Popularity of blackjack in Vegas

Since October of 2007 in Las Vegas not all games crashed in the same amount.
============
Blackjack plunged more than any other game, and much more than slots. For the last posting (end of November 2009), blackjack revenue in the state of Nevada was just over $1 billion for the preceding 12 months. The last time it was that low was in 1997 (almost 12 years earlier). Since 2008 baccarat has displaced blackjack as the dominant pit game. Blackjack has been on top for decades. In general gaming revenue is back to levels of 5 years ago.
=============
I think something happened. It is some combination of the following:
(1) baccarat players have more money
(2) baccarat appeals to foreign players (especially Asians)
(3) blackjack is not as encouraged by the casinos because they shut down a lot of tables
(4) blackjack has been debased by casinos with rules such as 6:5 payouts. Although this increases the house edge, it turns off people and they play much less.
(5) the depression has increased competition with other states, most of which offer blackjack and slots. Baccarat is only available in a few places in the country like the high end casinos on the strip, and possibly Foxwoods casino in connecticut.

Baccarat has already returned to the pre-recession levels. Everything else is still plunging. I think that this has serious long term consequences for Vegas. I don't think you can build large scale future growth on the handful of very rich players who like to play baccarat. Even today there are 14 blackjack tables for every baccarat table. Meat and potato players will still at home and go to their local club or slot parlor or Indian casino instead of flying to Vegas.

Investors who bought "The Sahara" and "The stratosphere" and "Golden Nugget" have lost tons of money. Harrah's mostly has the old casinos in vegas, with only Ceasars having high end baccarat tables. The Tropicana is just coming out of bankruptcy. Herbst gaming, and Station casinos are both in bankruptcy. Downtown vegas is now at gaming revenues not seen since 1988.

I am thinking that Vegas may never recover except for the high end. If blackjack is back 12 years, and slots are back 6 years, and most pit games are back 5 years, then it may take forever to recover. Wynn, Venetian, Ceasars, Bellagio, Mandalay Bay, and Aria will cater to the baccarat players. I think that the rest will continue to slide.

It is sort of like Reno which will probably never hit new highs again. They haven't built a new casino since 1995, and many of the old ones are being converted to other uses (like condos). Meanwhile the Indians continually build new casinos in the Sacramento area where people can go for day trips from the urban areas.

What do you think?

The biggest problem Vegas faces (A.C. as well for that matter) is competition.

If you looked at NATIONWIDE gaming revenue at locations open for more than 12 months, I'm sure you'll see an increase since last year. Ditto for a any time span you choose.

Quote: pacomartin

Baccarat is only available in a few places in the country like the high end casinos on the strip, and possibly Foxwoods casino in connecticut.

It's also at Mohegan Sun, as well as at several locations in A.C. - although I'm not sure if it's just Mini Baccarat or the full size dogbone tables.

I should say that really what is missing is the baccarat lifestyle. Baccarat tables on the strip make over $5 million per table (per year) in revenue. There are baccarat tables in other locations in Vegas (like Hard Rock and some of the nicer local casinos). But they pull in something like $1 million per year. Many of the smaller casinos now offer mini-baccarat.
-------------
Hard Rock has a fancy casino with lots of table games (including 4 baccarat tables) but they only make $50 million a year on the casino. Many local casinos with a bunch of slot machines and a dozen tables make much more than that. Hard Rock just doesn't have the appeal to big time gamblers. They get a lot of kids who are happy to drop several hundred on dinner in expensive restaurants or in the bar and for concerts. They just opened an all-suite hotel tower hoping to appeal to some big time gamblers.

Quote: pacomartin

As most everyone on the planet knows, gaming revenue in Vegas has crashed since October of 2007 when the depression began. However, not all games crashed in the same amount.
============
Blackjack plunged more than any other game, and much more than slots. For the last posting (end of November 2009), blackjack revenue in the state of Nevada was just over $1 billion for the preceding 12 months. The last time it was that low was in 1997 (almost 12 years earlier). Since 2008 baccarat has displaced blackjack as the dominant pit game. Blackjack has been on top for decades. In general gaming revenue is back to levels of 5 years ago.
=============
I think something happened. It is some combination of the following:
(1) baccarat players have more money
(2) baccarat appeals to foreign players (especially Asians)
(3) blackjack is not as encouraged by the casinos because they shut down a lot of tables
(4) blackjack has been debased by casinos with rules such as 6:5 payouts. Although this increases the house edge, it turns off people and they play much less.
(5) the depression has increased competition with other states, most of which offer blackjack and slots. Baccarat is only available in a few places in the country like the high end casinos on the strip, and possibly Foxwoods casino in connecticut.

