Sorry Charlie, no CSM for
you
28 September 2007
By Mark Pilarski
Dear Mark: Recently, I was playing Blackjack on
a cruise boat. The table had a constant shuffle
machine with either 6 or 8 decks, although I
can't be certain. What effect, if any, does this
have on the house advantage on a basic strategy
player? Charlie L.
With a typical shoe game, any time the number of
decks in play is increased, the casino's edge
goes up slightly. For example, compared to a
single deck, a two-deck game handicaps your play
by 0.35%, four decks, 0.48%, six decks, 0.54%
and eight decks 0.58%. It is always to your
advantage to play on a game that offers the
fewest decks.
As for the effect of the continuous shuffle
machine (CSM), it actually lowers the house edge
because there is no "cut card effect," besides
which you get an honest random shuffle, enabling
you to play with a fresh shoe every hand. For
non card-counters, on a CMS one deck ups your
advantage +1.13%, two decks, + 0.63%, four
decks, ++0.34%, six decks, +0.20%, and eight
decks, +0.14%.
So you would think I would advise your playing
on them. Not so fast, my friend, curves ahead.
The reduced house edge and increased speed of
the game cancel each other out, and then some.
"Let me explain ", quoth he, plucking aces out
of thin air.
With a constant shuffle machine, dealers do not
waste time manually shuffling. From the casino's
perspective, shuffling is time, and time is
money. The more hands you are dealt per hour,
the deeper the built-in casino advantage drills
into your bankroll.
From a player's perspective–your perspective,
Charlie–speed kills in a casino environment. The
longer you are exposed to the house advantage,
the happier havoc it will wreak on your
bankroll. Trust me, one bad beat on a continuous
shuffle machine and you'll swear off of them for
life.
Here's my overall recommendation, Charlie.
Continue to play each hand correctly by using
perfect basic strategy, at the lowest table
limit you can find, with the fewest decks
possible. These conditions force the dealer to
shuffle more, which, with smart play, keeps your
exposure to the casino's edge at a minimum.
Dear Mark: I see a lot of slot players who like
to play two machines simultaneously, reaching
back and forth between the two machines. What
are your thoughts on this method of playing
slots? Connie D.
Some people just can't lose money fast enough.
Dear Mark: Lately I started playing at higher
limits in poker with some moderate success at
the beginning. And then ___, well, you could
probably fill in the blank far better than me.
The problem I find now is that it is tough to go
back and play for less money. Is this behavior
ordinary amongst players who move up to higher
limits? Tommy S.
Upping your betting limits in poker invokes a
big-screen television analogy. Once you've got a
60-incher parked in the living room, a small
screen telly just isn't gonna cut it.
Your problem is that once you get accustomed to
higher limits, you tend to not want to retreat
to your previous limit, especially when the
bigger game turns ugly.
The solution is to play only on a game that you
are comfortable with, and that respects the size
of your bankroll. Sure, Tommy, you may want to
move up a limit or two to take advantage of
profitable opportunities when you've got some
bucks behind you, but while you're building your
war chest, you must to be able to move back down
when those circumstances change.
Gambling Wisdom of the Week: "In poker, you
should be rewarded for good decisions and
penalized for bad ones. That's the essence of
the game." --Mike Sexton, Shuffle Up and Deal
|
