Electronic Blackjack - hit after doubling down.

I don't know what the process is involving a software patch, or "fix" or reprograming. What I do know is that over the final 2 and a half weeks or so, From the time we hit that first casino in the middle of the country that didn't allow us to hit after doubling, we visited 11 casinos, 4 in the middle of the country and 7 on the east coast and of the 11 only 3 allowed us to hit after doubling. The play seemed to end very quickly at one place after another. And one of those 3 allowed it one day and not the next. It had been "fixed" overnight.

I have no idea how long it would take to come up with a "patch" or fix. I have no idea about that kind of thing. I also have no idea how long they worked on it. For all I know they may have become aware of the problem, before we even found it and been working on it.

The end, when it came, is pretty much how I figured it would come. That all of the sudden machine after machine at location after location, would no longer allow hitting after doubling. It happened just as I figured it would.....just earlier than I was hoping.

Wouldn't casinos have started reporting to the manufacturer, that "hey, we are losing money on these machines". Once a few reported something like that, wouldn't the manufacturer be working on finding the problem and fixing it?

From the day my brother told me about this play and I verified it for myself, it was always going to be a race against time. I was just hoping for a bit more time and a few less people around the country having figured it out.

With this experience now over and based on the discussion here, not by the trolls and haters like Singer and Mdawg, but comments by other real players like mickey and others that have experienced and played different "glitches" for lack of a better word, meaning software that allows something that it shouldn't, not just with blackjack, although several electronic blackjack glitches were mentioned, the thing I am most shocked at is how so many software errors, or "glitches" get past some sort of quality control. Do these manufacturers really have no quality control checking this stuff? :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

With this experience now over and based on the discussion here, not by the trolls and haters like Singer and Mdawg, but comments by other real players like mickey and others that have experienced and played different "glitches" for lack of a better word, meaning software that allows something that it shouldn't, not just with blackjack, although several electronic blackjack glitches were mentioned, the thing I am most shocked at is how so many software errors, or "glitches" get past some sort of quality control. Do these manufacturers really have no quality control checking this stuff? :confused:

---

Not when compared to your eagle eye.

It would have cool some more details. Continental breakfast reviews. Shit like that. What made you quit one casino and go to the next? Sounds like a hell of an adventure. You should post about the weird characters and such you meet. Must be tons of them. It is easy enough to not give any clue where you're at.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DGenBen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DGenBen

In his OP he mentions that a software patch came out & locations quickly dried up. Sounds from his OP like it’s not out there anymore.

---

How would kew know that a software patch came out/how'd it come out so fast? How did the manufacturer know there was this glitch when the casinos didn't know about it? All kew claimed was that the play was "burned out" by super duper savvy players like him and baby bro.

If you read thru his tale you'll see he keeps making the same missteps he does every single time he makes this stuff up. Never does he think these things through thoroughly enuf so he doesn't get caught being the same old fraud.

He repeatedly claims the play dried up or was shut down by unnamed casinos here and there. Yet he & baby bro simply move onto another part of the country to play it--COMPLETELY OBLIVIOUS to the fact that had the machines been discovered and shut down by the casinos, a manufacturer's tech would have immediately shown up, resulting in ALL SIMILAR MACHINES BEING SHUT DOWN ACROSS THE WORLD AT THAT MOMENT. Yet this lying clown never thought this thru deeply enough, and gave away his lie by trying to keep impressing everyone with his claim of playing it for weeks afterwards--with dwindling accessibility added in of course for better "credibility".

This whopper isn't that difficult to decipher when you take the time. He tried to show I wasn't the only one capable of finding and exploiting a machine glitch. He must really believe in my relevancy and higher intelligence level if he went through all this nonsense to try and dig himself out of the humiliating holes he dug for himself multiple times before.

The fairy is just plain sick. He knows he ain't much and never will be, so he resorts to stupidity like this, time and time again. I just love watching him make a fool of himself:)

---

Well that is an interesting point. So what would the process be when a bug is discovered? Apparently the casino will shut the machines down once they figure out there is an issue, but then how does the manufacturer find out and release updates?

If I recall from the Double Up Bug (and I may be misremembering) I think the first thing IGT did was send a memo to casinos to disable the double up feature?

But I also seem to recall that because their machines were so widespread that several years afterwards machines w the bug could still be found in some of the more offbeat locations.

---

Correct. After that idiot Kane got caught being greedy and stupid trying to use the same quad 4's on a $10 five-play machine in the HL slot area at Silverton a second time--effectively ending the play and my pro-gambling career abruptly in 2009--they called in an IGT tech who figured out what was going on. As soon as he reported it, IGT sent out a memo worldwide not to have the DU option enabled on certain machines until the update was installed in them. And yes, there were some machines that missed the fix because of the massive individual requirement, and there's probably some (very few by now) still out there.

