Shufflemaster model one-2-six. Silly question?

UK-21

Well-Known Member
#1
Silly question? Does the 1-2-6 bit of Shufflemaster's latest CSM model means it can take up to six decks of cards?

I played a few hands against one quite recently, and it was quite obvious that the 20 or so cards put back into the hopper at the end of each hand weren't immediately recycled - the next hand would be dealt out before the silly thing started whirring and clicking away.

Bearing this in mind, I' assuming that remembering the "mini-count" from the last hand it would be possible to reduce the HE? In theory, with a full table, you could end up with a RC of +15 (ENHC rules) before any additional cards are played, and so sitting at third base it would be possible to apply all playing indices up to TC+4 or so - the play adjustments benefits could be there, but the benefits of uping the bet would only be there in the odd instances where a doubling or splitting index was applicable. The biggest advantages of standing 16v10 and taking insurance at TC+3 could be used at times.

Perhaps a voodoo consideration, but where a round finished at say TC+3, would doubling the bet for the next hand be silly, on the assumption that all of those low cards won't immediately put an appearance in? If there is a good chance that they won't, then spreading the bet upwards will also go someway to chipping away at the HE?

Before you reach for your armalites, I'm not advocating that all of this stuff will eliminate the HE when playing CSMs, just that it will reduce it down to a minimum possible.

Newb99
 

HarryKuntz

Well-Known Member
#2
This machine can be used with 1-6 decks, hence the name. You would need to check with the casino in question to find out how many decks they are actually using.

Unless this is a SD or DD game (unlikely - properly 4-6 decks in ENHC), the TC's you talk about would be very rare with such bad pen. Even if it is a SD game, 20 cards is still only 38% pen and although you might be able to decrease the HE or even get a small advantage, you would need a mammoth spread with high var and high ROR.

Quite simply, it's just not worth the bother, find yourself a better game instead.
 

UK-21

Well-Known Member
#3
You're quite right. This would be strictly for table mins (perhaps x 2) and entertainment only. For doubling a wager at TC+2 I think the opportunity will only come up around 10% of the time (TC+3 less than 5%).

I'm under no illusions that it's a non-starter from an AP perspective, but if out socially it'll add a little something to the game. There's nothing more boring that playing BS with flat bets (even when sharing a table with friends).

Cheers.
 

HarryKuntz

Well-Known Member
#4
newb99 said:
You're quite right. This would be strictly for table mins (perhaps x 2) and entertainment only. For doubling a wager at TC+2 I think the opportunity will only come up around 10% of the time (TC+3 less than 5%).

I'm under no illusions that it's a non-starter from an AP perspective, but if out socially it'll add a little something to the game. There's nothing more boring that playing BS with flat bets (even when sharing a table with friends).

Cheers.
Well as long as your under no delusions about this and only playing for fun.

Just for a laugh and because i'm very bored at work, here is a 10mil hand sim of the average UK CSM game. - 6D, DOA, DAS, NOS, NO Ins, NS, 20 card pen, £5-£500 table limits. Played with BS+I18 (splitting 10's ignored). £50k BR (100Xtable max)

Notice that the highest the TC ever got was +2 and the lowest -3 (TC's are floored by the way). and see how few times this occured. Also notice even with a 100 unit spread, it still gives a 100% ROR.

Enjoy:-



PowerSim Simulation File: CSM.sim

Decks: 6
Cards: 312
Players: 4
Shuffle Point: 20
Maximum Rounds per shoe (32767 = infinity): 32767
Burn Cards: 0
Maximum Dealer Rounds (0 = infinity): 0
Holecard(1) or Upcard(0) last: 1
European No Hole Card: 1
Maximum Split Hands: 24
Double After Splits: 1
Resplit Aces: 0
Extra Hits on Split Aces: 0
Double on hard 10 or 11 only: 0
Double on split aces: 0
Dealer hits soft 17: 0
Late Surrender: 0
Pick up hands from Last(1) to first(0): 1
Display hands: 0
Display shoes: 0
Strategy File: UK DOA.str

