Gambling Guide
Ask the Wizard #27
Joe B. from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
When using Visual C++, the seed is evidently always the same. If I give the program the same input, then the output will always be the same after a random simulation. It is my understanding that this is what Microsoft intended, so that experiments could be replicated exactly. Visual J++ is evidently different based on my games, otherwise the same hands would occur in the same order every time.
Postscript: Since this writing I have a slower but much better way of calling random numbers. Click here for more information.
Chris from Seattle, Washington
This lowers the house edge from 3.06% to 1.42%.
Ginny from Seattle, Washington
The probability of 20 different people all having different birthdays (ignoring leap day) is (364/365)*(363/365)*(362/365)*...*(346/365) = 58.8562%. So the probability of at least one birthday match is 41.1438%. Also, 23 is the fewest number of people needed for the probability of a match to be greater than 50%.
John from Baltimore, Maryland
Sometimes in pai gow poker the dealer sets aside a dragon which is offered to each player in turn. This is like playing two hands and is likely what you are observing. However, when playing the dragon hand the rules generally specify that it must be set according to the house way.
Even if the player could use information from 14 cards when setting his hand, I doubt it would help that much, and making proper use of the information would be complicated.
Randy from Toledo, Ohio
In a 6-deck game the probability of a super bonus is 1 in 668382, and in an 8-deck game it is 1 in 549188. The house edge without the super bonus would be 0.03% more either way.
Andrew from Jupiter
A book could be written in response to this question. Please excuse me for only scraping the surface. On page 107 of Uston’s ’Million Dollar Blackjack’ he indicates that following card values for the Uston Advanced Point Count:
Uston Advanced Point Count
| Card | Value |
|---|---|
| 2 | +1 |
| 3 | +2 |
| 4 | +2 |
| 5 | +3 |
| 6 | +2 |
| 7 | +2 |
| 8 | +1 |
| 9 | -1 |
| 10 | -3 |
| ace | counted separately |
It is very true that this is a more powerful system then {-1,0,+1} systems like the Hi Opt I. There are different ways to measure the strength of any given system. My opinion is that the serious player should use the most powerful system that they are comfortable with. It is better to play a level 1 system (like the Hi Opt I) well than to play a level 2 system badly (like the Hi Opt II).
Maryanne S. from Redmond, Washington
My current book is 5.5" x 8.5". Sorry, but I don't plan to publish another one anytime soon.
When walking into one of these "Indian" casinos, I can stand for five minutes, listen to the bells and tunes, and know if it will be a good day. Take 300 slot machines with fixed payouts and listen, given the same number of players should produce the same frequency of sounds. It doesn't. I think all of the new machines are networked and changed based on overall psychological factors of the players.
K Foster from Temecula, California
In general Indian casinos are self-regulated. There is generally a tribal commission that will hear disputes, but ultimately the members of the commission know which side of their bread gets buttered.
Don't assume any kind of minimum return on the slot machines. However, ultimately economics would dictate that a return too low would be sensed by players, who would be unlikely to return if they consistently lost too much money too quickly. It would also be bad business, and time consuming, to loosen and tighten the slots like a yo-yo.
Your sound level hypothesis sounds interesting, I never thought of that.
Steve from Milton, U.S.
The casinos don't actually program the casinos to pay a certain percentage, but determine the weighting of the reels so that the theoretical return is whatever they wish. In the short run, the actual return can be either much higher or lower than the theoretical return. However, the laws of mathematics dictate that the actual return will get closer to the theoretical return the greater the number of trials.
Roger from Baton Rouge, U.S.
Dealing to the bottom of the deck would not help the basic strategy player but greatly benefits the counter. There would be no changes to the basic strategy. However, this game may be of interest to card counters. Vegas World (now the Stratosphere) in Las Vegas used to have such a game but I don't think card counters ever took it seriously because of other adverse rules like a blackjack only paying even money.
