Thanks for the quick reply. Class is in session. I know the shuffle I'm talking about the dealer only riffles the packets once every pass. And I have done my practicing with my shaded packet picked last. I like the math you give to figure out betting, how come you don't recommend it and what way is better? Also is it only through visual that you can track this packet? Is there any other way to tell if it gets split? I was under the impression from what I read earlier from Bojack that there might be certain cards that could help indicate where the packet is or if its been split? Am I following this right? I could go all day with this stuff I think its awsome. I'll leave you alone for now, but I look forward to more questions and answers.
Shuffle Tracking
- Thread starter JoeV
- Start date
Ask away. Personally i've somewhat bored of counting theory and spend most of my time thinking about various team play and advanced stratagies. Hence why i don't post on a lot of the counting stuff.
The problem with betting like that is that it assumes that every high card you see came from your packet. That's far from the case and if you play like that you'll underestimate your advantage substantially. I believe the NRS formula was derived by several of the MIT math heads to account for this but it is very complicated and far from practical at the tables. Arnold Snyder gives some basic rules for packet betting in the Cookbook but this over simplifies things and leaves a lot out. From what i know the best way to bet is to run sims on the shuffle to find the optimal betting stratagies, but i'm still investigating this myself.
What Bojack was talking about is a bit more advanced. He's discussing using a sequencing technique to recognise if your packet has been split. You key (fancy word for remember the card and order) the first four cards put into the discard pile. After the shuffle these should be the last few cards of your one deck section (as they were the very bottom cards of the grab, they'll be on the very bottom of the finished packet). However if they were to come out earlier, you know that the top of your packet been broken off and you can adjust your betting stratagy to compensate.
RJT.
The problem with betting like that is that it assumes that every high card you see came from your packet. That's far from the case and if you play like that you'll underestimate your advantage substantially. I believe the NRS formula was derived by several of the MIT math heads to account for this but it is very complicated and far from practical at the tables. Arnold Snyder gives some basic rules for packet betting in the Cookbook but this over simplifies things and leaves a lot out. From what i know the best way to bet is to run sims on the shuffle to find the optimal betting stratagies, but i'm still investigating this myself.
What Bojack was talking about is a bit more advanced. He's discussing using a sequencing technique to recognise if your packet has been split. You key (fancy word for remember the card and order) the first four cards put into the discard pile. After the shuffle these should be the last few cards of your one deck section (as they were the very bottom cards of the grab, they'll be on the very bottom of the finished packet). However if they were to come out earlier, you know that the top of your packet been broken off and you can adjust your betting stratagy to compensate.
RJT.
Well yeh. It's not actually as difficult as it sounds. You use some basic pneumonic techniques to remember the sequence. You have a word for each card in the deck and you use each of the 4 cards to create a little story which is more easily rememebered than just trying to remember the 4 cards.
Then you just watch for them coming out to signify the end of your packet. Sequencing can actually be use in more powerful and complex fashions, but this is a good starting point. When you think about it, the difficulty of remembering 4 cards in order actually pale in insignificance when compared to the likes of a multi-level count or a side count. Not that these things are unachievable - far from it - i just feel sequencing's easier. Ultimately it just takes practice. That's why i've always recommened using a basic count and saving the brain space for some more interesting and powerful techniques that can provide a greater advantage than side counting.
RJT.
Then you just watch for them coming out to signify the end of your packet. Sequencing can actually be use in more powerful and complex fashions, but this is a good starting point. When you think about it, the difficulty of remembering 4 cards in order actually pale in insignificance when compared to the likes of a multi-level count or a side count. Not that these things are unachievable - far from it - i just feel sequencing's easier. Ultimately it just takes practice. That's why i've always recommened using a basic count and saving the brain space for some more interesting and powerful techniques that can provide a greater advantage than side counting.
RJT.
I did say that it's not a technique you could use frequently. And that was just an example. But on a similar foot, if you want to look at something that will occur slightly more frequently, a count of 5 extra high cards in the first 1/4 deck will produce a TC of 4 in a 1 deck packet given the same conditions i spoke about before. That's over a 1% advantage for a deck at the top of the shoe and some nice cover for betting high off the top.
RJT.
RJT.
Still not satisfied? 3 extra high cards in the same 1/4 deck with the same conditions could produce a TC of 2.5 in a 1 deck section. Perhaps not the largest advantage, but still +EV off the top of the shoe. You won't find me arguing that this is the most versitile technique or the best shuffle for tracking, but it's fairly clear that it doesn't take a huge amount to create a opportunity that is at least worthwhile for cover if nothing else and honestly, a TC of 2.5 for a whole deck is a pretty good situation.
RJT.
RJT.
You would be correct most times, but if you are manipulating the shoe than there is a much better chance of it occuring. Even more so of the other examples RJT gave of 5 and 3 extra high cards. So in your vast playing experience.........you have never had a fairly high count dive bomb on you, like in counting theory its expected to do when you win? Such as a +10 going down to a 1 in 2 rounds of say 3 players. You don't even need to include the last few cards of the second round if they don't help you. All it takes is a blackjack some 20's and some hard stiffs and your there. And if you are at all accomplished at tracking, coupled with some luck you might be able to get those cards next time. Who knows it might occur more than once. It would be lucky to see that many high cards at once without some help, but it is possible, and seeing an extra 3 to 5 is quite common place.
That's different, I thought you meant 9 extra high cards. Added to the 5 expected high cards, that would leave you with 14 out of 13 cards in that quarter deck being high.:laugh:
Keep in mind that around here the casinos do not let you spank the shoe nor insert the cut card less than 1 deck from the end, so there is no way you can get those cards to the top of the shoe. I'd just as soon cut them towards the end of the play zone.
Lol i'd be impressed if you got 14 high cards in a 1/4 and i'd want to know what casino you were playing in. So cut 1 deck off the back of the stack and remember that your packet's the 2nd deck in. Cutting it to the end of the zone just makes you look like a counter, although i'd take it if that's where somewhere else cut it.
RJT.
RJT.