This Is Not BlackJack

This is a followup to my post about Electronic Table Games. You should probably read that first.

Let's Talk Pushes

A lot of times when you read (or watch) people talk about losing at BlackJack they are talking about actually losing a hand by either breaking or being out drawn by the dealer. But the push can equally be a money drainer if it rears its head often enough.

As I showed in previous postings, pushes happen relatively rarely in the game but there are times where pushes will cost you your bankroll (or session-roll) if it shows up at inopportune times. Card counters know that when the deck is rich in high cards that they are likely to get more 20s and blackjacks. It also means that the dealer is more likely to get more 20s and blackjacks. The problem discussed here is when that happens frequently enough to cost you many high bets.

My method of play involves betting high when there is a higher statistical likelihood of winning and conversely betting low when it is less likely but it is NOT card counting. Due to my method, I have a relatively high exposure to situations in which pushes are likely to happen. This can, and has presented problems on occasions. Let me paraphrase something I read online some months ago about surrender.

I read that the problem with surrender is that obviously if done each and every time, results in situations where you surrender where you would have won. In such a case not only do you lose the half-bet that you "recovered" but you also lost the money you would have won had you not surrendered. If you look at basic strategy for a game that allows late surrender you'll note that they tell you to surrender or HIT. Have you seen a surrender or STAND? No, neither have I. Personally, when I play in places where surrender is not an option, I have chosen to stand where Basic has called for surrender or hit. I'f I'm going to lose the money, I'm going to lose the money. You should do whatever you're comfortable with though. I'd rather lose the bet than the bet and a half.

So yes, wrong surrenders could cost you money. I'm sure mathematicians will point out that long term this may not be the case but most people are not going to be playing billion of hands, so there's that.

Similarly pushes that happen when you have high bets out cost you money because you're betting low when your losing and the high bets are how you overcome these losses, but each time you raise you lose or get pushed and there goes your bankroll.

I haven't quite figured out how to deal with this situation since you have no idea that you're in a push-hole until you've had a number of your high bets nullified. I have noticed though that these high number of pushes occur with numerous long losing streaks (6 or greater). Fortunately I have not seen this occur on consecutive shoe games. Continuous shufflers are a different thing altogether.

So this note is just to make the budding player aware of the roll that pushes have on your gambling income. Yeah, you didn't lose, but if you can't make your high bets (and you'll certainly lose a few high bets), pushes will allow the house to 'nickel and dime" you out of your money.

More BlackJack Life

BlackJack Life

p />

Stadium BlackJack

So you're a beginner of don't have a lot of bank so you roll into one of those casinos that has a low limit table. Odds are it is some form of stadium Blackjack like "ShaqJack". That is there is a dealer at the head of a number of tables and every player gets the same exact hand. Essentially you get to play "head up" against the dealer. If you know basic strategy you know when someone has done something "foolish" because they'll hit a hand where BS says to stand (classic variability). But there's a very, and I mean VERY, nice thing about stadium Blackjack:

You don't have to bet any money and still be in the game.

Here's the thing about stadium type games: As far as I've seen, so long as there is at least ONE player, the dealer must continue to deal hands. Unlike a standard table where if you don't bet, you don't get cards, in stadium games, the hands you don't bet on are still play out and are subject to the statistics I covered in earlier posts. You do realize what this means right?

If you understand that Blackjack is beaten by betting high (some would say extremely high) when the odds are in your favor, then you know that you bet the table minimum when odds are not in your favor. You don't expect to make money at these times. In stadium BJ the table minimum is effectively $0.

Some people would call this Wonging. I'd call it modified Wonging. Usually one would back count a table (or whatever model your using) and then jump in when the odds are good for a win. The problem IMO is that when you jump into a table you affect the flow of cards (a counter may not care about that, but other methods are definitely affected by a player entering and exiting a game). However in stadium BJ your entering and exiting by way of not betting, in no way affects the card flow since the cards you would have gotten would be played out in that order anyway.

