Some Grumping about CBJN Errors

I didn't see any way to provide updates for the Current Blackjack News without joining the Green Chip Forums, so I guess I'll post my observations from my recent LV trip here:

Almost Everywhere - Blackjach Switch games everywhere I played no longer consider a "switched" 21 as a natural. Instead, it will now push a drawn dealer 21. The listed house edge in CBJN of 0.18% is no longer correct - it's more like 0.6%.

Encore - Every table I played at allowed surrender. The CBJN listed edge is too high.

Fitzgerald's - Spanish 21 allows double-double-down, lowering the house edge to around 0.4% from the listed 0.78%. This one is a bit annoying, since 1) it has been in error since at least 2007, and 2) the rule in question is POSTED right at the table. You don't have to play the game, or even talk to the dealer or pit boss, to establish the rules in play. I know Spanish 21 is not too popular and a dying game. Still, has someone really visited Fitgerald's every month for over 2 years and not noticed this error?

Specfic forum to allow just this type of information.

Regards,
PM

If he bought a copy of CBJN, and it's not accurate, this problem should be known publicly, so it can be corrected, and so that potential buyers of CBJN can consider this before spending their $ on something they're assuming to be accurate.

Hiding known errors in CBJN is pretty dishonest.

Hiding known errors in CBJN is pretty dishonest.

When subscribing to CBJN, you get access to a page specifically for updates and corrections to be posted between issues. Rather than "hiding known errors," we are grateful for readers who take the time to submit corrections.

JohnDoe has it spot-on.

I *DID* buy a copy of the CBJN, and is *WAS NOT* completely accurate.

The plug for CBJN isn't "buy this for $13 and it's MOSTLY correct, but you need to join Green Chip for another $15 to have 100% accuracy."

Could these rule changes have all happened since I bought the copy? Doubtful. If they did, a lot of pit bosses were lying. (Disclaimer: I was using the April copy during the first week of May.)

The pit boss at Encore said they have had surrender since Day 1. That's no suprise, since Wynn also has surrender.

The pit boss at 4 Queens I asked said that the BJ Switch rules change happened "months ago".

Did Fitzgerald's add double-double-down to Spanish 21 between April 1 and May 10? If so, they also ordered a vintage beat-up scratched sign to advertise their "new" rule.

Look, these are mostly minor points on carnival games. The info in CBJN is a steal at the price. I'm just looking to help them clean up their data.

If you're really correcting errors diligently, then great work. But I agree with Big G - it's a bit silly to suggest that the ability to post, discuss, and become aware of those errors requires an extra fee.

[ And while we're at it, are all contributors to CBJN acknowledged, or thanked? ]

It may have been a simple oversight, but my contribution a few months ago was neither acknowledged nor paid.

(I would have even been quite happy with a couple free copies, or a GC membership, I expect $ is for regular/more valuable work.)

(I would have even been quite happy with a couple free copies, or a GC membership, I expect $ is for regular/more valuable work.)

Why expect anything? You purchased a copy and found some errors that you brought out. BJ21 is very appreciative of all that points out errors, whether they are GC members or not.

If you find errors in your newspaper and call or write them about it, are they going to give you a "free" subscription or $$ for doing it? Hardly.

If you don't like the publication and/or find no useful material inside, don't buy it! Jeez!

Regards,
PM

Please re-read what I wrote before you continue to shoot your mouth off.

Just for you, I'll clarify. I contributed new information about a casino that had not been previously included in CBJN, including both the standard CBJN data as well as other helpful information on conditions, dealers, tips, etc. According to Al's post above, this is the sort of thing that is both acknowledged and (often) paid. This information is now in CBJN, and being sold to others.

I didn't ask for money, but did ask for a single CBJN copy, and "if he was feeling generous" a (limited) GC membership. I have no idea what people are paid for info, but it's really not a big deal to me. I suggested token compensation that carried zero cost, and didn't insist.

But I did not receive so much as a "thank you", which I consider rather impolite, considering they sell the information, and that I had even offered to contribute information on other locations I frequent. Though I'll allow that it could have been a simple oversight. If that's the case, no harm, no foul.

