Shuffle master truth solved
Quote: gordonm888That is like asking whether excel spreadsheets can calculate numbers in a sequence that is non-random.
Shufflers have the technological capability to deal the cards in a pre-determined sequence, if the programming (software) of the shuffler is changed so as to specify the rules for the sequence.
Game integrity depends upon the certification of the software program by GLI, the laboratory that certifies shufflers, and upon whatever mechanisms/controls the state regulatory body puts in place to assure that the shuffler's software is not changed or reprogrammed.
Gordon has already been shamed for posting categorically false statements about shufflers in one thread (maybe it was this one, I didn't go back 20 pages to check), so tread lightly with anything he writes about them. He definitely doesn't know what he's talking about in regards to card shufflers.
Quote: SM777Gordon has already been shamed for posting categorically false statements about shufflers in one thread (maybe it was this one, I didn't go back 20 pages to check), so tread lightly with anything he writes about them. He definitely doesn't know what he's talking about in regards to card shufflers.
You're entitled to your opinion of course. But I am not ashamed of anything that I have said, nor do i think I have recently said anything that was categorically false -I just prefer not to get into a contentious back-and-forth argument by responding to inflammatory attacks,.
I was once chief engineer and chief technology officer of one of the world's major research laboratories. I occasionally spend some time researching shuffler technology and its state of the art. You're certainly free to ignore whatever I say; honestly, I'm not sure what I have done to annoy you.
Quote: gordonm888You're entitled to your opinion of course. But I am not ashamed of anything that I have said, nor do i think I have recently said anything that was categorically false -I just prefer not to get into a contentious back-and-forth argument by responding to inflammatory attacks,.
I was once chief engineer and chief technology officer of one of the world's major research laboratories. I occasionally spend some time researching shuffler technology and its state of the art. You're certainly free to ignore whatever I say; honestly, I'm not sure what I have done to annoy you.
I don't have anything against you either. No back and forth needed.
Just trying to alert the poster who you responded to that you have very recently made categorically false statements regarding shufflemaster shufflers, and that the person presenting the question should tread with caution regarding any response from you regarding shufflers. I thought my response made that clear. No ill will here at all.
Quote: BjproFrom 2006 to 2012 I made a 6 figures every year like clockwork and I noticed it was getting harder and harder so I took 10k and a month of my time and went everyday to the tables I started noticing a pattern Monday through Wednesday it was possible to win using classic count strategies but is was definitely harder Thursday through Sunday is was a slaughterhouse every table no was winning anywhere the shuffle master was the only difference they where the md2 advanced and Md3 versions .So road block after road block I managed to buy a new Md3 Shuffle Master for the price of $10,300.00 dollars What I found
1 Are they rigged?
Absolutely ,but not illegal as long as the still meet there payout
2 Is there beast mode ?
Yes that is 91% house favor this is done though moving higher value cards to the top (that’s why you need to cut at least 1 deck back) notice the deeper you cut the tag card is placed further out
3 scan every card?
Yes it knows if there is a extra card and exactly what card is extra
4 Do dealers know
Not details but they get there tips hurt by this so they know
5 can it be beaten?
Yes ,but throw basic strategy out the window NO splits ever not even aces No doubles you will lose if you do this that’s the beginning I will answer other question as they come in
Hopefully this puts the shuffle master myths to rest I’ve seen all the Forums people noticed the difference then the fool jumps in a say he works at shuffle master say can’t be rigged!!!
Bottom line is this I have the machine and have a year straight of practice They are absolutely rigged but not illegal if they stay in the payout guidelines .when the casino buys or leases a 10000 dollar machine you better believe it has to do more than just mix up the cards it provides the House a drastic advantage. Happy to answer any questions. And I’m back to making my 6 figures!!
From my time dealing (and working with ShuffleMaster machines)
I'll remove 1 and 2 as they are stupid on the face..
#3 - yes that is true, it does know every card in, and can be called back up if there's any belief the wrong cards are dealt or players changed them (especially on a high paying side bet)
4 - if this was the case, we as dealers would definitely know. So again, false.