Baccarat has already returned to the pre-recession levels. Everything else is still plunging. I think that this has serious long term consequences for Vegas. I don't think you can build large scale future growth on the handful of very rich players who like to play baccarat. Even today there are 14 blackjack tables for every baccarat table. Meat and potato players will still at home and go to their local club or slot parlor or Indian casino instead of flying to Vegas.

Investors who bought "The Sahara" and "The stratosphere" and "Golden Nugget" have lost tons of money. Harrah's mostly has the old casinos in vegas, with only Ceasars having high end baccarat tables. The Tropicana is just coming out of bankruptcy. Herbst gaming, and Station casinos are both in bankruptcy. Downtown vegas is now at gaming revenues not seen since 1988.

I am thinking that Vegas may never recover except for the high end. If blackjack is back 12 years, and slots are back 6 years, and most pit games are back 5 years, then it may take forever to recover. Wynn, Venetian, Ceasars, Bellagio, Mandalay Bay, and Aria will cater to the baccarat players. I think that the rest will continue to slide.

It is sort of like Reno which will probably never hit new highs again. They haven't built a new casino since 1995, and many of the old ones are being converted to other uses (like condos). Meanwhile the Indians continually build new casinos in the Sacramento area where people can go for day trips from the urban areas.

What do you think?

I think BJ will recover at some point as not every casino can survive by chasing the high-end Asian Player. Put me in charge of a property and I'll double the BJ drop in 18 months. How would I do this?

1. Open tables at reasonable limits. A $10 player is more profitable than 2 $5 players but ZERO $25 players are less profitable than a $3 player. We probably can't go back to $1 tables but I'd open as many tables as I could and at limits that keep them full.

2. More fair rules. Out with the 6:5 nonsense. If you hire me there will be a sign outside and every billboard I can buy saying, "IF IT DOESN'T PAY 3:2 IT SHOULDN'T BE CALLED BLACKJACK!" Today's gambler is not totally stupid as years ago. They read books and websites. They know.

3. Friendly and helpful dealers. Get off the "hands per hour" and get dealers who make it fun. And if you hear "WINNER WINNER CHICKEN DINNER" so much the better. Heck, maybe even give a chicken dinner for a suited BJ? People go to a casino for FUN, give them what they want.

4. Add a "progressive" side bet. You win a hand you put the unit on a side bet (think "lucky ladies" type side bets.) eg: you start at $10 and win, so you put the $10 winnings on the side bet. Then you win $10 + 10 and put a second $10 side bet for $30 in play. Give a 2:1 bonus for if you get to 10 hands in a row. Thus $110 in play you get $220 in winnings. All that action will get some takers you can bet (no pun intended.)

5. Let dealers choose to "go for their own" tips. That will bump the service level.

6. Realize that Vegas was built on the $10 player and not the whale who will kill you on comps and "rebates." Encourage pit bosses to give a "discretionary" comp, heck even require a few. Have the attitude "ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN" like on the "Las Vegas" TV Show. Not cars, but a free dinner for someone who has been playing an hour or so (and is up, preferably.) "Hello sir, I'm a pit-boss. I like your play? Can I offer you a dinner?"

Note almost everything here follows the cardinal rule: "Keep them playing and keep them coming back. The more they play the more they lose. In the end we get it all."

See I think that there might be something to what you say. Tony Marnell III just opened up the "M resort" in Vegas. Two decades ago his father opened the Rio before he sold it to Harrah's. Harrah's is the king of 6:5 blackjack. Tony is going to offer some small food comps at M resort even if the player doesn't ask for them (and without charging a player's card). He is trying to re-create the "high touch" atmosphere of decades ago.
=============
They tell me that in the early 90's you could play table games downtown for a quarter. When they let you play table games for a quarter the revenue was much higher than it is today. There was a type of whale that used to like to wade into a crowded game of small players and throw down huge bets. But people liked the crowded atmosphere. Nowadays those whales are all off by themselves playing with other whales or alone.
============
I am surprised by the depth of the drop in blackjack. They were pulling in almost $1.5 billion in October 2007, and now it's dropped to $1 billion only two years later (1997 levels). That is far worse than other games. There is stuff happening that is over and above the recession. It's almost like the casinos would rather you play slots so they don't have to worry about payroll.

How much does it cost to keep a blackjack table open per hour?

Follow up question, can a casino afford to keep open a $5 minimum table with good player value (i.e. 0.26% house edge with perfect basic strategy). After all, most players don't play perfectly, but I would think that a full table at the $5 level would make more money then an empty $100 table.

