6:5 BJ---will competition kill it?

It's hard to tell just how many people shy away from 6:5 tables, but it's obvious that many people happily play at them (ande those people VOTE...and REPRODUCE...*shudder*). But Vegas casinos are going down for the third time. How long before someone breaks ranks and removes their 6:5 donkeykillers? Would any major casino do this voluntarily?

I think it would be a VERY smart move for any given major Strip casino to do this; then they could scream it to the rooftops that they had "the best blackjack on the Strip!!!!!". What would REALLY be radical is to bring back 3:2 with single deck or double deck. The casinos somehow managed to make money, years ago, when such games were widespread. If one casino (chain) did this, there would be a domino effect, as even the turista stupidos would begin to dimly realize that the 3:2 games were a much better deal. Of course, we could still have some 6:5 games for those who would rather get paid $12 than $15.

Quote: mkl654321

The casinos somehow managed to make money, years ago, when such games were widespread.

Only because they cheated all of the players all the time. ;)

As evidenced by the $1 Blackjack at the Sahara - which pay even money, the casinos will not stop if there is demand. I think that blackjack is much like shopping at this point - the knowledgeable consumer will not pay "full price" with even money or 6:5 crapjack, and instead seek out the 3:2 tables.

Trump Marina in AC recently had 2 $1 blackjack tables with the .25 ante opened. They are doing gangbuster business right now, with Trump quoted that their standard 3:2 table makes about 950 a day, while these $1 tables are making between 1100-1500 a day. They are petitioning NJ gaming to add a 3rd table. People will happily pay $12.50 an hour to the house so they only have to pony up $40 for a night of blackjack.

-B

I have a question about the even-money blackjack at the Sahara. Apparently you receive a one-dollar voucher for free slot play for each blackjack you hit -- even if you're only betting $1/hand. So that's actually something like 1:1 blackjack. Of course, you won't get all the money back out of the machines, but let's say you play video poker or another decent game. What does this make the house edge?

Quote: mkl654321

It's hard to tell just how many people shy away from 6:5 tables, but it's obvious that many people happily play at them (ande those people VOTE...and REPRODUCE...*shudder*). But Vegas casinos are going down for the third time. How long before someone breaks ranks and removes their 6:5 donkeykillers? Would any major casino do this voluntarily?

.

It is here to stay. Few people are at the level of awareness as we are here but most here don't realize that--like McGovern supporters who couldn't believe he lost because "everyone they knew voted for him." Except we are smart!

Anyhow, I see it dealing Monte Carlo Nights. People don't understand let alone care they are getting ripped off. Same thing as Big 6/8 bets the attitude is "it is such a small amount, how much difference can it make--look at the hot cocktail waitress! I'll play here!"

Quote: nyuhoosier

I have a question about the even-money blackjack at the Sahara. Apparently you receive a one-dollar voucher for free slot play for each blackjack you hit -- even if you're only betting $1/hand. So that's actually something like 1:1 blackjack. Of course, you won't get all the money back out of the machines, but let's say you play video poker or another decent game. What does this make the house edge?

That's kind of interesting. Assume a minimum $1 bet. You get a BJ roughly every 21 hands (I assume that is a shoe game), so you are losing 0.5 bets every 21 hands (vs. 3:2)--that's about 2.6 percent. The game itself is probably -0.7%, so that's -3.3% EV for the player, but then you get back $1 every 21 hands--that's almost 5% back in your pocket, since if you can play the vouchers on VP, you figure to get back 97 or 98%! Wow! A highly positive game for the ultra-low roller!

I wonder how long THAT is going to last--people will be crawling out of their dumpsters to play!

I think you just get the voucher, no cash. Is that correct, nyuhoosier? If you get 1:1 plus the voucher then, you're right, it's a positive E.V. game.

It won't go away. The casinos are scared, and rightfully so, of legions of gamblers educated by The Wizard. A casino can't make money with educated gamblers at a $5, or maybe even a $10 table, with good rules. Sure they make money, but not enough to justify free booze, paying the dealer, paying the lights, paying the insurance, etc etc. The casinos are not in business to offer a fun public service. They are there to make money.

It's like a restaurant that finally raises the price of a menu item. They know it will prevent some customers from buying that item again, but they just can't afford to sell it at the lower price, no matter how many they sell. "We're sorry, but we HAD to raise the price."

Quote: mkl654321

How long before someone breaks ranks and removes their 6:5 donkeykillers? Would any major casino do this voluntarily?

Correct me if I'm wrong, as always, but I think the Venetian/Palazzo has 100% 3-2 blackjack. Same with the M.

Regarding the general question, the Strip casinos argue that a $5-$10 minimum 3-2 table is not profitable enough to keep on the floor. To play the devil's advocate, they would say the public is better served by giving the $5-$10 blackjack player something to play, rather than start all their blackjack tables at a $25 minimum. Furthermore, they would argue that even 6-5 blackjack is a better bet than most other games.

While those are valid points, I think the Vegas casinos are abusing it, and are trying to gradually phase more and more tables to 6-5. That kind of greed is killing the city.

Quote: Wizard

Correct me if I'm wrong, as always, but I think the Venetian/Palazzo has 100% 3-2 blackjack. Same with the M.

Regarding the general question, the Strip casinos argue that a $5-$10 minimum 3-2 table is not profitable enough to keep on the floor. To play the devil's advocate, they would say the public is better served by giving the $5-$10 blackjack player something to play, rather than start all their blackjack tables at a $25 minimum. Furthermore, they would argue that even 6-5 blackjack is a better bet than most other games.

While those are valid points, I think the Vegas casinos are abusing it, and are trying to gradually phase more and more tables to 6-5. That kind of greed is killing the city.

Well, yeah, but those tables are $100 minimum or something like that. I'd love to see a major Strip casino offer games no worse than, say, the Strip rules double deck at the Flaming O that existed several years ago---it was $5 minimum.

I have a VERY hard time believing that a low-limit 3:2 table isn't profitable "enough". 3:2 was the only kind of game available in Vegas for sixty years. I do believe the casinos made money on the game. The Horseshoe dealt $1 and $2 single deck all day and all night. They managed to stay open.

I agree that a perfect basic strategy player won't be worth the casino's while at a 3:2 game, but out of 100 tourists, maybe ONE plays accurate basic strategy. Just spend five minutes at any table and watch people stand on 15 against a 10, hit 14 against a 4, and double down on A9. The casinos made fortunes dealing 3:2; yes, they make even more dealing 6:5, but the long-term effect is to slaughter even the ploppies. A successful parasite does NOT kill its host.

There seems to be a number casinos aim at for card-based table games: a house advantage of 2-2.5 percent. This apparently makes money at a sufficient rate without absolutely slaughtering the players in the process. But the 2.3 percent house advantage at 6:5 shoe BJ isn't fixed, because of the skill factor. Anybody not playing perfect basic strategy would be fighting more like a 4% -EV. This moves the game into the mass slaughter zone.