Card Sharks strategies

[billmcdee]

During my vacation, I came across some stats online about what card is good to change.

The conclusion was anything from a 5 through a Jack is a card that should be changed if given the opportunity.

6 cards would be an improvement (Ace, King, Queen, 4, 3 and 2) and 2 cards would keep you the same (another 5 or a Jack).  Only 5 cards would make things worse (6, 7 or 8, 9, and 10).

So although it seemed an unpopular decision based on Jim Perry's reactions from time to time, changing a 5 or changing a Jack is more likely than not a good choice to make.


Another strategy I'd like to discuss involves the Eubanks/Rafferty Money Cards.

With one change per line, when is it best to change a card?  To me, the moment you get a bad card, you should change it, because you could win more that way.

If you start with $200 and a 10, and you decide not to change it and bet $100 lower, if right you end up with $300.
But if you change the 10 and get a really great card (Ace, King, Queen, 2, 3 or 4), you'd end up with more.
This is especially true when you get to the second level and the added $400.  Better to try to double $1,000 right away by changing a bad card rather than just bet $50 on a bad card.

[JonBoy]

I agree, if you have a bad card (6 to 10), or at least a questionable card (5 or Jack), change it promptly if you have it at the start of a row in Money Cards. You'could be throwing the baby out with the bathwster if you try to save the change card for later in the row in hopes of a bad card appearing, and you may end up winning less than you want.

Also, regarding freezing during the match, even if you get a very good card (even an ace or a 2) on the third or fourth card, it's a good idea to freeze anyway.  It may seem bizarre, but by not freezing on an ace or a 2, you risk getting a duplicate card and end up going back to square one.

[JonBoy]

I have been viewing the Eubanks version of Card Sharks over a period of time, and I have observed something. In a match, whenever a five is revealed, contestants would go with the odds and call higher, and almost all of the time, the result is not higher. I have a feeling the cards may not have been shuffled backstsge, and the sequence of the cards may have been rigged, in order to prolong a match and avoid giving away as much money. On the CBS version, Bob Eubanks also had to manually move the freeze bar, while on the NBC version, it moved electronically. This implies that CBS was being cheap.

[billmcdee]

I would be very hard pressed to think that CBS would have "rigged" this or any other game show given the 1950's scandals and also at the time, all the networks had Standards and Practices in place to make sure everything was on the up and up.

It happens that way sometimes with cards.  I have played hundreds if not thousands of mock games of Card Sharks by myself or with family members and very often odd things happen.

My wife had a King, and the next card was an Ace.  Next time out she had another King.

Also, players cut the cards in front of the audience, so many witnesses there as well.  Odd anomalies sometimes turn up in games of chance, especially where cards are concerned.

The Jim Perry version once had a player with all four 3's in a row at the Money Cards.

Actually CBS was hardly cheap.  They upped their Money Cards from a possible $28,800 to $32,000 and later on added an added car bonus game.  Also, they did not have a player lose money in a tie at the Money Cards, something that the NBC version didn't do for a while, and the CBS version allowed players to change one card per line, anywhere on the line, unlike Perry's version which only allowed the first card to be changed, and then later on, only the first card on each row to be changed.

The only thing I didn't necessarily like on the CBS version was no $500 bonus if a player ran the board straight across without freezing or without making an error.

I loved that CBS amended the tie-breaker game to just 1 question and three cards, showing the base card for both players.  That was sensational I thought. 

Much as I love Bob Eubanks, and he was great, I missed having Jim Perry hosting it.  He added quite a dramatic flare to the game, both during match play and most especially during the Money Cards round.

As far as any accusations of rigging are concerned though, I would say most definitely not the case, not with game shows on a major daytime network anyway.

[billmcdee]

And by the way, yes, the only other drawback with the CBS version I agree was Bob having to move the freeze bar over.  I liked it better when it was motorized.

[JonBoy]

To be fair, when i tested a computer game that I had been programming many years ago, a 5 was revealed, and I called higher, and more often the result was lower. So it's possible there was no rigging of the cards on the show, it's just natural.