The power of intuition?

[zengrifter]

An interesting article on the "randomness" of card shuffling, and how, for example, bridge players, can intuitively know the difference between a hand shuffled deck and a randomly, computer shuffled deck.

http://www.bridgeguys.com/SGlossary/ShuffleofCards.html

Some interesting quotes from article:

"many bridge players take advantage of the non-randomness of seemingly shuffled cards... These players had figured out that the cards were not being randomly shuffled, and that they could predict the distributions of cards by knowing what the deck looked like at the end of the previous hand."

"When computers were introduced into tournament bridge about 18 years ago, some players were puzzled and others outraged by the random hands the computer dealt and complained that the computers were not working right"

'At about the same time, a bridge encyclopedia was published. The encyclopedia "used a computer to figure out odds," Dr. Diaconis said. "For example, given that between my opponents there are seven hearts, what's the chances that one has four hearts and the other has three? Some of these odds were at variance with expert play. The experts had intuited - correctly - the actual ways the cards were shuffled. People thought the encyclopedia was wrong."'

This also brought to mind the U. of Iowa experiments mentioned in Malcolm Gladwell's book Blink, whereby basically experimental subjects had to choose between a blue deck with +EV, and a red deck with -EV. It took about 30 cards to figure out blue deck for the conscious mind to pick up that the blue deck was better, and another 30-40 cards to actually consciously formulate why its better. But when hooked up to a polygraph like device that measured perspiration in the palm (an indication of stress or trepidation), the subjects displayed increased stress reaction to the red deck after only 10 cards!

A link to a bit more thorough explanation to this:

http://www.cardschat.com/blog/01/17/blink-by-malcolm-gladwell/ (Archive copy)

What brought these articles to mind was the Bodog BJ "cheating" thread. I mentioned there I played around with the free Bodog BJ game, and I too had a very "unnatural" run of cards similar to what the OP of that thread posted. It just did not seem like a run of cards I ever had in any other real life or computer simulated BJ game.

I think there is no doubt that the sub conscious mind does a huge amount of processing behind the scenes, and the conscious mind is only the tip of the iceberg, with the sub conscious mind consisting of the rest.

However, not sure if there's any way this can be taking advantage of, as mentioned the only time I encountered a very unnatural run of the cards was the situation just mentioned.

Any thoughts from other members? Anyone with extensive experience with hand shuffled and ASM/CSM/computer sim games "feel" the cards are different (personally I haven't noticed).

Discussion of Intuition and the Iowa study and ANY discussion related to "unprovable" PSI effects are NOT ALLOWED at BJINFO, not even in VOODOO.

Here is where such discussion is appropriate, permitted and encouraged >>
http://www.zenzoneforum.com/forums/61-PSI-and-Gambling

 

[zengrifter]

I think there is no doubt that the sub conscious mind does a huge amount of processing behind the scenes, and the conscious mind is only the tip of the iceberg, with the sub conscious mind consisting of the rest.

See - ZGI pages -4,6,31
Also,
Catch Limitless, in theatres now. zg

 

[Gamblor]

Discussion of Intuition and the Iowa study and ANY discussion related to "unprovable" PSI effects are NOT ALLOWED at BJINFO, not even in VOODOO.

Here is where such discussion is appropriate, permitted and encouraged >>
http://www.zenzoneforum.com/forums/61-PSI-and-Gambling

Nonsense. You may argue if the scientific studies done by the U. of Iowa is thoroughly rigorous and have been verified and repeated by other scientists, but you certainly cannot lump it into PSI or as something as worse than vodoo.

I take the U. of Iowa study with a certain grain of salt, like may other scientific experiments that might not have been consistently and repeatedly proven, but I certainly will not discount it out of hand.

 

[Gamblor]

This is wrong. Chaotic systems are systems with non-linear dynamics, where the output is highly sensitive to arbitrarily close inputs.

