Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 27 to 39 of 56

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

  1. #27
    Sun Runner
    Guest

    Sun Runner: Re: the point

    > What is known about keeping tables full is
    > that higher stakes players usually prefer to
    > play either alone or virtually alone.

    > Card counters perfer uncrowded conditions
    > for the same reason that casino's should.

    > What is really going on is a guessing game.

    I thought 'bigplayer' was going to make my point (opinion) but stopped short.

    Since I have been lurking here, I have read many many posts that discredit the intellignece of casino management, and some times rightly so. However I do believe that casino management can add and subtract, multiply and divide, and run numbers as well as we can.

    My opinion, and that's all it is, is they run the numbers, know the score (or SCORE, no pun intended, but probably also true) and have made a decision. That decision (mistakenly) gives to much weight to how much money the counter can take them for; but that is their decision.

    And knowing to be true what 'bigplayer' stated (see above), they crowd the tables to either thwart or slow the play of the counter.

    Good move/bad move on their part; I don't know? But I believe that is why they do it.

    On a related note -historically, I thought slots were there for the entertainment of the spouses of the real gamblers that showed up to play table games. Now I believe it to be reversing -table games are a neccessary evil used only to entertain the spouse of those coming to play slots -and the slower the game for those folks, they more they like it.

    Sad.

  2. #28
    Bettie
    Guest

    Bettie: Good -n- Greasy!


    No, I've never had one, but you can click on the link below to story on the LVRJ website about fried foods - Twinkies, pickles, and more!



  3. #29
    ZOD
    Guest

    ZOD: Kudos to all above for a terrific thread *NM*


  4. #30
    bigplayer
    Guest

    bigplayer: disagree

    The reason they keep tables full and many closed is simply to cut labor costs. Bean counters can quickly quantify labor costs but cannot quickly quantify the opportunity cost of lost business or game speed based on an uncertain number of customers.

    Game speed works to the casino advantage in all situations. Card counters take from the casino in pure percentage terms does not change based on game speed. If card counters pull 2% of the profits out of the casino they will do it in a fast game or a slow game...it's just that in a slow game the pie is much smaller for both card counters and casinos. In a fast game a card counter will pull out more dollars from the casino, but the revenue pie is much bigger therefore the overall effect in percentage terms is unchanged.

    bp

  5. #31
    Sun Runner
    Guest

    Sun Runner: Re: disagree

    Respectfully, I disagree ..

    > Bean counters can quickly quantify labor costs
    > but cannot quickly quantify the opportunity
    > cost of lost business or game speed based on
    > an uncertain number of customers.

    As I have said before, most card players do not give the bean counters the credit they deserve. These are not your grandfathers bookkeepers. They learn how to quantify labor costs in Accounting I -as freshman.

    > Game speed works to the casino advantage in all situations.

    Probably true, back in the day, when they were overun with people wanting to play BJ. It may not be true now; all the gamblers may be migrating to slots. None the less, I don't believe saying it's all about game speed is accuarte; I don't think it is that linear anymore.

    There are seven prople in the casino this afternoon -you and six ploppies. The bean counters have shut down all but one table. The average bet for the ploppies -$25. The average bet for you -$100. They are losing at the rate of 2%; you are winning at the rate of 2%. All seven of you are averaging 50 hands per hour. You are earning $100 ph; the six of them collectively are losing $150 ph -the casino is loving it at $50 ph.

    The bean counters go home; some moron [] opens another pit in the back -and you slide over and are lucky enough to start playing alone.

    Same fact only you now get 100 hands ph and the six ploppies are still probably getting not much more, if any, than their original 50.

    They are still losing at the rate of $150, you are now winning at the rate of $200. The casino is hating life because they are a net loser now at $50 ph.

    The bean counters show up at 8:00 the next morning and wonder what happened to that $50 an hour EV they had budgeted for.

    I don't pretend to have studied game table management. I do understand a little about game speed and if you and your compadres are left to play alone -as fast as you can -it's bad for them.

    I also don't know what a typical dealer costs the casino an hour, but I KNOW it's less than what a table full of ploppies lose in an hour. Now, knowing that, I don't comprehend why more tables are not open -but I don't believe it is entirely because the green-eyeshade dudes at Harrah's are sweating a $15 (?) an hour dealer payroll. I think the answer probably lies somewhere in their belief that when they open that other table, or the third or the fourth -it won't fill up with rubes -it will fill up with you.

