WIRE BLACKJACK IS NOT RANDOM!!

Crash: Thanks Rod and Admin for destroying a cool game by making the computer unbeatable!!! lol ..... im sorry but there is NO WAY that getting eight 21s in a row is random...and then when the player happens to get a 21 ...the computer somehow gets a blackjack!! hahahaha ...... I might be more upset if it wasn't so blatantly obvious that you gave the computer a HUGE advantage!! haha ...way to go guys...good stuff!!

rumball: yeah, i think i agree with crash, the house always wins.

Henry Walsh:

Corwin: When Blackjack first appeared here on Wire, I took a pad and pen and began counting cards to see if the deck was sufficiently randomized.

I used my usual Blackjack system in which you never change the size of the bet, and hitting or standing is based on a strict mathematical formula. After about four hours of this (and pretty much breaking even with my chips ) I took out my calculator and tallied up the cards that had appeared.

The numbers I came up with showed that the cards are indeed sufficiently randomized with an error factor of only 0.01%. The cards are not only random, but are COMPLETELY random, as if the dealer was drawing from an infinite number of decks (in this situation, counting cards will create no mathematical advantage - the next card will always be random).

<EDIT> [In case there's any misunderstanding, I have no problem with the cards being random - my Blackjack system is BASED on the assumption that the cards are random, NOT based on the illegal practice of "card counting". I was only counting the cards to make sure that the cards were indeed random, to either exonerate Wireclub of rigging the game or to catch them in the act. ]

The problem I have, involves the limitations that Wire has placed on the game.
With my mathematical system I mentioned previously (which I describe in greater detail further down this page) I should be getting roughly a 5% advantage on the house, which means that after enough play my chips should slowly but steadily increase.
BUT this system involves taking advantage of certain situations with an increased probability of a win... namely, knowing when to "Double Down" and when to "Split" when dealt a pair.

Wire Blackjack does not allow Doubling Down, nor can you Split a pair. I find this particularly frustrating when dealt a pair of Aces - this is normally the best hand possible - you would split the Aces into two hands and have a high probability of ending up with two hands of 21... but instead you're left with a Soft 12 (which sucks ).

Just as with Doubling Down - (for example) if the dealer is showing a 6 there's a greater than 60% probability of the dealer going Bust, which means you Double Down if you have anything from 11 or under (it doesn't even matter if you end up with 12, you're betting that the dealer will bust). This is not an option with Wire Blackjack.
----------------------------------

But that all being said, the cards ARE random, so if you play safely and conservatively, you will have 50/50 odds with the house... the same as tossing a coin.

The thing is, most people don't know how to play Blackjack and have no understanding of the math involved. They make poor decisions (in other words, they gamble) and will not even reach that 50/50 odds margin.

Corwin: Oh, and if the original poster is still around read this, here's a bit of probability math for you:

You say there is NO WAY for the dealer to get eight 21s in a row... this is not true. It is statistically improbable, but not impossible. You need to understand what "random" really means.

For instance, if you took a coin and flipped it, you would have a 50/50 chance of either heads or tails. Each flip of the coin is called a "separate event", which means each toss has the same 50/50 odds.
Now, if you were to bet on the likelihood of flipping 10 heads in a row, you are considering the ten coin tosses as a single event... so with 2 possible outcomes in each toss you would calculate the odds thusly --> 1 chance in 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2... or 1 chance in 2 to the exponent 10... or 1 chance in 1024.
BUT (and here's where most people get this wrong) lets say you picked up a coin and started flipping it, and by chance you had just flipped 10 heads in a row... what do you think the odds are for the next coin toss? Most would intuitively lean towards tails as being the favored outcome seeing how the improbable event of 10 heads in a row had just occurred...
.... and they would be wrong --- the next coin toss (being a separate event) has a 50/50 outcome REGARDLESS of what had occurred previously.

So, if the dealer has just had a 21, it in no way effects the outcome of the next hand - the dealer has the same chance as before of getting 21. If the dealer had just had seven 21s in a row, it still in no way effects the outcome of the next hand - the dealer still has the same odds of getting another 21, which is statistically possible.
----------------

I know... this stuff can give you a headache, but to be honest, anybody who wishes to excel at games of chance would do well to study up on the mathematics of statistical probability.

Travis _: Calvin, just admit the game slants towards the dealer. I've seen seven straight 21's from the dealer. Has anyone on here ever had 7 straight 21's? Just keep hitting, and after about 500 tries, you may get 3 in a row, tops. That's why it's bullshit.

Probability is out the window when predetermined factors are thrown in. Wire wants you buying more credits, they don't want you getting a ton. The only people that win a lot, also bought a lot, therefore betting a lot (all while, losing a lot in the process).

