Card Counting in CSM Blackjack Game

S

San

Member
I’m living in Asia now and most of the casinos in Asia, Macao especially, only offer Blackjack games with “Continuous Shuffle Machine”. I use Hi-Lo Counting system but theoretically it’s pointless to count card in CSM game since it shuffles every hand. I think the casino staff also know this so they seem to accept very wide bet spread; at least I didn’t feel any heat in one
casino in Korea I played a few days ago.

The bet limitation of the table I played was from US$2 to US$300. The dealer didn’t put the dealt cards back to the machine every hand. Instead, they put the dealt cards back after 3 or 4 hands. The casino claimed there were 6 decks in the machine which I wasn’t sure.

Anyway, my questions is, suppose I use Hi-Lo system and there are indeed 6 decks in the machine. When the running count goes to 12 after 2 or 3 hands and the dealer didn’t put those dealt cards back to the machine, there would be about 5 decks left in the machine and the true count is about 2. If I bet US$300 when the true count goes to 2 and bet US$2 when wonging, could I get an edge over the house in the long-term? Is it possible to run computer simulation on this?

The following are the rules

- Bet limitation: US$2 to US$300
- 6 Decks, using Continuous Shuffle Machine
- Double any two cards
- Double After Split is Allowed
- Re-split up to 4 hands
- Late Surrender
- Dealer stands on soft 17
- Dealer Peeks
- Blackjack pays 3 to 2
- Three 7s is regarded as a nature and pays 3 to 2

Hope there's someone can help me on this, thanks.
 
A

AnIrishmannot2brite

Well-Known Member
San said:
I’m living in Asia now and most of the casinos in Asia, Macao especially, only offer Blackjack games with “Continuous Shuffle Machine”. I use Hi-Lo Counting system but theoretically it’s pointless to count card in CSM game since it shuffles every hand. I think the casino staff also know this so they seem to accept very wide bet spread; at least I didn’t feel any heat in one
casino in Korea I played a few days ago.

The bet limitation of the table I played was from US$2 to US$300. The dealer didn’t put the dealt cards back to the machine every hand. Instead, they put the dealt cards back after 3 or 4 hands. The casino claimed there were 6 decks in the machine which I wasn’t sure.

Anyway, my questions is, suppose I use Hi-Lo system and there are indeed 6 decks in the machine. When the running count goes to 12 after 2 or 3 hands and the dealer didn’t put those dealt cards back to the machine, there would be about 5 decks left in the machine and the true count is about 2. If I bet US$300 when the true count goes to 2 and bet US$2 when wonging, could I get an edge over the house in the long-term? Is it possible to run computer simulation on this?

The following are the rules

- Bet limitation: US$2 to US$300
- 6 Decks, using Continuous Shuffle Machine
- Double any two cards
- Double After Split is Allowed
- Re-split up to 4 hands
- Late Surrender
- Dealer stands on soft 17
- Dealer Peeks
- Blackjack pays 3 to 2
- Three 7s is regarded as a nature and pays 3 to 2

Hope there's someone can help me on this, thanks.
Click to expand...
I don't think there's ever enough edge to justify playing a CSM. The more experienced players will tell you that too. You're just not going to see enough positive hands with much penetration to defeat the built in house edge.

The bet spread is interesting but useless without a real chance of getting a positive TC. You'd probably have to back count that machine all night long to get even a glimpse of something advantageous. A waste of time. The estimation of how many cards really sit inside the machine prior to shuffle could vary radically. A lot of noise exists inside the casino and so the turning on/off of the machine would be inexact.

I wouldn't play it. The time is far better spent finding more positive games. In fact during the last month I've made more real money by searching out the better games up and down the highway. What I mean is that a good card player is like a successful salesman. He knows where his better clients are located. So he travels far and wide enough so as NOT to keep depleting the same accounts through excessive sales pressure and such. And he leaves the cheap ass accounts alone. A CSM casino is like a "cheap ass client".

Only we substitute the words "Casino heat" for "not depleting our regular accounts". It's the same angle.

If my math is off maybe someone can correct me.

I've still fiddled a tad with the local CSM prior to finding the much better local games a little bit farther down the road.

The guys here will help you locate better games in your area. Or you can ask about them.

Some folks have claimed the early CSM's were beatable.
 
S

San

Member
Well, I think "penetration" is a big problem here. But with such a wide bet spread, I think I might have a chance. I'll give it a shot and post my story later. Thanks for your opinions.

San
 
A

AnIrishmannot2brite

Well-Known Member
San said:
Well, I think "penetration" is a big problem here. But with such a wide bet spread, I think I might have a chance. I'll give it a shot and post my story later. Thanks for your opinions.

San
Click to expand...
Be interesting if you could find out if it was really one of those old old machines that left groups of high cards intact every four or five deals.

If so I'd be tempted to triple or quadruple my lost minimum bets under "positive" conditions. Would be matter of observation as spectator for several evenings first. Watching when the sequenced cards tend to return. Like a hand or two in a row that spits out tens and high cards to everyone. Count the deals/shuffles in between and then at least triple the last loss up until the end of the run. Maybe playing several hands at once.

If you're really onto a "system" for these older machines you won't know it until you start winning 66% of the time over many visits. To me that's time better spent upon finding the better games around your area.

