulnerability is when the table is empty and the players pick up their bet and go to another table or leave the dealer will need to shuffle the deck when no one enters at a certain time. I using the white rabbit technique in Blackjack Attack to attack those eight deck shoe games. So I wong out at TC <= -1 went to the bathroom come back and the new shoe is started. Therefore, this force the casino to shuffle away negative situations.

I think this rule is set by the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board.

My question is how do I simulate to find out my advantage if the casino shuffle away negative situations?

**Norm** · 05-21-2014, 10:57 AM

You can set "Force shuffle on exit" in CVData/CVCX which will allow you to wong-out while playing heads-up.

**seriousplayer** · 05-21-2014, 11:07 AM

Originally Posted by Norm

You can set "Force shuffle on exit" in CVData/CVCX which will allow you to wong-out while playing heads-up.

Does it allow me to set the wong out TC when setting "Force shuffle on exit"?

**DSchles** · 05-21-2014, 11:22 AM

Yes, of course.

Don

KJ · 05-21-2014, 02:05 PM

Originally Posted by seriousplayer

The Pennsylvania casinos offer good rules (S17, DAS, LS) for their blackjack games as everybody in this forum might have known. I think this rule is set by the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board.

For now, they are still offering good rules. But several casino's have petitioned the state to let individual casino's set the rules instead of the state. This of course would be the end of S17 and late surrender, and the beginning of 6/5 games, if the state agrees.

**seriousplayer** · 05-21-2014, 03:09 PM

Originally Posted by KJ

[SIZE=3]But several casino's have petitioned the state to let individual casino's set the rules instead of the state. This of course would be the end of S17 and late surrender, and the beginning of 6/5 games, if the state agrees.

I am willing to bet the FIRST casino that petition to the state is Harrah. They are famous for doing these kind of stuff. If the state agrees than the casinos in Pennsylvania might look like the ones in Atlantic City. What good is Pennsylvania blackjack when there is no S17 and LS?

**Three** · 05-21-2014, 03:37 PM

The state wouldn't cut off the revenue by changing the rules that get so many to come there instead of other states. Casinos are that stupid and constantly prove it but the state gets a lot out of the tourism dollar besides the rake on the games. It is a losing situation if they gouge their local population for more money and lose most of the out-of-state gamblers that bring out of state money to Pa businesses and the casinos. Of course the politicians can be bought by the casinos but I just don't see it happening. Gouging your voters and hurting local businesses to get the same tax revenue from the casinos has no upside for the government or the state. Even though the casinos are stupid enough to want it they would lose money as well.

**seriousplayer** · 05-21-2014, 04:41 PM

Originally Posted by Tthree

The state wouldn't cut off the revenue by changing the rules that get so many to come there instead of other states. Casinos are that stupid and constantly prove it but the state gets a lot out of the tourism dollar besides the rake on the games. It is a losing situation if they gouge their local population for more money and lose most of the out-of-state gamblers that bring out of state money to Pa businesses and the casinos. Of course the politicians can be bought by the casinos but I just don't see it happening. Gouging your voters and hurting local businesses to get the same tax revenue from the casinos has no upside for the government or the state. Even though the casinos are stupid enough to want it they would lose money as well.

If the Pennsylvania casinos keeps offering 8 deck blackjack than people will need go to other states instead. I would prefer to go to Mohegan Sun in Connecticut because I get hammer their six deck shoe game with the same rules. The only place I see profitable 6 deck blackjack with DAS, LS in Pennsylvania is in the high limit pit. There is not that many tables in the high limit pit (4-6 tables). They don't allow mid-shoe entry. Therefore, I can't wong-in in positive counts. When the casinos first open they use to offer 6 deck blackjack with no lower than $15 but right now they seem to turn to 8 deck completely.

**bigplayer** · 05-21-2014, 07:34 PM

An eight deck game with the same amount of cards cutoff has almost exactly the same win rate as a six deck game for big spreads. (i.e., a 7/8 game has the almost the same win rate as a 5/6 game) and probably far less heat because the 8 deck game might take an extra shoe or two to get to a max bet but all of your EV comes crashing home in extended big shoe. Granted a bad 8 deck game can be horrible, but I would not be so quick to write off 8 deck games too quickly. It always depends.

Regarding PA Rules, with revenue beginning to flatten Casinos will no doubt use that to say that the problem is that they are unable to innovate because they are restricted to the same set of rules as their competition and that with a wider range of rules they can make their games more attractive and generate more revenue. Of course that's complete bullshit but the casinos will push that line of reasoning and as the industry and regulators get more and more in bed with each other over time it becomes inevitable that the casino commission becomes more willing to do what the casinos want.