I've never asked for $ or recognition for a CBJN contribution but I think its around $7 for a single casino report. Which is less then a single issue of CBJN or a temporary GC subscription.

As for not saying thanks Al must have been busy. Al is quite the stand up guy and usually treats everyone pretty well.

I didn't ask for money, but did ask for a single CBJN copy, and "if he was feeling generous" a (limited) GC membership. I have no idea what people are paid for info, but it's really not a big deal to me. I suggested token compensation that carried zero cost, and didn't insist.

But I did not receive so much as a "thank you", which I consider rather impolite, considering they sell the information, and that I had even offered to contribute information on other locations I frequent. Though I'll allow that it could have been a simple oversight. If that's the case, no harm, no foul.

If the "thank you" from Al was ignored, you can bet your last green chip that it had to be an oversight on his part. I can vouch for Al when I tell you that he is a person of complete integrity, and would never willingly snub anyone.

And just one comment: Do consider joining Green Chip, the cost is minimal compared to the benefits you will get from your investment.

Regards,
drumz1

For a small casino located out in tin buck two that nobody really cares about then Stanford pays $7. For larger casinos near population centers, then the pay for CBJN reports is higher. Some Las Vegas routes pay over $200.

I don't think its fair to nick pick every little error in CBJN. But speaking of errors. Here is a nick pick in May CBJN.
Argosy Cinci 1 .53 2 0.8 25 2000 s17,d10,nrs,shoe

Fr Lick Fr Lick 1 .56 2 1.0 25 500 s17,d10,nrs

Notice for basically the same rules the house edge is different. I assume the house edge should be .56 because all the other casinos with these rules list .56 edge.

By the way, I think Stanford is over paying me for the little reporting I do, but don't mention a word to Stanford or Al.

You could eail your observations to the Webmaster thus avoid joining the green chip groupies. As far as Spanish21, it is before my time, I just notice dying 21 i.e. bj 6:5.

My observation about CBJN, basically helpful but players tend to overemphasize the playability of most games. Example, Circus Circus and Stratosphere in my opinion are completely unplayable table conditions.

E.Kid,

I will be at your "Candy Store" again in a few weeks, maybe I will run into you there.

Iggy.

I want to get another bj trip in before the summer tourist season starts. I assume you are talking about the one thats located outside of Michigan. I haven't been to the eastern U.P. for quite awhile but may also get over there this summer.

It may have been a simple oversight, but my contribution a few months ago was neither acknowledged nor paid.

If you want to get paid for updating the blackjack rules and playing conditions in a locale you visit, there are three things you have to do.

1. You have to send your report to both CBJN@bj21.com and stanfwong@bj21.com. The first email address gives your information to the editor who puts your update into the newsletter, and the second email address alerts the guy who writes the checks.

2. You have to send a complete report. An observation like "Penetration seems to be worse than reported in CBJN" does not get a check; putting a number on the penetration you observe, and updating all the other rules and playing conditions at that casino, will earn you a check.

3. You have to report on a location not covered by a regular monthly reporter. An easy way to determine whether your city is covered by a regular monthly reporter is to check the CBJN date on that city. If you are looking at the May 2009 CBJN and the date on your city is earlier than May 2009, then you will be reporting on a city not covered by a regular monthly reporter. If the date on your city is the same as the date on the newsletter, then you may or may not be reporting on a city covered by a regular monthly reporter.

Las Vegas is covered by five regular monthly reporters, so we do not pay for extra Las Vegas reports except in special circumstances. The special circumstances are: If you are the first to report on a great Las Vegas giveaway, then we find an appropriate way to say thank you. We have sent several thank-yous of $500 or more over the years.

The amounts paid per city for reports that cover every casino in that city are listed in a post on the CBJN page of BJ21.com.

Stanford Wong

I have been wondering the same thing. Perhaps adding a "last updated" month/year (e.g. Jul09) beside each casino name would be helpful to know the aging of the conditions. Right now I think the assumption is that every casino is re-checked on the 1st and 2nd of each month.