So for example, in my last trip to a casino that has stadium style BJ with $5 minimum, I had an epic 16 hand losing streak. once I hit loss 8 I simply stopped betting and waited for the dealer to lose a hand before entering again. I "saved" $45 in losses. When you are playing with small bank $45 is a lot of money. That 16 hand losing streak broke a lot of other players and they exited the table one after the other as their money evaporated to negative variance.

I'm not telling anyone how to play, but if you are going to play a stadium type game, you may want to consider not betting whenever you are in the situation. Mind you, this is not an invite to ignore the cards. For example, if on a 'non-bet" some player makes a bad basic strategy call that leads to a bust but that hand would have won, you should consider that a dealer bust because your hand would have been unaffected by other player's bad call.

Good luck y'all.

Video "BlackJack"

Have you played one of these:

Have you noticed that something is "not quite right"? Yes. Well I'm about to show you why this Blackjack game is not really Blackjack. Let me explain. In order to understand what I'm about to point out you need to understand a few things:

Blackjack is not simply the rules of the game. Just because you have "decks" of cards doesn't mean you have Blackjack. You have something that looks like blackjack. Blackjack was made for play using physical cards and NOT a random number generator (RNG). Physical cards have certain properties that cannot be changed. They have a thickness and material that sometimes sticks together. I won't go into dealer errors. Not only that but dealing and shuffling of the deck or shoe happens in a certain way.

For example I've watched a dealer shuffle. Here's how it went:

1)The decks are put into a shuffling machine usually referred to as an autoshuffler.
2)A cut card is placed halfway down the deck.
3)The two halves are separated and reversed front to back.
4)The cut card is then placed about 3/4 the way into the deck (also known as penetration).
5)A card is removed from the top of the deck and "burned".
6)The deck is placed in the shoe and the game begins. Note that once the deck is placed in the shoe there is NO OTHER SHUFFLING happening.

Whatever order the cards have, they have until the next shuffle regardless of how many people are playing or when a person enters and leaves the game.

If you've seen my last set of posts you know that there is a particular statistical pattern that will emerge. This is predictable and can be used to "beat" the game so long as you play perfect basic strategy AND use proper bankroll management. Now lets see what it is that these "Blackjack" machines actually do. Please note that I am about to quote the NYS Gambling laws. This differs from other state laws and therefore may not apply where you live. I strongly advise that you find and read the laws governing video games before you put "real" money down.

§ 5319.35. RNG requirements. The selection of game symbols or production of game outcomes for a gaming device using a RNG shall: (a) be statistically independent;
1093 updated (2/17)
(b) conform to the desired random distribution;
(c) pass various recognized statistical tests; and
(d) be unpredictable.

I wish to draw the reader's attention to items a, c and d. Why? Because actual Blackjack is actually predictable and does not "pass various recognized statistical tests". Tell me, have you seen an actual shoe undergo "statistical tests"? No? I thought not. So already we see that video "Blackjack" is not really Blackjack. but it goes further.

An independent testing laboratory approved by the commission may employ the use of various recognized tests to determine whether or not the random values produced by the random number generator pass the desired confidence level of 99 percent. Such independent testing laboratory may choose the appropriate tests on a case-by-case basis depending on the RNG under review. Such tests may include, without limitation:
(a) chi-square test;
(b) equi-distribution (frequency) test;
(c) gap test;
(d) overlaps test;
(e) poker test;
(f) coupon collector’s test;
(g) permutation test;
(h) Kolmogorov-Smirnov test;
(i) adjacencycriteriontests;
(j) order statistic test;
(k) runs tests (patterns of occurrences should not be recurrent);
(l) interplaycorrelationtest;
(m) serial correlation test potency and degree of serial correlation (outcomes should be independent of the previous game);
(n) tests on subsequences; and
(o) Poisson distribution.
[My underlines]

As I have shown in previous posts, in actual BlackJack not only are patterns of occurrences present but are NOT independent of the previous game (where a "game" is any hand). SO lets review:

Video blackjack such as that shown above is specifically programed to eliminate predictability and outcomes that are dependent upon previous hands. That is NOT Blackjack because Blackjack has these two things. But wait, there is more:

§ 5319.37. Background RNG activity requirement. A RNG shall be cycled continuously in the background between games and during game play at a speed that cannot be timed by the player.

