The rarest of the rare would have to be the 5-card 21 in a single deck game – hold on, not done – where all 5’s make an appearance. The first thing I know I’d do is probably kick myself for not getting it during a poker hand, but after that I’d collect my winnings (hopefully) and just move along to the next hand.

But think about it, not only is it incredibly rare to see four of a kind in a single-deck hand, but the conditions to even get to that point would have to be a perfect storm.

From the player’s perspective, you’d have to start out with 5, 5. Since you’d always hit that hand, the next card would half to be the third 5. With a hand of 15, you’re going to hit against any dealer card 7 or high. However, backing up one step, the dealer would have to have a 10 or an Ace or it’s a likely assumption the player would just double down on the 10. So let’s say the dealer has a 10. The player hits again, catches the ace (for a hand of 16) then hits one final time, catches the 5 and wins the hand with 21.

Even under those conditions, a player with 16 isn’t ALWAYS going to hit. That’s just the way it is. So taking all that into account, I read that someone figured it would take one player 24 years of average playing to see this occur. Which may be true, but I’m sure it’s happening once a week or once a month somewhere in the world.

See, once you start thinking about this, it’s fun to go back and talk war stories of all the weird hands (win or lose) that you or the dealer had during a session. Seeing things happen the same over and over in single or double-deck games is another eyebrow-raiser. Hell, anytime I see the dealer get the same value hand twice in a row (usually it’s blackjack since you’re seeing the second card), it makes me shake my head in disbelief. Deep down, you know the game isn’t rigged, but it makes you remember the hands, that’s for sure.

To that point, I can remember a dealer’s 6-card 21 that put me out of the game one night more vividly than I can remember my multiple winning sessions during that same year of hundreds of dollars each or more.

One of the major ways counters try to do this is by making it appear they’re losing much more than they actually are, or winning much less. This is also known as creating “paper losses.” It’s one of the more difficult things to accomplish, since it can be assumed someone working for the casino, somewhere, is watching everything all the time.

That said, the first option would be trying to palm chips when clearing after a winning hand. By removing these chips from the field of vision, the theory is that it’ll be generally assumed the pit crew won’t notice them as part of your winnings. This is a flawed approach, and not only will it probably never work, but is likely to backfire by creating more suspicions and assumptions.

Know this, the casino accounts for every large and medium-sized chip that’s put in play, and they count them per table on a regular basis. So when some of them turn up “missing,” it brings heat from the pit crew. Furthermore, if they get it in their heads that you’re the one with the missing chip, they’ll automatically account for it as part of your chip count, as well as assume it’s in your pocket. In the end, you draw enormous amounts of unnecessary attention to yourself. Not to mention the eye in the sky is going to notice you doing this to begin with on most occasions.

The smarter way to approach this isn’t to minimize the appearance of your winnings, but to maximize the appearance of your losses. How? After a significant down streak, and when the count is against you, cash out. If you’re a regular player, the pit crew will record your loss. At this point, my recommendation is you leave the casino for the day, not for an hour or so. The recorded loss remains on your permanent record. It also couldn’t hurt to ask to be “closed out.” That way you know it’s being recorded. If you just take a half hour break, though, and come play at another table, your loss won’t have mattered as far as the “books” are concerned.

To get right to the heart of it, technically speaking, a CSM (continuous shuffling machine) offers a slightly better situation for the blackjack player oddswise. It lowers the house advantage – a tad – and thus introduces the real debate.

We’re talking a fraction so small that to most players who don’t grind out session after session, the difference is negligible. However, you’re playing more hands with CSMs, and therefore, in theory, are actually losing more money. You’re losing you’re money more quickly, and in the end, the advantage still rests squarely with the house, so the expectation is that over the long run, unless you hit an incredible run of cards, you will lose regardless.

Now, I know some regular blackjack regulars, and many of them do prefer the CSM. They feel it provides for a more predictable mathematical probability, that it appears to even out the game, so to speak. What this means is they CSM offers true random distribution as opposed to a shoe, and goes a long way to eliminating some of the big runs of hot or cold cards a traditional shoe game can establish. This could be because they CSM is constantly feeding cards back at you, and has a full six (or eight, etc…) decks at the same time. This can balance typical player strategy, because you’re not adjusting to a gut feeling on the whim of the current state of a shoe.

Although, with a shoe, you get the knowledge of playing more against a “person” than a straight machine. And while it’s nothing like playing online, you never really, really know what’s going on in that machine behind closed doors.

My preference? Definitely a shoe, as I will try to hone my card counting game, and a CSM virtually eliminates that angle. And while I’m not heavily involved in shuffle tracking, obviously those players that do implement that strategy are avoiding a CSM table, as well. But if your game is straight strategy and nothing more, you might find the discipline of a CSM somewhat more to your liking, although the differences are likely not noticeable enough to be make or break for you.