Traditional card shuffles are nothing like that. Imagine you have two identical decks A and B. You shuffle deck A and get a new deck A'. In deck B you make a minimal manipulation by switching two cards. Then perform the exact same shuffle (that means same interleaving of riffles, same cuts...) and get a new deck B'.

For a chaotic shuffle, A' and B' would be nothing alike. However, with all those riffles, strips, cuts (and even washes), B' is the same deck as A' expect those two cards are exchanged.
Traditional shuffles are not chaotic systems.


An at least non-linear shuffle would be look like this (whether it is chaotic or not is a different question): Peek at the first card. If it is a red card (hearts or diamonds) make a cut. If it is a black card (spades or clubs) make a riffle.
Then peek again the first cards and proceed with the same rules for a definite number of runs.

This shuffle would be non-linear: if you exchange a red and a black card before the shuffle, the outcome is totally different.

You can construct chaotic behaviour with an obvious "attractor": On club cards make an in riffle. On spades cards make an out riffle.
Now you have an attractor: After your shuffle is complete, you are highly likely to have a spades card on top, since the out riffle does not change the top card - and once you happen to have a spades card on top it stays there.

Agreed that the shuffle itself is not chaotic. Was thinking more along the lines of player decisions and its affect. Certainly chaotic.

 

[BJgenius007]

Discussion of Intuition and the Iowa study and ANY discussion related to "unprovable" PSI effects are NOT ALLOWED at BJINFO, not even in VOODOO.

Here is where such discussion is appropriate, permitted and encouraged >>
http://www.zenzoneforum.com/forums/61-PSI-and-Gambling

I have an interesting case recently. There was a young guy playing at my table. He is perfect on Basic Strategy. After playing three hours, his mom came. He invited her to sit down and play. She said she doesn't know how and he said just stay if dealer has bust card and hit until 17 if the dealer has strong hand.

I was counting so I know the structure of the deck but both mom and son did not. But she often hit 12, 13 or even 14 when the negative true count demand her to do so. Her son protested each time and yelled "No, No!", just found out she did the right thing, not only making hand but saving the table. This has been going on for at least one hour then mom went back to play the slot machine and told him he is not very good at Blackjack, at least compared to her!

Mom won but she only played $10 a hand while son played green chips like an idiot. Call it women's intuition. Or she truly has PSI power.

 

[zengrifter]

Nonsense. You may argue if the scientific studies done by the U. of Iowa is thoroughly rigorous and have been verified and repeated by other scientists, but you certainly cannot lump it into PSI or as something as worse than vodoo.

I don't. I'm a big advocate of INTUITION. See ZGI.
But some yahoo jackboot mods here decided collectively that UNLESS you seek to debunk intuition you cannot post/discuss same here.

Look, still in the BJINFO search index:
(Dead link: http://www.blackjackinfo.com/cgi-bin/search.cgi?q=intuition+iowa) _Scientific Evidence Of Successful Intuition in Gambling_

Here is another example of biased jackboot censorship regarding INTUITION >>
https://twitter.com/BlackjackInfo/status/29634298264944642

Just to be clear - we had a poll and the overwhelming number of votes/members were in favor of allowing INTUITION and PSI discussion in Voodoo ... but some jackboot left-brained yahoo mods still said NO.

Cape'ce paisano? z:laugh:g

 

[zengrifter]

Here, reposted to Zzone for intelligent discussion -
Scientific Evidence Of Successful Intuition in Gambling

 

[gamblingghost]

I don't. I'm a big advocate of INTUITION. See ZGI.
But some yahoo jackboot mods here decided collectively that UNLESS you seek to debunk intuition you cannot post/discuss same here.

Look, still in the BJINFO search index:
(Dead link: http://www.blackjackinfo.com/cgi-bin/search.cgi?q=intuition+iowa) _Scientific Evidence Of Successful Intuition in Gambling_

Here is another example of biased jackboot censorship regarding INTUITION >>
https://twitter.com/BlackjackInfo/status/29634298264944642

Just to be clear - we had a poll and the overwhelming number of votes/members were in favor of allowing INTUITION and PSI discussion in Voodoo ... but some jackboot left-brained yahoo mods still said NO.

