Blackjack Gambling

[S0S]

What do you think of Anthony's position that in Blackjack, a novice player can screw-up the others on the blackjack table?


21
♠ ♣♥♦

[OGC]

I think that if you know what you are doing when you are playing blackjack, you want as few variables as you can get in the game. Therefore the best way to play is at a private table, just you and the dealer.

A player who doesn't know what they are doing, introduces too much guesswork to the whole process. Plus, the psychological effect on the other players would cause problems too.

[nevnut]

I totally get what Ant's talkin' about and I agree 100%.

[JustJon]

If you're watching where they cut the ace and are counting cards till it comes out, you don't want the random variable affecting the card's placement

[EddieMoscone]

I can understand people's frustrations, but mathematically does it really mean anything? Or do the situations where a novice screws you just stick out more than the times things work out?

[BoondockSaint]

I had a guy start bitching at me in Vegas once because I take a lot of chances sometimes. I was winning and he was losing. I got fed up with him bitching so we switched seats. I kept winning and he kept losing. I'm not going to make decisions about my hand worrying if I'm screwing yours up.

[Zorro]

Blackjack is just math. There are a finite number of cards in the shoe and the odds of a particular card appearing at any one time are governed by those odds. "Basic Strategy" is derived from those odds... Correct play doesn't guarantee a win it only tries to minimize the math that gives the house an edge. When another player acts outside of the basic rules they change the odds of that hand and by extension the odds of everyone at the table.

So unlike craps or roulette how others play can affect your result.

[Zorro]

I had a guy start bitching at me in Vegas once because I take a lot of chances sometimes. I was winning and he was losing. I got fed up with him bitching so we switched seats. I kept winning and he kept losing. I'm not going to make decisions about my hand worrying if I'm screwing yours up.

You're logic is screwed up. Blackjack is not random... It's not an intuition game.

[MadMatt]

I guess there can be two schools of thought:


Boondock mentioned the first: I win, you lose. Or, more accurately, just 'I win.' Everything is secondary to the individual getting a winning hand.

Anthony demonstrates the second: Player(s) vs. Dealer. As long as the dealer looses, the player(s) win. This is more about everybody at the table playing by the same rules, which are essentially common knowledge (or at least easy to find).


These two views are not very compatible, especially if an individualistic player intrudes on a table of people trying to beat the Dealer. I can completely understand how that can infuriate people.

[foodcourtdruide]

Blackjack is just math. There are a finite number of cards in the shoe and the odds of a particular card appearing at any one time are governed by those odds. "Basic Strategy" is derived from those odds... Correct play doesn't guarantee a win it only tries to minimize the math that gives the house an edge. When another player acts outside of the basic rules they change the odds of that hand and by extension the odds of everyone at the table.
So unlike craps or roulette how others play can affect your result.

How? The cards are shuffled. The odds of a K coming up at the 73rd card in the 6 shoot-deck is the same as the K coming out as the 74th card in the 6 shoot-deck.

The caller that talked about this being a Gambler Fallacy was DEAD on. Anthony sounded like someone who makes a sweeping statement in the political forum and can't back it up, so he started saying "IF YOU READ BOOKS THIS IS WHAT IT SAYS!".

I agree to some degree that the feeling at the table changes, and when an annoying player comes in and you feel negativity you should leave. However, to say there is a mathematical effect is just wrong.

[foodcourtdruide]

You're logic is screwed up. Blackjack is not random... It's not an intuition game.

Intuition is as close to random as you could get. Unless you have a belief that you have psychic abilities.

Edit: Lol! I'm an idiot. I didn't see the word "not".

[Snacks]

You're logic is screwed up. Blackjack is not random... It's not an intuition game.

Thank you! I would never want to play at a table with most of the guys on this board. I understand you are worrying about your money and hand not others but people playing for that 1 hand not only can and will screw up and lose other players money. But it can screw up your future hands as well. People need to learn how to play before they decide to bet. I have heard many of stories of people getting their ass kicked for doing shit like this. Fuck with the wrong guy and see if he doenst wait for you outside.

The easiest way to not deal with dummies is go to an empty table that is priced above the norm. Most weekend fly bye nigh gamblers dont like to risk higher amounts.

[foodcourtdruide]

I guess there can be two schools of thought:


Boondock mentioned the first: I win, you lose. Or, more accurately, just 'I win.' Everything is secondary to the individual getting a winning hand.

Anthony demonstrates the second: Player(s) vs. Dealer. As long as the dealer looses, the player(s) win. This is more about everybody at the table playing by the same rules, which are essentially common knowledge (or at least easy to find).


These two views are not very compatible, especially if an individualistic player intrudes on a table of people trying to beat the Dealer. I can completely understand how that can infuriate people.

Anthony's view makes no sense because the game is random. If you flip a coin 100 times, it may come up heads 54 times and tails 46 times,but does that mean it's more inclined to come up heads? A bad player has the same effect on a blackjack game. Sometimes he will make you win, sometimes he will make you lose. If it just annoys you to watch someone play poorly that's another story completely, but this notion that it has a mathematical effect either way is ridiculous.

[foodcourtdruide]

Thank you! I would never want to play at a table with most of the guys on this board. I understand you are worrying about your money and hand not others but people playing for that 1 hand not only can and will screw up and lose other players money. But it can screw up your future hands as well. People need to learn how to play before they decide to bet. I have heard many of stories of people getting their ass kicked for doing shit like this. Fuck with the wrong guy and see if he doenst wait for you outside.

The easiest way to not deal with dummies is go to an empty table that is priced above the norm. Most weekend fly bye nigh gamblers dont like to risk higher amounts.

It will screw up your future hands as many times as it benefits them. I don't see how anyone can disprove this statement.

[Snacks]

How? The cards are shuffled. The odds of a K coming up at the 73rd card in the 6 shoot-deck is the same as the K coming out as the 74th card in the 6 shoot-deck.

The caller that talked about this being a Gambler Fallacy was DEAD on. Anthony sounded like someone who makes a sweeping statement in the political forum and can't back it up, so he started saying "IF YOU READ BOOKS THIS IS WHAT IT SAYS!".