Which brings me to the question of the day – how do you handle conversion of the running count to the true count if the fraction doesn’t work to an even number?

First, let’s quickly review. Running count is what the current count of the hand is, while true count is dividing this number over the estimated number of decks remaining in the shoe. So if the running count is 8, and there are an estimated 4 decks remaining in the hand, that makes for a nice, clean true count of +2.

Most expert and regular card-counters will tell you to do the basic math in your hand, and then just round up or down. If it’s at .5 or higher, you round up. Then, keep in mind where the actual true count number is on close plays and make a judgment call accordingly.

Some players do their math in reverse, meaning they’ve trained their minds to count how many decks have been used, and arrive at the fraction by doing subtraction from the whole. A bit of a roundabout way of doing things, but as in all walks of life, if that’s the process that works best for you, there’s no reason to change – so long as you can keep up with the count changes.

Another related question on this topic has to do with whether you count the cards after the cut but still remaining in the shoe as part of the equation for determining the true count, and the answer to this is a resounding “yes.” The cards exist, and even though they won’t be part of this particular hand, you definitely use them in your calculations.

This is a great question that has bearing on every card counter from beginning up through expert. You have to be able to train yourself to handle quick changes in numbers, and practicing messy division is all part of the game. It’ll pay off when you’re sitting at the table trying to work out a running count of 11 over 3.5 remaining decks. Go ahead, I’ll wait.

The rule I’ve noticed lately is a casino that actually pays the player 50% of the bet if both the player and the dealer hit blackjack, which is a major change from a standard “push” situation at most tables, and it certainly alters the player advantage. While you might not think something as insignificant as one rule could have that much of an impact, I would beg to differ.

Right away, having this option eliminates the need to take even money – ever. In fact, I didn’t research it, but I’d be surprised if the game even offered even money. It also allows the player to take profit from tying a 10-value card blackjack. Both of these are player advantages that might seem like a dream, and they’re significant adjustments to the rule set that alters the house odds enough to pay attention.

On the general estimate that blackjack occurs in the game about 4.76 percent of the time, the odds calculators out there might put the overall player advantage of this at 0.1 percent. One small percentage for man, but one giant advantage boost for blackjack player-kind.

See, these are the rules you have to seek out and find a way to take advantage of as a player. I know it’s difficult when the physical casino is nowhere near you, but every once in a while you’ll get lucky, and if you’re a regular player grinding out sessions to make money over the long haul, these are the angles you have to play to get ahead of the casino. Card counting, of course, when you can get away with it is the best equalizer a player can bring to the table, but when the rules shift to the player’s favor, even if you’re not counting, the benefit can be extreme enough to make or break the game for you.

In some blackjack circles, it’s almost like clockwork that the observant player will change tables when the shifts change, so as not to allow the dealers to pass along any information to the next guy about how you play. And while I can see the justified paranoia behind this method of thinking (believe me, I do) it’s ultimately ridiculous and counterproductive.

Here’s why. First, what information are the dealers going to pass that the eye in the sky isn’t already aware of? If you’re being watched, you’re being watched. The dealer won’t be able to spot how you’re playing, counting or cheating any different from the cameras. And what other information is the dealer actually going to pass along? That you’re a good tipper? So, maybe the next dealer won’t…spit in your cards? Yes, that’s ridiculous, so you’re starting to get my point here.

Second, if you’re getting up every time there’s a shift change, don’t you think that in and of itself is drawing attention to you as a potential card counter? Nothing spells suspicious like routine behavior. That might sound backward to some, but you all know it’s true.

Third, this isn’t the 70’s. There’s electronics to track much of what you’re doing at the table even if you get up and come back after a shift change. Your “information” (i.e. betting patterns, time played, amounts wagered) is all accessible to them anytime they want to look. It’s much harder to hide this from the casino these days if the casino is determined to keep tabs on you as a player.

Now, if we’re talking about getting up, stretching your legs, getting a drink and damaging your elbow pulling a few hundred slot spins just to mix things up, hey, that’s what you’re there for, right? A little R&R? Oh, you’re not? Then you must be trying to make it look like you are while justifying your actions with one of the above reasons, in which case you’re wasting your time, fella.

First, you can’t expect the dealer to want to help you. Yeah, the casino probably lets the dealers offer “advice” up to what the strategy cards will tell you as a method of leeway to help them get more tips, but any further than that, the dealer isn’t your friend, brother. And even if he were, if the guy really knew so much about blackjack, what’s he doing at that side of the table? I’m sorry, but if I’m there to make money, I’ve studied and am totally prepared, and I’m not going to turn over my decision-making process to the guy flipping me the cards.

That’s not to say that some dealers don’t know what they’re talking about, but as a general rule you have to smile politely and do what you think is right on each hand. Of course, that brings me to a pet peeve about the players’ interaction with dealers. If they solicit the advice, it’s not the dealer’s fault if they take it and lose. That’s like asking a tourist in Europe for directions and then getting mad at him when you get lost. Not his fault, it’s yours.

