$25 3:2 vs. $10 6:5

[johnvic]

I am a member of a general Vegas forum and there is a thread comparing $10 6:5 and $25 3:2. The point was being made that for a recreational player on a budget they would lose less at the 6:5 game as opposed to the 3:2 game. So I tried to test this but I do not really know how to this. Anyway, here is what I wrote. How off am I and what is the correct answer?

I don't think my math is perfect here but it's a shot. I used the Wizard's house edge calculator and assumed 3 hours at 60 hands per hour. I also assumed 6 deck, H17, DAS, NoSurr, the only difference between the 2 games is 3:2 vs. 6:5. I did not account for double downs and splits because I don't have a simulator. Anyway:

3:2 - house edge of .639% at $25 = $.16 loss per hand times 180 hands = $28.76 loss
6:5 - house edge of 2% at $10 = $.20 loss per hand times 180 hands = $36.00 loss

[Dog Hand]

johnvic,

The calculation looks fine to me.

Understand that the "house edge" value DOES account for splits and double downs.

Hope this helps!

Dog Hand

[Freightman]

Regardless of other rules, the only salient point is $25 bets with 3-2 vs $10 bets with 6-5. Assume the 3-2 game is .5 HE off the top.approx numbers. Add 1.4 % for 6-5 HE

100hph
$2500 action at 3-2 = loss of $12.50
$1000 action at 6-5 = loss of $19.00

In order to beat the 6-5 game, huge pen and big spread are required. Not worth the effort unless there is some other unknown factor.

[johnvic]

Thanks! I won't drive 6:5 even as a BS player but ploppies are somehow ignoring even the basic math.

[RS]

Few things.....

-$10 6:5 games likely move slower than $25 3:2 games.
-Betting $10 instead of $25 means you'll have less variance. Losing 20 bets means losing $200, not $500. Or rather, if you have a $300 budget, you can either have 30 bets or 12 bets.
-6:5 games may be more entertaining for the recreational gambler, if it's in a party pit or table is full of party-people having fun & drinking it up. Everyone cheers loudly on wins, dealer's got some big tits, etc.
-You can't just assume someone will be playing with proper BS, so therefore the edge they're going up against isn't 0.5% for 3:2 nor 1.9% (or whatever it is for 6:5)....it's dependent on the player's skill. They're likely fighting with a 2.5% disadvantage on 3:2 and a 4% disadvantage on 6:5 (I don't know how much the average player gives up, might be an extra 0.5% or an extra 5%, don't know--don't care). Doing the math again:

$25 * 100 * 0.025 = $62.50/hour for 3:2.
$10 * 100 * 0.04 = $40 for 6:5.

So for those players who want to have a good time and drink, save their money or make their budget last longer, I'd say the $10 6:5 table is better than $25 3:2 tables. I haven't seen the thread OP is referring to, but I'd say the people arguing for 6:5 tables are correct, although, perhaps not for the right reason (a broken clock is right twice a day).

[Freightman]

Thanks! I won't drive 6:5 even as a BS player but ploppies are somehow ignoring even the basic math.

Ignoring the math vs not knowing any better are 2 different things. The ploppy only thinks it's a difference of only $5 vs $12.50 on a $25 blackjack. To simplify my example even further, assume 110 hph (average 1 blackjack every 22 hands)

5-$25 blackjacks at 6-5 yield a total bonus of $25
5-$25 blackjacks at 3-2 yield a total bonus of $62.50.

It costs $37.50 per hour to play 6-5. Now, the house doesn't make an extra $37.50 per hour, because they need to factor the reduced playing time into the equation as well as the increased disgust factor of being stripped faster in Vegas vs beat at home - so why play in Vegas. There have been recent posts saying that Vegas is becoming more of a entertainment vs gambling destination. In some way, perhaps 6-5 is responsible. It's called shooting yourself in the foot.

[Freightman]

Few things.....

-$10 6:5 games likely move slower than $25 3:2 games.
-Betting $10 instead of $25 means you'll have less variance. Losing 20 bets means losing $200, not $500. Or rather, if you have a $300 budget, you can either have 30 bets or 12 bets.
-6:5 games may be more entertaining for the recreational gambler, if it's in a party pit or table is full of party-people having fun & drinking it up. Everyone cheers loudly on wins, dealer's got some big tits, etc.
-You can't just assume someone will be playing with proper BS, so therefore the edge they're going up against isn't 0.5% for 3:2 nor 1.9% (or whatever it is for 6:5)....it's dependent on the player's skill. They're likely fighting with a 2.5% disadvantage on 3:2 and a 4% disadvantage on 6:5 (I don't know how much the average player gives up, might be an extra 0.5% or an extra 5%, don't know--don't care). Doing the math again:

$25 * 100 * 0.025 = $62.50/hour for 3:2.
$10 * 100 * 0.04 = $40 for 6:5.

