Of course, the non-nefarious reason for this would be to be able to count hands dealt for a more accurate depiction of what is happening in the room. Other software does this by counting a hand as when a chip or chips are dropped in the rake slot, but this is less accurate. Interfacing with the shuffler would allow a more accurate count.

Also, error codes could be passed from the shuffler to the room management software, alerting floor personnel to card jams, incorrect number of cards in deck, loss of power - all without a single card being recognized. And all would make the room more efficient.

But then, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they AREN'T out to get you, right?

I don't believe he's lying. He really does hear those voices in his head, and the tinfoil is not enough to stop the Russians from reading his mind.

superuser*

First of all, there is not always a correlation between Poker Success and being able to think logically. Your reactive post resulting from a biased and ignorant review of the Patent is all the evidence needed for this conclusion.

So you are one of these guys from Event #48?

1.Alexandre Gomes$770,540
2.Marco Johnson$491,273
3.Ryan D'Angelo$326,812
4.Robert Brewer$274,101
5.Alan Cutler$223,497
6.Kirill Gerasimov$177,111
7.Sverre Sundbo$134,942
8.Gabriel Costner$103,315
9.Dan Rome$71,687

Nice job - but you're still not making any sense with the Shufflemaster Conspiracy theory.

Sorry.

Couldn't the card recognition technology be used for less nefarious purposes - like determining if there were two of the same card, for instance?

OP - if you want to show that you're not merely ranting and raving, then explain how the shuffler could possibly take into account the number of people at the table for that particular hand, as that definitely impacts who gets which cards.

Exactly what casinos are you playing in, sir? Most casinos I play in only use time rake on bigger games, where the fear of breaking the game is far less, so your argument doesn't hold water there. Making games non-action extends the length of the hand, meaning less hands per hour. If you're on time rake, the outcome of the hands is COMPLETELY irrelevant. The house is getting their rake no matter what happens.

On smaller limit games, the rake is pot-based and the max is hit far less often. On pot-based rake, the outcome of the hands is far more important, so if the house were trying to make things happen, they would do so by creating MORE action, not LESS, to ensure a higher average drop per hand.

Your argument belies the experience you claim to have. Either your have less experience than you claim, or you have a definite misunderstanding as to how casinos make money in poker.

This is my last post to you, that doesn't even deserve a response, Nothing you said makes any sense whatsoever, non means faster & more hands which doesnt even matter because most all games are time raked now & if they are not will be in the near future

OMG RIGGED!

LOL


Okay folks, if you are interested, I had a thread regarding the Shufflemasster Deckmate some years ago. I will recap here:


A) I have a background in engineering.

B) I am an inventor with patents to my name, and patents pending.

C) I toyed with the idea of making a home version of the deckmate, and I read and thoroughly understand the deckmate patent, and what exactly the deckmate does and does not do.


Having said all of that:


The Shufflemasster Deckmate is a $15,000 device, which I will simplify into three main components:

1) An input tray with rollers for feeding cards to the output tray.

2) An output tray comprising of an "elevator", and a set of card "grippers".

3) An embedded CPU for generating random sequences, and controlling the device.

The device also has sensors to count the number of cards that pass out of the input tray, a display and some illuminated buttons for operation.


WHAT THE DECKMATE DOES NOT HAVE:


The Deckmate DOES NOT have ANY means of determining WHAT value a particular card it. When it moves a card from the input tray to the output tray, it has NO IDEA if that card is a duece of hearts, or an ace of spades, nor any other card.

It only knows that a card has passed through. It only counts the total number of cards, and flashes the red button if the count is not correct for whatever game it is programmed for (hold em for instance is 52 cards, but the deckmate can be programmed for decks with other card quantities.)


OPERATION:

After the dealer places a deck in the input tray, the deckmate creates a pattern by which those cards are to be sorted. It creates this pattern without knowing the initial starting state of the deck. It determines, for instance, that the first card shall become the 17th card, the second card shall become the 9th card, the third card shall become the 42nd card, etc:


1 --> 17
2 --> 09
3 --> 42
4 --> 16
...


Using this example, the first card is sent onto the elevator, then the elevator rises up such that this card is in the rach of the grippers, then the grippers grab this card and hold it.

