what is extra house advantage on VBJ with CSM?

J

jp123x

New Member
Hello: Longtime reader of the forums but only a limited skilled live BJ basic strategy player (I play mostly live poker tournaments and VP). I have found a Video BJ game at a nearby shop (which has some pretty substantial cashback), so was wondering what effect the CSM will add to the casino advantage.

When using the basic strategy engine it shows: "Estimated casino edge for these rules: 0.36 %" But I have it set as a 6-deck game, since the VBJ states it's a 6-deck, that shuffles every round.

I did some searching but could not locate what impact the CSM part will have on the house advantage?

dealer S17
DA2
DAS
1-card on Aces
BJ 3:2

Thanks in advance for any replies.
 
For a 6D game the house edge is actually reduced by about 0.02% for a basic strategy player. The bad part is that you usually play more hands per hour so your hourly loss can be higher despite the slightly lower house edge. If you are getting cashback based on the amount of action you give them then this should not be an issue. In fact, as you probably already know since you play VP, more hands per hour is actually better for your style of play. More details here:

http://wizardofodds.com/blackjack/appendix10.html

-Sonny-
 
jp123x said:
I did some searching but could not locate what impact the CSM part will have on the house advantage?..
Click to expand...

No big deal, but I'd say none at all.

Since, usually, I think, HA's are expressed off the top of a shoe and assume re-shuffling after every round just as, I assume you assume, CSM's do.

Even if they don't lol.

In other words I'd say, if you played a cut-card game as a flat-betting BS player, your HA would be 0.02% worse or -0.38% in your case lol.

I guess I'm probably nit-picking on how I interpreted it was possible you might interpret what Sonny said lol.

I'm pretty sure he'll agree?

What a shocker lmao!
 
Last edited:
follow-up progressive "royal match"

Thanks for the earlier replies. I was able to stay on the bank with the nice cashback for a few months, but they did cutback the cb ratio so I don't play much there anymore.

The shop had the ShuffleMaster Royal Match 21 ... but they've recently added the progressive for the Crown Treasure (player and dealer both have KQ suited), with a very good progressive meter.

I don't know the cycle it is to have a CrownTreasure (# of hands it will take on average to have a match with the dealer), so am wondering if anyone can relay me that info.

It's the six-deck CSM version.

The Wizard posts plenty of info but I don't see anything about # of hands:

http://wizardofodds.com/blackjack/appendix8.html#royalmatch
 
Sonny said:
For a 6D game the house edge is actually reduced by about 0.02% for a basic strategy player. The bad part is that you usually play more hands per hour so your hourly loss can be higher despite the slightly lower house edge. If you are getting cashback based on the amount of action you give them then this should not be an issue. In fact, as you probably already know since you play VP, more hands per hour is actually better for your style of play. More details here:

http://wizardofodds.com/blackjack/appendix10.html

-Sonny-
Click to expand...

Sonny I just find the wizards distribution chart hard to believe. Why would a csm favor any card over another unless it was programmed to do so?

The way I see it the csm is not dealing a fair game. Distribution should be random. The casino obviously wants csms to thwart counters. But if it doesnt randomly select cards why wouldnt they come out to hurt the player.

I forget the order of cards but I remember being told of a shoe can be rigged so no matter how many players there were playing or how it changed the dealer would win every hand after the initial change at any point. The order righted itself after 1 hand if disrupted.

This meant in order for the players to have a shot at winning the number of players had to change with each round or the players had to make ridiculous decisions in order to thwart the card order. I found it hard to believe so I spent a couple days messing with a loaded shoe. It was absolutely true.

Dont you think this nonrandom delivery of the cards uses a watered down version of this rigged shoe so as to guarantee you loose if you spend any reasonable or compable amount of time playing no matter what except in rare occasions. If that is true the actual casino edge sky rockets father than being chipped away at.

I havent played with csm much because every time I do the loss rate seems to far out of the norm that I never believed it to be a fair game. I called them money vacuums. The loss rate was so astronomical every time that it was like the worst nightmare shoe game which I encounter very very rarely. The only time I ever won money against a csm I played 4 hands thinking it was a shoe game and left when I realized I was mistaken.

Ive played blackjack for 30 years and it was not a little out of the norm but unbelievably so. I felt cheated every time. I think the wizards chart is the proof. Just because more tens come out doesnt make it favorable. I think its the smoking gun.
 
Maybe I went postal and posted to quickly

I thought about it for a while and I can see how a round of blackjack would favor higher cards slightly in the process of deciding the hands.

When a high card is drawn it always has the effect of needing to draw fewer cards. The cards that follow are slightly more likely to be small cards. When a low card is drawn, the effect is that more often this requires more cards to be drawn with the exception being when it makes a hand. The following cards are slightly more likely to be high cards.

Maybe most of you understood that intuitively. I think my poor experiences with csms got in the way of understanding this quickly. Funny how the mind works.
 
tthree said:
Sonny I just find the wizards distribution chart hard to believe. Why would a csm favor any card over another unless it was programmed to do so?
Click to expand...

Read the linked page again. This is not data from an actual physical CSM machine. If something is biased, then it is the simulation. Not a physical CSM device.

Of course fluctuations of a shoe with cut card is lower, since it is a shoe with "balanced decks". Wizard fail to report the penetration of his shoe, which is honestly not scientific. If the shoe had 100% penetration there would be NO fluctuation of number of ranks drawn.
If you reduce penetration, fluctuation of ranks increase.
A CSM has an effective penetration of 1 card, and thus has highest fluctuation.

Wizard fails to report the expected fluctuation, which - again - is not scientific.
 
Last edited:
Thanx mango

It took me a while to figure out the effect of replacement versus a shoe. Thanx for the post the extreme nature of your examples confirm I finally got my brain going down the right path.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top