It's over in CT (and all of New England?)
8 deck
H17
6:5
Supposedly the high roller pits/tables ($50 min?) will retain 3:2 blackjack. Not known whether 8 deck and/or H17 will be universal.
Their selling point is that outside the high-roller pits there will always be $10 blackjack. Mohegan recently ended grandfathering at a lower level when the table limit was raised. The idea going forward is that they can tout the always-available low limit and forget to mention 6:5.
Don't know if there is any 3:2 Blackjack at Foxwoods or Twin River (RI) but if there is now, there won't be any for very long. And will any of the new casinos need to do otherwise?
Occasional players who go to the casino once or twice a year or for dinner and a show won't notice or realize the raw deal of 6:5. Based on the fallacies, myths and legends you hear at the low-limit tables, even from the regulars, the hit that 6:5 takes from the game won't be understood. Many players down in steerage think Match The Dealer is the best bet on the table., so 6:5 won't bother them. I would guess that this change won't reduce the take on those tables where it's made because few people will recognize that they need to stay away.
Ironically, at the high limit tables where 6:5 would most benefit the bottom line, it won't be implemented.
I've heard that they feel the need to bleed the clientele as much as they can now, before Springfield, Boston and Tiverton RI come online. Setting the "standard" for everyone before they do will be the incentive for the newcomers to follow suit. Although that might be sour grapes. General reaction of dealers, floors and pits that I speak with is that it's a rotten move. But corporate loyalty among the lower echelons that I talk to has always been near zero. Welcome to corporate America, casinos no more than any other industry.
News in CT papers has been that MGM wants to buy the Wynn Boston resort since Steve Wynn got caught with his business outside of his pants and will lose his license. MGM would sell Springfield to the Mohegan/Foxwoods conglomerate, which would in turn forgo Windsor Locks in north-central CT and operate Springfield. But that's for another thread.
6:5 blackjack. That's the sad story here.
If it's true, I'm done. It's been fun, but I was never going to quit my day job. Can't blame a guy for dreaming that he could though. Not any more.
MGM Springfield and Wynn Boston will deal CSM Shuffled 6:5.
In anticipation of Springfield opening in August, Mohegan is offering a buyout to their employees. One month salary for every year with the casino. They should take it.
Quote: TigerWuWhat is the house edge difference in 3:2 vs 6:5?
You get a BJ around 1 in 21 hands. So does the dealer. So around 5% of the time instead you will be paid $3 less on a $10 bet. So around 15 cents per hand. Around 1.5%.
Quote: TigerWuWhat is the house edge difference in 3:2 vs 6:5?
Everything else remaining the same, the difference is 1.71% vs 0.35% for 3:2.
Under the proposed changes, the H.E. will be 2.019% vs. the current 0.35%.
Quote: TigerWuI see... that's a pretty big jump in edge from 3:2 to 6:5, but even 1.5%-2% is still pretty decent odds for a casino game. I mean, I can see how that would screw over APs, but for a non-counting average player it's probably not even noticeable. And that's probably what casinos are counting on -- weeds out the counters, keeps the normies.
The thing that casinos don't get though, is that they will not make more money! The same amount of people will lose the same amount of money, just faster. Example: Instead of Joe Blow's $200 lasting 3 hours, it now only lasts 2.5 hours. Eventually they stop coming all together.
Quote: IbeatyouracesThe thing that casinos don't get though, is that they will not make more money! The same amount of people will lose the same amount of money, just faster. Example: Instead of Joe Blow's $200 lasting 3 hours, it now only lasts 2.5 hours. Eventually they stop coming all together.
Mine only seems to last 10 minutes
That's what she said
Quote: aceofspadesMine only seems to last 10 minutes
That's what she said
Sounds like a personal problem. 🤣
That HE applies *IF* you rigorously apply basic strategy. I don't see that often. You will be better off playing craps, if you stay away from the sucker bets. Better yet, play baccarat where the ONLY thing you have to remember is don't bet the tie. If I do play again it will be Pai Gow tiles. Challenging to learn, but the HE and slow rate of play will make it interesting and the expected loss will be acceptable. As I said, I am done, done, done with blackjack at Mohegan Sun given the changes described.Quote: TankoEverything else remaining the same, the difference is 1.71% vs 0.35% for 3:2.
Under the proposed changes, the H.E. will be 2.019% vs. the current 0.35%.
