This one I literally refuse to believe. Blogger David McKee reports on the Las Vegas Advisor web site that MGM Resorts, owner of several major Las Vegas casinos, plans to convert all its remaining 3:2 blackjack games on the Strip to 6:5.
For those not familiar with blackjack, one of the basics of the game is that a player dealt a blackjack -- an ace and ten-value card -- is paid one and a half times his bet, or 3:2.
In the past decade, many casinos have reduced the payout for blackjack to 6:5, starting with single-deck games. Gradually the 6;5 curse has spread to other games, including some as bad as eight-deck shoes with no double after split.
I don't spend much time on the Strip, but unless things have changed drastically in the past year, there are still many good 3:2 games there, especially at MGM properties. Downtown and at the locals casinos, most games still pay the traditional 3:2.
It is sad but true that many ploppies will play a game that pays them $12 for a blackjack on a $10 bet instead of $15, robbing them of about $12 an hour based on the average number of blackjacks received by a player in a moderately fast game. To an extent, 6:5 games have gained acceptance by a segment of the gaming public.
But that is not to say that those who now play 3:2 games, especially for higher stakes, will acquiesce in a change to 6:5. A $100 bettor is being shortchanged $120 an hour by a 6:5 game, and it is hard to believe that that amount of damage won't soon be felt.
If MGM goes through with its horrible idea, it will present a golden opportunity for its competition to tout the availability of its full-pay blackjack games. Explaining the difference between a 3:2 game and a 6:5 game isn't that complicated and should be easily accomplished in newspaper, magazine, billboard and online advertising.
I predict that if MGM goes through with this plan, its blackjack play will drop off precipitously and it will be forced to relent. You read it here first.
The other item of interest is from Vegas Inc., also by way of Las Vegas Advisor. It's about a report commissioned by the Association of Gaming Equipment Manufacturers which suggests that the reduction in slot machine payouts in recent years has led to a decline in slot revenues. The Vegas Inc. story, including a link to the study, can be found at http://vegasinc.com/business/gaming/2015/aug/20/slot-revenue-drops-machines-get-tighter-industry/
The idea that people will play less if games return less is a subject of hot debate in the gaming industry. Some believe that variance -- the ups and downs of a game's return -- far outweigh long-term average return in most players' experience. Others argue that the effect of a reduction in return cannot be masked for very long as players experience less "time on device" for their money.
My opinion is that the first point of view made more sense when gaming was confined mostly to a few resort destination. Now that gaming is widely available, many more people are able to play more often and get a more accurate idea of how quickly their money is likely to disappear in a typical session.
Absent from both the study and the Vegas Inc. article was any mention of the growth of penny slots in recent years. These machines have become very popular despite the fact that they have the lowest payouts. So, at least to some extent, slot players have themselves to blame for the lower returns they are getting.
Both of these news items bring to mind two recurring thoughts of mine concerning the casino business. First, unlike other transactions in a market economy, all aspects of gaming are a zero-sum game. What the players get comes out of the pockets of the casinos and vice-versa. Second, except for the pathetic addicted degenerate gamblers that the industry claims it would never want as customers, no one has to gamble. Casinos are in competition not only with each other but with all other forms of entertainment. Try to take so much from the customer that the enjoyment from gambling is no longer worth the cost, and people will do other things for fun.
Perhaps the biggest threat to the future of gaming as an industry is the constant craving of Wall Street for earnings growth. In this era of gaming saturation, expansion can no longer satisfy this appetite. As the big casino companies try to increase earnings by further squeezing their customers, they will reach a point where they hurt their own bottom line. We may be near that point now.
Showing posts with label blackjack. Show all posts
Showing posts with label blackjack. Show all posts
Saturday, August 22, 2015
Thursday, February 20, 2014
An amazing blackjack hand
Last Friday I was playing in the Blackjack Attack tournament at the Gold Coast in Las Vegas. It's a weekly tournament with a $25 buy-in and $2,500 prize pool. Not a lot of prize money, but a good way to get some real-life tournament experience without much risk.
The tournament game is double-deck, with the cards dealt face up. One of the players at my table starting hitting his hand -- I can't remember what he started with -- and soon five aces had appeared. By the time the dealer was through, eight cards formed a jagged line from the player's betting spot to the chip tray. The total, of course, was 21.
I'm as sure as I can be that it was the first eight-card hand I'd ever seen in about nine years of playing blackjack.
The amazing thing, of course, was that the hand was dealt to a player. Usually -- or at least it seems -- multi-card hands totaling 21 show up on the dealer's side of the table, usually when I have 20 or 21.
The tournament game is double-deck, with the cards dealt face up. One of the players at my table starting hitting his hand -- I can't remember what he started with -- and soon five aces had appeared. By the time the dealer was through, eight cards formed a jagged line from the player's betting spot to the chip tray. The total, of course, was 21.
I'm as sure as I can be that it was the first eight-card hand I'd ever seen in about nine years of playing blackjack.
The amazing thing, of course, was that the hand was dealt to a player. Usually -- or at least it seems -- multi-card hands totaling 21 show up on the dealer's side of the table, usually when I have 20 or 21.
Thursday, December 26, 2013
Differences between gambling and real life
In real life, if something happens again and again, we assume it's going to keep happening, and almost always we're right. The sun came up in the morning two days ago, yesterday and today. We can be all but certain it will come up tomorrow.
In gambling, that's often not the case. In blackjack, we can hit 16 against the dealer's 10 and bust, and do it again and bust, and do it again and bust. Yet the right play, for a non-card counter, is to do it every time. In the long run, the player will come out very slightly ahead by always hitting the 16.
Why can't we learn from the experience of hitting the 16 and busting again and again? Basically because gambling is governed by the mathematics of random events, not by the laws of nature.
The first thing we must understand is the meaning of "random." Many people seem to think that random means scattered all over the place, without any pattern. Not necessarily. Random outcomes can include significant streaks or bunching of results.
So even though hitting the 16 will produce enough positive results to make it worthwhile, it can -- and will -- result in the player busting two, threee, four and more times consecutively. It seems to be stupid to continue such a futile move, but the mathematics of gambling asserts itself over thousands and thousands of trials, not over half a dozen hands of blackjack.
As a result of not understanding this principle, gamblers often try to get a different result by making changes that cannot affect the outcome of the game or can affect it only negatively.
An acqaintance of mine, a video poker player, does this by pulling or inserting her player's card when things are going bad, by swtiching games and/or denomination played, and by changing the number of coins she bets. (One time I saw her hit a royal on a less-than-full-coin bet, which cost her a lot of money and some embarrassment.)
Here's why these things don't work: The part of the machine that deals the cards doesn't know if a player's card is inserted or not. By not using your player's card every time you play on a machine, you're just denying yourself comps and other casino marketing benefits. Switching games or denominations isn't going to alter your long-term results. You should always play what for you is the best game available at the denomination that best fits your bankroll. Given the promotions available on a particular day, there is usually only one game and one denomination that will give a particular player the best long-term results. And, there is almost never a good reason to bet less than the maximum on video poker, because of the huge penalty on a royal hit with less than maximum coin. And again, the part of the machine that deals the cards has no idea how many coins have been bet.
Another way in which gambling differs from most other aspects of life is the relationship between effort and result. In gambling, practice and study do pay off, but only in a long run measured in months or years. An expert video poker player can lose session after session while a ploppie sitting next to him keeps hitting winning hands.
It's not hard to accept that gambling is subject to ups and downs in the short run, but the losing streaks can be lengthy and brutal. And there isn't a lot you can do about it, except to let time and the mathematics take their course.
If you've ever played golf, you might have experienced a similar level of futility.
In gambling, that's often not the case. In blackjack, we can hit 16 against the dealer's 10 and bust, and do it again and bust, and do it again and bust. Yet the right play, for a non-card counter, is to do it every time. In the long run, the player will come out very slightly ahead by always hitting the 16.
Why can't we learn from the experience of hitting the 16 and busting again and again? Basically because gambling is governed by the mathematics of random events, not by the laws of nature.
The first thing we must understand is the meaning of "random." Many people seem to think that random means scattered all over the place, without any pattern. Not necessarily. Random outcomes can include significant streaks or bunching of results.
So even though hitting the 16 will produce enough positive results to make it worthwhile, it can -- and will -- result in the player busting two, threee, four and more times consecutively. It seems to be stupid to continue such a futile move, but the mathematics of gambling asserts itself over thousands and thousands of trials, not over half a dozen hands of blackjack.
As a result of not understanding this principle, gamblers often try to get a different result by making changes that cannot affect the outcome of the game or can affect it only negatively.
An acqaintance of mine, a video poker player, does this by pulling or inserting her player's card when things are going bad, by swtiching games and/or denomination played, and by changing the number of coins she bets. (One time I saw her hit a royal on a less-than-full-coin bet, which cost her a lot of money and some embarrassment.)
Here's why these things don't work: The part of the machine that deals the cards doesn't know if a player's card is inserted or not. By not using your player's card every time you play on a machine, you're just denying yourself comps and other casino marketing benefits. Switching games or denominations isn't going to alter your long-term results. You should always play what for you is the best game available at the denomination that best fits your bankroll. Given the promotions available on a particular day, there is usually only one game and one denomination that will give a particular player the best long-term results. And, there is almost never a good reason to bet less than the maximum on video poker, because of the huge penalty on a royal hit with less than maximum coin. And again, the part of the machine that deals the cards has no idea how many coins have been bet.
