Shuffle tracking Discussion

[Blue Efficacy]

Walk into a casino that uses ASMs and watch what happens when the shoe ends. In MOST places, the dealers are required to perform a quick shuffle or at least SOME sort of defensive maneuver with the cards, before placing them into the shuffling machine. This should provide you with at least a hint as to the answer to your question.

Are you sure there is a valid reason for this, and it is not undue paranoia on the casinos' part?

I have many times played a first batch of cards from an ASM inserted in new deck order. I haven't noticed anything out of the ordinary, except the fact that i don't see anything out of the ordinary. Often the first hand shuffle with new cards is inferior.

 

[Sucker]

I believe it's a little bit of both. ASMs' ARE (mildly) trackable even with standard tracking techniques, but most professionals would probably just leave it alone in search of greener pastures. Just as the 6:5 blackjack game, or for that matter; even the CSM CAN be beaten with a big enough spread. But who would bother when there are REAL situations to be had?

I personally think that the money they think they're saving by the preshuffle is lost tenfold; because of the time they waste in doing so.

 

[Blue Efficacy]

At one favorite casino, they grab half of the shoe, and spin it 180 degrees, before placing it in the ASM. A dealer told me that's to help keep the cards flat.

 

[moo321]

At one favorite casino, they grab half of the shoe, and spin it 180 degrees, before placing it in the ASM. A dealer told me that's to help keep the cards flat.

I think it's actually to protect against markers.

And card that can be put in "upside down", although all cards are symmetrical now.

 

[Nynefingers]

At one favorite casino, they grab half of the shoe, and spin it 180 degrees, before placing it in the ASM. A dealer told me that's to help keep the cards flat.

Does this make you happy?

 

[Blue Efficacy]

Does this make you happy?

Sorry but I am confused by this question.

 

[Nynefingers]

Sorry but I am confused by this question.

You mention that it's a favorite casino, then describe a procedure. I couldn't figure out the relevance. I thought maybe you found a way to take advantage.

 

[Blue Efficacy]

You mention that it's a favorite casino, then describe a procedure. I couldn't figure out the relevance. I thought maybe you found a way to take advantage.

Oh no it's one of my favorites because of the deep penetration.

 

[bigplayer]

tracking

More money has been lost trying to track shuffles than won by those who can actually do it. Tread carefully look for really simple shuffles are those where specific parts of the shoe can be exploited. Otherwise you'd be better served just counting.

If anything for newbies don't try to cut your slug to the front of the shoe. Cut it to the last deck of the shoe to be played and just count normally. If you cut correctly you'll have a + count when your segment arrives and will be less likely to overbet into garbage. You can then use a much smaller spread since almost every shoe will end with big bet opportunities rather than just the normal 1 in 5 you get from straight counting alone. (i.e, the game will play like double deck instead of six or eight deck).

 

[Blue Efficacy]

More money has been lost trying to track shuffles than won by those who can actually do it. Tread carefully look for really simple shuffles are those where specific parts of the shoe can be exploited. Otherwise you'd be better served just counting.

Do you have documentation of this?

Also, plenty of people have lost money attempting to count cards.

Personally, I like not getting barred. And using tracking to merely assist a card counting game will not stop you from getting barred if you're playing a strong game.

I have seen card counters barred at my very table. Naturally they got caught when I didn't cut the shoe since I would give them nothing but awful negative counts :laugh:

 

[Blue Efficacy]

More money has been lost trying to track shuffles than won by those who can actually do it. Tread carefully look for really simple shuffles are those where specific parts of the shoe can be exploited. Otherwise you'd be better served just counting.

Do you have documentation of this?

Also, plenty of people have lost money attempting to count cards.

Personally, I like not getting barred. And using tracking to merely assist a card counting game will not stop you from getting barred if you're playing a strong game.

I have seen card counters barred at my very table. Naturally they got caught when I didn't cut the shoe since I would give them nothing but awful negative counts :laugh:

 

[bigplayer]

Cutting

Do you have documentation of this?

Also, plenty of people have lost money attempting to count cards.

Personally, I like not getting barred. And using tracking to merely assist a card counting game will not stop you from getting barred if you're playing a strong game.

I have seen card counters barred at my very table. Naturally they got caught when I didn't cut the shoe since I would give them nothing but awful negative counts :laugh:

I can't document my claim about most people who try to track fail miserably at it...but everything I've read and heard seems to point to that. Especially in today's typical shuffles where there are only small parts of the shoe that are easily exploitable. People should not be encouraged to attempt this advanced technique without going very slowly, spending a lot of time at the coffee table with a shoe, discard tray, and 6 decks of cards doing drills such as recommended by the Bishop. Of course some people get to be good at it and some very good at it and the ability to make big bets off the top of a fresh shoe is very good for the bottom line. People do lose money counting cards...but you and I both know that it is a much more basic technique.

I will tell you that ST does not make you completely impervious to barring. You're still moving your bets around and still winning. I've been barred from several casinos (The Mirage is one) while shuffle tracking was letting me make big bets early in shoes with counts that would be neutral or negative to someone counting me down. I know players who have been backed off tracking and key-carding certain games where there is no way the casino could know or understand what was going on. If you move your bets around and happen to win there is a chance you're gonna get thrown out.

 

[aslan]

I can't document my claim about most people who try to track fail miserably at it...but everything I've read and heard seems to point to that. Especially in today's typical shuffles where there are only small parts of the shoe that are easily exploitable. People should not be encouraged to attempt this advanced technique without going very slowly, spending a lot of time at the coffee table with a shoe, discard tray, and 6 decks of cards doing drills such as recommended by the Bishop. Of course some people get to be good at it and some very good at it and the ability to make big bets off the top of a fresh shoe is very good for the bottom line. People do lose money counting cards...but you and I both know that it is a much more basic technique.

I will tell you that ST does not make you completely impervious to barring. You're still moving your bets around and still winning. I've been barred from several casinos (The Mirage is one) while shuffle tracking was letting me make big bets early in shoes with counts that would be neutral or negative to someone counting me down. I know players who have been backed off tracking and key-carding certain games where there is no way the casino could know or understand what was going on. If you move your bets around and happen to win there is a chance you're gonna get thrown out.

I knew they had a pretty good surveillance team at the Mirage, but I didn't know it was that good.

 

[21forme]

I knew they had a pretty good surveillance team at the Mirage, but I didn't know it was that good.

Maybe they're not that good and just overly paranoid. What we don't know is how many ploppies they throw out.

 

[Automatic Monkey]

I think it's actually to protect against markers.

And card that can be put in "upside down", although all cards are symmetrical now.

Well, not really. They spin half of the shoe to prevent exploitation of "pointer cards." The A,3,5,6,7,8,9 of S,H,C are asymmetrical on their faces on the vertical axis, and this information can assist in sequencing. E.g. I might know that an ace follows the 9S that points down and not up.

In a hand-held game you can make it point any way you want.

 

[Brock Windsor]

I think it's actually to protect against markers.

And card that can be put in "upside down", although all cards are symmetrical now.

All card backs are not symmetrical. With the naked eye at the kitchen table you should be able to sort most standard casino cards. Doing so in a casino is more challenging.
http://cardshark.us/readers_frs.shtml

-BW

 

[FLASH1296]

AutoMonk' is correct BUT the traditional reason had to do with the Bee brand of playing cards.

Decades ago these BEE brand decks were ubiquitous in casinos.

If you were playing BJ (especially in a pitch game) and the dealer did not "spin" the cards,
you could <easily> flip all of the High Cards to be different than the others as the
margins were so very often visibly UNEVEN on these decks.
You could then view the dealers top card as they were de facto "marked"