Quote: IbeatyouracesThe thing that casinos don't get though, is that they will not make more money! The same amount of people will lose the same amount of money, just faster. Example: Instead of Joe Blow's $200 lasting 3 hours, it now only lasts 2.5 hours. Eventually they stop coming all together.
I've mentioned multiple times in this forum how terrible the casino games are in Oklahoma. Worse than 6:5 Vegas blackjack. And yet people continue to pack the floors. I don't think moving to 6:5 BJ is going to hurt any casino's bottom line. The average vacationing tourist doesn't care (and probably won't notice) their money runs out 20 minutes sooner. That's 20 more minutes they'll spend by the pool or at the bar paying for alcohol instead of getting it for free. Or 20 more minutes sitting at the slot machines where they'll bleed money even faster.
Quote: TigerWu1.5%-2% is still pretty decent odds for a casino game.
Although you are making your case on a fact, BJ is a terrible game unless the HE is low, because the Variance is also very low. In fact I have decided I just don't like the game even when the HE is around 0.4%. This can be quantified by looking at EV/SD.
When the day comes that there are no affordable 3-2 games, please don't forget about Ultimate Texas Hold 'Em, which has an Element of Risk of 0.53%. Craps too. The only reason that game is still alive is the many sucker bets on the table.
Quote: racquetEffective June 1st at Mohegan CT:
8 deck
H17
6:5
Supposedly the high roller pits/tables ($50 min?) will retain 3:2 blackjack. Not known whether 8 deck and/or H17 will be universal.
Their selling point is that outside the high-roller pits there will always be $10 blackjack. Mohegan recently ended grandfathering at a lower level when the table limit was raised. The idea going forward is that they can tout the always-available low limit and forget to mention 6:5.
Don't know if there is any 3:2 Blackjack at Foxwoods or Twin River (RI) but if there is now, there won't be any for very long. And will any of the new casinos need to do otherwise?
Occasional players who go to the casino once or twice a year or for dinner and a show won't notice or realize the raw deal of 6:5. Based on the fallacies, myths and legends you hear at the low-limit tables, even from the regulars, the hit that 6:5 takes from the game won't be understood. Many players down in steerage think Match The Dealer is the best bet on the table., so 6:5 won't bother them. I would guess that this change won't reduce the take on those tables where it's made because few people will recognize that they need to stay away.
Ironically, at the high limit tables where 6:5 would most benefit the bottom line, it won't be implemented.
I've heard that they feel the need to bleed the clientele as much as they can now, before Springfield, Boston and Tiverton RI come online. Setting the "standard" for everyone before they do will be the incentive for the newcomers to follow suit. Although that might be sour grapes. General reaction of dealers, floors and pits that I speak with is that it's a rotten move. But corporate loyalty among the lower echelons that I talk to has always been near zero. Welcome to corporate America, casinos no more than any other industry.
News in CT papers has been that MGM wants to buy the Wynn Boston resort since Steve Wynn got caught with his business outside of his pants and will lose his license. MGM would sell Springfield to the Mohegan/Foxwoods conglomerate, which would in turn forgo Windsor Locks in north-central CT and operate Springfield. But that's for another thread.
6:5 blackjack. That's the sad story here.
If it's true, I'm done. It's been fun, but I was never going to quit my day job. Can't blame a guy for dreaming that he could though. Not any more.
Do you have a link to this article?
Quote: WizardAs players, we are losing the fight against 6 to 5, battle by battle, and will eventually lose the war. I hope this won't be any big corporate reveal, but when I worked for a major Strip casino I calculated the company only broke even on a $50 3-2 player with average strategy, to say nothing of the basic strategy player. The thin house edge covered the cost of labor but left nothing to be filed under profits.
When the day comes that there are no affordable 3-2 games, please don't forget about Ultimate Texas Hold 'Em, which has an Element of Risk of 0.53%. Craps too. The only reason that game is still alive is the many sucker bets on the table.
So instead of letting the players play for a bit longer, make them lose faster so the dealers are standing around doing nothing but twiddling their thumbs. Makes sense. I'll say this again, casinos are not making more money by doing this.
Quote: Ibeatyouraces
Makes sense. I'll say this again, casinos are not making more money by doing this.
They have to be, or else they wouldn't be doing it.