I agree to some degree that the feeling at the table changes, and when an annoying player comes in and you feel negativity you should leave. However, to say there is a mathematical effect is just wrong.

Ask casino security if thats true. They have cameras to cath players like that. They ban players who beat the casinos and most of these people do it with mathematical probabilities. There is no guarantee with anything but when there is a jerk off playing the game wrong, that player messes with strategy and probabilities.

[foodcourtdruide]

Ask casino security if thats true. They have cameras to cath players like that. They ban players who beat the casinos and most of these people do it with mathematical probabilities. There is no guarantee with anything but when there is a jerk off playing the game wrong, that player messes with strategy and probabilities.

Players that change tables if they are uncomfortable? That happens all the time at Casino's.

[Snoogans]

I agree with Ant on it based on whats pretty much table etiquette, but I dont think it effects it as much as we all feel like it does when we play. But playing correctly does positively effect your own ability to win at the game based on mathmatics. So people always should play anthony's way

[Zorro]

How? The cards are shuffled. The odds of a K coming up at the 73rd card in the 6 shoot-deck is the same as the K coming out as the 74th card in the 6 shoot-deck.

The caller that talked about this being a Gambler Fallacy was DEAD on. Anthony sounded like someone who makes a sweeping statement in the political forum and can't back it up, so he started saying "IF YOU READ BOOKS THIS IS WHAT IT SAYS!".

I agree to some degree that the feeling at the table changes, and when an annoying player comes in and you feel negativity you should leave. However, to say there is a mathematical effect is just wrong.

First off it's a "shoe" not a "shoot". Secondly you need to read a basic statistics book. The odds of any one card being drawn from a deck (in this case we are talking "value") are based on their percentage related to the total amount of cards in the deck. Think multi colored golf balls in a bucket. If there were 100 balls 50 white and 50 other colors the odds say that you have a 50% chance of pulling a white ball. If I reach in and pull a white one then you reach in after me your odds of getting white are reduced. It's the same with blackjack. Since the dealer MUST hit on 16 by taking a card you reduced the odds of that dealer drawing a 10 (or another high card) affecting everyone at the table.

[BoondockSaint]

I just find it more fun to take more chances on gut feelings. Now I'm not hitting on 20 or anything but if I have a 13 and the dealer shows 3 I might hit when you're supposed to stand.

[Snoogans]

The cards arent based on the odds when EVERY card is still in the shoe. Its based on the odds of whats left going by whats come out so far. Thats why taking cards at wrong times cause screw up people. It doesnt screw the overall odds, but it does fuck up the odds of whats coming and whats left. Besides, its just stupid. You play the right way cause thats your best chance to win, and combined, its the best chance for everyone to win by all following those mathematical probabilities. 1 person not following that throws off the whole thing for the rest of the shoe

[Snoogans]

I just find it more fun to take more chances on gut feelings. Now I'm not hitting on 20 or anything but if I have a 13 and the dealer shows 3 I might hit when you're supposed to stand.

thats not the arguement. If you have 13 and the dealer has a 6 showin, then you are an ass. cause then that 7 that woulda made you happy, had you not taken it, woulda busted the dealers 16. And you still woulda won anyway. Thats why you still by the math. Most likely, by standing, you will win more by standing then chancing you get under 8 or whatever

if you have 12 and the dealer is showing 2, people wont really care as much cause chances are alot less that 1 card can break the dealer

[MadMatt]

Anthony's view makes no sense because the game is random. If you flip a coin 100 times, it may come up heads 54 times and tails 46 times,but does that mean it's more inclined to come up heads? A bad player has the same effect on a blackjack game. Sometimes he will make you win, sometimes he will make you lose. If it just annoys you to watch someone play poorly that's another story completely, but this notion that it has a mathematical effect either way is ridiculous.

Where did I make any comment about the randomness of the game or mathematical probabilities - my statements are based upon perception and the way players play the game.

If a table is following the 'rules' of Blackjack and are trying to beat the dealer, then some douche comes over, only cares about his hand, and screws up the rhythm of the table, OF COURSE the table is going to get pissed. It completely changes the dynamic of the game.

[BoondockSaint]

thats not the arguement. If you have 13 and the dealer has a 6 showin, then you are an ass. cause then that 7 that woulda made you happy, had you not taken it, woulda busted the dealers 16. And you still woulda won anyway. Thats why you still by the math. Most likely, by standing, you will win more by standing then chancing you get under 8 or whatever

if you have 12 and the dealer is showing 2, people wont really care as much cause chances are alot less that 1 card can break the dealer

Yes, but I find sitting at the table doing exactly what you're supposed to do each time boring. I find it a lot more exciting to hit 15 against 5 and win 20 to 18 then staying every time just because the odds say to do it. I know it's not the smart way to play but I'm there for my enjoyment.

[MadMatt]

And although the turn of the cards is essentially random, a smart player will be able to 'track' the cards that have been played and make an educated guess about what card might pop up next. And I don't mean strict card counting - simply keeping track of face cards and noticing how many have been dealt recently can help the player.

There are a finite number of cards in the shoe so there is certainly a way to keep up with the deck. Plus, any time you watch a show about gambling in AC or Vegas (ex: Travel Channel shows on the secrets of gambling), they say Blackjack is the best game to play because a knowledgeable player can improve their odds of success.

[Snoogans]

Yes, but I find sitting at the table doing exactly what you're supposed to do each time boring. I find it a lot more exciting to hit 15 against 5 and win 20 to 18 then staying every time just because the odds say to do it. I know it's not the smart way to play but I'm there for my enjoyment.

but thats the thing. Exactly what you are supposed to do doesnt encompass the whole game. There are alot of middle numbers that you can kinda choose or get away with the feelings. Basically the main issue is people hitting on like 15 and over with dealers showing less then 7. Stuff like that. They have little charts that tell you when to do what and splits and things, and even then, the good ones leave you options.

Splitting and doubles always make the game fun. Plus the excitement for me comes mostly in waiting to see the dealer's result.