Corwin: @ Talvis - Why would I admit something that isn't true?
I doubt very much that you put the amount of close statistical study into your perception of Wire Blackjack as I did. I also highly doubt that you carefully read (or understood) my above posts.

I'm an experienced Blackjack player with a thorough understanding of the math involved. Trust me, I had EVERY intention of calling foul if the math demonstrated that there was a bias in the cards... the statistical analysis I performed showed NO bias, and math doesn't lie.

I have no trouble breaking-even when I play Wire Blackjack... but that's because I use a strict mathematical system, the same type of system used by professional Blackjack players. Systems like this are the reason there ARE professional Blackjack players. The reason that Casinos can still make money with Blackjack tables is because the average player doesn't use a strict system, they gamble and makes poor decisions... betting big on a "gut-feeling" or randomly increasing the size of their bet -- sure you can win big that way, and lose big even more easily. And a gambler rarely quits while they are up -- they keep going hoping for a bigger win, and instead quit when they run out of chips and have no choice in the matter.

In fact, because Blackjack is a game that can be beaten mathematically, Casinos wouldn't even have Blackjack tables if it weren't required by law for a Casino to have a certain number of Blackjack tables per square foot of floor-space.

The only problem with Wire Blackjack (as I mentioned earlier) is that there is no option to Double Down or Split a pair... which eliminates a player's option to take advantage of optimal situations and tip the odds in their favour against the house. Which leaves the game with 50/50 odds at best (which for me makes the game pointless ).

Crash: Tis true , tis true what corvin is saying unfortunately. I don't know much about probability math. However I do know enough to know that he is right. I just like making ill advised rants on occasion to keep admin on their toes. Travis, you should really read Corvin's post once again. Pay close attention to what he says about "Separate Events." I would love to believe that it is biased toward the game, however, the math just doesn't support it. Sigh. Thank you and goodnight!

Corwin: And just for the heck of it, I'll offer a few very good Blackjack tips to give you suckers a fighting chance.

Blackjack is NOT about trying to get 21... it's about beating the dealer... and most people don't realize that there are situations where you stand with a 12.
(That's right.... STAND with only a 12).

Keep in mind that the deck is stacked with 10s... 10, Jack, Queen, King, are all 10s... so you must always keep in mind that there is a higher probability of the next card being a 10. Include the 9s and 8s and 7s in there, and you're talking a deck with far more high cards than low cards... busting is always imminent if you have more than 11.

- The dealer stands on 17, and MUST hit on 16... the player is not obligated to hit on 16, which gives the player a statistical advantage if the dealer looks likely to bust.

- Pay attention to what card the dealer is showing, and make your decisions based on that.

- If the dealer shows a 7, you assume the dealer has 17, and you will hit on 16, or stand on 17. If the dealer is showing and 8, 9, 10, or Ace, you still hit on 16 and stand on 17 (and take your chances)... if you hit on 17 you're too likely to bust. Better to stay in the hand on the chance that the dealer doesn't have a 10 in the hole. NEVER hit on a 17 or higher under any circumstances.

- BUT if the dealer is showing a 6, you assume that the dealer has 16 and will have to hit and will likely bust. In this case you only hit with 11 or lower... even if you have 12, another 10 will bust you... let the dealer bust instead. (except a Soft 12 - always hit on a Soft 12)
If the dealer is showing a 5, 4, 3, or 2, the same rule applies... let the dealer bust instead of taking the chance of busting yourself. (It's not as favorable as the dealer showing a 6, but it's your optimal move)

- One exception - If the dealer is showing a 2, and you have 12 (the terrible 2s ), your odds are about even - you can hit or stand... BUT you must choose to either ALWAYS hit in that situation or ALWAYS stand in that situation... any decision made randomly will throw a wrench into the statistical mathematics that govern the overall outcome over time. The more hands played, the closer the overall numbers approach statistical average.

The above rules will get you close to your 50/50 odds with each individual hand of Wire Blackjack.

AND - if you really want to play it safe:

- As I said - any random decision will throw a wrench into the math - NEVER CHANGE THE SIZE OF YOUR BET... if you begin playing with bets of 25, you stick with bets of 25. But don't even start playing unless you have 50 times the amount of your bet in your stash - your chips will go up, and they'll go down, but will always hover around your break-even mark over time... 50 times your bet worth of chips gives you a reasonable safety margin of not getting cleaned out.

- Quit while you're ahead. Using this "safe" method, you will never win big... but your chips will go above and below your break-even mark... quit while you're up and be happy that you won something at all. Be happier still that you didn't get cleaned out.
--------------------

This is just a few of the basics of the system I use (all the ins-and-outs of the entire system would be a novelette), and I'll admit that it isn't exactly an exciting way to play, but it's a safe way to play... to be honest, professional Blackjack players do not live a very exciting life. You're not really gambling, or even making decisions... you're simply making the correct move depending on what cards turn up - being a human computer.

