Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

The art of shuffling...?

SuperWooper:

prime numbers break the cards up and spread them as far apart as possible. The lack of factors means that you reduce the risk that any trainer pokemon energy weave will either be preserved or emphasised.

Personally I like 5 piles for my "counting" shuffles followed by 7 piles to really mix them up. Though 6 piles does count the deck, as 6 has three as a factor, nasty things can happen with decks that have been weaved intentionally or otherwise. If you suspect that an opponent has weaved their deck then a three pile shuffle can really mess them up! Untill they improve their weave that is.

Alternative explanation: yep its just a thing of mine :D I like prime numbers.

If I have to quickly randomise a deck I use a Vegas riffle: split it into three roughly equal piles A, B and C. Riffle A and B. Then split into two again A' and B' . Pick one of these (B') and riffle into C. Now split this, pick one half and riffle back into A'. repeat...
 
Naki Feralkin said:
I know its not a random issue either, lest I would not be getting 4 Banette's in my hand the second game I play (for fun) with no supporters and very minimal energy.
Click to expand...

Hey, that's me! :smile: Seriously, you did have some very unlucky draws at States.

We tend to use the six pile shuffle because it does seem to mix them up well and it is a great way to make sure that you still have 60 cards after a match (little kids with the same sleeves :rolleyes:). I usually make 6 piles and then shuffle 1, 3, and 5 together into A and 2, 4, and 6 together into B and then shuffle A and B together. I had not really thought it through before but it does make sense that they are most likely more clumped after deck check since they will start in your deck list order. It sounds like go with the 5 or 6 pile shuffle with lots of extra rifling before first round.
 
I think the best and Proper way to shuffle is to (BEFORE GAME)
1. Shuffle a few times
+ This demonstrates to your opponent that your deck isn't "stacked or weaved".
2. Do a 6 card or 5 card pile shuffle
+ this definitely unclumps cards that might have been togeter in discard pile
+ you also know that you have 60 cards, and didn't lose one last round.
3. Shuffle a few more times
+ Your opponent is further assured that you aren't stacking or weaving your deck.
+ You do this so that there is a "chance" that cards can get clumped back together, but it would be true random, not a biased clumping because of insufficient shuffleing.

The shuffle before and after a pile shuffle is the key thing so that your opponent knows you aren't up to no good.

Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:

Heatherdu said:
We tend to use the six pile shuffle because it does seem to mix them up well and it is a great way to make sure that you still have 60 cards after a match (little kids with the same sleeves :rolleyes:). I usually make 6 piles and then shuffle 1, 3, and 5 together into A and 2, 4, and 6 together into B and then shuffle A and B together. I had not really thought it through before but it does make sense that they are most likely more clumped after deck check since they will start in your deck list order. It sounds like go with the 5 or 6 pile shuffle with lots of extra rifling before first round.
Click to expand...

Careful with this sort of Pile shuffling routine, if you have 6 card "string" in your discard pile for example, a Garnivoir, Kirlia, Ralts, and 3 Psychic NRG. You shuffle a few times, but some how this string stays intact. Thus your regular shuffle didn't unclump this stuff.

A pile shuffle will likely put all these cards in the same number (or level) from the top, thus the 4 or 5th card in a 6 pile x 10 card per pile shuffle. If you shuffle two stacks back together like mentioned above, and are succesful in having every other card in the combined stack, you just CLUMPED the cards back together. Seems a bit extreme, but you can probably recongize the bias if you did it in such a way.

Thus better just grabing the 6 stacks in total and doing a 1/3 shuffle into the 2/3 remainder of the deck.
 
Last edited:
I always do 6 pile then shuffle. It's time consuming as it takes lots of time and i have to do it after every game! But it's the way how we get the good shuffling done!
 
Lawman said:
The oppo cannot count out the cards for a cut. It has to be a direct cut. If they do this, call the judge bc this is an error.

Keith
Click to expand...

I will. because that pisses me off. I get screwed by a bad 7 card hand because they can see usually two or 3 of my bottom 7.
 
Many players will inadvertently show the bottom card. For younger players it is just about impossible for them not to.

I think there should be something about a TOO thin of cut. IE Bottom 7, if your opponent spots something like a feebas on the bottom. A better player probably knows to finish his normal shuffle and cut a few times to the table cuts before presenting his deck to opponent.

But a better player / shuffler will often try hard not reveal any glimpses of their decks to opponents before the swiss game.

That is why it upset's me off when a opponent shuffles my deck, and shuffles perpendicular to the table. One could assume that they could PEEK at my deck when doing so. If you are playing Magmotar, or Garny Galade for example, not that hard to figure out with just small flash of color.

I guess I am saying, if you choose to shuffle rather than cut, then the onus or burden is on you to do a shuffle in a way that you can't see anything of your opponents deck.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top