    Respectfully, I believe a large part of table management is to try and control losses to people like yourself.

    I wish they worried about me as much -but they probably don't.

    SR


  6. #32
    bigplayer
    Guest

    bigplayer: comment

    casinos often do try to control flux by keeping tables full....this also keeps earnings down. The same $100 counter you refer to in your second example which drags earnings down will be much more likely to be a $100 ploppie who will not play at a full table with $5 bettors. This casino loses the action of the $100 ploppie.

    Casinos that are afraid of flux are just like counters who are afraid of flux...neither make the money they should. Flux is inherantly part of playing a winning game for either.

    Bean counters would prefer for steady month to month results rather than having to explain to corporate honcho's that they were just unlucky that month. When you have fast games and lots of big action players the casino has the potential to have fantastic daily and weekly variance. But in the end they make much more money getting in more hands. It always comes down to action * edge and action is directly correlated to hands per hour. There simply aren't that many card counters relative to the universe of players. For any casino to open or close tables for fear of card counters is possible (as some are quite paranoid) but inherantly a very dumb idea.


  7. #33
    Zapp
    Guest

    Zapp: Re: disagree

    Assuming a card counter is at every table betting blah,blah,blah, and all ploppies are betting the minimum is far fetched. These are not realistic conditions. If a casino manager followed your theory he would have to a complete moron with a mental problem of extreme paranoia.

    It's too easy to make up the rules to fit a story. It's not a case of "Well what if?" but rather...what is".

    > Respectfully, I disagree ..

    > As I have said before, most card players do
    > not give the bean counters the credit they
    > deserve. These are not your grandfathers
    > bookkeepers. They learn how to quantify
    > labor costs in Accounting I -as freshman.

    > Probably true, back in the day, when they
    > were overun with people wanting to play BJ.
    > It may not be true now; all the gamblers may
    > be migrating to slots. None the less, I
    > don't believe saying it's all about game
    > speed is accuarte; I don't think it is that
    > linear anymore.

    > There are seven prople in the casino this
    > afternoon -you and six ploppies. The bean
    > counters have shut down all but one table.
    > The average bet for the ploppies -$25. The
    > average bet for you -$100. They are losing
    > at the rate of 2%; you are winning at the
    > rate of 2%. All seven of you are averaging
    > 50 hands per hour. You are earning $100 ph;
    > the six of them collectively are losing $150
    > ph -the casino is loving it at $50 ph.

    > The bean counters go home; some moron []
    > opens another pit in the back -and you slide
    > over and are lucky enough to start playing
    > alone.

    > Same fact only you now get 100 hands ph and
    > the six ploppies are still probably getting
    > not much more, if any, than their original
    > 50.

    > They are still losing at the rate of $150,
    > you are now winning at the rate of $200. The
    > casino is hating life because they are a net
    > loser now at $50 ph.

    > The bean counters show up at 8:00 the next
    > morning and wonder what happened to that $50
    > an hour EV they had budgeted for.

    > I don't pretend to have studied game table
    > management. I do understand a little about
    > game speed and if you and your compadres are
    > left to play alone -as fast as you can -it's
    > bad for them.

    > I also don't know what a typical dealer
    > costs the casino an hour, but I KNOW it's
    > less than what a table full of ploppies lose
    > in an hour. Now, knowing that, I don't
    > comprehend why more tables are not open -but
    > I don't believe it is entirely because the
    > green-eyeshade dudes at Harrah's are
    > sweating a $15 (?) an hour dealer payroll. I
    > think the answer probably lies somewhere in
    > their belief that when they open that other
    > table, or the third or the fourth -it won't
    > fill up with rubes -it will fill up with
    > you.

    > Respectfully, I believe a large part of
    > table management is to try and control
    > losses to people like yourself.

    > I wish they worried about me as much -but
    > they probably don't.

    > SR

  8. #34
    Sun Runner
    Guest

    Sun Runner: Well then,

    > It's too easy to make up the rules to fit a
    > story. It's not a case of "Well what
    > if?" but rather...what is".

    .. what is it?

