Stu Ungar's shoe-counting abilities

#1
This tale about Stuey winning a $100K bet from Bob Stupak is all over the interwebs, but no one seems to know the details :

<<<
Despite being banned from blackjack at many casinos, Stu Ungar had discovered his talent for card counting, and it wouldn’t be long before he capitalized on it. With no money left, Stu put out an open bet- He would bet anyone willing that he could count down the last two decks of a six deck shoe. Amazingly, nobody took him up on this offer.

It was through this incredible offer that Stu would meet one of the few positive influences on his life, a former casino owner named Bob Stupak. Stupak gave Ungar 10-1 odds, but challenged him to count the last THREE decks of a 6 deck shoe; if he succeeded, Ungar would collect $100,000, and if he failed, he would add a $10,000 debt to Stupak to his growing tally. To the amazement of onlookers, Ungar forecast 156 cards without a single miss.
>>>


When I first read this many years ago , I didn't really understand it , and I still don't.

Here's the part ( I think) I understand :

The 6-deck ( 312 card ) shoe was shuffled according to the casino technique , and then the cards were peeled-off and flipped over one-by-one as Ungar watched. This continued for 3 decks worth ( 156 cards ).

Next , for the remaining 3 decks worth ( 156 cards ) Ungar predicted something about each successive card before it was flipped over.

Here's what I don't understand :

Did Stuey actually predict each card precisely , including rank & suit ? To me, this would seem impossible -- well , not impossible , it could happen , but there would be a good deal of luck involved.

Even if

(1) Ungar had total recall of the cards that came off , so that for say jacks he knew that that only the Jd Js were remaining

(2) Ungar accurately maintained an advanced high-low count , so that he knew the relative probabilities of a high ( KQJT ) vs a medium ( 98765 ) vs a low ( 432A ) card coming out next ,

(3) the 6-deck shoe originally was in factory order , and Ungar had accurately peformed an advanced shuffle-tracking technique so that he knew where clumps of various high/low/medium cards were likely to be present

it still seems impossible based on skill alone for Stuey to have sequentially predicted 156 exact cards.

I suspect that what actually happenned indeed was mind-blowing , and indeed demonstrated that The Kid had total recall , and also the ability to maintain a number of advanced counts simultaneously. However, some crucial details have been left out of the story.

Anyone know what really happenned ?
 
Last edited:

Pro21

Well-Known Member
#2
No, you have it wrong. They dealt 3 decks worth of cards, picked up the cards out of the discard rack, and Stuey was able to repeat back the order of the 156 cards that had been dealt. If this story is true I would love to know how much time Stuey had to "memorize" the order of the cards.
 

KenSmith

Administrator
Staff member
#3
I'm not familiar with this story, but I see a slightly longer version posted here:
http://www.blindbetpoker.com/profiles/stu-ungar.html

From that piece: "Stu had won over $80,000 at Caeser’s Palace. Once word got to the Casino manager, play was stopped immediately and Stu was asked to leave; Stu’s response- he correctly counted down the remaining 18 cards in the deck, without making a single mistake."

Even in that context, it is a puzzling statement. The story would seem apocryphal because I can't imagine any circumstance where a casino would entertain any notion of checking the remaining deck. I suppose if the game was single-deck and dealt to the bottom it would be possible. Games dealt to completion and then reshuffled used to exist, right?

Regardless, the use of the phrase "counted down" seems out of place, unless it means something substantially less impressive than naming every card in sequence. I'll be curious to hear others weigh in.
 

KenSmith

Administrator
Staff member
#4
Ah, thanks Pro21, your post came in while I was typing. your response makes a lot more sense for the six-deck portion, but I'm still confused by the single deck description.
 
#5
Thanks for the responses everyone.

So, exactly how difficult is it to do what Ungar did ?

( I'm assuming that the cards were initially flipped over at a fair clip otherwise there could be the possibility of cheating , no ? )

I mean , just to put some boundaries on it :

Is this a memory trick that can be learned by a decent percentage of the general population ?

Or is it the case that most expert card pros could never learn to do this no matter how much they practiced ?
 
#7
Mind-blowing. Looks like Ed Pridmore memorized at least 27 decks in 1 hour ?

So , when you are memorizing a deck in 5 mins is this flipping over the cards one-by-one always going forward ? Or can you retrace as you like ?

How much practice did it take you to learn to do this ? Do you think you have any special ability ? Or was it all practice ?
 

Pro21

Well-Known Member
#8
I don't think I have any special ability, it was just practice. I use mnemonic tricks that you would learn in any memory book. I liked Harry Lorraines book but the actual method I use I learned form Al Francesco. Yes, I flip over one card at a time but once I have the whole deck down you can cut the deck as many times as you like and I can start anywhere. This is really more of a parlor trick than anything that is useful in the casino, but it is a fun thing to do at parties.
 
#9
Are you a professional magician ? ( card tricks , flourishing , sleight-of-hand )

Harry Lorraines is the bible for magicians, right ?

( I know very little about this stuff ; I just play poker and blackjack and study both games in my spare time. )
 
#11
broastedromo said:
Thanks for the responses everyone.

So, exactly how difficult is it to do what Ungar did ?

( I'm assuming that the cards were initially flipped over at a fair clip otherwise there could be the possibility of cheating , no ? )

I mean , just to put some boundaries on it :

Is this a memory trick that can be learned by a decent percentage of the general population ?