Quote: TigerWuI've mentioned multiple times in this forum how terrible the casino games are in Oklahoma. Worse than 6:5 Vegas blackjack. And yet people continue to pack the floors. I don't think moving to 6:5 BJ is going to hurt any casino's bottom line. The average vacationing tourist doesn't care (and probably won't notice) their money runs out 20 minutes sooner. That's 20 more minutes they'll spend by the pool or at the bar paying for alcohol instead of getting it for free. Or 20 more minutes sitting at the slot machines where they'll bleed money even faster.
Are speaking specifically of the collection you sometimes have to pay in Oklahoma? Because the blackjack games there tend to have good rules from what I've seen (3:2, S17, LS, etc). The limits most places are laughably low, though.
Quote: IbeatyouracesQuote: WizardAs players, we are losing the fight against 6 to 5, battle by battle, and will eventually lose the war. I hope this won't be any big corporate reveal, but when I worked for a major Strip casino I calculated the company only broke even on a $50 3-2 player with average strategy, to say nothing of the basic strategy player. The thin house edge covered the cost of labor but left nothing to be filed under profits.
When the day comes that there are no affordable 3-2 games, please don't forget about Ultimate Texas Hold 'Em, which has an Element of Risk of 0.53%. Craps too. The only reason that game is still alive is the many sucker bets on the table.
So instead of letting the players play for a bit longer, make them lose faster so the dealers are standing around doing nothing but twiddling their thumbs. Makes sense. I'll say this again, casinos are not making more money by doing this.
First order of business - if you can get a customer to spend the same amount of money in 20 minutes instead of 30 minutes thats great. Frees up the seat for the next person
Second order of business - if you honestly offer people something and they misinterpret it ("you would be stupid to play a game that only offers you 3 and 2 when this other game offers you as much as 6 and 5" says the ploppie) then take advantage of customer stupidity
Quote: WizardAs players, we are losing the fight against 6 to 5, battle by battle, and will eventually lose the war. I hope this won't be any big corporate reveal, but when I worked for a major Strip casino I calculated the company only broke even on a $50 3-2 player with average strategy, to say nothing of the basic strategy player. The thin house edge covered the cost of labor but left nothing to be filed under profits.
Too many sheep will never notice or care about the difference. People don't even know the game. How many say, "You are trying to get as close to 21 without going over as possible." As long as those folks play at my parties then go to the casino, we are doomed.
But, a question. How did they ever make money back in the day?
Quote: WizardAs players, we are losing the fight against 6 to 5, battle by battle, and will eventually lose the war.
Have you ever tried talking to people
about games in the actual casino? More
ignorance I have never seen. They have
no interest in how things work, think
the casino is fair in every game it offers,
and want to hear nothing to the contrary.
The best are the ones that think they will
someday get ahead and stay ahead on
the slots. There are legions of them that
think this is easily possible.
Quote: darkozQuote: IbeatyouracesQuote: WizardAs players, we are losing the fight against 6 to 5, battle by battle, and will eventually lose the war. I hope this won't be any big corporate reveal, but when I worked for a major Strip casino I calculated the company only broke even on a $50 3-2 player with average strategy, to say nothing of the basic strategy player. The thin house edge covered the cost of labor but left nothing to be filed under profits.
When the day comes that there are no affordable 3-2 games, please don't forget about Ultimate Texas Hold 'Em, which has an Element of Risk of 0.53%. Craps too. The only reason that game is still alive is the many sucker bets on the table.
So instead of letting the players play for a bit longer, make them lose faster so the dealers are standing around doing nothing but twiddling their thumbs. Makes sense. I'll say this again, casinos are not making more money by doing this.
First order of business - if you can get a customer to spend the same amount of money in 20 minutes instead of 30 minutes thats great. Frees up the seat for the next person
Second order of business - if you honestly offer people something and they misinterpret it ("you would be stupid to play a game that only offers you 3 and 2 when this other game offers you as much as 6 and 5" says the ploppie) then take advantage of customer stupidity
In response to the bolded part... sure, but you won't get MORE customers. In turn, you don't make more money.
Quote: EvenBobThe best are the ones that think they will
someday get ahead and stay ahead on
the slots. There are legions of them that
think this is easily possible.
If you know the right slots at the right times, it can be pretty easy.
Quote: AZDuffmanQuote: WizardAs players, we are losing the fight against 6 to 5, battle by battle, and will eventually lose the war. I hope this won't be any big corporate reveal, but when I worked for a major Strip casino I calculated the company only broke even on a $50 3-2 player with average strategy, to say nothing of the basic strategy player. The thin house edge covered the cost of labor but left nothing to be filed under profits.
