A truly discouraging sight...
Quote: PaigowdanDealers have enough of a time dealing and adding; surveillance tracks the counters.
Oh, please. Yes there are new dealers who struggle just to keep the game moving, but the vast majority I run into are more than adept at spotting counters. That doesn't mean they're tracking the count - just watching my bets and signaling the PB if my bets look suspicious. I ran into a dealer last week who recognized I was counting within the first 5 hands, and actually helped me stay out of trouble. She'd give me a bit of a frown if I tried to increase my bet too quickly, and within the first shoe I was able to determine that the house tolerance was a 1:10 spread.
Quote: Rio481PGD -
First, I appreciate the spirited debate. I understand your position, just completely disagree with it.
Second, you're right it's strike three. I'm not at all convinced. Let's take the very specific case of games with both CSMs and 6:5. CSMs are a perfect countermeasure to card counters. And they're actually cheaper than the placard at the table. By eliminating down time between shoes they more than make up for the $2000/month they cost to rent. So let's look at an example. With 6D H17 (common on the strip before CSMs were introduced) the house edge is something like .57%. It's not easy to overcome that advantage in a 6D game, but it can be done. Now the CSM is introduced as a countermeasure for a small population of skilled counters. Card counting is now completely ineffective. So what's the point of now introducing 6:5? There's no longer a threat to defeat. The answer is very simple and one that I've repeated - shareholder value. Now, if you want to make the argument that a larger hold is needed to cover increased payroll costs for the dealers, higher maintenance charges for the facility, construction for new facilities, more lavish environment, etc then I think we have something to talk about. But let's please not pretend that 6:5 is about protecting the game from counters, or that APs were the direct cause of the 6:5 trend. I'm sure this is probably the way it's discussed by the operators, but I'm afraid it's a case of them starting to believe their own BS.
Third, I reserve the right lament anything I please. I choose not to play games that are a bad value, but I do not run over to the tables and try to persuade people not to play. It's their money, and if they choose to lose it more quickly than necessary it's their business. But I do not relinquish my right to complain. And I accept that others may reject my opinions and arguments, either in good spirit or not. And I will defend your right to express your opinions even though I disagree with you. Ain't this free speech thing great?!!
Thanks!
The world changes. Opportunities that once existed in a bigger way begin to fade.
On CSMs: they have both value and expense, and are better values on non-stop busy games of high limits. However, would they be welcomed in a high-limit room? I think not. For many places, 6:5 is a fine, even perfect, solution for both increased game protection and increased revenues.
6:5: 6:5 was introduced to both increase revenue and decrease card counting, to pay for expenses of operating a casino. If card counting ate into that revenue, and it did, then addressing it is a valid reason from the operator's game protection point of view. This is particularly true if it were effective in that goal - which it is.
Lamentation: You're right, you may lament, but is it helpful? I look at trends, and it seems that as we progress into our more technologically advanced (or even procedurally more advanced) future, this door seems to be closing in an unstoppable fashion. Why deny it? Imagine a future where there's only CSMs and 6:5 Blackjack with 99% of the people not noticing anything different in their civilian ploppie lives, or caring about the plight of the card counter. What is plan "B" here? Craps? Pai Gow Poker? Studying to obtain a degree in Dentistry? Will we miss thinking for money "Plus-one, Plus-one, minus-one, minus-one, zero-zero-zero?" I view this as an interesting fixation, and not "the life." Should casino operators enable this? I think not.
Quote: PaigowdanYou're right, you may lament, but is it helpful? I look at trends, and it seems that as we progress into our more technologically advanced (or even procedurally more advanced) future, this door seems to be closing in an unstoppable fashion. Why deny it?
What am I denying? The entire point of my initial post was that based on my observations I think it's clear 6:5 is here to stay and will spread. I also complain about my wife watching HGTV every night, but don't expect that to change either. I have a particular interest in Blackjack, and find it both relaxing and entertaining to play, particularly to play well. That doesn't mean I don't have other interests, passions, and avocations. Is it helpful to lament? To me, yes. I find it helpful to share experiences and insights with others who have common interests. Kind of what a discussion forum is all about, no?
Quote: PaigowdanCSM's cost something like $2,000 per table month to rent. 6:5 is free. Remember the bean counters.....
Add that $2000 back with the ASM there.
Dan are you blaming AP'so for 6:5 BJ?
