Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSquealer
That is a bizarre comment.
The MIT teams were immensely successful. Further, its not overyly relevant how many decks are used or if its shuffled 1/2 way through as it doesn't change the remaining cards and therefore does not change the probability of future outcomes which is based on the cards remaining (total high/low cards) and the rules of blackjack which dictate how the dealer must play.
I think people commonly assume "counting cards" means tracking every single card in a deck and that you must be a math genius or something. Thats not what counting cards is. It's simply keeping a running tally of high/low cards played and therefore, those remaining in the deck which simply shifts the odds towards different outcomes for the dealer given they have to follow rules in hitting/staying.
It should also be pointed out as said above that casinos don't care about card counting.... that guys original book on card counting - if i recall, was an MIT professor and published it in the early 60s, drove countless millions of jerkoffs to vegas to try to get rich who lost all their money to casinos. The system for counting cards has made vegas billions of dollars because people are inherently stupid anyway. The more stupid someone is, the more likely they are to beleive they have a great plan.
|
You're right. I was wrong about MIT. I was thinking about another group that also had a story done on them that I had seen in a documentary but can't remember their name.
You are wrong about one thing. Reshuffling the cards is a counter measure and makes it difficult for a card counter to make his move when the count is on his side. The amount of cards left in a deck are relevant since the deeper into the deck you go the more likely you are to experience the advantageous count within the next few bets. You can have the advantage within 1/5 of the deck being dealt but the high cards could still all be at the back of the deck. Less of a possibility with less deck remaining.