Will you play these two hands differently?

[BJGenius007]

Recently I had this memorable shoe, especially the last two hands that cost me almost $2500. Want to know you guys' opinions.

The rules are 6 decks, S17, LS. There are four players at the table. I am using Hi-Lo with a twist that does not affect RC, TC and the general Hi-Lo play in this case. Note that the casino seems to use ASM to sequence the cards since it is often to have -35 or +35 RC in the middle of the shoe then swing back to almost 0 in the end. And ace clump is common. Anyway in this particular of the shoe, the last two hands are like this,

RC is +13 (dropped from +28 two hands ago), 7 aces rich, 1.5 decks left. I have face card pair, dealer up card is 3.

Since TC is +9 already even without the rich ace adjustment, I split and get 6, stay, get another face card, split again, get 7 and 10. Dealer drew cards to 19. I lost two and won one max bet. The net is one max bet loss.

The next hand I have a pairs of 7 against up card 2. RC is +11, ASC is +8, 1.25 decks left. I split accordingly. Get an ace. Double, get an 7. Ouch! Get another A , double, get a 10. Dealer draw 4 cards to 19. I lost four max bets. He would have lost if I doubled my first one but stayed on the second hand. That 10 would bust his hand. If I did not double at all, I would have just lost 2 max bets as dealer got my first 7 to reach 19.

Will you play like I did, especially the two double on A7 against 2 when TC is +8? Or split the ten's against 3? Considering not only TC is way higher than the requirements but there are extra 7 or 8 aces to help. Basically the shoes only played 10 aces and had 14 aces behind the cut card.

[Stealth]

You described one of the many disasters that can occur at high counts and we all have empathy. With some thought, I can also share some of the must outrageous circumstances when "I should have won" and I got killed.

But to no avail, I must continue to rely on the math, the playing protocol, the skill set and the appropriate bankroll I have available to play correctly and without regard to the short term consequences. Else, I am just gambling.

Better Variance to you!

[ZenMaster_Flash]

Split Tens against a 3 ? L O L

Surely you jest. [Chuckling.] Is there an antonym for Risk Aversion ?

That guaranteed that the E I T S would be (re-)counting down the shoe.

By the way - try to remember -- "Greed Kills"

" … 7 Aces remained" in 1.5 decks" ? 13 Aces available in 78 cards.

16.7% Aces. > double normal. Possible. Were you sober.

What is your Hi-Lo "magical twist" ?

Your absurdist slightly paranoid tinged claims re: ASM "sequences" are not welcome.

Your amateurish superstitious comments re: What Would Have Happened ... are worse.

[BJGenius007]

You described one of the many disasters that can occur at high counts and we all have empathy. With some thought, I can also share some of the must outrageous circumstances when "I should have won" and I got killed.

But to no avail, I must continue to rely on the math, the playing protocol, the skill set and the appropriate bankroll I have available to play correctly and without regard to the short term consequences. Else, I am just gambling.

Better Variance to you!

When I split the face card pair, the ploppies whined. But double A7 against 2, ploppies are OK with it because double a soft hand against a small card is acceptable.

[DSchles]

"Is there an antonym for Risk Aversion?"

Risk seeking.

Don

[Jabberwocky]

Kamikaze pilot!

[RS]

If this place sequences the cards as you say....WHY ARE YOU PLAYING???? If they actually do sequence the cards*, then you should figure out a way to beat the shuffle. If you can't figure out a way to beat the shuffle, then I'll ask again, why are you playing?


* I personally don't believe in the whole "ASM sequencing" stuff you love to write about.

[BJGenius007]

If this place sequences the cards as you say....WHY ARE YOU PLAYING???? If they actually do sequence the cards*, then you should figure out a way to beat the shuffle. If you can't figure out a way to beat the shuffle, then I'll ask again, why are you playing?


* I personally don't believe in the whole "ASM sequencing" stuff you love to write about.

That shoe is OK. I just did not get the cherry on top. Especially I took the risk for the index plays.

Also the shoe is memorable because of High TC and ace richness in the end. That is what I want if I get to cut the shoe.

[ZeeBabar]

If this place sequences the cards as you say....WHY ARE YOU PLAYING???? If they actually do sequence the cards*, then you should figure out a way to beat the shuffle. If you can't figure out a way to beat the shuffle, then I'll ask again, why are you playing?


* I personally don't believe in the whole "ASM sequencing" stuff you love to write about.

however, one night, the pit guy took three cards out, face down from the 6 deck, put it into the CSM which had a window on top. I asked him what he was doing and he said he was performing a test. The shuffling machine finally halted with a red light on. He looked at the window, called out the three cards and then flipped over the three cards and he was right. He smiled, said the machine was as advertised.

[Freightman]

however, one night, the pit guy took three cards out, face down from the 6 deck, put it into the CSM which had a window on top. I asked him what he was doing and he said he was performing a test. The shuffling machine finally halted with a red light on. He looked at the window, called out the three cards and then flipped over the three cards and he was right. He smiled, said the machine was as advertised.

That's the easy part. The point being considered is - can the house program the machine to perform non random shuffles that would favor the house.

There is no question that the technology is there. The point is - would the house actually be willing to gamble goodwill, legal implications, cheating allegations, etc., for he sake of a few dollars.

[BJGenius007]

That's the easy part. The point being considered is - can the house program the machine to perform non random shuffles that would favor the house.

There is no question that the technology is there. The point is - would the house actually be willing to gamble goodwill, legal implications, cheating allegations, etc., for he sake of a few dollars.

My answer inclined to yes. If the house knows for sure an AP just came to the table, then it is a fair game for them to turn on ASM sequencing mode. Since AP was cheating in their mind, sequencing the cards is not cheating as long as the ASM returns to normal mode for the general public after the AP leaves.

[Freightman]

My answer inclined to yes. If the house knows for sure an AP just came to the table, then it is a fair game for them to turn on ASM sequencing mode. Since AP was cheating in their mind, sequencing the cards is not cheating as long as the ASM returns to normal mode for the general public after the AP leaves.

An incredibly interesting point (perhaps not knowingly) has been raised. Not withstanding the point that someone fooling around with the ASM after the arrival of a known AP would raise flags - Transport trucks involved in accidents have a device, which police will check, which will confirm speed, stops and other types of information. Likewise, some sort of odometer, so to speak, could record data, and which could be programmed to transmit to regulatory authorities, changes in the device with regards to changes from random shuffling mode - or retain data which could be available upon request to regulatory authorities.

Other than perhaps US tribal locations, I have trouble believing (though sometimes I might think otherwise) that established houses would risk this type of activity.

[bjarg]

BJGenius has been promoting this "ASM card clumping" conspiracy for quite some time now.
I partook in one of such discussions some time ago with what I thought were conclusive arguments to prove his theory wrong, but I realize now of the futility of my attemts.

My friend, what you dont seem to understand is that if this clumping magic button you keep talking about actually existed, it would the best thing you could ask for against an ASM.
If I believed your theory I would ask you where this game is located at and wouldnt hesitate for one second before going there, but since I know for a fact that it cannot be done, I'll refrain from asking.