Sure, kew HAD to respond to my exposure of his haphazard concoction with stumbling explanations because that's what he always does when he gets cornered. Expect even more of this face-saving "setting the record straight" to fill up this thread. But the fact remains: inasmuch as he continuously blurts out "that's not how LV works,!" when it comes to mdawg, even more apropos here is saying to him "that's not how casinos & manufacturers react to machine glitches".

It was a clever thing he did by creating a story out of a totally believable & possible machine issue. But he likely got caught up in his typical "loser's giddiness" when it came to what he'd say about the fine details regarding how he "made money from it". The result tanked. End of story.

UNKewlJ simply cannot post anything at length without contradicting and outing himself as the compulsive liar that he is.

He'll never make it to the finish line.

MDawg, did you ever get your rolex back from that prostitute. Did it smell like vagina?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Correct. After that idiot Kane got caught being greedy and stupid trying to use the same quad 4's on a $10 five-play machine in the HL slot area at Silverton a second time--effectively ending the play and my pro-gambling career abruptly in 2009--they called in an IGT tech who figured out what was going on. As soon as he reported it, IGT sent out a memo worldwide not to have the DU option enabled on certain machines until the update was installed in them. And yes, there were some machines that missed the fix because of the massive individual requirement, and there's probably some (very few by now) still out there.

---

Rob, stop with your stupid comparisons to this short lived play at a very limited number of machines and the double up bug that Kane and Nester discovered and played and you eventually stole from them, (not in real life, just for the purposes of an internet story on a forum).

The Kane/Nester double up bug was a glitch on probably the single most popular machine available in almost every casino. Anyone finding that would have been an idiot not to milk it for all it was worth. Only greed could kill the play as it did for Kane/nester. This on the other hand was a play that had a very limited time period on a small number of machines. Anyone discovering it (and there apparently were many) needed to get what they could as quickly as they could.

The second difference is with Kane/nester's double up, there was something required to trigger the glitch. There was nothing like that on this. All the player had to do was play using the options available.

And the final difference is that I would argue the Kane/nester play was illegal. The player was getting a payout higher than he KNEW he was entitled to. THAT by definition, is theft and/or receiving stolen goods. Had they been charged with that, I think they would have been convicted. Instead the actual charges were something more complicated that didn't really apply. It was an over-reach.

So there is/was nothing illegal about this blackjack game play. the player was just playing by the options given to him.

A better comparison would be if there was a video poker game that allowed the player to redraw a third time. While anyone playing would know it was a mistake, they would be doing nothing to trigger the mistake and it would not be illegal. Just a software glitch or bug on a computer on a computerized casino game, which apparently happens somewhat frequently, mostly due to incompetence.

Looks like something, someone said, put MCrimm on


But, to his credit, he eventually calms down and goes back to coherent posts.

But with UNKewlJ, it's always that way! He's never other than vacillating between depression and mania, spurting nonsense, trying desperately to establish some

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accountinquestion

street creds.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

but comments by other real players like mickey

---

Yess, comments like this one,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

MDawg, did you ever get your rolex back from that prostitute. Did it smell like vagina?

---

that definitely show that he's capable of sifting through fact and fiction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

I don't know what the process is involving a software patch, or "fix" or reprograming.

---

Obviously, because you made up that lie about have a shuffling machine re-programmed in about fifteen minutes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MDawg

That rigged shuffler story, besides not making any sense, reaffirmed in my mind that this guy really doesn't play much table games, because I'd expect such nonsense from a recreational player, not a card counter.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accountinquestion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Damn Straight that I didn't post a picture. I was illegal to possess that machine, at least at that time.

It was me that hired the programmer. It was a guy who knew nothing about any kind of shuffle machines. After fiddling with it for 10-15 minutes, he said Ok, I think I got it. It then took him about 45 second to access the mode required to do what I suspected and would be illegal.

When you make comments about "spitting out cards", I think you are still thinking of CSM (continuous shuffle machines). I am talking about ASM (automatic shuffle machines. These machine work by shuffling one set of cards while the other is in play. Then when you have used up the cards being played and it is time for what would otherwise be a hand shuffle, the dealer takes out the already shuffled cards and inserts the just finished played cards into the shuffler and play resumes with the freshly shuffled deck.....no or less down time for shuffling.

---

First off the machine is NOT going to have a cheat mode already programmed into it. That would just be ASKING for shufflemaster to be sued or something else. This would NEVER be a secret that could be kept.

A programmer would not be able to figure out something in 15 minutes.. such absurdity. That is one world i have a good amount of experience in although I can't do that stuff. It would take reprogramming the EEPROM or whatever it is called.

OMG dude you are such a fucking liar. Amazing.

No, you said you sold it to some high-level AP took it apart and this and that but now you're saying YOU hired a programmer who figured it out in 15 minutes. SUCH UTTER FUCKING BULLSHIT.

*NO ONE* reverse engineers things so quickly. NO ONE. There is 0.00000 chance of the manufacturer having these modes baked in it ready to do. If someone could figure it out in 15 minutes this means the capability was already there.