The elevator lowers, and the next card is sent onto the elevator.

Then the elevator rises to a point where both of these cards are grabbed, then lowers so that the next card (that is to be the 42 card when complete) is pushed onto the elevator.

Then the elevator rises, the gripper releases, and the elevator lowers under CPU control so that the gripper can only grab the TOP most card, as the fourth card is to be placed in between.

Here now the elevator lowers with two lower cards on it, and the top most card being held in the gripper, the fourth card is inserted.


And so it continues - the elevator moving to a position where the upper gripper will grab a certain number of cards, as determined by the CPU, lower the remaining cards, and insert the next card into the deck.


CAVEATS:


1) The pseudorandom generator. the random generating algorythym used by the CPU is "pseudorandom" - however, a true random generator is absolutely NOT needed here, as the deck placed into the input tray is already in a state of chaos. The degree of randomosity in the random number generators here is absolutely NOT important.

2) The only possible deficiency I found was that if the grippers where not holding the cards correctly, that the next card would not be inserted into the correct place in the deck. I noticed that on occasion that a new deck, not scrambled, seemed to come out and present a very coordinated board on the flop. This lead me to the thought that if the grippers were not doing their job, that the deck was only reverse sorted, at least in part.

However, in the last year, I've not seen this happen very often. I'd consider it only a possibility that if not functioning correctly and not gripping correctly that the input deck could conceivably only be reverse sorted, and not randomly shuffled. And this would only be in the case of a malfunctioning machine.

NOTE ON RANDOMIZING:

It should be noted that it takes a dealer somewhere on the order of 14 riffles to truely randomize a deck. In fact, when shuffling live, it is the dealer's scramble that creates the majority of randomization.

But all that is actually needed is that the cards be put in an order that none of the players at the table can know or predict.

That is the extent that randomization is needed.


HAVING SAID ALL THIS:

There is absolutely NO MERIT to the OP's assertion. Based on comments, he is looking for external reason for his losing play. He need, instead, to look at improving his play.

Might I suggest a membership to Dueces Cracked?



AB

I've never seen the player cut the deck at any casino poker game i've been in.

I don't trust these machines either. i've never really thought about it for poker actually, but definitely don't like playing blackjack where these are used.

Semi-related, I was playing that 'crazy 4 poker' table game at TI a few weekends ago to kill some time and do some degen gambling, and mentioned something jokingly about the shuffle machine being rigged. The dealer corrected me and told me that it wasn't a shuffle machine at all, that that's why they hand shuffle before they put the cards in. He said all the machine did was select the hands and spit them out, and that every hand it deals was chosen. Then he said that if he opened it up and showed us how it worked that none of us would ever play that game again. Not really sure why he told us this, must have been disgruntled with his job or something.

But I don't think that machine knew how many players were in the game. I guess if anything, it could make sure that noone hits any big hands like straight flushes or quads.

With blackjack, it would probably be pretty easy to not rig actual hands, but to make sure that the count never goes too high, etc. Just a few weekends ago I saw some black chippers playing 2 deck BJ at Excalibur who refused to play unless the dealer hand shuffled. Since they were betting blacks (high roller for Excalibur), they accommodated them.

There's obviously card reading technology, (I'm not sure), but isn't that what the little slot the dealer's check their hole cards with are?

</paranoid delusion

Cutting the deck is more about psychology than a real randomization process. It eases peoples mind that the deck isn't rigged while cleaning up only the most basic and obvious attempts at rigging a deck.

If your goal was to manipulate a deck over a large sample with a programmable mechanical shuffler, cutting the deck would only be a minor problem.

Outstanding post.

FALSE.

The DECKMATE (the shuffler used on poker tables) does NOT have the ability to "see" the cards. (Shufflemaster does have a system that can read cards, used on some blackjack tables, but NOT the deckmate).