[Zorro]

Yes, but I find sitting at the table doing exactly what you're supposed to do each time boring. I find it a lot more exciting to hit 15 against 5 and win 20 to 18 then staying every time just because the odds say to do it. I know it's not the smart way to play but I'm there for my enjoyment.

I always gambled to win money. That's the enjoyment

[foodcourtdruide]

First off it's a "shoe" not a "shoot". Secondly you need to read a basic statistics book. The odds of any one card being drawn from a deck (in this case we are talking "value") are based on their percentage related to the total amount of cards in the deck. Think multi colored golf balls in a bucket. If there were 100 balls 50 white and 50 other colors the odds say that you have a 50% chance of pulling a white ball. If I reach in and pull a white one then you reach in after me your odds of getting white are reduced. It's the same with blackjack. Since the dealer MUST hit on 16 by taking a card you reduced the odds of that dealer drawing a 10 (or another high card) affecting everyone at the table.

Sorry about the shoe/shoot thing, you're totally right.

Onto your other point. The only way this would matter is if someone was counting cards, which is 1. almost impossible with a 6 deck SHOE and 2. illegal in a casino anyway. The bad player drawing a 10 reduces the odds of the dealer drawing a 10 and the bad player drawing anything other than a 10 increases the odds of the dealer drawing a 10. When cards are not being counted, the card that the bad player will get is for all purposes, random.

All in all, I guess the point of this thread is people just disagree about this topic lol.

[foodcourtdruide]

Where did I make any comment about the randomness of the game or mathematical probabilities - my statements are based upon perception and the way players play the game.

If a table is following the 'rules' of Blackjack and are trying to beat the dealer, then some douche comes over, only cares about his hand, and screws up the rhythm of the table, OF COURSE the table is going to get pissed. It completely changes the dynamic of the game.

I was speaking of Anthony's point of view in general, that player A has a mathematical effect on player B. It only changes the dynamic of the game from a feeling or senses point of view. The only thing it could effect is a card count.

[foodcourtdruide]

but thats the thing. Exactly what you are supposed to do doesnt encompass the whole game. There are alot of middle numbers that you can kinda choose or get away with the feelings. Basically the main issue is people hitting on like 15 and over with dealers showing less then 7. Stuff like that. They have little charts that tell you when to do what and splits and things, and even then, the good ones leave you options.

Splitting and doubles always make the game fun. Plus the excitement for me comes mostly in waiting to see the dealer's result.

I think this is the root of the problem. People who are playing their months rent don't want to play next to a guy getting a cheap thrill.

[Ritalin]

People who carp and moan at a blackjack table about people "playing wrong" make me tired. They only bitch when their losing, and as far as I'm concerned the argument holds no water. Whether or not I draw a card has NO BEARING on the card you draw after me, EXCEPT that it's one less of those cards you could potentially draw.

So if you're beef with me (well, not me, because I generally play "right") is that you wanted the card I drew, well, isn't that going to be the case whether I'm playing "right" or "wrong" in your book.

Go do your paperback book card counting somewhere else then, and let me enjoy my free jack and coke in peace. Or, better yet, go play with the loners and droolers at the Hold'em table.

[Snoogans]

I think this is the root of the problem. People who are playing their months rent don't want to play next to a guy getting a cheap thrill.

but im sitting here advocating playing the right way. People who are playing with mortgages are just stupid. You should always have the money available that you are gambling. Doesnt mean you are in it for a cheap thrill. Im there to win money, and I play to win money. It doesnt make it less exciting to sweat the next card or anything

[Snacks]

Sorry about the shoe/shoot thing, you're totally right.

Onto your other point. The only way this would matter is if someone was counting cards, which is 1. almost impossible with a 6 deck SHOE and 2. illegal in a casino anyway. The bad player drawing a 10 reduces the odds of the dealer drawing a 10 and the bad player drawing anything other than a 10 increases the odds of the dealer drawing a 10. When cards are not being counted, the card that the bad player will get is for all purposes, random.

All in all, I guess the point of this thread is people just disagree about this topic lol.

first card counting isnt illegal. Its not illegal to use your brain it is only illegal if you use a device. And you can card count with 6 decks. Its not counting each individual king, queen etc its counting hight to low. People get banned once casinos get beat for tons of cash from the same person. Security pictures are passed around from casino to casino and if its person who seems to never lose then they black list them. I personally cant do it but a family friend does and makes a killing. Basically anytime he sees a picture card or a 10 it counts as something and 2-9 something else, then half way through the shoe you should have an idea of whats coming and when. It lets you know when to bet big and went to back off. There is a lot more to it but that is the jist of it.

[Zorro]

People who carp and moan at a blackjack table about people "playing wrong" make me tired. They only bitch when their losing, and as far as I'm concerned the argument holds no water. Whether or not I draw a card has NO BEARING on the card you draw after me, EXCEPT that it's one less of those cards you could potentially draw.

So if you're beef with me (well, not me, because I generally play "right") is that you wanted the card I drew, well, isn't that going to be the case whether I'm playing "right" or "wrong" in your book.

Go do your paperback book card counting somewhere else then, and let me enjoy my free jack and coke in peace. Or, better yet, go play with the loners and droolers at the Hold'em table.

It's people like you that warm the hearts of Casino executives everywhere. Everytime you see all those glittery lights turn to your wife and say "I helped build this place"

[Snoogans]

first card counting isnt illegal. Its not illegal to use your brain it is only illegal if you use a device. And you can card count with 6 decks. Its not counting each individual king, queen etc its counting hight to low. People get banned once casinos get beat for tons of cash from the same person. Security pictures are passed around from casino to casino and if its person who seems to never lose then they black list them. I personally cant do it but a family friend does and makes a killing. Basically anytime he sees a picture card or a 10 it counts as something and 2-9 something else, then half way through the shoe you should have an idea of whats coming and when. It lets you know when to bet big and went to back off. There is a lot more to it but that is the jist of it.

