Devastation with the shufflers

[Barney112]

I have played in places that people say have rigged shufflers. I beat the shit out of them. The truth is the people are either bad at CC or can't see variance or can't see other reasons for results. I tracked results carefully and determined what conditions contributed to poor results. Then I avoided those conditions and my results improved greatly. These people that see figged this or whatever will never learn why they actually lose. Usually the places that seem to offer the best games are toughest to beat. They are not cheating. The variance is high on great games. The margin for error is much less forgiving. Combine the 2 and you have trouble. As the last card approaches any error in anything is greatly magnified. The increase in any kind of human error from counting error to memory error to deck estimation error exponentially increases the randomness of results when you are playing with the most variance. I have had places that kicked my ass most of the time so I went there less. Eventually I started winning most of the time and went there more and vise versa. That is variance. When you always get beat there is a reason and you should figure out why because it is very unlikely the casino is cheating. You just have more to learn. Careful observation of what places aren't killing you because of variance will teach you advanced lessons in AP by figuring out why. If you believe you are being cheated and don't try to understand what is actually going on you are destined to continually fail where you could learn to succeed.

we'll put thanks

Sent from my B1-820 using Tapatalk

[ZeeBabar]

I have played in places that people say have rigged shufflers. I beat the shit out of them. The truth is the people are either bad at CC or can't see variance or can't see other reasons for results. I tracked results carefully and determined what conditions contributed to poor results. Then I avoided those conditions and my results improved greatly. These people that see figged this or whatever will never learn why they actually lose. Usually the places that seem to offer the best games are toughest to beat. They are not cheating. The variance is high on great games. The margin for error is much less forgiving. Combine the 2 and you have trouble. As the last card approaches any error in anything is greatly magnified. The increase in any kind of human error from counting error to memory error to deck estimation error exponentially increases the randomness of results when you are playing with the most variance. I have had places that kicked my ass most of the time so I went there less. Eventually I started winning most of the time and went there more and vise versa. That is variance. When you always get beat there is a reason and you should figure out why because it is very unlikely the casino is cheating. You just have more to learn. Careful observation of what places aren't killing you because of variance will teach you advanced lessons in AP by figuring out why. If you believe you are being cheated and don't try to understand what is actually going on you are destined to continually fail where you could learn to succeed.

With the counts and columns and bins you use, those machines rigged to defeat the average counter with a common count, cannot beat you and might even end up helping you T3. You saying you can win everywhere is similar to a great golfer saying he can get par on any course. Probably makes it easier for him to win as the course defeats most others.

[BJGenius007]

I have played in places that people say have rigged shufflers. I beat the shit out of them. The truth is the people are either bad at CC or can't see variance or can't see other reasons for results. I tracked results carefully and determined what conditions contributed to poor results. Then I avoided those conditions and my results improved greatly. These people that see rigged this or whatever will never learn why they actually lose. Usually the places that seem to offer the best games are toughest to beat. They are not cheating. The variance is high on great games. The margin for error is much less forgiving. Combine the 2 and you have trouble. As the last card approaches any error in anything is greatly magnified. The increase in any kind of human error from counting error to memory error to deck estimation error exponentially increases the randomness of results when you are playing with the most variance. I have had places that kicked my ass most of the time so I went there less. Eventually I started winning most of the time and went there more and vise versa. That is variance. When you always get beat there is a reason and you should figure out why because it is very unlikely the casino is cheating. You just have more to learn. Careful observation of what places aren't killing you because of variance will teach you advanced lessons in AP by figuring out why. If you believe you are being cheated and don't try to understand what is actually going on you are destined to continually fail where you could learn to succeed.

Actually your result could just be the proof that ASM is programmed to generate player unfriendly sequence. In the past two years I have seen BS players and Hi-Lo players getting seriously hurt by the clumping. I basically use HiOptII/ASC with a serious of add-ons, so the clumping has little effect on me. However, one kind of the ploppies benefit from the clumping. Read her story next.

