Blackjack Approximator: New Threat To APs

[Finn Dog]

Well, unfortunately here's a new threat to the AP community (at least for now, it's only at one casino):

http://www.casinoenterprisemanagement.com/articles/june-2010/blackjack-approximator

 

[johndoe]

Uh oh, they're on to me!

 

[QFIT]

I've given a lot of thought to such software, and I don't think it has any value at catching good counters. MGM has been using BJ Survey for 15 years. It recommends that you follow 150 hands. In 150 hands, there is no way that you can find a significant number of examples like these. How often do they think 10v5 at a TC>5 occurs? I wish the count increased that high that often.

Realize that you will only be tracked if the pit calls surv, and they agree. In the first eleven years, MGM surveyed only 650 players (five a month). The program claimed 10% of those were counters with an edge (0.5 per month). I'd love to know how many of those identifications were correct.

 

[JulieCA]

Very interesting interview. Thanks for posting that!

 

[WRX]

I'm totally underwhelmed.

This is just another computer program, although possibly a decent one, for evaluating suspected counters, requiring the laborious manual entry of data. How often do you think a casino is going to go to that much trouble?

A much more serious threat is an employee with the skill to evaluate your play in real time, and whom management has given adequate time free from other duties to do so. Once you're flagged by such means, and continue to spend enough time at the table for a complete evaluation, you're dead meat. The details of how the casino does that evaluation aren't terribly important.

Any casino that relies on a crutch like "Blackjack Approximator," as a substitute for training personnel well and giving them adequate time to do their job, is doing APs a favor.

My favorite quote:

"MR: That’s pretty impressive. What sort of count is built into this thing?
VL: That’s a secret."

Shouldn't take long to figure that one out.

But thanks, Finn Dog!

 

[jopke]

Thanks for the link...

They seem to be targeting the bigger players, interesting they are pretty up front about not really focusing on the shoe games or lower-limit counters.

 

[Canceler]

I'm totally underwhelmed.

This is just another computer program...

I'm even less whelmed than you are. Sounds to me like it's just an Excel sheet. :sleep:

 

[Finn Dog]

BJ Survey...recommends that you follow 150 hands. In 150 hands, there is no way that you can find a significant number of examples like these. How often do they think 10v5 at a TC>5 occurs? I wish the count increased that high that often.

Realize that you will only be tracked if the pit calls surv, and they agree. In the first eleven years, MGM surveyed only 650 players (five a month). The program claimed 10% of those were counters with an edge (0.5 per month). I'd love to know how many of those identifications were correct.

Indeed, the big picture of why not to let paranoia spawn its own self-induced heat.

I'm totally underwhelmed.

This is just another computer program, although possibly a decent one, for evaluating suspected counters, requiring the laborious manual entry of data.

Agreed, in fact I really fail to see how this program actually differs inherently all that much from Survey Voice: the threat is already there.

Regards to all,

FD