So for those players who want to have a good time and drink, save their money or make their budget last longer, I'd say the $10 6:5 table is better than $25 3:2 tables. I haven't seen the thread OP is referring to, but I'd say the people arguing for 6:5 tables are correct, although, perhaps not for the right reason (a broken clock is right twice a day).

I think you're wrong. Why is the 6-5 game slower?

It's likely played from a CSM vs the 3-2 $25 game played from an ASM. Given that ploppies are doing whatever there doing regardless of table min, it would seem logical they would play more hph from the csm. If anything, I think the logical argument from your side of the table is that the $10 table is more crowded that the $25 table.

The average flat betting low spread ploppy will tend to play until they've busted out their entertainment bankroll. They're going to lose it anyways. What 6-5 is doing is making them lose it more quickly. In other words, without knowing why, they haven't got their money's worth, because they got stripped faster.

[Tarzan]

I want to barf.

[ZenMaster_Flash]

I suggest a group barf followed by chanting of:

"Tar_Zan! Tar_Zan! Tar_Zan!" for 21 seconds ...

be added to our yearly Festivus activities upon the winter solstice.

[Romes]

A lot of interesting points on both sides...

1) I do agree with RS that the 6:5 tables will be slower. Why? because the drunk guy at 3rd base is staring at the dealers party pit tits and thinking of "hitting that" instead of listening to her say "would you like to hit, your hand, sir?" If you don't agree with this, sit and play a $5 party pit table sometime and keep track of your hands per hour. Not a chance they'll reach 100 (or get the same/more than a 3:2 6D game).

2) I also agree it comes down to the ploppy's skill. If we're assuming they're smart enough to play basic strategy, then perhaps they're smart enough to find the S17 $25 tables on the strip? If that's the case that'll certainly effect the hourly EV. Not only that, you can actually find plenty of DD 3:2 at the quarter level, which would have a lower house edge too. While ploppies are ploppies, I've found in my experience they all do prefer a lower number of decks though. Along those lines a ploppy willing to play $10 6:5 could easily find a 6:5 single deck game on the strip.

3) The "cost per hour" to the player of literally getting paid less on blackjacks is accounted for in the house edge. So instead of saying it costs them "$37/hour" to play 6:5, it actually doesn't. It ups the house edge in which it will cost them the real value of X per hour, pending their average bet and hands per hour of course.

4) The majority of the $5 6:5 blackjack party pits are all on shufflers. These shufflers typically have 4 decks and aren't subjected to the cut card effect. Therefor I submit that the house edges are off for the 6:5 estimation.

6:5 table
CSM - 60 hands per hour, avg bet $10... (10)*(60)*(-0.0193) = -$11.58/hour
1D (NDAS, D9-11) - 60 hands per hour, avg bet $10... (10)*(60)*(-0.0184) = -$11.04/hour

3:2 table
6D - 80 hands per hour, avg bet $25... (25)*(80)*(-.00634) = -$12.68/hour
2D (NDAS) - 80 hands per hour, avg bet $25... (25)*(80)*(-.006) = -$12.00/hour

So pretty much all of these are within $1/hour or less of each other. Then, it comes down to the other variables... 1) fun, 2) bankroll, 3) titties. I believe all 3 of these would point your "typical" ploppy to the 6:5 table.

[Norm]

There is another problem deciding between a $10 6:5 table and a $25 3:2 table for a non-AP. I assume the player has a budget. If so, he is more likely to stick to flat betting at the $25 table. If he plays at the $10 table, but had considered playing at the $25 table, he's not as likely to flat bet the $10 table, but will likely get bored and raise his bet. So, assuming flat betting both tables may not be correct.

[Romes]

There is another problem deciding between a $10 6:5 table and a $25 3:2 table for a non-AP. I assume the player has a budget. If so, he is more likely to stick to flat betting at the $25 table. If he plays at the $10 table, but had considered playing at the $25 table, he's not as likely to flat bet the $10 table, but will likely get bored and raise his bet. So, assuming flat betting both tables may not be correct.

I definitely agree there's "some" merit to this, but in my experience ploppies that flat bet any table flat bet every table. I suppose there could be a slightly higher average bet for the 6:5 game, but if you're saying $15 avg bet ($10-$20) instead of 10, that would effect the numbers a bit, but not life/budget changing I wouldn't think?

[Three]

In order to beat the 6-5 game, huge pen and big spread are required. Not worth the effort unless there is some other unknown factor.

When the term recreational player was used in this context it meant ploppy. Poppies only lose more with a bet spread. So we are talking flat betting and basic strategy.