Unique Shuffle Tracking Opportunity

Please forgive me for what will surely be a longer post, but I have some information to share and some questions to ask (don't we all?)

I live in North Dakota, where every little bar or "casino" in each town seems to have a blackjack game. The town I live in has 18 different locations I could get a game on any given night. Most games are excellent. They are 4 deck S17 and come with a 0.32% house edge (however, betting is capped at $3-25). Besides the rules, what is most important is the shuffle. The dealers run through a one pass shuffle where they split the 4 deck into 2 piles and grab either 1/3 or 1/4 of each pile and riffle the cards 3 times. This offers a golden opportunity for shuffle tracking (more specifically section tracking).

My big question is how to calculate an edge here. I know it is hard to calculate frequencies and things of that nature, but generally speaking, I should be able to calculate an edge if I know the theoretical TC of a 2 deck section. For example:

Say I have 4 decks, decks ABCD. As these decks go into the discard tray, I note the running count of each deck. Let us say they go as follows:

A +4
B -5
C +3
D -2

When they get broke up into two piles...

A C
B D

They then get shuffled together as such...

A+C and B+D, yielding a running count of -7 for the first two deck section (AC) and +7 for the second 2 deck section (BD).

Now I know that the "true count" for that 2 deck section (AC) is theoretically -3.5, I know that I have 3.5 more big cards than little cards per deck during that two deck section, and thus should be able to raise my bets during this portion of the shoe. Note that negative counts being a good thing here is a little counter-intuitive to what counters are used to, but it follows the same idea that we know when the big cards are to come, and know that we should have a theoretical advantage when there are more big cards to come than little cards.

I would like to find a way to calculate my edge for the rich sections of the deck. If I know those two decks are a theoretical -3.5, is this like playing with a +3.5 edge in a normal card counting situation? My first thoughts were no, because you can lose rich sections of deck behind the cut card, and with section tracking you theoretically know that those rich sections of high cards will come out, and when they should be coming out. It is almost like having 100% penetration.

I could get into things like keeping the count and trying to keep track of what should come and what has yet to come in those two deck sections, but for now that is too complicated. What type of sims or mathematics can be run so that I can get a chart that tells me what my edge should be if a 2 deck section is a theoretical true -1, -2, -3 etc? Thank you for taking the time to read this and I look forward to any and all responses.

A one pass shuffle is very beatable. Some other smarter math guys might be able to tell you what the edge is more precisley. It is much higher than regular counting probably five times or more better. The only problem is the games are 25 dollar max charity games run by the bars. It would take a huge edge and a lot of hands to make a worthwhile hourly rate. Pretty rare to see a one pass shuffle. The book blackjack blueprint has some info on shuffle tracking. In general it is a dying skill because of the complex shuffles around in the modern game.

I understand the hindrance of the $25 max and that is part of the reason I would like to know what the edge at certain count values might be. But let's say your 5x better than a normal counting edge is true, and we go with a reasonable counting edge of 0.5%. That is a 2.5% edge. Over 100 hands... let's say we play 2 decks (2/3 of playable cards in a 4 deck game with 75% pen) at $25 and the other 1 deck at $5. Over 100 hands, 67 would be played in the good part of the deck and 33 in the bad. This makes 67 hands in a 2.5% edge and 33 hands at let's say a -3% edge. Thus:

0.025 * 67 * $25 = $41.88

-0.03 * 33 * 5 = -$4.95

So, over 100 hands of shuffle tracking, our EV may be around $37. That's decent for our circumstances and could be inflated by betting $3 in the bad, splitting two hands in the good (especially if it's really good) and some other things like that. These games don't even come with pit bosses or a real eye in the sky, so heat would be nonexistent. But right now these numbers are somewhat made up and with some trial runs I know I can expect to have between a -1.5 true and a -6 true virtually every run through the cards, so it'd be nice to do some math on what those values could actually be worth.

Thanks for your feedback, it's good to know this is better than basic card counting and that the game is realistically beatable. We are gonna keep working on it :)

Quote: Mitch801777

My Nephew lives there and frequents these bars(just look for the kid knocking heads).

He was telling me the dealers are very sloppy and you can get away with a lot.

I've killed these types of games before.

Counting isn't the most efficient way to beat these games, as there are many other ways to beat those games.