10 of face counts as 1 6-9 is 0 and 2-5 is -1

when the count gets really minus, more high cards are likley left, and vice versa. It takes alot of money and you have to be willing to lose money. But in the long term it makes a ton. Its easy to learn how to do, its REALLY hard to do it when it matters

[Snacks]

People who carp and moan at a blackjack table about people "playing wrong" make me tired. They only bitch when their losing, and as far as I'm concerned the argument holds no water. Whether or not I draw a card has NO BEARING on the card you draw after me, EXCEPT that it's one less of those cards you could potentially draw.

So if you're beef with me (well, not me, because I generally play "right") is that you wanted the card I drew, well, isn't that going to be the case whether I'm playing "right" or "wrong" in your book.

Go do your paperback book card counting somewhere else then, and let me enjoy my free jack and coke in peace. Or, better yet, go play with the loners and droolers at the Hold'em table.

My father was a big gambler. He would bet $500 a hand like it was a $1. Believe me when I tell you he would bitch even when he was winning. Every player effects the next in black jack. To say otherwise shows stupidity about the game itself. Every card dealt will change the hand of ever hand the rest of the shoe. 1 wrong hit could create a killer shoe. Sometimes stupidity helps a hand but can kill you over the next 5 hands in a row.

Next time your at a casino see and try to remember the cards a couple hands after a dummy does something stupid. You can back track the cards and see what most people mean.

[Snacks]

10 of face counts as 1 6-9 is 0 and 2-5 is -1

when the count gets really minus, more high cards are likley left, and vice versa. It takes alot of money and you have to be willing to lose money. But in the long term it makes a ton. Its easy to learn how to do, its REALLY hard to do it when it matters

like I said I never did it or totally understood it but I know it works for him. He does it for living and when he used to meet us in AC I would sit nest to him and do what he said. I would win, bit not as much as I could. I never liked betting more then $50 -$100 on hand.

[Ritalin]

People who carp and moan at a blackjack table about people "playing wrong" make me tired. They only bitch when their losing, and as far as I'm concerned the argument holds no water. Whether or not I draw a card has NO BEARING on the card you draw after me, EXCEPT that it's one less of those cards you could potentially draw.

So if you're beef with me (well, not me, because I generally play "right") is that you wanted the card I drew, well, isn't that going to be the case whether I'm playing "right" or "wrong" in your book.

Go do your paperback book card counting somewhere else then, and let me enjoy my free jack and coke in peace. Or, better yet, go play with the loners and droolers at the Hold'em table.

My father was a big gambler. He would bet $500 a hand like it was a $1. Believe me when I tell you he would bitch even when he was winning. Every player effects the next in black jack. To say otherwise shows stupidity about the game itself. Every card dealt will change the hand of ever hand the rest of the shoe. 1 wrong hit could create a killer shoe. Sometimes stupidity helps a hand but can kill you over the next 5 hands in a row.

Next time your at a casino see and try to remember the cards a couple hands after a dummy does something stupid. You can back track the cards and see what most people mean.

Right, that's exactly what I'm saying. Every player effects every player in blackjack. It's the nature of the game. So I could still play "right" and fuck your draw up. What difference does it make to you if I'm drawing on a 12 or a 19? The next card in the shoe is still your's whether I'm Johnny Vegas or some dick from Iowa playing like a schmuck. That's my point.

[HBox]

Please read this book before commenting further. (http://www.amazon.com/Busting-Vegas-Brought-Casinos-Their/dp/B000Q6GXWM/ref=pd_bbs_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1200454639&sr=8-2)

[Ritalin]

People who carp and moan at a blackjack table about people "playing wrong" make me tired. They only bitch when their losing, and as far as I'm concerned the argument holds no water. Whether or not I draw a card has NO BEARING on the card you draw after me, EXCEPT that it's one less of those cards you could potentially draw.

So if you're beef with me (well, not me, because I generally play "right") is that you wanted the card I drew, well, isn't that going to be the case whether I'm playing "right" or "wrong" in your book.

Go do your paperback book card counting somewhere else then, and let me enjoy my free jack and coke in peace. Or, better yet, go play with the loners and droolers at the Hold'em table.

It's people like you that warm the hearts of Casino executives everywhere. Everytime you see all those glittery lights turn to your wife and say "I helped build this place"

What people like me. You don't know me. We probably play very similarly at a table.

The difference is I don't throw up my hands in despair and moan into my armpit when I don't draw the card I want.

[Snoogans]

What people like me. You don't know me. We probably play very similarly at a table.

The difference is I don't throw up my hands in despair and moan into my armpit when I don't draw the card I want.

Dont lie. Everyone does. yOU may not blame it on the other players, but it pisses you off that you didnt win.

[Ritalin]

Please read this book before commenting further. (http://www.amazon.com/Busting-Vegas-Brought-Casinos-Their/dp/B000Q6GXWM/ref=pd_bbs_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1200454639&sr=8-2)

I read it.

Synopsis: They figured out a way to shortcut card count, and they could predict with pretty reasonable accuracy when a table was going to get "hot", and they would flood that table with big money bets. Money management was as much a key to they system as anything.

So what? That system is not predicated on what the guy sitting to your right is going to do. It has to do with recognizing the right set of conditions under which it's optimal to wager as much money as you can on every favorable hand until the next shuffle. It was built into their system that they were going to make some really big bets and lose them anyway, but the odds still favored making those bets.

I'll admit it's been a while. I wouldn't bet my life on the complete accuracy of my synopsis, but I think I'm right.

[Ritalin]

Dont lie. Everyone does. yOU may not blame it on the other players, but it pisses you off that you didnt win.

No, I really don't. I'm there to have fun, and I assume other people are too.

Listen, everybody hates "hit on 19" guy, and if I'm sitting on 20 and the dealer comes up 21, I'll moan and laugh and shake my head just like everyone else. But I'm not giving other players at the table a hard time.

[Snoogans]

No, I really don't. I'm there to have fun, and I assume other people are too.

