Notes and thoughts on a few new things:
1. The Orleans has changed its Tuesday seniors program to include a drawing at 4 p.m. This drawing is unusual in a couple of a little unusual. You don't have to activate your tickets -- everyone who has played during the eligibility period is entered automatically. But you do have to present to win. Three names are called. Each winner who is there gets $1,000. Any money that isn't claimed carries over to the following week. The first week, none of the three winners was there. I suspect the prizes will sometimes be substantial, but with everyone who has played during the earning period entered, the chances of winning are reduced. I plan to time my visits to the Orleans to be there for this drawing and see how it goes. Incidentally, exactly what the earning period is is unclear. It was announced in the casino that it's just the day of the drawing, but I was been clicking the "drawings" button on the kiosks and finding tickets for this drawing on other days. Next chance I get, I'll review the written rules, which are on a sign in front of the players' club.
2. I was very disappointed in a promotion at the M Resort that started Friday night. The deal was, earn up to five swipes by putting $250 coin in on video poker. Some swipes would award free play. In my case, five swipes resulted in nothing. My wife got a total of $10. A near-Strip resort has been running a similar promotion this month and the same week I got nothing at the M I got $140 in free play at the other place (which I am not naming because to keep competition at its drawings, which have been very good to me, to a minimum). At both places I play 15/9 "pseudo not so ugly" deuces for $1 on the five-play machines, betting $25 a hand. I would think that kind of play would earn something, especially on the first day of a promotion. I cannot understand why casino executives implement promotions that will tick people off instead of promoting the casinos' business. In fairness to the M, its seniors' drawing on Tuesdays offers a good chance of winning meaningful prizes, but this new promotion appears to be a big stinker. Another disappointment at the M: The convenience store on the property apparently has been sold and no longer accepts M slot club points for payment for gas or other purchases.
3. Guess what's back at the Palms? After all the 100-percent payback games had been removed, two or three weeks ago I walked over the area where the $2 "not so ugly" 16/10 deuces were and found them replaced by two rows of 100-percent-plus payback machines, with big signs on top advertising their presence. The games on two rows of machines are double bonus, double double bonus and deuces wild at 25 and 50 cents. Points are earned at one-quarter the rate on other games, making them worth 0.625 percent. Double bonus, which is very difficult to play accurately, and double double bonus, which pays back barely over 100 percent with perfect play, are still fairly common in Las Vegas and can be found in denominations as high as $1. Deuces wild, which pays back 100.76 percent with perfect play, has become relatively rare even at quarters and is found at 50 cents only in two small casinos in Henderson that don't have slot clubs. So the 50-cent full-pay deuces at the Palms is quite a find. Unfortunately, if history is a guide, it won't last long, so enjoy it while you can.
4. Stations continues its comeback with a surprisingly strong promotion this month. Each day through May 28, players' club members can swipe their card at a kiok for prizes. When Stations has run this type of promotion in the past, the prizes have often been disappointing. In particular, they would often be drawing tickets, which were worse than worthless because any edge an individual would get would be swamped by the extra entries awarded other players. Other prizes included slot club points, dining credits and free play. This time, the types of prizes are the same, but in my and my wife's experience, the prizes are many times more valuable than they have been in the past. Point prizes have ranged from 5,000 to 25,000; free play from $10 to $100, and dining credits from $10 to $50. This promotion is been run in conjunction with daily drawings in which five people at each of the eight Stations and two Fiestas wins $500 and a chance to win a Cadillac in a drawing held that night. Winners who are present get an extra $500. The best news about the swipe card part of the promotion is that the drawing ticket prizes have become quite rare and the number of tickets awarded enough to give the winner a real advantage. I was awarded drawing tickets only once in this promotion and the 5,000 extra entries may have been responsible for me winning one of the $1,000 prizes that night (the free drawing tickets, unlike tickets earned during the promotion, are good for one night only). Kudos to Stations for running a promotion that gives its customers something of real value every day they come in.
5. A small casino in Henderson, Club Fortune ticked me and at least a couple of other players off a couple of weeks ago. At this casino it has long been possible to download free play only on certain machines, but these included virtually every machine in the high-limit room. I walked in one day to find labels on almost all the machines in this room saying "this machine does not accept free play." My wife, who preceded me into the room, heard one player saying he was going to the players' club to complain. I tracked down a slot attendant and asked to speak with a manager. The explanation I got was that the slot director wanted to spread the availablilty of free-play compatible machines throughout the floor to give more people a chance to use free play on their favorite machines. This might have made some sense if I had not also been told that the move was made in conjuction with a doubling of the number of machines available for free play. The only sense I could make of this move is that it is a crude attempt to force customers to play at least their free play on machines with worse pay tables, but I did not express this opinion to the manager I spoke with, because it can be hazardous to become known to casino management as a player who knows too much. At any rate, this appears to be a particularly petty, stupid move by a casino's management in terms of possible gain versus irritation of bigger players. Here are two good rules for casino executives to keep in mind: 1. People don't like to have things taken away, even relatively minor conveniences, and 2. People don't like to be told they can't do something at your casino that they can do at other casinos (at most casinos, free play can be used at all or a vast majority of machines).
Monday, May 21, 2012
Monday, April 30, 2012
'We want the hardcore gambler ...'
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.
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
