SHUFFLE TECH News (3 Viewers)

[tabletalker7]

Do you think using stiffer decks that are already broken in beforehand might help with the unit not jamming? What about bridge decks?

My Fournier sets are the broken in stiffer deck and honestly I think it is card weight that matters not whether or not they are broken in. As far as bridge cards, the manufacturer warns you that bridge cards will jam more frequently. I don't have any to test it with (I always preferred the wider cards myself) but seeing how exactly the machine works, I would not expect bridge size cards to work all that well with it.

 

[Goldfish]

Seems I have struck a nerve. I am not opposed to a shuffler. It is a great tool for sure, assuming u get a good one. All I am saying is a dedicated dealer shuffles plus does much more - he/she, among other things, manages and moves the game along, keeps players on task as well as manages the pots. The dealer is objective, having no stake in the outcome of the hand, and takes care of everything so the players do not have any responsibility except to play their cards. plus, half the guys that play in my area are drunk 1 hour into the game so they can’t be depended on to shuffle or deal anyway, nor would anyone want them too. The dealers i play with are machines And are really good. They don’t eat or drink. They just deal. everyone else can just relax, drink, eat and play poker. Well worth the cost which is typically borne by the winners.

 

[tabletalker7]

Seems I have struck a nerve. I am not opposed to a shuffler. It is a great tool for sure, assuming u get a good one. All I am saying is a dedicated dealer shuffles plus does much more - he/she, among other things, manages and moves the game along, keeps players on task as well as manages the pots. The dealer is objective, having no stake in the outcome of the hand, and takes care of everything so the players do not have any responsibility except to play their cards. plus, half the guys that play in my area are drunk 1 hour into the game so they can’t be depended on to shuffle or deal anyway, nor would anyone want them too. The dealers i play with are machines And are really good. They don’t eat or drink. They just deal. everyone else can just relax, drink, eat and play poker. Well worth the cost which is typically borne by the winners.

You didn't strike a nerve, you just have a different point behind your games than I do behind mine. A dedicated dealer ..... not for us. We need our self inflicted stupidity.

 

[BGinGA]

Moving our group to using dedicated dealers (years ago) was the best decision I ever made as a TD. The players are free to enjoy the game itself without the hassle (and sometimes chaos) of self-dealt games. Even our players who can competently deal dislike other local games where they are forced to do it.

 

[Dix]

Seems I have struck a nerve.

No, you struck math, physics & time. Or, more correctly stuck out, on all counts.

Your original point was....

One of the hosts in my area has a casino grade shuffler. The better dealers don’t use it. They go much faster without it.

From a hands/hr angle, it's simply not possible to have a game (or a dealer) be faster (more hands/hr) if you're hand shuffling between hands.

And, while you may consider the ones that don't use it "better", if tips are involved, they're certainly not smarter. If they're getting tipped at the table they should take any opportunity to deal more hands per hour... if they're smart. More hands/hr = more tipping opportunities.

Hand shuffling between hands drops your hands/hr rate by at least 5-10 hands/hr, or more. & you need some of the fastest shuffling dealers on the planet to get close to losing only 5.

Even as a player, given the choice of a table with a shuffler or one without, I'll take the the one with it every time. A dedicated dealer to go with it isn't a bad thing, it's just that the shuffler has a deck ready to go once the hand in play is over. I like more hands/hr too.

At a cash table, more hands/hr equals higher BB/hr earning rate. In a tourney, more hands/hr increases the skill factor of it.

The other option for player dealt games is using two decks per table.

 

[BGinGA]

The other option for player dealt games is using two decks per table.

That's an option for dedicated dealer games, too, essentially making them as fast or faster than self-dealt games or games that use automatic shufflers.

Fwiw, every host I know who had a shuffler installed in their table has since removed it....including several members here on PCF.

Some people like 'em, some people don't.

 

[Dix]

However you want to do it, I'm good with it. Just get rid of that having to wait for the shuffling process between hands.

& don't insult my common sense & the laws of physics & time by trying to tell me you can increase the hands/hr rate AND hand shuffle between hands.

Which defies all logic no matter what the angle.

(while I have your attention, I'm working on DB2.0 as we speak)

 

[WedgeRock]

If we're talking maximum hands per hour, those electronic tables win...

