NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/rec/gambling/5760

Text File | 1992-11-19 | 3.6 KB | 72 lines

Newsgroups: rec.gambling
Path: sparky!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ucla-cs!ucla-mic!hup.ucla.edu!eric
From: [e-mail] (Eric J. Splaver)
Subject: Re: Excalibur was {Re: SD rules (was Re: AMEX Trop Deal)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Lines: 60
Nntp-Posting-Host: 128.97.222.120
Organization: UCLA Honors and Undergraduate Programs
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: 18 Nov 92 21:46:28 PST

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Matt K/Gonzo) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Eric J. Splaver)
>>As far as SD conditions at the Ex; I've seen two hands of four far more
>>than three hands of four, and I too have been shuffled up against when going
>>from two hands of $5-10 to one hand of $50.
>It is fairly standard practice to shuffle when someone
>a) enters with a big bet
>b) more than doubles/triples (depends on club) his bet.
>
I've been playing bj in Vegas for over ten years and can count the number of
times I've been shuffled up against on one hand (well maybe two).  It's
hardly standard practice, especially if some precautions are used.  I
use dealer tips to indicate my desire for as many cards as possible and I
always put on some kind of "act".  In fact the same day that the exc.
shuffled up on a 1 to 7 spread, I got away with a 1 to 80 spread at the
circus^2, I drew heat and left after that bet but there was no shuffle.


>I think it's asking a bit much to expect them NOT to shuffle when you go from
>$10 to $50.

I completly disagree.  Ditto above.

>
>Well, I agree, in that, if you don't do anything to disguise your play,
>dealers will be forced to do the job the bosses want them to do and will make
>your play unbearable. As a result it WILL take a lifetime to beat SD, since
>you will be shuffled up on or barred at many clubs. (All this IMHO.)
>
I always disguise my play, but I try very hard not to overestimate my
advantage.  I use the Uston APC, with approx. 50% of the matrix number play
variations, and I figure on a good day I might have a 1.25% edge at a "good"
game.  I've never been barred for bj but I was once barred from the Dunes
for too much coupon action.  I'll play every coupon I can find to rip and
tear my way into the black.


>I have a coupla questions about penetration. It seems that most people talk
>about % of the deck dealt out. This does not seem important as a figure
>taken alone. A figure I use, which is biased to a player using few strategy
>adjustments, is "avg. # of cards dealt before each bet." This help show
>how much better a head on game can be. It also shows why 3x3, even tho you
>see fewer cards than 2x7, is just as good a game, since avg # cards b4 each
>bet is equal.
>
Huh?  Why is an equal # of cards seen between each bet important?  The
important factor is not having too many cards shuffled away.  Eg a 3x3 game
exposes 12 hands (incl. dealers) with an average of 2.7 cards each or a
total of 32.4 cards, leaving almost 20 cards.  That's enough to include all
four aces and all sixteen tens!  A 2x7 isn't the greatest game but if you
sit at 3rd base it's acceptable and I find it a relaxing break from more
concentrated play.  If you don't care about total cards out and instead want
an equal number of cards perhaps you should be playing at the Las Vegas
Club.  "The most liberal bj rules in the world" and the worst percentage
penetration.

________________________
Eric J. Splaver
[e-mail]
[phone]