Listen, everybody hates "hit on 19" guy, and if I'm sitting on 20 and the dealer comes up 21, I'll moan and laugh and shake my head just like everyone else. But I'm not giving other players at the table a hard time.

i didnt say that. Im sayin, if you dont get a card on a big bet, at least everyone i know, it doesnt make them happy. I dont get mad and yell at people or blame hit on 19 guy but i dont have as much fun on bad shoes

[Ritalin]

i didnt say that. Im sayin, if you dont get a card on a big bet, at least everyone i know, it doesnt make them happy. I dont get mad and yell at people or blame hit on 19 guy but i dont have as much fun on bad shoes

No, neither do I.

We should have a RF.net Atlantic City outing.

[drusilla]

What do you think of Anthony's position that in Blackjack, a novice player can screw-up the others on the blackjack table?


21
♠ ♣♥♦




my father would pay people to leave the table

[HBox]

I read it.

Synopsis: They figured out a way to shortcut card count, and they could predict with pretty reasonable accuracy when a table was going to get "hot", and they would flood that table with big money bets. Money management was as much a key to they system as anything.

So what? That system is not predicated on what the guy sitting to your right is going to do. It has to do with recognizing the right set of conditions under which it's optimal to wager as much money as you can on every favorable hand until the next shuffle. It was built into their system that they were going to make some really big bets and lose them anyway, but the odds still favored making those bets.

I'll admit it's been a while. I wouldn't bet my life on the complete accuracy of my synopsis, but I think I'm right.

You definitely remember wrong. The whole system was predicated on everyone at the table playing the same way, always making the right move. They couldn't guarantee that any one person would make money. Remember, they were working as a team, playing the odds, and card counting of course. And they, as a group, would win big. But it was still very important played the game the right way, even if they kept on themselves losing, so that they as team would win.

[IrishAlkey]

my father would pay people to leave the table

I'd pay Mikeyboy to ban the cunt who started this thread.

[CruelCircus]

How? The cards are shuffled. The odds of a K coming up at the 73rd card in the 6 shoot-deck is the same as the K coming out as the 74th card in the 6 shoot-deck...
However, to say there is a mathematical effect is just wrong.

No, you're wrong. The cards are indeed shuffled, but the game is not random at all. It is estimated that you need to (perfectly) shuffle a deck of cards at least 7 times to acheive a completely random shuffle. Dealers do not shuffle that thoroughly, plus the 4, 6, and 8 deck shoes magnify the effect. In addition, the dealer has specific limts on what he can and cannot do with certain cards. In effect, the players and dealer are playing by different "rules" in the same game which again decreases the true randomness of the possible outcomes. Also, when players bust out, the dealer removes their cards from the table immediately, but winners' and standers' (usually lower) cards stay on the table. This tends to group higher bust cards together in the pile, and since the shuffle is not random, these "clumps" can have a definite impact on gameplay. Also, by playing multiple decks, the casino eliminates the available cards with each subsequent hand. With each hand, the shoe moves further and further from perfect randomness. This is one of the reasons why veteran players seek out "one-deck" BJ tables. The cards are shuffled after each and every hand. It's the closest the game gets to truly random. And the biggest one- the odds of a particular number coming out are NOT the same! There are many more 10's in the deck (10, J, Q, K) than any other possible number. HUGE impact on the randomness of the cards (or their value, at least). Those are just a few of the points, but you get the idea.

Basic Strategy is designed to take advantage of all of these factors, and allows players to give themselves the best possible odds by minimizing the house's advantage. But it works best when all players are playing by the same rules. Any outliers tend to help the house in the big picture. It is in the best interests of the table AND the individual player to minimize that house edge.

The point that Ant didn't really articulate well, is that the "I won" player is short sighted in that it is not zero-sum. The options go beyond Player A winning and the rest of the table losing. The goal is to have Player A win AND the rest of the table win.

[ATMfromChico]

Fuck it! Who wants to play a few hands of 3card with a Bikini-tini in your hand?

[Snacks]

No, neither do I.

We should have a RF.net Atlantic City outing.

Please, lets not! Do everyone a favor and never go near a black jack table. If you want to play for fun and do what you want play black jack on a slot machine. Go at it have a balst!

I read it.

Synopsis: They figured out a way to shortcut card count, and they could predict with pretty reasonable accuracy when a table was going to get "hot", and they would flood that table with big money bets. Money management was as much a key to they system as anything.

So what? That system is not predicated on what the guy sitting to your right is going to do. It has to do with recognizing the right set of conditions under which it's optimal to wager as much money as you can on every favorable hand until the next shuffle. It was built into their system that they were going to make some really big bets and lose them anyway, but the odds still favored making those bets.

I'll admit it's been a while. I wouldn't bet my life on the complete accuracy of my synopsis, but I think I'm right.

just doest get it!!!

You definitely remember wrong. The whole system was predicated on everyone at the table playing the same way, always making the right move. They couldn't guarantee that any one person would make money. Remember, they were working as a team, playing the odds, and card counting of course. And they, as a group, would win big. But it was still very important played the game the right way, even if they kept on themselves losing, so that they as team would win.

thank you. thats the whole purpose of the system is that everyone plays the correct way. If they do then the system should work more often then not. If they dont play correctly they will fuck up the system.

[sailor]

other players may affect you on a given hand, but on average it makes no difference. the cards are all still random. it can help you just as likely as it can hurt you. you have no way of knowing beforehand. think about it. you have a 20 and the dealer shows 10. you can give them either the next card or the one after that. what do you do? please, tell me you see that there is absolutely no way to know which card is going to work out better for you. please.

and ant keeps saying they would throw someone out who played crazy in the high rollers room and asking why. if they do that (i have never heard it before except from him) it is obviously because that one player would upset other players and cause them to gamble less. yes, the crazy player will lose quicker long-term, but he does not affect the rest of the table. anthony keeps confusing the fact that blackjack books give instructions for the individual, not for the whole table.

[Ritalin]

This thread has gotten a little out of hand, but I honestly want to understand where I'm missing the boat on this one.

If I'm reading HBox correctly, the only thing I got wrong about this system is that the players work together. They spread out and play separate tables, and when they recognize one table that has become "prime" - my word - then they swarm to that table and make very large bets on every hand that warrants it.