I don't know how much it costs to keep a table open. I am sure it is a closely guarded secret. The new thing in Vegas is to having dancing girls by the blackjack tables, which has to cost something. I know that there are fewer blackjack tables now then there used to be because the casinos prefer newer games with higher edges. But the problem is every game (except blackjack) is going downhill. If blackjack were going down but slots were going up I would think the casinos would be making more money.

Quote: pacomartin

gaming revenue in Vegas has crashed since October of 2007 when the depression began. However, not all games crashed in the same amount.

Blackjack plunged more than any other game, and much more than slots. For the last posting (end of November 2009), blackjack revenue in the state of Nevada was just over $1 billion for the preceding 12 months. The last time it was that low was in 1997 (almost 12 years earlier). Since 2008 baccarat has displaced blackjack as the dominant pit game. Blackjack has been on top for decades. In general gaming revenue is back to levels of 5 years ago.

First of all, could you decrease the size of your image so that this page is not distorted? Thanks.

Good job collecting data, but it isn't the right data to draw your conclusions. You need to look at all the historical data that's available and normalize it. Here's a bit.

There were 187 carnival (non-traditional) game tables in 1990, 617 in 1999 and 955 in 2009. Carnival games are games like Pai Gow Poker, Caribbean Stud and so on. In the same time blackjack went from 3470 tables in 1990 to 3778 tables in 1999, to 3144 in 2009. To say blackjack has been on top for decades overlooks the lack of competition by non-traditional games.

Baccarat went from 71 tables in 1990 to 115 tables in 1999 to 231 tables in 2009. It's still a small player as far as the total number of tables. Three Card Poker currently has more tables in Nevada than baccarat. Also, agressive marketing to Asia has driven the growth of both bacarrat and Pai Gow Poker.

People are not leaving blackjack because of 6/5. People are playing more blackjack because of 6/5. The game of 6/5 is offering a price-point that allows casinos to offer low-limit games, drawing in players who can't afford a $25 minimum, for example. Harrah's, in particular, offers 6/5 specifically because of its broad ability to attract players, and develop them to play at higher limits. Without 6/5, there would be much less blackjack in Nevada.

Revenue is not a good indicator of market movement. It is driven by too many intabibles that can't be normalized out. Total tables (or percent tables) is a much better indicator of the growth or decline of market segements. In 1990, 3.85% of tables were carnival games. In 1999, 10.89% of tables were carnival games. In 2009, 17.36% of tables were carnival games. Now, that's a trend!

Another trend is seen through these numbers: there were 5667 tables for table games in 1999 and 5501 tables in 2009. That's a decrease in total tables for table games, in spite of the incredible growth of gaming space in Nevada during that period. The easy conclusion here is that the trend is for there to be fewer table games per casino (the space is being allocated to slots), and for more of these games to be carnival games. The market has spoken.

--Dorothy

I'm not sure how to decrease the size of the image. I made it in excel, used Gimp to turn it into PNG file, and uploaded into Wikimedia Commons. For this forum I used the IMG to refer to the location in Wikimedia. Perhaps the administrator could help me out here,

======================

Dorothy, I respect your analysis. But I was trying to figure out where the decreases are coming. Part of the decrease in BJ revenue is the elimination of BJ tables. We've known for some time that the casinos would like to de-emphasize blackjack since it has such a low house edge and it is expensive to operate. Roulette and Craps have higher house edges (depending on how you play) and most carnival games have much higher edges.

But the per machine or per table analysis sometimes loses the big picture. Penny machines have very high house edges, but who is to say how many people are being lured from machines where they will play more. While revenue from penny slots keeps going up and up, the total revenue from slots is plummeting.

In my opinion, the market share of blackjack will continue to go down. I would attribute the decline to:

1. Hard times in Vegas overall.
2. Players are making fewer mistakes.
3. Popularity of new poker-based games.
4. Every game has a lifespan, and I put blackjack's age at about 55.

On another topic, I find financial charts that don't start at zero on the vertical axis to be a bit dishonest. The one posted makes the blackjack and "rest of pit" drops to look more catastrophic that they really are.

Quote: pacomartin

I'm not sure how to decrease the size of the image. I made it in excel, used Gimp to turn it into PNG file, and uploaded into Wikimedia Commons.

You can resize in Excel.

Quote:

Dorothy, I respect your analysis. But I was trying to figure out where the decreases are coming. Part of the decrease in BJ revenue is the elimination of BJ tables.

Frank, your work is excellent, I read several other bits of research you did. I caution against fitting the data to the conclusion. No revenue is being lost by elimination of BJ tables. Revenue is lost because people aren't playing blackjack as much.

