bfbagain: Not sure how to ask this

[Cacarulo]

The "shuffle time" is VERY costly to the casinos. Much more than the CCE.

Sincerely,
Cac

[Norm Wattenberger]

Shuffle time costs the casinos real estate and personnel costs. And these are very high costs. But, I?ve always wondered how much it changes the total amount lost. A large segment of visitors set aside a gambling budget. They will play until it is lost. Most of them will lose it more slowly if the play is slower; but will still lose the same total amount either way. Of course if they get bored waiting for the shuffle, they may wander off to a competitor.

> The "shuffle time" is VERY costly to the
> casinos. Much more than the CCE.

> Sincerely,
> Cac

[Don Schlesinger]

> Shuffle time costs the casinos real estate and
> personnel costs. And these are very high costs. But,
> I?ve always wondered how much it changes the total
> amount lost. A large segment of visitors set aside a
> gambling budget. They will play until it is lost. Most
> of them will lose it more slowly if the play is
> slower; but will still lose the same total amount
> either way. Of course if they get bored waiting for
> the shuffle, they may wander off to a competitor.

Suppose there were only one dealer at one table in the casino. Suppose you came in with a budget to lose x amount of dollars, and the dealer had to keep dealing until you did. And the dealer is paid by the hour.

Would it be better for them to deal 4/6 or 5.5/6?

Somewhere along the way, it costs casinos to be shuffling cards instead of dealing them. It can't possibly be otherwise.

Don