They're not making crazy plays - ie hitting on 17, let's say, because they think the next card is going to be a 4. They're taking advantage of the conditions of the shoe at that table because they have determined that the conditions are ripe. They're playing the cards the same way any experienced player would play them.

So the strategy as I see it is one of money management.

In this scenario, I don't see why they would care if there was some yahoo at the table taking hits on 19. That guy is probably going to eat some cards that the system players would like to have, but he doesn't change the optimal conditions of the shoe that they are looking for.

Let me put it this way: with that MIT system, let's say there are 4 players working together, and they find a table that they KNOW is hot. Are they going to stay away from playing because there's some guy playing like a knucklehead at the same table?

(maybe I've answered my own question here. The knucklehead hitting on 19 IS taking one face card out of the shoe unneccesarily, and that DOES mathematically change the odds at the table. What I'm confused about is why it matters if the person in that chair is playing "correctly" or not. If I'm playing in that seat, and I take a hit that you approve of, I'm still changing the odds at the table in exactly the same manner.)

[joethebartender]

I say that at any table $10 and under (if you can find them) you can play however you want to. If you get all hot about others playing crazy cards then take the anchor seat and never look to your right. At $25+ tables play right or get lost! Sooner or later you'll find a table that works together at least for a little while.

[Snacks]

other players may affect you on a given hand, but on average it makes no difference. the cards are all still random. it can help you just as likely as it can hurt you. you have no way of knowing beforehand. think about it. you have a 20 and the dealer shows 10. you can give them either the next card or the one after that. what do you do? please, tell me you see that there is absolutely no way to know which card is going to work out better for you. please.

and ant keeps saying they would throw someone out who played crazy in the high rollers room and asking why. if they do that (i have never heard it before except from him) it is obviously because that one player would upset other players and cause them to gamble less. yes, the crazy player will lose quicker long-term, but he does not affect the rest of the table. anthony keeps confusing the fact that blackjack books give instructions for the individual, not for the whole table.

The books give you everything for the individual, yes but it is on,ly based on everyone playing the correct way. If they dont then their fucked up play makes it harder and even more random.

Im shocked that so many of you dont understand that. Yes the game is random but there are ways to play to make the chances work in your favor. There is a reason they say if a dealer is showing a 5 and you have 13 dont hit. Its because there is more of a chance of the dealer haven 15 and the 7 or 8 you are looking for might help you win but will break the dealer and the entire table will win.

Its really not hard to understand the concept or why it is what it is. Seems like the people that think this way are the ones who really dont play the game often or to win real money. They play it for fun and thats what the casinos want. Because the one retard can hurt the entire table. More money for the casinos.

Ant is right they will throw a player out for playing the wrong way. Not so much because they care that he is doing it but because the other big players will leave and go somewhere else. They dont want to lose 5 gamblers when they can just get rid of one. Trust me its true.

[Snacks]

I say that at any table $10 and under (if you can find them) you can play however you want to. If you get all hot about others playing crazy cards then take the anchor seat and never look to your right. At $25+ tables play right or get lost! Sooner or later you'll find a table that works together at least for a little while.

even if you are the last player at the table it doesnt stop others before you from fucking up the draw. It doesnt matter where you sit it matters the people playing. I hope to never play with any of you.

[Ritalin]

Snacks, let's take your example with the dealer showing 5, and you have 13. I agree with you. You stand pat, dealer hits, busts, everybody's a winner. Now let's change things up a little bit.

Scenario 1: Dealer showing 5, but some yahoo sitting next to you has 18 and a hunch, and hits. Draws a 10, busts. Everyone else holds and the dealer hits a 6, and everyone loses. It's the yahoo's fault, right? And you're all going to give him guff for playing "wrong".

Scenario 2: Dealer showing 5, you have 13, I'm sitting to your right, and I have 2 9's. I'm going to split my 9's and hit face cards on both of them. Everyone else holds, dealer draws a 2 and you lose. Nobody says a word. But it's my fault that you lost. If I hadn't split my 9's the dealer would have busted and everyone at the table would be a winner. I win, you lose.

Of course there's a right and a wrong way to play. That's not my point. My point is that it's a drag to sit at a table with some jackass who throws his hands up in the air and blames other people when things don't go his way.

Yes, there are little slivers of an edge in the odds to be found on the blackjack table, and smart players take advantage of them. But if that's what you're after, why are you on the blackjack table at all? Craps give the player the best odds in the house, and how others play their money has no bearing on your bet.

[sailor]

The books give you everything for the individual, yes but it is on,ly based on everyone playing the correct way. If they dont then their fucked up play makes it harder and even more random.

Im shocked that so many of you dont understand that. Yes the game is random but there are ways to play to make the chances work in your favor. There is a reason they say if a dealer is showing a 5 and you have 13 dont hit. Its because there is more of a chance of the dealer haven 15 and the 7 or 8 you are looking for might help you win but will break the dealer and the entire table will win.

Its really not hard to understand the concept or why it is what it is. Seems like the people that think this way are the ones who really dont play the game often or to win real money. They play it for fun and thats what the casinos want. Because the one retard can hurt the entire table. More money for the casinos.

Ant is right they will throw a player out for playing the wrong way. Not so much because they care that he is doing it but because the other big players will leave and go somewhere else. They dont want to lose 5 gamblers when they can just get rid of one. Trust me its true.

answer my question. i understand your idea. i also understand your idea is wrong. sorry. also, the part of your post i bolded is what i was saying about the other players playing less because they were bothered by the poor player (even though he is not actually having an effect on their ability to win/lose).

and just because ritalin and i disagree with your ideas, please don't act like we'd play like that poor player. i play blackjack very well and have won much more than i have lost. like ritalin said earlier, you have no idea about who i am, but assumed because i didn't agree with your logic that i am a por player. based on nothing, sir.

[Snacks]

answer my question. i understand your idea. i also understand your idea is wrong. sorry. also, the part of your post i bolded is what i was saying about the other players playing less because they were bothered by the poor player (even though he is not actually having an effect on their ability to win/lose).

and just because ritalin and i disagree with your ideas, please don't act like we'd play like that poor player. i play blackjack very well and have won much more than i have lost. like ritalin said earlier, you have no idea about who i am, but assumed because i didn't agree with your logic that i am a por player. based on nothing, sir.