It's bad enough that we're using a RNG (which of course has to happen for there to be a "shuffled" deck but unlike an actual deck in which there is no randomization of ANYTHING until an actual physical shuffle occurs, this RNG is constantly in operation. Think about it. Once a Deck hits a shoe the cards are set until shuffle, According to this document, the RNG which actually "picks" the card is constantly running. That is not Blackjack.

The first seed shall be determined randomly by an uncontrolled event. After every game there shall be a random change in the RNG process (new seed, random timer, delay, etc.) in order to ensure that the RNG does not start at the same value every time. It is permissible not to use a random seed. Nevertheless, a manufacturer shall ensure that multiple games will not synchronize.[My underlines]

. Really? I don't know how many people playing a physical shoe have noticed that a shoe was identical but I've never noticed it but lets assume it does happen. Why is a manufacturer required to make sure that something that is possible cannot happen?

§ 5319.39. Live game correlation. Where a gaming device plays a game that is recognizable to be a simulation of a live casino game, such as poker, blackjack, roulette, etc., the same probabilities associated with the live game shall be evident in the simulated game, unless otherwise denoted on the display or help screen.

This is misleading. Number one "same probabilities" doesn't mean what you think it does why? because as quoted above, the games are specifically programmed to avoid predictability and patterns of occurrences influenced by previous games. Again though I have already shown in previous posts that Blackjack by definition is predictable and hands (games) are directly influenced by the hands that preceded them.

Lets look at some other legal requirements:

§ 5319.45. Software requirements for percentage payout.

(b) Gaming devices that may be affected by player skill shall meet the requirement of this section when using a method of play that will provide the greatest return to the player over a period of continuous play.

"...a method of play...". Unless we're talking side bets and IF we're talking side bets....

(c) RNG. Each RNG shall meet the requirements set forth in section 5319.35 of this Part and the following requirements:

(1) In the game selection process:
(i) each possible permutation or combination of game elements that produces winning or losing game outcomes shall be available for random selection at the initiation of each play, unless otherwise denoted by the game;

Again, we know that in a shuffled deck there is no 'randomization" of card picks. That is, the dealer cannot close his or her eyes and pick a card from anywhere in the shoe. No, the shoe was determined at shuffle. There is nothing else to do but pull the cards. It may seem "random" to the player, but the cards are actually set already. You need to understand this. There should be no randomization going on once a deck is created.

Let us also be clear if you have been playing the game pictured above and have been wondering why, for example, you have these long winning and losing streaks. Or if you have noticed that even though certain events happen at a certain frequency almost *all the time*. Or if you have noticed that playing these differs strongly from what you see at a live dealer, you are not imagining things.

Ask yourself the following: The sign says "random shuffle" but have you EVER been notified of a shuffle? No? Why not? If this is supposed to simulate an actual Blackjack game, you should at least be notified that a shuffle has happened. Oh it's when the avatar changes? Really? Did they tell you that? You do know that at a casino a dealer can rotate out between shuffles right?

Say what about penetration. Do those signs ever tell you about penetration? Did you see anything in the NYS Gambling commission about notifying the player about how much of this "random" deck is being used in each game? No? Any real Blackjack player knows that the penetration has an immense affect on the game. You'll note that the laws only require a random deck. It says NOTHING about how much of the deck has to be used. It says nothing in regards to whether the deck has to be the same penetration after every "shuffle" (whenever that is).

