The above is an unusual, almost heretical, statement by a casino executive, yet it was made by Noah Acres, the Riviera's director of player development (more about this ironic title later), in material aimed not at industry insiders but at new players at his casino.
The reason such statements are so rare is that the "gaming" industry has taken great pains to paint gambling as just another form of entertainment, one with minimal negative effects on the communities where casinos are found. Casinos stress that they love winners, but what they really love are ignorant players who win by dumb luck. Anyone who knows enough not even to win but just to lose less than most is considered a threat by many if not most gaming executives.
Of course, the ugly truth about gambling is that it ruins lives. Not many, as a percentage of those who gamble, but undoubtedly thousands each year in the United States. The extent to which the gaming industry is responsible for creating, enabling and increasing addiction is beyond the scope of this post, because it is beyond my knowledge of these issues. But I do know that the industry does everything it can to disassociate itself from anything hinting at exploitation of addicted gamblers.
The context of Mr. Acres' statement was an information card on a promotion at the Riviera offering new and some inactive players a $1,000 loss guarantee. There's nothing new about this kind of promotion but in five years in Las Vegas I have never seen one this big.
The idea is simple. You sign up for a players' club card and go play a slot or video poker machine until you have had enough or lost $1,000. If you are unlucky enough to win, it's as if the promotion didn't exist. You cash out as usual and that's it. If you lose, you get half your loss back immediately in the form of free slot play and half on your "next visit" (if you take advantage of this promotion, be sure to ask when the second installment becomes available and how long your have to use both installments of your free slot play).
Before we went to the Riviera, my wife and I listened to a discussion of this promotion on the radio program "Gambling with an Edge." Based on the discussion among hosts Bob Dancer and Mike Shakelford and guest Richard Munchkin, we set a goal of winning $2,000 or busting out trying. Losing, say, $300 would be taking advantage of only 30 percent of the value of the promotion. We made sure to get to the casino early in the evening to give ourselves plenty of time to run through $1,000 each.
Several types of slot, video poker and virtual table game machines have been excluded from this promotion. We both decided to play video poker at the highest denomination available, $1 single line. My spouse opted to play double double bonus even though the pay table, 8/5, is horrendous (we looked it up later and found the payback was less than 97 percent). This game offers a lot of opportunities for big hits, including $2,000 for four aces and a kicker, meaning that if she got lucky, she could reach $4,000 without hitting a royal flush. The downside of this strategy is that if she didn't get many four-of-a-kinds she could go down quickly. Of course, with the loss guarantee, the downside risk was greatly reduced. I took a more conservative approach, playing the best game available, 8/5 bonus poker (slightly over 99 percent payback). I knew I'd need a royal flush to hit $2,000, but I planned to alter my strategy a bit to increase the chance of hitting a royal (but in the process decrease the statistical return of the game). I hoped that playing a game with a higher return and less variance would keep me alive longer, giving me more of a chance to hit the royal. Another factor is that I am more comfortable playing bonus poker than double double bonus, though I have played the latter in tournaments.
In retrospect, I think both decisions were defensible, but my wife's was better -- and not just because she wound up hitting four aces with a kicker (after hitting four aces without, which kept her going awhile). I wound up losing $1,000 in less than two hours. At that point she was up a couple of hundred. I went and got my first $500 in free play and ran it through the machine. We decided I'd take advantage of some opportunies at other casinos and come back in a couple of hours. A half hour, maybe 40 minutes later she called me and said she had hit the four aces with a kicker. She was down only about $200, so if she quit right then she'd lock in a $1,800 win. The alternative under our plan was to try to win more or lose a full $1,000, and there probably wasn't time for that. So she "settled" for a win that was $200 short of her goal.
The reason her strategy was probably better than mine is because she had more chances to win. She also had much more of a chance of losing, but the entire loss would be reimbursed. Of course, had she actually lost, she would have played the free play much more conservatively because at that point any losses would be hers, and real.
Now, a word about the title of that executive who said he wanted "the hardcore gambler." To the unititated, "director of player development" might sound like someone in charge of educating players, making them better. But this is the last thing the casinos want. The development in this title refers to the casinos' business, not the quality of its players (unless quality is defined as losing more).
