Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 14 to 26 of 56

Thread: onetoomany: Why don't the casinos just eliminate

  1. #14
    AdvantageRay
    Guest

    AdvantageRay: Damn I always get..

    Coin In and Drop mixed up (Its been a few years since Ive been in the business). You are correct, it just sounds like it should be the other way

    D

  2. #15
    Ouchez
    Guest

    Ouchez: The last paragraph was an eye opener! *NM*


  3. #16
    Parker
    Guest

    Parker: Thanks, & comment

    Thanks for a most informative post. These terms get tossed around a lot, with many people not really understanding exactly what they mean.

    > This is why casinos with a labor policy that
    > keeps only a few blackjack tables open with
    > those tables kept intentionally full tend to
    > make less money per hour from their players
    > than casinos with lots of open tables and
    > fairly uncrowded conditions. Full tables are
    > slow tables and the house grind is less
    > effective at game speeds of 50 rounds per
    > hour versus 125 per hour at fairly uncrowded
    > tables.

    This seems so obvious to me. Yet they have full tables, slowing the games to a crawl, rather than have a dealer standing behind an empty table for even 5 minutes. And casino managers wonder why many of us are of the opinion that collectively they are a bunch of morons.

  4. #17
    sam
    Guest

    sam: more money per hr

    BigPlayer,

    Wouldn't 6 players betting $10 per hand at 50 hands per hour expose more total money to the house grind than 1 player betting $10 per hand at 125 hands per hour? $3000 vs.$1250. Granted a single player would suffer greater individual exposure to the grind than 1 player playing with 5 other players but if the house is interested in volume exposed to the house edge, then more players at a table increases that volume. Maybe I'm missing something. Check me on this. Thanks.

    Sam

    > but very close...having run an establishment
    > with gaming machines here is what everything
    > means.

    > Drop...is the total of the original amounts
    > of cash money actually dropped into a
    > machine or table by customers over a given
    > amount of time. For a slot machine it would
    > be the actual paper money in the bill
    > acceptor plus the coins in the bottom coin
    > box. For table games it would be the sum of
    > the actual money dropped into the box by the
    > dealer.

    > Coin-In..refers to the total of all action
    > or wagers given on a slot machine. If you
    > play $5 VP for an hour putting in a $100
    > bill to start the machine's drop will be
    > $100, but coin-in will be $25/hand * 600
    > hands or $15,000. This figure is also known
    > as the "handle" and includes only
    > money actually wagered...not just put into
    > the machine.

    > For table games, the "Float" is
    > the amount of chips in the chip rack. The
    > profit/loss of the table is determined by
    > subtracting the amount of chips the players
    > "walked" with from the amount of
    > money the dealer dropped into the cash box
    > and then dividing by the total of buy-in's.
    > A player might buy-in for $500 but walk with
    > $400. The table hold would be 20% in this
    > example.

    > Casino Win or "Hold" for slot
    > machines is the Coin-Out minus Coin-In
    > divided by the Drop. So in the above VP
    > example, if the player's handle is $15,000
    > coin-in and his coin-out was $14,950 he
    > would be left with a cash-out of $50. The
    > "Hold" in this case would be
    > ($14,950-$15,000)/$100 or 50%.

    > Hold should not be confused with the house
    > theoretical edge which is usually a much
    > lower number. Take a typical Louisiana bar
    > with three state licensed Video Poker
    > Machines. (Max return according to state law
    > is 94%). This particular bar has machines
    > set to return 92% (pretty bad machines).
    > Because of the grind of the machines these
    > games had a hold of over 50% most weeks...so
    > you have an 8% edge translating into a 50%
    > grind. Blackjack works the same way, where a
    > 0.5% to 2% edge (depending on player skill)
    > translates to a house hold of 12% to 15% on
    > average. Obviously, the faster the game, the
    > more unskilled the players, the less crowded
    > the conditions, the more effective the house
    > grind becomes as the players initial
    > investment and subsequent winnings get
    > exposed to the house edge over and over
    > again.

    > This is why casinos with a labor policy that
    > keeps only a few blackjack tables open with
    > those tables kept intentionally full tend to
    > make less money per hour from their players
    > than casinos with lots of open tables and
    > fairly uncrowded conditions. Full tables are
    > slow tables and the house grind is less
    > effective at game speeds of 50 rounds per
    > hour versus 125 per hour at fairly uncrowded
    > tables.

  5. #18
    Parker
    Guest

    Parker: Not the way to look at it

    > BigPlayer,

    > Wouldn't 6 players betting $10 per hand at
    > 50 hands per hour expose more total money to
    > the house grind than 1 player betting $10
    > per hand at 125 hands per hour? $3000
    > vs.$1250. Granted a single player would
    > suffer greater individual exposure to the
    > grind than 1 player playing with 5 other
    > players but if the house is interested in
    > volume exposed to the house edge, then more
    > players at a table increases that volume.
    > Maybe I'm missing something. Check me on
    > this. Thanks.