AB

Alien boy, Your are absolutely correct in the way the original shufflemaster machine was designed, However you are not addressing the fact that these machines are made to work with other options, The patent I have describes machines that are equipped with more sensors & card reading capability, you need to read this. Also, as I mentioned before , ameranth making the software interface for the deckmate, so these machines are continually updated. Also, I'm making more money playing poker than I ever have so I'll take a raincheck on deuces cracked. I've played with almost everyone that plays bigger stakes with exception of a few nosebleeders in bobbies room & I still haven't found anyone that could outplay me

Standard boilerplate for a patent. You list all the "possible" additional and improvements to prevent another party from doing an "improvement invention".

The DECKMATE does NOT have optical card recognition. The shufflemaster systems that use card recognition are substantially more than $15,000.


AB

Gabe -when you watched your WPT final table did you tire of the "prince of thieves" references.

How big of a douche is Men the Master

How bad at poker is Brett Faustmann.

How tall is Freddy Deeb

I have read it several times.

Here is the machine that uses optical recognition:

http://www.shufflemaster.com/02_eu_p...s_mdb/md_2.asp

This system is substantially more expensive than the deckmate (I heard $60,000), and has an accompanying workstation.

The deckmate does not have the optical recognition system.

http://www.shufflemaster.com/02_eu_p.../deck_mate.asp


AB

everything can get rigged and alot of things are that involve big money. i play at a place that doesnt cut the deck bay 101 and the players dont seem to care. players never seemed to care about online thngs that can go wrong. or playing in casinos that everyone knew were shady. ostriches with their head in the sand.
these machins should(must) be made so that players can look into the box and see what is going on. more than just to try to protect from the manufacturer doing wrong. but to protect themselves from someone else altering the machine to do things out of sight that are devastating.
afterall if you are a regular player in a casino or cardroom you could easily loose your whole net worth to being cheated. many have and the players themselves need to let management know what their concerns are or play elsewhere.

Rayzee, thank you for the intelligent post, That is exactly my whole point for this thread

I must be really lucky...or someone is looking out for me...I win live...I win online...I win when hand shuffled...I win when machine shuffled. Great, the powers that be have decided to rig poker in my favor!

Excellent response. "I can't refute your response, so I won't talk to you. Neener, neener, neener"

Your grasp of logic is dizzying. If the game is time raked, the number of hands makes no difference. By your theory, since everyone will be on time rake anyway, the only reason to create non-action hands is to keep players at the table. Most players I know won't stay at a non-action table, as there's no money to be made. So the theory doesn't hold water. Good players would leave the game, not sit and grind a bunch of non-action flops all night.

Weak players will still be busted by better play. Weak players give action when they shouldn't, don't play when they should. You need the action to get their money. If the action isn't there, why play? More importantly, you're more likely to build a list when the game has plenty of action. Good players want a shot at the money on the table.

Pot rake going away? Again, where exactly do you play? Time rake is only beneficial if the game stays full. An average table drops $90-$120 an hour. average time rake is about $6 per half. So, at a 10-handed table, it maxes out at the top end of that range. Drop that table to 7-handed, and you're losing money. 6-handed? Ouch. 7-handed on a pot-raked game still makes the same amount per hour because it's based on the number of hands dealt, not the number of players. Then again, that's based on fact and math, not conjecture and a need to find a bogeyman.

Please. Don't respond.

I see your point, but if you're this concerned with this kind of cheating in live poker, I would think online players who log a lot of time should be absolutely TERRIFIED at the prospects of this kind of maneuvering when it comes to shuffles and deals.

But how does the shufflemaster know how many people are seated and going to be dealt hands?

a more practical solution:

http://www.seenontvproducts.net/auto...FRKAxgod8Q3Mtg

@ 12.95, this is waaaay cheaper than a Shufflemaster [even if you use a lot of batteries]... plus @ 12.95, how the hell is the manufacturer supposed to cost-effectively implement an optical sensor, let alone a microprocessor?

If the Casino wanted to cheat you out of your net worth, there are FAR easier methods, even at the Poker table, than employing a hidden scheme with a third party hardware manufacturer over whom they have absolutely zero control. These guys are vendors LEASING machines to the Casino.

You guys see too many movies.

Casinos lease Shufflemaster's from the company.. kind of like Visa terminals. The monthly lease on a 60k machine will be more but casinos aren't buying them.

OP claims are pretty ridiculous though... dood you went busto on the 2/4 table because of the rake.