Yes or no answer please.
Quote: Paigowdan6:5: 6:5 was introduced to both increase revenue and decrease card counting, to pay for expenses of operating a casino.
How does 6:5 decrease card counting? I would think one of the reasons it exists is to offset card counting (as one of my Ten Rules Of Gambling says, "No, you don't know how to count cards well enough to beat a 6-5 single-deck blackjack table" - and as the next one says, "No, you aren't different").
Quote: AxelWolfI didn't read all this thread so excuse me if this has been asked and answered.
Dan are you blaming AP'so for 6:5 BJ?
Yes or no answer please.
I think he would agree the answer is "yes", he is. He considers 6:5 an AP counter-measure, according to his previous posts. If you want to argue that answer, you probably need to read the thread first. :)
If the people who run casinos install 6:5 blackjack precisely to reduce/alleviate card counting issues, I have no reason not to believe them.
You can say "it's because they make more money," and you'd be right. They can say, "It's because we make more money not having losses to card counting under the radar, and with less surveillance expense." And they'd be right, too. Now this would be in addition to the extra money from the higher house edge, but as stated, house edge is not the only rationale.
Also, I was told by multiple gaming mathematicians that [and a direct quote here] "6:5 is very difficult to count," and "counters wouldn't rationally select a 6:5 table if they're looking to make some money," basically saying "Yeah, it's the current countermeasure to counting, short of putting a CSM on every table."
You shouldn't be concerned with me, for blaming card counting on the advancement of 6:5 blackjack. You've got every suit in the industry thinking it helps game blackjack protection to some degree, along with CSMs, and they seem to be right. They believe this and use it. I'm a pit boss/table games manager at no casino. Why care?
Quote: MintyMaybe this question has been asked in a poll before, and if so, I'm sorry. What do you all think, do you think eventually blackjack will simply be an amalgamation of terrible games that are only played by the uneducated and the desperate? My optimism says no, but my cynicism says yes.
One can argue that that's historically been blackjack, because in general, BJ has only gotten better. Look at Blackjack Switch, Freebet Blackjack, Superfun-21, the Super-4 progressive for Blackjack, and the like. Plus, double deck will always be here, I believe. I think a blackjack variant will emerge that has both game protection and a low house edge for the players with no CSM.
I mean, if we put a man on the moon, we can do this. Certainly that scenario would provide a wide-open golden opportunity for a good game designer.
However, if you judge blackjack games only by what AP maneuver you can get away with for some illicit cold hard cash, then yes, blackjack will be nothing but lousy offerings for those seeking to exploit "bad game protection games" to play. But that isn't really gambling, anyway.
Quote: Paigowdan
If you judge blackjack games only by what AP maneuver you can get away with for some illicit cold hard cash, then yes, blackjack will be nothing but lousy offerings for those seeking "bad game protection games" to play.
It seems like our ideas about what a "good" blackjack game is differ significantly... However, I should say that the wide variety of blackjack variants is appreciated! They come with their own opportunities.
Quote: MintyIt seems like our ideas about what a "good" blackjack game is differ significantly... However, I should say that the wide variety of blackjack variants is appreciated! They come with their own opportunities.
True. Some people search for a variety of gambling action, others seek new opportunities to exploit. To each his own.
Quote: PaigowdanYes, I do indeed, precisely because I was told by casino managers and executives that it alleviates card counting issues and losses in particular.
If the people who run casinos install 6:5 blackjack precisely to reduce/alleviate card counting issues, I have no reason not to believe them.
I have a reason not to believe them. Let me re-post my previous, not-so-hypothetical question.
So let's look at an example. With 6D H17 (common on the strip before CSMs were introduced) the house edge is something like .57%. It's not easy to overcome that advantage in a 6D game, but it can be done. Now the CSM is introduced as a countermeasure for a small population of skilled counters. Card counting is now completely ineffective. So what's the point of now introducing 6:5? There's no longer a threat to defeat. The answer is very simple and one that I've repeated - shareholder value.
I'm sorry, but the actions of the casino managers and executives bely their words. There's simply no reason to have 6:5 on a table along with CSMs as a deterrent to counting. I could maybe understand your argument (maybe) if this were an isolated occurrence, but it's not. I saw it at 4 of the 5 strip casinos I visited last week, and have seen it often on previous trips over the last couple years. I do not doubt what you say you're hearing from these folks, and I suspect many of them in fact believe it. But again, I think they're starting to believe their own BS.
