Zcore13
Joined: Nov 30, 2009
• Posts: 3521
July 26th, 2010 at 11:38:07 AM permalink
I see your point. On the \$150 bet, the player actually gets \$375 for the suited blackjack (\$300 on the first \$100 and \$75 for the remaining \$50) and \$300 for any regular blackjack.

So, if suited blackjacks are only 25% of blackjacks, wouldn't the following be correct?

\$100 bet and you get 4 blackjacks per hour, you would get three payments of \$200 and one payment of \$300 = \$900 in blackjacks.

\$150 bet and you get 4 blackjack per hour, you would get three payments of \$300 and one payment of \$375 =\$1,275 in blackjacks during the hour.

You just have to hope you don't hit a bad streak of cards with the \$150 bet because you can run though a bankroll much quicker at \$150 than \$100.
I am an employee of a Casino. All the personal opinions I post are my own and do not represent the opinions of the Casino or Tribe that I work for.
weaselman
Joined: Jul 11, 2010
• Posts: 2349
July 26th, 2010 at 11:47:24 AM permalink
Quote: rudeboyoi

so its hard to imagine betting an additional \$50/hand is going to cost you more than \$75 in between getting blackjacks which is about 1 in 21 hands.

Actually, unless I screwed up my math again, the expectation of a non-blackjack hand with these rules is about -7.84%.
20 hands * 50 bucks * 7.84% is \$78.40, so, in fact, it is somewhat more likely to be more than \$75.

And don't forget that that 21st hand might just happen to be a push too ...
"When two people always agree one of them is unnecessary"
rudeboyoi
Joined: Mar 28, 2010
• Posts: 2001
July 26th, 2010 at 12:16:19 PM permalink
Quote: weaselman

Actually, unless I screwed up my math again, the expectation of a non-blackjack hand with these rules is about -7.84%.
20 hands * 50 bucks * 7.84% is \$78.40, so, in fact, it is somewhat more likely to be more than \$75.

And don't forget that that 21st hand might just happen to be a push too ...

you probably arent adding in splits or doubles.
weaselman
Joined: Jul 11, 2010
• Posts: 2349
July 26th, 2010 at 12:27:03 PM permalink
yeah, I am ...
The overall expectation is about -0.7%. Blackjack part is 1.5*8/169*161/169, that leaves (-7.83%)*161/169 for everything else, including splits and doubles.
"When two people always agree one of them is unnecessary"
rudeboyoi
Joined: Mar 28, 2010
• Posts: 2001
July 26th, 2010 at 12:39:26 PM permalink
Quote: Zcore13

I see your point. On the \$150 bet, the player actually gets \$375 for the suited blackjack (\$300 on the first \$100 and \$75 for the remaining \$50) and \$300 for any regular blackjack.

So, if suited blackjacks are only 25% of blackjacks, wouldn't the following be correct?

\$100 bet and you get 4 blackjacks per hour, you would get three payments of \$200 and one payment of \$300 = \$900 in blackjacks.

\$150 bet and you get 4 blackjack per hour, you would get three payments of \$300 and one payment of \$375 =\$1,275 in blackjacks during the hour.

You just have to hope you don't hit a bad streak of cards with the \$150 bet because you can run though a bankroll much quicker at \$150 than \$100.

oh if thats how the blackjack actually works. its definitely better betting a \$150/hand. i thought a \$150 hand would pay \$300 total on a suited blackjack. i didnt realize it would pay \$375.

suited blackjacks make up 25% of your blackjacks.

if u bet \$100 on a square and get a blackjack.

\$200(.75)+(\$300)(.25) = \$225

you get \$225 on average if you get a blackjack betting \$100 on a square.

if u bet \$150 on a square and get a blackjack.

\$300(.75)+\$375(.25) = \$318.75

you get \$318.75 on average if you get a blackjack betting \$150 on a square.

so theres a \$93.75 difference getting paid on blackjacks betting \$100 or \$150 per hand.

which is greater than weasalmans loss of \$78.40 betting \$50 more per hand in between getting blackjacks.
DorothyGale
Joined: Nov 23, 2009
• Posts: 639
October 25th, 2010 at 2:12:18 PM permalink
Whatever happened to this? Any one want to share their experience? Any estimation on casino losses?
"Who would have thought a good little girl like you could destroy my beautiful wickedness!"
Zcore13
Joined: Nov 30, 2009
• Posts: 3521
October 30th, 2010 at 9:40:44 AM permalink
It starts again on November 1st and goes through the end of the year. I've already heard from a few people from this forum that they are flying/driving in to play.
I am an employee of a Casino. All the personal opinions I post are my own and do not represent the opinions of the Casino or Tribe that I work for.
NotThisTime
Joined: Nov 21, 2010
• Posts: 13
November 21st, 2010 at 6:09:06 PM permalink
I was not able to make the first go round back in the summer. I knew about it but was too busy. My understanding was that there were very few playing it at that time. I knew this time would be more of a zoo and boy was it.