Quote: Mitch8017

I understand the hindrance of the $25 max and that is part of the reason I would like to know what the edge at certain count values might be. But let's say your 5x better than a normal counting edge is true, and we go with a reasonable counting edge of 0.5%. That is a 2.5% edge. Over 100 hands... let's say we play 2 decks (2/3 of playable cards in a 4 deck game with 75% pen) at $25 and the other 1 deck at $5. Over 100 hands, 67 would be played in the good part of the deck and 33 in the bad. This makes 67 hands in a 2.5% edge and 33 hands at let's say a -3% edge. Thus:

0.025 * 67 * $25 = $41.88

-0.03 * 33 * 5 = -$4.95

So, over 100 hands of shuffle tracking, our EV may be around $37. That's decent for our circumstances and could be inflated by betting $3 in the bad, splitting two hands in the good (especially if it's really good) and some other things like that...

You're on the right path. What you seem to know, but not point out, is just how important getting the cut card is... Get the cut card, cut the good slug to the front, play it, then sit out (bathroom/phone call/etc/etc). I've played shuffle tracking games before and when my partner and I did he would literally steal the cut card if it was thrown anywhere around him and toss it to me lol. No one ever spoke up so we just always got to cut =). Then you're only playing good slugs such as TC +2, TC +3, etc. Your exact edge will change pending each of the RC's/TC's you actually get to play. If you cut RC +12 slug to the front of the shoe (in 2 decks worth of cards) then you get a TC +6 advantage (~2.5%) advantage.

Don't forget, if you have a slug that is RC +12 (A) and it gets shuffled in to RC 0 equal stack (B) then the result is going to be (12+0) / 2 since it's diluted. Thus the resulting RC of AB is going to be +6, and the TC = +3.

If I understand what is being described, your edge can be quite a bit higher than this. If the first two decks start with an RC of +6, then yes the first hand has a TC of +3. BUT, that’s just the first hand. The edge of a game is not just about the first hand. You are playing a two-deck game with almost 100% penetration. This can provide an enormous edge. Not quite the same as real two-deck 100% pen, and you have to be careful near the end of the playing zone where a hand can start in a PZ and end outside of it. But, this is a great game ('ceptin' for the low max).

In this case, using HiLo Sweet16, EV by TC is about:

+1: 0.6%
+2: 1.3%
+3: 1.6%
+4: 2.4%
+5: 2.9%
+6: 3.6%
+7: 3.8%
+8: 4.5%

Do these values change at all based on penetration? I know I've seen estimates somewhere that cutting out 0.75 decks instead of 2 decks in a 6 deck game can triple EV.

Oh yes. Pretty much everything affects everything. Strategy, number of indices, bet spread, penetration, and obviously rules.

Who finances these games? I'd be worried about taking them using a method someone might think is cheating.

Quote: billryan

Who finances these games? I'd be worried about taking them using a method someone might think is cheating.

How could they even prove what you're doing though? You know where the slug is, so you play that portion of the slug (hopefully cutting it to the front) and just bet huge and flat bet every hand playing correctly. Don't ever even have to touch the cards, etc, and to anyone trying to count the game they'll see the count tank negative when all the big cards start coming out at the beginning of the shoe, yet our player would still be betting large. Shuffle Tracking, to the untrained eye, is quite difficult to spot.

Do they need to prove anything? When Arizona had similar games thirty years ago, an awful lot of frontier justice occurred.
Sometimes against cheaters, sometimes just against winners. Eventually, every mechanic is the universe seemed to flood the state before the games were shut down., most of them taking jobs working for the house.
Light regulated bar games in Deadwood just set off my spider-sense. Probably wrong.

Quote: billryan

When Arizona had similar games fifteen years ago...

It's 2017. I'll take action that no casino/diner/store "roughs up" anyone for shuffle tracking. If they start getting beat they'll think he's counting, but if he's flat betting they'll be puzzled as hell and probably just kick him out if he keeps winning. The OP also said there are no pit bosses or eyes in the sky... so only the dealers would care and watch as they just flat bet. Even these diners/stores/etc with a couple tables of blackjack are businesses in 2017. Highly doubt they're going to a) do anything 'rough' and b) have a case for absolutely anything against a shuffle tracker.