Too many sheep will never notice or care about the difference. People don't even know the game. How many say, "You are trying to get as close to 21 without going over as possible." As long as those folks play at my parties then go to the casino, we are doomed.
But, a question. How did they ever make money back in the day?
Back in the day people didnt play anything close to basic strategy,as bad as players are now they used to be much worse.
The customers truly do not care. Anyone serious about blackjack is playing in the high-limit room. Out on the casino floor, the customers are concerned with how hot the waitresses are and how quickly they get their "free" drink. Proof of this? Jam-packed roulette wheels where every bet costs five percent.
Have you ever talked to the average casino patron? Not the friends you came with. But the average customer? I am surprised they had enough brain power to navigate the parking garage.
And it is only getting worse.
Games like craps and blackjack grew in popularity because many years ago, guys gambled recreationally with one another. Maybe in the world wars, soldiers played dice and cards.
The millennial generation was always distracted by something else and many never learned to gamble or care about it. They are there to hook up and drink. They're lucky they are getting 6 to 5. The extra unit is a gift from the casino at this point.
Quote: aceofspadesDo you have a link to this article?
Google "mgm springfield wynn casino news" You can find an article from the Hartford Courant that references a story from the Wall Street Journal. The usual denials from those that might know the details, but it makes sense to me that they might look into it.
Connecticut has been screwed over so many times with sweetheart deals that go sour at the last minute that such an outcome rings true. For example, I'm still waiting to get my Hartford Patriot season tickets in the mail. Imagine if CT's friends the Mohegans and Mashantuckets high-tail it out of state to take over Springfield. Even more revenue lost to the state's bloodsucking government. Sweet.
Quote: sodawaterThe millennial generation was always distracted by something else and many never learned to gamble or care about it. They are there to hook up and drink. They're lucky they are getting 6 to 5. The extra unit is a gift from the casino at this point.
It was only a matter of time before millennials were blamed for 6:5 blackjack.
As one of the 3 millennials on this forum I am highly offended.
When i started working at my current job on the strip (March 2016), they started changing all the non DD,HL games(except one for whatever reason) to 8Deck, 6:5, No surrender, No Even Money, Ace Split once. Its the #1 non drink-service related complaint i get.
It is a good marketing campaign for local Vegas casinos, they proudly have their billboards all over town touting their 3:2 blackjack.
So who WONT play 6:5 BJ? Smart players, who even if non APs, and just played basic strategy, were just losing a few bucks an hour while taking up a seat, drinking for free, getting a free buffet comp. As Mike said in an earlier post, after expenses, the casino LOSES money on a low level basic strategy player at a low house edge table.
And increasing the HE on casino games only reinforces that viewpoint that gambling is a waste of money.
Quote: gordonm888There are more entertaining and less expensive gaming options than casinos available in many forms - video games, board games, racing wi-fi cars and drones,etc.
I dont know how many non-vegas casinos have them, but Skill Based slots have been popping up everywhere around here. I think that is one of the things they are doing to get the younger crowd playing slots. As a millennial myself, the space invaders one has me hooked.
Quote: gamerfreakIt was only a matter of time before millennials were blamed for 6:5 blackjack.
Wait a minute....
If millennials are responsible for 6:5 blackjack....
And 6:5 blackjack makes casinos more money....
And more money for the casinos means more money for the shareholders....
Then millennials are therefore responsible for increased profits to corporate America and its investors!
Boomers and capitalists should be happy about this....
Take the money you would have spent on 6:5 BJ and put it in the market instead.
Quote: TigerWuWait a minute....
If millennials are responsible for 6:5 blackjack....
And 6:5 blackjack makes casinos more money....
And more money for the casinos means more money for the shareholders....
Then millennials are therefore responsible for increased profits to corporate America and its investors!
Boomers and capitalists should be happy about this....
Take the money you would have spent on 6:5 BJ and put it in the market instead.
All the "Old School" Casino people have to die out eventually.