Cape'ce paisano? z:laugh:g

Well, my take on it goes like this. First, this is a math based site and they
want to focus on this. Second, they have no products that dove tails with
this concept. Third, they sincerely believe it is a waste of time. As for me, well, I am going over to your site to check it out, curious me!!:laugh:

 

[Gamblor]

I don't. I'm a big advocate of INTUITION. See ZGI.
But some yahoo jackboot mods here decided collectively that UNLESS you seek to debunk intuition you cannot post/discuss same here.

Look, still in the BJINFO search index:
(Dead link: http://www.blackjackinfo.com/cgi-bin/search.cgi?q=intuition+iowa) _Scientific Evidence Of Successful Intuition in Gambling_

Here is another example of biased jackboot censorship regarding INTUITION >>
https://twitter.com/BlackjackInfo/status/29634298264944642

Just to be clear - we had a poll and the overwhelming number of votes/members were in favor of allowing INTUITION and PSI discussion in Voodoo ... but some jackboot left-brained yahoo mods still said NO.

Cape'ce paisano? z:laugh:g

My bad Zen. Your use of the word "unprovable" was a trigger word. Intuition is of course such an obvious and blatant fact, some people tend to think its false.

Plus, I had few beers and broke out the grill, celebrating being forced to leave work early due to good variance, third session in a row

 

[Gamblor]

I have an interesting case recently. There was a young guy playing at my table. He is perfect on Basic Strategy. After playing three hours, his mom came. He invited her to sit down and play. She said she doesn't know how and he said just stay if dealer has bust card and hit until 17 if the dealer has strong hand.

I was counting so I know the structure of the deck but both mom and son did not. But she often hit 12, 13 or even 14 when the negative true count demand her to do so. Her son protested each time and yelled "No, No!", just found out she did the right thing, not only making hand but saving the table. This has been going on for at least one hour then mom went back to play the slot machine and told him he is not very good at Blackjack, at least compared to her!

Mom won but she only played $10 a hand while son played green chips like an idiot. Call it women's intuition. Or she truly has PSI power.

Maybe she's a counter with good cover. She should be flat betting on low counts

One incident I had was a middle aged black lady. She took an immediate dislike to me (and vice versa) because she seemed to have quickly picked up that I played differently than most others. I would joke around with other players, and she would say things like "don't help him, he doesn't help the table." Well this is false, counters tend to help the table by eating up low cards during neg. counts, and not eating up cards during high counts.

When I took insurance, she would say "Umm hmm, he knows something." Ha ha, that was the most astute comment ever made by a ploppy, the casino should hire her as card counter catcher.

Another interesting thing she mentioned was "the 10 always follows the ace". Normally I would discount this as the mad ravings of a ploppy, but you know, maybe they catch on to certain things

 

[blackchipjim]

Voodoo vs the math?

The machines follow a algorythm to shuffle using this information is to one's advantage. Can you or is it possible to really be attuned to the shuffle? That is the endless topic of discussion that eludes many a player and is not just limited to bj. Is it exploitable? Sacred flow is just that sacred and not something to mess with.

 

[MangoJ]

The machines follow a algorythm to shuffle using this information is to one's advantage. Can you or is it possible to really be attuned to the shuffle? That is the endless topic of discussion that eludes many a player and is not just limited to bj. Is it exploitable? Sacred flow is just that sacred and not something to mess with.

If the entropy is large enough, no it doesn't help if you know the shuffle algorithm. In essence (and simplified): shuffle algorithms draw a random number from a (at best from a physical) random device, and perform a specific shuffle depending on that very number. If the range the number drawn is drawn from is large (and I mean really large), that the number of perturbations of the shoe (that is the number of all physically possible shuffles) is smaller than this range of the drawn number - you cannot predict the shuffle or any feature of it.