5 - Please please I beg of you throw basic strategy out the window... Give the casino a BIGGER ADVANTAGE over you, they will be drooling for you night and day if you do so :)
Quote: KrazipinoNew to the thread. I'm not here to accuse any wrong doing or side with one or the other. I would like to ask a question, but would like to start with this. I have been playing basically every day for the past 3 months. I've had my fair share of losing and winnings. I play basic strategy and I cut thin on front or back of double deck. This past Friday I noticed a pattern...an ace came up for dealer on every first hand for four straight shoes. The dealer noticed it as well. We called the pit boss and he gave me the same usual answer "coincidence". He stayed for the 5th shoe, the first hand for dealer was a 7. I hit and made a hand. Dealer flipped over an ace. That boss called another boss to watch the cards on the same shoe, she saw 4 dealer hands draw out 21 w 4 plus cards. Now for my question, what are the odds of the ace coming up like that? I would say very slim to unlikely. What are your thoughts? I also want to add, the table prior to this one also did the same thing.
The odds of a first card are are 4 in 52, or 7.62%. Can easily happen multiple shoes in a row. The shuffle machine is not setting any card to come out at any special time.
How would the shuffler know where you were going to cut the cards? How would the shuffler know how many hands will be played at the table or whether you will play 1 or 2 hands to start the shoe?
Wishful thinking and selective memory combined to sway your thoughts.
ZCore13
Quote: KrazipinoNew to the thread. I'm not here to accuse any wrong doing or side with one or the other. I would like to ask a question, but would like to start with this. I have been playing basically every day for the past 3 months. I've had my fair share of losing and winnings. I play basic strategy and I cut thin on front or back of double deck. This past Friday I noticed a pattern...an ace came up for dealer on every first hand for four straight shoes. The dealer noticed it as well. We called the pit boss and he gave me the same usual answer "coincidence". He stayed for the 5th shoe, the first hand for dealer was a 7. I hit and made a hand. Dealer flipped over an ace. That boss called another boss to watch the cards on the same shoe, she saw 4 dealer hands draw out 21 w 4 plus cards. Now for my question, what are the odds of the ace coming up like that? I would say very slim to unlikely. What are your thoughts? I also want to add, the table prior to this one also did the same thing.
Nothing that you said occurred is unusual at all. I actually can’t belueve a pit boss was called over for that silly of a reason.
Quote: michael99000Nothing that you said occurred is unusual at all. I actually can’t belueve a pit boss was called over for that silly of a reason.
The dealer was just humoring the player I'm sure. No dealer would be on a table for 6vshoes to even see how many times it happened. Absolutely nothing out of the ordinary even if a Floor came over and chances are it didn't even happen 6 in a row.
ZCore13
Quote: KrazipinoNew to the thread. I'm not here to accuse any wrong doing or side with one or the other. I would like to ask a question, but would like to start with this. I have been playing basically every day for the past 3 months. I've had my fair share of losing and winnings. I play basic strategy and I cut thin on front or back of double deck. This past Friday I noticed a pattern...an ace came up for dealer on every first hand for four straight shoes. The dealer noticed it as well. We called the pit boss and he gave me the same usual answer "coincidence". He stayed for the 5th shoe, the first hand for dealer was a 7. I hit and made a hand. Dealer flipped over an ace. That boss called another boss to watch the cards on the same shoe, she saw 4 dealer hands draw out 21 w 4 plus cards. Now for my question, what are the odds of the ace coming up like that? I would say very slim to unlikely. What are your thoughts? I also want to add, the table prior to this one also did the same thing.
One time, I was playing an automatic shuffler machine at a full table and got four 15s in a row! A five and a hard card 10 card. The woman next to me proceeded to split her 10s and lost the whole table lost when the dealer made 20 from a 6 up card. My very next hand was another 15. That's 5 in a row! Was it the machine purposely doing that? NOPE it's called coincidence.
EDIT: Link to the video...
https://youtu.be/2QHDgVWMdw4
You might be misunderstanding what that term actually means. It has nothing to do with good or bad memory.Quote: KrazipinoAnd it wasnt selective memory because my memory is great.
I has more to do with you selectively choosing to remember what you want or don't want, even if it's subconsciously. Or, your focus is on certain events usually involving some kind of pattern since we are programmed to notice patterns. You tend to notice something after it has already happened and associate it with an unlikely occurrence that doesn't seem random. Random should have patterns that come up.
