I just purchased a book by Gregory Mannarino/ copyright 2003 titled (Gregorian Strategy for Multiple Deck Blackjack) Lyle Stuart Kensington Publishing Corp. (www.kensingtonbooks.com.) Has anyone read this book yet and if so would you please comment on it? This seems to be some pretty earth shaking stuff for blackjack. (or perhaps just some very talented litterary persuasion) Seriously, Mr. Mannarino's (system) seems to have some pretty substantial mathematical analysis behind it. Any input on this book would be appreciated. Thanks, Jon
On GREGORIAN: What's his approach and how does the earthshaking part differ from benchmark blackjack literature? I'm always curious, but there are a lot of "different" blackjack philosophies out there.
hi, new to this site. I have read Mannarino's book and i agree that he poses some interesting questions. However, my opinion is that its a scam... his math is a bit suspect. His basic thory is that old basic strategy is only accurate for single deck games, and he poses a new "gregorian strategy" for multiple deck games. Most notably you would hit 12 against dealers up card of 4 or 5 (as oppsed to just 2 or 3 as in basic strategy)... similarly u would hit a 13 against a dealer 4. also there are some variations in splitting and doubling (no split aces against a ten... because he says the fact that you will only recieve one card on aces screws you).
i have condensed the gregorian strategy into a card and used in a six deck game (everyone at the table, including the dealer was going nuts which made it fun) and i won about $300 betting $10 per hand over 5 hours. i would be happy to post the entire strategy if anyhone wants.
the main problem i saw with his mathmatics was that he only considers the likelyhood of the dealer's cards and doesnt consider what your chances of busting in specified situation would be. For example he says that teh dealer will make a pat hand x% when showing a six up. then he asks, what will happen if you stand on your 12... you will ose X% of the time..... but he does not provide the %of time you would bust with your 12 and combine it with the dealer to get total probability. also i suck at math so i basically just giving my uneducated guesses here.
My appologies for not replying sooner. Bug, I'll answer your question first as you were the first to respond. I couldn't discuss math much with you because I don"t have a very strong math background. Grifter, the author does addresss counting in the later part of his book and is a counter. He doesn't see any reason to change the bet unless the count goes up (which I take exception to as I am a progression bettor.) But the main course is his change of the basic strategy to conform to multiple deck games as opposed to single and double deck games. Renzy I guess the earth shaking part would be his boast of a full one percent advantage over the house when played against the multiple deck games with common Las Vegas strip and Atlantic City rules. (Dealer stands on soft 17, double after split, double on any two cards, no resplitting of aces, split aces only draw one card, and surrender.) He says that after five thousand hands using the new Gregorian Strategy (and he admits that five thousand hands may sound like a lot but isn't over the long run) that he showed a one percent advantage over the house. He ran off another ten thousand hands and was still showing a full one percent advantage. He played thousands of hands against the computer with the same outcome. Played against a card recirculating machine still showing a distinct advantage. The author claims the Gregorian Strategy "took three years of research and development, two years of theory, and one year of proving that the theory works. I am skeptical of Mr. Mannarino"s system myself. I'd love to think that it works but, as you say, there are a lot of different blackjack philosophies out there. That is exactly why I put it on the forum to see if anyone could put any holes in it. I don't have the time, mathematical background, nor the computer program that could run a test of tens or even hundreds of thousands of hands to prove or disprove his theory but I'd sure like to know. Drew brought up a good point. The author fails to provide the percent of the time that you would bust by hitting the 2,3,4,5. On the other hand he admits that he walked out of the casino up $300 on a $10 table. As far as it being a scam I doubt it. (Unless the casino wrote the book and wants us all to play like this.) Bill, I would recommend reading it, my philosophy being, if I can pick even one smal thing that works out of any book that I read, in this game, it's paid for itself. Thank you for your interest in this guys. Jon
the author talks about surrender, then touts a flat 1% advantage. does that 1% advantage only appear when surrender is an option? or is that for shoe games that dont offer surrender (like 95% of them)? as i understand, just having surrender as an option gives you almost a 1/2% bump.
The basic idea for such authors is "I have a _different_ basic strategy. It is better. It will win you more money. Obviously others don't want you to know this because they continue to publish the original "single-deck BS (even though there are DD and shoe BS cards around of course)" so that you won't discover these much more accurate BS plays.