That describes me. Yes, the casino was not making much money on my play. Blackjack was something for me to do while Mrs. Chips played the slots. We enjoyed frequenting the casino, a together thing except for our choices for gambling. Hanging in the comped room or drinking in the lounges doesn't do it for me, so we are not going as often. Our "donations" to the casino are one-third of what they were five years ago, and I expect will continue to shrink as things that entertain me continue to evaporate. I think there are many other cases of partners who gamble where one is a high value client and the other, like me, is necessary baggage.Quote: SOOPOO... So who WONT play 6:5 BJ? Smart players, who even if non APs, and just played basic strategy, were just losing a few bucks an hour while taking up a seat, drinking for free, getting a free buffet comp. As Mike said in an earlier post, after expenses, the casino LOSES money on a low level basic strategy player at a low house edge table.
Quote: SOOPOOHave any of you ever walked by a double zero roulette table? How about a bank of 90% slots? Caribbean Stud table? That stupid 'big wheel'? Betting hardways at craps? So who WONT play 6:5 BJ? Smart players, who even if non APs, and just played basic strategy, were just losing a few bucks an hour while taking up a seat, drinking for free, getting a free buffet comp.
Agreed.
The ploppies are always going to come to the casino. Anyone that is not selective in what and how they play will continue to win or (sooner or later) lose whatever they were going to lose, regardless of the rules of the game. How many times have I heard "we can't win at this game, let's go play craps. I can win at craps." Blackjack was the best game in the house, with the lowest house edge, and the only game exploitable because of the count. Yet the horrible house edge games, and the slots, draw people probably moreso than blackjack.
I wonder if there is any point, honestly, where the rules turn people away so much that it can be seen? What blackjack payoff is prohibitive? 11:10? You can find 3:2 games with other bad rules, not as obvious as 6:5, and those games are up and running.
I think all the currently operating casinos are scared to death. There will be a casino on every corner before long, as state governments come to rely more and more on the hidden taxes inherent in all of the vices we have - gambling, smoking, drugs, sex. The states will license more and more venues in a misguided idea of "if you build it, they will come," without acknowledging "but not if everyone else is building one too."
The casinos are thinking "squeeze every nickel we can from the customers we have, because as soon as there's a casino closer to them then we are, they are gone."
Ploppies playing $10 low limit tables aren’t going to notice much difference between $12 or $15 payout, especially when they are already are giving up 5%+++ EV playing terrible strategy and terrible side bets.
I think the tables in the high limit rooms will stay 3:2 for the foreseeable future because it’s much more noticeable to the players.
Blackjack is mind numbingly boring. If I’m playing -EV for entertainment at a table, it’s probably going to be Pai Gow Poker. It’s by far the best value for a -EV table game.
Yep, this source says 1.39 % to be exact:Quote: SOOPOOYou get a BJ around 1 in 21 hands. So does the dealer. So around 5% of the time instead you will be paid $3 less on a $10 bet. So around 15 cents per hand. Around 1.5%.
https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/rule-variations/
Quote: racquetGoogle "mgm springfield wynn casino news" You can find an article from the Hartford Courant that references a story from the Wall Street Journal. The usual denials from those that might know the details, but it makes sense to me that they might look into it.
Connecticut has been screwed over so many times with sweetheart deals that go sour at the last minute that such an outcome rings true. For example, I'm still waiting to get my Hartford Patriot season tickets in the mail. Imagine if CT's friends the Mohegans and Mashantuckets high-tail it out of state to take over Springfield. Even more revenue lost to the state's bloodsucking government. Sweet.
How will the tribes spin it ,if they get the casino in Springfield or the Wynn ,since they wanted to build the one in Windsor to KEEP JOBS IN THE STATE.
Quote: racquetGoogle "mgm springfield wynn casino news" You can find an article from the Hartford Courant that references a story from the Wall Street Journal. The usual denials from those that might know the details, but it makes sense to me that they might look into it.
Connecticut has been screwed over so many times with sweetheart deals that go sour at the last minute that such an outcome rings true. For example, I'm still waiting to get my Hartford Patriot season tickets in the mail. Imagine if CT's friends the Mohegans and Mashantuckets high-tail it out of state to take over Springfield. Even more revenue lost to the state's bloodsucking government. Sweet.
I did that but cannot find anything that states that, as of June 1st, Mohegan will change blackjack rules
Quote: aceofspadesI did that but cannot find anything that states that, as of June 1st, Mohegan will change blackjack rules
Sorry.
The article I mentioned in an earlier post had to do with the rumored license switch. - Springfield - Wynn - Windsor CT.
6:5 blackjack is something I heard from several different sources, nothing official or from anyone connected with the casino except that they were customers at my blackjack table. Don't know their sources.