Don't get me wrong, the casinos have every right to do what they do, and if people accept the change (which they appear to be doing in droves) so be it. There are legitimate reasons to look for increased revenue. Just don't try to tell me this is all about stopping those hoards of nefarious card counters. I'd actually have a little respect for a casino that says "You know what, we want to offer $5 - $10 BJ games, but simply can't justify it based on our costs. So we introduced 6:5 to make the numbers work and provide a game for our recreational gamblers." That, I believe, is closer to reality.
Quote: Rio481There's simply no reason to have 6:5 on a table along with CSMs as a deterrent to counting.
I agree, it's utterly foolish and completely wasteful. On a CSM, you can offer 3:2 in safety, so there's no reason to deny players here, absolutely true. It's a daffy implementation but you wouldn't care unless it thwarts your intention to count down a table.
Keep in mind:
1. Putting 6:5 on a CSM table seems like they're forcing people to get acclimated to it. Perhaps this reveals how committed they are to 6:5. But it's ridiculous overkill. They may also be trying to justify equipment usage as per countless agreements with manufacturers, etc. This is a big part of the business.
2. A lot of gaming managers, like managers of other business, might not be too bright or efficient, or don't question orders from above. They're human, and a lot of decisions (including business decisions) aren't always logical or efficient or sensible. This won't be the first time or last we see the result of a daffy decision on the casino floor.
3. Shareholders don't make managerial decisions. They too look at numbers. And Tourist/Ploppy/Average Joe money covers a multitude of sins.
Quote: Rio481I could maybe understand your argument (maybe) if this were an isolated occurrence, but it's not. I saw it at 4 of the 5 strip casinos I visited last week, and have seen it often on previous trips over the last couple years. I do not doubt what you say you're hearing from these folks, and I suspect many of them in fact believe it. But again, I think they're starting to believe their own BS.
I think it's more that they don't know always know how to implement new decisions and trends.
Quote: Rio481Don't get me wrong, the casinos have every right to do what they do, and if people accept the change (which they appear to be doing in droves) so be it. There are legitimate reasons to look for increased revenue. Just don't try to tell me this is all about stopping those hoards of nefarious card counters.
It's more about increasing profits in general and stopping card counting in general, to make these factors non-issues in operations.
Quote: Rio481I'd actually have a little respect for a casino that says "You know what, we want to offer $5 - $10 BJ games, but simply can't justify it based on our costs. So we introduced 6:5 to make the numbers work and provide a game for our recreational gamblers." That, I believe, is closer to reality.
Me, too, but they may take the attitude of "Here's our offerings, this is what we're doing, go play what you want, no further explanation as your action dictates what to do." And ploppies flock to the tables with less issues and more revenue.
Casinos make changes on the casino floor without any public input or referendum. They look at numbers for the previous month upstairs. Same with new game field trials, no notice, a new game just pops up on the floor. Play it if you want, here's a how-to-play card.
I think this 6:5 situation is a huge marketing opportunity for Downtown. Imagine the marketing campaign they could run, "You want to play REAL Blackjack in Vegas? Come and play in re-vitalized Downtown Las Vegas where we always pay 3:2 on your Blackjacks!!" If they put in some compelling side bets with 4-6% house edges and get 10% of the betting volume coming through those wagers, they can still average .95% - 1.15% optimal play HE games.
I think the Strip Vegas BJ market is going to feel the pain as there are so many local/regional markets that gambler's will start to frequent more often to play BJ. Sure they will still go to Vegas, but they will go there for all the other attractions, play craps & PGP as alternatives. The speed of BJ along with the 6:5 game at a 2% HE will turn some players off BJ on the Strip...particularly when alternatives are available both in Downtown and back in the their local markets.
I lobby my group of ploppies when we are in town to not play 6:5. "Let's go Downtown and eat at one of those new foodie type restaurants for way cheaper than a nice meal on the Strip, we can play 3:2 BJ and at a minimums of less that $15-$25". It is a compelling proposition for the majority of the ploppy masses.
One thing mentioned at the TG Conference by a Director level individual at a large tribal property (local market) is his amazement at the number of 6:5 BJ tables when he walked through Strip properties. He was coming from a large locals perspective and felt very assuredly that this type of gouging of players would not work out in the long run, at least not as his property.
