Is there any way to take advantage of fresh decks?

[21forme]

The other day, I played a heads-up 6D shoe with fresh decks. There were way more BJs than expected.

I'm currently reading a book that discusses the non-randomness of shuffling and I presume the proximity of the Aces to the 10s, and the lack of adequate mixing, is why.

Has anyone looked at the mathematics of fresh deck play and come up with any useful strategy for it?

 

[jack.jackson]

The other day, I played a heads-up 6D shoe with fresh decks. There were way more BJs than expected.

I'm currently reading a book that discusses the non-randomness of shuffling and I presume the proximity of the Aces to the 10s, and the lack of adequate mixing, is why.

Has anyone looked at the mathematics of fresh deck play and come up with any useful strategy for it?

Arnold Snyder has a great article about this "Probing the shoehenge mysteries" in his forum. He states if the casinos didnt shuffle a fresh pack of cards the player a 1st base with a full table would win at an Incredible rate.

 

[zengrifter]

Griffin discusses how different #s of riffles on a fresh deck affect BS edge. For example, 4 (5?) riffles gives the house a 12%(?) edge over BS. For a time Binions was introducing fresh decks to 1D games every 30-min and the dealers were instructed "4 riffles and deal". zg

 

[RJT]

Arnold Snyder has a great article about this "Probing the shoehenge mysteries" in his forum. He states if the casinos didnt shuffle a fresh pack of cards the player a 1st base with a full table would win at an Incredible rate.

From what i remember that article was discussing not shuffling at the end of playing a shoe - not new decks. If i recall this correctly he was looking at the fact that playing blackjack actually put the cards in a favorable order for the player and showed that even the most basic and clumsy shuffle destroyed any potential gain that first base could have.
As to Harrah's, the riffles - again from what i remember - would have to be absolutely perfect for the player to gain that sort of advantage, but this one i'm less sure of.
If you're reading a book on the non-randomness of shuffles and proximity of 10's and A's and it's trying to tell you that there is some way to take advantage of this, chances are its full of crap. With a really accurate dealers, and a really poor shuffle you might be able to predict the next/hole cards with fair accuracy, but the chances of you ever finding this game are very slim. These books that discuss non-random shuffles - barring the ones discussing shuffle tracking - all fall under the heading of voodoo.

RJT.

 

[jack.jackson]

From what i remember that article was discussing not shuffling at the end of playing a shoe - not new decks. If i recall this correctly he was looking at the fact that playing blackjack actually put the cards in a favorable order for the player and showed that even the most basic and clumsy shuffle destroyed any potential gain that first base could have.
As to Harrah's, the riffles - again from what i remember - would have to be absolutely perfect for the player to gain that sort of advantage, but this one i'm less sure of.
If you're reading a book on the non-randomness of shuffles and proximity of 10's and A's and it's trying to tell you that there is some way to take advantage of this, chances are its full of crap. With a really accurate dealers, and a really poor shuffle you might be able to predict the next/hole cards with fair accuracy, but the chances of you ever finding this game are very slim. These books that discuss non-random shuffles - barring the ones discussing shuffle tracking - all fall under the heading of voodoo.

RJT.

Thanks for clearing that up RJT.
Its been awhile since Ive actually read the article myself,
I guess I should of re-read it, before I made such a post. I actually tried to just put in the link, but was unsuccesful. Also, I recall another article, almost the same in nature. I think it was "Non-Random Shuffles" I believe. Nevertheless, I found the article to be somewhat Interesting.
__________________________________________________________________________________
Angels love bad men-The Highway men: Johnny Cash,Kris Kristopherson,Waylon Jennings,&Willie Nelson

 

[moo321]

The only problem with the non-random shuffle stuff is it assumes that the dealer makes 4 perfect riffles, which they don't. Still might be some validity to it, but it's not cut and dried.

 

[RJT]

Thanks for clearing that up RJT.
Its been awhile since Ive actually read the article myself,
I guess I should of re-read it, before I made such a post. I actually tried to just put in the link, but was unsuccesful. Also, I recall another article, almost the same in nature. I think it was "Non-Random Shuffles" I believe. Nevertheless, I found the article to be somewhat Interesting.

Yeh it was an interesting article - aside from being able to sequence cards perfectly i had wondered previously if there would have been any other advantages to finding an unshuffled pack being played - not that you are ever likely to find it.

RJT.

 

[moo321]

Yeh it was an interesting article - aside from being able to sequence cards perfectly i had wondered previously if there would have been any other advantages to finding an unshuffled pack being played - not that you are ever likely to find it.

RJT.

If you find one in Carribean Stud, or 3 card poker, there are some interesting possibilities that may come up...

 

[Sonny]

The other day, I played a heads-up 6D shoe with fresh decks. There were way more BJs than expected.

Did they not wash the cards before shuffling? If they didn't then you might be able to do some incredible sequencing.

-Sonny-

 

[21forme]

Did they not wash the cards before shuffling? If they didn't then you might be able to do some incredible sequencing.

-Sonny-

They were pretty clean to start with :grin:

Seriously, yes they did. However, the rare times I play fresh decks, there always seems to be more naturals than one would expect.