Never assumed anything just making my opinion based on your logic. You are dead wrong, sorry! Ask any professional gambler or read any book and it will tell you exactly what Im saying. How can you say someone playing wrong really doesnt change shit? If I have a 7 and 4 and you have 15 and the dealer has a 4 showing. You are suppose to stay but if you hit and get a 10, you bust you took my 21, lets say the next card then for me is a 3 then I have to stay and hope the dealer bust. You lost, you took away my hand and now the dealer may bust but also may get a 6 and win. You are suppose to follow the rules and strategy of the game if not it DOES change the game for everyone.

Why wouldnt you play like that player? If you think there is nothing wrong with it and you wouldnt play like that then you are admitting its wrong? If not then play like the fool.

[HBox]

I'm going to put it this: Nobody can predict how any one hand will turn out. But in the long run, statistically, bad play will hurt not just the bad player but everyone at the table. The most important hand is always the dealer's. To be break the odds in the players favor everyone has to play the right way.

Ritalin, the whole point of the book was the guys getting their odds in their favor. A big part of that was money management and card counting, knowing when the odds were best in their favor and betting large then. Another big part of that was everyone always making the call which statistically maximized their odds. There was a system and they all had to follow. If they didn't they wouldn't have made much money.

In blackjack you can't focus on any particular you have to think in the long run.

[foodcourtdruide]

No, you're wrong. The cards are indeed shuffled, but the game is not random at all. It is estimated that you need to (perfectly) shuffle a deck of cards at least 7 times to acheive a completely random shuffle. Dealers do not shuffle that thoroughly, plus the 4, 6, and 8 deck shoes magnify the effect. In addition, the dealer has specific limts on what he can and cannot do with certain cards. In effect, the players and dealer are playing by different "rules" in the same game which again decreases the true randomness of the possible outcomes. Also, when players bust out, the dealer removes their cards from the table immediately, but winners' and standers' (usually lower) cards stay on the table. This tends to group higher bust cards together in the pile, and since the shuffle is not random, these "clumps" can have a definite impact on gameplay. Also, by playing multiple decks, the casino eliminates the available cards with each subsequent hand. With each hand, the shoe moves further and further from perfect randomness. This is one of the reasons why veteran players seek out "one-deck" BJ tables. The cards are shuffled after each and every hand. It's the closest the game gets to truly random. And the biggest one- the odds of a particular number coming out are NOT the same! There are many more 10's in the deck (10, J, Q, K) than any other possible number. HUGE impact on the randomness of the cards (or their value, at least). Those are just a few of the points, but you get the idea.

Basic Strategy is designed to take advantage of all of these factors, and allows players to give themselves the best possible odds by minimizing the house's advantage. But it works best when all players are playing by the same rules. Any outliers tend to help the house in the big picture. It is in the best interests of the table AND the individual player to minimize that house edge.

The point that Ant didn't really articulate well, is that the "I won" player is short sighted in that it is not zero-sum. The options go beyond Player A winning and the rest of the table losing. The goal is to have Player A win AND the rest of the table win.

This is how I see it, tell me if I'm wrong.

You have an eight deck shoe. 52 cards per deck. That's 416 cards. Let's say the cut card is placed before the second to last deck, so that eliminated 104 cards. Unless you are counting in an extremely controlled evironment how could what the person does in front of you have a more negative, or more positive impact on your game?

This is the argument I think people are making: that a 10 makes the dealer bust more often than not and the bad player taking an extra card eliminated a potential 10 from the deck, however I'd repeat my original point that the chances of a 10 being the 83rd card are exactly the same as it being the 84th card, unless you are card counting.

Also, I agree that the smart player will win more often than the risky player, but the argument is if the risky player hurts the smart players game.

Your shuffle theory was really interesting and the only real way I've seen so far (besides a disruption of flow) that the bad player could have an effect on the game. I don't know enough about casino procedure though. I've been to casino's where they use a shuffling machine. Wouldn't that create real randomness?

[sailor]

Never assumed anything just making my opinion based on your logic. You are dead wrong, sorry! Ask any professional gambler or read any book and it will tell you exactly what Im saying. How can you say someone playing wrong really doesnt change shit? If I have a 7 and 4 and you have 15 and the dealer has a 4 showing. You are suppose to stay but if you hit and get a 10, you bust you took my 21, lets say the next card then for me is a 3 then I have to stay and hope the dealer bust. You lost, you took away my hand and now the dealer may bust but also may get a 6 and win. You are suppose to follow the rules and strategy of the game if not it DOES change the game for everyone.

Why wouldnt you play like that player? If you think there is nothing wrong with it and you wouldnt play like that then you are admitting its wrong? If not then play like the fool.

yet, you con tinually ignore my logic based question and reply with stories. i'll break it down again:

1. you have 20
2. dealer has 10
3. you have chance to give dealer next card or the card after that (one is a nine one is an ace)
4. what do you do? which card do you want the dealer to take? which card is a nine, which is an ace? is there any possible way to know?

yes, everything anyone does affects the table. that's obvious. but, it has a net-zero effect. the number of players at a table or a new player joining or a player leaving the table obvfiously affect what cards everyone will get...but you don't leave a table because someone leaves or someone else joins or if one of the player decides to play two hands, even tho' every one of those will affect which cards you and the dealer get. your argument is based solely on intuition and feel and not science and math and game theory.

[foodcourtdruide]

Never assumed anything just making my opinion based on your logic. You are dead wrong, sorry! Ask any professional gambler or read any book and it will tell you exactly what Im saying. How can you say someone playing wrong really doesnt change shit? If I have a 7 and 4 and you have 15 and the dealer has a 4 showing. You are suppose to stay but if you hit and get a 10, you bust you took my 21, lets say the next card then for me is a 3 then I have to stay and hope the dealer bust. You lost, you took away my hand and now the dealer may bust but also may get a 6 and win. You are suppose to follow the rules and strategy of the game if not it DOES change the game for everyone.

