To beat the continuous shuffle machines(KING)?

#1
Hi,

From the UNITED STATES CSM patent(patent no:6,254,096)report(4deck Model), Maximum & minimum no of cards to be unloaded from a compartment to the second card receiver is 14 and 4 respectively, therefore, average number of cards is 9.

Average number of cards in second card receiver to trigger unloading of a compartment is 8 as stated in the patent report.

1)Assuming that the previous round just finished at this juncture and second card receiver start to trigger unloading of a compartment just before the dealer insert the played cards into first card receiver, therefore, there are average total of 17(9 from a compartment+ 8 in the 2nd receiver) cards in the second receiver and all this cards will not shuffle with the cards just insert to the CSM, am I correct?, please give your comments.

2)In the Operation/Use section of the patent report, ".....the CSM is programmed to constantly maintain a "buffer" of a selected number of cards, for example 20 cards.."...what it means by this statement ?...is it there are always 20 cards in second card receiver and all this cards will not shuffle with the cards(from previous round) just insert to the CSM ???

3)The buffer may be selected, how we can determine the buffer of one particular CSM??

4) Assuming the TC from the previous round is +2 (8 small cards, 4 Deck), and there are 17/20 (as what I mentioned in paragraph 1 & 2) cards already in the second cards receiver(this cards will not shuffle with cards in compartments!!), so we can play 6 hands( total cards = 6 hands x 3cards/hand = 18cards, just take up all the cards in 2nd receiver) for the next round with TC=+2!!!...what is your comments?? is it possible to beat the CSM by using this method???

cheers

James from singapore
 

KenSmith

Administrator
Staff member
#2
Link to the complete patent

James, I took the liberty of moving your post down to 'Advanced Techniques'.

I saw your post about this on another newsgroup a few days back, and I was intrigued by it. However, I haven't had any time to think about it much. Maybe later tonight...

Meanwhile, for others who are interested, here's a link to the entire patent:
(Dead link: http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6,254,096.WKU.&OS=PN/6,254,096&RS=PN/6,254,096) _Device and Method for Continuously Shuffling Cards_

(If you get an error about too many users accessing the patent web site, just try again. It may take several tries.)
 
#3
4 Card Shuffle

I Do Not Know If I'm Qualified To Answer Here. However, I Want To Share An Experience With Automatic Shufflers.
While Playing At The Borgata, The Dealer Dealt 4 7's In A Row. Later That Game 4 2's Came Out.
Several Deals Later 4 9's Came Out. I Questioned The Dealer About This. She Made The Comment, " Ohh, The Shuffler Apparently Does That Once In A Awhile." From This Experience And A Similar One At Trump, I Came To The Assumption She May Be Correct. Does The Optical Shuffler First Organize The Deck, And Then Reshuffle?
How Else Would 4 Card Hands Appear Frequently? Is It Possible The Shuffler "malfunctions" In This Manner?
Any Comments?
 
#4
another request

Hello there!

I ' m John from Greece.

Did anyone ,finally, answer your questions, James from Singapore? If he did, I' m interested in the response! I think there is a very good possibility that you are actually right on what you wrote about the 6254096 patent-the king model-.

But what about the 6659460 patent -"one to six" model-? In the us patent office, the description is not as analytical as the King's model.Therefore I cannot understand the operation procedure they follow, since there is no operation/use chapter.

If anyone knows something exploitable about them, I would be really gratefull if he could share his information with me

Thanks in advance!
 

Preston

Well-Known Member
#5
FISHNCAMP said:
I Do Not Know If I'm Qualified To Answer Here. However, I Want To Share An Experience With Automatic Shufflers.
While Playing At The Borgata, The Dealer Dealt 4 7's In A Row. Later That Game 4 2's Came Out.
Several Deals Later 4 9's Came Out. I Questioned The Dealer About This. She Made The Comment, " Ohh, The Shuffler Apparently Does That Once In A Awhile." From This Experience And A Similar One At Trump, I Came To The Assumption She May Be Correct. Does The Optical Shuffler First Organize The Deck, And Then Reshuffle?
How Else Would 4 Card Hands Appear Frequently? Is It Possible The Shuffler "malfunctions" In This Manner?
Any Comments?
You are talking about an auto shuffler.. this is different than a CSM.

The four 2's and four 7's is unlikely, but it can happen. The fact that it happened was just coincidence, I wouldn't attribute it to anything more.
 