[Update] looking over my data for the past few months and comparing it to physical games, I estimate that the penetration on these game ranges from 1/3 to 1/2. Since I have seen no laws regarding notifying the user of penetration (something you can see at a physical game) or of having a set penetration you should assume that the casino can legally change the penetration (or randomize it) in order to increase the house advantage. This statement assumes that a "shuffle" occurs at every avatar change.

[/update] It's not that these companies cannot program such notices. It's not that they cannot show you a cut card and a burn card. It's that it is to the benefit of the casino that they do not.

Now a note about those "continuous shuffle" Interblock games. If you've played against an physical continuous shuffler and researched the mechanism, you know that a continuous shuffler really isn't. It holds cards in something like a 16 card "slot". As each card is used and returned to the deck, it is randomly assigned to a slot. Obviously "full" slots cannot be used. In other words, although the shuffle is continuous, it is not exactly random. For this reason, even physical continuous shufflers can be mathematically mapped for optimum winning play. However these IB games with continuous shuffles have to adhere to the rules laid down by the laws governing gaming. As shown above they do their best to be random and non-recurring and not influenced by previous hands. Again, something that is impossible to do with physical cards and a physical continuous shuffler.

So to close, I want to be clear. I'm not accusing casinos of cheating. Nor am I accusing the manufacturers of cheating. They are offering games under specific rules and laws. They are using computers that are running specific code. You take that risk as a part of "gambling". My only purpose here is to inform the player of what game they are actually playing. IMO these "blackjack" games are specialized slot machines. It is in your best interest to hit and run these machines and stack short term winnings if you are looking to make real money. It would be better to attack a real physical card game where non-randomness and predictability is part and parcel of the game.

Blackjack 3rd “loss” Analysis

So in the previous post I showed the frequency of different win-loss-pushes in a row. I demonstrated that there is a 50% drop in likelihood of a 2nd loss in a row and then another 50% drop in likelihood of a 3rd loss and another 50% drop by the 4th loss. After that the chart levels out with any further loss in a row being equally [un] likely. It also demonstrated that it is a bad idea to keep escalating bets beyond 4 due to this because though it is unlikely that one would lose again, at that end of the scale winning and losing are about equal likelihood (aka: no real advantage).

So the chart shows that the optimal inflection point is between the 3rd and 4th loss. So again used two programs to determine how frequently one hits on the 3rd try (after 2 losses in a row). Same rules applied:

Basic Strategy, no deviations.
6 decks
4 shoes

So since the charts got kinda messed up, the first bar is wins on "3rd try" (just had 2 losses in a row) the second bar is you just lost your 3rd hand in a row and the last bar (3) is you got pushed.

The reason I have 2 charts per app is because I was surprised by the difference between Mobilityware and BJAT. These two apps must be using different algorithms to get their "randomness". I will say that I have found MW to be somewhat streaky. Assuming BJAT to be more accurate you can see that on the second pass it "conformed" to the expectations. It is possible that the first run was an example of negative deviation and indeed I was cash negative for most of that run (was also up 12% at one point and I would have cashed out).

In the charts we can see that the win percentage on BJ Apprentice trainer falls on the low side of wins at 44.7 and 48.27% wins respectively. Admittedly I thought that to be pretty low given the previous charts. I cannot say how this would actually play out but you would “break even” in a give and take situation (assumings your gives aren’t doubles). If you’re fortunate, with a few BJ and doubles on your high bet you can come out far ahead.

Mobilityware showed a far more favorable win rate for the player with 57.14% and 57.8% win rate. This is a SERIOUS advantage and if it played out like that in a casino, one could expect to make a lot of money as that is way beyond the casino advantage.

The average between these two is 51.97% (52%) which is still an advantage over the casino.

Now I have not had practice play that resembled anything I saw at the casino. Some better, some worse, which I guess is about right so take these stats with the appropriate grains of salt and remember these stats are for short term play, I have no idea and have no intentions on how this would work out long term.