As for Mr. Acres, I think he's got quite a challenge ahead of him. The Riviera, one of the oldest casinos on the Strip, is, by today's standards, a dump. Think the Tropicana before its recent makeover. Furthermore, it's in a really bad neighborhood, by Strip standards, stuck amid closed casinos, failed projects and that butt of jokes, Circus Circus.
The loss guarantee will bring tourists in and maybe some locals. But whether they'll come back is another issue. The Riviera has introduced some better-than-usual games, for the Strip, including single zero roulette. But the games mostly aren't as good as those available in locals' casinos. I'll be back to play my second $500 in free play, but after that Mr. Acres and his colleagues will have to come up with something else to hook me as a regular.
I wish them luck in trying to revive the Riviera, and I'm afraid they're going to need it.
Monday, April 30, 2012
Sunday, April 29, 2012
A new supermarket
For a city with a plethora of restaurants of all kinds, Vegas has what seems to me to be a lot of supermarkets. Major chains include Albertson's, Smith's and Vons. There's a low-price chain called Food 4 Less. Wal Mart has a major share of the market with several 24-hour supercenters. Warehouse clubs -- Costco and Sam's Club -- sell lots of groceries. And there are niche players such as Whole Foods, Trader Joe's and a couple of Spanish chains.
So it surprised me to see that a big store called WinCo had opened in Hederson, on Stephanie Street just north of I-215. It's hard for me to imagine a group of supermarket executives sitting around saying, "Gee, the Las Vegas market could really use some more major supermarkets." I was also interested because I had never heard of WinCo, and I though I was familiar with at least the names of all the big supermarket chains.
The other night I stopped into WinCo to pick up a few things. I was a little surprised to find the interior similar to that of a Food 4 Less, with items stacked still in their boxes and concrete floors. This store is clearly going for the lower-end business. That may not be a bad strategy even in relatively well-off Henderson given Southern Nevada's still sky-high unemployment and foreclosure rates.
But maybe the fact that a company would even make the kind of investment WinCo did in Southern Nevada is a sign of hope for the region's economy and future growth. I certainly hope so.
So it surprised me to see that a big store called WinCo had opened in Hederson, on Stephanie Street just north of I-215. It's hard for me to imagine a group of supermarket executives sitting around saying, "Gee, the Las Vegas market could really use some more major supermarkets." I was also interested because I had never heard of WinCo, and I though I was familiar with at least the names of all the big supermarket chains.
The other night I stopped into WinCo to pick up a few things. I was a little surprised to find the interior similar to that of a Food 4 Less, with items stacked still in their boxes and concrete floors. This store is clearly going for the lower-end business. That may not be a bad strategy even in relatively well-off Henderson given Southern Nevada's still sky-high unemployment and foreclosure rates.
But maybe the fact that a company would even make the kind of investment WinCo did in Southern Nevada is a sign of hope for the region's economy and future growth. I certainly hope so.
Saturday, April 28, 2012
Related to gambling (but not very closely)
This item is related to gambling because the car I won in a casino drawing came with Sirius XM satellite radio.
When I was growing up in northern New Jersey in the 1960s the big pop-rock radio station was 77 AM WABC in New York City. And the biggest DJ on WABC was "Cousin" Bruce Morrow. I remember listening to Cousin Brucie on a small transistor radio many nights when I was supposed to be concentrating on my homework.
Sometime before leaving New Jersey for college in the early '70s I stopped listening to AM radio and to Cousin Brucie, and I didn't give him much thought during the ensuing decades.
But one Saturday night while listening to '60s on 6 in my new car, I heard that unmistakable voice from the past. It was Cousin Brucie, just as if I was 12 years old again.
I did some quick mental arithmetic and figured that if he was in his early 30s when I was a regular listener, he must be at least 80 now. The first chance I got I looked him up in Wikipedia and found that he was 76, which means he probably cracked the New York market when he was under 30. Good for him.
I wish that I could say the years have given me a greater appreciation of the Cousin and what he meant, but there really wasn't that much to what he did. The guy with the right schtik at the right time in the right place, I guess.