You tend to notice and focus on Aces since they are special to BJ. Did you ever notice when the dealer had some other strange combination of first cards? Or, when the dealer should have had a insignificant card come out by now but didn't?
The main reason I think this functionality is unlikely to be in play even if it is technically feasible is from the casino's perspective the opportunity for it to be used in the other way. Let's consider you're a senior manager and you and three other people in the casino decide to collude and switch on the "beast mode". How much do you trust the other guys to take the risk, for limited personal gain, of starting to use a corrupt practice - presumably if the functionality can be used to weight in favour of the house, potentially it can work the other way, potentially bringing lots of A and faces to the front of a deck.
How do you know one of the other guys won't collude with an advantage player to occasionally load the deck, tip him the wink when it's happening and win big? If he does, what can you do to call him out - he knows that you're in on the corrupt practice as well. Nah, I just can't see anyone taking the risk in practicality.
I am in no way saying this is being done, but if it is possible, it definitely opens the door for corruption, and you can bet someone is doing it somewhere. All it would take is a good "hacker" selling his services to a casino, or multiple casinos. There are plenty of great hackers out there.
Again, not saying it is being done, and many of the posts here and on other threads show how the dealing/ card collection process can and will lead to some card clumping. so all you'd have to do is have a minimal shuffle mode to keep those clumps intact.
I've played enough to see some pretty strange anomalies though. Last month, one night I lost 14 hands in a row over 2 tables and 5 shoes, came back the next morning lost 12 hands in a row over 2 tables and 3 shoes (one was 6 deck). All playing strict basic strategy. odds of 26 losses in a row - I think it's somewhere in the range of 7 million to 1, guess I should have bought a lottery ticket (Martingale would have lost his net worth - that's a joke). Does something like that make me suspicious. uh -yeah. but then I win 4 or 5 days in a row, and I chalk it up to "pretty strange anomalies".
Yesterday and today - I got killed . Yesterday - 90 minutes of hell.... approx 25% wins - got outta there. Today only about 20 minutes 22 hands 4 wins..... only 2 dealer busts in 22 hands - didn't want to endure the torture to my wallet, and left quickly.... again, not ready to say it's rigged, this is a very small sample. But in cases like these the cards are nowhere near "randomized". If I'd stayed another 4-5-6 hours things may have come back my direction, .....but when you're getting slammed, I've found it best to come back another day.
Can't do much with just small sample empirical evidence, but it definitely feels like the odds are swinging way too far out of normal to be legit sometimes, which is why it makes it a little easier to believe in the conspiracies.
anyway - fun posts to follow. I like your research and thinking processes.
Quote: dailyplayerIt would be very interesting to know if the SHFL machines have wireless capability (wifi / bluetooth). If so, there would be very few people necessary to be "in on it". You are very correct that any machine that can be programed to shuffle the cards back into "new deck" order, could be programed to shuffle them into any order. and your patent research even claims this as a feature. so especially if wifi enabled, it could be switched to predetermined shuffles at any time. No need for pit bosses to back a player off, the guy they've paid to do this remotely could just serve him a few bad shuffles.
I am in no way saying this is being done, but if it is possible, it definitely opens the door for corruption, and you can bet someone is doing it somewhere. All it would take is a good "hacker" selling his services to a casino, or multiple casinos. There are plenty of great hackers out there.
Again, not saying it is being done, and many of the posts here and on other threads show how the dealing/ card collection process can and will lead to some card clumping. so all you'd have to do is have a minimal shuffle mode to keep those clumps intact.
I've played enough to see some pretty strange anomalies though. Last month, one night I lost 14 hands in a row over 2 tables and 5 shoes, came back the next morning lost 12 hands in a row over 2 tables and 3 shoes (one was 6 deck). All playing strict basic strategy. odds of 26 losses in a row - I think it's somewhere in the range of 7 million to 1, guess I should have bought a lottery ticket (Martingale would have lost his net worth - that's a joke). Does something like that make me suspicious. uh -yeah. but then I win 4 or 5 days in a row, and I chalk it up to "pretty strange anomalies".