I used to think the only game in town here was this piece of crap CSM casino in Petaluma. It wasn't! So in reality I made much more money by finding four other places i could go that offered good to very good rules and decent deck penetration.

Am looking for still more too.
 
S

San

Member
Well, casinos in Seoul, like Walker Hill and Seven Luck, also offers shoe game, not using CSM. However, they only have a few low stake (minimum US$10) tables so sometimes it's hard to find a open seats on weekends. My bankroll is not big enough for me to play blackjack in high stake tables, which has more seats.

The other option is to visit the casinos in Macau. But they only offer CSM blackjack.

San
 
peaegg

peaegg

Well-Known Member
Is it true that the players hold the cards in hand when playing Blackjack in Macau or Korea? If the cards are dealt facing down, that will make counting a little harder. The game could also be delayed because players handling the cards.
 
S

San

Member
peaegg said:
Is it true that the players hold the cards in hand when playing Blackjack in Macau or Korea? If the cards are dealt facing down, that will make counting a little harder. The game could also be delayed because players handling the cards.
Click to expand...
In Korea, no. But I'm not sure of it in Macau since I havn't been there for many years. But when I was in Macau, the players were not allowed to touch the cards, just like in Korea.

San
 
C

chichow

Well-Known Member
SAN...

I'd consider a return trip to Seoul. I did not go to the Casino before.

Would you mind telling us the conditions there?

H17 S17, pen, min max etc?

even in the high limit room where you don't play?

Thanks.
 
Jimulacrum

Jimulacrum

New Member
I Think It Just Might Work!

I think that in this situation, it should be profitable to keep a count of the dead cards the dealer leaves out of the CSM, especially at a table with many players.
Think about the possible number of dead cards the dealer could leave out. We're working with a 6-deck shoe, so there are 312 cards. (I know there is doubt as to whether casinos are honest about the number and distribution of cards in a CSM, but that's a separate debate.) At a table with 6 players, the minimum number of cards dealt in a hand is 14; with 7 players, 16.

By the nature of the play of the game, high cards result in fewer cards being dealt than do low cards. Low cards usually result in a higher number of cards being dealt. Consequently, when a large number of cards is dealt, you're likely to be working with a count of zero or better; however, if only a small number of cards is dealt, the count is probably zero or negative.

First of all, it seems to me that enough cards can be dealt that a good true count can be reached. You'll never see a +20, but you should be able to make some money at a $2–$300 table. Those dead cards are a hole in the casino's plot to thwart counters. If the dealer were to just put the cards back in the machine each hand, the game would be fully uncountable.

The funny thing is that the packet of dead cards creates a kind of shorthand way to count. When the packet is small the count is low; when it's large the count is high. This isn't 100% accurate, but it is true most of the time, and it's more information than the typical non-counter has. (Actually, it's more accurate as the packet size gets closer to the minimum and maximum.) A basic-strategy player who varies his bet solely according to the size of the packet—the same way a counter varies his bet with the count—should at least be able to significantlydecrease the house advantage.
 
Last edited:
Sonny

Sonny

Well-Known Member
It’s a good thought, but I don’t think it will work very well.

Jimulacrum said:
First of all, it seems to me that enough cards can be dealt that a good true count can be reached.
Click to expand...
Well, that depends on how many cards they deal out before reinserting the discard into the machine. I don’t have much experience with CSMs but it seems like they only deal 1 deck or less before reinserting. That’s only 17% penetration at best. Most card counters consider anything less than 75% to be unplayable. The problem is that the count has to swing very high very quickly. If must jump to at least +6 after only a few hands have been played in order to have a positive count for the last hand before the reinsertion. It’s certainly possible for that to happen but it is very infrequent. There will be very few opportunities to get an advantage and the majority of the time will be spent at a disadvantage (or not playing at all).

Jimulacrum said:
When the packet is small the count is low; when it's large the count is high…A basic-strategy player who varies his bet solely according to the size of the packet—the same way a counter varies his bet with the count—should at least be able to significantly decrease the house advantage.
Click to expand...
That is not necessarily true. The CSM dealers that I have seen are fairly inconsistent with the reinsertion of the discards. Sometimes they will reinsert them after 2-3 hands while other times they will forget to do it for quite a while. The size of the discards is often more related to the dealers than to the composition of the cards. If you can find a dealer that is very consistent about reinserting the cards then your system, coupled with a wild bet spread, could help to decrease the house edge. It may even be able to show a small advantage, although the variance would be huge.

Still, the idea does have merit. It might be a better plan for a BS player to bet as little as possible during the disadvantageous periods and bet his full-sized bet (or maybe even a few units) during a positive period. That way his overall action would be a bit smaller and his disadvantage might be smaller as well.

-Sonny-
 
sagefr0g

sagefr0g

Well-Known Member
Jimulacrum said:
.......
First of all, it seems to me that enough cards can be dealt that a good true count can be reached. .....
Click to expand...
lol i like the way your mind works. :cool2:
problem is one would be experiencing the exasperating situation one faces when playing poor penetration. that being just when it gets good here comes the shuffle. but i guess you might get a decent shot every so often. could try wonging in on the darn contraption when a decent plus count presents. i've done that before with mixed results.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top