Still, I listen to him most Saturday nights when I'm in my car and enjoy a link to my past that I never expected to find.
When I was growing up in northern New Jersey in the 1960s the big pop-rock radio station was 77 AM WABC in New York City. And the biggest DJ on WABC was "Cousin" Bruce Morrow. I remember listening to Cousin Brucie on a small transistor radio many nights when I was supposed to be concentrating on my homework.
Sometime before leaving New Jersey for college in the early '70s I stopped listening to AM radio and to Cousin Brucie, and I didn't give him much thought during the ensuing decades.
But one Saturday night while listening to '60s on 6 in my new car, I heard that unmistakable voice from the past. It was Cousin Brucie, just as if I was 12 years old again.
I did some quick mental arithmetic and figured that if he was in his early 30s when I was a regular listener, he must be at least 80 now. The first chance I got I looked him up in Wikipedia and found that he was 76, which means he probably cracked the New York market when he was under 30. Good for him.
I wish that I could say the years have given me a greater appreciation of the Cousin and what he meant, but there really wasn't that much to what he did. The guy with the right schtik at the right time in the right place, I guess.
Still, I listen to him most Saturday nights when I'm in my car and enjoy a link to my past that I never expected to find.
Monday, April 23, 2012
Finding an answer for ourselves
As I have noted in previous posts, getting reliable information from casino employees can be difficult. All too often they are eager to answer your questions, whether they know the correct answer or not. When possible its best to get answers in writing. Often materials are available concerning players' club policies and rules for drawings and promotions, but sometimes they are not. In these cases getting reliable information can be difficult.
A case in point: There is a chain of small casinos throughout Nevada called Dotty's. Each week a drawing is held and a number of people are awarded $20 each. Regular players receive coupons in the mail for drawing entries for that week in addition to those earned by playing. The coupons can be dropped off at any Dotty's, but my wife wanted to know whether the entries would be good at only one location or at all of them. She asked at several locations and received contradictory answers.
To determine whether the drawings are at each location or company-wide, she wrote down the players' card numbers of a couple of the winners posted at one location. Then she went to a different Dotty's -- they're about as close together in Las Vegas as Walgreens -- and looked at the winners' players' card numbers posted there.
The numbers were different, indicating separate drawings for each Dotty's and that the extra entries are probably good only at the location where the coupon is dropped off. But why don't all the employees -- there's usually only one at a time at each Dotty's -- know this?
A case in point: There is a chain of small casinos throughout Nevada called Dotty's. Each week a drawing is held and a number of people are awarded $20 each. Regular players receive coupons in the mail for drawing entries for that week in addition to those earned by playing. The coupons can be dropped off at any Dotty's, but my wife wanted to know whether the entries would be good at only one location or at all of them. She asked at several locations and received contradictory answers.
To determine whether the drawings are at each location or company-wide, she wrote down the players' card numbers of a couple of the winners posted at one location. Then she went to a different Dotty's -- they're about as close together in Las Vegas as Walgreens -- and looked at the winners' players' card numbers posted there.
The numbers were different, indicating separate drawings for each Dotty's and that the extra entries are probably good only at the location where the coupon is dropped off. But why don't all the employees -- there's usually only one at a time at each Dotty's -- know this?
A surprising find
Across Blue Diamond Road from the Silverton, just west of Interstate 15, is a bigt truck stop and gas station. The building has a sign saying "casino" but that isn't surprising because, in Nevada, many gas stations, as well as convenience stores, drug stores, supermarkets and other businesses have small casinos inside.
A couple of weeks ago my wife stopped for gas at the truck stop across from the Silverton. She went inside to pay with cash and much to her surprise she saw a table games pit with two blackjack tables and a live poker table. The blackjack games were both single deck with blackjacks paying 3-to-2. The minimums were $5 and $10.
A couple of days ago we were in the area and needed gas, so we stopped there. I went inside and saw that the casino was much larger than most in other kinds of business. There was even a players' club window. I checked one of the multi-game video poker machines and found, at $1, 9/5 jacks or better, 8/5 bonus poker and 15/9 "pseudo not so ugly" deuces wild. These are not the best games around but they are not the worst, either, and could even be profitable depending on players' club benefits, which I did not look into during this visit.
