BJ conspiracy theory?

so i have read over a dozen blackjack books by the most renown authors all from the late 60s to now, i have read millions or felt like millions of posts people claiming they double their roll within hours and same with others blowing through it (mostly info from )

i have played blackjack in real life casino and computer simulations atlantic city, sands pa, las vegas, video blackjack masque blackjack casino verite

i haven't had the balls to punch in 3k$ to play in real life so i can not judge what is frequency of going belly up or doubling the bank roll in real life conditions

using the Kiss 3 counting i on casino verite is childs play if i punch in the hours i can make that $$$ that everyone talks about

i try that system on masque blackjack and i am down negative 70 max bet (25-250) yes same rules/conditions on each program

i can beat any blackjack pc game with card counting except masque , i have lost 70 max bets in the past VERY rare frequency but since i got it i have yet able to double the roll just a downward spiral

anywho i reconstructed one session to play 2 hands and turns out instead of losing 1475 w/ one hand i played 2 hands and only only lost 687

its almost gotten me to the point where i wish to stand infront of a blackjack table record each card numbered 1-312 or wherever they shuffle and come home and reconstruct that order and use my count and not the ploppies gut feeling

what do you guys think about that?

i can't imagine losing 70 max bets in world of blackjack right off the bat and still going down

and i sure cant imagine winning 8k$ within 2 days lol neither the casino or the player would try this if both scenarios were evenly likely or skewed

i remember reading Kewljason claiming rarely ever dipping below 50 max bets (id rather witness his results because via a machine it may as well be fiction)

last rules i been playing 6deck 2/3 shuffle , das,, late surr, s17, 1v1 heads up, 25-250 spread, split ace once

i figured after 25-50 some odd weeks (the more the better) of data mining the hell out of each shoe will tell me what i wish to know , bad thing is if the end result of the 50th week proved/showed a positive outcome sucks i didn't wager or that shoulda been my shoe(s) if i lost well looks like the casinos have everyone licked lol

i also read about auto shuffles ofcourse the websites are no help, AP claiming they are rigged and others claiming they are not, i am just thinking can they rig the shuffle like masque blackjack? clump the high cards behind the cut card? the game i described is very beatable and now i wonder if the computer simulation games i played on the computer are recycled shuffles never really changing the flow of the randomness

any thoughts or opinions will be helpful

I've never met a novice player that mastered KISS 3 before. Congrats.

i was waiting for someone to talk down to a lvl one count now i will talk about how k3 holds its own against the industry standard you guessed it the hi lo

if you read any blackjack books you know know this computer simulations will show the it still gets the money as does the red 7, ko, etc etc but go ahead think what ya want

replies like that makes me confirm this site is either running by BIG FAT liars who make money off everyone a short 4 word reply that had nothing to do about the game or run by casinos to entice the middle man to think he has an edge over the house

id rather be a novice player than joel, billythebjkid, adventureboy, jimmtech, donr, and the damned others who lost there bank account to this mystical game card 21

Quote: sidthesquid

replies like that makes me confirm this site is either running by BIG FAT liars who make money off everyone a short 4 word reply that had nothing to do about the game or run by casinos to entice the middle man to think he has an edge over the house

Replies like yours are incomprehensible to me, with you being a new member. Who are you responding to? The only reply you've gotten was largely complimentary. But I doubt you'll get another worth reading with your follow-on post.

Counters here generally respect and encourage people making the effort. And yes, I'd say you're a novice if you haven't counted a live game for cash.

carry on then blackjack soldiers, i only pray your not the next jimmtech, donr, adventureboy, joel or the famous billythebjkid and the countless others who been defeated by this floating advantage lol , yea Kewljason knows who im talking about,

Thanks for the 2 replies not exactly what i was hoping for but gambling never is what you hope for...


good cards!

Quote: beachbumbabs

Replies like yours are incomprehensible to me, with you being a new member. Who are you responding to? The only reply you've gotten was largely complimentary. But I doubt you'll get another worth reading with your follow-on post.

Counters here generally respect and encourage people making the effort. And yes, I'd say you're a novice if you haven't counted a live game for cash.

Perhaps any effort the OP makes in the future would be better spent learning what a paragraph is. Anyway, it's unclear what the OP wanted to hear--only that he didn't get it, whatever it was. Validation? Each and every one of us has had sets of results three or four standard deviations away from the norm. It's really not all that significant to be simply unlucky. Like any question involving numeric data, you have to do your research and expand your sample size. One bad session is just bad luck; several in a row might be something else.

Unfortunately, that something else might be that you're playing badly. Or it might just be good ol' variance. I read in one BJ book that betting big with a 2% advantage is like reaching blindfolded into a jar with 51 black and 49 white marbles and betting $1000 that the marble you grab will be black. It wouldn't be that unusual to be down $5000 or so after you'd played the game for a while.

Quote: Joeshlabotnik

Perhaps any effort the OP makes in the future would be better spent learning what a paragraph is. Anyway, it's unclear what the OP wanted to hear--only that he didn't get it, whatever it was. Validation? Each and every one of us has had sets of results three or four standard deviations away from the norm. It's really not all that significant to be simply unlucky. Like any question involving numeric data, you have to do your research and expand your sample size. One bad session is just bad luck; several in a row might be something else.