To me 6:5 BJ had a better chance of long term success back in the day when there weren't as many regional gambling markets as close to as many folks as there are today. I don't think this ends well for the number of regular blackjack tables without compelling side bets in Las Vegas...but then again from a game developer's perspective, maybe there is nothing wrong with that outcome.
And the game developer's side bets.
Nuttin' personal ;-)
Quote: ParadigmI think the Strip Vegas BJ market is going to feel the pain as there are so many local/regional markets that gambler's will start to frequent more often to play BJ. Sure they will still go to Vegas, but they will go there for all the other attractions, play craps & PGP as alternatives.
Wish I could agree with you on this. The whole point of my original post was the strip casinos seem to have no problem getting action on their 6:5 tables. I think there's a sizeable portion of folks (perhaps the majority) who come to the strip primarily for the party/club/resort scene. When they play BJ they go to the nearest table regardless of conditions and play until their gambling budget is gone. Hopefully it will be primarily contained to the strip and SD games, though I have my doubts. Time will tell . . .
Quote:Hopefully it will be primarily contained to the strip and SD games, though I have my doubts. Time will tell . . .
Rio, please tell me you're wrong about this. Unfortunately, I'm cynical enough to believe you're probably right. The 6:5 disease is also starting to spread to Reno, although it's still limited to a few downtown casinos. I try to tell anyone who will listen to stay away.
Quote: ParadigmAgree Rio, but you aren't playing them, I won't play them and I am sure there are others...our play counts somewhere in the overall numbers and my play has been headed downtown and will continue there as long as I can find 3:2 BJ. And if it disappears in Vegas, I'll play craps & other options while in Vegas and just play BJ at my home casinos in So Cal. We got options, let's use them and see what happens.
Agreed. But unfortunately I think that whatever business they're losing to you, me, and likeminded gamblers is more than offset by the additional revenue they're collecting from the increased house edge. And I think our numbers are so small in relation to the masses that play these games that we're just lost in the noise.
Quote: RenoGamblerRio, please tell me you're wrong about this. Unfortunately, I'm cynical enough to believe you're probably right. The 6:5 disease is also starting to spread to Reno, although it's still limited to a few downtown casinos. I try to tell anyone who will listen to stay away.
There were a couple optimistic signs during my last trip.
1) Even though it's been several years now since 6:5 was introduced it still seems to be contained to just the low limit tables. Evidence to support my theory that the strip casinos can't cost justify $5 - $10 tables without going to 6:5.
2) I found some good red chip games at a very nice off-strip resort, including a $10 DD game.
Quote: IbeatyouracesIt's also one thing when the suckers are betting table minimum on these games. It's a another when I see them betting large sums on it.
That was the most discouraging part. . . Seeing folks packed into a $10 6:5 table playing strictly green/black when the $25 3:2 table just across the aisle was empty.
Quote: Rio481That was the most discouraging part. . . Seeing folks packed into a $10 6:5 table playing strictly green/black when the $25 3:2 table just across the aisle was empty.
I think that's because a lot of people play for the social aspect, not for the best chance of winning. So they won't open a table, they'll join other players.
Quote: beachbumbabsI think that's because a lot of people play for the social aspect, not for the best chance of winning. So they won't open a table, they'll join other players.
My last time at Soaring Eagle, a guy had the $10 6:5 SD game "reserved" and playing alone with his gf watching. He was betting $300 a hand. I watched in disgust for about 10 minutes.
Quote: IbeatyouracesMy last time at Soaring Eagle, a guy had the $10 6:5 SD game "reserved" and playing alone with his gf watching. He was betting $300 a hand. I watched in disgust for about 10 minutes.
Yikes!! So how did he fare over that 10 minute span?
Quote: beachbumbabsI think that's because a lot of people play for the social aspect, not for the best chance of winning. So they won't open a table, they'll join other players.
Sure, I play socially sometimes as well. I have no problem sitting down at $5 CSM table with some friends just to have some fun. But why not bet table minimum to extend your play / minimize your losses? I have to assume folks just think the short pay isn't a big deal. Or worse yet, don't even understand that 6:5 is a short pay.
Quote: Rio481Yikes!! So how did he fare over that 10 minute span?
He was holding his own. I only saw one blackjack and that's when I left shaking my head. I can't justify letting the casino keep $90 on a $300 blackjack.
