Tales from the felt

[21gunsalute]

They absolutely are the same game. They are both taking random cards from a pack containing an identical amount of cards. If you think that will change any long term outcomes you are a ploppy.

So the dealer gets exactly the same cards either way? Wrong!

 

[MangoJ]

So the dealer gets exactly the same cards either way? Wrong!

Of course he doesn't get the same cards. If you would know the cards the dealer will draw you would like to play different "games".

That is simply not the issue. The issue is, that the dealers chance of busting, reaching 17, 18, 19, 20 or 21 (and even having blackjack) is not altered.

Please accept the mystery of randomness: While the deck may have changed, the probability of drawing cards or reaching certain hands are STILL the same.

If you pull out a gun and force the dealer to reshuffle his remaining shoe whenever you like, this would be just a waste of time - not an AP move at all.

 

[21gunsalute]

Again, in a shuffled pile of cards, it doesn't matter which card you take - because they are shuffled.

Okay, lets step back a bit. Consider a coin flip in two variations.


First game:
You name a side - head and tailes. I then flip the coin and hide the outcome. Then I reveal the outcome (without manipulation).

Second game:
I flip the coin and hide the outcome. You then name a side - head or tailes. I reveal the outcome (without manipulation).

Please answer honestly: Which game is better for you ? Which game is better for me ?

Both games are exactly the same. In the second game, you simply cannot let me take the "bust side of the coin" without knowing the outcome.
I may even know the outcome of the flip before revealing - that would not change the game either.

Once again you're comparing apples to oranges. A coin flip does not involve beating the dealer. Blackjack does, and other players at the table can influence the outcome of both another players hand and the dealers hand. If you're going to try to make a comparison at least make a valid comparison and quit changing the rules, parameters and ignoring all sorts of factors. You might just as well state that Blackjack and Poker are the same game. They're equal because they both are card games.

 

[MangoJ]

If you are not perceptive to arguments, there is simply no help. It's a waste of time for all sides - I surrender to your ignorance.

At least this type of ploppy thought will keep blackjack alive.

 

[blackjack avenger]

Some Messy Sims

I ran 2 sims, 6 deck

sim 1
player 1 halves player using halves indices
player 2 halves player but using ko indices (playing wrong)

sim 2
player 1 halves player using halves indices
player 2 halves player but using 2 deck BS (playing wrong)

Both player 1's played the same way.

Using the same seed for both sims, so the same shoes?
There was a slight difference between the 2 correct halves player, about 30 cents for SCORE.

good cards
:joker::whip:

 

[Sharky]

my $0.02:

I LOVE the "dealer pull from the bottom" analogy to explain randomness

regardless of 21gun's feeling on this matter, he/she is no ploppy imo...can still harbor these feelings an be an AP...so long as they don't effect the correct play

 

[aslan]

Easy. As you just stated, the play itself caused the table to lose. The play was stupid. Therefore the stupid play caused the table to lose.

Or are you going to to dispute that the play was stupid? :laugh:

Your last statement is quite a misrepresentation of what I said actually.

Listen, you're welcome to believe that ploppy's stupid plays cause you to lose. You're probably right, and I'm wrong. You do seem to have all the answers. I was just hoping to give you some advice that might save you time and money. Most APs only have to concern themselves with such things as game selection and surveillance. You have the additional burden of finding a game where ploppies will not cause you to lose. Good luck in that.

 

[aslan]

Ever make an indice play and lose that hand and get crushed for the shoe? So we should not make indice plays? Of course not.

With our civilian holding his 6, if the count was positive we would want him to stand so more cards are available for following rounds.

If our civilian was holding a 17 vs dealers 6 and the count was negative we would want him to hit to use up cards.

If a civilian is hesitant on what to do, if count is negative encourage him to use cards if count is positive encourage them to use less cards. It's about all we can do. This is where a civilian can hurt us, if they do the opposite of the above.

If getting aggressive towards a civilian draws pit attention, it's probably not a good thing. Now, one can mutter about flow of cards etc. as camo.

Probably great anger can lead to a loss of control, not good since AP play is cerebral.

good cards
:joker::whip:

Right. A civilian can influence the number of cards dealt and therefore the number of rounds played. Sometimes we might want him to make the right bs play, and sometimes we might want him to make the wrong bs play, in order waste or save more cards depending on the count.

 

[aslan]

Ok here is a PROOF. It is quite simple, and unlike many other mathematical proofs easy to follow. It's short, and without any formulas. Please ask any question you like.

First of all, we modify the game slightly. When the dealer will draw his cards, he will draw his cards from the bottom of the shoe (instead of drawing from the top). In case there is a cut-card in the shoe, he will draw the cards right in front of the cut card. (But that doesn't really matter - let's ignore any cut card).
Is this the SAME game as before ? Yes, in EVERY aspect. As the shoe is shuffled before, it doesn't matter if he draws from the top, the bottom, or from the middle of an random shoe.