#7
I would never enter a casino that uses CSM. The csm was not invented to be used all the time. It was invented to help the dealer to shuffle the cards better, and put back into shoe, not continue to run the machine all the time. The stinking casinos saw things different about the csm. I have a card shuffler and a shoe. I was think about getting a dead tray.

Harry:)
 

cardcounter0

Well-Known Member
#8
FISHNCAMP said:
I Do Not Know If I'm Qualified To Answer Here. However, I Want To Share An Experience With Automatic Shufflers.
While Playing At The Borgata, The Dealer Dealt 4 7's In A Row. Later That Game 4 2's Came Out.
Several Deals Later 4 9's Came Out. I Questioned The Dealer About This. She Made The Comment, " Ohh, The Shuffler Apparently Does That Once In A Awhile." From This Experience And A Similar One At Trump, I Came To The Assumption She May Be Correct. Does The Optical Shuffler First Organize The Deck, And Then Reshuffle?
How Else Would 4 Card Hands Appear Frequently? Is It Possible The Shuffler "malfunctions" In This Manner?
Any Comments?
This Only Happens If You Are Known To Capitalize The First Letter Of Every Word You Type Like Some Kind Of Idiot.
 

callipygian

Well-Known Member
#9
KenSmith said:
Meanwhile, for others who are interested, here's a link to the entire patent:
(Dead link: http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6,254,096.WKU.&OS=PN/6,254,096&RS=PN/6,254,096) _Device and Method for Continuously Shuffling Cards_

(If you get an error about too many users accessing the patent web site, just try again. It may take several tries.)
The patent database is public information and there are multiple free search engines that don't have a capacity problem.

(Dead link: http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6254096.html) _Patent Storm_ and Free Patents Online are two that are popular.
 
#10
johnnaras said:
Hello there!

I ' m John from Greece.

Did anyone ,finally, answer your questions, James from Singapore? If he did, I' m interested in the response! I think there is a very good possibility that you are actually right on what you wrote about the 6254096 patent-the king model-.

But what about the 6659460 patent -"one to six" model-? In the us patent office, the description is not as analytical as the King's model.Therefore I cannot understand the operation procedure they follow, since there is no operation/use chapter.

If anyone knows something exploitable about them, I would be really gratefull if he could share his information with me

Thanks in advance!
I have found that the CSM machines in Europe, like other shuffles, demonstrate card repeating phenomenon, if you have a loaded table, with all the players adhering to basic strategy. Take Amsterdam cCasino for example I made a killing there. They have about 20 tables all of them packed, and most of the players consistently employ basic strategy. Also the tables are multi-action tables. What I found was that I could find 3 good seats at a good table and track the cards, and when favorable card patterns started coming to those seats I bet on their spots. I made several thousand euros in just a few nights playing like this. But you need a multi action table to employ this technique. In amsterdam they only have one casino and it is always packed and evey table is full, and most seats have several bettors and of course one player. seven seats per table, five betting spots per seat.
I found that in this situation, the cards were not really random, because the machine was shuffling with a set pattern, and the players, who were all mostly employing basic strategy, were playing with a set pattern, and the dealer was of course replacing the card back in the machine, it was based on the players moves. What I did was looked for a table where the dealer seemed to be busting consistantly, and then I just watched that table for about an hour, Then I could notice certain trends, and take advantage of these trends. It was uncanny, I noticed that in many cases, the exact same cards were coming to the exact same seats! Needless to say, I made lots of money. Because there were 20 tables to choose from, I could find tables where the dealer was consistently getting low hands, and breaking frequently.
When I first saw them I just watched for about 6 hours. It was hypnotic. I noticed that bad tables tende to stay bad, and good tables tended to stay good.
I believe that while CSM machines destroy the prospect of card counting, in the right circumstances, like in Europe, with multiaction tables, they lend themselves to a simple form of advantage play, that is very lucrative. They have a consistancy that I have never seen before. I find that they are much more consistant then hand shuffles or autoshuffles.
I have limited expierience with them, and have never played them in the US as I am primarily a counter. I played them in Europe, because, generally that was all that was available, but I think there is potential. Does anyone else have experience, beating them?
 

moo321

Well-Known Member
#11
cardcounter0 said:
This Only Happens If You Are Known To Capitalize The First Letter Of Every Word You Type Like Some Kind Of Idiot.
I just noticed that you flamed someone from 3 1/2 years ago. Classy.
 
Top