A question for Arnold Snyder maybe. The continuous shuffling machines have a bad reputation among blackjack players, because we’ve been told it speeds up the game, so the casino can grind out our losses faster. After each hand, the dealer scoops up the cards and puts them back into the CSM.
But I’ve read gambling advice from supposed experts that say if you’re not a card counter, the CSMs actually help the casual player, because all the aces are constantly in the deck and increase your chances of getting a blackjack. Is this true? Does having all the aces available to you on every hand overcome the speed penalty of a CSM-dealt game? If so, then playing at a full table might be best since, that would slow the CSM game as much as possible, but sadly the aces could be dealt to other players instead of you.
[Editor's Note: Yes, a good question for Mr. Snyder. Here's his response.]
On rounds of play where no aces are dealt from a CSM, those excess aces would be available in the round(s) that follow -- unless the dealer puts the dealt cards back into the CSM, as he or she will do. In this case, the CSM hinders play with an ace-rich deck, which would, of course, give the players a better chance of getting a blackjack than a normal full deck.
The “supposed experts” who claim that the CSM helps the casual player get his full share of blackjacks forgot to consider that just as often, the CSM will hurt the player when the dealer shuffles before any aces are dealt. Ace-rich and ace-poor rounds will all even out in the end.
On the other hand, use of a CSM does cut the house edge slightly against a basic strategy player, assuming the dealer in the regular (non-CSM) game typically uses a cut card to determine the shuffle point. There is a somewhat complex but logical explanation for this. I’ll spare you the details. But the “supposed experts” are correct that a recreational player is slightly better off playing against a CSM than a standard non-CSM game.
Over the long run, of course, regardless of how many players are at the table, on average, one out of every 13 cards dealt to your hand will be an ace. Note that I said "on average." If you’re heads up with the dealer, 1/13 of your cards will be aces. And 1/13 of the dealer’s cards will be aces. If six players are at the table, 1/13 of your cards will still be aces. Other players at the table will also be getting — on average — just one ace out of every 13 cards dealt to them.
Due to normal fluctuations, however, even if you're heads up with the dealer, you can play for an hour without ever being dealt an ace or with the dealer being dealt 90% of the aces that come out. That's just fluctuation. If you keep watching, you'll find yourself being dealt 90% of the aces over another hour.
On average, one out of every 21 hands you're dealt will be a blackjack. But every blackjack player has experienced hours of play without being dealt a single blackjack. Just fluctuation. And it can happen to any player, including the dealer, regardless of how many players are at the table. In the long run, you'll have hot streaks where you're dealt far more than your share of aces and blackjacks. But if you keep records long enough, it will all even out. This is easy to test if you have high-speed computer-simulation software, but that's a question for another day.
Back to today's question, if you’re not counting cards or using some other valid method of gaining an edge on the house, playing at crowded tables will definitely slow down your rate of losing. So this is not a bad strategy for stretching out the time you can spend gambling by keeping your money in your pocket longer.
Card counters avoid CSM games. There’s little benefit from card counting until more cards are dealt than a CSM game allows. There’s very little value from card counting until half or more of the cards in play have been dealt.
 |
Barry Liptzer
Dec-19-2022
|
 |
Bob Nelson
Dec-19-2022
|
 |
Claude Barclay
Dec-19-2022
|
 |
Raymond
Dec-19-2022
|
