Dealer flipping 2nd card as upcard?

[twentyonee]

Hi, new poster here. I have noticed something unusual and just wondering if this affects the odds in any way. I'm used to playing blackjack where the dealer always uses the first card that comes out of the shoe as the upcard, but I recently ran into a casino where the dealer uses the '2nd' card as the upcard. Would this affect the odds in any way for someone who counts cards or even a basic strategy player? My understanding is that it would not, since the cards are random and the first card is just as likely to help you or hurt you as is the 2nd card, but I would like to know if anyone has done any simulations on this specific dealing procedure.

Thanks in advance.

[ZeeBabar]

You are probably correct.

[Freightman]

Hi, new poster here. I have noticed something unusual and just wondering if this affects the odds in any way. I'm used to playing blackjack where the dealer always uses the first card that comes out of the shoe as the upcard, but I recently ran into a casino where the dealer uses the '2nd' card as the upcard. Would this affect the odds in any way for someone who counts cards or even a basic strategy player? My understanding is that it would not, since the cards are random and the first card is just as likely to help you or hurt you as is the 2nd card, but I would like to know if anyone has done any simulations on this specific dealing procedure.

Thanks in advance.

My games are almost all NHC. That being said, this will not affect the basic player in any way. I can see that this twist could well hurt the counter on index plays.

Example, dealer ace up.
What was true count when dealer took his first card versus his second card, factored by number of players, and make appropriate adjustments.

For the most part, wouldn't worry about it.

I recall some years back, playing a nice little 4 decker. It was $5 min $100 max, with 3 or 4 players. I had a massive $20 bet out, with 10 showing versus dealer 10. B the time it got back to me to make a decision, true count increased to the point if justifying a double, with an initial measly $20 bet. Similar to your posted question.

[RCJH]

Hi, new poster here. I have noticed something unusual and just wondering if this affects the odds in any way. I'm used to playing blackjack where the dealer always uses the first card that comes out of the shoe as the upcard, but I recently ran into a casino where the dealer uses the '2nd' card as the upcard. Would this affect the odds in any way for someone who counts cards or even a basic strategy player? My understanding is that it would not, since the cards are random and the first card is just as likely to help you or hurt you as is the 2nd card, but I would like to know if anyone has done any simulations on this specific dealing procedure.

Thanks in advance.

So there's two ways to read this. Is this a ENHC game? In that the dealer only TAKES one card, and doesn't TAKE his upcard until after the players have played out their hands? In that case, yes, there are different indices.

Or, are you saying the dealer deals everyone one card and he takes one face down, then he deals everyone a second card and then he takes one for himself up before the players get their hands? So you are looking at one down and one up as you make your playing decisions? If that's the case, no, it makes no difference.

[Three]

As long as the dealer is consistent as to which card is the up-card it affects nothing. If it is sometimes the first card and sometimes the second card they are probably cheating by having a different texture to certain ranks that they would rather have as a dealer up-card. The dealer feels the desired up-card on the first card the card is flipped. If not the second card becomes the dealer up-card.

[Freightman]

So there's two ways to read this. Is this a ENHC game? In that the dealer only TAKES one card, and doesn't TAKE his upcard until after the players have played out their hands? In that case, yes, there are different indices.

Or, are you saying the dealer deals everyone one card and he takes one face down, then he deals everyone a second card and then he takes one for himself up before the players get their hands? So you are looking at one down and one up as you make your playing decisions? If that's the case, no, it makes no difference.

I know common protocol is to say no difference, but there is. I'll try to get back to this later. Right now, I'm N the mispddle of my gruelling work day

[Freightman]

As long as the dealer is consistent as to which card is the up-card it affects nothing. If it is sometimes the first card and sometimes the second card they are probably cheating by having a different texture to certain ranks that they would rather have as a dealer up-card. The dealer feels the desired up-card on the first card the card is flipped. If not the second card becomes the dealer up-card.

This is actually really worth noting. I've not known this to happen in any if my circles if okay. I knew a guy, havent seen him in years, did write a second rate Blackjack book, and mentioned this exact scenario, on I think, a Caribbean junket.

P,Ayer has 10 up, texture a, about to get a second card that has same texture, dealer is able to skip a card - from a shoe. Talk about effect on house edge.

[DSchles]

Bottom line: No, it makes no difference whatsoever which card is flipped, provided it's always the same card, or even if it's a different one, but you're certain there is no cheating, and the choice is random.

However, if it's not always the same one, I would be very suspicious that cheating is, indeed, the motive. Casinos have very strict policies on exactly how every dealer move at the table is to be executed, and it simply isn't acceptable procedure to vary which card is flipped. In your case, if it's always the second, rather than the first, it makes no difference whatsoever.

Don

[terry0222]

But if there is a 3-card poker side game going on (first two player cards plus dealer up card), I'll bet it drives those people crazy. I never play it, but people who do are *always* talking about the dealers "hole card."

[ShipTheCookies]

There is too much cheating paranoia here. Next thing people will say is that the ASM's are rigged!

[twentyonee]

Bottom line: No, it makes no difference whatsoever which card is flipped, provided it's always the same card, or even if it's a different one, but you're certain there is no cheating, and the choice is random.

However, if it's not always the same one, I would be very suspicious that cheating is, indeed, the motive. Casinos have very strict policies on exactly how every dealer move at the table is to be executed, and it simply isn't acceptable procedure to vary which card is flipped. In your case, if it's always the second, rather than the first, it makes no difference whatsoever.

Don

Thanks don. Yes it's always consistent. Dealer always uses 2nd card as the upcard. It was just awkward to see for once.

For everyone else, let me clear up the confusion. This is not ENHC or any no hole card game. Dealer still gets both cards, but they are flipping the '2nd' card out of the shoe as the upcard rather the the 'standard' 1st card as the upcard.

[Three]

Bottom line: No, it makes no difference whatsoever which card is flipped, provided it's always the same card, or even if it's a different one, but you're certain there is no cheating, and the choice is random.

However, if it's not always the same one, I would be very suspicious that cheating is, indeed, the motive. Casinos have very strict policies on exactly how every dealer move at the table is to be executed, and it simply isn't acceptable procedure to vary which card is flipped. In your case, if it's always the second, rather than the first, it makes no difference whatsoever.

Don

I guess I didn't use enough words to say this exact same thing.

[twentyonee]

I guess I didn't use enough words to say this exact same thing.

You did Tthree, i thanked you and don in my previous post