Travis _: None of that explains how the computer can manage 5+ blackjacks in a row, while the user will never get that many in a million tries.

The game is slanted towards the computer, no analysis needed.

Travis _: Blackjack is about getting as close to 21 as possible to increase your odds of either:
a) Topping what the dealer has
b) Forcing the dealer to hit and go over 21

The fact that each pull is a separate event just dramatically improves the likelihood that the game is slanting against the user. If the cards were truly pulled from a virtual deck and you could count them, then you wouldn't see the dealer pegging 4-7 straight 21's in a row.

Crash: hmmmmmm

Corwin:

"None of that explains how the computer can manage 5+ blackjacks in a row"

- I did explain that. It is statistically possible for this to happen... it happened... deal with it. If YOU got 5+ Blackjacks in a row I doubt that you would be complaining.

"The game is slanted towards the computer, no analysis needed. "
- So how could you possibly determine this without some form of analysis?? It's your "impression" that the game is slanted because you don't understand the game of Blackjack... which your next statement clearly demonstrates:

"Blackjack is about getting as close to 21 as possible to increase your odds of either:
a) Topping what the dealer has
b) Forcing the dealer to hit and go over 21


You obviously didn't read my last post.

First of all (a) you don't need to "top" the dealer to "beat" the dealer if the dealer goes bust.

Secondly (b) you cannot "FORCE" the dealer to do ANYTHING... the dealer HITS on 16 and STANDS on 17.... PERIOD. The dealer does not think, the dealer does not make a decision, the dealer CANNOT hit on 17 if you have something better.

The only advantage that the dealer has, is that the dealer doesn't have to keep playing if you've already busted yourself... if you bust, you lose, it doesn't matter what the dealer has -- if the dealer had to do better than a bust, and the dealer busted as well, and they called it a "push", then that would factor in to even the odds... but it DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY.

The only way to counter those odds is with the method I explained in my above post... by NOT hitting, and NOT risking a bust and trying to get closer to 21, when there's a statistical probability that the dealer might bust. PERIOD.

Forget about the number 21... it clouds your judgement... the dealer isn't trying to get 21... the dealer is just hitting on 16 and standing on 17, and mindlessly allowing players to bust themselves.
-----------------

I didn't make all this shit up, you know... there are entire books written on the subject, and it's all based on the Science/Math of Statistical Probability.

I offered you some very good advice... very educated and informed advice that I learned from the pros... you can take it, or you can leave it...
... but unless you're going to at least attempt to learn some kind of understanding of the game, don't whine about how the odds are "slanted" against you. If you don't learn how to play, the odds will ALWAYS be slanted against you, and NOT because the game is rigged.

Crash: well said sir

Crash: however ....it might be pertinent to note that we have no idea if the cards being dealt are from an actual "virtual deck" or a random card generator. so wouldn't that alter the odds a bit corvin?

Corwin: My impression is that the cards are indeed generated with a random card generator, not a virtual deck or decks. This does not effect the odds according to the mathematical system I have described (my system is based on the cards being random).

What it does eliminate is any hope of a player "counting cards", which in Casinos is considered a form of cheating. Casinos offset this by dealing from multiple decks shuffled together... if you take a number of decks and shuffle them all together it's pretty much the same as a random card generator. It would take some kind of "Rainman Supergenius" to count into an 8 deck shuffle.
A computer could do this, which is why you'd get your ass hauled to the curb if you were caught using a computer at a Casino Blackjack table... with an online Blackjack game we all have computers on hand, so a random card generator is really the only way the game can be done properly and eliminate any possible cheating.

Crash: gotcha

Travis _: Tl;dr

As for your statement that the dealer always stands on 17, no they don't. I literally just tested it, played about 10~ hands before I got the result I was waiting for. The dealer HIT at 17, got a 3, and beat my 3, 6, 10.

The advice works in actual blackjack, with actual cards. Not this online crap, where the objective is get you to buy more wireclub credits. You really think they're going to give people a fair shot at winning without first buying? LOL.

Crash: hmmmmm he raises a good point.

Corwin: The dealer does NOT hit on 17, EVER... you're high, Travis.

I always have Wire credits, and I've never bought them once.

cire_: How can there be a 50/50 chance when the player goes first? I feel like you need to check the maths a bit more closely...

Corwin:
Because the player has certain advantages over the Dealer.
(I suggest reading this thread from the beginning, but I'll repeat a few points for you, because, you know, everybody loves repeating themselves over and over)

-- The player can Stand on 16 or less to prevent busting. The Dealer does NOT have this option, and MUST hit on 16 or less. (Read the system I described above).
i.e. The experienced player can make informed decisions based on their knowledge of statistical likelihood. The Dealer cannot make ANY decisions -- it hits on 16 or less, and stands on 17 or greater.