Or is it the case that most expert card pros could never learn to do this no matter how much they practiced ?
broastedromo said:
This tale about Stuey winning a $100K bet from Bob Stupak is all over the interwebs, but no one seems to know the details :

<<<
Despite being banned from blackjack at many casinos, Stu Ungar had discovered his talent for card counting, and it wouldn’t be long before he capitalized on it. With no money left, Stu put out an open bet- He would bet anyone willing that he could count down the last two decks of a six deck shoe. Amazingly, nobody took him up on this offer.

It was through this incredible offer that Stu would meet one of the few positive influences on his life, a former casino owner named Bob Stupak. Stupak gave Ungar 10-1 odds, but challenged him to count the last THREE decks of a 6 deck shoe; if he succeeded, Ungar would collect $100,000, and if he failed, he would add a $10,000 debt to Stupak to his growing tally. To the amazement of onlookers, Ungar forecast 156 cards without a single miss.
>>>


When I first read this many years ago , I didn't really understand it , and I still don't.

Here's the part ( I think) I understand :

The 6-deck ( 312 card ) shoe was shuffled according to the casino technique , and then the cards were peeled-off and flipped over one-by-one as Ungar watched. This continued for 3 decks worth ( 156 cards ).

Next , for the remaining 3 decks worth ( 156 cards ) Ungar predicted something about each successive card before it was flipped over.

Here's what I don't understand :

Did Stuey actually predict each card precisely , including rank & suit ? To me, this would seem impossible -- well , not impossible , it could happen , but there would be a good deal of luck involved.

Even if

(1) Ungar had total recall of the cards that came off , so that for say jacks he knew that that only the Jd Js were remaining

(2) Ungar accurately maintained an advanced high-low count , so that he knew the relative probabilities of a high ( KQJT ) vs a medium ( 98765 ) vs a low ( 432A ) card coming out next ,

(3) the 6-deck shoe originally was in factory order , and Ungar had accurately peformed an advanced shuffle-tracking technique so that he knew where clumps of various high/low/medium cards were likely to be present

it still seems impossible based on skill alone for Stuey to have sequentially predicted 156 exact cards.

I suspect that what actually happenned indeed was mind-blowing , and indeed demonstrated that The Kid had total recall , and also the ability to maintain a number of advanced counts simultaneously. However, some crucial details have been left out of the story.

Anyone know what really happenned ?
so, I think y’all have the wrong idea (and the story didn’t help- gave poor language...).
All they were asking him to do was know all the card left in the shoot. Not in order- that’s impossible.
 
#13
KenSmith said:
I'm not familiar with this story, but I see a slightly longer version posted here:
http://www.blindbetpoker.com/profiles/stu-ungar.html

From that piece: "Stu had won over $80,000 at Caeser’s Palace. Once word got to the Casino manager, play was stopped immediately and Stu was asked to leave; Stu’s response- he correctly counted down the remaining 18 cards in the deck, without making a single mistake."

Even in that context, it is a puzzling statement. The story would seem apocryphal because I can't imagine any circumstance where a casino would entertain any notion of checking the remaining deck. I suppose if the game was single-deck and dealt to the bottom it would be possible. Games dealt to completion and then reshuffled used to exist, right?

Regardless, the use of the phrase "counted down" seems out of place, unless it means something substantially less impressive than naming every card in sequence. I'll be curious to hear others weigh in.
Again- he just knew the 18 cards left...not the order...
21forme said:
The “shoe” (autocorrect - Siri deserves coal in her stocking) is the setup at a blackjack table... stack of 6+ decks of cards and the plastic container that holds them.
 

MrFatCat

Well-Known Member
#14
I think the better savant-ism story of Stuey is that after the opponent discarded their second card in a gin rummy hand (10-cards), Stuey told the opponent they could name all 10 cards, opponent offered them 10:1 against, Stuey named 9/10 and knew the last card's rank and color, but wasn't certain on the suit. Opponent offered to buy out for 5:1 odds, Stuey gambled on the coinflip and guessed the wrong red suit.

I don't know that I could do three whole decks, but if you gave me about 5 minutes like Pro21 above I can memorize a full deck. Not surprising to me at all that Stuey could do three depending on how long they gave him.
 

LC Larry

Well-Known Member
#15
MrFatCat said:
I think the better savant-ism story of Stuey is that after the opponent discarded their second card in a gin rummy hand (10-cards), Stuey told the opponent they could name all 10 cards, opponent offered them 10:1 against, Stuey named 9/10 and knew the last card's rank and color, but wasn't certain on the suit. Opponent offered to buy out for 5:1 odds, Stuey gambled on the coinflip and guessed the wrong red suit.

I don't know that I could do three whole decks, but if you gave me about 5 minutes like Pro21 above I can memorize a full deck. Not surprising to me at all that Stuey could do three depending on how long they gave him.
And nobody ever questioned whether he was cheating or using a marked deck?
 

MrFatCat

Well-Known Member
#16
LC Larry said:
And nobody ever questioned whether he was cheating or using a marked deck?
The story's possibly apocryphal just like this one, but my understanding in that one was the opponent was a made person in some criminal organization or another, and it was at the guy's house/restaurant/wherever. I don't think Stuey was doing anything other than being that good at gin rummy, and I believe Stuey won multiple gin rummy tournaments.
 
Top