The future of 'profitable blackjack'

[Jumpfreak888]

Now, more than ever, it seems that card counters are facing more and more obstacles everyday. With new rules such as 6:5 blackjack, the implenting of CSM's, and games that offer less and less penetration, our game of 21 has been on a downward spiral. However, so long as there is money to be made in the game of blackjack SOMEWHERE, I will hunt it down. This brings me to my overall thought - will blackjack inevitably become just another 'gamble' for all casino goers? As of late, it seems that casinos everywhere are making as many subtle yet powerful variations to the game of blackjack in hopes of whittling away ANY skilled players profit.

Fortunatley, I have seen the power of protest in action and know that it IS effective. Several months back, one of my local casinos introduced the dreaded CSM to all of their games of blackjack. As soon as I saw this, I left and never came back. However, one day a couple of months later, I happened to come back because one of my buddies (who could care less about CSM's, he is not a skilled bj player) had an itch to play. Amazingly, when I walked in, all of the CSM's were gone. When I asked why, one of the pit bosses told me that it simply drove away too many people. Protesting/ refusing to play an inferior game DOES make a difference.

Yet at the same time I have to wonder why so many people protested the change. 95% of all the bj players I see in there (it is like a community - I see several of the same players time and time again) play a decent basic strategy but lose overall. Why should non-counters give a hoot about the kind of game they play? I suppose that they will lose LESS on better games, yet I can only assume that most of the players at that casino only protested the change out of habit. When something they weren't used to came in, (the CSM) and they lost money, they probably NOTICED THEIR LOSSES MORE since there was something new to blame. It is human nature to point fingers and blame something other than themselves when failing. For this very reason I fear that although the CSM's disappered, they disappered for the 'wrong reason'.

Now consider a change much less obvious than a CSM, such as 6:5 blackjack. The average player/tourist will look at the game and remember hearing that single deck is the best game to play. They will sit down with a grin on their face and proceed to support an inferior game. Without jabbering on, I just want to state the dillema that has been floating in my head - for the most part, ONLY SKILLED PLAYERS WILL PROTEST INFERIOR GAMES. And the fact is, most people are NOT skilled players. This of course is good, since if there WERE more skilled players, blackjack would have been extinct a long time ago, but at the same time...

Bottom Line - how are we supposed to get the 'average player' to protest games that are inferior when they ultimatley dont care or are just plain ignorant? It all just seems so hopeless.

 

[SweetAxtion]

Slot machine juggarnaut

In British Columbia Canada all new Casino's that will open must have CSM's according to the Gaming Policy and Enforcement Branch. This includes any existing casino's which will have "renovations" (same gaming license). Thus, there is no grandfather clause once a casino decides to upgrade their facilities in regards to CSM's.

They continue (so far) to keep Automatic Shufflers in their high stakes rooms but that can change they tell me.

So why do I mention Slot Machines? Because blackjack IMO is a suckers game for all the people who throw their money away at it playing CSM's without even utilizing BS. I've even seen a player counting out loud and holding up play in front of the dealer and pit at a CSM.

A friend of mine owned a casino here and all he had were slot machines and two computerized BJ games. He didn't need table games because slot machines earn casinos much more money. As it is, friends of mine who work in casinos here tell me that the average house take from a busy local casino here is 2k-5k a day per table on blackjack. Slot machines earn the casino's much more.

Here it is a lost battle I believe because of the ignorance of people and the idea that blackjack is just another "game". Even the language used to describe gambling as "gaming" is a powerful tool. So when the masses start viewing blackjack as just another alternative to slot machines there is no reason for them to complain.

Considering that our casinos are government regulated and the people on the commision are gov't officials who don't even "gamble", they see CSM's as a fine alternative. These are the same people who ok slot machines, so why should they give players a break by providing them with a "fair" game?

If people here stopped playing CSM blackjack I don't think the gov't is going to change their mind and reintroduce shuffles. They'd just phase out the tables and add more slots which I know they did in another casino in which not enough people were playing shuffled shoes.

