I know my deuces aren’t exactly gorgeous… but they fly when they need to.
Excuse the sounds of the cards hitting the microphone. I didn’t think muting would be right since its a false deal and sound is important.
Cool beans.
Filed under: Shuffle Work
Just a sort of… update.
Brief video showing a top standard top stock retention gleamed from various sources. Supposed to mimic a standard dextrous shuffler (although not strictly casino procedure – no weeding.)
Regards…
Filed under: Shuffle Work | Tags: cheating, gambling, hold'em, idea, poker, protection, texas
OK this idea relies on bad poker players, or call-machines as they are sometimes referred to. The type of players who will play ace-rag far too strongly.
This isn’t a surefire method, but it SHOULD work more often than it fails. If it DOES fail, sometimes you’ll be able to bow out of the hand and watch some fireworks.
Its relatively move-heavy, but not entirely ridiculous.
Its your deal. Fantastic. Cull 3 aces. Or 4. 4 would be great, but its unnecessary work. If you happen to be able to, then this works even better.
Either way, get your 3 aces on top. Keep them there in any way you wish. Now when you deal, the first three players will receive (hopefully) ace-rag. If they get AK, AQ or AJ etc then you aren’t screwed. But you might be. Chortle.
Now you rely on lady luck to give you a relatively playable hand such as 10J, JQ, KQ, etc. Now if you can, you can peek the flop or something, or the top card and deal a second or something which can help you on the luck thing.
At any rate, I’m babbling. The basic idea here is that it is very unlikely that any of the 3 people with ace-rag will hit their ace; impossible if you managed 4 aces instead of 3. Bad players, however, will play their hand and call your raises simply because they hold an ace. But they’re dead to a pair. So get a raise in preflop and you SHOULD get 3 callers.
Now if you hit a pair, it is likely you will have the best hand because none of the suckers will hit their ace. If they hit their rag then they are in more trouble because that ace will keep them fishing with their single crappy pair.
You don’t want much aggressive betting, but you do need to keep putting money in the pot. You’ll get more callers than you deserve and you SHOULD win the hand with a pair or queens or something. The reason why the win will be good is because you can count on getting lots more callers than you usually would, so your small bets get paid off massively. Lots of small amounts add up quite quickly.
It seemed a pretty subtle method for building a stack, and so I thought I’d post it.
Of course, there ARE pitfalls. But as long as you UNDERSTAND that, it shouldn’t be a massive problem. If someone who you know to have an ace is betting out pre-flop, you can assume he’s got a nice kicker attached and you may just want to fold. If an ace does indeed hit the flop, just fold and watch all 3 players defend their pair of aces. If the board pairs, there’s a chance someone has trip rags, so fold. If you don’t hit a pair, folding could be wise. If 2,3,4,5 hits the board, just make sure you have a 6.
The beauty of this is that you don’t put much in the pot for the possibility of a large gain, so folding isn’t too painful. Nor is losing for the suckers.
That way, it won’t bring much heat, if any.
Clever, ey?
Perhaps partially.
Don’t cheat, guys and gals, just educate yourself.
–Arthur–
OK more Hold’em. I’m sorry. I play hold’em. That’s all I play. Little bit of Omaha – but the cheating still applies in similar ways.
Its fairly well known that knowing the position of one card in the deck gives a 2% advantage. I’ve been exploring the ways of gaining that teeny edge just incase one day it saves me.
Easiest way of course is to peek the bottom card using one of many methods in Erdnase. If you aren’t shuffling then you can still often attain this advantage by watching a shuffle.
This is all rather dull though. Why not challenge yourself with a bit of shuffle tracking? When you fold your Ace-Junk hand, watch where the ace goes on the deck. Somewhere near the bottom usually. Now if the dealer now shuffles the cards in the riffley way (the riffliest of ways) then its RELATIVELY easy to keep track ROUGHLY of where the card is in the deck. Watch as the cards are dealt – does it look like it could be one of your opponents hole cards? It might be a little lower and hit the flop, turn or river. In which case, if your holding out for an ace, you might want to hang on a little longer. Or if your pocket kings look the best, betting anyone holding out for an ace out of the game before it hits the board seems a good idea as well.
Its all so easy and so helpful. Do that, and peek the bottom card. 4% advantage?!?!? Un-bloody-stoppable, my friends.
I know a well known Steve is very adept at shuffle tracking – although its more commonly used at blackjack tables. Who cares? There are no rules with deception.
–Arthur–
Filed under: Shuffle Work | Tags: easy, flush, hand, hold'em, texas, winning
A lot of my time messing around with cheating at hold’em goes into ideas for EASY to cull hands that are guaranteed winners. Also easy stacking is always ideal.