 

[boltonguy]

We use two decks but people forget to shuffle, can’t shuffle, do a poor job. I pretty much end up volunteering to shuffle any time I’m not in a hand. It’s a pain in the rear and slows the game down. I’ve been reading all these shuffletech threads over and over again trying to convince myself to buy one. I could definitely see how having a dedicated dealer would be even better than a shuffler as they would also keep the action moving. A combination of both would be a dream.

 

[BGinGA]

If we're talking maximum hands per hour, those electronic tables win...

Unfortunately, I could not both laugh at and hate this message.

Laugh won.

 

[BGinGA]

don't insult my common sense & the laws of physics & time by trying to tell me you can increase the hands/hr rate AND hand shuffle between hands.

Which defies all logic no matter what the angle.

Dunno about ~increasing~ the hands/hour, but I've seen some pretty damn quick dealers who once they've collected the cards, can perform a riffle-riffle-strip-riffle in about the same amount of time it would take to push buttons and swap out decks in a table-mounted shuffler (pending model and location) -- and certainly much faster than I could type out that action on my cell phone this fine May morning.

I would, however, argue that a dedicated dealer with a manual shuffling assistant is faster than a dedicated dealer using an automatic shuffler. He doesn't need to first collect and organize the cards, press any buttons, or wait for any mechanical doors to open -- he simply releases the previous stub, picks up the new already-shuffled deck sitting right by him on the felt, cuts, and starts dealing. It cannot be physically done any faster than that, within the rules and/or proper procedures.

 

[Dix]

If we're talking maximum hands per hour, those electronic tables win...

Unfortunately, I could not both laugh at and hate this message.

Laugh won.

DITTO!!!

Although, I'll definitely concede that online poker wins the hands/hr fight. (my bank account prior to Black Friday would also agree)

Dunno about ~increasing~ the hands/hour, but I've seen some pretty damn quick dealers who once they've collected the cards, can perform a riffle-riffle-strip-riffle in about the same amount of time it would take to push buttons and swap out decks in a table-mounted shuffler (pending model and location)

I'll take that bet.... Dollars, doughnuts, you pick the stakes....

Standard usual & customary circumstances. No dealer assistants, one dealer per table. One table without a shuffler, the other with a shuffler & two decks.

Both are awarding the pot & collecting the cards after each hand. Dealer without the shuffler has to perform a minimum of three riffles & a strip (std casino shuffle).

I'll win that one every time. Unloading & loading that shuffler takes about 5 seconds tops... ain't no human that fast at the casino shuffle on this planet.

 

[WedgeRock]

My gawd! Live poker needs to return!

We've devolved into arguing and wagering on whether a machine or a human can shuffle faster!

 

[Dix]

My gawd! Live poker needs to return!

We've devolved into arguing and wagering on whether a machine or a human can shuffle faster!

We call that Cabin Fever in these parts.

 

[BGinGA]

My gawd! Live poker needs to return!

We've devolved into arguing and wagering on whether a machine or a human can shuffle faster!

It's actually worse than that (humans crush machines on straight-out shuffling time, no brainer there).

We're actually arguing/wagering whether or not a human can shuffle faster than he can manipulate the controls on an automatic shuffler.

 

[WedgeRock]

With two decks in an automatic shuffler, shuffling one deck while the hand is in progress, there's no doubt that the machine wins.

However, using one deck for each, a human can randomize a deck faster than a machine can be loaded, randomize a deck and be unloaded.

IMO. Now that we have that settled...shuffle behind or shuffle ahead?

 

[Dix]

BTW BG.... (OT)

Database 2.0 is done, just waiting on @Tommy to hit the approval button on it.

Copied everything into a table to get rid of the annoying "code" tag needed for formatting.

<end hijack>

 

[BGinGA]

With two decks in an automatic shuffler, shuffling one deck while the hand is in progress, there's no doubt that the machine wins.

However, using one deck for each, a human can randomize a deck faster than a machine can be loaded, randomize a deck and be unloaded.

IMO. Now that we have that settled...shuffle behind or shuffle ahead?

Well, since you asked.....

Shuffle Behind is the most efficient and least disruptive method, since a) the previous dealer cleans up his own mess, b) most of those cards (deck stub, board cards, and muck pile) are already in his control and within easy reach, and c) the new/current dealer doesn't need to wait for or pitch around the SB (or BB) as they attempt to post their blind while gathering up all of the cards from the previous deal (most of which also have to cross in front of the new dealer, causing even more chaos). The previous dealer shuffles and places the deck to his left, and at the end of the current deal, that dealer takes the shuffled deck (on his right), cuts, and hands it to the new dealer on his left, who immediately begins dealing, beginning with the unobstructed blind position players. Cards always move clockwise.