In regards to blackjack in BC...unfortnuately it is only a short time from now before all games will be CSM. The only thing going for those of us who endure this is that it is 4 deck CSM...so there are times that I foolishly believe one can notice card clumping of either small cards or tens/aces. Those are the only times CSM's can be exploited I believe.

 

[BJStanko]

I agree..

...with everything you said. especially that part about CSM

The only thing we can do is to educate beginners about proper bj conditions!

It is so important to have more threads like this, to spread the word as much as possible.

 

[BJStanko]

Average players

can be educated too.

We just have to tell them that they will lose 100 more money if play 6:5 rule!

Not knowing anything about blackjack theory they will stay away from that game.

But it is hard if somebody relly wants to watch plastic t.... in "Rio"

 

[lagavulin62]

my input

I'd like to share my understanding of the auto-shufflers. from a card-counters perspective, auto-shufflers, if they are only doing what they are designed to do, which of course is shuffle to make a truly random deck, should not be a threat on card-counting in theory. auto shufflers shouldn't arrange the cards in any specific order but it is a natural phenomenom, that at times the deck will be tens rich, or poor. card counters have knowledge of those times and can exploit this phenomenom to their advantage. compare this to the situation of a hand-shuffled deck. if the dealer is a good shuffler then the new deck should be just as random as the deck shuffled by the auto-shuffler. of course in reality we all know that most dealers are not that good and as a result their shuffled deck would tend to be more rich in "clumps". then too consider the fact that because of the way people play the game as cards are collected they tend to be lumped together in "high card groups" and "low card groups".(I won't even go into this because I know everyone is aware of it.) so when the dealer uses an inferior shuffle compared to the auto-shuffler the result is that you would seem to have longer swings when the deck is either rich in "high cards" or "low cards". this certainly gives the card-counter a better advantage if he can play the hand shuffled games. it even gives the bs player an advantage, although he has no way of knowing when he has the advantage. so the question as far as I see it is, do auto-shufflers destroy the art of card-counting? no they don't, but they do limit the degree to which a good counter can take advantage of the game. and this is enough reason to stay away from these games............if possible. unfortunately most of us do not have that option so it is perfectly acceptable to play the auto-shufflers.
what about the csm's? when this becomes our only option will it be acceptable to play this game? _ E L L N O!!!!! a game with a small advantage is still playable and beatable, but a game with no advantage is a ripoff. any more thoughts on this?

as far as the "ease the changes in" theory I agree completely. big business is notorious for slowly moving in changes that will ultimately work to their advantage. most people will never notice the difference between auto-shufflers and csm's. in fact I skimmed a few of the websites for these companies and I think some of their auto-shufflers can be easily converted to be used as csm's. maybe I'm not totally correct on that but I agree that the ultimate goal is to have the csm's in place completely at some point. and how nice of the industry to have the govt in bc make it a law that they have to utilize csm's. now that sounds like one lobbying effort where money was well spent. perfect justification for their robbery, just make it the law.

one other point I'd like to throw out. it's my belief that part of the problem is big business in the "gaming industry". I've shared some of this in another thread but didnt' get much response so would like some opinions of this. the problem with wall street is they understand nothing except numbers. when they take over something they are like leeches, sucking out every last cent to earn that extra penny or two on their earnings report. what happens is that decisions are made on paper without always understanding the whole or big picture. many times the decision makers are individuals who have little or no contact with the customers. as a result it seems they don't understand the tradeoffs which are so important in business to create long-term customer/client relationships. those that do, pit bosses, managers, probably don't even have the flexibility to make decisions like they used to. so you have a situation where things change for the good of the company but no give back is there for the customers. technology further increases the distance between those making the decisions and the customers. I believe that this is the real evil that is happening in the industry. I think gamblers are becoming victims of technology and big business more than anything. although I believe casinos have a concern about protecting themselves against card counters, I don't think they are marching in sinc with a grand design to make counters obsolete. I think there is more at work here than their attempts to have skilled counters barred. what the industry needs(well what gamblers need) in my opinion is a business environment that allows room for smaller privately owned casinos to operate. maybe this is the idea with indian casinos? anway, I'm rambling, maybe way out in left field on this but would appreciate anyones input on this.

mike