-- The player wins 1.5X their initial bet with a Blackjack. When the Dealer beats you with a Blackjack you only lose 1X your bet.


In a Casino, the player has a few more advantages over the Dealer. For example [1] the option to Split a pair of Aces into two hands and a chance at two Blackjacks. The Dealer is stuck with a Soft-12 in that situation.
[2] The option to Double-Down your bet when the Dealer is likely to Bust.
(Wire's Blackjack lacks the above two advantageous options ).

With all that factored in, the experienced Casino Blackjack player has BETTER than 50/50 odds over the House, somewhere between 55/45 and 60/40, depending on the specific table rules the Casino has in place.

This is the reason there is such a thing as a "Professional Blackjack Player". Nobody makes their living playing Slots.
---------------------------

A note to Cir -- I learned "the maths" 30 years ago. I didn't invent them. And they work.
There are plenty of books you could read on the subject of Blackjack, as well as studies in the Science of Statistical Probability.
So perhaps YOU could "learn the maths" yourself first, before lecturing experienced Blackjack players on how they should "check" theirs.

cire_: So, my new job is to use my little blackjack advice card and just play the odds and I'll be up 5-10 bucks for every 100 dollars I bet (long-run...) I mean, it's maths, so there can't be two options to play on any given set of cards. There is one correct option to play in every given situation, and you're saying we can all beat the house following those simple rules and win $5-$10 for every hundred we bet (in the long-run.)

(depending on the specific table rules casino has in place, of course...)

Next you'll tell me that an 'advice card' won't likely be allowed in high stakes, so memory takes over, etc. etc...

The most important piece of information for me is, how rich are you, given your knowledge of the 55/45 or 60/40 payout?

Corwin: That is correct -- there is only ONE correct move in any given card situation. You play on "autopilot".

I've done fairly well for myself. But that has nothing to do with Blackjack.
I don't play professionally, nor would I want to. A pretty boring way to make a living if you ask me, and it won't make you "rich".
And to be honest, I don't really like Casinos all that much.


One of the last times I was at a Casino, I remember sitting there at the Blackjack table, playing on autopilot... your mind tends to wander, so I "people-watch". I was watching all those SUCKERS glued to the slot machines... pissing their money away for the endorphin rush of blinking lights and fancy sounds (they should try pinball -- it's cheaper)... while I sat there smug in the knowledge that my dinner and drinks would be on the House when I stepped away from the table.
Blackjack is the only game I'll play, because it's the only game you can win.

But then it hit me... I'm bored out of my frickin' mind...
... well... boredom combined with having to take a leak, jonesing for a cigarette, and a slight nagging anxiety that I might run into an unlucky streak of cards and end up stuck at that table for hours longer getting myself ahead again...
... those "suckers" at the slot machines were having WAY more fun than I was.


My very last visit to the Falls, I just found myself a computer Blackjack machine, played a couple of high-stakes hands, got lucky with the cards and found myself $80 ahead after 10 minutes, so I cashed in and left.
Slightly better odds than putting it all on Red at the Roulette table.

Corwin: Oh, and about this ---> " I'll be up 5-10 bucks for every 100 dollars"

It doesn't work like that. Your stack doesn't slowly grow in a "gradual linear" fashion. The cards "dance". Your stack goes down, and your stack goes up. Your stack can go WAY down, so it's best to have a "float" of about 50X the size of your bet-value. The odds say that you will "eventually" find yourself ahead over the long run.

But it's not without its risks. Like I said, the cards "dance", and they can behave VERY strangely at times. That's why inexperienced players often think the cards are "rigged"... they're not rigged... the cards can just be assholes at times and have a tendency to "misbehave".

The trick is knowing when to walk away, and to not get "greedy". Like say once you find yourself ahead 10X your bet-value, don't push your luck... quit while you're ahead, and be thankful for that humble profit-margin.

A "gambler" is incapable of doing this, which is why Casinos still make money at the tables. The gambler will see their larger stack, feel "lucky", and start increasing the size of their bets... and BAM... they find themselves back down again, or even cleaned out.

Corwin: That 5% to 10% "edge" over the House that the system provides, is just that... it's an "edge"... but this is where the science of Statistical Probability comes to play.
You're not banking on "certainties", but on "likelihoods".

Each individual hand can have a very unlikely and unpredictable outcome... but over MANY hands it will average out according to mathematical Law.

Think of a coin-toss... the odds are 50/50... but toss a coin 10 times, and it's very unlikely that the overall outcome will be a 50/50 split. Toss a coin 100 times, and the outcome will be closer to a 50/50 split... toss a coin 1 million times, and the overall outcome will be extremely close to 50/50 to several decimal points accuracy.