The point of this story is that despite the spread of casino gambling throughout the United States, Nevada and Las Vegas are still, and likely always will be, different because of the dominance of gambling in the economy and the culture here. Other states may have major casinos that rival those in Vegas, but where else can you play video poker while waiting for a prescription to be filled? Or a a few hands of blackjack while your truck's oil is being changed?
A couple of weeks ago my wife stopped for gas at the truck stop across from the Silverton. She went inside to pay with cash and much to her surprise she saw a table games pit with two blackjack tables and a live poker table. The blackjack games were both single deck with blackjacks paying 3-to-2. The minimums were $5 and $10.
A couple of days ago we were in the area and needed gas, so we stopped there. I went inside and saw that the casino was much larger than most in other kinds of business. There was even a players' club window. I checked one of the multi-game video poker machines and found, at $1, 9/5 jacks or better, 8/5 bonus poker and 15/9 "pseudo not so ugly" deuces wild. These are not the best games around but they are not the worst, either, and could even be profitable depending on players' club benefits, which I did not look into during this visit.
The point of this story is that despite the spread of casino gambling throughout the United States, Nevada and Las Vegas are still, and likely always will be, different because of the dominance of gambling in the economy and the culture here. Other states may have major casinos that rival those in Vegas, but where else can you play video poker while waiting for a prescription to be filled? Or a a few hands of blackjack while your truck's oil is being changed?
Backed off
Last week I was backed off while playing blackjack at the Silverton. It was the third time I have been backed off but the first time in at least three years, a pretty good record considering how much blackjack I have been playing.
For the unfamiliar, being backed off means being told you can't play. It is the most common way (but not the only way) casinos deal with blackjack players they believe can beat them legally in the long run. (Cheaters are a whole different story; in Nevada, they are considered suspected criminals and treated as such.)
For card counters, the vast majority of advantage blackjack players, being backed off is part of life. Card counters make their money by putting out bigger bets when the count indicates the remaining pack of cards is rich in aces and those with a value of 10. A card counter can be detected by observation by someone competent at card counting. A few pit bosses can count, but the vast majority cannot and are not expected to detect card counters as part of their jobs. For the most part detection is the province of the so-called eye in the sky. Surveillance is allowed to use computer programs to help detect counters; apparently an observer enters the cards played and the bets made and the computer determines whether the player being watched is raising his bets when the count rises. Incidentally, players are not allowed to use any computing or mechanical device to aid their play in any way. Doing so is considered cheating in Nevada and could lead to liability for a crime.
Obviously surveillance doesn't track every blackjack player looking for card counters. So when one gets backed off, the question always is: What could have caused it? In this case, I have a couple of theories. First, the Silverton is a pretty low-roller place. The highest minimum for blackjack I have ever seen there is $25, and I have never seen more than one table with this minimum. By playing at this table I was making it far more likely that I would be watched than if I had been playing at a $10 table and betting mostly red chips.
Another factor was that I was varying my bets with the count, though not to the full extent my system calls for because suspected I was likely to be watched at this casino. In retrospect, the small adjustments I made probably provided no meaninful cover and I should have just gone all out and made as much money as I could.
Another tip-off that a player is counting is that he is winning, which I was on this partiuclar night. After about a half hour of play I had about two and half times as much in front of me as I had bought in for -- a nice win but nowhere near off the charts. This may have been a factor, especially in light of my won-loss history at that casino. I haven't reviewed my records but I remember having a couple of fairly big wins, and I would guess that I am ahead there for this year, the only period in which I have played there with any regularity.
I made it easy for the Silverton to track my wins and losses by always presenting my players' club card when I played there. I almost always play with a card because I want the comps and benefits that come with playing. At the Silverton and some other casinos, these include free bets that add considerably to the value of the game. I would not have played regularly at the Silverton without the incentive of the four free bets a month my play was earning (the amounts varied but this month were $20 each). The reason for that is that the double deck game there had lousy penetration. Until a few weeks ago the dealers did not use a cut card but most dealt out fifty percent of the cards or not much more. Lately they have been using a cut card and it has been placed consistently in the middle of the two decks, which is about as bad as it gets. (Good double deck penetration is about 75 percent of the cards being dealt out.)