Another way in which gambling differs from most other aspects of life is the relationship between effort and result. In gambling, practice and study do pay off, but only in a long run measured in months or years. An expert video poker player can lose session after session while a ploppie sitting next to him keeps hitting winning hands.
It's not hard to accept that gambling is subject to ups and downs in the short run, but the losing streaks can be lengthy and brutal. And there isn't a lot you can do about it, except to let time and the mathematics take their course.
If you've ever played golf, you might have experienced a similar level of futility.
Saturday, December 21, 2013
A (minor) coupon catastrophe
Every month Station Casinos sends me four free bets or two free bets and two match plays for use on table games. A free bet coupon can be used just like a chip, but in this case for one bet only. Win or lose, the dealer takes the coupon. A match play works the same way, but can be used only with chips equal to or greater than the amount of the coupon.
On Thursday I took my $15 free bet to a Stations property with the intent of playing only one hand of blackjack. I rarely do this, figuring that the free bets and match plays will dry up if I don't give the casino a reasonable amount of play. With Stations, about 50 minutes once a week has been enough to keep these coupons coming for years.
But I was headed out of town the next morning and had a long list of offers to take advantage of Thursday. So I walked up to a $10 double-deck table and put down my free bet. The dealer flips over a 6, one of the best cards for the players. I'm dealt an 8 and a 2, creating an ripe double-down opportunity. So I reach into my wallet and throw three $5 bills onto the table. The dealer turns over a five and then, as sure as night follows day, deals himself a "monkey" (face card) for 21. The only card that could have helped me was an ace, and I didn't get it. So my "free" bet wound up costing me $15.
The unexpected, both good and bad, happens often in gambling, but in the long run, any mathematical advantage you can get will play out. Free bets and match plays are definitely worth using, even though you will often lose with them and -- on rare occasions -- they can actually cost you money.
On Thursday I took my $15 free bet to a Stations property with the intent of playing only one hand of blackjack. I rarely do this, figuring that the free bets and match plays will dry up if I don't give the casino a reasonable amount of play. With Stations, about 50 minutes once a week has been enough to keep these coupons coming for years.
But I was headed out of town the next morning and had a long list of offers to take advantage of Thursday. So I walked up to a $10 double-deck table and put down my free bet. The dealer flips over a 6, one of the best cards for the players. I'm dealt an 8 and a 2, creating an ripe double-down opportunity. So I reach into my wallet and throw three $5 bills onto the table. The dealer turns over a five and then, as sure as night follows day, deals himself a "monkey" (face card) for 21. The only card that could have helped me was an ace, and I didn't get it. So my "free" bet wound up costing me $15.
The unexpected, both good and bad, happens often in gambling, but in the long run, any mathematical advantage you can get will play out. Free bets and match plays are definitely worth using, even though you will often lose with them and -- on rare occasions -- they can actually cost you money.
Monday, April 23, 2012
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.
Monday, February 27, 2012
Some questions about a new game
On a recent visit to the Las Vegas Hotel and Casino -- formerly the Las Vegas Hilton -- I couldn't help but notice a new game just inside the entrance to the race and sports book (I also saw this game downtown at the Four Queens). Called "Triple Towers Greyhound Racing," It's a two-sided big-screen TV surrounded by betting stations. Every few minutes an animated dog race is run on the TV. It's fun to watch, but I wouldn't think of playing unless I had the answers to these questions:
How is the order in which the dogs finish each race determined? If it's random, how is randomization achieved? If it's not random,what factors are involved? The game designates some dogs as favorites or underdogs, based on the results of their past five races. But if the race results are random, this information means nothing.
What is the casino's takout from the bets made? In other words, what is the average percentage return on each bet to the players? How does this compare with what actual dog tracks take out?
Triple Towers is an offshoot of the trend toward electronic table games, including blackjack, roulette, craps and three-card poker. Judging by their increased presence on casino floors, these games appear to be popular with players, possibly in part because of their usually lower minimum bets than their real-like counterparts. But do these games offer players a good value?
My concern in this regard, which also applies to the greyhound race game, is that the house edge (or track takeout) on the "real" games (or race bets) reflects the cost of operating those games, particularly paying the dealers, pit clerks, supervisors and other employees involved. These costs should be much less for the electronic versions, so the odds should be better for the players, right?
I haven't done any systematic study, but my casual observation suggests that this is not usually the case. The craps and roulette set-ups I've seen offer the same payouts as their real-life counterparts. In the case of roulette, this means a double-zero game (exception: some upright slot-like rouletter machines I've seen are single-zero). The blackjack games have varying rules, some paying 6-to-5 for blackjack, which is to be avoided in all manifestations of the game. Some of the blackjack games have very good rules, including surrender. The one downside is that they cannot accommodate re-splitting of hands, so players are limited to splitting each hand once.
Another downside is that at some casinos craps and roulette machines don't take players' cards, meaning no comps for playing these games. One casino worker explained to me that this is to prevent people from making offsetting bets such as both black and red on roulette and racking up lots of points while losing little money.
On the other hand, there is no dealer to tip, which saves some players money.
At one small casino, Monte Lago at Lake Las Vegas in Henderson, what had been a live table games pit under previous ownership now consists entirely of electronic games. I don't expect to see this happen soon at larger casinos, but the electronic versions are likely to replace some of the lower-limit (and less profitable) table games.
Particularly with the blackjack games, players should review the rules carefully before playing. And they should play the other games only if they're willing to give the house the same edge its gets on the live versions. In most cases, that's too much for me.
How is the order in which the dogs finish each race determined? If it's random, how is randomization achieved? If it's not random,what factors are involved? The game designates some dogs as favorites or underdogs, based on the results of their past five races. But if the race results are random, this information means nothing.
What is the casino's takout from the bets made? In other words, what is the average percentage return on each bet to the players? How does this compare with what actual dog tracks take out?
Triple Towers is an offshoot of the trend toward electronic table games, including blackjack, roulette, craps and three-card poker. Judging by their increased presence on casino floors, these games appear to be popular with players, possibly in part because of their usually lower minimum bets than their real-like counterparts. But do these games offer players a good value?
My concern in this regard, which also applies to the greyhound race game, is that the house edge (or track takeout) on the "real" games (or race bets) reflects the cost of operating those games, particularly paying the dealers, pit clerks, supervisors and other employees involved. These costs should be much less for the electronic versions, so the odds should be better for the players, right?
I haven't done any systematic study, but my casual observation suggests that this is not usually the case. The craps and roulette set-ups I've seen offer the same payouts as their real-life counterparts. In the case of roulette, this means a double-zero game (exception: some upright slot-like rouletter machines I've seen are single-zero). The blackjack games have varying rules, some paying 6-to-5 for blackjack, which is to be avoided in all manifestations of the game. Some of the blackjack games have very good rules, including surrender. The one downside is that they cannot accommodate re-splitting of hands, so players are limited to splitting each hand once.
Another downside is that at some casinos craps and roulette machines don't take players' cards, meaning no comps for playing these games. One casino worker explained to me that this is to prevent people from making offsetting bets such as both black and red on roulette and racking up lots of points while losing little money.
On the other hand, there is no dealer to tip, which saves some players money.
At one small casino, Monte Lago at Lake Las Vegas in Henderson, what had been a live table games pit under previous ownership now consists entirely of electronic games. I don't expect to see this happen soon at larger casinos, but the electronic versions are likely to replace some of the lower-limit (and less profitable) table games.
Particularly with the blackjack games, players should review the rules carefully before playing. And they should play the other games only if they're willing to give the house the same edge its gets on the live versions. In most cases, that's too much for me.
Saturday, January 28, 2012
The Rio's marketing to locals
The Rio is one of the casinos in Las Vegas owned by Caesars Entertainment, formerly Harrah's, known to advantage players and other knowledgeable and value-oriented gamblers as The Evil Empire. Caesars' other Vegas properties are on the Strip and cater almost exclusively to out-of-towners. The company and its mostly second-rate properties are known for lousy games, chintzy comps and high prices, especially compared with the locals' casinos. It's been widely rumored for some time that the company would like to unload the Rio, and it has been marketing the property to locals for the past couple of months.
The Rio is part of a geographic cluster of three casinos west of the Strip on Flamingo. The others are the Palms and Gold Coast, both of which offer much better video poker but rather unattractive (to me) blackjack. I was surprised to learn a few months ago that the Rio offers a decent version of the game I prefer, double-deck with a $25 minimum. The main thing that makes the Rio's game attractive is the good penetration provided by most dealers, which makes up for the petty rule prohibiting doubling after split. I also like the absence of a side bet, which can slow the game down considerably, and the relatively liberal rules on spreading hands (playing two hands is allowed at any time with a bet of least twice the table minimum).