Yesterday and today - I got killed . Yesterday - 90 minutes of hell.... approx 25% wins - got outta there. Today only about 20 minutes 22 hands 4 wins..... only 2 dealer busts in 22 hands - didn't want to endure the torture to my wallet, and left quickly.... again, not ready to say it's rigged, this is a very small sample. But in cases like these the cards are nowhere near "randomized". If I'd stayed another 4-5-6 hours things may have come back my direction, .....but when you're getting slammed, I've found it best to come back another day.
Can't do much with just small sample empirical evidence, but it definitely feels like the odds are swinging way too far out of normal to be legit sometimes, which is why it makes it a little easier to believe in the conspiracies.
anyway - fun posts to follow. I like your research and thinking processes.
Selective memory. And no, Shufflemaster machines do not have WiFi in them.
ZCore13
Next day, came back was the only player at the table (a.m. weekday), played 2 hands 2 deals lost both,switched to 1 hand-lost, switched back to 2 - lost both (#6&7 for that morning), moved to another table played 2 hands lost both first hand, played 3 more single hands, lost em. 12 more hands in a row .
I had been winning the night before prior to the huge loss streak. I know it's easy to dismiss it as selective memory, and I would probably think it too if I were in your shoes. And I wish it weren't true, but things like that are pretty easy to remember . After 6 in a row I was calling them out to the ere's 7, that's 8,...holy crap that's 12.... up to 14. And the next morning I was waiting for my first win to come, so I kept counting.
In the morning session, I let the dealer know about the night before, and he was shaking his head after the first 2 x 2 hand losses. After then after 2 more losses 1 playing 1 hand and one playing 2, we were both blown away. The dealer at the next table that I switched to had heard a lot of it, and boom 1 x 2 hand loss and 3 x 1 hand losses, left me pretty pissed off and feeling very defeated.
a streak like that is something that you can't help but track. You can doubt it, and I would expect you to, who wouldn't. Wish I had a body cam to show it.
The paragraph about the last 2 days are e 25% wins was probably not that bad and just tainted by finishing with 1 win in my last 7 hands.. the 4/22 could have been 5 for 23 or 24 , with 3 or 4 pushes, the math worked out to 16 more losses than wins in 20 minutes ($400 stake - stayed $25 min the whole time - never higher than +2 TC). The dealer is the one who pointed out, that's my first bust, and I cheered about 7 hands later when he busted again.
My point was big anomalies exist (and suck), and when you have a big loss anomaly, you want to believe someone is "behind" it all - which is why the conspiracy theories are out there. But then you have good runs where you win 9, 10 or 11 out of 15 hands and those theories go away.
Quote: Zcore13Selective memory. And no, Shufflemaster machines do not have WiFi in them.
ZCore13
Once again Zcore chiming in from his bubble looking at his own reflection from the shiny inside too enamored to think outside of it
These machines (MD3) shufflers can have something called a Flex Cellular modem on them for specific jurisdictions
https://www.wsgc.wa.gov/sites/default/files/public/activities/equipment/MD3%20Shuffler%20-%20Updated%20Approval.pdf
Quote:
We are updating the electronic signatures issued with our approval letter of August 29, 2019 for
the MD3 Shuffler, Part Number 249498 which designates the MD3 Shuffler with the Flex
Cellular Modem, and MD3 Shuffler, Part Number MD2299 which designates the MD3 Shuffler
without the Flex Cellular Modem in Washington State
What i suggest you do is - take an ordinary deck of blackjack and play it yourself
I am the number one proponent here of rigged shufflers - but the normal game of blackjack is burtal no matter if you play it on a shuffler or at home by yourself
Something is going on - but not a single person here will tell you the things they think about because this subject has been beat to death and these things are being taken advantage of already from what i understand
trust your inner gut and dont try to say this stuff on a website that is run by the casino industry pretty much because they dont want to just feed it to you - you have to work for it
Quote: heatmapOnce again Zcore chiming in from his bubble looking at his own reflection from the shiny inside too enamored to think outside of it.
So which part of they do not have WiFi was I wrong about?
ZCore13
Quote: Zcore13So which part of they do not have WiFi was I wrong about?
