BJ21.com Free Message Board
You know that a given seqment is composed of cards that were a half deck from the end of the previous shoe and 2 decks from the end. You know that that given segment ended with a +3 runing count, start to finish. You know that the remaining cards that were a half deck from the end of the previous shoe, and were remainders of the previous shoe 2 decks from the end, ARE GOING TO BE THE MAIN PART OF THE NEXT SEGMENT. There is a very weak, but still significant, likelyhood that that next segment, WILL be slightly richer than average, in that the cards you just saw are NOT just removed from the total remainders, BUT ARE ALSO to a great degree SPECIFICALLY removed from the next segment. If you have any reason to presume that the prior shoe was "balanced" you are correct in being slightly more certain that the next segement is richer.
My entire discussion about trip ruin is just to introduce the FACT that the CLT is not as prohibitive as it once was thought to be about such predictions. Trip ruin validity means that sample boundarys don't have to be as definite, as is discussed nomraly in shuffle tracking, to make such inferences, in the same way that trip ruin shows statistical boundaries to results can be found even before normal sample limits. Showing how you can open a box also shows how you can exploit the "box" being fuzzy too.
BJ21.com Free Message Board is maintained by Pi Yee Press