Re: Blackjack Strategy
Casino CSM's are mechanical devices that have several and quite severe constraints on their ability to shuffle randomly (eg. mechanical reliability, wear-and-tear on the cards, card reappearance latency, etc).
CONTINUOUS Software shuffling programs have no mechanical constraints, and very few constraints of other types (I guess if they shuffled very, very fast (eg. a million times a second) they could end up using too much CPU power, but that is easily fixed simply by doing one random shuffle before each card is dealt. It'd no longer be "continuous", per se, but that's semantics only).
[FWIW, Non-Continuous software shuffling programs, as used in most on-line casinos, have even fewer constraints. They typically have (in software form) a cut-card very near the front of an 8-deck shoe (eg. 35 cards into the 416 card shoe). When the cut-card is reached, the hand is finished, and a completely random shuffle is executed.]
The post of yours that I said was wrong was,
[ QUOTE ]
Oddly enough, the continuous shuffle program used by most online sites results in blackjack ratios closer to a single deck than a multiple deck blackjack ratio.
[/ QUOTE ]
Your statemetn dealt exclusively with "continuous shuffle program used by most online sites". You then use the wizardofodds site's analysis of physical CSMs as proof. I doubt very much whether the writers of online CSM's have attempted to reproduce the way physical CSMs are built.
I know how many types of physical CSMs work. Writing a program to reproduce their logic would be far more difficult than writing a clean, simply, true continuous shuffler. Physical CSMs have all sorts of engineering problems that are solved/ameliorated in ways which are simply unnecessary, and are overly complicated, in a program.
Most Physical CSM's do not, in fact, CONTINUOUSLY shuffle. What they do is when the previous hand's discards are put into the input hopper, randomly place each of these cards. If there are no new cards to 'digest' (in the hopper), and no cards being dealt (dead table) CSMs are usually totally inactive. They are not "continuously shuffling". There are several real-world engineering reasons for this, none of which apply to a computer program which can, very easily, be continuously shuffling.
Unless you can show that on-line sites have gone to the totally excessive, unnecessary and sub-optimal extent of exactly duplicating how the mechanics of a physical CSM works (thereby making the wizardofodds reference valid), then I will repeat my statement that your assertion is wrong.
|