ZCore13
The fact that the original poster actually doesn't care about if its Wi-Fi or not - he technically wanted to know if it had networking capabilities
and it does
and if you dont understand why people get all worked up because of this stuff its because your technicalities - which you make seem to be the only answer that is the correct answer - is not really correct everywhere just in your jurisdiction
but you come off as an expert - you are answering one jurisdictions answer to a question and you are making people feel as if there is no way that the thing they are asking about is possible in any way
Quote: heatmapThe fact that the original poster actually doesn't care about if its Wi-Fi or not - he technically wanted to know if it had networking capabilities
and it does
and if you dont understand why people get all worked up because of this stuff its because your technicalities - which you make seem to be the only answer that is the correct answer - is not really correct everywhere just in your jurisdiction
but you come off as an expert - you are answering one jurisdictions answer to a question and you are making people feel as if there is no way that the thing they are asking about is possible in any way
Can the machine be changed via modem dial in to make certain hands come out or certain cards not come out or to hurt the players chance at winning? No. That is what he was asking/implying. It's isn't happening no matter how much you think your reading and sleuth work does.
It's hilarious how much stress you must feel reading all this stuff and then imagining all the bad things that must be happening.
ZCore13
Quote: Zcore13Can the machine be changed via modem dial in to make certain hands come out or certain cards not come out or to hurt the players chance at winning? No. That is what he was asking/implying. It's isn't happening no matter how much you think your reading and sleuth work does.
It's hilarious how much stress you must feel reading all this stuff and then imagining all the bad things that must be happening.
ZCore13
no i think that most people who are claiming this have never actually played blackjack for as long as they play in the casino at home on their own. they dont simulate it or know how to make a basic RNG which will show them that they are not going to normally win.
but i myself know what shuffle master patents say. i know which patents they own that they didnt invent. i know the patents that scientific games has and what they can do with their products.
my issue is that its being "professionally dismissed" (yes i just made that up) - as in you are a professional and we all know that
but you literally know a small percentage of the actual casino industry - patent wise. You know procedural, you have life experience, your skills are worth paying for.
but this forum is about all ideas - not ones that DONT exist in your world.
im sorry that i constantly say the things i do - but the hypocrisy in the real world - aka the patents com,panies pay for with real money - are worth investing in and it doesnt matter if it only exists in patent form online - its very possible they are using those ideas without your knowlege.
I do not know if people think it would require a great amount of preprogramming changes using multiple various clumps in a shoe to make a difference. In reality, the house edge can change significantly in their favor with just one small clump of cards taking place per shoe. Some good players who would know it was actually happening are those who were looking for it based on suspicion by their own prior history results at that casino. Even some newer card counters would not recognize it unless they frequented the place. Of course, one player's results is a meaningless sample size, however, you may see repeated things happening way too often that makes one wonder if that game is truly non-random or not. Another two possible giveaways if the percentage of pushes of 20 at that specific casino is way out of proportion. Or you see people re-splitting of Aces way too much.
The argument of where a cut card is inserted and where the deck is cut makes composing decks that favor the house to win is a false argument.
- Independent studies have been run using AI Cloud Computing and Machine Learning and have proved, that decks of cards, as well as dual decks, for simulations where there 1-15 players - that NO MATTER WHERE THE DECK IS CUT - a specific player will ALWAYS win.
EXAMPLE: No Limit Holdem - 1 Deck - 6 Players
The player in the small blind will ALWAYS win if the deck is setup as:
Aspades.Khearts.Qspades.Jclubs.8spades.7diamonds.6hearts.3spades.4diamonds.Jdiamonds.4hearts.9clubs.5clubs.Ahearts.Kdiamonds.8diamonds.Tclubs.Qclubs.7clubs.5diamonds.Aclubs.Kspades.2spades.6clubs.9spades.6diamonds.4spades.3hearts.Jhearts.Tspades.5spades.2diamonds.3clubs.Qdiamonds.Kclubs.9hearts.4clubs.6spades.7spades.Adiamonds.Qhearts.Jspades.Tdiamonds.5hearts.3diamonds.2clubs.2hearts.8hearts.Thearts.8clubs.9diamonds.7hearts
The SMALL BLIND (the first player dealt) will always win, regardless of where the deck is cut.
THE TECHNOLOGY to solve single deck, and dual deck decks up to 6 players - for every position, no matter where the cut card is placed, was solved 11 years ago in 2010.
It is now 2021.
Simply put. The MD3 has multiple modes on how it creates the output deck. First, it does not shuffle the deck at all.
