CSM/Royal match question for wizard

Been to site after site after site and they all say that CSM's help you lower the house edge, but you need to stay away....so stay away i do......But could anyone who actually knows or the wizard anwser whats the reasoning to stay away.

Plus, its been debated on here and maybe one or two sites but does anyone know 99.9% certain that the electronic royal match 21 blackjack games are actually Fair and not something you should avoid like the plague, its a machine therefore can be programmed and im a bit suspecious of them given that fact.....
and do we all use the same shoe for royal match 21 or separate one's. Some sites say separate others say same. so which one is it....and i need to know whether or not to avoid this machine just like those damn csm's.

I don't pretend to be an "expert," just someone who has played blackjack for twenty years and still studies the game. The reason why the CSM's (continuous shuffle machines) are to be avoided is because it increases the hands played per hour since there's no "shuffle break." In a negative expectation game, this means you will simply lose your money faster. Advantage players don't like them because they're obviously impossible for "counting" purposes. The reason why the house edge is slightly lower with a CSM is because it tends to eliminate the phenomenon of "card clumping" in a shoe.

Royal Match bets have a house of ranging from about 6.50 percent to over 10 percent. The house edge is actually lowered by more decks being played. I avoid it.

I believe Hollywood06 was referring to the ShuffleMaster TableMaster units. These are electronic blackjack games, with a big video screen of a pretty dealer, the players are shown electronic cards, and press buttons on how to play them. It is basically a fancy video blackjack game. The question is whether or not the games cheat. Personally, I have never seen any evidence that they do. It is a gaming regulation in Nevada that any video representation of a card game must play by the same odds as if a real person were dealing the cards. Furthermore I know ShuffleMaster as a company pretty well, and they are legitimate and on the level. I say talk of those units cheating is just a conspiracy theory. If not, somebody prove me wrong.

Another thing to remember is the risk a casino would take on by installing a cheating blackjack game. Not only could it be discovered by the players, but all it would take is one employee of either the manufacturer (shufflemaster in this case) or the casino to blow the whistle on the whole thing. The level of secrecy would be huge, and you can bet the casino/shufflemaster could never fire anyone who knew about it.

Really, this all comes down to the same reason the casino does not deal from a short deck in blackjack: It already has the advantage, and has no reason to cheat using illegal methods, which could risk the complete ruination of the casino and its parent company. Its just not worth it.

As the wizard said, if someone wishes to prove otherwise, it would not be hard to set up a hypothesis and test.

I also find it interesting that these machines are questioned but VP is left alone, despite using identical technology.

Quote: Hollywood06

and do we all use the same shoe for royal match 21 or separate one's. Some sites say separate others say same. so which one is it....and i need to know whether or not to avoid this machine just like those damn csm's.

If your state has regular table games, you will all be using the same shoe. If it does not, it is very likely you will be using separate shoes.

If you wish to avoid CSMs, you should avoid this machine as well as they have the same effect. It does not have a break for shuffling, and the cards are either shuffled every round or at a non-announced point 2/3 in the virtual shoe. Counting is impossible in both cases.

Pennsylvania is I believe the only place the law says it must be separate shoes. With table games heading to PA by the summer, it will interesting to see whether they either change that rule (since you will be able to affect others people's play at the tables anyway), or whether it won't be worth the effort to change the rule, or whether the machines will just be removed. I can't imagine they will have as many units in there with real table games on the other side of the room.

Quote: cclub79

I can't imagine they will have as many units in there with real table games on the other side of the room.

Don't be so sure.

When I was in Vegas at the Sahara in September, I saw that machine. It was a $1 minimum paying, I believe, 6:5. (Heck, it MIGHT have been 3:2, but I DO know it was $1)

They had two BJ pits. One was $1 minimum paying EVEN MONEY unless the bet was $5, then paying 6:5 - and no comps (they don't take the player's club cards, even when asked). The other pit was $5 minimum paying 3:2, WITH comps. I'm not sure what other rules may have been in effect.

But guess where most of the people were? In the $1 pit!

