Cutting Edge Blackjack — Time to move on to the strategy that makes sense

Recently I read a column that featured a printout of statistics one of those all-around casino “experts” bought from some computer geek that supposedly told you what hands were winning hands and which ones were losing hands. But he failed to tell you some very important facts. The first of which is that those numbers are completely bogus.

His data was based on computer simulations. These are phony blackjack rounds spewed out by a computer’s random number generator in a vain effort to simulate the game. But the data produced by this ruse has little to do with the real card game, which, as my research has proven, does not play out randomly.

Random number generators pump out weird strings of pretend cards many series of which would rarely if ever occur in a real card game. Random number generators also miss out on the many predictable aspects of the game that result from non-random casino-style shuffling. (My historic card behavior studies and those of a major university in the 1970s proved that shuffling does not randomize the cards.)

He also failed to tell you that global statistics (numbers based upon many lifetimes of projected blackjack rounds) tell you nothing about your odds of winning or losing in any given round. We do not get to bet on the collective results of millions of rounds.

Your odds of winning in a specific round can be easily and accurately predicted on the spot through intelligent card analysis and the use of state-of-the-art methods such as mine. As even Edward Thorp, author of 1962’s Beat The Dealer, recognized, your odds of winning and the intelligence of making any move varies depending on the composition of the un-dealt cards. So only information pertaining to each unique un-dealt card mix you face in any given round will help you identify whether a hand is a winner or not.

Furthermore, he failed to tell you that his projections assumed you use the old school basic strategy method in choosing card moves – the faulty one-size-fits-all approach that recommends one move per hand and dealer up card. The research he used did not include a test of winning and losing rates based upon more intelligent card strategies.

I don’t know about you, but I don’t care what hands I’d lose over the course of many lifetimes using a losing method like basic strategy. I don’t use that method and I don’t get to bet on the collective results of many lifetimes of blackjack. My reality is that of a real-world casino blackjack player; I act on the specific information at hand in any given round and I play with far more precise, state-of-the-art methods that give me a much higher winning rate than you could ever get from basic strategy.

Even the man who introduced basic strategy to the world, Edward Thorp, estimated you’d face roughly a 1 percent disadvantage when using that faulty approach in single deck games. And he said your disadvantage with basic strategy grows with each additional deck used. So who cares how you might do over many lifetimes of blackjack using a game strategy even its early proponents admitted was a loser?

The truth is a state-of-the-art advantage player can and does do much better than those trumped up stats in the column I’m referring to projected.

The writer failed to even interpret his own data properly. It revealed how poorly basic strategy fares against the game. Why not admit it? For one thing, you will lose 66 percent of the stiffs you get (12-16 point hands) using basic strategy. That losing rate is unacceptably high.

And finally, the columnist I’m talking about failed to mention the impact your bet size has on your likelihood of losing. You see, real-world players face real-world losses based upon how much money they bet on losing hands. And my research has proven that you need to adjust your card strategy based upon this reality. But the old schoolers – by their own admission – failed to test for betting variations so they can’t talk about this everyday player reality.

They only tested for rounds won and lost using an antiquated and faulty method even they admitted was a losing system. Their research, in effect, assumed no money was involved – or, to be kind, that you flat bet every round (which no one does).

If you’re still following the old school advice, isn’t it time you moved onto a more intelligent and modern approach, that’s more effective and makes more sense?

Richard Harvey is the acclaimed blackjack strategies innovator, expert player, blackjack coach and bestselling author of Blackjack The SMART Way (the NEW Gold Edition), Cutting Edge Blackjack (the NEW Third Edition), NEW Ways To Win MORE at Blackjack and the audio book Richard Harvey’s Blackjack PowerPrep Session. Have blackjack questions? Send them to  rharvey2121@netscape.net. For more info see  http://www.blackjacktoday.com.