    Simply telling me I'm wrong is easy. Why do all those tables go unused?

  9. #35
    Sun Runner
    Guest

    Sun Runner: thank you

    As always, the back and forth with you helps me refine my thoughts.

    Originally you stated that ..

    "The reason they keep tables full and many closed is simply to cut labor costs."

    I simply disagree.

    They either believe that counters pose a greater probem to their financial future than you (and I) do and are making decisions accordingly or they have quantified the flux and their own ROR and are happy with it or both.

    I know a guy who trades stocks for a living. Early on in his carreer he was earning a huge ROI. Huge. Now he has put together a sizeable BR and his ROI, while still huge, is about a tenth of what it was in those early years.

    Sound familiar? The larger the BR, the harder it becomes to replace, and the lower the ROI you become willing (happy) to take.

    The casino's have a huge BR to protect, corporate suits to please, some have stockholders to coddle, and I imagine, some have financial statement targets that must be hit quarterly that are tied to banking arrangements.

    If they didn't have some or all of those constraints, I agree, they could up the ante a bit, accept a little wider flux, open up some tables, and in the long run see the increased profits pour to the bottom line.

    They may not have that luxury.

    Maybe only guys like Benny Binnion did.

    But they don't close tables because they can't quantify the labor cost of an employee or two. They can.

    Thanks again for the insite.

  10. #36
    Zap
    Guest

    Zap: unused?

    > Simply telling me I'm wrong is easy. Why do
    > all those tables go unused?

    Well it certainly is not because of the casinos fear a card counter might sneak over to it. Uh, why are not all the slots used all the time?...called lack of a crowd.

    A card counter is only a prick in the skin to a casino. You seem to think that everything in blackjack is based around a card counter.

    You're wrong...excuse me mmm,I mean I disagree.

    Zap#

  11. #37
    bigplayer
    Guest

    bigplayer: Labor Costs

    you misquote me...I say it is easy for the csino to quantify labor costs...but difficult to quantify potential lost business by giving too many dealers the "early-out".

    When you have a known savings and an unknown cost too often the known savings (labor costs) is the choice.

    I say that casinos close tables to save labor costs...you say it's due to paranoia about card counters. If you are correct my point is still accurate in that it is a stupid assumption on the part of the casino's. Keeping tables closed to prevent card counting is the worst game protection example I've ever heard of. In fact, a casino could guarantee that no card counters get down any action by just closing all blackjack tables.

  12. #38
    Sun Runner
    Guest

    Sun Runner: Re: unused?

    > Well it certainly is not because of the
    > casinos fear a card counter might sneak over
    > to it. Uh, why are not all the slots used
    > all the time?...called lack of a crowd.

    The slots may not be used all the time .. but they are open for use all the time.

    > A card counter is only a prick in the skin
    > to a casino.

    I happen to agree .. but I also think they feel differently. Otherwise, they would not be bringing the heat, going to court to keep us out, wasting millions of dollars on the Griffin etals, 86'ing players that are long run losers just to 'be sure', etc.

    > You seem to think that
    > everything in blackjack is based around a
    > card counter.

    When it comes to the casino protecting their BR, they are not worried about the civilians.

    > You're wrong...

    Wouldn't be the first time.

  13. #39
    Sun Runner
    Guest

    Sun Runner: Re: Labor Costs

    > you misquote me...

    Certainly un-intended.

    > I say that casinos close tables to save
    > labor costs ...

    And I think that is to simplistic.

    > If you are correct my
    > point is still accurate in that it is a
    > stupid assumption on the part of the
    > casino's.

    To recap, they may have reasons you and I do not share.

    > Keeping tables closed to prevent
    > card counting is the worst game protection
    > example I've ever heard of.

    May be, but we are back to the original question and I still don't think it is about (all about) saving a couple of dollars an hour in payroll.

    > In fact, a
    > casino could guarantee that no card counters
    > get down any action by just closing all
    > blackjack tables.

    Of course, and they don't want that. So they find a balance between letting the civilians come and play and slowing you down while monitoring your play.

    Look, I just don't think they are totally ignorant and that the only issue before them is payroll management.

    Could they be that stupid!? Really?

    Anyway I've beat this horse enough. Thanks for posting along.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 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.