--Dorothy

Quote: pacomartin

I'm not sure how to decrease the size of the image. I made it in excel, used Gimp to turn it into PNG file, and uploaded into Wikimedia Commons.

You can resize in Excel.

Quote:

Dorothy, I respect your analysis. But I was trying to figure out where the decreases are coming. Part of the decrease in BJ revenue is the elimination of BJ tables.

Frank, your work is excellent, I read several other bits of research you did. I caution against fitting the data to the conclusion. No revenue is being lost by elimination of BJ tables. Revenue is lost in the game of blackjack because people aren't playing blackjack as much.

Quote:

We've known for some time that the casinos would like to de-emphasize blackjack since it has such a low house edge and it is expensive to operate. Roulette and Craps have higher house edges (depending on how you play) and most carnival games have much higher edges.

Players are moving from blackjack to non-traditional games, they are not moving to Roulette and Craps. Some non-traditional games have a lower edge than blackjack (e.g. Blackjack Switch). The products are out there, players are making the choice and driving the market by virtue of these choices.

There's a lot of data about various gaming markets. Aside from saying what's obvious to the casual observer, there is a lot of downside risk in trying to draw conclusions. Nevertheless, I enjoy and appreciate your work towards that end.

--Dorothy

Relative to October 2007 when statewide revenue peaked the state numbers are:
(1) Slots down 19% to year ending July 2004
(2) Pit (all sources) down 22% to year ending Dec 2004
(3) Blackjack down 30% to year ending Dec 1997
-----------
So in the last 2 years Nevada numbers have dropped to what they were over 5 years ago. Then how long do you think it will be before they come back? Will it take 5 years just to get back to where they were? Over the last two decades gaming revenue has been growing by 50% every 7 years. Now it might take the industry 7 years to just getting back to where it was in 2007.
-------------
More importantly the newspaper says we broke 23 months of month over month (year before) consecutive declines. But what really happened was there was a huge jump in baccarat which offset losses in all other areas. Baccarat is very variable since it depends on whales and because it is far fewer players it fluctuates much more widely. The Paquiao-Mayweather fight may have been the deciding factor. It should be noted that the Baccarat hold was very high which means in probability that the players were staying at the table longer than normal.
-------------
Maybe the big time blackjack players are all playing baccarat now. It is as valid a hypothesis as anything else. The final answer may not be knowable because only the casinos know the habits of the top 1000 players who can tip the balance every month. The behavior of these men is one of the most closely guarded secrets in Vegas. The Gaming Board expressed their surprise the there was a Billion dollars in baccarat play last August for no apparent reason. There was more play than for the rest of the pit combined.
--------------
I also wonder about the potential collapse of the older casinos which still supply tens of thousands of jobs. They may not be sustainable without the slot and blackjack and carnival game revenue. One of the reasons Sheldon Adelson made more many faster than anyone in history was that his casino, the Venetian was catering to so many high rollers. He could maintain them with a relatively small workforce. All the profits went straight into his pockets. Harrah's employs most of the people in the industry, trying to keep all the restaurants, gaming tables, rooms and player clubs going for the millions of small time gamblers all across the country. Nevada has 193K hotel rooms, more than any comparable size place in the world.

Quote: DorothyGale

People are not leaving blackjack because of 6/5. People are playing more blackjack because of 6/5. The game of 6/5 is offering a price-point that allows casinos to offer low-limit games, drawing in players who can't afford a $25 minimum, for example. Harrah's, in particular, offers 6/5 specifically because of its broad ability to attract players, and develop them to play at higher limits. Without 6/5, there would be much less blackjack in Nevada.

While I agree with most of your other points and analysis, I can't agree with this. The fact is there is no data to support this statement. Blackjack was doing very well before 6:5 and in fact has declined significantly since. While it is very difficult to seperate cause from effect and thus nobody here can make meaningful conclusions, we can say that 6:5 certainly has not been the savior of blackjack.

Whether it has hurt the game is another matter. Personally I think those very un-exciting payouts on naturals (who wants white chips?) are one of the reasons low-limit gamblers have moved to other games or reduced their casino patronage entirely. But I really don't know. I am reasonably sure that everyone would be better off without it. Without 6:5, lots of casinos would simply offer exclusively H17 games with poor rules for all their low limit tables like they used to. Most people playing these games play to a pretty high disadvantage but at least still get to enjoy their bonus payout on blackjacks. 6:5 is not a necessity for the casinos here, and may very well have been a bad business decision.