One of the few good things about Caesars overly complex yet stingy comp system (called Total Rewards) is that it is relatively transparent. I have asked about my comp balance a couple of times at the players' clubs. From this experience I have concluded that my blackjack play at an average $50 bet is worth less than $2 an hour in comps. But a couple of months ago I was surprised to get from the Rio not just the free bets that some other casinos send their table games players, but an entire mailer offering free slot play, gifts and hotel room nights. Conspicuously absent were any dining offers.
The three $20 free bet coupons I received for a one-month period required that I go to the cage, which exchanged each one for two $10 coupons to use at the tables. I was delighted to discover that these coupons were "play 'til you lose," not "one bet only, win or lose," like most other free bet and match play coupons. The dealers at the Rio let the coupons ride on winning bets and pushes, greatly increasing their value. The typical coupon is taken by the dealer after any hand except a push.
My most recent mailer also included "mystery" free slot play. I was surprised to see this because I had never played any slots or video poker at the Rio and had not played any video poker at any Caesars property in probably a year. At any rate, I was expecting a minimal amount, $3, maybe $5. I was surprised to get $10, although I had to earn it by standing on line at both the players' club and the cage, which took the coupon I received at the club and issed me a ticket to put into a machine. This is an unbelievably cumbersome and labor-intensive process that would break down if the Rio had a significant number of local customers trying to get their free play at any one time. (By comparison, free play at most casinos is loaded on players' accounts and avaible for download on most slot and video poker machines.)
Another problem is where to use the ticket. The best games in dollars at the Rio are 8/5 bonus poker and 9/7 double bonus, with 9/6 jacks or better at $5 in the high limit room. The dollar games in particular, at just over 99.1 percent return, are not competitive with those at the nearby Palms and Gold Coast, which have a wide selection of games returning very close to 100 percent.
I recently took up the Rio on an offer of two free room nights. The Rio is an all-suite hotel, and my room was large and comfortable. I was put off when making my reservation when the agent tried to charge me a $10 "processing fee," which is unbelievable chutzpah in view of the Caesars billboards in Vegas attacking other operators' resort fees. I protested this fee and it did not wind up on my bill.
On the plus side, the TV channel lineup included MSNBC, which in my experience is rarely available in Las Vegas hotel rooms, although Fox News almost always is. On the down side, Caesars squeezes the lemon when it comes to in-room coffee, making K cups available at three for $8.
A couple of brief news items concerning the Rio: 1. KJ, a new seafood and dim sum Chinese restaurant, has opened where the small bowling alley was, between the poker room and Carnival World Buffet. I'll review it when I earn enough comps for a dinner, in maybe three or four years. 2. A new, supposedly faster, beverage service system divides tasks of taking orders and delivering drinks between new "beverage ambassadors" -- a number of them male -- with electronic tablets and the traditional cocktail servers. The order-taking ambassadors are not allowed to take tips.
I first played blackjack at the Rio not expecting much except a game I could beat in the long run. Although the Rio remains uncompetitive with the locals' casinos in many crucial ways, it has provided me with surprising value and likely will remain on my rotation as long as I'm allowed to play blackjack there.
The Rio is part of a geographic cluster of three casinos west of the Strip on Flamingo. The others are the Palms and Gold Coast, both of which offer much better video poker but rather unattractive (to me) blackjack. I was surprised to learn a few months ago that the Rio offers a decent version of the game I prefer, double-deck with a $25 minimum. The main thing that makes the Rio's game attractive is the good penetration provided by most dealers, which makes up for the petty rule prohibiting doubling after split. I also like the absence of a side bet, which can slow the game down considerably, and the relatively liberal rules on spreading hands (playing two hands is allowed at any time with a bet of least twice the table minimum).
One of the few good things about Caesars overly complex yet stingy comp system (called Total Rewards) is that it is relatively transparent. I have asked about my comp balance a couple of times at the players' clubs. From this experience I have concluded that my blackjack play at an average $50 bet is worth less than $2 an hour in comps. But a couple of months ago I was surprised to get from the Rio not just the free bets that some other casinos send their table games players, but an entire mailer offering free slot play, gifts and hotel room nights. Conspicuously absent were any dining offers.
The three $20 free bet coupons I received for a one-month period required that I go to the cage, which exchanged each one for two $10 coupons to use at the tables. I was delighted to discover that these coupons were "play 'til you lose," not "one bet only, win or lose," like most other free bet and match play coupons. The dealers at the Rio let the coupons ride on winning bets and pushes, greatly increasing their value. The typical coupon is taken by the dealer after any hand except a push.
My most recent mailer also included "mystery" free slot play. I was surprised to see this because I had never played any slots or video poker at the Rio and had not played any video poker at any Caesars property in probably a year. At any rate, I was expecting a minimal amount, $3, maybe $5. I was surprised to get $10, although I had to earn it by standing on line at both the players' club and the cage, which took the coupon I received at the club and issed me a ticket to put into a machine. This is an unbelievably cumbersome and labor-intensive process that would break down if the Rio had a significant number of local customers trying to get their free play at any one time. (By comparison, free play at most casinos is loaded on players' accounts and avaible for download on most slot and video poker machines.)
Another problem is where to use the ticket. The best games in dollars at the Rio are 8/5 bonus poker and 9/7 double bonus, with 9/6 jacks or better at $5 in the high limit room. The dollar games in particular, at just over 99.1 percent return, are not competitive with those at the nearby Palms and Gold Coast, which have a wide selection of games returning very close to 100 percent.
I recently took up the Rio on an offer of two free room nights. The Rio is an all-suite hotel, and my room was large and comfortable. I was put off when making my reservation when the agent tried to charge me a $10 "processing fee," which is unbelievable chutzpah in view of the Caesars billboards in Vegas attacking other operators' resort fees. I protested this fee and it did not wind up on my bill.
On the plus side, the TV channel lineup included MSNBC, which in my experience is rarely available in Las Vegas hotel rooms, although Fox News almost always is. On the down side, Caesars squeezes the lemon when it comes to in-room coffee, making K cups available at three for $8.
A couple of brief news items concerning the Rio: 1. KJ, a new seafood and dim sum Chinese restaurant, has opened where the small bowling alley was, between the poker room and Carnival World Buffet. I'll review it when I earn enough comps for a dinner, in maybe three or four years. 2. A new, supposedly faster, beverage service system divides tasks of taking orders and delivering drinks between new "beverage ambassadors" -- a number of them male -- with electronic tablets and the traditional cocktail servers. The order-taking ambassadors are not allowed to take tips.
I first played blackjack at the Rio not expecting much except a game I could beat in the long run. Although the Rio remains uncompetitive with the locals' casinos in many crucial ways, it has provided me with surprising value and likely will remain on my rotation as long as I'm allowed to play blackjack there.
Friday, December 31, 2010
A minor mistake
Last night while playing blackjack I made a mistake regarding the taking of insurance. It was an understandable error, but one I have made before and vowed never to make again, which made it partcularly annoying.
Insurance is offered when the dealer's upcard is an ace. A player who thinks the dealer has blackjack can put up to half his bet on a line on the table, making a side bet on the dealer's hand. If the dealer has blackjack, the insurance bet pays two-to-one. The player loses his main bet but is made whole by the win on the insurance bet. (This assumes the player does not himself have a blackjack. If he doesn, he can choose to take "even money" rather than the higher blackjack payout, coming out twice as good as with the push he would have if he decline even money.)
Insurance and even money are both bad bets most of the time. Unless a player is counting cards, he should never take insurance or even money. But if the remaining deck is rich enough in 10-value cards, the bet is a good one. In my counting system, Knock-Out, insurance is taken when the cout reaches one below the number at which the maximum bet is put out.
Last night I was playing a double-deck game with the cards dealt face-down. I was sitting at first base. When the dealer offered insurance, the count, based on his upcard and my two cards, was where I had to take it. I put the chips on the line. But I hadn't looked to my left to see whether either of the other two players at the table had flipped over a blackjack. After I put the money out, I noticed that the player at third base had done just that, bring the count below the point at which I should have taken insurance.
I would have felt better about my error if the dealer had blackjack anyway, but he didn't.
A little mistake, but one with a cost.
Insurance is offered when the dealer's upcard is an ace. A player who thinks the dealer has blackjack can put up to half his bet on a line on the table, making a side bet on the dealer's hand. If the dealer has blackjack, the insurance bet pays two-to-one. The player loses his main bet but is made whole by the win on the insurance bet. (This assumes the player does not himself have a blackjack. If he doesn, he can choose to take "even money" rather than the higher blackjack payout, coming out twice as good as with the push he would have if he decline even money.)
Insurance and even money are both bad bets most of the time. Unless a player is counting cards, he should never take insurance or even money. But if the remaining deck is rich enough in 10-value cards, the bet is a good one. In my counting system, Knock-Out, insurance is taken when the cout reaches one below the number at which the maximum bet is put out.
Last night I was playing a double-deck game with the cards dealt face-down. I was sitting at first base. When the dealer offered insurance, the count, based on his upcard and my two cards, was where I had to take it. I put the chips on the line. But I hadn't looked to my left to see whether either of the other two players at the table had flipped over a blackjack. After I put the money out, I noticed that the player at third base had done just that, bring the count below the point at which I should have taken insurance.
I would have felt better about my error if the dealer had blackjack anyway, but he didn't.
A little mistake, but one with a cost.