Also, can we please stop tipping these guys? Not in all scenarios, as I understand like waiters they make a good amount on the tips alone, but for offering bad advice, it has to stop. We’re rewarding incorrect information with money. These players don’t know better, and that makes observing the situation even worse. We’re reinforcing the practice of giving less than perfect advice (even money on a 3:2 game? yeah, I’ve heard it recommended). We’re enablers, people. Get your act together.

I rarely tip at the blackjack table anymore. I’m not stingy, I just like to reward good service, and it’s hard to come by. I can actually see why many folks have turned solely to the Internet for all their blackjack and general gambling needs. And many of them trust the “virtual” dealer (i.e. Google) for information all the same. The difference is, if the Internet is wrong, you still don’t have the urge to tip it.

Something tells me Google ain’t the kind of search engine that tips out to Yahoo and Bing at the end of the night, either, if you know what I mean.

Especially if the dealer shows a 10 value card, eights creates the worst scenario for an uncertain player, even one who know what he or she should be doing. Our first instinct, of course, is to split. Even before you see what the dealer has, you’re holding yourself back from reaching for your chip stack to split the hand. The current value of 16 against a 7 or higher forces you into one of 2 decisions, really. You’re either splitting or hitting. Anything under a 7 and you’re either standing or splitting.

But is there a third option against a 10? What about the surrender? This afford you the opportunity to halve your losses, keeping in mind you’re going to be the underdog on both hands even if you do split them. So what’s a player to do?

Assuming we’re not counting (otherwise the true count plays a role in what you should do), surrender is the correct move if you have the option. Since some casinos don’t offer this on all their games (find out before you sit down), my choice in this situation is to split. Many will disagree with me and call for a stand, even against the 10 or a 9, but I disagree. Although, I admit the pitfall of splitting your hand more than once with the strongest current value you’re going on is an 8, it’s very realistic to think you’ll end up dumping 4 hands to the dealer’s 20 in the blink of an eye. Which is exactly why I hate the 8’s.

Turn it around, though, and face a dealer’s 7 or lower, and splitting the 8’s is the correct move. Still, it’s a slipperly slope there, as one can easily find themselves with 2 hands valued lower than your starting 16 and with fewer options after the split. You’re be in twice as deep with your back against the wall. Granted, it’s just one hand, but you want to play every hand as if your entire bank account were riding on it. Otherwise, if you’re there to make money, what’s the point in playing?

Here’s the story, you’re at a casino, playing blackjack (any rules, doesn’t matter) with a dealer you know and have sat with before. You keep going back to that dealer because he or she is efficient. You’ve been playing long enough that your own decisions are nearly instantaneous, so it’s a match made in casino heaven. You can play fast enough in heads up to get through almost a dozen hands every minute – playing a couple hands at once. You’re not counting, you’re not loud or causing a disturbance, you’re just doing your thing.

But the pit bosses don’t like it. Why? The surveillance is having trouble keeping up with your pace. They phone in and instruct the dealer to slow down, to keep the cards face up longer before scooping them, too, to help them out a little. I rarely laugh from a casino story but this one got me.

Not only because the casino was playing catch-up, but because they had to basically let a player know he was being watched, which isn’t something they prefer to do. That gives the player, even if he isn’t counting, fair warning to probably cash in and move on. If you’re under the eye in the sky, it’s not a welcome environment in which to play.

Here’s an idea for that player, offer your services to the casino to train them to pick up their pace, since they obviously need the help. It’ll be just like a retired hacker going to work for the government. Lol.

To start out, let’s get something clear. Players themselves do not cut cards out of play. A player will make his or her cut, but then the dealer always takes the yellow card and cuts the end of the shoe out of play. Where he or she makes THAT cut is what establishes the penetration percentage. And this can range from half the deck or less to more than half the entire shoe, all depending on the dealer and the casino.

If a dealer yellow card’s the shoe two decks from the back of an eight-deck shoe, you’ve established a 75% penetration, because 25% of the cards are taken out of the equation. Six decks remain, and those are the cards in play for the coming hands. This cut is always made at the end of the shoe, not the beginning. That doesn’t really matter, but just as a point of clarification.

The penetration is of general concern only to card counters and shuffle trackers, the former being much more common. The fewer cards there are in a deck, the greater advantage the card counter has against the casino. It’s specifically for this reason, too, that you’ve started to see continuous shufflers being introduced with more regularity into casino play.

But if you’re just learning how to count, and you’re at home practicing for hours and hours at a time, getting your rhythm and your confidence, so you can walk into a casino and flow through the game while looking like you’re just a regular player, the last thing you really need to worry about this step is what the penetration is. There’ll be a time down the road to play closer attention to that.