Other than that, very interesting data on the carnival games. I knew they were on the rise, but I did not realize how much it actually was. I'm a bit surprised this is not driving at least some revenue growth overall. These games are usually far worse than even 6:5. Blackjack switch is an exception, but the strategy is so complicated that it probably has a quite high real-world edge. Nobody knows the switching strategy, and few people make adjustments for the push-on-22 rule in basic strategy.

Do you think this is all really a case of the 'market has spoken', or do you think the casinos have misjudged the market by installing too many of these games simply because they were blinded by the flashy house edge numbers?

Paco, the year 2007 is not a good baseline for measuring any trends. It was a bubble year. Data is available since 1990, it should all be used in any academic discussion about gaming trends in Nevada.

As far as data about blackjack, the following data (this is my personal research -- if IP means anything these days) shows the number of visitors per blackjack table (V/BJ) in Nevada from 1990 to 2009, and the number of visitors per table game overall (V/TG). The value V/BJ is going up steadily, showing the incremental decline of blackjack as a destination for the Nevada visitor. The value V/TG has been steady since 1999, showing that overall about the same fraction of visitors are playing table games.

The data since 2007 is anomolous, due to the failing economy, hence my caution to Paco.

Year	V/BJ	V/TG
1990	6039	4582
1991	6265	4539
1992	6789	4357
1993	6963	4674
1994	8375	4839
1995	8525	5014
1996	8332	5229
1997	8647	5224
1998	8807	5218
1999	8949	5667
2000	9640	5712
2001	9620	5669
2002	9813	5588
2003	10278	5500
2004	11118	5425
2005	11134	5685
2006	11578	5679
2007	11972	5646
2008	11629	5629
2009	11326	5500

--Dorothy

Quote: pocketaces

Quote: DorothyGale

People are not leaving blackjack because of 6/5. People are playing more blackjack because of 6/5. The game of 6/5 is offering a price-point that allows casinos to offer low-limit games, drawing in players who can't afford a $25 minimum, for example. Harrah's, in particular, offers 6/5 specifically because of its broad ability to attract players, and develop them to play at higher limits. Without 6/5, there would be much less blackjack in Nevada.

While I agree with most of your other points and analysis, I can't agree with this. The fact is there is no data to support this statement. Blackjack was doing very well before 6:5 and in fact has declined significantly since. While it is very difficult to seperate cause from effect and thus nobody here can make meaningful conclusions, we can say that 6:5 certainly has not been the savior of blackjack.

See data above. I believe it supports my statements. There is more data I can present, but it all gets boring.

Blackjack was not "doing very well" before 6/5. Blackjack has been in steady decline in Nevada for almost 20 years (as long as data has been kept). If you look at those values in the table, you will see that V/BJ has been relatively constant since 6/5 was introduced, but was increasing very quickly before that. 6/5 has helped keep the number of blackjack tables relatively high, keeping the ratio smaller than would be predicted by the trend 1990-2003. In this sense, 6/5 has saved blackjack.

Imagining Las Vegas without 6/5 gives me the creeps; just think of how much more Crazy 4 Poker, Whoop Ass Poker and Ultimate Texas Hold 'em there would be in that universe.

--Dorothy

Quote: DorothyGale

Imagining Las Vegas without 6/5 gives me the creeps; just think of how much more Crazy 4 Poker, Whoop Ass Poker and Ultimate Texas Hold 'em there would be in that universe.

--Dorothy

Heh. Not to get too off-topic, but Ultimate Texas Hold 'em can be a good play sometimes, especially if you are playing for comps. Check out some of the links on the Wizard's page.

Quote: DorothyGale

Blackjack was not "doing very well" before 6/5. Blackjack has been in steady decline in Nevada for almost 20 years (as long as data has been kept). If you look at those values in the table, you will see that V/BJ has been relatively constant since 6/5 was introduced, but was increasing very quickly before that. 6/5 has helped keep the number of blackjack tables relatively high, keeping the ratio smaller than would be predicted by the trend 1990-2003. In this sense, 6/5 has saved blackjack.

Imagining Las Vegas without 6/5 gives me the creeps; just think of how much more Crazy 4 Poker, Whoop Ass Poker and Ultimate Texas Hold 'em there would be in that universe.

--Dorothy

I agree that there would be less blackjack tables without 6:5. There is no doubt that if there were no 6:5 tables, there would be less blackjack tables overall today. However, an argument can very easily be made that 6:5 is a carnival game like any other. If we take this to be true and remove 6:5 from all the blackjack figures, it can be seen that it has massively hurt blackjack with the V/BJ figure shooting skyward as tables were converted.

I really look at it that way. Many of the carnival games have house edges better or not far from 6:5, and some like the WPT games are far better when using element of risk. Far from a savior, 6:5 accelerated the trend towards carnival games.