Two blackjack rules my brother hates
My brother, who lives in the Northeast and plays most of his blackjack at one of the huge Indian casinos in Connecticut, recently visited Las Vegas and couldn't stop complaining about the rule requiring dealers to hit soft 17, which has become pervasive here. (A few games are still available, at higher limits, in which the dealer stands on 17. Examples are the double deck games at the Mirage and Aria -- lowest minimum $25 --and in the high-limit room of the M Resort -- $100.)
He also railed against the "no double after split" rule at the Caesars (formerly Harrah's) properties where he gets free rooms and plays. (This rule is also common downtown.)
The first rule, hitting soft 17, costs the basic strategy player 0.2 percent. The second, no double after split, costs 0.13 percent -- at least in theory. But there are key differences in the ways the rules work in practice. I believe that the first is here to stay and likely will spread to those parts of the blackjack world where it is not now the norm. I'm not happy about that -- it's costing me money -- but I understand the logic from the casinos' point of view. The same cannot be said about the second rule, which probably doesn't help the casinos nearly as much as they think and hurts their employees as well as players.
First, a little background: In blackjack, a "soft" hand is one in which an ace can function as either a one or an 11. So a soft 17 is a hand such as ace, six or ace, three, three. Traditionally, dealers would stand on such hands. Hitting the soft 17 gives the house a chance to improve its hand. If the dealer's first two cards are ace, six, the hand is immediately improved if another ace or a two, three or four is drawn. In addition, the dealer can draw a card that seems to hurt the hand -- say a seven, resulting in a total of 14 -- but then can come up with a result better than 17 by drawing one of an even bigger number of cards. Because 10-value cards make up 30 percent of the deck, the dealer will often turn a soft 17 into a hard 17. This might seem to have no effect on the players -- the dealer's total is unchanged -- but it removes a card valuable to them.
On the other hand, this rule gives the dealer an opportunity to bust, giving all the players at the table with hands of less than 17 an unexpected win. This doesn't happen often enough to offset the harm the rule does to the players, but it happens often enough to add to the suspense and excitement of the game. Because of this, the typical player, who probably has no idea of the statistical disadvantge of the rule, probaly does not mind this rule.
From the house's point of view, the rule is always applied perfectly and there is no way the statistical gain it offers can be lost. Except to the relatively rare knowledgeable player -- not a desirable customer to the casino anyway -- there is no apparent downside to this rule.
The story concerning no double after split is different in key ways. First, where it is in force, there is usually a sign to that effect on the table. Even the relatively unsophisticated player is being told he is being deprived of a privilege he knows he has elsewhere; who wants to be told that? Second, to some degree, the rule is self-defeating to the casinos in pure financial terms. The 0.13 percent edge is provides assumes all players use perfect basic strategy, which is far, far from true. The house gains when players split when they shouldn't and then double on those split hands. This rule deprives the casinos of that gain. By limiting doubling and reducing splitting -- fewer hands are worth splitting if doubling isn't possible -- casinos with this rule are taking the most exciting hands out of the game, reducing its entertainment value. And they are hurting the dealers they employ by depriving them of the the tips that result from big wins -- such as the ones that result when a dealer busts and a three- or four-way split with a double down or two pays off.
To the extent that I can take the casinos' perspective, hitting soft 17 makes sense. Not allowing doubling after split appears to be, at best, not worth the cost, and at worst totally self-defeating. And, fortunately, players still have plenty of opportunities to avoid these games. If this rule can't be eliminated, I believe it can be contained if players vote with their feet.
He also railed against the "no double after split" rule at the Caesars (formerly Harrah's) properties where he gets free rooms and plays. (This rule is also common downtown.)
The first rule, hitting soft 17, costs the basic strategy player 0.2 percent. The second, no double after split, costs 0.13 percent -- at least in theory. But there are key differences in the ways the rules work in practice. I believe that the first is here to stay and likely will spread to those parts of the blackjack world where it is not now the norm. I'm not happy about that -- it's costing me money -- but I understand the logic from the casinos' point of view. The same cannot be said about the second rule, which probably doesn't help the casinos nearly as much as they think and hurts their employees as well as players.
First, a little background: In blackjack, a "soft" hand is one in which an ace can function as either a one or an 11. So a soft 17 is a hand such as ace, six or ace, three, three. Traditionally, dealers would stand on such hands. Hitting the soft 17 gives the house a chance to improve its hand. If the dealer's first two cards are ace, six, the hand is immediately improved if another ace or a two, three or four is drawn. In addition, the dealer can draw a card that seems to hurt the hand -- say a seven, resulting in a total of 14 -- but then can come up with a result better than 17 by drawing one of an even bigger number of cards. Because 10-value cards make up 30 percent of the deck, the dealer will often turn a soft 17 into a hard 17. This might seem to have no effect on the players -- the dealer's total is unchanged -- but it removes a card valuable to them.
On the other hand, this rule gives the dealer an opportunity to bust, giving all the players at the table with hands of less than 17 an unexpected win. This doesn't happen often enough to offset the harm the rule does to the players, but it happens often enough to add to the suspense and excitement of the game. Because of this, the typical player, who probably has no idea of the statistical disadvantge of the rule, probaly does not mind this rule.
From the house's point of view, the rule is always applied perfectly and there is no way the statistical gain it offers can be lost. Except to the relatively rare knowledgeable player -- not a desirable customer to the casino anyway -- there is no apparent downside to this rule.
The story concerning no double after split is different in key ways. First, where it is in force, there is usually a sign to that effect on the table. Even the relatively unsophisticated player is being told he is being deprived of a privilege he knows he has elsewhere; who wants to be told that? Second, to some degree, the rule is self-defeating to the casinos in pure financial terms. The 0.13 percent edge is provides assumes all players use perfect basic strategy, which is far, far from true. The house gains when players split when they shouldn't and then double on those split hands. This rule deprives the casinos of that gain. By limiting doubling and reducing splitting -- fewer hands are worth splitting if doubling isn't possible -- casinos with this rule are taking the most exciting hands out of the game, reducing its entertainment value. And they are hurting the dealers they employ by depriving them of the the tips that result from big wins -- such as the ones that result when a dealer busts and a three- or four-way split with a double down or two pays off.
To the extent that I can take the casinos' perspective, hitting soft 17 makes sense. Not allowing doubling after split appears to be, at best, not worth the cost, and at worst totally self-defeating. And, fortunately, players still have plenty of opportunities to avoid these games. If this rule can't be eliminated, I believe it can be contained if players vote with their feet.
Sunday, November 14, 2010
Barely off the Strip
This post is directed to serious blackjack and/or video poker players who are coming to Las Vegas and staying on or near the Strip, but looking for better games than the Strip casinos offer.
When it comes to blackjack, there are good games on the Strip, but the double-deck games are often available only at minimums of $25 and higher. There is little good video poker on the Strip, defined as games with 99.5 percent payback or better. Some Strip casinos do offer 9/6 jacks or better, but rarely at less than $5, unless you're willing to forgo comps (New York New York offers 9/6 Jacks at $1 and $2, but those machines don't accept a players club card).
This may come as a surprise, but Hooters offers some of the best video poker near the Strip. The good video poker is all on two banks of machines in front of the cage. Games include jacks or better (99.54 percent payback), "not so ugly" deuces wild (99.73 percent) and, on one machine only, double bonus deuces wild (99.81 percent). Slot club points for video poker accrue at a rate of one for every $3 coin in, but each dollar of free play costs only 100 points.
Hooters also offers $10-minimum double deck blackjack with typical locals casino rules and a 0.40 house edge. This game is not open all the time and is never on more than one table. Penetration varies by dealer.
This casino is a very short walk from the Strip at Tropicana, just east of the Tropicana hotel. It is easily accessible by the Monorail, which stops just across Tropicana Avenue at the MGM Grand.
Moving north, a longtime favorite of Strip casino workers and other locals is Ellis Island, a few minutes’ walk east of the Strip on Koval Lane just south of Flamingo Road. This casino, which got its name from founder Gary Ellis, features shoe and double deck blackjack games at $5 and video poker including “not so ugly” deuces at 25 cents and 9/6 jacks or better at up to $2. The casino building also houses a microbrewery, karaoke bar, restaurant, barbecue and Metro Pizza outlet. The casino and karaoke bars serve very generous drinks at moderate prices. Expect a wait at the restaurant (open 24 hours every day) and barbeque (open 4-10 p.m. every day). The restaurant is famous for its off-the-menu steak special, a 10-oz. filet-cut sirloin for $7.99, including an Ellis Island beer.
Farther east at Flamingo and Paradise Road, a fair walk or short bus or taxi ride from the Strip, is Terrible’s (named after founder “Terrible” Herbst, so-called by his competitors in the gas station business for undercutting their prices). The only video poker that meets the 99.5 percent criterion here is 9/6 jacks or better, at up to 50 cents, near the cashier. Double-deck blackjack is consistently offered at $10, based on my experience.
On the other side of the Strip, a long walk or short bus or taxi ride away, are the Palms and Gold Coast, directly across the street from each other. The Palms has one of the best and biggest selections of good video poker in Las Vegas, including a 25-cent full pay deuces wild (100.76 percent) progressive and a $1 full-pay double bonus (100.17 percent) progressive with progressives on the straight flush and quads as well as the royal flush. “Not so ugly” deuces and 9/6 jacks or better are available at pretty much all denominations, including on Triple Play/Five Play machines. Slot club points are worth a generous 0.25 percent.
