Joshua Singer wrote:
Unless the shill's actions can affect either the game game state or the payoffs, there is no hope. So, for example, craps and roulette cannot be affected by a shill, who can change neither the uniform odds on the dice or the wheel, nor the payoffs to the other players who have made bets on specific outcomes. Horse racing can be affected, however, since the shill's bets can affect the payoffs on the horses he bets on. (I know this is not a casino game.)
Regarding the method outlined below, in which a shill burns through a blackjack deck when the state favors the player, I'm not sure this would accomplish anything. It seems to me that this is as likely to make the deck even more favorable to the player as to make it less favorable.
As a thought experiment: suppose that the shill had the option, at his turn, to take the *bottom* four cards off the deck. Does it seem like this would affect the other players' odds? Since the next four cards and the bottom four cards are equivalent, from a probabilistic standpoint, the answers to the thought experiment and to the actual proposed method must be the same.
JSS
On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Bernie Cosell wrote:
On 1 Dec 2003 at 13:19, Dave Dyer wrote:
In casino games where each player plays against the house, are there any mathematically sound strategies that a player working for the house could employ to disadvantage other players? Assume that the winnings or losses of such players are unimportant because it all goes back to the house.
Certainly -- in Blackjack, where the 'heat' of the deck affects the player's effective-odds, when the deck is disfavorable to the house, the 'shill' could play lots of hands and keep getting hit as much as possible, using up cards as quickly as possible to work through the 'bad stats' on the deck with as few customer-wins as possible.
/Bernie\
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
Yes, taking the bottom 4 cards changes things. It is still the case that the number of cards remaining is decreased by four, which "helps" the house. If the casino ensures that every high stakes table has at least 5 players, filling in with shills when necessary, they may be able to "offer" more favorable rules while preventing skilled counters from gaining much benefit. Hugh