Another way players conceal the amounts they are winning is by "rat holing" or secretly pocketing chips. I have never done this, mostly for fear that it would do more harm than good if I were caught. At the places I usually play and the amounts I usually play for, I don't think rat holing has been necessary. Maybe I'll have to re-think that.
Of course, the most important thing we can do to avoid being detected is to keep our sessions short, generally meaning to less than an hour. I'm sure length of session was not a factor in my back-off at the Silverton because I had been playing only about a half hour when the pit "critter" whose native language obviously is not English delivered the news: "You cannot play table games here." (Why the Silverton would not want me to play any table game other than blackjack is a compete mystery.)
In one respect the Silverton's back off was favorable -- casinos sometimes wait until a player has incurred a
big loss to lower the boom. Had I been allowed to play another twenty minutes I might have given back much of the money I had won.
In another resepect, though, the back off came at a bad time. The Silverton is running a series of drawings this month, and my wife and I have been playing video poker there every day -- way more than we normally would -- to make sure we accrue the maximum number of tickets for each week's drawing. Normally what happened to me would be irrelevant to this, but the Silverton has an unusual provision in the rules for all of its promotions that gives it the right to disqualify anyone it deems an "advantage player." I will be very interested to see if the casino tries to inoke this rule if I win a prize in the drawing. Stay tuned for further developments.
For the unfamiliar, being backed off means being told you can't play. It is the most common way (but not the only way) casinos deal with blackjack players they believe can beat them legally in the long run. (Cheaters are a whole different story; in Nevada, they are considered suspected criminals and treated as such.)
For card counters, the vast majority of advantage blackjack players, being backed off is part of life. Card counters make their money by putting out bigger bets when the count indicates the remaining pack of cards is rich in aces and those with a value of 10. A card counter can be detected by observation by someone competent at card counting. A few pit bosses can count, but the vast majority cannot and are not expected to detect card counters as part of their jobs. For the most part detection is the province of the so-called eye in the sky. Surveillance is allowed to use computer programs to help detect counters; apparently an observer enters the cards played and the bets made and the computer determines whether the player being watched is raising his bets when the count rises. Incidentally, players are not allowed to use any computing or mechanical device to aid their play in any way. Doing so is considered cheating in Nevada and could lead to liability for a crime.
Obviously surveillance doesn't track every blackjack player looking for card counters. So when one gets backed off, the question always is: What could have caused it? In this case, I have a couple of theories. First, the Silverton is a pretty low-roller place. The highest minimum for blackjack I have ever seen there is $25, and I have never seen more than one table with this minimum. By playing at this table I was making it far more likely that I would be watched than if I had been playing at a $10 table and betting mostly red chips.
Another factor was that I was varying my bets with the count, though not to the full extent my system calls for because suspected I was likely to be watched at this casino. In retrospect, the small adjustments I made probably provided no meaninful cover and I should have just gone all out and made as much money as I could.
Another tip-off that a player is counting is that he is winning, which I was on this partiuclar night. After about a half hour of play I had about two and half times as much in front of me as I had bought in for -- a nice win but nowhere near off the charts. This may have been a factor, especially in light of my won-loss history at that casino. I haven't reviewed my records but I remember having a couple of fairly big wins, and I would guess that I am ahead there for this year, the only period in which I have played there with any regularity.
I made it easy for the Silverton to track my wins and losses by always presenting my players' club card when I played there. I almost always play with a card because I want the comps and benefits that come with playing. At the Silverton and some other casinos, these include free bets that add considerably to the value of the game. I would not have played regularly at the Silverton without the incentive of the four free bets a month my play was earning (the amounts varied but this month were $20 each). The reason for that is that the double deck game there had lousy penetration. Until a few weeks ago the dealers did not use a cut card but most dealt out fifty percent of the cards or not much more. Lately they have been using a cut card and it has been placed consistently in the middle of the two decks, which is about as bad as it gets. (Good double deck penetration is about 75 percent of the cards being dealt out.)