Naturally, thats difficult to achieve but recently I’ve been using this little ruse which works about 1/3 of the time (what with being an automatic flush draw). But unlike a normal flush draw, you will know if you have hit your flush by the flop.
It needs to be 4 handed hold’em. On the discards cull 4 of the same suit. You ideally need the ace of king of this suit to be one of the top 2 cards of the slug – but it doesn’t really matter (just makes sure you have the nut flush). Get the slug on top of the deck. Easy enough.
Now do 2 perfect in-faros. And deal.
You will receive 2 in the pocket, and (remembering to burn cards) the 3rd card of the flop will be the 3rd of your slug. The fourth will hit the river. This means that if either the 1st or 2nd card of the flop is of the same suit as your slug, you have hit a flush.
Bet accordingly.
Of course it would be strange to bet loads on a flush draw. So play it accordingly and hopefully you will get some callers.
–Arthur–
PS don’t cheat and all that.
Vernon’s “Revelations”, and “Revelation” (the new printing which I urge you all to get several copies of,) has an explanation of Dad Stevens’ cull, which famously brought tears to Vernon’s eyes.
There is a lot of debate around whether the explanation given by Vernon is actually what Stevens did. I shan’t go into the logistics of that argument, although the problem of deck burning and whatnot certainly seems very real and the relative inability to catch 3 cards cleanly without stuttering. A very interesting thread can be read on the subject here. I do believe the explanation given about the cull being used in the game of Faro to be highly plausible.
I can not, however, believe that the cull is completely useless at the poker table. Whilst I wouldn’t dream of culling (and then stacking) a full house, flush or quads from scratch, used in conjunction with the pick-up, I can see its uses.
Consider this. In slow company, looking at your hands when you shuffle is not strange. So, as long as you can do the cull and stack smoothly, you’re made. You are in a 5 handed game of Hold’em. On the pickup, you need to get a pair on the top of the deck. Ideally this should be comprised of the previous burn cards so their reappearance in the next round flies unnoticed. After the pick-up, imagine you have two knaves on top. In the FIRST shuffle, you search for another knave to make your pair a set. Whether you catch it or not, shuffle 4 cards on top of the Js, and either 1, 2, 3, 5 or 7 in between them (the lower the better.) Now either cull the 3rd J on top of the deck, or shuffle again in search of a one. Once the 3rd knave is atop the deck, Zarrow stack or riffle stack carefully or simply cut 4 cards on top the slug.
Then beat the cut, of course.
When you deal, you will receive pocket Js and then hit the flop, turn or river depending on how many you put in between the Js.
If you miss the cull, just shuffle 5 cards on top and be happy with a pair I guess.
This means you are only culling one card, not all 3 as is suggested by Vernon.
Whether or not it would work at the table, I do not know for sure. But its a fun procedure to practice.
–Arthur–
Filed under: Shuffle Work | Tags: advantage, best, erdnase, glimpse, peek, shuffle, stack
It seems fitting that the first post of pasteboard-thought should fall to Erdnase. I, like many more experienced people, believe this to be the best book ever on card artifice.
Rather than simply blowing sunshine up Andrews’ arse, I’ll share my thoughts on the best item in the book. Whilst the bottom deal is fantastic and the methods for retaining stocks at top and bottom during the riffle are indispensable, one other item seems more adept at “getting the money”
To ascertain the Top Cards While Riffling and Reserve Them at Bottom
It seems so simple and yet it is so deadly. The drawing and explanation Erdnase uses is somewhat strange and unclear. I was preparing to write a little on correct execution of the sleight (which is still worked out from the Erdnase text, just with a bit of thought) until I discovered Jeff Wessmiller got there first. Well, probably not the first ever obviously, but still. I advise all to click here and digest his thoughts like a fine meal.
I can assure you that in a game situation, this works. You can do it with more than one card. Hypothetically, you are in a 4 handed game of Texas Hold’em.
Using Erdnase’s method you can sight the top 3 cards and note the values (suits if you can be bothered), then again you shuffle and sight the top 3 cards (whilst holding back 4). You then have 6 values, all of which denote to a card in your (very simply) stacked deck.
For example, if you noted 4,6,K,A,2,2 you know that the player to the right of you has 4,A in the hole. The player opposite has 6,2 and the player to the right has K,2. It is like playing with the cards face up.
It is an easy ruse, but should be thoroughly practiced and used in conjunction of blind shuffles, and whatever method you wish of beating the cut. Vernon mentions in Revelation that an “able card enthusiast in Detroit recently wrote us that he considered it one of the best things in the book.” I could not agree more.
-Arthur–