The Palms also offers a range of blackjack games, including the variation Blackjack Switch. In the past double deck has been offered at $10, but I haven’t seen that for a while. Expect a minimum for double deck of $15 or even $25. Card counters would do better elsewhere; double deck penetration is set at 50 percent with a notch.
The Palms is a big, high-end property with lots of dining and entertainment options. On weekends it is filled with young club goers; during the week it draws an older crowd heavy with locals there for the good video poker and promotions.
The Gold Coast, across the street, has lots of $5 blackjack at all times with good Vegas rules (but consistently lousy penetration) and lots of good video poker, including 9/6 jacks, “not so ugly” deuces and double bonus deuces, at denominations of up to $2. A favorite of Chinese Americans, the Gold Coast has two Chinese restaurants among its dining options. Another nearby casino, the Orleans, is also part of the Coast group owned by Boyd Gaming. A free shuttle connects two and goes to the Strip at Flamingo as well.
Bracketing Las Vegas’ Chinatown area to the north, at Sahara Avenue at Interstate 15, is Palace Station, which offers blackjack with excellent rules and, usually, good penetration at as little as $5 for shoes and $10 for double deck. The selection of positive video poker games (found on machines labeled “Optimum Play” is less than at most other Station properties. To my recollection, no such games are offered at more than 50 cents, but like all things casino-related, that could change at any time.
Finally, the property most like a major Strip resort, but with much better games, is the Las Vegas Hilton, on Paradise Road east of the Strip and south of Sahara Avenue. The Hilton is a major property famous for its entertainment offerings and with excellent restaurants and full major-resort amenities.
The only downside concerning video poker at the Hilton is that all the good games are in the sports book area, which can be crowded, loud and smoky. The upside is the games themselves, including “not so ugly” deuces, loose deuce deuces wild (100.15 percent) and 9/6 jacks. All are offered at 25 cents and $1; the jacks are also offered at $5.
Blackjack at the Hilton is also excellent, with surrender offered not only on shoe games but also on double deck. Shoe games are sometimes offered at $5, usually at $10; double deck is offered at $25. Penetration for both is set by a notch, with about a deck and a third cut off for the six-deck game and about a third of the pack cut off the double-deck game.
The Hilton is a short walk from the Sahara or Riviera, and is accessible by the Monorail, which stops right at the hotel.
When it comes to blackjack, there are good games on the Strip, but the double-deck games are often available only at minimums of $25 and higher. There is little good video poker on the Strip, defined as games with 99.5 percent payback or better. Some Strip casinos do offer 9/6 jacks or better, but rarely at less than $5, unless you're willing to forgo comps (New York New York offers 9/6 Jacks at $1 and $2, but those machines don't accept a players club card).
This may come as a surprise, but Hooters offers some of the best video poker near the Strip. The good video poker is all on two banks of machines in front of the cage. Games include jacks or better (99.54 percent payback), "not so ugly" deuces wild (99.73 percent) and, on one machine only, double bonus deuces wild (99.81 percent). Slot club points for video poker accrue at a rate of one for every $3 coin in, but each dollar of free play costs only 100 points.
Hooters also offers $10-minimum double deck blackjack with typical locals casino rules and a 0.40 house edge. This game is not open all the time and is never on more than one table. Penetration varies by dealer.
This casino is a very short walk from the Strip at Tropicana, just east of the Tropicana hotel. It is easily accessible by the Monorail, which stops just across Tropicana Avenue at the MGM Grand.
Moving north, a longtime favorite of Strip casino workers and other locals is Ellis Island, a few minutes’ walk east of the Strip on Koval Lane just south of Flamingo Road. This casino, which got its name from founder Gary Ellis, features shoe and double deck blackjack games at $5 and video poker including “not so ugly” deuces at 25 cents and 9/6 jacks or better at up to $2. The casino building also houses a microbrewery, karaoke bar, restaurant, barbecue and Metro Pizza outlet. The casino and karaoke bars serve very generous drinks at moderate prices. Expect a wait at the restaurant (open 24 hours every day) and barbeque (open 4-10 p.m. every day). The restaurant is famous for its off-the-menu steak special, a 10-oz. filet-cut sirloin for $7.99, including an Ellis Island beer.
Farther east at Flamingo and Paradise Road, a fair walk or short bus or taxi ride from the Strip, is Terrible’s (named after founder “Terrible” Herbst, so-called by his competitors in the gas station business for undercutting their prices). The only video poker that meets the 99.5 percent criterion here is 9/6 jacks or better, at up to 50 cents, near the cashier. Double-deck blackjack is consistently offered at $10, based on my experience.
On the other side of the Strip, a long walk or short bus or taxi ride away, are the Palms and Gold Coast, directly across the street from each other. The Palms has one of the best and biggest selections of good video poker in Las Vegas, including a 25-cent full pay deuces wild (100.76 percent) progressive and a $1 full-pay double bonus (100.17 percent) progressive with progressives on the straight flush and quads as well as the royal flush. “Not so ugly” deuces and 9/6 jacks or better are available at pretty much all denominations, including on Triple Play/Five Play machines. Slot club points are worth a generous 0.25 percent.
The Palms also offers a range of blackjack games, including the variation Blackjack Switch. In the past double deck has been offered at $10, but I haven’t seen that for a while. Expect a minimum for double deck of $15 or even $25. Card counters would do better elsewhere; double deck penetration is set at 50 percent with a notch.
The Palms is a big, high-end property with lots of dining and entertainment options. On weekends it is filled with young club goers; during the week it draws an older crowd heavy with locals there for the good video poker and promotions.
The Gold Coast, across the street, has lots of $5 blackjack at all times with good Vegas rules (but consistently lousy penetration) and lots of good video poker, including 9/6 jacks, “not so ugly” deuces and double bonus deuces, at denominations of up to $2. A favorite of Chinese Americans, the Gold Coast has two Chinese restaurants among its dining options. Another nearby casino, the Orleans, is also part of the Coast group owned by Boyd Gaming. A free shuttle connects two and goes to the Strip at Flamingo as well.
Bracketing Las Vegas’ Chinatown area to the north, at Sahara Avenue at Interstate 15, is Palace Station, which offers blackjack with excellent rules and, usually, good penetration at as little as $5 for shoes and $10 for double deck. The selection of positive video poker games (found on machines labeled “Optimum Play” is less than at most other Station properties. To my recollection, no such games are offered at more than 50 cents, but like all things casino-related, that could change at any time.
Finally, the property most like a major Strip resort, but with much better games, is the Las Vegas Hilton, on Paradise Road east of the Strip and south of Sahara Avenue. The Hilton is a major property famous for its entertainment offerings and with excellent restaurants and full major-resort amenities.
The only downside concerning video poker at the Hilton is that all the good games are in the sports book area, which can be crowded, loud and smoky. The upside is the games themselves, including “not so ugly” deuces, loose deuce deuces wild (100.15 percent) and 9/6 jacks. All are offered at 25 cents and $1; the jacks are also offered at $5.
Blackjack at the Hilton is also excellent, with surrender offered not only on shoe games but also on double deck. Shoe games are sometimes offered at $5, usually at $10; double deck is offered at $25. Penetration for both is set by a notch, with about a deck and a third cut off for the six-deck game and about a third of the pack cut off the double-deck game.
The Hilton is a short walk from the Sahara or Riviera, and is accessible by the Monorail, which stops right at the hotel.
Saturday, October 9, 2010
A suprising development at the Las Vegas Hilton
First, a little background. Traditionally the game of blackjack is based on a payout of 3-to-2 for a player's two first cards of ace, ten (unless the dealer also has ace, ten). Such a hand is called a blackjack, indicating its singificance to the game.
A few years ago someone, probably an MBA, got the idea that you could pay less -- 6-to-5 -- for blackjack if you give players something in return for the lower payout. At first, that something was a single-deck game, which had disappeared from most casinos because it was too advantageous to good players.
More recently the 6-to-5 payout has spread to shoe games and games with rules that are less advantageous to the playes. In some cases the tradoff was entertainment, often in the form of sexy young women dealing and/or dancing. This was the case at the Las Vegas Hilton, which in the past few months installed a large pit with stages inside for young women to dance on. On recent visits I saw lots of players at these tables, which were all 6-to-5 games, some shoes, with minimums as high as $25. The players seemed happy and the money surely must have been rolling in.
Some imagine my surprise the other day when I walked through the main casino at the Hilton and saw empty carpet where the party pit had been. I decided to ask a floorman at the remaining pit what had happened. Surely, I said, the party pit was making money. Yes, he said, but many of the hotel's older customers didn't like it, and the casino decided to get rid of it.
I'm not sure exactly what to think of this development. I'm not a big fan of the party pits and would never play a blackjack game that pays 6-to-5. But I suspect that the bad games in casino subsidize the good ones, and I'm worried about what the Hilton might do to make up for the lost revenue.
I also don't know whether the Hilton did the right thing in respect to the customers who didn't like the party pit, or just made a business decision.
