Technology and it’s advances..

[cc12b]

Some casinos use RFID chips on black chips and above. Sensors in the betting circle determine players' bets without the dealer calling out checks play.

This is being used at one of my local store, it is part of big chain. They even know how much chips in your pocket if you are a hamster.

[nighterfighter]

I am not sure about the cost issue. If you can reduce your surveillance staff, get information to the pit where they can hawk the right table, seems to me they might actually save stuff. If they suspect card counting at a particular table, if they could use technology to tell them what the count is at a table instantly, would it not help them? Instead, they have to call upstairs and get someone to look into it?

Long term, yes. But remember, management is usually short-sighted. I don't mean that in a bad way, but upper management and executives have to answer to shareholders, who demand profits every quarter.

Reducing staff will save money in the long term, but the short term expense of installing the equipment/licensing fees, will be a lot.

[Norm]

The experience thus far is quite the opposite. As casino consultants like the ZMan have correctly pointed out; paranoia about APs not only sucks large amounts of money out of casinos -- but pisses off those that will ultimately lose.

[Freightman]

How far in the future is it that technology, in real time, can tell surveillance the count at each table on the floor and in HL rooms and on the floor? .

The software would do a lot more than keep count. It would analyze complete deck composition. Keep in mind that the strength plus 1,2,3,or 4 etc, is influenced by the composition of all of the cards, not just some of the cards.

[Norm]

There is an ancient article by Arnold Snyder that essentially states that even APs at the same table would think other AP players are idiots because they are using very different techniques, all of which are valid. Points to anyone that finds the article.

[nighterfighter]

The software would do a lot more than keep count. It would analyze complete deck composition. Keep in mind that the strength plus 1,2,3,or 4 etc, is influenced by the composition of all of the cards, not just some of the cards.

Software could trivially know what cards are removed from any shoe, and what remains in the shoe. The hard part would then be calculating the advantage that offers the player and correlating that to the player's decisions. I'm not very familiar with how the effect of removal impacts strategy decisions, but I'm guessing most players don't calculate that in their head on the fly (while keeping track of what cards are already gone, except maybe in single deck where the EoR should be much more influential?) Would it even be worth it for the software to calculate that for the casino? (Keeping in mind that extra features cost more to develop, aka cost more for the casino to buy).

Edit: I was originally typing the text below, but decided to remove it, then saw Norm's post regarding multiple APs at the same table:

The software could also keep track of multiple counts (HiLo, KO, Ace5, etc) and correlate that to what any individual at a table is using with some confidence value, and when it hit's a strikepoint send up an alert. For example, 6 hands in, the software is 60% sure Seat 1 is using HiLo, and 15% sure that they are using Ace5, and 67% sure Seat 4 is using KO. After another 6 hands, the confidence value for Seat 1 jumps up to 80%, which triggers an alert to the pit boss.

[Freightman]

There is an ancient article by Arnold Snyder that essentially states that even APs at the same table would think other AP players are idiots because they are using very different techniques, all of which are valid. Points to anyone that finds the article.

If it’s the same article, I’m thinking of, it’s wild. If it is, the guy who lost the least, by surrendering some under 10 count. What’s even more wild are the incredibly diverse plays made, which were based on the particular technique used by the individual players. The article also indicated that all of the professional players were unaware of the pro status of any of the other players.
What was most entertaining is that each player made the correct play based on their particular skill set.

[ShipTheCookies]

There is an ancient article by Arnold Snyder that essentially states that even APs at the same table would think other AP players are idiots because they are using very different techniques, all of which are valid. Points to anyone that finds the article.

This one?

http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/...ldntYouHit.htm

[Freightman]

Software could trivially know what cards are removed from any shoe, and what remains in the shoe. The hard part would then be calculating the advantage that offers the player and correlating that to the player's decisions. I'm not very familiar with how the effect of removal impacts strategy decisions, but I'm guessing most players don't calculate that in their head on the fly (while keeping track of what cards are already gone, except maybe in single deck where the EoR should be much more influential?) Would it even be worth it for the software to calculate that for the casino? (Keeping in mind that extra features cost more to develop, aka cost more for the casino to buy).

Edit: I was originally typing the text below, but decided to remove it, then saw Norm's post regarding multiple APs at the same table:

The software could also keep track of multiple counts (HiLo, KO, Ace5, etc) and correlate that to what any individual at a table is using with some confidence value, and when it hit's a strikepoint send up an alert. For example, 6 hands in, the software is 60% sure Seat 1 is using HiLo, and 15% sure that they are using Ace5, and 67% sure Seat 4 is using KO. After another 6 hands, the confidence value for Seat 1 jumps up to 80%, which triggers an alert to the pit boss.

Further, an analysis if actual remaining deck composition without regard to count used, which would be the one scaring me. The overall program would identify me as a poor quality counter, except for what I’ve just Suggested. I won’t elaborate more, as I want to give Counting Is Fun another opportunity to stick his foot in his mouth.

[nighterfighter]

Further, an analysis if actual remaining deck composition without regard to count used, which would be the one scaring me. The overall program would identify me as a poor quality counter, except for what I’ve just Suggested. I won’t elaborate more, as I want to give Counting Is Fun another opportunity to stick his foot in his mouth.

I'm not sure I'm following. Is that referencing the advantage to the player (regardless of bet size) based on the deck composition? IE: There are 87 cards left, 20 of them are 10 valued, 4 are Aces, 3 are 9s, 6 are 5s, etc... That exact composition is then used to calculate, on the fly, the theoretical advantage a player has? For example, with that theoretical example, there happens to be a 1.27% advantage to the player?

[Freightman]

This one?

http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/...ldntYouHit.htm

That’s the one I was thinking of.

[Freightman]

I'm not sure I'm following. Is that referencing the advantage to the player (regardless of bet size) based on the deck composition? IE: There are 87 cards left, 20 of them are 10 valued, 4 are Aces, 3 are 9s, 6 are 5s, etc... That exact composition is then used to calculate, on the fly, the theoretical advantage a player has? For example, with that theoretical example, there happens to be a 1.27% advantage to the player?

The bet size is relevant, as a super super max bet would indicate that the moon is in the 7th hour and Jupiter would align with Mars.

[nighterfighter]

The bet size is relevant, as a super super max bet would indicate that the moon is in the 7th hour and Jupiter would align with Mars.

Well, now I am more confused, or I did a bad job of explaining what I was thinking. I'm really curious to know what you meant, as I'm still trying to learn. But, I understand if you don't want to say.