See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

# Thread: Run bad or UNFAIR MACHINES??

#### Hybrid View

1. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

## Run bad or UNFAIR MACHINES??

a group of us have been playing a blackjack machine for over a year now. we have accumulated 2,015,000 hands as a group. our current net results are -1475 units.

the rules of the game are superb. im not going to name them as it could give the game away, but i ran the numbers and i am certain that with composition dependant strategy, the game shows a payback of 100.10% (yes, crazy good i know)

so, after 2 million hands, our ev is +2000 units, and we are currently at -1475 units.*

standard deviation= 1.1

variance=1.21

n0 = 1.21/(.001*.001) = 1.21 million hands

as a group, after 2,015,000 hands, we are DOWN 2.23 standard deviations.

at what point do we stop calling this just a bad run and start to question if this game is just not fair?*

NOTE- i did NOT make an error in calculating EV based on the rules of the game, and yes bj pays 3:2. based on rules, the game payback is 100.10% with a million percent certainty

i always thought that games like video poker and video blackjack had to use random cards and that the only way to change the payback % was to change the rules/pay tables. after doing some reading, ive seen people say that it IS possible to make the game unfair, however casinos in, for example, las vegas, would never operate their machines in an unfair manner, as the legal implications would consume them (plus they make enough with a fair game anyway)

2. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
So I have several thoughts, but you don't have PM privileges. If you post an email, I will reply.

3. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Maybe it's a Class II machine.

4. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Your result is about a 1 in 50 occurrence so not way way out there. Have you made a reasonable deduction to your +0.1% perfect play edge to account for player strategy errors? Obviously it won’t take much errror rate to cut your +0.1% perfect play edge down to say +0.07% or even less than that. With a lower realistic edge your result would obviously be less unusual.

Obviously, if just one of the team players is either stealing money OR making a high rate of play strategy errors, then your result would be less unusual.

5. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Originally Posted by Chuck Jones
Your result is about a 1 in 50 occurrence so not way way out there.
No, that's not true. A 2.23-s.d. loss happens 1.29% of the time, or once in 77.5.

Originally Posted by Chuck Jones
Have you made a reasonable deduction to your +0.1% perfect play edge to account for player strategy errors?
This is flat-betting basic strategy play, presumably for high stakes. It would be ridiculous to make playing mistakes. That isn't the reason.

Originally Posted by Chuck Jones
Obviously, if just one of the team players is either stealing money OR making a high rate of play strategy errors, then your result would be less unusual.
Whereas a one in 78 shot is far from impossible, I'd surely think that the likelihood of someone's stealing is just as great, if not greater.

Don

6. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Don,

Thank you for correcting my error on the 2.23 SD occurrence rate.

Blueman says the team is using a composition dependent strategy and he says it is a BJ machine play. Is this a single deck game that is shuffled after every round? If so, then I am thinking that playing perfect composition dependent strategy is more difficult versus playing a simple basic strategy so there just has to be some human playing errors, and especially when playing a BJ machine where errors just tend to happen more when pushing buttons compared to hand signals with table game play. With a perfect composition dependent strategy play edge of just 0.1% just a very infrequent playing error will easily eat into that tiny perfect play edge.

Obviously the team’s total EV is not coming from that tiny 0.1% perfect composition dependent play edge (cause team is getting cash back, etc) so giving up even half of that 0.1% to infrequent playing
errors is probably not a problem, since play speed affects your overall yield much more than a few infrequent playing errors.

My thoughts are: Blueman, just consider a realistic playing error rate in your edge calculation estimates, and, most importantly, just like Don said, you got to be sure you are running a super tight ship with nobody stealing money.

Chuck

7. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Originally Posted by DSchles
This is flat-betting basic strategy play, presumably for high stakes. It would be ridiculous to make playing mistakes. That isn't the reason.

Don
Just because it’d be ridiculous to make mistakes, doesn’t mean mistakes aren’t happening.

8. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
And it’s really not ridiculous to make a few infrequent playing mistakes because their overall edge is coming mainly from cash back, or something like that, not from that tiny 0.1% perfect play edge. Increasing speed of play can easily be worth more than the cost of a few more infrequent playing errors.

9. 2 out of 2 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Yeah, it's ridiculous to misspell the word "the". But, for some reason I always type it teh and have to go back and correct it. Can't go back and correct a misplay when you're trying to get in as many hands as possible.

10. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Originally Posted by RCJH
So I have several thoughts, but you don't have PM privileges. If you post an email, I will reply.
[email protected]

Page 1 of 2 12 Last

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•