In reality, the good rules mandated in PA gives the casinos there a leg-up on the casinos in NJ and other states. Bad rules have already been proven ineffective at increasing table holds to any significant degree. On the LV Strip, despite the proliferation of h17, CSM's, and 6/5 Payoffs, table holds haven't budged in the slightest and in some cases have actually gone down.

**seriousplayer** · 05-22-2014, 02:02 PM

Originally Posted by bigplayer

An eight deck game with the same amount of cards cutoff has almost exactly the same win rate as a six deck game for big spreads. (i.e., a 7/8 game has the almost the same win rate as a 5/6 game) and probably far less heat because the 8 deck game might take an extra shoe or two to get to a max bet but all of your EV comes crashing home in extended big shoe. Granted a bad 8 deck game can be horrible, but I would not be so quick to write off 8 deck games too quickly. It always depends.

Regarding PA Rules, with revenue beginning to flatten Casinos will no doubt use that to say that the problem is that they are unable to innovate because they are restricted to the same set of rules as their competition and that with a wider range of rules they can make their games more attractive and generate more revenue. Of course that's complete bullshit but the casinos will push that line of reasoning and as the industry and regulators get more and more in bed with each other over time it becomes inevitable that the casino commission becomes more willing to do what the casinos want.

In reality, the good rules mandated in PA gives the casinos there a leg-up on the casinos in NJ and other states. Bad rules have already been proven ineffective at increasing table holds to any significant degree. On the LV Strip, despite the proliferation of h17, CSM's, and 6/5 Payoffs, table holds haven't budged in the slightest and in some cases have actually gone down.

Sometimes what kills me in eight deck is when the count is positive. I hate it when the TC = 5, 7, or 9 and there is still no high cards coming out. I put two hand out there and both of them are stiff hands. I have information to leave negative counts but in high counts it is better to put out the bets.

**code red** · 05-22-2014, 05:18 PM

Sounds like a fair game you're playing, but it's very possible for low cards to keep coming out. Just don't over bet, keep following your optimal bets.

I hope it turns around for you.

**seriousplayer** · 05-22-2014, 05:27 PM

Originally Posted by code red

Sounds like a fair game you're playing, but it's very possible for low cards to keep coming out. Just don't over bet, keep following your optimal bets.

I hope it turns around for you.

I use wong out leave at TC =-1 so I can keep my max optimal bet for two hand to less than $60 since I play in a $10 table so 1-8 bet spread will be $58 ($80 x .73 = $58.4) each hand for two hands. When I wong out I back count and wong in when the count become positive again.

**Bodarc** · 05-23-2014, 01:31 AM

I do not play a $10 table if a $5 table is available if I want a smaller max because of bankroll limitations. Minimum bet at low count is 1/2 that of a $10 table and my spread is to 2x$75. In my opinion a 1-8 spread is too low on a red chip table.

Here is something I think is very important that I have never seen mentioned. The dealer is your best line of defense against heat. A dealer can make you or break you as far as heat is concerned. You will be surprised what a few kind words or a few compliments and a little playful teasing can get you.

While I am on the subject, I will give an example that applies in all cases. It was late at night and I got off one exit too early at a busy intersection. Rather than having to make it complicated, I decided to just shoot across 6 lanes and get back on the highway. Sure enough blue lights started flashing. When the officer came to my window, I laughed and said "I knew it, I knew that just as sure as I pulled that stunt, you were going to catch me. I even looked around for you and didn't see you. Where were you"? He just laughed and said "Mr. X, I was right behind you". I said "Well no wonder, I was looking everywhere else for you and didn't think to check behind me". He laughed again and said "Here, I'm just going to give you a warning ticket and next time, look a little closer before you run across six lanes of traffic". I said "Yes Sir! You can bet I will!"

Now this had to do with a police officer but it saved me from having to deal with a fine, court costs, an attorney or a judge. The police officer is the one who starts the chain reaction. It doesn't matter if you are talking about a dealer, a police officer, an IRS agent or any one else who can cause you a problem. It is the low man on the totem pole that starts the chain reaction that travels up the line so as best you can, make sure the chain reaction never starts.

Someone who dislikes you or is mad at you will never give you a break, so make sure that dealer likes you. Of course there are always a few bad apples in the barrel, but when you get one of those, move on. I think you can avoid a lot of heat problems with a watchful eye and by using just a little common sense.