I call her "Girl on fire". Basically her strategy is "mimic the dealer". She hardly double or split. She ignore dealer's upcard, hit 12, 13, 14 or even 15 when the coming cards is on small clump. Normally a shoe has two or three small clumps, a sequence of 15 to 20 cards, 80% to 90% are 2, 3, 4, 6. Then there are face card clumps, of 13 cards, 11 or 12 cards are face so everybody pushes. Ace and 5 have their own clump. My most profitable session is always with her. With only two of us and she eats all small cards, sometimes I won 75% of the hands and my average ev is triple my average with her at the table. Even she is flat betting, she won as much as I do. Not just her, my observation is that if there is some ploppy mimic the dealer, it always benefit the table because small cards come in clump. In this case, "The Flow" is true.

[Three]

You miss the point of my post. The point is the players that are less motivated take the easy way out. Rather than analyze why you win or lose and what is just variance and what isn't, they just say they are being cheated. They never spend the effort required to figure out how to win more from their records. Maybe they are not motivated enough to keep records. Now this is not to say that everyone that uses this count fits, but what count do you think the unmotivated people tend to use? Hilo, of course, because it is easiest. Others use Hilo but are highly motivated and figured out how to use the count so they can consistently win and how to play with enough affordable cover whether betting or playing to have some degree of longevity if they are not in the slash and burn camp (players that play so aggressively they expect a quick backoff but travel all over so they still have plenty of games they can play). You just turned the thread yellow Zee and Genius.

[moses]

I'm surprised it lasted this long. Either run with the big dogs or stay in the porch. Not that the porch is a bad place.

[Norm]

Makes no sense at all. Are you saying the shuffle somehow dynamically adapts to different number of hands?

[Canceler]

I am new here whats with the yellow??

Yellow is for caution. It's to alert you that you're likely reading nonsense.

[Nick12345]

I like to suggest my theory and add on my experiences that's making me believe my local tribal casinos may be cheating.

My theory first, if we can have a program that runs billions of simulations to help us find an edge, the casinos (or specifically the ASM) can do the same. They could run billions of simulations to figure out the best way to shuffle (stack) the cards in multiple different ways to give casino more edge. Regardless of where the cut cards goes and how many players come in and out, the simulation would have taken into account of this.

From my experience of 2 years, I have noticed the differences between hand shuffle and the ASM for single deck. For ASM, I frequently see small cards with aces clumped up, from small to the extreme. I'm guessing this reduces players from getting blackjack thus losing edge.

I would see the count go very high, dealer shows bust card, you know there's a high possibility of a 10 coming out and surprisingly, it's a small/medium to help the dealer make a hand. I know these are possible outcomes, but I've seen it way too much to be a coincidence. I've log in 3x the hours playing on hand shuffle compared to ASM, so it's safe to compare the two. In hand shuffle, I may see this clump once every hour, but most of the time its nonexistent. Whereas for ASM, I have seen it as frequently as 7-10 times an hour. Even went to the extremes (from watching) where 4 players, 2 rounds dealt and only 3 tens came out, 2-3 aces, 80% small cards and rest mediums dealt out, that's half the deck! It's usually the pattern of small cards followed by an ace and continued with small cards.

Okay maybe its variance, but this next part really bothers me.
This tribal casino's ASM for single deck has an antenna. Asked pit boss what this is for. Responds, casino doesn't own the ASM and must pay per shuffle. I'm thinking what if it could be linked to surveillance or someone who can just press a button which can affect the ASM. It could be telling it how many players on tables, thus affect how cards are shuffled/stacked.
Let's assume that's all bullshit, thus leads me to think "why would this casino invest in this?" They lose money in the long run, "paying per shuffle." What makes it special compared to actually owning their own shuffle machine for a couple grand. I guess it may be patented and no company in the world can build a simple shuffle machine for the casino? Nothing fancy? Cause I know these ASM can read cards, making sure all cards are present, no different color cards mixed in, etc. Unless there's a patent on a machine that just simply shuffles cards, nothing more and nothing less. Too many variables just don't add up.