An RNG is created, and that RNG is used to compose a specific deck composition.
Modes are available on the MD3 to create subsets (clumping of chunks of cards) to create high or low counts in the game of blackjack. Additional subsets of cards are created after previous subsets which are composed of "choppy waters".
FOR EXAMPLE:
Within a 6 Deck Shoe, a subset of 40 cards is created which consist mostly of low cards valued 2-6.
The result is the deck's true count will go rise significantly once those 40 cards are dealt.
Players using a counting system such as HiLo will thus increase their wagers as the True Count has likely gone positive. (Keep in mind there are multiple subsets, 2-20, in a 6 deck shoe thus the cut card does not matter).
After a long low card subset is finished. The next subset of cards contains a 30 card subset of very choppy card distributions. Example: T T T 2 T 5 5 3 4 T 4 7 3 T T A T 3 5 4 5 6 T T T 4 T T T 4 6 3 4... and so on. You can see how the order of that sequence would not be good for players, few would hit twenty, because there are streaks of Tens followed by bad cards 4-6 cards later.
The result is the count goes neutral or stays positive. Or it goes negative. Another subset of 50 cards makes it go very negative. containing lots of High cards chopped up to create a higher edge for the house.
Players either lose or Wong out... only to miss out on the next subset where the streaks ot Tens left in the now positive deck with fewer players result in dealers drawing to 20 more often (naturals) and either winning or pushing hands.
I could go into more detail, but 500 pages could be written on how decks could be programmed to be composed by the MD3 to absolutely increase the house edge and create tough spots for the player. Regardless of where the cut card is placed.
The MD3 can also create a COMPLETELY random deck.
It's up to the owner of the machine, and the skilled programmer and technicians they hire, on how it runs...
So-- it's all a matter of do you trust the house is running their machines 100% fair, honest, and with no bias?
Is it believable that certain properties employ tactics of programming their MD3s to simply create BAD DECKS 6/10 times, drastically increasing their EV for the house - randomly creating 4/10 decks the rest of the time?
Creating programmed deck solutions that use enough cover, only bias at certain times of the day, days of the week, x out of x times, table to table randomized, etc etc - that gaming commissions could never prove the house was stacking the deck due to the absolute randomness of the "losses" players incur?
Do you trust the house?
In Australia from the time we shifted to automatic shufflers, i have found it has significantly reduced the payouts.
I am a fortnightly or weekend gambler and my two games of choice were 3 card poker and mississippi stud (MS). I play for entertainment. I realise this forum has very seasoned gamblers so keen to get your views.
Usually play for around 2.5 - 3 hours or around 160 hands a sitting.
My simple observation rightly or wrongly was that i would expect in Mississippi stud, I should be dealt around 10 pairs ( including 3 non paying pairs) over that time. (1 every 16 hands) and should see the common cards pair up once every six hands when all three are revealed, whether i play or not. I used this 1 in six as a metric for 3 card poker too. I have seen a lot less pairing on the board in Mississippi stud ever since the automatic shuffler machines put the first 3 cards as community cards. I have also found i have been dealt far more non starting hands than i used ot get. Used to fold around 2 in 3 Mississippi Stud hands on deal and now I fold closer to 4 out of 5. Maybe just been going through a bad patch but it has been almost every time this year.
Quote: LukeAustralia21Know this original post is a bit dated and this is my first post here.
In Australia from the time we shifted to automatic shufflers, i have found it has significantly reduced the payouts.
I am a fortnightly or weekend gambler and my two games of choice were 3 card poker and mississippi stud (MS). I play for entertainment. I realise this forum has very seasoned gamblers so keen to get your views.
Usually play for around 2.5 - 3 hours or around 160 hands a sitting.
My simple observation rightly or wrongly was that i would expect in Mississippi stud, I should be dealt around 10 pairs ( including 3 non paying pairs) over that time. (1 every 16 hands) and should see the common cards pair up once every six hands when all three are revealed, whether i play or not. I used this 1 in six as a metric for 3 card poker too. I have seen a lot less pairing on the board in Mississippi stud ever since the automatic shuffler machines put the first 3 cards as community cards. I have also found i have been dealt far more non starting hands than i used ot get. Used to fold around 2 in 3 Mississippi Stud hands on deal and now I fold closer to 4 out of 5. Maybe just been going through a bad patch but it has been almost every time this year.
