Blackjack count question

[hanning]

This may be a stupid question, but is there any correlation between the count from one pass thru a shoe to the next?

Example - lets say you count down thru a shoe and when the dealer shuffles up for the next pass thru the shoe the count was -5. What is the likelihood of the count being negative on the next pass? Can you use this to your advantage by assuming a negative count towards the end of the new shoe so assume a positive count at the start and bet accordingly?

I guess I am asking this because if card sequencing works, and ace tracking works, how much can the count shange from shuffle to shuffle?

[CORed]

Not a stupid question at all. It all depends on the shuffle. With a truly random shuffle, there would be no correlation. But a lot of casino shuffles are far from truly random. Some hand shuffles used in 6 or 8 games are trackable. I'm by no means an expert on the subject, but the idea of shuffle tracking is that when you get a section of the shoe that is rich in high cards, you figure out where those high cards end up after the shuffle, so you can increase your bets for that part of the shoe. If you have the cut, you can cut the rich part of the deck to the top of the shoe. Because your betting big off the top, it doesn't look like you are an advantage player. This is a Cliff Notes versin of a very advanced topic. If you want to do this, you need to do a lot more research.

[four-flush]

Assuming that the shuffle will produce random results on the next shoe your running count or true count from the previous shoe will in no way help you. Thus you will have to start counting fresh on the new shoe.

Once upon a time (ooh about 45 years ago) when blackjack was primarily single-deck and casinos started having their dealers learnt to count, the dealers would shuffle-up when they detected that the deck was about to get rich in high cards. Unfortunately, many dealers pretended they could count when really they couldn't. Counters would then place a `large' bet as if the count was high (when in fact it was low) to urge the dealer to shuffle up. As a result, the dealer would shuffle up all the bad decks and deal all the good ones. Lol.

Of course back then many counters I am certain failed not because they didn't have the patience or the bankroll or whatever, but simply because the `ten-count' as well as the then `total point count' were so complicated that none but the mathematically inclined could use them.

[cardcounter0]

It depends on the shuffle and which player is placing the cut card in the new shoe.

[Shaggy]

If you are really interested, look into the book "The Shuffle Tracker's Cookbook" by Arnold Snyder. Also look into his website, www.blackjackforumonline.com

-Shaggy