AGAIN 0 chance. THat would DESTROY the company's rep. Opening them up to lawsuits and meaning casinos would have to get rid of all their shufflers just because of the outcry.

You are such a fucking compulsive liar. Jesus dude. It doesn't stop.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

I was just hoping for a bit more time and a few less people around the country having figured it out.

---

So even though you knew it would take the play down faster, the first thing you did was tell everyone about it on the internet?? Makes no sense. It's the same as talking about a legal matter you're actively involved in when it is very much in your interest to not discuss it. Your priority is always to tell the story, because there is no consequence from doing so since the story is fiction.

Surprising that so many on here seem gullible enough to believe that kewl actually went across the country working this play. This guy faked his death... I mean who does that?? But on the other hand, if kewl thinks he's getting traction with his nonsense then he will keep posting it. And I do find it, and the resulting criticism, quite entertaining. So keep up the good work kewl!

...

Kew comes up with these whoppers every so often as he begins to feel more and more irrelevant. Why, after his fully debunked tale about "backrooming" and that ridiculous story about shufflemaster, he thought a concoction about bj machines would bring him back into forum graces, is a mystery to behold.

I too enjoy watching the creations he comes up with....but only because I over-the-top enjoy watching him go down in flames due to his uncontrollable propensity for lying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MDawg

Looks like something, someone said, put MCrimm on


But, to his credit, he eventually calms down and goes back to coherent posts.

But with UNKewlJ, it's always that way! He's never other than vacillating between depression and mania, spurting nonsense, trying desperately to establish some

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accountinquestion

street creds.

---

---

You are on here trolling everyday. I throw one little troll post at you and you think I'm the asshole? C'mon, doggie. So tell us the truth. Did you take a whiff of that rolex when you got it back?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accountinquestion

Lets talk about the math and stop trolling.

---

This is a very straightforward problem. That is, the probabilities are the same as those encountered in compositional strategy. For example, given your three cards (two initial cards plus the double down card) and the dealer's upcard (and I suppose the other players' cards if that information is available), you would decide whether to take a 2nd double down card (on a glitched machine) using the exact same criteria you would use under the scenario where you have not doubled down.

Working Example on a hypothetical glitched machine:
1. You are dealt a 6 and 5 with the dealer's upcard being a 10 and you decide to double down since it is +EV to do so (Hi-Lo neutral count).
2. You get a 2
3. So (with double the money in action) now you have a 6,5, and 2 versus the dealer 10 and you would hit. The explanation for this is already described above but is clarified in points 4. and 5. below.
4. If you walked up to a BJ table, started playing, and then received a 2 and 5 initially versus a 10, then you would take a hit according to basic strategy and not double down (again neutral hi-lo count). Receiving a 6 on your third card, you would then take another card since you would hit on a 13 (2,5,6) versus a dealer 10.
5. The order of reception is different than the double down scenario but the action is the same, you take another card when you have a 6,5, and 2 in your hand versus a dealer 10. You are making things worse on yourself (i.e. losing even more in this already -EV spot) if you do not do this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

You have a 10 vs dealer 8. You double down and draw a 3. Your double down is now likely a losing hand. But hitting again, you have a chance to improve your hand. You might still bust or draw a 2 or 3 and still lose, but you have the chance to improve your hand and that makes everything +EV.

---

No. It absolutely does not make it +EV for this 10 versus 8 spot. It just reduces the degree to which it is -EV (i.e. you would lose less on average in this 10 vs. 8 spot than if you didn't have the option to take a fourth card).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

No. It absolutely does not make it +EV for this 10 versus 8 spot. It just reduces the degree to which it is -EV (i.e. you would lose less on average in this 10 vs. 8 spot than if you didn't have the option to take a fourth card).

---

And THAT makes the ability to take that 4th card +EV vs not having the ability to take a 4th card and being stuck with your 13 vs dealer 8.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

No. It absolutely does not make it +EV for this 10 versus 8 spot. It just reduces the degree to which it is -EV (i.e. you would lose less on average in this 10 vs. 8 spot than if you didn't have the option to take a fourth card).

---

And THAT makes the ability to take that 4th card +EV vs not having the ability to take a 4th card and being stuck with your 13 vs dealer 8.

---

I just wrote that. There was no "versus" in your original statement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MDawg

Looks like something, someone said, put MCrimm on


But, to his credit, he eventually calms down and goes back to coherent posts.

But with UNKewlJ, it's always that way! He's never other than vacillating between depression and mania, spurting nonsense, trying desperately to establish some

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accountinquestion

street creds.

---

---

You are on here trolling everyday. I throw one little troll post at you and you think I'm the asshole? C'mon, doggie. So tell us the truth. Did you take a whiff of that rolex when you got it back?

---

No I did not, I like my pussy fresh not aged. No telling how long that thing was in there.