If we are including 6:5 in the blackjack figures, why not SF21? Is it simply because the casino still calls it blackjack?

Basically, using house edge as our determining factor rather than the casino's chosen name, 6:5 belongs in the grouping which have house edges many times worse than regular blackjack.

I also am convinced 6:5 has been part of the overall decline in table revenues. 6:5 replaces an exciting game (blackjack) that has a massive draw with a less exciting game where a low-limit player can look forward to some white chips with their naturals. Blackjack always had the appeal of getting this bonus payout, and without it, I think it signicantly reduces playing time for many gamblers. I don't have any data to back this up, but as I said, this move to 6:5 and other carnival games certainly has not increased revenue.

Besides being 55 and having played some very good games in Vegas in the mid-and late 70’s and 80’s, I have to take exception to Mr. Wizard’s 4th opinion regarding establishing a baseline of 55 years for becoming obsolescent or moribund. Blackjack is a casino’s best friend, maybe not a golden goose but certainly a silver duck if casino management respects and reveres the beauty and simplicity of the game. During the 80’s and 90’s every Blackjack book espousing a winning strategy to “beat the dealer” or “turn the tables” derived more profit for the casino’s than for the authors of these books, or certainly for the readers- who naively came to Vegas with high expectations, little experience and low bankrolls. I seem to remember a litter nuisance, just south, past the Welcome to Fabulous Las Vegas sign, of Blackjack-Your-Way-to-Riches books piling-up from despondent losers throwing these get-rich-fast-playing-Blackjack texts out of the windows of their cars. If the casino’s changed the minimums to $5 and only revised the rules to the standards of the 1980’s they would pack the tables, make the game exciting, while only appearing to be vulnerable to risk. The years following Ken Houston’s Million Dollar Blackjack were the most popular and most profitable for Blackjack in Vegas and AC. People will come again, in the thousands with thousands, if they hold a false perception that they have an edge over the casinos playing Blackjack. And we all know that Blackjack has an enormous house edge or advantage if basic strategy is not perfectly employed. In my 30+ years of playing Blackjack in Vegas, I cannot remember sitting at a table full of strong basic strategy players, let alone with a table full of advantage players. Will high–rollers still find a game in Vegas? Duh!. Can the casinos increase employment, increase profits and provide an intoxicating and seductive environment with low table minimums and better Blackjack rules? Well? Yes-even at 55 years old.

Quote: DorothyGale

The data since 2007 is anomolous, due to the failing economy, hence my caution to Paco.
--Dorothy

I was trying to see what games were doing well in the failing economy. Comparing strip revenue in November 2009 (latest data) against October 2007 (peak data). I used data that represented 12 months ending on these months so as to take out any seasonal fluctuations.

Of the traditional games which represent 84.7% of the pit revenue, baccarat is not down far from it's absolute peak. Blackjack is way down. Since mini-baccarat is even lower than blackjack we can assume it is about lifestyle and income of the players instead of increasing popularity of the actual game. Baccarat and Blackjack are half the pit.
BACCARAT | -8.2%
ROULETTE | -14.1%
CRAPS | -21.1%
TWENTY-ONE | -31.2%
MINI-BACCARAT | -40.6%

The two proprietary Shuffle Master games are holding their own, but they represent 4.8% of the market.
LET IT RIDE | -11.2%
3-CARD POKER | -22.3%

Race and Sports have dropped considerably as they have elsewhere. Represents 3.2% of the market.
RACE BOOK | -35.7%
SPORTS POOL | -39.7%

There is a shift toward Pai Gow Poker probably because it is easier for the casino to deal cards than to play with tiles. Represents only 2.9% of the market.
PAI GOW POKER | -19.4%
PAI GOW | -55.8%

Small traditional games representing only 0.4% of the market
BINGO | +118.0%
KENO | -31.6%

Carnival Games are 4.0% of market
Rest of Pit | -14.4%

The dollar drop in total pit revenue is 47% from blackjack. Since the pit revenue as a whole has dropped 21.4% you can eyeball which games are doing better than average.

Quote: pacomartin

The dollar drop in total pit revenue [since 2007] is 47% from blackjack. Since the pit revenue as a whole has dropped 21.4% you can eyeball which games are doing better than average.

The march towards carnival games has been relentless. Your data supports a huge move in the last three years towards carnival games by both casino management and casino patrons. This is supported by other data I have seen as well as anecdotal experiences.

