One2Six continuous shuffler

[Guest CarlosM]

Not sure if I should have posted this in the private forum. There has not been much discussion on playing NBJ against these shufflers. I have played many great games at First Base or Third Base. Some games lasted many shoes and some for just one GREAT shoe. Anyone else with their personal experiences and observation against these shufflers?

[zabocr]

Carlos I'm having trouble locating the subscription area to private forum. Any help would be great!

[SteveO]

Carlos I'm having trouble locating the subscription area to private forum. Any help would be great!

Subscription site to all things BTC

http://www.e-junkie.com/beatthecasino/

[zabocr]

I don't see anything on that about private blackjack forum

[DarkValefor]

well, my local casino use this same machine too. i suggest you read the zero prox part of the manual again, i believe we all go thought this same confusion too at beginning right? even till today when i read the manual again i still find something new.

[SteveO]

I don't see anything on that about private blackjack forum

Then I guess you're SOL.

[zabocr]

Haha, I guess so

[SteveO]

Maybe send a PM to Keith?

[Guest]

I've played BJ against continuous shufflers. One of our BJ members played them exclusively for a while.

The games are similar to hand shuffle: The older the cards and the more players in the game the more the cards clump.

You can play NBJ 3rd base against newer cards and NBJ 1st base against older cards. And, just like normal machines and hand shuffle, some tables are beatable and some are not.

But We both found that these machines to not produce good games as consistently as regular or hand shuffle. So why play them???

If nobody played them, they wouldn't exist.

[brad01]

Hi Carlos,

In Australia these shufflers are on every table. I don't know much about Blackjack but I stood and watched a few games here and there out of 2 hands on a full table for example I saw everyone bar 1 person either lose or bust and the dealer got 19 - 21 both times. Why do you think the casinos use them?

Is it just for faster games or are these machines set up to give them better odds somehow?

Brad

[Guest CarlosM]

The cards pretty much clump the same as hand shuffled. The more players in the game and the longer they are played the more they clump and the stronger a dealers bias becomes to the point of an un beatable game. They use 6 decks in the one2six shuffler. Most high limit tables even hand shuffled use 6 decks. 6 decks is the most unstable. Good games have the shortest life. I beleive these shufflers only shuffle very minimal. Also would like to know what Ellis thinks.

[TheOne]

What happened to the administrator Carlos?

[brad01]

Sure he's around man. Not sure how much support he's getting on private forum.

[TheOne]

A few weeks ago his status said banned. Is he real? Is this blackjack method even real? I have never seen that on many forums I been on, administrator who runs blackjack forum being ejected. Makes people not have faith in blackjack forum or books on here

[brad01]

I don't know man not been told anything. Ellis's new blackjack is real tho. How u think the casinos can beat everyone easily. Watch his video and you will get it. A few weeks ago Carlos answered my question about auto shufflers so till I'm told otherwise I assume he's still around.

[TheOne]

Sad news. Carlos M passed away. Just found out. He must have been a great player. Take a minute today for prayer

[brad01]

Are you sure? I thought we would of heard something definite. Where did u hear this?

[kachatz1]

Not sure of this, but cannot seem to verify either...

Actually have ticket to Toronto and rez for Fallsview Casino to meet Carlos next week to play BlackJack...set up early December...

Have emailed and called, but no confirmation of his " availability" for same.

Say it ain't so Carlos....

Also, Ellis...was he really " banned" /resigned as Admin or ???

Kevin

[Guest]

Carlos called me within a week ago and was in good health and seemingly in good spirits.

He was temporarily banned at the request of a member.

I've heard both sides of the story and I simply can't say which is the more accurate???

Nor do I see how a ban resolves anything. Carlos has been a great help to many players.

But whatever they did, they both did it of their own free will. And only the both of them know the whole truth of it.

Even then, they each see the same truth from two different perspectives.

It is extremely common that when a player loses his money, always of his own free will, he looks for someone else to blame it on.

Whether he played and lost or paid someone else to play and he lost, the decision was his and his alone.

But I do know one thing for sure:

There is a moral to this story:

Never play someone else's money!

And the other side of the same coin is: never give your money to someone else to play.

NEVER! On both counts - NEVER!

Why not?

Because the player won't play the same. It may be totally subconcious but a player never plays the same when playing someone else's money.

Even if you win, you won't get any credit for it. The giver won't give you credit for winning. He gives himself the credit for giving you his money.

So there is no up side for the player. He either loses or he wins and gets no credit for the win.

Besides, if he plays his own money and wins - he gets ALL of the money.

If he plays someone elses money and wins, he only gets half or in many cases NONE!

This reminds me of the last time I played A.C.:

I was playing 4 people's money - everybody's except my own.

So, while I'm diligently winning 6 shoes, they are partying at MY favorite bar.

So afterwards I split the winnings 4 ways - more than sufficient for them to pay their share of the bar and dinner bill.

While I paid mine out of pocket.

So did anybody think to say Ellis, let me pick up your share of the bill since we are paying it out of your winnings.

Well no. Because see, they don't give me credit for winning. THAT they look upon as a given.

Instead, they give the credit to themselves for having the wisdom to give me the initial buy in money.

So, did I quintouple the stakes. No! I played a simple 123, exactly the same as if I was playing my own money.

WHY? For heaven's sake?

Because I know that the 1 bet has less than a 50/50 chance of winning.

So the LAST thing I'm going to do is quintouple it.

So, do I at least advance to a 146.

No, the 146 is great in BJ but sucks in Baccarat.

Which brings us to the case in point - BJ

When you play someone else's money you fall victim to a perfect Catch 22.

See, a good BJ player knows to quickly work his way up to a 146 progression.