Quote: IbeatyouracesHe was holding his own. I only saw one blackjack and that's when I left shaking my head. I can't justify letting the casino keep $90 on a $300 blackjack.
True. I can somewhat see letting them keep $3 on a $10 Blackjack if you just don't have the bankroll and are playing recreationally. Still wouldn't do it myself when I can find better options, but I get it. But if I were plunking down $300/hand at a Blackjack table I think I'd take the time to educate myself just a little bit and play smart. Just pick up a BS card from the gift shop and avoid 6:5. Very little investment to protect some of your entertainment dollars.
I think you missed the AP opportunity. You could have hit on the chick. It is similar to waiting until midnight to go out clubbing.Quote: IbeatyouracesMy last time at Soaring Eagle, a guy had the $10 6:5 SD game "reserved" and playing alone with his gf watching. He was betting $300 a hand. I watched in disgust for about 10 minutes.
Take the chick....
Quote: Rio481There were a couple optimistic signs during my last trip.
1) Even though it's been several years now since 6:5 was introduced it still seems to be contained to just the low limit tables. Evidence to support my theory that the strip casinos can't cost justify $5 - $10 tables without going to 6:5.
2) I found some good red chip games at a very nice off-strip resort, including a $10 DD game.
The high cost of the strip definitely makes it much harder to make a good red chip game profitable. But it means I'll go off strip to find those casinos, and also spend money there on other things such as restaurants.
Quote: Rio481True. I can somewhat see letting them keep $3 on a $10 Blackjack if you just don't have the bankroll and are playing recreationally. Still wouldn't do it myself when I can find better options, but I get it. But if I were plunking down $300/hand at a Blackjack table I think I'd take the time to educate myself just a little bit and play smart. Just pick up a BS card from the gift shop and avoid 6:5. Very little investment to protect some of your entertainment dollars.
Basic Strategy cards should just scratch the entire strategy part off the cards and replace it with a big fat "AVOID 6:5 BJ"
Quote: RSBasic Strategy cards should just scratch the entire strategy part off the cards and replace it with a big fat "AVOID 6:5 BJ"
Unfortunately, the 6:5 disease keeps spreading because most people just don't seem to care.
It saddens me that our metro area would fall for that when Detroit hasn't. Aren't we always able to say "At least we're not Detroit?" ;)
There is an insatiable desire for gambling here, especially table games. HC Cleveland made $9,000,000 on tables last month which was more than they made on slots. We also have the two highest-grossing racinos in the state.
Quote: RSBasic Strategy cards should just scratch the entire strategy part off the cards and replace it with a big fat "AVOID 6:5 BJ"
Unfortunately I think the placard at the table that reads $10 Minimum trumps the AVOID 6:5 BJ warning on the strategy card.
Quote: Rio481Quote: RSBasic Strategy cards should just scratch the entire strategy part off the cards and replace it with a big fat "AVOID 6:5 BJ"
Unfortunately I think the placard at the table that reads $10 Minimum trumps the AVOID 6:5 BJ warning on the strategy card.
As little attention as many players pay, I wouldn't be surprised to see low minimum games eventually go from 6:5 to even money.
Quote: RenoGamblerQuote: Rio481Quote: RSBasic Strategy cards should just scratch the entire strategy part off the cards and replace it with a big fat "AVOID 6:5 BJ"
Unfortunately I think the placard at the table that reads $10 Minimum trumps the AVOID 6:5 BJ warning on the strategy card.
As little attention as many players pay, I wouldn't be surprised to see low minimum games eventually go from 6:5 to even money.
Nah, it'll go to bj pays 2:3.
Quote: IbeatyouracesQuote: RenoGamblerQuote: Rio481Quote: RSBasic Strategy cards should just scratch the entire strategy part off the cards and replace it with a big fat "AVOID 6:5 BJ"
Unfortunately I think the placard at the table that reads $10 Minimum trumps the AVOID 6:5 BJ warning on the strategy card.
As little attention as many players pay, I wouldn't be surprised to see low minimum games eventually go from 6:5 to even money.
Nah, it'll go to bj pays 2:3.
You see, it's a good deal because 3 is more than 2. Have another free drink.
Quote: RenoGamblerQuote: IbeatyouracesQuote: RenoGamblerQuote: Rio481Quote: RSBasic Strategy cards should just scratch the entire strategy part off the cards and replace it with a big fat "AVOID 6:5 BJ"
Unfortunately I think the placard at the table that reads $10 Minimum trumps the AVOID 6:5 BJ warning on the strategy card.