One thing to keep in mind is that carnival games have enticed some slot players to move up to table games. In this sense, they are helping to keep gaming pits at their current level. Without carnival games, and the slot players who play them, as well as 6/5 blackjack, the table games area would be on the road towards extinction at many casinos.

Yesterday, I overheard a patron at a casino say "I don't like this slot, it doesn't have any sounds." That's typical of the level of thought that goes into patron's choice of games these days. I could say a lot more here, but the disgressions to make various points seem endless.

--Dorothy

I looked at old quarterly statistical reports to come up with the following percentage of 21 tables to total non-slot games. 2009 is based on the third quarter, and all other years, the fourth quarter. You can see that 21 games dropped from 69% in 1990 to 52% in 2009.

Year	21 Share
1990	69.1%
1991	67.8%
1992	66.3%
1993	65.0%
1994	61.9%
1995	60.4%
1996	61.2%
1997	60.9%
1998	60.2%
1999	60.3%
2000	59.0%
2001	57.6%
2002	57.1%
2003	56.6%
2004	55.8%
2005	55.4%
2006	53.9%
2007	53.1%
2008	52.3%
2009	52.1%

I plan write about this in my next "Ask the Wizard." Here is a link to a preview.

Wizard
Thanks for addressing the issue. I would add something about the drop in 21 revenue and the increase in Baccarat revenue. Follows is for strip revenue only, and the percent refers to percent of the pit (i.e. no card games or slots).

Year Ending	Baccarat	Twenty One
30-Nov-09	34.0%	28.3%
31-Oct-07	29.1%	32.3%

This thread got too complicated for my tiny brain, so I stayed out of it after my initial response.


But since the Wiz addressed this thread in his Ask The Wiz #245, I thought I'd comment on his conclusion.

Quote:

This begs the question of why blackjack is losing market share. Here are what I think are the main reasons:

1 - Popularity of poker-based games is causing some players to switch.
2 - Casinos don't comp blackjack play as well as other games.
3 - The rules are getting worse. I'm not suggesting most players know this, but over time, players can feel rule changes, like the dealer's hitting a soft 17, in their wallet.
4 - All casino games have a natural lifespan, and blackjack is getting more grey.

I think #3 is only partly right. I think paying 6:5 has far more impact than hitting on soft 17.

Quite frankly, I wonder how many recreational BJ players even know the difference between H17 and S17 rules? Probably less than the number who know the difference between single and double zero roulette! Even I didn't know there were different dealer rules until I started to read about it on the Wiz's main site.

Seriously, I thought that the rule was printed on the table simply as a point of information, much the same way as the insurance area specifies 'Pays 2 to 1'.

Yeah, the tables also say BJ pays ___, but even that often goes unnoticed until the player at a 6:5 table thinks he got short-paid. Then it makes a BIG, IMMEDIATE impact!

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Quite frankly, I wonder how many recreational BJ players even know the difference between H17 and S17 rules? Probably less than the number who know the difference between single and double zero roulette! Even I didn't know there were different dealer rules until I started to read about it on the Wiz's main site.

Well of course most players don't know rules like H17 or S17 or Double After Split is permitted or not. Most people think a hard 17 is a good hand solely because they don't have to make a decision. But people do learn simple rules. Most recreational blackjack players will confidently say that insurance is for suckers (while almost always taking even money).A lot of people know always splits aces and eights since the alliterative phrase is easy to remember. Even people that have no interest in the basic strategy can learn 6:5 blackjack is for suckers.

But blackjack has clearly plunged more than any other major table game, far more than slots (as a percentage) or craps or roulette. I was struggling to explain the dramatic difference. I think that avoidance of bad rules has to be part of the explanation.

The drop in TWENTY-ONE (or BLACKJACK) revenue has been half the dollar amountof the drop in the total pit. BACCARAT has recovered almost to pre-depression levels. The total pit dropped 21% so you can see how each game fared against the average. Data is for the Las Vegas Strip only.

Blackjack has returned to 1997 levels in the state of Nevada. But it peaked in October 2007. During the recession Baccarat has replaced Blackjack as the most popular table game.

Category	Pit Revenue	Game	Drop
Traditional	84.70%	BACCARAT	-8.20%
		ROULETTE	-14.10%
		CRAPS	-21.10%
		TWENTY-ONE	-31.20%
		MINI-BACCARAT	-40.60%
Shufflemaster proprietary	4.80%	LET IT RIDE	-11.20%
		3-CARD POKER	-22.30%
Sports	3.20%	RACE BOOK	-35.70%
		SPORTS POOL	-39.70%
Pai Gow	2.90%	PAI GOW POKER	-19.40%
		PAI GOW TILES	-55.80%
Small Traditional	0.40%	BINGO	+118.00%
		KENO	-31.60%
Carnival	4.00%	Rest of Pit	-14.40%

Slots took a similar 21% drop in revenue over the same period. As most people know penny slots are increasing in revenue even in the depression , but all other slots are falling.

Quote: pacomartin

Well of course most players don't know rules like H17 or S17 or Double After Split is permitted or not.

Double After Split is the type of thing that people will ask about, and may not even realize that there could be some tables in the casino with different rules about that.

Frankly, pick any of the stupid rules changes, and you can be sure it's part of the reason for the decline of BlackJack.


My point was, that of all the stupid rules changes, H17 / S17 is one that the recreational player is least familiar with, while 6:5 has the biggest, obvious impact.

6:5 BJ should not even be considered BJ. It is just another variant of "21" games. New Jersey classifies the game differently as distinct from BJ. Another reason they are the better gaming jurisdiction.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Frankly, pick any of the stupid rules changes, and you can be sure it's part of the reason for the decline of BlackJack.

Basically that is the $0.5 billion question. How much of that it drop in Nevada is because of stupid rule changes, because of competition with other states, the depression, or the aging of blackjack?

"Blackjack", or, "21", is game that while currently overshadowed by the popularity of Poker, continues to be one of the most played games in Las Vegas, and it is quickly becoming a mainstay of many other casinos

Quote: henrykipson

"Blackjack", or, "21", is game that while currently overshadowed by the popularity of Poker, continues to be one of the most played games in Las Vegas, and it is quickly becoming a mainstay of many other casinos

http://www.eldoradopalace.com/

I was not disputing that Blackjack is popular. It is still very firmly in the #2 place on the strip for all table games (behind baccarat). However, it used to be #1 as recent as August 2009, and it has fallen further than almost every other table game.

Poker (i.e. tournaments and regular games with a rake) earn less for casinos than the table game "3-card poker", and is distant to baccarat, blackjack, craps, and roulette. I agree that it is a popular game, it just doesn't make that much money for casinos.

"Baccarat is only available in a few places in the country like the high end casinos on the strip, and possibly Foxwoods casino in connecticut."

I think Baccarat is becoming more popular outside of Vegas too. The Harrah's here in St. Louis has 4 tables for it and draws a pretty good (mostly asian) crowd. Last time I was in Tunica they had it at Sam's town too.

Mini baccarat has not been very successful in Vegas, largely because the players want to tear the cards up and do other things that fit their superstitions.

Quote: pacomartin

Mini baccarat has not been very successful in Vegas, largely because the players want to tear the cards up and do other things that fit their superstitions.

Why is Vegas attracting players with such childish behavior? Does the casino really want their action at all?

If the casinos can impose 6:5 at Blackjack can't they impose proper decorum at the Baccarat and Mini-Bacc tables as well.

The casinos have a mix of games and a mix of slot machines and try to attract various segments of the market. Currently carnival games are on the ascendancy. Fine. Its a mixture of player ignorance, player sobriety, whims, social factors, etc.

MiniBacc is fun for me. Its a question of luck and table limits. I don't mind the constant chatter in a foreign language, I don't mind floormen insulting me by handing me a pad and pencil as I sit down, ... I do mind high table limits and I would also object to any rowdy behavior at the table.

Some casinos attract crack sellers other casinos attract crack users but I expect proper behavior from each group. Give me a huge bankroll and a bimbo in an evening gown and I'll be happy to join a Baccarat table in some swanky joint's chandeliered-alcove but I'll leave if the players want to throw fits and tear up the cards or otherwise engage in histrionics.

They don't permit tearing the cards in mini-baccarat, However, if you pay full scale baccarat no one cares what you do.

>They don't permit tearing the cards in mini-baccarat,
No, gamblers don't even touch, much less cut, tear, bend, fold, staple or mutilate the cards at a Mini-baccarat game.

> However, if you pay full scale baccarat no one cares what you do.
Full scale baccarat means a bigger table, a swankier atmosphere (crew in evening dress, chandeliers, etc.). Now it also means Asian players with lots of money who like to scream out Monkey from time to time.

I know casinos want a mix of games and a mix of players ... but I think that just as casino will rue the day they let these yuppie screwing clubs hustle those drunken brats, the casino will rue the day they let Baccarat players misbehave. Just think: you can now wait on line for over an hour, get fondled at an xray machine, get long-hauled at the airport, ... and wind up at a Baccarat Table with a group of loud mouthed charting idiots. Makes you sort of want to stay home.

The tearing of the cards is more of a Chinese tradition, often undertaken with the same kind of concentration as if they were reading a stock report.