If successful, he knows he's at a good table and in the right seat.

So, theortetically he should be trying to double the stakes and work his way up to a 2 8 12.

But will he do that?

NO! His knowledge of the game won't permit it.

See, he knows that his hit rate on his 1 bets are usually less than 50%.

So it would be pure stupid to double a bet he knows is an overall loser.

So fine, he leaves his first bet at 1.

What about his second bet?

Again, he's a victim of his own knowledge of the game.

He KNOWS that ideally his second bet needs to be 4 times his first bet.

More than that he enters the realm of diminishing return.

So, he's stuck with the 146. The success of the 146 is based on making the losing 1 bet the table min.

But now he's giving up half his winnings.

See that? The perfect Catch 22 !

Look at Don Johnson !

He won his millions because the casino, by prearrangement, gave him back 20% of his loses.

Well, that changes the overall odds of the game, doesn't it.

By 20% in fact.

Well, as they quickly found out, a casino can't give away 20% of their odds to a good player and still expect to win.

Especially a player who knows to raise the stakes in a good game.

But what if, instead, the arrangement was whenever he won he had to give back 50% of his winnings.

He coulden't win, could he?

Well neither could I, or anybody else.

Get it?

Look, there are no short cuts.

FIRST, learn how to play, YOURSELF!

NEXT, WIN with your OWN freaking money.

Don't deviate! You'll end up wishing you hadn't. Just ask Carlos!

Edited January 6, 2015 by Ellis

[kachatz1]

Carlos called me within a week ago and was in good health and seemingly in good spirits.

He was temporarily banned at the request of a member.

I've heard both sides of the story and I simply can't say which is the more accurate???

Nor do I see how a ban resolves anything. Carlos has been a great help to many players.

But whatever they did, they both did it of their own free will. And only the both of them know the whole truth of it.

Even then, they each see the same truth from two different perspectives.

It is extremely common that when a player loses his money, always of his own free will, he looks for someone else to blame it on.

Whether he played and lost or paid someone else to play and he lost, the decision was his and his alone.

But I do know one thing for sure:

There is a moral to this story:

Never play someone else's money!

And the other side of the same coin is: never give your money to someone else to play.

NEVER! On both counts - NEVER!

Why not?

Because the player won't play the same. It may be totally subconcious but a player never plays the same when playing someone else's money.

Even if you win, you won't get any credit for it. The giver won't give you credit for winning. He gives himself the credit for giving you his money.

So there is no up side for the player. He either loses or he wins and gets no credit for the win.

Besides, if he plays his own money and wins - he gets ALL of the money.

If he plays someone elses money and wins, he only gets half or in many cases NONE!

This reminds me of the last time I played A.C.:

I was playing 4 people's money - everybody's except my own.

So, while I'm diligently winning 6 shoes, they are partying at MY favorite bar.

So afterwards I split the winnings 4 ways - more than sufficient for them to pay their share of the bar and dinner bill.

While I paid mine out of pocket.

So did anybody think to say Ellis, let me pick up your share of the bill since we are paying it out of your winnings.

Well no. Because see, they don't give me credit for winning. THAT they look upon as a given.

Instead, they give the credit to themselves for having the wisdom to give me the initial buy in money.

So, did I quintouple the stakes. No! I played a simple 123, exactly the same as if I was playing my own money.

WHY? For heaven's sake?

Because I know that the 1 bet has less than a 50/50 chance of winning.

So the LAST thing I'm going to do is quintouple it.

So, do I at least advance to a 146.

No, the 146 is great in BJ but sucks in Baccarat.

Which brings us to the case in point - BJ

When you play someone else's money you fall victim to a perfect Catch 22.

See, a good BJ player knows to quickly work his way up to a 146 progression.

If successful, he knows he's at a good table and in the right seat.

So, theortetically he should be trying to double the stakes and work his way up to a 2 8 12.

But will he do that?

NO! His knowledge of the game won't permit it.

See, he knows that his hit rate on his 1 bets are usually less than 50%.

So it would be pure stupid to double a bet he knows is an overall loser.

So fine, he leaves his first bet at 1.

What about his second bet?

Again, he's a victim of his own knowledge of the game.

He KNOWS that ideally his second bet needs to be 4 times his first bet.

More than that he enters the realm of diminishing return.

So, he's stuck with the 146. The success of the 146 is based on making the losing 1 bet the table min.

But now he's giving up half his winnings.

See that? The perfect Catch 22 !

Look at Don Johnson !

He won his millions because the casino, by prearrangement, gave him back 20% of his loses.

Well, that changes the overall odds of the game, doesn't it.

By 20% in fact.

Well, as they quickly found out, a casino can't give away 20% of their odds to a good player and still expect to win.

Especially a player who knows to raise the stakes in a good game.

But what if, instead, the arrangement was whenever he won he had to give back 50% of his winnings.

He coulden't win, could he?

Well neither could I, or anybody else.

Get it?

Look, there are no short cuts.

FIRST, learn how to play, YOURSELF!

NEXT, WIN with your OWN freaking money.

Don't deviate! You'll end up wishing you hadn't. Just ask Carlos!

Thanks, Ellis.

I'll keep trying to get ahold of Carlos...

As for the "play your own money" sentiment, I 100% agree!

Kevin

850-687-3128

[brad01]

Once again excellent advice from years of experience Ellis.

I'm sure many people don't realise how valuable your posts are and on the public forum they are free too.

Really hope things get sorted out with Carlos as was planning to join up and learn BJ properly too.

Yeah the playing with other peoples money is definitely a no win situation and usually ends in grief.

[Empirezer2]

gclub register
gclub register