Player 1 using basic: 0
Player 2 using basic: 0
Player 3 using basic: 0
Player 4 using basic: 0

Tag for 1: -1
Tag for 2: 1
Tag for 3: 1
Tag for 4: 1
Tag for 5: 1
Tag for 6: 1
Tag for 7: 0
Tag for 8: 0
Tag for 9: 0
Tag for 10: -1

************************************************************

.BIN file: CSM.bin seed: 1303139430

Round 10000000 was completed at: 11/12/2008 16:37:45
A maximum of 52 cards were dealt from the shoe.
Stats from CSM.bin:

Player 1
True Count: Frequency: Win Rate: Variance:
-3: 17 -.0588236 1.114187
-2: 186875 -.013188 1.302557
-1: 2058677 -.0069379 1.292377
0: 7535060 -.004954 1.289953
1: 218243 -.0024835 1.281453
2: 1128 .0115248 1.231694
Player 2
True Count: Frequency: Win Rate: Variance:
-3: 17 -.352941 1.757785
-2: 186875 -.0089017 1.301616
-1: 2058677 -.0062156 1.293104
0: 7535060 -.0052499 1.288671
1: 218243 -.0051823 1.280624
2: 1128 .0394503 1.316928
Player 3
True Count: Frequency: Win Rate: Variance:
-3: 17 -.147059 1.16955
-2: 186875 -.0084308 1.302304
-1: 2058677 -.0056869 1.292488
0: 7535060 -.0050904 1.29005
1: 218243 -.001118 1.282904
2: 1128 5.81251e-9 1.326241
Player 4
True Count: Frequency: Win Rate: Variance:
-3: 17 -.205882 .854671
-2: 186875 -.0088 1.296365
-1: 2058677 -.0071422 1.292928
0: 7535060 -.0044162 1.28908
1: 218243 .0031089 1.280477
2: 1128 -.0226064 1.280739

============================================================

Bet Ramps from: CSM.bin

Player # 1: -20: 10 -19: 10 -18: 10 -17: 10 -16: 10 -15: 10 -14: 10 -13: 10 -12: 10 -11: 10 -10: 10 -9: 10 -8: 10 -7: 10 -6: 10 -5: 10 -4: 10 -3: 10 -2: 10 -1: 10 0: 10 1: 10 2: 10 3: 10 4: 10 5: 10 6: 10 7: 10 8: 10 9: 10 10: 10 11: 10 12: 10 13: 10 14: 10 15: 10 16: 10 17: 10 18: 10 19: 10 20: 10
Player # 2: -20: 5 -19: 5 -18: 5 -17: 5 -16: 5 -15: 5 -14: 5 -13: 5 -12: 5 -11: 5 -10: 5 -9: 5 -8: 5 -7: 5 -6: 5 -5: 5 -4: 5 -3: 5 -2: 5 -1: 5 0: 5 1: 20 2: 100 3: 200 4: 300 5: 400 6: 500 7: 500 8: 500 9: 500 10: 500 11: 500 12: 500 13: 500 14: 500 15: 500 16: 500 17: 500 18: 500 19: 500 20: 500
Player # 3: -20: 5 -19: 5 -18: 5 -17: 5 -16: 5 -15: 5 -14: 5 -13: 5 -12: 5 -11: 5 -10: 5 -9: 5 -8: 5 -7: 5 -6: 5 -5: 5 -4: 5 -3: 5 -2: 5 -1: 5 0: 5 1: 20 2: 100 3: 200 4: 300 5: 400 6: 500 7: 500 8: 500 9: 500 10: 500 11: 500 12: 500 13: 500 14: 500 15: 500 16: 500 17: 500 18: 500 19: 500 20: 500
Player # 4: -20: 5 -19: 5 -18: 5 -17: 5 -16: 5 -15: 5 -14: 5 -13: 5 -12: 5 -11: 5 -10: 5 -9: 5 -8: 5 -7: 5 -6: 5 -5: 5 -4: 5 -3: 5 -2: 5 -1: 5 0: 5 1: 20 2: 100 3: 200 4: 300 5: 400 6: 500 7: 500 8: 500 9: 500 10: 500 11: 500 12: 500 13: 500 14: 500 15: 500 16: 500 17: 500 18: 500 19: 500 20: 500

10000000 rounds Bankroll = 50000
1: $-.0546061/$10 =-.546061% var = 129.05 ROR = 100%!!
2: $-.028829/$5.33808 =-.540063% var = 44.2058 ROR = 100%!!
3: $-.0263091/$5.33808 =-.492857% var = 44.2574 ROR = 100%!!
4: $-.0237118/$5.33808 =-.444202% var = 44.1669 ROR = 100%!!

------------------------------------------------------------

Bet Ramps from: CSM.bin

Player # 1: -20: 10 -19: 10 -18: 10 -17: 10 -16: 10 -15: 10 -14: 10 -13: 10 -12: 10 -11: 10 -10: 10 -9: 10 -8: 10 -7: 10 -6: 10 -5: 10 -4: 10 -3: 10 -2: 10 -1: 10 0: 10 1: 10 2: 10 3: 10 4: 10 5: 10 6: 10 7: 10 8: 10 9: 10 10: 10 11: 10 12: 10 13: 10 14: 10 15: 10 16: 10 17: 10 18: 10 19: 10 20: 10
Player # 2: -20: 0 -19: 0 -18: 0 -17: 0 -16: 0 -15: 0 -14: 0 -13: 0 -12: 0 -11: 0 -10: 0 -9: 0 -8: 0 -7: 0 -6: 0 -5: 0 -4: 0 -3: 5 -2: 5 -1: 5 0: 5 1: 5 2: 500 3: 500 4: 500 5: 500 6: 500 7: 500 8: 500 9: 500 10: 500 11: 500 12: 500 13: 500 14: 500 15: 500 16: 500 17: 500 18: 500 19: 500 20: 500
Player # 3: -20: 0 -19: 0 -18: 0 -17: 0 -16: 0 -15: 0 -14: 0 -13: 0 -12: 0 -11: 0 -10: 0 -9: 0 -8: 0 -7: 0 -6: 0 -5: 0 -4: 0 -3: 5 -2: 5 -1: 5 0: 5 1: 5 2: 500 3: 500 4: 500 5: 500 6: 500 7: 500 8: 500 9: 500 10: 500 11: 500 12: 500 13: 500 14: 500 15: 500 16: 500 17: 500 18: 500 19: 500 20: 500
Player # 4: -20: 0 -19: 0 -18: 0 -17: 0 -16: 0 -15: 0 -14: 0 -13: 0 -12: 0 -11: 0 -10: 0 -9: 0 -8: 0 -7: 0 -6: 0 -5: 0 -4: 0 -3: 5 -2: 5 -1: 5 0: 5 1: 5 2: 500 3: 500 4: 500 5: 500 6: 500 7: 500 8: 500 9: 500 10: 500 11: 500 12: 500 13: 500 14: 500 15: 500 16: 500 17: 500 18: 500 19: 500 20: 500

10000000 rounds Bankroll = 50000
1: $-.0546061/$10 =-.546061% var = 129.05 ROR = 100%!!
2: $-.0253525/$5.05584 =-.50145% var = 69.419 ROR = 100%!!
3: $-.0259431/$5.05584 =-.513132% var = 69.662 ROR = 100%!!
4: $-.0257496/$5.05584 =-.509304% var = 68.3731 ROR = 100%!!

------------------------------------------------------------
 

UK-21

Well-Known Member
#5
Ta muchly for that. Quite revealing, but not surprising, really. It does highlight what anyone who has done some sums has fathomed out - that as a long term strategy CSMs are a waste of time and money. I'm surprised that in 10 million hands TC+3 never appeared once in the results, although I suspect that some of the +2s are nearer to 3 than 2.

One reason why I asked whether it should go in the Voodoo part of the board. If one limited oneself to buying in 15 units, and played until all gone, up 5 units or an hour / 70 hands had been played, I wonder what the results would be? With such a tiny sample, there must be a percentage of such sessions that would hit the 33% win target? I achieved a 30% win in just 18 hands or so against a CSM last Saturday (started with 10 chips, walked away when I was holding 13 - and that was just flat betting and playing BS). What led me to raise the query was that in one round 15 cards were dealt and there wasn't a single picture, ten or ace amongst them - wasn't keeping the count, but I suspect the RC would have been around +10-12. Doubled my 8-3and pulled a picture. Could do with that happening more often!

Regards.

Newb99
 

HarryKuntz

Well-Known Member
#6
newb99 said:
Ta muchly for that. Quite revealing, but not surprising, really. It does highlight what anyone who has done some sums has fathomed out - that as a long term strategy CSMs are a waste of time and money. I'm surprised that in 10 million hands TC+3 never appeared once in the results, although I suspect that some of the +2s are nearer to 3 than 2.
Thats no problem, your right, there will be +2's which are actually 2.5 or above and there will also be -3's with are acutally -2.5 or above as all TC's are floored.

newb99 said:
One reason why I asked whether it should go in the Voodoo part of the board. If one limited oneself to buying in 15 units, and played until all gone, up 5 units or an hour / 70 hands had been played, I wonder what the results would be? With such a tiny sample, there must be a percentage of such sessions that would hit the 33% win target? I achieved a 30% win in just 18 hands or so against a CSM last Saturday (started with 10 chips, walked away when I was holding 13 - and that was just flat betting and playing BS). What led me to raise the query was that in one round 15 cards were dealt and there wasn't a single picture, ten or ace amongst them - wasn't keeping the count, but I suspect the RC would have been around +10-12. Doubled my 8-3and pulled a picture. Could do with that happening more often!

Regards.

Newb99
With such a tiny sample anything could happen - the reason why blackjack is popular is because anyone can make a profit on the night. The sad fact is that its only variance and unless your an AP or a cheat the house always win in the end.
 

SystemsTrader

Well-Known Member
#7
HarryKuntz said:
This machine can be used with 1-6 decks, hence the name. You would need to check with the casino in question to find out how many decks they are actually using.
Look closely at the OnetoSix machines they actually have a little digital screen which states the number of decks being shuffled.
 

Kasi

Well-Known Member
#8
HarryKuntz said:
Thats no problem, your right, there will be +2's which are actually 2.5 or above and there will also be -3's with are acutally -2.5 or above as all TC's are floored.



With such a tiny sample anything could happen - the reason why blackjack is popular is because anyone can make a profit on the night. The sad fact is that its only variance and unless your an AP or a cheat the house always win in the end.
Not that it matters but if the guy was assuming 20 cards go back in but can't be played the next round, shouldn't the shuffle point maybe be 40?

Was that split thing allowing up to 24 splits? Is that why 52 cards could be dealt in one round to 5 people - if that is what that meant?

No big deal lol.
 

UK-21

Well-Known Member
#9
Sessional calcs for 70 hand CSM games . . .

What would be useful for comparison purposes would be to run say 100 x 70 hand sims (1 hour of play?) for a CSM game based on the following:

Betting Unit = £/$ 5.00
Ramp: TC+2 = 2 units
TC+2.5 = 3 units
TC +3 = 4 units

For the UK game I play I reckon that zero HE occurs at around TC+1.5.

Indices:
TC-3: 13v3 hit, A3v5 hit, 10v9 hit,
TC-2: 12v5 hit, 9v3 hit, 13v2 hit,
TC-1: 12v6 hit, A4v4 hit, A2v5 hit,
TC=0: 16v10 stand, 12v4 hit,
TC+1: 9v2 double, A7vA stand,
TC+2: 8v6 double, A7v7 double, 12v3 stand
TC+2.5: 16vA stand, 12v2 stand, 9v7 double, 77v8 spl, 99v7 spl,
no insurance

These are a selection of the ones I play. Before I'm burnt at the stake, do remember this is for the ENHC-UK game, so doubling against 10s etc are off the menu. Also the TC+2.5 indices are ones I normally play at +3, so playing them a bit prematurely will have a cost.

It'd be interesting to see the %age of winning sessions, and how the above chips away at the OTT HE overall, albeit it's still a losing game.

Newb99
 

Kasi

Well-Known Member
#10
newb99 said:
If one limited oneself to buying in 15 units, and played until all gone, up 5 units or an hour / 70 hands had been played, I wonder what the results would be? With such a tiny sample, there must be a percentage of such sessions that would hit the 33% win target? I
I'm sure there is - maybe you could use some ROR calculator?


Say you're buying in with $75 at a $5 table and want to win $25. Maybe better might be to buy in with $300 and quit when you are 1 $25 unit ahead. You probably will be 80% of the time in less than 15 hands. Maybe 90% of the time if you play 50 hands. Not sure about being unable to double near the end lol.

Whatever - have your own kind of fun! Work your black magic lol.
 
#11
Let me get something strait with these machines does it shuffle the cards put in with all 6 decks or with just one deck? Is it possible to get the same cards over and over again? maybe unlikely but is it possible? And I am assuming it is possible to obviously recieve completely different cards an infinate amount of times.
 

UK-21

Well-Known Member
#12
You can find some stuff on the web about the functionality of these gadgets. Overall, it's fair to say that the chances of any cards just played being instantly re-dealt is remote, and in fact of the 20 or so cards recycled each hand (based on 7 players), some may be re-inserted at the back end of the feed hopper and so take some time to put an appearance back in.

My earlier posting re ramping bets up on the following hand could, I suppose, be extended to ramping over two hands following the one counted (40 cards?) although this would carry some degree of error and risk.

I think that there's a good chance that some of the cards re-inserted will be re-dealt 3 rounds later, so the strategy couldn't be taken beyond this point.

Do remember what Harry has said - OK if you know that this is strictly for fun (or words to that effect!).

Regards.
 

Elhombre

Well-Known Member
#13
takinfromindians97 said:
Let me get something strait with these machines does it shuffle the cards put in with all 6 decks or with just one deck? Is it possible to get the same cards over and over again? maybe unlikely but is it possible? And I am assuming it is possible to obviously recieve completely different cards an infinate amount of times.

It could happen that you recieve a sequenze of the same cards in the
next round after the dealer inserted the cards, not often.
Listen to the noises of the machine, the machine puts every single card into the small boxes of the weel.
After the inserting the machine makes an other noise,now the weel is turning.
To beat the machines is very hard and the gain is small, handshuffled games
generally much better.
rainer:cool2::joker:
 

HarryKuntz

Well-Known Member
#14
Kasi said:
Not that it matters but if the guy was assuming 20 cards go back in but can't be played the next round, shouldn't the shuffle point maybe be 40?

Was that split thing allowing up to 24 splits? Is that why 52 cards could be dealt in one round to 5 people - if that is what that meant?

No big deal lol.
I set the pen to 20 cards but this is the min. If the first card out on a new round was the 20th, you would still see all the additional cards for that round before shuffling, so this would increase the pen further. The sim was only run for 4 players and usally cards are returned to a csm either after every round or every other, the average hand contains 3 cards so i guess maybe 30 - 40 cards might have been a more realistic figure. But hey, its just for fun.

In the UK there's normally no limit on the about of resplits allowed, so its possible but very unlikely that whilst playing a 6 deck game, you could split to up to 24 hands. I guess in theory, if you had a full table and everybody split to 24 hands, you could see 100% of cards but the odds on this must be billions to one. The most I have ever split to is about 7 or 8 hands.
 

HarryKuntz

Well-Known Member
#15
newb99 said:
What would be useful for comparison purposes would be to run say 100 x 70 hand sims (1 hour of play?) for a CSM game based on the following:

Betting Unit = £/$ 5.00
Ramp: TC+2 = 2 units
TC+2.5 = 3 units
TC +3 = 4 units

For the UK game I play I reckon that zero HE occurs at around TC+1.5.

Indices:
TC-3: 13v3 hit, A3v5 hit, 10v9 hit,
TC-2: 12v5 hit, 9v3 hit, 13v2 hit,
TC-1: 12v6 hit, A4v4 hit, A2v5 hit,
TC=0: 16v10 stand, 12v4 hit,
TC+1: 9v2 double, A7vA stand,
TC+2: 8v6 double, A7v7 double, 12v3 stand
TC+2.5: 16vA stand, 12v2 stand, 9v7 double, 77v8 spl, 99v7 spl,
no insurance

These are a selection of the ones I play. Before I'm burnt at the stake, do remember this is for the ENHC-UK game, so doubling against 10s etc are off the menu. Also the TC+2.5 indices are ones I normally play at +3, so playing them a bit prematurely will have a cost.

It'd be interesting to see the %age of winning sessions, and how the above chips away at the OTT HE overall, albeit it's still a losing game.

Newb99
Sorry, Newb your have to run those sim's yourself as i don't have the time, your can get a copy of powersim here:-
http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/w-agora/view.php?site=bjf&bn=bjf_simsimp&key=1220349028

A copy of my Stratagy file is attached which is set up for ENHC card game - Standard UK DOA game, make sure you rename it to .str before using. It's all fairly simple to do. If you spot any errors please be sure to let me know.

.
Please post your results here.
 
Last edited:

UK-21

Well-Known Member
#18
An hour or so being silly . . . .

Spent an hour or so being silly on the practice table at home.

Replicated a CSM dealt game (6 decks with 7 players), on the basis that the cards from the round just played and the one before it would not be redistributed into the 20 or so at the front of the hopper that would be dealt out next - so at any one time approx 40 cards are effectively out of play. Kept the count for each individual round using chips. They actual RC would be the net count of the two rounds out of play plus the count of the round in play (so for instance +3 and +4 and -2 = +5). After a round was out of play for two further rounds the cards were broken up and distributed at random back into the shoe.

A favourable edge appearing at RC +11 (TC+2 x 5.5 decks in play - I know it should be c272/52 = 5.23) happened about once every 25 rounds, after there were two successive rounds with predominently small cards. I appreciate this is not very scientific, and that the sample is too small to draw any meaningful conclusions. Playing with 4 decks, an RC of +7 would be needed for an advantageous edge, and this happened almost twice as often as one of +11.

In theory, with the latency of the cards just played not being likely to be immediately re-dealt, there will be times when a player advantageous edge occurs. Whether this happens as often as a player advantageous edge in a normal shoe game (assume 6 decks) is up for grabs. According to the tables in the various books I have, a TC+2 occurs about 13% of the time whilst playing a 6 deck shoe. If one takes the frequency from a CSM at 5% (once every 20 rounds), does it follow that using the methodology I played with, a betting spread of two and a half times normal would roughly equate things?There's also a multiplying factor to consider - CSM rounds are dealt 20-30% faster and that a full table of 7 players is necessary to get as many cards out of the game as possible for the next two rounds, whereas in a shoe game a full table is disadvantageous.

I do have fantasies of leaving a CSM game with a big handful of chips and saying to the PB "I bet the salesman told you that these things are completely unpredictable and so can't be beaten . . . how long's the lease?" I did read somewhere quite recently of a report that a team of players had come up with a method for beating CSMs. I suppose having a team of 7 players, and dominating a table, and all ramping up bets significantly when the edge moves in the players' favour would have an effect.

Don't worry - I'm not intending to do this as a career. Still intend to play the shoe games that are around at present.

Und, Elhombre, ich spreche eine bisschen Deutsch. Ich bin neurlich aus Deutschland zuruckgekommen wo war ich in Baden besucht. Enschuldigungen, Deutsch nicht perfekt ! ! ! !
 
Last edited:
Top