Unfortunately, that something else might be that you're playing badly. Or it might just be good ol' variance. I read in one BJ book that betting big with a 2% advantage is like reaching blindfolded into a jar with 51 black and 49 white marbles and betting $1000 that the marble you grab will be black. It wouldn't be that unusual to be down $5000 or so after you'd played the game for a while.

Do the marbles chosen go back in the near after each hand?

The blackjack game of gambling now here confuses this thread with me. Seventy big bets are lost on "masque" blackjacks, as do I know for who that is? Be careful for casino online, explanation why you down many big bets, might. Fairly the game, or he were unregulated? The used to say, Ancient Hawaiians, "The 2/3'th shuffle of the 6D BJ be tougher game to beat than iguana speed on hot day."

masque blackjack was/is a blackjack simulator created by Julian Braun in 1980s early 1990s , it uses 1-8 deckers das, late surr, pent 50-80 it does track each card for you how many cards are left in the deck, like i said i used a lvl one count k3 which is almost as equal to hi lo and it ate all 70 max bets, was able to win 3500ish but after that it kept eating max bets kinda like what happen to the old the gods (jimmthech, billybjkid, joel, and adventureboy god bless his soul man lost 25k$ of his bank roll i always wonder if these gods were dead on accurate and was a victim of that suck it up kid "Standard Deviant!" but well never know

anywho yea its a legit blackjack game that uses virtual cards/shuffle and man that shuffle is scary

Sid,
I'd like to welcome you to the forum.
I'd like to, doesn't mean I'm going to. Your attitude sucks.

That said, your subject was 'Blackjack conspiracy?' Who do you suspect is conspiring against whom?

In this thread you seem to suggest that Masque Blackjack gives you worse results at max bets than some other simulators, yet in another thread you suggest it's a great sim. So which is it? and 'virtual card shuffle': What's so special about that? Surely it's just a graphical representation of what's being done by the underlying RNG. It doesn't mean it's game is any more or less rigged than any other RNG shuffle game.

Finally, as the new member here why do you name drop so many previous players/members? Are we maybe supposed to bow in awe to your extensive knowledge of advantage play, or are you perhaps suggesting that those guys are in on the conspiracy?

Maybe you are just trying to get traffic to some affiliate site where your mentioned BJ software is promoted?

Quote: RS

The blackjack game of gambling now here confuses this thread with me.

+10, RS. I love it when you do that. So subtle.

Be lion-mettled, proud, and take no care
Who chafes, who frets, or where conspirers are!

Quote: OnceDear

Sid,
I'd like to welcome you to the forum.
I'd like to, doesn't mean I'm going to. Your attitude sucks.

Sadly +1.

Sid - most people here accept newbie questions - please pretend it's as if you have just joined a friendly club.

I cannot comment on the results of your simulations but from personal experience know that you have to run many millions of hands to get an accurate estimate of the norm. Fewer trials will experience the variance that is inherent in BJ, so you occasionally see strange results. The other issue with older RNGs is whether they're good enough, I'm not saying they're not it's just things like Mersenne (which is what I use) have been developed since the 80s.

I have never simulated CSMs so do not know whether there is a bias in keeping cards back, grouping etc. Obviously over a very long trial hopefully most cards will suffer equally. Sadly the accuracy of running sims could only detect an obvious difference and one would hope the manufacturers have already done various trials.

apparently everyone has missed my point and question at hand, its very simple and one way

casino verite created by the renown Norm, played 25k turns well over 18k won counting cards works like a freakin charm(i played 500k turns on pc/android but that seems to be the average)

masque blackjack made by the ancient famous Julian counting enters a downard spiral and continues minus 70 max bets and counting (same counting system not working)

its a pattern a trend as it were i punch in the hours and casino verite rewards me, i try that on masque blackjack and i get hammered

im asking why is it that im 3 standard devations over to the right on verite and 10 on masque like every time like clockwork not to say i never witnessed a 50+ max bet drop on verite but its the norm on masque

what im trying to say is i played 3k turns in verite and up 10k+ cash
i played 35 hours on masque and down 16k+

i dont need to keep playing over and over both simulations anymore to figure out the out come


i came to the conclusion neither is real i can not imagine people flocking to bj tables forking over 3k 6k 9k$ and so on and losing and say well thats a gamble

and i can't imagine playing 3k turns and won 10k+ casinos would guard their games better

it just seems like all the losers been playing masque blackjack simulator the names i mentioned before

and the winners like automatic monkey and kewljason been playing casino or some poorly shuffle game of 21

i know the swings are extreme in both ways pos/neg but the patterns/trend is pissing me off all simulations seem worthless just a recycle of old deck/shoe with flaws in it


i don't mean to ramble on the only way i'll find out if i go there and try or record each individual card numbered 1-312 in correct order that popped out of that shoe so i can reconstruct the order at home, i am very aware i can play for 6k+ turns and still be at even or more turns has happened to me on verite

the blackjack authors claim 1 out of 5 chance of losing 20 max bets but again its happens all the time from the people i read about on differents sites

i mean i dont know how much they won or lost prior to that nose dive, im sure its a different world when you take a hit like that and still up and gambling with the casinos money card counters complain how they lost x amount of money feel like crap yet still up and still gambling with the houses money how does that make sense lol and my final note is every time i walk by a casino table i see the deal always reaching his/her hand at the players chips and taking 9/10 times rarely i ever see he or she giving them chips

Quote: OnceDear

+10, RS. I love it when you do that. So subtle.

