This post is syndicated by the Las Vegas Advisor for the 888 casino group. Anthony Curtis comments on the 888 article introduced and linked to on this page.
AC Says:
This article puts forth the accurate premise that deck penetration in a blackjack game (how far into the pack the cards are dealt before a shuffle) is an important consideration for skilled players, specifically card counters, but then loses its direction somewhat. The article suggests that better penetration in and of itself will improve results, even stating that it affects basic strategy, which isn’t true. The reality is, deck penetration is a very important consideration, but only if you’re employing a count system. Additionally, I’m not familiar with the games dealt on the online 888casino platform and it looks like they may include live games where penetration does come into play. However, penetration is a non-issue in online games that shuffle after every hand. The article references our book, Blackjack Attack by Don Schlesinger, which is an excellent recommendation for thorough coverage of the effects of good and bad penetration. While all good blackjack books discuss it, Schlesinger’s is among the most complete. Another valuable treatment can be found in Burning the Tables in Las Vegas by Ian Andersen.
This article was written by 888 in association with 888Casino.
Welcome to 888casino UK, where the thrill of blackjack takes center stage, and understanding its nuances becomes your key to success. Today, we delve into an often-overlooked aspect of this classic game: Deck Penetration in Blackjack.
Whether you’re a seasoned card shark or new to the world of 21, this online casino guide will enhance your strategic approach and deepen your appreciation for the game.
I have a question concerning AC’s statement that “deck penetration is a very important consideration, but only if you’re employing a count system.” There is no doubt that deeper penetration is more valuable to the card counter. But every table that I’ve seen showing the house edge for a given set of rules shows the house edge increasing with the number of decks in play. I have assumed that these tables are based the first hand played out of a deck or shoe. If so, given that cards are continuing to be dealt out randomly throughout the shoe, doesn’t the house edge get smaller on average as the number of cards left to be dealt dwindles? And deeper penetration provides a smaller yet significant way for a non-counter to reduce the house edge?
That’s a reasonable assumption, but it’s not the case. Without tracking the deck in some way (counting), you can’t tell what state the pack is in and in which direction the advantage has moved. Hence, you have to assume top-of-the-deck status regardless of whether 1 of 6 decks has been dealt or 5 of 6.