Blackjack BJ MIT team debunked!

''Imagine that you were to find someone and fill his head with stories of all the riches and the “wonderful” life of a professional blackjack player.
Now imagine that you were to teach him how to count cards, under the condition that he had to split his profits with you.
Imagine that you are a very bright college student who is attending a major college and you have a very good gift of gab.

Your gift is SO persuasive that you somehow con 200 people into working for you.
Two hundred people making $80 a week comes out to $16,000 a week, half of it is YOURS.

Oh – I almost forgot.
Part of the agreement was that ALL of the comps belong to YOU.
So you open a travel agency and make extra money SELLING room comps.

Put this all together, and that should be strong enough to get you into the Blackjack Hall of BS.

The movie was 98% hogwash!
In the words of the immortal Paul Harvey; NOW you know the REST of the story.''

Let's face it, counting never provided any advantage, not now not ever!

By counting you could determine the portion of ''high value'' cards among the undealt cards of the deck and those aces and 10's make it easier for a BJ to occur, but as you might know the dealer is getting BJ's too and in some cases dealer's BJ beats your BJ...

1) Dealer uses cards from the same deck and sometimes his/her BJ beats yours

2) By ''knowing'' that there are plenty of high value cards it doesn't determine in which turn those cards are going to be dealt

The whole thing was a fallacy, maybe a convenient and convincing one, but misleading nonetheless.
Besides why counting provides advantage only on BJ?
Aren't any other card games with depleted possibilities, such as baccarat, poker...etc??

Do you understand why those ''experts'' created a whole generation of idiots?
BlackJack is one of the very few table games in which the player can bet only one side of the ''coin''...in the contrary, on Baccarat (player VS banker), Roulette (EC bets), Craps (P,DP bets) you have both of the opposite sides available, thus cheating is irrelevant...

 

There is a big hole in your analysis. Sure, the dealer has an equal chance of getting blackjack. But when they do they only get paid even money meanwhile you get paid 3 to 2.

 

Not so big one because first you have to BJ and then if the dealer doesn't have BJ too you get paid 6 to 5 instead of 3 to 2.
They reduced payouts, set automatic shufflers...BJ is dead in my opinion but I could be wrong.
At my local casino they have a rule if you get BJ and the dealer has ace for open card then the player may decide to get paid 1 to 1 before dealer opens his/her card, do you think it's beneficial?
When I was at an Italian casino they had a special bet as side-bet, you could wager that you are going to BJ on next hand, if someone would then he/she got paid 18 to 1, what do you think?

 

I am not familiar with BJ in Greece or most places outside of Vegas (wait is there life outside of Vegas? ). If they are reducing BJ payouts and using all CSM (differentiate CSM vs ASM) that is a problem. You may need to travel to places that have real BJ.

But here in Vegas and other jurisdictions in the U.S. that I travel to and play at, BJ and card counting possibilities are alive and well. Just refuse to play 6:5 games and CSM games. There are plenty of game throughout Vegas and the U.S. that are still real BJ and can be beat using card counting.

As for the MIT teams (you realize MIT teams refers to numerous teams throughout the last 50 years), I am sure there was some exaggerations involved in the movie. That tends to happen when Hollywood gets involved. But the basic story is for the most part true, as I understand it. But you are free to believe what you like. Hey I hear the world is flat too.

 

On Gambling With an Edge a former MIT team player said that the Ben Mezrich book was about 50% accurate, then in the movie they threw out the other 50%. lol!

 

I'm not a BJ expert but I think this side bet would be highly exploitable with the right kind of count. The frequency of a blackjack depends on the number of decks in use. In a single deck, first hand off the top, the math of making a BJ looks like this:

Total Two-Card Combinations-52X51/2X1 = 1326
Combinations that make BJ-4X16 = 64
1326/64 = 20.72

But if you remove 5 non ten/Ace value cards from the deck the math of making BJ looks like this:

Total Two-Card Combinations-47X46/2X1 = 1081
Combinations that make BJ-4X16 = 64
1081/64 = 16.89

So if the side bet pays 18 to 1 and the right kind of count is used then I think one can find an edge.

 

They were shuffling by hands in front of us and only one deck, I think it cannot get any better.

 

It's not that you could be wrong....it's that you are wrong. Come back when you have some sort of actual proof of something, not regurgitating the 3 points some idiot made on a YouTube video.

 

Why don't you show your "proof" to the casino and let the fools know that they have a loophole which smart alecs like you could expose to their benefit??
I'd not be surprised if they laugh at you but unfortunately I'd not be there to witness it.