Now, does the decision of a player (say, on third base) hitting his hand or standing alter the way the dealer will make his hand ?.
No it doesn't, because the dealer will draw his cards from the bottom of the shoe, while the player takes the cards from the top of the shoe.


Since the dealer-bottom-drawing and dealer-top-drawing games are identically, the strategy decision of the player at 3rd base does not influence the dealers chance of busting/standing on any number in a normal game.


I leave it for your homework to proof that the dealers chance of busting/standing is also not influenced by the strategy decisions of players at 1st base, and any other base. Tip: expand the argument of bottom-drawing to dealer and all but one player.

Well done.

 

[blackjack avenger]

An Avenger Among Civilians

6 deck shoe
same shoes for each sim

Players:
halves player with indicies
halves player but hits 16 vs 3,4,5,6 will be called "hit"
halves player but stands 16 vs 7,8,9,10 will be called "stand"
halves perfect, plays perfect bs will be called "perfect"

these 3 sims playing tc2 and up

stand score 29.57
halves score 42.18

perfect score 26.49
halves score 41.75

hit score 9.18
halves score 41.68

Notice halves score drops as his partners hit more frequently. So it appears you want your partners to conserve cards when the count is positive. Though the effect is not great.

these 3 sims play all:

halves score 25.51
hit score .4689

halves score 25.04
perfect score 15.00

halves score 24.68
stand score 14.39

With these 3 sims it appears when you are facing negative hands; as most are in play all, you want your partners to hit. As the partners hit more the halves player score improves.

Stand and Hit were pretty bad players. One does but rarely sees players this bad. In the real world getting players to take cards when a negative count and not use cards when a positive count can be helpful, but an added benefit of coaching civilians may be in getting them to play fast. One can coach while sounding civilian.

good cards
:joker::whip:

 

[aslan]

6 deck shoe
same shoes for each sim

Players:
halves player with indicies
halves player but hits 16 vs 3,4,5,6 will be called "hit"
halves player but stands 16 vs 7,8,9,10 will be called "stand"
halves perfect, plays perfect bs will be called "perfect"

these 3 sims playing tc2 and up

stand score 29.57
halves score 42.18

perfect score 26.49
halves score 41.75

hit score 9.18
halves score 41.68

Notice halves score drops as his partners hit more frequently. So it appears you want your partners to conserve cards when the count is positive. Though the effect is not great.

these 3 sims play all:

halves score 25.51
hit score .4689

halves score 25.04
perfect score 15.00

halves score 24.68
stand score 14.39

With these 3 sims it appears when you are facing negative hands; as most are in play all, you want your partners to hit. As the partners hit more the halves player score improves.

Stand and Hit were pretty bad players. One does but rarely sees players this bad. In the real world getting players to take cards when a negative count and not use cards when a positive count can be helpful, but an added benefit of coaching civilians may be in getting them to play fast. One can coach while sounding civilian.

good cards
:joker::whip:

It would be hard for me to give bad advice to the other players at the table, deliberately leading them into harm's way, for my benefit, but that's me. I rather enjoy the idea of the casino being my only enemy at the table. Am I guilty of faulty thinking? OTOH, if I could help myself by helping them make the correct play, I would be more than happy to.

 

[blackjack avenger]

Karma

It would be hard for me to give bad advice to the other players at the table, deliberately leading them into harm's way, for my benefit, but that's me. I rather enjoy the idea of the casino being my only enemy at the table. Am I guilty of faulty thinking? OTOH, if I could help myself by helping them make the correct play, I would be more than happy to.

While helping yourself
One can coach up, help them with correct advice.
Once can coach down, hurt them with incorrect advice.
or on coin flip calls, coach to help yourself.

If one plays poker or pool for money, those are zero sum? games. If someone puts money on a bj table, they should know they can lose it. However, I agree with you. Leading a civilian astray can have a moral implication. Often it seems to me one finds civilians hitting stiffs against dealers 2 through 6, so often one would be helping them and yourself by coaching. If they choose to hit and the count is negative it's not such a bad play.

good cards
:joker::whip:

 

[blackjack avenger]

Back to the OP

If CP and his friend were counting they should have been happy that the civilian stood on his 6. The reason being it saved cards for the next rounds. When they lost the hand it was just variance. Of course in their minds they could replay the hand and win. Well, doing that they would have known to not make the bets in the first place or hit their own hands no matter what they had. Now, for good camo they can act mad and spout off some civilian flow speak. Real anger can cloud judgement. If they acted or were so angry that the game slowed down they hurt their EV.

I think you will find in bj literature
"a steely mind will do" "no emotional atachment to the chips". It's one of the reasons we play with chips to disengage that it's cash.