Another way players conceal the amounts they are winning is by "rat holing" or secretly pocketing chips. I have never done this, mostly for fear that it would do more harm than good if I were caught. At the places I usually play and the amounts I usually play for, I don't think rat holing has been necessary. Maybe I'll have to re-think that.
Of course, the most important thing we can do to avoid being detected is to keep our sessions short, generally meaning to less than an hour. I'm sure length of session was not a factor in my back-off at the Silverton because I had been playing only about a half hour when the pit "critter" whose native language obviously is not English delivered the news: "You cannot play table games here." (Why the Silverton would not want me to play any table game other than blackjack is a compete mystery.)
In one respect the Silverton's back off was favorable -- casinos sometimes wait until a player has incurred a
big loss to lower the boom. Had I been allowed to play another twenty minutes I might have given back much of the money I had won.
In another resepect, though, the back off came at a bad time. The Silverton is running a series of drawings this month, and my wife and I have been playing video poker there every day -- way more than we normally would -- to make sure we accrue the maximum number of tickets for each week's drawing. Normally what happened to me would be irrelevant to this, but the Silverton has an unusual provision in the rules for all of its promotions that gives it the right to disqualify anyone it deems an "advantage player." I will be very interested to see if the casino tries to inoke this rule if I win a prize in the drawing. Stay tuned for further developments.
Sunday, April 8, 2012
Playing for a living
A few weeks ago it occurred to me that I'm part of a pretty elite group in American society. What most people do for a living is called working. What I, along with rich and famous athletes and entertainers, do is called playing.
There are both similarities and differences between what I do and what athletes and entertainers do. The biggest difference is that what they do, they do for the entertainment of an audience, which pays directly (for tickets) or indirectly (in the higher cost of products advertised on television, for example) to see them at work. Audiences are willing to pay because these people are exceptionally talented and can do what very few other people can. And, they work in fields -- arts, entertainment and sports -- that are inherently interesting and aesthically pleasing to the masses.
I am not exceptionally talented, and very few people could distinguish what I do at a blackjack table or video poker machine from what the average ploppie is doing. I have been told that my overall approach to gambling and how I decide where, when and what to play would interest some people, but I know that the nuts and bolts of it would not.
One thing I do have in common with athletes and entertainers is that what we do requires a lot of work and discipline even though it is called play. Maybe we call certain kinds of work "play" because we consider it inconsequential. I plead guilty to that, concerning what I do. And most of what most athletes and popular entertainers do is merely diversion, though as a society we spend exhorbitantly on it. Work is what we say is more important, even though we reward it less (teachers vs. baseball players).
Like most people, I have no exceptional talent in the arts or athletics. I can offer little of entertainment to others (except, I hope, my writing). But somehow I have fallen into the situation of having something in common with those who receive the worship of crowds -- even if it's only a word that's applied to what we, and few others, do for a living.
There are both similarities and differences between what I do and what athletes and entertainers do. The biggest difference is that what they do, they do for the entertainment of an audience, which pays directly (for tickets) or indirectly (in the higher cost of products advertised on television, for example) to see them at work. Audiences are willing to pay because these people are exceptionally talented and can do what very few other people can. And, they work in fields -- arts, entertainment and sports -- that are inherently interesting and aesthically pleasing to the masses.
I am not exceptionally talented, and very few people could distinguish what I do at a blackjack table or video poker machine from what the average ploppie is doing. I have been told that my overall approach to gambling and how I decide where, when and what to play would interest some people, but I know that the nuts and bolts of it would not.
One thing I do have in common with athletes and entertainers is that what we do requires a lot of work and discipline even though it is called play. Maybe we call certain kinds of work "play" because we consider it inconsequential. I plead guilty to that, concerning what I do. And most of what most athletes and popular entertainers do is merely diversion, though as a society we spend exhorbitantly on it. Work is what we say is more important, even though we reward it less (teachers vs. baseball players).
Like most people, I have no exceptional talent in the arts or athletics. I can offer little of entertainment to others (except, I hope, my writing). But somehow I have fallen into the situation of having something in common with those who receive the worship of crowds -- even if it's only a word that's applied to what we, and few others, do for a living.