    Naturally six players will generate more revenue for the house than one player, but that's not the point.

    Suppose those same six players, instead of being all bunched up at one table, were spread among 3 tables. Say, 3 at one table @ 75 hands/hour, two at another table @ 90 hands/hour, and our solo player at 125 hands/hour.

    Now we're looking at $5300/hr vs $3000/hr. This should more than cover the cost of the two additional dealers, to say the least. Plus, if other players wander in, there will be open seats available.

  6. #19
    SOTSOG
    Guest

    SOTSOG: Glad I Asked!

    Excellent definitions.

    Somebody should print out the crowded tables make less money paragraph and send it to Harrahs.
    They seem to be the masters of the close/open tables to keep them full at all times.


  7. #20
    SOTSOG
    Guest

    SOTSOG: Tell this one to Harrahs also.

    Isle of Capri had to learn the hard way.

    Besides there full table policies, Harrahs seems to be a major force behind trying to turn some of its boats into huge floating slot barges.

  8. #21
    Shaggy18vw
    Guest

    Shaggy18vw: Re: It's called greed

    Speaking of Mermaids... Has anyone ever had one of those deep fried Twinkies?

  9. #22
    sam
    Guest

    sam: the point

    > Naturally six players will generate more
    > revenue for the house than one player, but
    > that's not the point.

    Generating more revenue for the house is the whole point of the house's existence. My guess is the house sees constantly full tables as more certainly doing that than the sporadic nature of the scenario you describe. Plus the pent up demand created by the wait to play may cause players to play less carefully. These casino folks may be more thoughtful than one at first thinks.
    > Suppose those same six players, instead of
    > being all bunched up at one table, were
    > spread among 3 tables. Say, 3 at one table @
    > 75 hands/hour, two at another table @ 90
    > hands/hour, and our solo player at 125
    > hands/hour.

    > Now we're looking at $5300/hr vs $3000/hr.
    > This should more than cover the cost of the
    > two additional dealers, to say the least.
    > Plus, if other players wander in, there will
    > be open seats available.

  10. #23
    Parker
    Guest

    Parker: Re: the point

    > Generating more revenue for the house is the
    > whole point of the house's existence. My
    > guess is the house sees constantly full
    > tables as more certainly doing that than the
    > sporadic nature of the scenario you
    > describe. Plus the pent up demand created by
    > the wait to play may cause players to play
    > less carefully. These casino folks may be
    > more thoughtful than one at first thinks.

    I think you're giving them too much credit. The truth is, they simply can't stand to see a dealer standing behind an empty table, staring off into space, So, the minute that happens, they close the table and send the dealer home.

    Then a few more people walk in, and we have the aforementioned crowded table scenario. It is certainly not by design.

    Another problem with the packed table approach is when a dealer gets a hot streak and makes several multi-card 21's and/or gets a series of blackjacks. This will send the superstitious ploppies running to another table. If all the other tables are full, it will send them running to another casino.

  11. #24
    bigplayer
    Guest

    bigplayer: Re: the point

    what you have here is a battle between known costs and unknown costs. Labor costs are easy to predict and the savings are obvious when you send dealers home early. The money lost by slowing games to a crawl is unknown.

    What is known about keeping tables full is that higher stakes players usually prefer to play either alone or virtually alone. What is known is that full tables are slow tables and slow tables do not generate as much profit as fast tables on a per player basis. Card counters perfer uncrowded conditions for the same reason that casino's should.

    What is really going on is a guessing game. In trying to keep labor costs low the casino often guesses wrong and it costs them more money from the game than they save in labor costs. Not all casinos are smart...I have been at casinos where they had six tables open with each having 2 players and the casino closed four of them forcing us to all consolidate to the two remaining games. If you run the numbers you will find that a table with 3 players makes almost as much money as the same table with 6 players.

  12. #25
    Hip Hip
    Guest

    Hip Hip: Hold on a sec

    > Speaking of Mermaids... Has anyone ever had
    > one of those deep fried Twinkies?

    Deep Fried? Twinkie?

    Sounds like a heart attack just waiting to happen. What have I been missing?

    I've never heard of these, are they worth a taste?

    Hip Hop

  13. #26
    Shaggy18vw
    Guest

    Shaggy18vw: Re: Hold on a sec

    I've never had one, but they sell them at the downtown joint with the Chiquita Bananna dressed ladies standing out front. You know the place, these are the girls who are wearing jeans and a sweatshirt under their uniforms (two-piece bathing suit).

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

About Blackjack: The Forum

BJTF is an advantage player site based on the principles of comity. That is, civil and considerate behavior for the mutual benefit of all involved. The goal of advantage play is the legal extraction of funds from gaming establishments by gaining a mathematic advantage and developing the skills required to use that advantage. To maximize our success, it is important to understand that we are all on the same side. Personal conflicts simply get in the way of our goals.