If one focuses on bad plays that win for you, it's a better world or only try to focus on what's important.

good cards
:joker::whip:

 

[apex]

If CP and his friend were counting they should have been happy that the civilian stood on his 6. The reason being it saved cards for the next rounds. When they lost the hand it was just variance. Of course in their minds they could replay the hand and win. Well, doing that they would have known to not make the bets in the first place or hit their own hands no matter what they had. Now, for good camo they can act mad and spout off some civilian flow speak. Real anger can cloud judgement. If they acted or were so angry that the game slowed down they hurt their EV.

I think you will find in bj literature
"a steely mind will do" "no emotional atachment to the chips". It's one of the reasons we play with chips to disengage that it's cash.

If one focuses on bad plays that win for you, it's a better world or only try to focus on what's important.

good cards
:joker::whip:

Agreed. Still, I find myself doing the hindsight deck order math in situations where I had big bets out and silly plays occured. Now if that player would have stood like he should have... For a moment I am mad at the player, then for several moments I am mad at myself for even thinking about it.

 

[blackjack avenger]

Don't Look for Trouble

Agreed. Still, I find myself doing the hindsight deck order math in situations where I had big bets out and silly plays occured. Now if that player would have stood like he should have... For a moment I am mad at the player, then for several moments I am mad at myself for even thinking about it.

Yes, stop replaying hands, wasted mental effort. Also, one is probably more likely to play if they enjoy their play.

good cards
:joker::whip:

 

[21gunsalute]

If CP and his friend were counting they should have been happy that the civilian stood on his 6. The reason being it saved cards for the next rounds.

No, because it was the last hand of the shoe. And no, I wasn't the other player at the table.

 

[21gunsalute]

If you are not perceptive to arguments, there is simply no help. It's a waste of time for all sides - I surrender to your ignorance.

At least this type of ploppy thought will keep blackjack alive.

No you surrendered because you couldn't come up with a valid, logical argument.

I find it incredible that a few posters here have become rather insulting over a difference of opinion that probably can never be proven one way or another. If you want to refer to me as a ploppy and call me ignorant simply because we disagree on this silly little matter then I think you must be rather shallow and narrow minded, but that's just my opinion, I can't prove it one way or another.

 

[21gunsalute]

It would be hard for me to give bad advice to the other players at the table, deliberately leading them into harm's way, for my benefit, but that's me. I rather enjoy the idea of the casino being my only enemy at the table. Am I guilty of faulty thinking? OTOH, if I could help myself by helping them make the correct play, I would be more than happy to.

Now you're talking!

 

[blackjack avenger]

Be Happy, Make Money

No, because it was the last hand of the shoe. And no, I wasn't the other player at the table.

Nothing in the original OP says the 6 up civilian hand was the last hand of the shoe? Even if it was, the ruckus still probably slowed things down.

Having read the original OP again I am perplexed that it was ok for the "highly skilled AP" to apparently split 10s when not warranted, and it is justified because they won? That gave the mindset for it doesn't matter if the play was horrible or not, did it win. So when the civilian "hurt" the table, it was a big deal. In the face of something serious going down there is this flippant misplay of the 10 split?

The couple asking to play. Sounds like they were innocent. Many in a casino are. How were they suppose to know something "serious" was going down? The size of bets? What is serious bets to one is not serious to another. they may have had no idea what those chips were in front of them. Seems like she was trying to do the right thing by asking the dealer if they could play. Most civilians are there to have fun, even I like to have fun. So many civilians don't look at playing as a life and death struggle.

The whole situation just seems out of place and unwaranted. At the end of the evening were CP and company happy with their EV or lamenting what other players did?

Yes, I also hate variance.

good cards
:joker::whip:

 

[21gunsalute]

Nothing in the original OP says the 6 up civilian hand was the last hand of the shoe? Even if it was, the ruckus still probably slowed things down.

Having read the original OP again I am perplexed that it was ok for the "highly skilled AP" to apparently split 10s when not warranted, and it is justified because they won? That gave the mindset for it doesn't matter if the play was horrible or not, did it win. So when the civilian "hurt" the table, it was a big deal. In the face of something serious going down there is this flippant misplay of the 10 split?

The couple asking to play. Sounds like they were innocent. Many in a casino are. How were they suppose to know something "serious" was going down? The size of bets? What is serious bets to one is not serious to another. they may have had no idea what those chips were in front of them. Seems like she was trying to do the right thing by asking the dealer if they could play. Most civilians are there to have fun, even I like to have fun. So many civilians don't look at playing as a life and death struggle.

The whole situation just seems out of place and unwaranted. At the end of the evening were CP and company happy with their EV or lamenting what other players did?

Yes, I also hate variance.

good cards
:joker::whip:

I didn't witness the splitting of 10's or the couple trying to play, so I probably shouldn't comment except to say that I'm pretty certain the splitting of the 10's was in a very negative count with small bets out, done at least in part to eat up cards.