"The most powerful Blackjack manual"- Jay Moore

#1
Anyone read this book?

This mathematician/architect makes an interesting argument considering all I am seeing in the casinos are automatic shuffling machines which are creating almost perfectly random (ie. low count) hands. His progression looks to take advantage of the increased oscillation (sp?) between win/loss hands and the infrequency of streaks (ie. clumping destoyed) by automatic, continuously shuffling, card machines. In other words, what do you do when penetration is DEAD? Can you take advatage of THAT?

Doctors.....comments?

Timothy
 

Sonny

Well-Known Member
#2
Timothy said:
Anyone read this book?
We had a discussion about this last week. See the thread below:

http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?t=2819

Timothy said:
This mathematician/architect makes an interesting argument considering all I am seeing in the casinos are automatic shuffling machines which are creating almost perfectly random (ie. low count) hands.
A perfectly random shuffle (if there is such a thing) would create globally neutral counts, not constant low (or high) counts. If such counts would be constantly neutral then the term "random" doesn't really apply, does it? If something is random it cannot also be constant. Something random must exhibit wild fluctuations with each outcome being equally probably. A truly random shoe would have equal probabilities of being neutral, negative or positive. In that case, why would a shuffle machine be any more random than a human shuffle? I think Moore’s misunderstanding (or misrepresentation) of the term “random” is the main reason his system is a failure.

Timothy said:
His progression looks to take advantage of the increased oscillation (sp?) between win/loss hands and the infrequency of streaks (ie. clumping destoyed) by automatic, continuously shuffling, card machines.
The shuffle machines do not destroy card clumping at all. If you watch the games you will see plenty of high card and low card clumps. Just because the shoe is constantly shuffled doesn’t mean that the distribution of cards is random. The machines don’t look through the shoe and say “Hmm, there aren’t a lot of fives in this section so I’ll put one here.” They just blindly insert the cards into (or deal the cards from, depending on the model) a random section. They are just as likely to put two fives next to each other as to put them roughly 13 cards apart.

Even if the shoes were “random” you still wouldn’t be able to predict the outcome of the next hand before you place your bet. There is no progression system that can predict the outcome of the next hand based on past events. In fact, since every hand is played from a full shoe you should expect the house edge to be against you on every hand. Raising your bet will only cause you to lose more money.

As far as streaks are concerned, his theory of “increased oscillation” and “infrequent streaks” is not accurate. Games like roulette and craps are completely random (independent trials) yet you still see streaks all the time. The fact that they are not predictable, just like in blackjack, means that the games are not beatable using ANY progression system.

Timothy said:
In other words, what do you do when penetration is DEAD? Can you take advatage of THAT?
Sure, just not by blindly using a progression system. Here's a little tidbit:

"Wong was one of the first to beat the Continuous Shuffle Machines (CSM's). When the first generation of Continuous Shufflers were introduced at the Mirage, two teams of professional card-counters, one led by Stanford Wong, beat the casinos, making off with tens of thousands of dollars before the casino removed the machines. Needless to say refinements have been made to the Continuous Shuffle Machines since then. Many believe they are still beatable…"

Look around on the Advanced Strategies section for more info on CSMs. The new models are beatable but it is usually not worth the effort.

-Sonny-
 
#4
Sonny said:
The shuffle machines do not destroy card clumping at all. If you watch the games you will see plenty of high card and low card clumps. Just because the shoe is constantly shuffled doesn’t mean that the distribution of cards is random. The machines don’t look through the shoe and say “Hmm, there aren’t a lot of fives in this section so I’ll put one here.” They just blindly insert the cards into (or deal the cards from, depending on the model) a random section. They are just as likely to put two fives next to each other as to put them roughly 13 cards apart.
Well, card clumping is a random occurance. If it infact did look for clumps, then you would be sure that you'd never hit a clump. Then it wouldn't be random. :)
 
Top