Effect of Removal, Sims with a Modified Shoe

[k_c]

Thanks, Don.

k_c, maybe I am getting confused. In your most recent post, whenever you used the word "modify," each time were you meaning 'permanently modify' (due to an incomplete shoe)? Or at times when you used the word "modify,' did you mean 'temporarily modify' via removal due to the cards being 'played out?'

k_c and Don and others, thanks for your patience. I realize this is confusing. Perhaps if k_c replies I can soon explain my rationale for this convoluted question.

This is one of those times where verbal communication is so much more effective that writing. One of the things I am looking forward to in a collaborator is not having to rely solely on written communication.

You are stipulating that 2,3,3,4,4,4,4,4,4 are always played on round 1. Nothing else is known. You can reshuffle them back into a full shoe after shoe number 1 is completed if you wish but your stipulation is that 2,3,3,4,4,4,4,4,4 will again be removed on the next round 1. Shoe number 2 is mathematically identical to shoe number 1 and all other shoes for which this stipulation is made.

k_c

[Overkill]

"You can reshuffle them back into a full shoe after shoe number 1 is completed if you wish but your stipulation is that 2,3,3,4,4,4,4,4,4 will again be removed on the next round 1."

Your above sentence tells me you understand my question. The only part of the question that I am unsure of is if you put any stock in 'card clumping.' (As an aside, though I dont want the thread to go off on a card clumping tangent, regarding card clumping: I believe that if someone were to present to me 2 strings of 30 cards (from 2 shoes of cards that have been in play a while) that are in post-shuffle order, I can tell you with accuracy beyond random guessing which string came from a machine shuffler and which string came from a human hand shuffle.).

Now, there are options, k_c:
1) you DO believe there is some validity to card clumping, and you still maintain that the player E.V. across both scenarios (permanently modified shoe and shoe with all 104 cards) will be the same, or,
2) you do not believe in card clumping anyway.

But for whatever reason [either 1) or 2) above], you answered that both practices (using a shoe of cards with the 9 cards permanently removed and using a shoe of cards with the 9 cards removed for everything except Round 1 and shuffles) will result in the same player E.V.

Now, given that's true:
If we had a laptop on the felt of a table in the high limit room of Caesar's Palace , could you, k_c, after each Round 1 of each shoe, enter the 4-12 or so cards comprising the dealer's cards and the lone player's cards of Round 1 and ask the computer to tell you the Effect of Removal (EOR) of, say, those 6 cards on the rest of the shoe (roughly 11 more hands).

The beauty of this EOR of a STRING of cards over and above calculating the EOR of a SINGLE card is obviously improved precision of calculated E.V. for the rest of the shoe. And obviously the beauty of this EOR of a string of cards over card counting is that no more math is required (unless desired) once Round 2 starts: we already have our advantage or lack of advantage for the rest of the shoe. This of course is huge because heat is not really an issue.

If a computer can do this, which I am sure it easily can, the next step is to see how the task can be adjusted for a human to do without a computer.

Indeed, I realize card counting obviates the need for what I am proposing (and I know I cannot be the first person to propose such!) but at a loss of precision and cover.

Thanks again for your patience again regarding my long-windedness.

[k_c]

Sounds like you may be thinking about shuffle tracking; art of predicting when slug of positive cards are about to be dealt. I couldn't help with that.

k_c

[Overkill]

Not shuffltracking.

Consider Round 1 of Shoe 1. Round 1 of Shoe 1 is comprised of the same 9 cards we have been discussing. We know the player advantage for Round 2 and on is what you previously calculated: roughly +2%. So we flat bet the rest of the Shoe at an appropriate amount ($1000 maybe).

Next, we encounter Round 1 of Shoe 2: 10, Q, Q, J. We know that the effect of the removal of this string of cards is bad for the player, so we flat bet the table minimum for the rest of this Shoe, or we move to a different table or casino.

Next, we encounter Round 1 of Shoe 3: 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, J, J. We calculate whether or not we have an advantage for this Shoe and bet accordingly.

Continue to next Shoe, etc.

I realize that most of the time the player will either be facing a player disadvantage or only a slight player advantage. Nonetheless, is it possible for a human to sit in a casino without a computer and know the player advantage or disadvantage for each shoe based on what string of cards has been removed from Round 1 of each Shoe he faces?

Thank you again.

[DSchles]

What you're proposing makes zero sense. You're basically talking about seeing one round and playing or not playing an entire six-deck shoe based on that one round? Forget about it!!

Don

[peterlee]

I realize that most of the time the player will either be facing a player disadvantage or only a slight player advantage. Nonetheless, is it possible for a human to sit in a casino without a computer and know the player advantage or disadvantage for each shoe based on what string of cards has been removed from Round 1 of each Shoe he faces?

.

Yes..because humans can hardly handle those EOR numbers, we invented counting systems we can easily handle, like simple HiLo.

+++
Chatgpt answer:

While it is possible for a human to keep track of cards and potentially gain an advantage in certain situations, this technique is commonly known as card counting, and it is not easy to do accurately or consistently without significant practice and knowledge.
Card counting involves keeping track of the cards that have been played in a blackjack game to determine the remaining cards in the deck or shoe. This information can then be used to make better decisions on when to bet and how much to bet. However, this technique requires a great deal of focus, mental calculations, and practice to execute effectively, and it is generally not allowed in casinos. In fact, many casinos employ measures to prevent or deter card counting, such as using multiple decks of cards, shuffling more frequently, or using automatic shufflers.
Furthermore, even if a player is able to accurately count cards, the advantage gained may only be slight, and there is always a risk of losing money due to factors such as variance and the casino's built-in house edge.
In short, while it is technically possible for a human to track cards and gain a player advantage in certain situations, it is generally not a reliable or practical strategy for the average player in a casino setting.