Bettie: LV RJ article addresses 6:5 payouts

[Bettie]

From the Gaming Chips column in today's Review Journal:

COLUMN: PLAYER'S EDGE

Blackjack payout changes make losers of players

This column usually addresses events in the slot departments around town. Let's shine some light now on the table game side of the casino.

Within the past several months, a number of casinos have offered single deck blackjack games that pay only six to five rather than seven-and-a-half to five (which is normally expressed as three to two) for naturals. This reduction in payout costs the player, in round numbers, 1.5 percent more than the normal payout.

How much is 1.5 percent? To say it with no frills, it is huge. Most players will find they lose money twice as fast playing this game than they usually do playing under normal rules. So blackjack players who are foolish enough to sit down at this game either lose twice as much money, or are only able to play half as long on the same gambling budget.

What should you do about it? Very simple. Don't play. Even playing a shoe game with normal-paying blackjacks is a much better game.

The rest of the column addresses the Global Gaming Expo, but I sure hope that people - and casinos - notice this and wise up!

Bettie

[Don Schlesinger]

> From the Gaming Chips column in today's
> Review Journal:

> COLUMN: PLAYER'S EDGE

> Blackjack payout changes make losers of
> players

> This column usually addresses events in the
> slot departments around town. Let's shine
> some light now on the table game side of the
> casino.

> Within the past several months, a number of
> casinos have offered single deck blackjack
> games that pay only six to five rather than
> seven-and-a-half to five (which is normally
> expressed as three to two) for naturals.
> This reduction in payout costs the player,
> in round numbers, 1.5 percent more than the
> normal payout.

> How much is 1.5 percent? To say it with no
> frills, it is huge. Most players will find
> they lose money twice as fast playing this
> game than they usually do playing under
> normal rules. So blackjack players who are
> foolish enough to sit down at this game
> either lose twice as much money, or are only
> able to play half as long on the same
> gambling budget.

Too bad he got the "twice as fast" part SOOOOO wrong. "Eight times as fast" would have had a much nicer ring to it, no?

Don

[Parker]

The only problem with this is that it was in the LVRJ, which is mostly read by locals, who know better. Note that there are no 6:5 games in the Station casinos, Coast casinos, or any casinos that cater to locals.

This abomination is only found in the major strip casinos (Park Place joints in particular) that cater to clueless tourists, who likely don't bother to read the local newspapers.

[MathProf]

> Too bad he got the "twice as fast"
> part SOOOOO wrong. "Eight times as
> fast" would have had a much nicer ring
> to it, no?

> Don
>

The article didn't say good BS players would lose money twice as fast. It said "most" players. The typical players gives up about 1.5-2% to the House in BJ. So they do lose about double to 6:5.

Actually. Many of the tourists in town who frequent carnival games probably give up much more to House. You see people standing on A5 vs a 10, and then hitting 15v4, and you wonder . . .

[Don Schlesinger]

> The article didn't say good BS players would
> lose money twice as fast. It said
> "most" players. The typical
> players gives up about 1.5-2% to the House
> in BJ. So they do lose about double to 6:5.

I never considered that aspect; that's a good point. Of course, I don't know if the writer of the article considered it, either, but your observation is certainly valid.

Persoanlly, had I written the article, I would have been sure to point out that, for those who use a little BS card to play, you will now lose eight times as fast as usual!

Don

[98%]

> The only problem with this is that it was in
> the LVRJ, which is mostly read by locals,
> who know better. Note that there are no 6:5
> games in the Station casinos, Coast casinos,
> or any casinos that cater to locals.

Nothing seems to stop the "savvy" locals from playing roulette, the various carnival games, betting the horses or playing any of the countless banks of low-return slots. Superfun has made it to locals casinos, as have blackjack games with mediocre rules in general. In fact, you're far more likely to find good rules (S17, DAS, LS, etc.) in the major Strip houses than in the locals siphons. In time, I think we'll see 6:5 or something of a similar nature creep into some of the locals joints.

> This abomination is only found in the major
> strip casinos (Park Place joints in
> particular) that cater to clueless tourists,
> who likely don't bother to read the local
> newspapers.

I think there is another point here which has been missed. The vast majority of people who enjoy losing their money in the casinos probably never even think about picking up a newspaper, let alone reading it. We live in a barely literate society and I have a hunch that those who are interested in reading newspapers and able to do so are probably the same type who are "smart enough to know that gambling is a losing proposition" and probably do not log all that many hours in the casinos anyway. So, in a sense, even the RJ is probably, for the most part, just preaching to the choir. Allow me to share my casino IQ scale, which sort of pertains to this topic. It runs from dumbest to smartest (note this is for entertainment purposes only!):

1 - Can't even figure out how to get to a casino.
2 - Can get to the casino but can't figure out how to gamble.
3 - Thinks slots are fun.
4 - Is smart enough to realize slots are rigged so plays table games.
5 - Is smart enough to realize the house always wins so avoids casinos.
6 - Has figured out a way to get an advantage over the house but isn't good enough to make it work.
7 - Plays with an advantage over the house.
8 - Realizes there is more to life than playing with an advantage over the house, so avoids casinos.

A few classifications, or subcategories, tend to transcend the list and can be found among people in categories 2 through 7:

(a) Has a gambling problem.
(b) Plays poker.
(c) Routinely gets lost in casinos.
(d) Cheats.
(e) Underage.
(f) Comes from a culture where casinos do not exist.
(g) Has too much money for own good and simply does not care.

Subcategories a-g notwithstanding, I would hypothesize that most ploppies are in categories 3 and 4, most advantage players are in 6 and 7 and most RJ readers are in 5.