☰
In a YouTube "Beer Friday" episode, Anthony said something to the effect of, "For the non-card counter playing basic strategy, a continuous shuffler is the best way to play blackjack." He then talked about something called the "cut effect" or a similar name. As long as I can remember, all I ever heard from the "experts" is to stay away from continuous shufflers. The "best" game out there is single-deck BJ. Then when that went away, it was double-deck. Can you elaborate why playing blackjack with a continuous shuffler is better than single- or double-deck? I play blackjack and I use basic strategy. What's the best game for me to play?
This is a nuance that often surprises people, because the conventional wisdom has long been to avoid continuous shuffling machines (CSMs). However, that advice is primarily aimed at card counters and those who employ other advantage-play techniques at blackjack.
For a pure basic strategy player, playing a continuous shuffling machine actually has a slightly lower house edge than playing the same game with a cut card. This is due to what Anthony referred to as the "cut-card effect," by which the use of a cut card results in a reduction in the number of hands dealt at positive counts (it takes more cards to complete a hand when the count is rising because small cards are coming out). The non-counter doesn't realize this, but is affected nonetheless.
According to the Wizard of Odds, the reduction in the house edge from a CSM (vs. a cut-card shoe) is about 0.014%, or roughly 0.01%–0.02% depending on exact rules and decks. That's tiny — about 14 cents per $1,000 wagered — but it's still a slight win for the basic strategy player in terms of expected value per hand.
While it doesn't make a big difference, a basic strategy player is slightly better off playing against a CSM than a traditional shoe with a cut card. The practical takeaway is there's no reason for a basic strategy player to avoid a CSM if he would have played the game had it been dealt from a shoe.
Or is there?
Given a pre-pub look at our answer, Blackjack Hall of Famer and author of Blackjack Attack, Don Schlesinger, commented:
"Yes there is [a reason to avoid a CSM], and it’s crucial! With no downtime for shuffling, the CSM plays about 20% faster than the traditional game. So, for many players, who often devote a fixed amount of time to play, like an hour, the CSM will surely be worse. If you choose to play it, then you either purposely play more slowly or quit after 50 minutes, instead of 60."
It's a valid point. For basic strategy players who are playing with negative expectation, losing less really comes down to playing at tables with the most players. More players means fewer hands per hour. Fewer hands per hour means less losses over time. Order a drink. Talk it up. Play slowly. Lose less.