Whatever the motive behind it, the decision leaves a big hole on the Hilton's casino floor. I'll be interested to see what fills it.
A few years ago someone, probably an MBA, got the idea that you could pay less -- 6-to-5 -- for blackjack if you give players something in return for the lower payout. At first, that something was a single-deck game, which had disappeared from most casinos because it was too advantageous to good players.
More recently the 6-to-5 payout has spread to shoe games and games with rules that are less advantageous to the playes. In some cases the tradoff was entertainment, often in the form of sexy young women dealing and/or dancing. This was the case at the Las Vegas Hilton, which in the past few months installed a large pit with stages inside for young women to dance on. On recent visits I saw lots of players at these tables, which were all 6-to-5 games, some shoes, with minimums as high as $25. The players seemed happy and the money surely must have been rolling in.
Some imagine my surprise the other day when I walked through the main casino at the Hilton and saw empty carpet where the party pit had been. I decided to ask a floorman at the remaining pit what had happened. Surely, I said, the party pit was making money. Yes, he said, but many of the hotel's older customers didn't like it, and the casino decided to get rid of it.
I'm not sure exactly what to think of this development. I'm not a big fan of the party pits and would never play a blackjack game that pays 6-to-5. But I suspect that the bad games in casino subsidize the good ones, and I'm worried about what the Hilton might do to make up for the lost revenue.
I also don't know whether the Hilton did the right thing in respect to the customers who didn't like the party pit, or just made a business decision.
Whatever the motive behind it, the decision leaves a big hole on the Hilton's casino floor. I'll be interested to see what fills it.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Insurance
Playing blackjack recently at Sunset Station, I was reminded of one of the most widespread misconceptions among not only players but the dealers who advise them.
The dealer was showing an ace and the count was high. I put chips amounting to half my bet on the insurance line (no one else at the table did), and the dealer flipped a 10 for the dreaded blackjack. Except for one who had blackjack and pushed, every other player but me lost his bet. My insurance bet paid 2-to-1, conveniently covering the main bet I lost and leaving me, effectively, with a push.
One of the players asked the dealer to explain insurance, which he did pretty well. If the dealer has an ace up, players can put half their bet or less on the insurance line. If the dealer has blackjack, a full insurance bet covers the lost main bet, leaving the player whole. If the dealer doesn't have blackjack, the insurance bet loses, and play of the round continues normally, with the main bet winning or losing based on the player's and dealer's hands.
Then the dealer said something I've heard dozens of times even though it makes no sense at all. You should insure a good hand, he told the player -- unless you want to gamble. Many players believe you should insure a had such as two 10-value cards but never a bad hand such as two small cards. (Many players also believe you should never hit a soft 18, another part of "folk" basic strategy that is wrong.)
Here's why that belief is wrong: The insurance bet has nothing to do with the player's hand. It is a bet on whether the dealer has blackjack. If the dealer has BJ, the insurance bet wins, no matter what the player's hand. If the dealer doesn't have BJ, the player loses the insurance bet no matter how good his hand is. In fact, as the authors of "Knock-Out Blackjack" point out, if a player has two 10-value cards, that's two less cards available for the dealer to get and make blackjack with, meaning the odds of winning the insurance bet are actually less when the player has such a hand than when he has, say, a 7 and 8.
So what to do about insurance? Unless you're a card counter, don't ever take it. It's a good bet only when the remaining deck or shoe is particularly rich in 10-value cards, and unless you are counting you have no way of knowing when this is. The cards in your hand have no significant effect on the dealer's likelihood of making a BJ, which is all the insurance bet is about. So don't ever insure a "good" hand unless you're counting, but be ready to hear "you should have taken insurance" if the dealer has BJ against your pair of monkeys.
The dealer was showing an ace and the count was high. I put chips amounting to half my bet on the insurance line (no one else at the table did), and the dealer flipped a 10 for the dreaded blackjack. Except for one who had blackjack and pushed, every other player but me lost his bet. My insurance bet paid 2-to-1, conveniently covering the main bet I lost and leaving me, effectively, with a push.
One of the players asked the dealer to explain insurance, which he did pretty well. If the dealer has an ace up, players can put half their bet or less on the insurance line. If the dealer has blackjack, a full insurance bet covers the lost main bet, leaving the player whole. If the dealer doesn't have blackjack, the insurance bet loses, and play of the round continues normally, with the main bet winning or losing based on the player's and dealer's hands.
Then the dealer said something I've heard dozens of times even though it makes no sense at all. You should insure a good hand, he told the player -- unless you want to gamble. Many players believe you should insure a had such as two 10-value cards but never a bad hand such as two small cards. (Many players also believe you should never hit a soft 18, another part of "folk" basic strategy that is wrong.)
Here's why that belief is wrong: The insurance bet has nothing to do with the player's hand. It is a bet on whether the dealer has blackjack. If the dealer has BJ, the insurance bet wins, no matter what the player's hand. If the dealer doesn't have BJ, the player loses the insurance bet no matter how good his hand is. In fact, as the authors of "Knock-Out Blackjack" point out, if a player has two 10-value cards, that's two less cards available for the dealer to get and make blackjack with, meaning the odds of winning the insurance bet are actually less when the player has such a hand than when he has, say, a 7 and 8.
So what to do about insurance? Unless you're a card counter, don't ever take it. It's a good bet only when the remaining deck or shoe is particularly rich in 10-value cards, and unless you are counting you have no way of knowing when this is. The cards in your hand have no significant effect on the dealer's likelihood of making a BJ, which is all the insurance bet is about. So don't ever insure a "good" hand unless you're counting, but be ready to hear "you should have taken insurance" if the dealer has BJ against your pair of monkeys.
Saturday, April 3, 2010
Best of Vegas? (Part I)
Each year the Review-Journal comes out with the in numerous categories as chosen by the newspaper's readers and staff. Many businesses use the "Best of Vegas" seal as a kind of Good Housekeeping seal of approval to gain public confidence. In my opinion these "awards" are just about meaningless, as a close look at some of the gambling winners will show.
Forget (if you can) that the same pool of voters who selected the gambling winners found that in Vegas, which has some of the finest restaurants in the world, the "best" this year included Applebees, the Olive Garden and the Red Lobster. These people don't have any particular expertise in the areas in which they voted, and they are not statistically representative of the R-J's readers. They're just people who decided to vote.
Nonetheless, just as the blind squirrel sometimes finds an acorn, some of their choices aren't bad. In particular, a case can be made for Sunset Station as offering the best blackjack, though not for the reasons stated in the newspaper, which cited "Wicked 21" blackjack offered on Friday and Saturday nights.
So what criteria would I use to choose the "best blackjack" winner, and what casino would that be?
First, we need to address the issue "best for whom" -- the $5 player or the $100 player? The tourist or the card counter? In blackjack and other categories, there is no one "best" for everyone. Here are the criteria I would use in evaluating casinos for the quality of their blackjack, in descending order of importance:
1. Availability. Most players should be able to find a seat most of the time at a game they want to play for a minimum bet amount they're comfortable with.
2. Rules. Doubling on any first two cards and doubling after splitting should be allowed in all games. Resplitting of aces, dealer standing on soft 17, and late surrender earn extra points. If games that pay 6-to-5 for blackjack are offered, they should be in a small minority and clearly labeled.
3. Variety. Double deck should be available. Shoe games should be six decks, not eight. Continuous shuffling machines are OK for lower-limit games as long as players have other choices.
4. Extras. Promotions especially for, or at least that include, table players earn extra credit.
5. Atmosphere, surroundings, decor, including ventilation and availability of non-smoking areas.
6. Friendliness and competence of dealers and pit staff.
7. Good penetration. Dealers don't spend half their time shuffling.
8. Tables without side bets so players have a choice.
By these criteria, I think the choice of Sunset Station is a reasonable one. The casino generally has a reasonable number of tables open, including double deck for as low as $10. The rules are better than average, with resplitting of aces allowed, though surrender is not offered on any games. The table games area has a spectacular ceiling and is well ventilated. Dealers are competent and mostly friendly. As primarly a locals' casino, Sunset attracts mostly reasonably competent players who allow the games to keep moving.
On the negative side, the Stations in general don't do much to promote blackjack (or other table games). Their comp system for table games is opaque and, in my experience, not very generous.
On the whole, though, the Stations are among the best places in Vegas for the low- to mid-level blackjack player. Other places I like to play include the M Resort, Mirage, Aria, Rampart and the Orleans.
In my next post, I'll discuss why I disagree with the Review-Journal readers' choice of South Point as having the best video poker, though I don't think it's a bad place at all for that game.
Forget (if you can) that the same pool of voters who selected the gambling winners found that in Vegas, which has some of the finest restaurants in the world, the "best" this year included Applebees, the Olive Garden and the Red Lobster. These people don't have any particular expertise in the areas in which they voted, and they are not statistically representative of the R-J's readers. They're just people who decided to vote.
Nonetheless, just as the blind squirrel sometimes finds an acorn, some of their choices aren't bad. In particular, a case can be made for Sunset Station as offering the best blackjack, though not for the reasons stated in the newspaper, which cited "Wicked 21" blackjack offered on Friday and Saturday nights.