That is pretty funny. It went over my head, I didn't know RS was doing that purposely, I just figured maybe he was drinking, I couldn't understand a thing he was saying.

Thank you for toning down the attitude.

Quote: sidthesquid

apparently everyone has missed my point and question at hand, its very simple and one way

It was easily missed and not so clearly stated, so let's give it another shot.

Quote:

im asking why is it that im 3 standard deviations over to the right on verite and 10 on masque like every time like clockwork not to say i never witnessed a 50+ max bet drop on verite but its the norm on masque

what im trying to say is i played 3k turns in verite and up 10k+ cash
i played 35 hours on masque and down 16k+

i dont need to keep playing over and over both simulations anymore to figure out the out come

i came to the conclusion neither is real i can not imagine people flocking to bj tables forking over 3k 6k 9k$ and so on and losing and say well thats a gamble

and i can't imagine playing 3k turns and won 10k+ casinos would guard their games better

I don't know whether you really did a large enough sample to determine that you are 3 sd's or 10 sd's away from ev. I suspect you didn't, but I'll accept that maybe you did and maybe you are correct to conclude that the results are statistically very extreme. But that's not really indicative of any sort of conspiracy. Maybe there are flaws in your two simulators or maybe there are flaws in your statistical analysis, or maybe you really did just reveal some extreme variance. Does it really matter though? These are simulations and no money was at stake. Maybe by seeing first hand that even lengthy simulations you can still get massive variance from ev, you are just seeing the true nature of the game.

Quote:

it just seems like all the losers been playing masque blackjack simulator the names i mentioned before
and the winners like automatic monkey and kewljason been playing casino or some poorly shuffle game of 21
i know the swings are extreme in both ways pos/neg but the patterns/trend is pissing me off all simulations seem worthless just a recycle of old deck/shoe with flaws in it

Why name drop those guys. If they make claims that you find absurd, challenge them where they make them. The simulations may be worthless, or maybe the object lesson is that sh1t happens and that's what they just simulated. I don't know where YOU downloaded your sim softwares from. Maybe the source was unreliable?

Quote:

. . . i'll find out if i go there and try or record each individual card numbered 1-312 in correct order that popped out of that shoe so i can reconstruct the order at home,

That doesn't really make much sense to me. Are you saying that by observing and reproducing ONE real shoe worth of real dealt cards, you will have anything to analyze? After all, you can hardly 'record' and replay millions of actual observed hands.

Quote:

the blackjack authors claim 1 out of 5 chance of losing 20 max bets but again its happens all the time from the people i read about on differents sites

Do they make those claims here? take it up with them if you disagree that strongly. What you read from other people on other forums will be tainted by their own flawed perceptions: Barely worth taking that as any sort of evidence.

Quote:

i mean i dont know how much they won or lost prior to that nose dive, im sure its a different world when you take a hit like that and still up and gambling with the casinos money card counters complain how they lost x amount of money feel like crap yet still up and still gambling with the houses money how does that make sense

There are all sorts of posters who make all sort of wild claims. The guy on the internet sometimes exaggerates.

Quote:

every time i walk by a casino table i see the deal always reaching his/her hand at the players chips and taking 9/10 times rarely i ever see he or she giving them chips

Well, that really is an absurd observation. sure, they spend a lot of time taking in chips and for a full table, there are usually many lost chips, especially on side bets. But from simple BJ bets, they hand out almost as many chips as the suck in.

It's tough to say, I wouldn't card count professionally with less than $10k. The 2/3 shuffle point is poor on a shoe game, 10-1 spread is minimal for the shoe (but an s17 game with ls probably has a $25 min.)

The LS rule helps keep risks down, you might like the chapter in "Burning the tables in Las Vegas" called "Crazy Surrender" or "Million Dollar Blackjack" which also has good stuff on surrender. Most people only rarely use surrender or never use it, though it can be a giveaway to counting; Crazy Surrender is a solution to this and is profitable with counting over never surrender.

As far as what's possible, with a hundred dollar unit the range is usually -1900 to +2000. There are ways to minimize losses, but at $250 max bet; you may see $5000 swings. I would want $50,000 bankroll to do those kind of bets.

Horrible pen horrible spread

67-68% pent Mr Arnold says thats fair to bad, not the greatest apparently but you can get a whoopin .98% edge with LS/S17
and any 1-10 spread should get the job done, i doubt anyone reads these posts and just reads a little and say whatever they want, ive played dozens of bj
simulators and this the ONLY one that hasn't succumb to counting oh well