The only positive aspect of Shuffle Ahead is the extra time the shuffler gets to perform the shuffle, since he's one of the last players to act after the deal is finished. But it's not worth all of the downsides inherent to the method.

 

[namsupak]

Having a dedicated dealer is a must. But also having a machine helps the dealer save his/her hands. I do agree as well that having an electronic shuffler makes the idea of stacking the deck as an even more remote possibility.

 

[T_Chan]

I think that it also depends on how the dealer shuffles the cards. Proper dealer etiquette is to never put down the stub once the cards are dealt. If that's the case, then the dealer would need to shuffle between hands, in which case in most circumstances a shuffler would be faster since the deck would be made and ready.

If the shuffle is being passed to the button, then both should be the same speed.

When I deal as a dedicated dealer, I put down the stub *gasp*. I deal hole cards, put down the stub to give it 3 riffles, overhand, 1 riffle and I will almost always finish before it's time for the flop.

When it gets to 3 handed or heads up, I'm always faster than the shuffler. But, the shuffler is nice to have at those times since the game becomes 80% shuffling.

 

[dimperdoo]

does all this take in to account that you should give the cards a riffle either before or after the shuffler?

 

[Dix]

Why? That's what the shuffler does... standard casino shuffle.... riffle, riffle, strip, riffle... so beyond any personal preference/hangup what's the point of doing an extra one?

Or, if you have a deck that's fresh out of the package, you have the option of 7 riffles & a strip.

 

[dimperdoo]

oh, ok

 

[tabletalker7]

does all this take in to account that you should give the cards a riffle either before or after the shuffler?

All I plan on doing is letting the machine shuffle it, pass the shuffled deck to the person before the button, let them cut the deck, then pass it to the dealer to deal. Let's us keep self dealing while letting the shuffler handle the dirty work.

 

[dimperdoo]

so, i've seen a lot of people who are suspicious of the shuffler. a single riffle (particularly after) nullifies that suspicion

say the shuffler has card recognition. many do. they can sort the deck for you. while the concern is that the shuffler could be programmed to dispense in a certain order, anyone who has waited for one to sort a deck knows that would take a very long time.

also, the shufflers mix according to an algorithm. there's a concern that since it's not truly random, capable people could identify trends & cheat.

 

[tabletalker7]

so, i've seen a lot of people who are suspicious of the shuffler. a single riffle (particularly after) nullifies that suspicion

say the shuffler has card recognition. many do. they can sort the deck for you. while the concern is that the shuffler could be programmed to dispense in a certain order, anyone who has waited for one to sort a deck knows that would take a very long time.

also, the shufflers mix according to an algorithm. there's a concern that since it's not truly random, capable people could identify trends & cheat.

Watch a YouTube video of this thing running. There is no ordering the deck. There is no algorithm. It is too simple a machine for any of that

 

[T_Chan]

Also, in order to take advantage of any algorithm, you would need to know the exact order of the deck, or most of it, as it's going into the machine. A cut after it comes out the machine should be more than enough to produce a random deck. And as mentioned, the machine isn't so precise that it can insert exact number of cards from each side when combining the two halves.

I've heard of some people using the thorough mode every orbit or every hour to ensure the deck is well mixed as well.

 

[Irish]

Also, in order to take advantage of any algorithm, you would need to know the exact order of the deck, or most of it, as it's going into the machine. A cut after it comes out the machine should be more than enough to produce a random deck. And as mentioned, the machine isn't so precise that it can insert exact number of cards from each side when combining the two halves.

I've heard of some people using the thorough mode every orbit or every hour to ensure the deck is well mixed as well.

x1000. Cut the deck and you're good each hand. Wash the deck every orbit or so to alay any "stacking the deck" concerns, if needed. My guys will often request that we hit the 7 "supershuffle" setting if they're on a cooler, lol. The shuffler does its job.

 

[dimperdoo]

i guess these aren't the kind of shuffler i'm thinking about. but yeah @T_Chan that's why i say a riffle beforehand ~an algorithm against a truly randomized deck remains truly random

if you're throwing in a wash, that's more time wasted than a riffle

i take it the one in this video:

is doing a thorough shuffle?

i thought i'd do a riffle, riffle, strip, riffle & "race" it. i do that in 12 seconds. the machine shuffled for a full minute

 

[T_Chan]

I've been wanting to add some videos to my youtube channel. I think this will definately be one of them.