Why wouldnt you play like that player? If you think there is nothing wrong with it and you wouldnt play like that then you are admitting its wrong? If not then play like the fool.

Why should everyone play the same? The reason everyone gambles is different.

And your example above doesn't address this:

A bad player is just as likely to hurt you as he/she is to help you. The 10 the bad player drew had the same chance of being the 83rd card in the deck as it did b eing the 84th card in the deck, and unless you were card counting you could not have predicted it.

[sailor]

Why should everyone play the same? The reason everyone gambles is different.

And your example above doesn't address this:

A bad player is just as likely to hurt you as he/she is to help you. The 10 the bad player drew had the same chance of being the 83rd card in the deck as it did b eing the 84th card in the deck, and unless you were card counting you could not have predicted it.

your post is essentially what i was saying. actually, even with card counting you cannot predict a single card. you can predict a 10 or face card is more likely, but you can't predict the location of a single card. the only way you can do that is the old school set-ups when you could actually cut the deck and saw the actual bottom card.

[PhishHead]

didn't Ben Mezrich today on O&A say that a bad player statistically does not change your chances of winning or losing? He said if you are counting cards it may throw off your count not knowing what he will do, but overall mathematically and statistically a loose cannon/bad player will not affect your chances.

[sailor]

didn't Ben Mezrich today on O&A say that a bad player statistically does not change your chances of winning or losing? He said if you are counting cards it may throw off your count not knowing what he will do, but overall mathematically and statistically a loose cannon/bad player will not affect your chances.

i had to get on the train right as they said he was going to be on the phone during the next break. is that what he said?

[foodcourtdruide]

didn't Ben Mezrich today on O&A say that a bad player statistically does not change your chances of winning or losing? He said if you are counting cards it may throw off your count not knowing what he will do, but overall mathematically and statistically a loose cannon/bad player will not affect your chances.

Did Anthony tell him to read a book or talk to an expert and see how they all agree on this?

[PhishHead]

i had to get on the train right as they said he was going to be on the phone during the next break. is that what he said?

Did Anthony tell him to read a book or talk to an expert and see how they all agree on this?

anthony took bens answers and anthony then said he himself was wrong and he agrees with Ben if thats what he says because of his experience. Ben basically said it affects more of the feel of the game and how you will bet and what not but in no terms does it mess it up anything statistically speaking.

[foodcourtdruide]

anthony took bens answers and anthony then said he himself was wrong and he agrees with Ben if thats what he says because of his experience. Ben basically said it affects more of the feel of the game and how you will bet and what not but in no terms does it mess it up anything statistically speaking.

Ah, kudos to Anthony.

[Ritalin]

I'm going to put it this: Nobody can predict how any one hand will turn out. But in the long run, statistically, bad play will hurt not just the bad player but everyone at the table. The most important hand is always the dealer's. To be break the odds in the players favor everyone has to play the right way.

Ritalin, the whole point of the book was the guys getting their odds in their favor. A big part of that was money management and card counting, knowing when the odds were best in their favor and betting large then. Another big part of that was everyone always making the call which statistically maximized their odds. There was a system and they all had to follow. If they didn't they wouldn't have made much money.

In blackjack you can't focus on any particular you have to think in the long run.

You and I are saying the same thing, HBox. Within the MIT gimmick, all of the players have to adhere certain rules in order to maximize the advantage gained through the card counting.

But it doesn't matter to them if there's someone else at the table who doesn't get the gimmick. They're still sitting at a table that they KNOW is hot, and they're going to ride it out. Statistically, the other player at the table (the one who doesn't get the gimmick) isn't changing their odds any more or less with his play.

The system works because they pool their resources, and they maximize that pool's exposure to favorable odds as much as they can. They don't care if there's another player sitting at the table hitting on 18.

[CruelCircus]

This is how I see it, tell me if I'm wrong.
... however I'd repeat my original point that the chances of a 10 being the 83rd card are exactly the same as it being the 84th card, unless you are card counting.
That's absolutely true in a statistical vacuum, and a perfect shuffle. But as I mentioned in my post, the game of blackjack is not a perfect situation. There are all kinds of factors and rules that affect the distribution of the cards, and how they are removed from the deck(s). The fact that chances are (theoretically) the same for 83 vs. 84 really isn'rt actually very relevant.

I don't know enough about casino procedure though. I've been to casino's where they use a shuffling machine. Wouldn't that create real randomness?

If the machine shuffles the whole shoe at least 7 times, I suppose it would. However, I don't know the settings on the machines, and they would probably be different for each casino, or each gambling city. I do know that I played over the summer on a cruise ship that had machines and got absolutely destroyed, so either I had a really bad streak, or the shuffle is more random.

[CruelCircus]

but, it has a net-zero effect.
Actually it has a cumulative effect. It gets worse the longer someone isn't using Basic Strategy.

but you don't leave a table because someone leaves or someone else joins or if one of the player decides to play two hands, even tho' every one of those will affect which cards you and the dealer get. your argument is based solely on intuition and feel and not science and math and game theory.
Actually, I've met players who won't play multiple hands and don't like it when someone else does. Also, there are many players who won't enter a game in the middle of a shoe. They consider it a courtesy to the players at the table. They wait until the shuffle to sit down.

[sailor]

Actually it has a cumulative effect. It gets worse the longer someone isn't using Basic Strategy.


well, as phishhead pointed out ben mezrich author of bringing down the house (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0743249992) agreed that another player at the table has a net-zero effect on your winning. i don't see how you could persist with your argument in light of that.

[CruelCircus]

I didn't hear the Mezrich interview.
I'll try and track it down if I can and take a listen.

[DJEvelEd]

What's the big friggin deal? If you have an issue with bad players, sit in the first seat! If you want to see everyone else's cards, sit in the last seat and deal with the bad players. I like to sit in the last seat to see how many face cards are out there, and I can usually see the cut card from that position too.

I sometimes have a problem when the dealer has a 6 showing and someone takes a hit on a bad card. In that case, sitting in the first position can't help you but at least they can't take your card.