How you feel and what is actually true are two different things.
ZCore13
Quote: LukeAustralia21Thanks for your reply. Not sure i understand it. Given your experience as a Table Games Director would you say nothing has changed? Also given your knowledge would the casino even bother with changing the odds when many punters who play MS on the lower stakes tables seem happy to chase ridiculously low probability hands.
Tell him to piss off he has one answer for people like you and he doesn’t believe shufflers have any abilities because if he admitted them to have the basic functionality of a shuffle he would have to admit they can stack a deck if they wanted
The shufflers have the ability to place specific cards into specific places in a deck of cards it’s what a shuffling machine does
The “shuffle” happens in computer memory and then the physical machine takes the cards and puts them into that order
This is pseudo random number generation
The question is not that if they can do that it is if the shuffling algorithm in the shuffler is purposely making you lose in various different ways
I personally think it can - based on how the laws are written in various jurisdictions - not really sure about Nevada - but have changed my mind a bit after playing many hours of hand shuffled shoes
There is a bit of a difference in output imo
Quote: LukeAustralia21Thanks for your reply. Not sure i understand it. Given your experience as a Table Games Director would you say nothing has changed? Also given your knowledge would the casino even bother with changing the odds when many punters who play MS on the lower stakes tables seem happy to chase ridiculously low probability hands.
The only thing the shuffler do differently is give you more hands per hour. In return, that means higher loss per hour.
If you are concerned about losing, MS is the wrong game for you. With a 3.5 - 4.9% house edge, depending on your pay table, you could play 1 hour of MS or 7-10 hours of Blackjack for the same expected loss.
If you are playing any side bets or progressives as well, you might as well just be setting up a direct deposit to the casino and save the drive time. :)
ZCore13
Quote: LukeAustralia21<snip>My simple observation rightly or wrongly was that i would expect in Mississippi stud, I should be dealt around 10 pairs ( including 3 non paying pairs) over that time. (1 every 16 hands)<snip>
LukeAustralia21,
I believe your math is incorrect: pocket pairs should be expected once every 17 rounds... unless they're using Spanish 21 decks ;-)
Dog Hand
Perhaps i have been watching too many documentaries like the Social Dilemma. I somehow got the impression the shuffle machine algorithm was based on Artificial intelligence not designed only to shuffle cards and deal perfectly random hands. It has the capability of profiling each player based on cards they play and cards they fold, All designed to ensure that players are not cheating which is perfectly acceptable. The question is whether you are playing against an AI bot.
I don't play that often. I felt there was some change. i posted as i was not sure whether it was just a bad luck and wanted to see what others thought.
Quote: LukeAustralia21Thanks heatmap
I don't play that often. I felt there was some change. i posted as i was not sure whether it was just a bad luck and wanted to see what others thought.
Congrats, you probably just earned an honorary tin foil hat from Heatmap. You are now a proud member of the "Shufflers COULD be programmed to deal you worse cards, but I've never actually seen or read an actual case of it being proven".
ZCore13
(I do have a tin foil hat collection).
Quote: LukeAustralia21As you said, what you believe and what is reality are often two different things. We only have one casino per capital city and a couple in two smaller ones. All highly regulated and all very reputable.
(I do have a tin foil hat collection).
i dont care about what that guy says this is not and never was a conspiracy
this is about functionality
what we see happening out in the casinos CAN and WILL happen in your home if you do hand shuffles
so what i would do if i were you is get 6 or 8 decks of cards and shuffle the crap out of them yourself and start dealing and playing
if you think you see the same things happening then you might be wrong
alot of the things i think i saw were dealer always having a 10/20 or me the player always getting below a 20 kind of thing, but after playing hand shuffled shoes i am slightly changing my mind about the things i think i saw, but have concluded that there is still a difference in some way.
Quote: heatmapi dont care about what that guy says this is not and never was a conspiracy
this is about functionality
what we see happening out in the casinos CAN and WILL happen in your home if you do hand shuffles
so what i would do if i were you is get 6 or 8 decks of cards and shuffle the crap out of them yourself and start dealing and playing
if you think you see the same things happening then you might be wrong
alot of the things i think i saw were dealer always having a 10/20 or me the player always getting below a 20 kind of thing, but after playing hand shuffled shoes i am slightly changing my mind about the things i think i saw, but have concluded that there is still a difference in some way.