Goodbye, old buddy
One of my favorite ongoing casino promotions, the Wheel of Winners at the Las Vegas Hotel and Casino (formerly the Las Vegas Hilton), is no more. The wheel was a drawing held Thursday nights that offered five people a chance to win from $1,000 to $5,000 each. Weekend drawings with a chance to win $10,000 were also offered several times a year.
The best thing about this drawing was that the tickets were paper, which prevented the ticket inflation that has become rampant since most casinos started doing their drawings electronically. The Wheel favored bigger players because tickets had to be earned, but low rollers got a break because the first ticket each day required less play than the rest of them.
Another good thing about this drawing was the prizes. Most of the big locals' casinos that have drawings offer top prizes of $4,000 or $5,000, but the lesser prizes are often as low as $250 or $500. At a Coast or Station Casinos drawing with five winners, maybe one or two typically win $1,000 or more. At the LVH, everyone called won at least $1,000, and the average was probably well over $2,000.
Finally, the number of participants in this drawing was smaller than for most drawings at the big locals' casinos, so it seemed like everyone had a decent chance of winning. Any individual's actual chance of winning, of course, depended upon the number of tickets he or she had in the drum that week. And, I think, that's what did in the Wheel. There were too many repeat winners, some week after week. I do think the promotion caused regular players to play more than they otherwise might have, to earn more tickets. But it didn't seem to bring in a lot of new business for the casino (probably because it wasn't advertised to the public much outside the property).
The LVH still has a lot to offer in competition with the locals' casinos. It has decent blackjack, sometimes for as little as $5. The video poker is actually better than at many locals' casinos, with many games returning more than 99.5 percent. The race and sports book is the biggest in the world. Locals get 25 percent off at all restaurants, which are excellent. But perhaps most important is the LVH's program of tournaments, which is hands down the best in Vegas, with many of the events free to regular, local players.
Meanwhile, concerning weekly drawings, other casinos have picked up the mantle, at least temporarily. Stations, which for at least a year during its financial difficulties ran no drawings, is now offering them at several properties. Perhaps the best drawing this month is at the Silverton, which is giving away an Audi (actually a gift certificate to a dealer for $32,500) each week. Second prize each week is $5,000, which typically is first place in similar drawings.
The best thing about this drawing was that the tickets were paper, which prevented the ticket inflation that has become rampant since most casinos started doing their drawings electronically. The Wheel favored bigger players because tickets had to be earned, but low rollers got a break because the first ticket each day required less play than the rest of them.
Another good thing about this drawing was the prizes. Most of the big locals' casinos that have drawings offer top prizes of $4,000 or $5,000, but the lesser prizes are often as low as $250 or $500. At a Coast or Station Casinos drawing with five winners, maybe one or two typically win $1,000 or more. At the LVH, everyone called won at least $1,000, and the average was probably well over $2,000.
Finally, the number of participants in this drawing was smaller than for most drawings at the big locals' casinos, so it seemed like everyone had a decent chance of winning. Any individual's actual chance of winning, of course, depended upon the number of tickets he or she had in the drum that week. And, I think, that's what did in the Wheel. There were too many repeat winners, some week after week. I do think the promotion caused regular players to play more than they otherwise might have, to earn more tickets. But it didn't seem to bring in a lot of new business for the casino (probably because it wasn't advertised to the public much outside the property).
The LVH still has a lot to offer in competition with the locals' casinos. It has decent blackjack, sometimes for as little as $5. The video poker is actually better than at many locals' casinos, with many games returning more than 99.5 percent. The race and sports book is the biggest in the world. Locals get 25 percent off at all restaurants, which are excellent. But perhaps most important is the LVH's program of tournaments, which is hands down the best in Vegas, with many of the events free to regular, local players.
Meanwhile, concerning weekly drawings, other casinos have picked up the mantle, at least temporarily. Stations, which for at least a year during its financial difficulties ran no drawings, is now offering them at several properties. Perhaps the best drawing this month is at the Silverton, which is giving away an Audi (actually a gift certificate to a dealer for $32,500) each week. Second prize each week is $5,000, which typically is first place in similar drawings.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
