Order of the Cards simulation

Using CVData (full, paid version) I attempted to prove or disprove the belief that a player who enters or leaves mid-shoe "ruins the order of the cards" for other players at the table. I would appreciate your replies, questions, and comments.
300,000,000 rounds per simulation, 8D, S17, DOA, DAS, noSurr, 1 burn card, 78 cards cut off
All players play basic strategy and flat bet. TBA is Total Bet Advantage (element of risk) and IBA is Initial Bet Advantage (house edge).
In this simulation Players 1 and 2 play at the start of the shoe and continue playing untill the shuffle point. Player 3 enters and only plays hand #5. Player 4 enters and only plays hand #10.
Hands Played Units Lost TBA% IBA%
Player 1 308477400 1344784 -0.396 -0.448
Player 2 308476872 1354028 -0.398 -0.451
Player 3 7677510 37072 -0.439 -0.497
Player 4 7676671 31339 -0.371 -0.420
In this simulation Players 1, 2 and 3 play at the start of the shoe and continue playing untill the shuffle point. Player 4 enters and plays hand #10 and leaves after a loss (may play more than 1 round).
Hands Played Units Lost TBA% IBA%
Player 1 308470636 1325000 -0.390 -0.442
Player 2 308476902 1386103 -0.407 -0.462
Player 3 308472664 1353373 -0.398 -0.451
Player 4 21184267 97640 -0.419 -0.474
In this simulation Players 1 and 2 play at the start of the shoe and continue playing untill the shuffle point. Player 3 enters and plays hand #5 and leaves after a loss (may play more than 1 round). Player 4 enters and plays hand #10 and leaves after a loss (may play more than 1 round).
Hands Played Units Lost TBA% IBA%
Player 1 308468668 1320109 -0.389 -0.440
Player 2 308470144 1357654 -0.399 -0.453
Player 3 16322575 69691 -0.388 -0.439
Player 4 16319844 75323 -0.419 -0.475
In this simulation Player 1 plays at the start of the shoe and continues playing untill the shuffle point. Player 2 plays at the start of the shoe and leaves after a loss (may play more than 1 round). Player 3 enters and plays hand #5 and leaves after a loss. Player 4 enters and plays hand #10 and leaves after a loss.
Hands Played Units Lost TBA% IBA%
Player 1 308471648 1303609 -0.384 -0.435
Player 2 11250076 43511 -0.350 -0.398
Player 3 11252700 45225 -0.365 -0.413
Player 4 11235427 60446 -0.489 -0.555
In this simulation Player 1 plays at the start of the shoe and continues playing untill the shuffle point. Player 2 plays at the start of the shoe and leaves after a loss (may play more than 1 round). Player 3 enters and plays hand #5 and leaves after a loss. Player 4 enters and plays hand #10 and leaves after a loss. Player 5 enters and plays hand #15 and leaves after a loss.
Hands Played Units Lost TBA% IBA
Player 1 308474376 1341050 -0.395 -0.447
Player 2 11446074 50061 -0.396 -0.450
Player 3 11446753` 49707 -0.394 -0.446
Player 4 11448851 46366 -0.368 -0.416
Player 5 11452842 45633 -0.362 -0.410
My conclusion is that in every case, the players who did NOT "go in and out" had a house edge of .44% to .46% against them, which is the same as the house edge of normal Blackjack. The players who did "go in and out" had a greater range of house edges because the sample size (number of hands played) was smaller.

Great, but I don't see why someone who doesn't believe something that can be proven by simple math would believe the results of a simulation.

Quote: nvr55xx

Using CVData (full, paid version) I attempted to prove or disprove the belief that a player who enters or leaves mid-shoe "ruins the order of the cards" for other players at the table. I would appreciate your replies, questions, and comments.

Prove is simple.
(1) As the shoe is shuffled, cards can be drawn from *any* region without any observable effect to the game.
(2) If the mid entry player would draw his cards from the bottom of the shoe, it would not affect the other players game.

combine (1) and (2): the mid entry player, even when he draws from the top of the shoe, does not affect the other players game.

Quote: AxiomOfChoice

Great, but I don't see why someone who doesn't believe something that can be proven by simple math would believe the results of a simulation.

Thank you for your reply. I know that mid-shoe entry doesn't "ruin the order of the cards". But I have heard that expression so many times that I just had to make a simulation of it!

Quote: nvr55xx

Thank you for your reply. I know that mid-shoe entry doesn't "ruin the order of the cards". But I have heard that expression so many times that I just had to make a simulation of it!

I understand. My point is that no one who believes that nonsense will trust your simulation. They will tell you that that's only on the computer, and that real cards are different. No matter what you do, they will come up with some excuse to keep believing their nonsense. People who have chosen to ignore common sense are surprisingly good at it!

Quote: AxiomOfChoice

I understand. My point is that no one who believes that nonsense will trust your simulation. They will tell you that that's only on the computer, and that real cards are different. No matter what you do, they will come up with some excuse to keep believing their nonsense. People who have chosen to ignore common sense are surprisingly good at it!

I know! I've even been told by dealers that I made everyone lose! What a great way to earn a tip! Sometimes I wish I would hear a player say "that guy who played one or two hands took all the good cards and now all that's left is junk." At least that would be somewhat accurate (sometimes). Haven't these so-called "knowledgeable" players even watched the movie 21 ? I know the movie's not totally accurate, but how do you think they won money at Blackjack? They didn't ask "is it okay for me to come in". They weren't concerned with the "order of the cards".

At its most basic level, what is card counting? You bet more when you think you have the edge and bet less when you think you don't have the edge (or a greater house edge than a new shoe). Sometimes "less" can mean nothing! I've been at tables where the first 2 or 3 rounds was almost all Aces and X's. Players even said out loud "look at all the Aces and face cards", and then they refuse to sit out one hand or go from 2 spots to one because they're scared of "ruining the order of the cards"! If the Aces and X's are gone, then it doesn't matter what order the damn cards are in.