Quote: OCDCDo you trust the house?
When due to a malfunction the house wins, will they give back your money?
You might as well ask Penn State administrators what they know about Jerry Sandusky's assaults on young boys. Penn State managers simply will not give any information to the public that would embarrass Penn State. It is unreasonable to expect Zcore to provide any information that would embarrass his casino. So his denials should be considered in that context: he would deny if it is false, and he would have strong real-world incentives to deny it if it is true.
Zcore has expended tremendous amounts of time and energy attacking every WOV poster who makes any claim in this area. Now he apparently postures as being the master of truth on the integrity of games in Australian casinos. I wonder whether he has any real knowledge or expertise about Australian casino game integrity.
Every intelligent gambler should be trying to stay abreast of the expanding technical functionality of automated shufflers. Zcore has never stepped up and revealed anything in this forum on the expanding technical functionality of shuffler devices -everything we have learned is gleaned from other sources.
Every gambler has the common-sense right to keep their eyes wide open in casinos and ask questions in this forum about what they see. And ideally this would be in an environment where they would not immediately be denounced and sneered at by a casino employee who claims that things that don't occur in his own backyard can't possibly be happening any where at all in the entire wide world.
Quote: gordonm888As an operations manager at an Indian Casino, I imagine that Zcore would be fired from his job if he posted on social media that there may be a technical functionality for pre-determined non-random deals from a Shufflemaster device and that Shufflemaster devices have a technical connectivity to other CPUs in the casino.. Whether or not this information is true, no casino wants their staff to be posting (or releasing) such information on social media. So, while Zcore may be an expert on what happens in his local Indian casino, he is also a "conflicted witness."
You might as well ask Penn State administrators what they know about Jerry Sandusky's assaults on young boys. Penn State managers simply will not give any information to the public that would embarrass Penn State. It is unreasonable to expect Zcore to provide any information that would embarrass his casino. So his denials should be considered in that context: he would deny if it is false, and he would have strong real-world incentives to deny it if it is true.
Zcore has expended tremendous amounts of time and energy attacking every WOV poster who makes any claim in this area. Now he apparently postures as being the master of truth on the integrity of games in Australian casinos. I wonder whether he has any real knowledge or expertise about Australian casino game integrity.
Every intelligent gambler should be trying to stay abreast of the expanding technical functionality of automated shufflers. Zcore has never stepped up and revealed anything in this forum on the expanding technical functionality of shuffler devices -everything we have learned is gleaned from other sources.
Every gambler has the common-sense right to keep their eyes wide open in casinos and ask questions in this forum about what they see. And ideally this would be in an environment where they would not immediately be denounced and sneered at by a casino employee who claims that things that don't occur in his own backyard can't possibly be happening any where at all in the entire wide world.
Silly all the way through. I'd definitely expose any cheating by any company involved. I've also given details of how the machines work. I deal with facts, trusted 3rd party inspections of software and hardware, real life knowledge of the digital signatures included in the security of the machines and what happens at the casino regulatory if the digital signature does not match.
Others here use there thoughts and feelings. Which do you think would be more reliable? I don't speak for 3rd World Countries gambling regulations and trust. The chances are VERY slim a regulated casino in the U.S. or Australia, or the U.K. are in cahoots with Shuffle Master and their regulatory department to secretly add software or hardware to shufflers. But, keep thinking your common sense right to keeping your eyes open proof of anything.
ZCore13
I go back to this.... if I had a game that I had a 4% or so house edge, and people were stupid enough to fill the seats, would I risk that dependable cash flow to form a conspiracy to cheat? I mean, ONE programmer going public ruins the entire deal. Maybe if I individually owned a small casino, and additional profits went directly into my pockets, and I could set the machine without help from anyone else, well, then yeah, it’s possible the game is rigged. I just don’t see a highly regulated state casino doing this.....
Quote: LukeAustralia21In Australia our casinos are highly regulated and very well run.
I love the Australian regulators! So far they have been the only ones that managed to expose how utterly incompetent the upper management is.
(World wide) I am still waiting for many more heads to roll!