First off thumbs up to Buckys for offering this promotion. It was very nice of them to do so. I also want to thank them for behaving in a civilized manor and treating the players pretty well for the most part. Often casinos can get very nasty with players during promotions like this. There were a handful of players who were not so courteous to the casino. Some of them had moments where they were clearly out of line. Even these players were treated fairly well when the casino would have been justified in being a bit more curt with them.

Opening extra tables during the promotion time was a nice treat. Often casinos will not bring in the extra staff when needed. The raising of the limits to \$50 min before the promotion times was a bit greedy but understandable given the situation.

My only real gripe was that players were told during the final session on Thursday that the promotion would continue on Monday. Some of us traveled quite a distance only to find out the promotion was dead when we showed up on Monday.

I have a pretty good idea on the final results for the week after talking with several of the players and at the end of the week there were a handful of players who lost money and travel expenses on top of it. Although I'm pretty sure that overall the players did alright the casino had quite a lucky run.
Zcore13
Joined: Nov 30, 2009
• Posts: 3521
November 21st, 2010 at 8:50:39 PM permalink
I'm glad you had fun and yes it was a zoo compared to the first session a few months before. We did not envision the response we got. We normally have 2 or 3 blackjack tables open during a weekday and 2 or 3 green chip players per day. We did not expect 20 black chip players all at once. Because of this we brought in extra dealers and had a lot of overtime so we could open 7 blackjack tables during the promotional times. We did this for two reasons. One, because we knew players came from a long distance to play. But also, because we had so many non-regulars we needed room for our regular players. They are the ones that support us day in and day out. Our business is our regulars.

I am sorry that the promotion had to be canceled. On Thursday when we told people it would continue on Monday, that was the truth at that time. I don't know which of the 20 players you are, but I was there every day with your guys. I was as fair and honest as I could be with all of you. I even took care of some rooms that I probably shouldn't have. If I knew it was going to be canceled I would have told you and I'm pretty high up on the food chain. Did I think there was a chance it would be canceled... yes. But the plan was to run it at least a few weeks before making any decisions.

I hope you had fun while it lasted and made a little money. We'll do something again that will be a nice promotion, but won't alienate our regulars. I hope someday you'll make it back our way. If you do, let me know... your first drink is on me!
I am an employee of a Casino. All the personal opinions I post are my own and do not represent the opinions of the Casino or Tribe that I work for.
mkl654321
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
• Posts: 3412
November 21st, 2010 at 9:03:36 PM permalink
Quote: Zcore13

I am sorry that the promotion had to be canceled. On Thursday when we told people it would continue on Monday, that was the truth at that time.

I respect that you treated the players better than some casinos would have, but that doesn't excuse what you guys did. It's dishonest to advertise a promotion and then discontinue it when people actually show up to play it. "That was the truth at the time"? Oh, come ON--it was a statement about the future, specifically, what your casino would do in the future, which equates to a promise. Then you guys broke that promise.

I realize that you're somewhat in the middle here, since you weren't the one who made the decision to kill the promo. But by doing that, the casino sends a message: don't count on us doing what we say--we reserve the right to change our minds. Anyone who drove any distance only to find that the promo had been canceled would probably not return, except maybe at gunpoint. The question is, is the ill will sown by reneging on the promotion worth the money saved? Somehow, I doubt it.

Arizona is a market that has many gaming options (including driving to Vegas). An isolated, captive-audience casino can afford to treat its customers poorly, but one that must compete to survive can't. I gather that the whole point of the promo was to attract players. It did that, and by slamming the door on those players, Bucky's shot itself in the foot.

By the way, did anyone think of limiting the promo payouts to a \$25 bet or less, which would have chased away all those nasty black chip bettors (who, I readily agree, were not the targets of the promotion anyway)?
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw