CSM maths
October 2nd, 2018 at 6:40:32 PM
permalink
I've just read the article at Blackjack Appendix 10 which suggests the card distributions when using a CSM don't match a standard shoe with the same number of decks. I can understand the difference in the short term - with a shoe, the previous cards dealt from it are no longer available, whereas with a CSM, only the cards from the last game or two won't appear in the next one. However I don't see how a CSM could introduce a bias against large cards, or how the house edge is impacted (assuming no card-counting strategy is used). Can someone shine some light on this please?
October 2nd, 2018 at 10:02:06 PM
permalink
Search this site for “cut card effect”.
“You don’t bring a bone saw to a negotiation.” - Robert Jordan, former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia
October 7th, 2018 at 7:25:03 PM
permalink
OK, I think I understand now. The difference in house edge isn't because they are using a CSM. It's that shoes with a cut card placed at a fixed depth (even if approximate) introduces a slight disadvantage to the player. So the house edge with a CSM is closer to the theoretical calculated assuming a fresh shoe on every hand.