As little attention as many players pay, I wouldn't be surprised to see low minimum games eventually go from 6:5 to even money.
Nah, it'll go to bj pays 2:3.
You see, it's a good deal because 3 is more than 2. Have another free drink.
It's all the same thing....ya just gotta bet more to win the same amount!
Quote: RenoGamblerQuote: IbeatyouracesQuote: RenoGamblerQuote: Rio481Quote: RSBasic Strategy cards should just scratch the entire strategy part off the cards and replace it with a big fat "AVOID 6:5 BJ"
Unfortunately I think the placard at the table that reads $10 Minimum trumps the AVOID 6:5 BJ warning on the strategy card.
As little attention as many players pay, I wouldn't be surprised to see low minimum games eventually go from 6:5 to even money.
Nah, it'll go to bj pays 2:3.
You see, it's a good deal because 3 is more than 2. Have another free drink.
If BJs payed 2:3, I think it'd be almost right to double down on one vs. a weak dealer card (and perhaps actually right against a 6).
Quote:If BJs payed 2:3, I think it'd be almost right to double down on one vs. a weak dealer card (and perhaps actually right against a 6).
No doubt. I seem to recall reading a thread that doubling BJ is the right play in a 6:5 game when the count is strong. Didn't pay too much attention to the specifics because I don't play 6:5.
heres what i wish some of u would check out for me. it seemed they were dealing almost to the bottom of the shoe? unless it was just this one dealer, or doing it for the girl who was sitting there before me only, i would think this would hurt their bottom line bigtime? i wonder if they remove some of the shoe and leave it in the shuffler? its a regular shoe, not a csm, but its automatic, not hand shuffled. i just cant bring myself to believe the penetration is 98%
please have the courtesy to post back once u find out or me posting this is useless
Quote: RomesProbably just a random dealer giving phenomenal penetration... And for the record this HELPS their bottom line, big time, because it gets more hands out to their customers, which 99% of aren't counters, and of the 1% of counters only another 1% actually have a winning game. If casinos had half a brain they'd deal out as many hands as they possibly could from every shoe. In protecting against the 1 in 10,000 successful card counter, they massively hurt their bottom line with their crap rules and crap penetration. Pretty idiotic, but they've been sold and suckered in to "counters will break your casino!" by so called "security experts" that want to stay in business and just try to scare casinos.
We're talking about Greektown. I'd say more like 99.9999999999%, 0.00000000001%, 0.00000000009%.
Quote: RomesProbably just a random dealer giving phenomenal penetration... And for the record this HELPS their bottom line, big time, because it gets more hands out to their customers, which 99% of aren't counters, and of the 1% of counters only another 1% actually have a winning game. If casinos had half a brain they'd deal out as many hands as they possibly could from every shoe. In protecting against the 1 in 10,000 successful card counter, they massively hurt their bottom line with their crap rules and crap penetration. Pretty idiotic, but they've been sold and suckered in to "counters will break your casino!" by so called "security experts" that want to stay in business and just try to scare casinos.
Do you really think that only one percent of counters have a winning game? That seems really low to me.
Of people who call themselves card counters, yes, sadly I do believe that. I've taught dozens of counters, and maybe one of them had a "winning game" albeit rough understandings of RoR/Kelly/etc. And of those people I've taught most came from one forums or another where they'd already been exposed to these concepts, let alone the random friend/family/etc... And I've run in to other "counters" at the tables and in convo they show they don't know these other things at allllllll.Quote: billryanDo you really think that only one percent of counters have a winning game? That seems really low to me.
I seriously think the casino should do this: You're allowed to card count if you spread 1-100. 99.9999999999% of people won't have ANY concept or RoR/Kelly and they will go broke even if they count PERFECTLY and play PERFECT deviations just because they don't understand those core concepts. Never mind that the true professionals (1% of 1%) would have a field day... the others would lose more than they would make due to the shier number of losing counters.
So how come there are no mathletes at casinos who urge management to offer this opportunity? It would be a win-win all the way around! Or, maybe there are some aspects of bottom line management we customers /players don't know about?Quote: RomesI seriously think the casino should do this: You're allowed to card count if you spread 1-100.
https://youtu.be/v9oWq9zIXTY?t=3