Oh absolutely people don't find the best deal; I posted earlier about the Single Zero/Double Zero Bally's machines. But I don't think the casino will devote as much space to the machines (which really are no better or worse edge-wise than AC rules these days) when they have the table games. Philadelphia has A LOT of them, at least 20...It's much like that Wheel Of Fortune game...big, only 5 positions, slow, lots of gawkers...I'm thinking after table games come in, there'll be banks of slots in that area, with maybe a couple of holdovers.

Quote: pocketaces

Another thing to remember is the risk a casino would take on by installing a cheating blackjack game. Not only could it be discovered by the players, but all it would take is one employee of either the manufacturer (shufflemaster in this case) or the casino to blow the whistle on the whole thing. The level of secrecy would be huge, and you can bet the casino/shufflemaster could never fire anyone who knew about it.

Really, this all comes down to the same reason the casino does not deal from a short deck in blackjack: It already has the advantage, and has no reason to cheat using illegal methods, which could risk the complete ruination of the casino and its parent company. Its just not worth it.

As the wizard said, if someone wishes to prove otherwise, it would not be hard to set up a hypothesis and test.

I also find it interesting that these machines are questioned but VP is left alone, despite using identical technology.

I have dealt with a few of these machines at pari-mutuel casinos in Florida. I noticed a high number of 3, 4, and 5 card draws to 20 and 21, a large amount of the time. I am still stuck with a small sample size (maybe 100 hands).

I want to know: how could I go about setting up a hypothesis and a test for these machines? I'd love to set my own uncertainty to rest.

You would have to play thousands of hands, maybe tens of thousands. I can say that I have played thousands of hands, probably tens of thousands, on those machines, and I have seen everything. EVERYTHING! I've lost 15 hands in a row, had the dealer draw 21 I think 6? times in a row, had the dealer BUST at least ten times in a row, and received 5 blackjacks in a row on at least THREE separate occasions. I can tell you that I beleive it's fair. I've won a lot, lost a lot, and I think the general feeling is when you lose, there has to be a reason. In a hand dealt game, you can't really think you are being cheated, but in a computer game, you can always fall back on that excuse. They don't need to cheat you! The game will give them money legally over time. It's just like the risk/reward argument on the other thread about cheating: What would they gain by tweeking it a little, and what would they lose if it was exposed? Plus, with those games, they can change things like getting rid of surrender, hitting S17, to legally increase their edge. Why do it illegally if you can do it legally?

Quote: pocketaces

I also find it interesting that these machines are questioned but VP is left alone, despite using identical technology.

Really? It's not too hard to find threads right on this forum that question VP.

For what it's worth, I won't play those pultiplayer BJ machines because of the dealer. And it's not a specific dealer. It's all of them. The blank stares and fake motions. Way too creepy for me to even consider sitting down.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Really? It's not too hard to find threads right on this forum that question VP.

For what it's worth, I won't play those pultiplayer BJ machines because of the dealer. And it's not a specific dealer. It's all of them. The blank stares and fake motions. Way too creepy for me to even consider sitting down.

Well to clarify I would say that it seems like most people who come across these machines are suspicious of them, while VP is more accepted. But you're right, VP still has declarations of cheating of their own come up once in a while. There are also far more VP machines out there.

I agree these machines are very creepy with the staring. I was at a casino recently that has a baccarat one as well as a blackjack one. Literally every 10 seconds the guy loudly asks you to 'Come play baccarat!' while staring in to space.

Great posts...after playing for so long, you memorize the cues and don't even think about them. For me it made it less creepy. But the funny thing is, there are rare situations where you see a rare video that isn't normally played. On one of the machines with a woman, if you wait too long to act (which doesn't happen often but I think I needed to add additional money to double down, so it was taking some time) she says "Hey, are you playing with something other than me?!" It was the frist time that I'd agree it was very creepy.

Quote: cclub79

Great posts...after playing for so long, you memorize the cues and don't even think about them. For me it made it less creepy. But the funny thing is, there are rare situations where you see a rare video that isn't normally played. On one of the machines with a woman, if you wait too long to act (which doesn't happen often but I think I needed to add additional money to double down, so it was taking some time) she says "Hey, are you playing with something other than me?!" It was the frist time that I'd agree it was very creepy.

Ha! Now I may go play one of these just to hear that line..

Quote: pocketaces

Quote: cclub79

...she says "Hey, are you playing with something other than me?!"

Ha! Now I may go play one of these just to hear that line..

Me too! :)