I can't see this surviving a legal challenge. Don't forget that the prime function of gaming regulation is to protect the STATE's interests (which gets a cut of the winnings). A computer which tracks the placement of cards in the undealt decks could be used to favor accomplice players to increase their bets when it is advantageous. Consider the edge you would have if you were alerted to play the table maximum every time an ace was going to be dealt to you. For that matter, if I understand the program, anyone who had access would know exactly what cards were coming to each seat at the table as well as the dealer.
···
-------------- Original message --------------
In video poker (or any other game that is "representative of live
gambling games"), the Nevada statutes specify that "the mathematical
probability of a symbol or other element appearing in a game outcome
must be equal to the mathematical probability of that symbol or
element occurring in the live gambling game."Permitting preferential shuffling in the live game of blackjack
certainly goes against the intent of that statement. If this use of
MindPlay is allowed, consider this: Can a shuffle be arbitrarily
discarded because too many face cards and Aces will be dealt? Back
to VP: What if the video poker games check the density of high cards
in the first ten cards on the top of the deck, and discard the deck
and shuffle again if the ratio is too high.In my mind, it's the same exact thing. And, I can see the argument
made to justify it using the exact statue quoted above, if a MindPlay-
preferential-shuffled game is a legal "live gambling game".Go get 'em Bob N.
Ken Smith http://www.blackjackinfo.comvpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]