So what criteria would I use to choose the "best blackjack" winner, and what casino would that be?
First, we need to address the issue "best for whom" -- the $5 player or the $100 player? The tourist or the card counter? In blackjack and other categories, there is no one "best" for everyone. Here are the criteria I would use in evaluating casinos for the quality of their blackjack, in descending order of importance:
1. Availability. Most players should be able to find a seat most of the time at a game they want to play for a minimum bet amount they're comfortable with.
2. Rules. Doubling on any first two cards and doubling after splitting should be allowed in all games. Resplitting of aces, dealer standing on soft 17, and late surrender earn extra points. If games that pay 6-to-5 for blackjack are offered, they should be in a small minority and clearly labeled.
3. Variety. Double deck should be available. Shoe games should be six decks, not eight. Continuous shuffling machines are OK for lower-limit games as long as players have other choices.
4. Extras. Promotions especially for, or at least that include, table players earn extra credit.
5. Atmosphere, surroundings, decor, including ventilation and availability of non-smoking areas.
6. Friendliness and competence of dealers and pit staff.
7. Good penetration. Dealers don't spend half their time shuffling.
8. Tables without side bets so players have a choice.
By these criteria, I think the choice of Sunset Station is a reasonable one. The casino generally has a reasonable number of tables open, including double deck for as low as $10. The rules are better than average, with resplitting of aces allowed, though surrender is not offered on any games. The table games area has a spectacular ceiling and is well ventilated. Dealers are competent and mostly friendly. As primarly a locals' casino, Sunset attracts mostly reasonably competent players who allow the games to keep moving.
On the negative side, the Stations in general don't do much to promote blackjack (or other table games). Their comp system for table games is opaque and, in my experience, not very generous.
On the whole, though, the Stations are among the best places in Vegas for the low- to mid-level blackjack player. Other places I like to play include the M Resort, Mirage, Aria, Rampart and the Orleans.
In my next post, I'll discuss why I disagree with the Review-Journal readers' choice of South Point as having the best video poker, though I don't think it's a bad place at all for that game.
Laughlin, Nevada
The spouse and I spent a couple of days this week in Laughlin, a gambling center about 95 miles south of Las Vegas on the Colorado River. We had two free room nights at the Golden Nugget as a result of some play by the spouse at the Nugget in Vegas. If you're going to Laughlin and want to stay at a nice place, I recommend the Nugget, despite an incident in the parking garage that I'll describe later.
Laughlin caters mostly to low rollers, and a few places offers some decent opportunities for quarter video poker players and $5 blackjack players. A friend who is a low roller and a frequent visitor says he has gotten very generous room and dining offers from some of the places where he has played. He served as our guide during our first trip to Laughlin, just for a day, earlier in the month.
Probably the best gambling overall in Laughlin is at the Colorado Belle and Edgewater, adjacent properties owned by the Marnell family. Both have $5 double deck blackjack games with good penetration and each has a bank of 100 percent payback video poker machines, with all games at the quarter level. We also saw positive video poker at the Aquarius, which is affiliated with the Stratosphere and Arizona Charlie's properties in the Las Vegas area. The Aquarius has a $1 10/7 double bonus progressive, with a jackpot for the four aces as well as the royal. The same machines, just outside the hosts' office near the main entrance, have 16/10 "not so ugly" deuces for $1 as well. These were the only good video poker plays for $1 or more we saw in all of Laughlin, except for one game of 10/7 double bonus (100.17 percent payback) that we think was a programming mistake because it was in a casino where all the other games were horrible.
With few exceptions, the video poker situation in Laughlin can be described only as deplorable. In most places we checked the prevailing pay tables were 9/6 for double bonus (97.81 percent payback), 8/5 for jacks or better (97.30 percent) and 16/13 for deuces wild (96.77 percent). This appalling version of deuces is known as Colorado deuces and I always assumed the name came from the state, not the river. After visiting Laughlin, I'm not so sure.
The blackjack in Laughlin is characterized by a prohibition against doubling after split, even in some shoe games. This gives the house an additional edge of .13 percent against a perfect basic strategy player. It also takes the most exciting moments -- when the big money is out on the table -- out of the game, and prohibits customers from doing something many know they can do somewhere else, which I'm sure most appreciate as much as I do. Further, this stupid rule is self-defeating for the casinos because so few people play perfect basic strategy. They should want most of the players I saw to split and double down whenever they want; it would be money in the bank. Such rule can be made only by executives who go by statistics and not by any real experience at the gaming tables.
A couple of more things about blackjack in Laughlin: The signs at many tables say "double after any first two cards." A dealer at one place told us that in the past, many places in Laughlin allowed doubling on first two cards totaling 10 and 11 only. These signs conveniently avoid the issue of whether players can double after splitting, which was barred in all the double deck games I played in Laughlin, though it was allowed in the six deck shoe games at the Golden Nugget. If in doubt, ask the dealer. Also, table minimums are low -- mostly $5, some $10. I found it disconcerting when, at a couple of places, I put out a $30 bet and the dealer called out "green action." Nothing came of it, but the pit needs to know if someone is betting $30?
In terms of atmosphere, most of the places in Laughlin are on the level of downtown Las Vegas. As noted, the Nugget is the classiest, though the Aquarius claims to have the best (newly remodeled) rooms (you can see a mock-up on the casino floor). Out room at the Nugget was pretty standard. One thing I liked was the honor basket of snack items that were so reasonably priced we actually went for a couple of them, something I have never done in a hotel. The Nugget also has a nice tropical forest inside the main entrance, on a smaller scale but along the lines of the one at the Mirage, but with some of the flowers plastic, along the lines of the foliage at the Fiesta Henderson.
Sunday, February 14, 2010
A different kind of casino
After almost three years living in Vegas, I've visited most of the casinos in the area's major tourist areas. Until recently, one of the few exceptions was the Westin Casuarina, on Flamingo Road just east of the Strip. I did duck in a couple of months ago for a few minutes but didn't play. The other night a good players' club sign-up offer and a $25 table games match play coupon in the American Casino Guide got me in the door again. The offer was a rebate in free play of up to $50 in first-day slot or video poker losses. When I signed up, I was also given a $10 table games match play coupon.
What's different about the Westin is that although it's a short walk from the Strip, it has the atmosphere of a business hotel rather than a Vegas resort. The casino is small by Vegas standards for the size of the hotel, and it was quiet and crowd-free. The only businesses in the casino are a restaurant called Suede, a gift shop and a Starbucks coffee. There's one bar in the casino, with video poker.
The best video poker in the casino is 16/10 "not so ugly" deuces wild, which pays back 99.73 percent, for 25 cents. According to vpFREE2.com, 9/6 jacks or better (99.54 percent) is also available for 25 cents. The best game at higher denominations (50 cents, $1 and $2) is 15/9/4 "pseudo not so ugly" deuces wild (98.92 percent). Playing the 16/10, I quickly lost $50 and went to the players' club booth (which doubles as the cashiers' cage) and got my $50 rebate in free play, which I managed to turn into $50 cash for a break-even session.
Then it was time for blackjack. Two tables were open, one with a continuous-shuffle machine, the other with six decks, hand-shuffled. The minimum at both was $5. I chose the latter. A sign on the table detailed the rules, which are pretty standard: Dealer hits soft 17, double on any two cards, double after split, no re-slitting aces, no surrender (for a house edge of .63 against a basic strategy strategy player. For you card counters, penetration is set by notch at about 67 percent -- two full decks cut off.
For the center-Strip area, and especially with a $5 minimum, this isn't a bad blackjack game. It's certainly a lot better than the horrific 6-to-five games at the nearby Harrah's places. It's not a game I would normally play, but with $35 in match plays, my chances of winning a little money looked good. Alas, I lost my bet with the big coupon and left a loser by $40.
For machine play, the Westin gives both points than can be converted to free play and comp dollars for use in the restaurant, gift shop and Starbucks. According to vpFREE2, it takes $10 coin in to earn a point, and 100 points equal $5 in free play, which adds 0.5 percent to the players' return. This alone makes the 16/10 deuces a positive game for those who play it well. In addition to points, comp dollars are awarded at rates ranging from 0.48 percent to 0.93 percent, according to vpFREE2. Presumably the lowest rate is awarded for at least the better video poker games, but even so the total value of free play and comps comes to almost 1 percent, with this caveat:
Through the conversation at my blackjack table, I learned that the restaurant prices are quite high. In many casinos, restaurant prices are low, to draw in potential gamblers. Apparently the Westin restaurant is more of a typical of a business hotel, where many customers are on expense accounts and more interested in convenience than value. So the real value of the comp dollars may not be as high as their nominal value, considering available alternatives. Still, the overall return of the players' club benefits is quite good.
How often I return to the Westin may well depend on the offers, if any, I get in the mail. It doesn't seem to be a place that targets locals, but if I were a visitor who wanted to stay or play near the center Strip, it's definitely a place I would consider.
What's different about the Westin is that although it's a short walk from the Strip, it has the atmosphere of a business hotel rather than a Vegas resort. The casino is small by Vegas standards for the size of the hotel, and it was quiet and crowd-free. The only businesses in the casino are a restaurant called Suede, a gift shop and a Starbucks coffee. There's one bar in the casino, with video poker.
