Grossjean's Dirty 32

I am contemplating purchasing JG's book as I've heard many good things about it. The info I have seen around on the "Dirty 32" has me quite puzzled. I hear its a set of 32 different Level 10 counts for the 32 most important indices, but how is this feasible? Obviously you aren't going to be keeping the RC's from round to round, right? So are these counts powerful enough to have an effect on only one round of play? Doesn't seem possible, but perhaps I'm missing something. I don't expect for anyone to spill the beans here, my intention is not to blow up JG's spot. I just would like any info anyone could give me to help me understand the idea behind it. Thanks

The system was never intended for use by a human. Aside from the impossibility of keeping so many different counts, the gain from the use of such a system is absolutely negligble, not more than a few hundredths of % in virtually any shoe game you are ever likely to encounter, amounting to at best a couple of extra cents an hour. For further information on the utterly negligible gains from the use of a computer see Bill Zender's "Card Counting for the casino executive".

When quizzed on this forum about the issue, Grosjean's argument was that the system was designed to be employed by a robot against an online game. Reading between the lines he must have been talking about the Stanley Acropolis game, since that was the only online casino that matched the specified table limits, rules and penetration of the time.

In retrospect I can only assume that Grosjean made a serious error of judgement trying to employ this elaborate technique at Stanley Acropolis. SA were offering a 20% sign-up bonus up to $1000 at the time, as well as a recurring 5% bonus. In addition, you could shuffle up at will on any negative counts. Finally, there were incredible one-off promotions such as a day's worth of 2-1 blackjacks which cost Stanley over a million dollars. In short, nothing terribly sophisticated was required to beat that game, not even count cards if you didn't want to.

Many new blackjack students are fascinated by the idea of computer perfect play but the reallity is underwhelming to say the least. Even if you can do it that will not materially affect your results except in single-deck games with very deep penetration. The brainpower would be better devoted towards some external technique such as shuffle-tracking.

The advantage bandied about for using a computer to play blackjack is in the range of 5-6% in reasonable quality land-based games. This is NOT negligible. OTOH, if you mean "computer-perfect" play of a particular counting system such as High-Low or AOII then any gain from this would certainly be not worth the trouble.

Where do you get that figure? Maybe you are talking about a deeply dealt single deck but not a normal 6 deck game with 75% penetration.

As blue eyes white dragon (great handle) and ......... state below you are an order of magnitude out for most modern shoe games. With a single-deck game dealt down to the last card you might get that type of advantage (did you perhaps get that figure from an outdated, albeit classic, text?), but no such games exist nowadays. Sorry, its disappointing I know, but the negative evidence is overwhelming.

There are some single deck games where they deal out all the cards in biloxi. One small rule change only, Blackjack pays even money. Other than that rules are good LOL. I have done well against this game using the end game tactics that thorpe talks about.

Steve

These games were much discussed a few years back. They are indeed vulnerable to end-play. I did not know they were still going. If you don't mind perhaps you could tell us whether they burn any cards? That makes quite a big difference.

This game could actually be badly beaten by a computer but there would not be much point in this case.

at this particular table. The dealers count and if they see you sitting out hands or varying your bet size with the count they signal the pit critters. They also use shills. YOu have to have good cover to play this game.

It was funny, you could count to your heart's content at the six deck games and even the "regular" SD and DD games. But this game they watch very close.

Steve

at this particular table. The dealers count and if they see you sitting out hands or varying your bet size with the count they signal the pit critters. They also use shills. YOu have to have good cover to play this game.

Neither should be required really. Maybe we should take this to e-mail again...

There was a computer developed that could predict accurately the next card from the shoe. As the cards are dealt, every card is entered into the computer. Then, after the shuufle, as the cards are played they are again entered into the computer. As the deal gets deeper , the computer gets more accurate a predicting the next card. This computer works because the shuffle does not completely alter sequences of cards. Very large edges are obtainable, obviosly. This is a "sequencer" and it works in 6 deck games. Can't remeber the name of it. I would be afraid to use it.

Bert

Shuffle-tracking computers work on fundamentally different principles from card counting computers and the gain can indeed be spectacular. It should be remembered however that human sequencers can also yield spectacular gains under optimal conditions.

I think the device you are referring to "Black Magic", which is mentioned in Carlson's Blackjack for Blood. Note this device would have trouble identifying the next card-it was designed to identify hole-cards-this is easier because sequencing is much more powerful if you can see the cards before and after an unknown card.