The best video poker in the casino is 16/10 "not so ugly" deuces wild, which pays back 99.73 percent, for 25 cents. According to vpFREE2.com, 9/6 jacks or better (99.54 percent) is also available for 25 cents. The best game at higher denominations (50 cents, $1 and $2) is 15/9/4 "pseudo not so ugly" deuces wild (98.92 percent). Playing the 16/10, I quickly lost $50 and went to the players' club booth (which doubles as the cashiers' cage) and got my $50 rebate in free play, which I managed to turn into $50 cash for a break-even session.
Then it was time for blackjack. Two tables were open, one with a continuous-shuffle machine, the other with six decks, hand-shuffled. The minimum at both was $5. I chose the latter. A sign on the table detailed the rules, which are pretty standard: Dealer hits soft 17, double on any two cards, double after split, no re-slitting aces, no surrender (for a house edge of .63 against a basic strategy strategy player. For you card counters, penetration is set by notch at about 67 percent -- two full decks cut off.
For the center-Strip area, and especially with a $5 minimum, this isn't a bad blackjack game. It's certainly a lot better than the horrific 6-to-five games at the nearby Harrah's places. It's not a game I would normally play, but with $35 in match plays, my chances of winning a little money looked good. Alas, I lost my bet with the big coupon and left a loser by $40.
For machine play, the Westin gives both points than can be converted to free play and comp dollars for use in the restaurant, gift shop and Starbucks. According to vpFREE2, it takes $10 coin in to earn a point, and 100 points equal $5 in free play, which adds 0.5 percent to the players' return. This alone makes the 16/10 deuces a positive game for those who play it well. In addition to points, comp dollars are awarded at rates ranging from 0.48 percent to 0.93 percent, according to vpFREE2. Presumably the lowest rate is awarded for at least the better video poker games, but even so the total value of free play and comps comes to almost 1 percent, with this caveat:
Through the conversation at my blackjack table, I learned that the restaurant prices are quite high. In many casinos, restaurant prices are low, to draw in potential gamblers. Apparently the Westin restaurant is more of a typical of a business hotel, where many customers are on expense accounts and more interested in convenience than value. So the real value of the comp dollars may not be as high as their nominal value, considering available alternatives. Still, the overall return of the players' club benefits is quite good.
How often I return to the Westin may well depend on the offers, if any, I get in the mail. It doesn't seem to be a place that targets locals, but if I were a visitor who wanted to stay or play near the center Strip, it's definitely a place I would consider.
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Saying goodbye
There are many reasons to play at one casino rather than another, but the bottom line for me is games I want to play -- games that give me a fair chance to come out ahead. For video poker, these include not just 100 percent payback games but games such as 16/10 "not so ugly deuces" with 99.73 percent payback that can be combined with players' club benefits to yield a positive return. Progressives can make games with otherwise unacceptable pay tables a good play.
This aging Strip property has been doing many things right. It has a generous players' club program that awards comp points, cash back and free play. The mailers I've gotten for my video poker play have offered generous amounts of free play. It offers point multipliers, gifts to local players and invitations to special events.
In recent weeks and months, several casinos have downgraded their video poker inventory, making it diffuclt for me to continue playing there. A case in point is one of the few Strip casinos that has made a genuine effort to go after the locals' business -- the Sahara.
This aging Strip property has been doing many things right. It has a generous players' club program that awards comp points, cash back and free play. The mailers I've gotten for my video poker play have offered generous amounts of free play. It offers point multipliers, gifts to local players and invitations to special events.The Sahara deserves compliments for its $1 blackjack. Many casinos that offer low-limit blackjack have only one table of it; the Sahara always has at least one full pit open. Players get paid only even money for blackjacks and don't get rated for comps unless they bet $5 per hand (in which cases blackjacks play 6-to-5). But it's the only place I know of in Vegas where you can play blackjack for $1, and at that bet level the average loss from the reduced payout for blackjack is about $1.50 an hour. (Normally any game that pay less than 3-to-2 for blackjacks is to be avoided like the plague; in this case the disadvantage to the player is mitigated by the small amount of the bets.)
For slot and video poker players the Sahara has a "Locals Lane" with video poker that used to be better than that in the main casino. Not too long ago the best game there was 10/7 double bonus (100.17 percent payback) for 50 cents; most recently it was 16/10 "not so ugly" deuces (99.73 percent payback), in denominations up to $1. I was happy to play this game there given the Sahara's slot club benefits.
A few weeks ago, I found that the deuces pay tables had been changed to 15/9/4 "pseudo not so ugly," aka "Illinois deuces," which pays back 98.91 percent. The best double bonus is now 9/7, which pays back 99.11 percent, and it isn't even in Locals Lane. Absent incentives such as a big progressive jackpot or point multiplier, there is no reason to play games with these pay tables. The Las Vegas Hilton, right across the street, offers better games, including 16/10 deuces and 9/6 jacks or better (99.54 percent payback).
Nothing's forever in the casino business, and it's possible the folks at the Sahara will realize they've gone too far. But until they bring back the better pay tables or something else worthwile, I'll be using up my free play and than spending my time at other casinos.
Monday, January 18, 2010
More on L.V. Hilton blackjack
Penetration in double deck games generally ranges from about 50 percent (very poor) to about 80 percent (excellent). In most casinos, pentration is determined by the dealers, who place the cut card manually, usually according to a house standard. Other casinos, including the Hilton, eliminate variations in penetration by having the dealers use a notch placed in the discard rack (for double deck games) or shoe (six or eight deck games) to place the cut card. Double deck penetration at the Hilton appears to be between 60 and 65 percent, about average. A player can "improve" the penetration by spreading hands, which requires each bet to be double the table minimum.
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Blackjack at the Las Vegas Hilton
You might not think of the Las Vegas Hilton as a locals' place, but compared with other big casinos on and near the Strip, it does a lot to appeal to Las Vegas area residents.
For one thing, locals get a "Hometown Hot Spot" sticker on their players cards entitling them to 25 percent off at all restaurants in the hotel.
The games at the Hilton are a notch above those found on the Strip, especially for lower-denomination players. Several video poker games, including 9/6 Jacks or Better and 16/10 Deuces Wild ("Not So Ugly Deuces") return more than 99-1/2 percent with perfect play. The best video poker is found in the Sports Book.
In recent years the blackjack at the Hilton has been, at best, mixed. A six-deck shoe game with surrender was offered with a $5 or $10 minimum, but usually only on one or two tables. Double deck was available, at $25 minimum, but with doubling after split not allowed. There were often numerous tables of single-deck 21 paying only 6-to-5 for blackjack, a rip-off game that's also found in many Strip casinos.
On recent visits to the Hilton, I found several tables of the good shoe game with a $10 minimum. I also found that the double deck rules had changed to allow doubling after split, resplitting aces -- and surrender. To the best of my knowledge, this is the only double deck game in Vegas with a full 3-to-2 payoff for blackjacks in which surrender is allowed.
For those not familiar with this rule, it allows players, after receiving their first two cards -- let's say a 10 and a six against a dealer's 10 -- to fold, and keep half their bet. I always surrender a 16 (except a pair of eights) against a dealer's ace, 10 or nine, and any 15 against a dealer's 10.
This double deck game is available with a minumum of as low as $10, compared with $25 for decent double deck on the Strip. At least it was on a recent weeknight. On a weekend day, the minimum was $25.
It's good to see the Hilton bucking the trend of making games worse for players, and taking on the locals' casinos for the blackjack business of players who appreciate rules that give them the best chance against the house.
For one thing, locals get a "Hometown Hot Spot" sticker on their players cards entitling them to 25 percent off at all restaurants in the hotel.
The games at the Hilton are a notch above those found on the Strip, especially for lower-denomination players. Several video poker games, including 9/6 Jacks or Better and 16/10 Deuces Wild ("Not So Ugly Deuces") return more than 99-1/2 percent with perfect play. The best video poker is found in the Sports Book.
In recent years the blackjack at the Hilton has been, at best, mixed. A six-deck shoe game with surrender was offered with a $5 or $10 minimum, but usually only on one or two tables. Double deck was available, at $25 minimum, but with doubling after split not allowed. There were often numerous tables of single-deck 21 paying only 6-to-5 for blackjack, a rip-off game that's also found in many Strip casinos.
On recent visits to the Hilton, I found several tables of the good shoe game with a $10 minimum. I also found that the double deck rules had changed to allow doubling after split, resplitting aces -- and surrender. To the best of my knowledge, this is the only double deck game in Vegas with a full 3-to-2 payoff for blackjacks in which surrender is allowed.
For those not familiar with this rule, it allows players, after receiving their first two cards -- let's say a 10 and a six against a dealer's 10 -- to fold, and keep half their bet. I always surrender a 16 (except a pair of eights) against a dealer's ace, 10 or nine, and any 15 against a dealer's 10.
This double deck game is available with a minumum of as low as $10, compared with $25 for decent double deck on the Strip. At least it was on a recent weeknight. On a weekend day, the minimum was $25.
It's good to see the Hilton bucking the trend of making games worse for players, and taking on the locals' casinos for the blackjack business of players who appreciate rules that give them the best chance against the house.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