I had heard about the loss of grandfathering the same way, unofficially, before it went into effect. There was never any announcement per se until they started telling the table whenever they raised a limit.
I'd bet it's gonna happen. Giving 3:2 odds.
Quote: HunterhillHow will the tribes spin it ,if they get the casino in Springfield or the Wynn ,since they wanted to build the one in Windsor to KEEP JOBS IN THE STATE.
Oh yea. Those casinos. They want to keep jobs in the state. I forgot that was their rationale for existence. Silly me.
Because of Steve Wynn's activities, everyone in the casino business is figuring out how best to play the new reality.
Wynn, Inc. has added more women to its board. That's because the old board woke up one morning last week and started appreciating the role that females play in the operation of casinos? Yeah. Sure. Bet they dont "spin" it that way.
MGM figures they can move from a marginal market - Springfield - to a more lucrative one - Boston - because of the benefit to womankind by removing the name "Wynn" from the front door and replacing it with "MGM?" Ah. Another spin.
Mohegan and Foxwoods, longtime adversaries, teamed up to offer to build Windsor because of the ancestral connections forged over a tribal fire 600 years ago? They offered to build it only with substantial funding from CT - because they had no need to have the state provide the money, and location, needed to get it underway? They decided to build it just inside the state line from Springfield, not because folks driving up I-91 from NYC would not, just maybe, prefer to pull off the highway a couple of exits earlier than Springfield?
And they now want to get in line for the switcheroo because they DON'T want to remove from their neighborhood the next great competition for their customers?
SPIN? The only thing these folks want to spin is a roulette wheel. One that has, at LEAST, two green slots with zeros on it.
Quote: racquetSorry.
The article I mentioned in an earlier post had to do with the rumored license switch. - Springfield - Wynn - Windsor CT.
6:5 blackjack is something I heard from several different sources, nothing official or from anyone connected with the casino except that they were customers at my blackjack table. Don't know their sources.
I had heard about the loss of grandfathering the same way, unofficially, before it went into effect. There was never any announcement per se until they started telling the table whenever they raised a limit.
I'd bet it's gonna happen. Giving 3:2 odds.
So fake news.... Come on you can't start a thread like this without a reliable source.
Quote: bj4funSo fake news.... Come on you can't start a thread like this without a reliable source.
He was there, he heard about it, he passed it on. It's not exactly something that gets featured in the media. As in, not a selling point.
Maybe he saved some people some expenses, or helped them move up their play to May.
Quote: beachbumbabsHe was there, he heard about it, he passed it on. It's not exactly something that gets featured in the media. As in, not a selling point.
Maybe he saved some people some expenses, or helped them move up their play to May.
Objection - hearsay
Quote: aceofspadesObjection - hearsay
Fortunately this is NOT a court of law. By protecting people's rights courts do NOT let the truth win out. Here on WoV, the truth reigns supreme.....
Quote: bj4funSo fake news.... Come on you can't start a thread like this without a reliable source.
My original post includes the phrases "I've heard", and "Supposedly".
_I_ am a reliable source. This is not the New York Times, (although some of the posts I have read here make me think that it could be the National Enquirer). I did not start the thread with any disclaimer, or with the opening "A long time ago in a galaxy far away", although I could take a Haldeman ("to the best of my recollection at this point in time"). I won't do so. Without identifying my _reliable sources_, I will state categorically that I heard it from multiple _independent_ sources. No, none of them were Mohegan employees, and in fact all of my sources might be able to be traced back to a single originator. I doubt it.
I believe what I heard was true, and that it will in fact happen.
IN MY OPINION, it fits with recent changes at Mohegan: 6:5 on the Fusion or Stadium game; the end of grandfathering; offering "packages" (i.e. buyouts) to staff. It makes sense from a bottom-line perspective, and even if we think it's misguided, many in the industry who have the power to make these choices have gone this route.
MY OPINION is that it's easy for empty suits to propose changes like this because it can be sold to other more-senior empty suits as a way to increase profits. Hell - I'm biased. Maybe in fact it WILL.
And in my never-ending quest to rumor-monger and otherwise spread FUD, I've also been told that $5 blackjack will return to Mohegan at the same time as 6:5 blackjack. More fake news? We shall see.
Quote: Hunterhill
Back in the day people didnt play anything close to basic strategy,as bad as players are now they used to be much worse.
I will at least partially buy that. One day I am going to crack and strangle a person who says to a new player, "see, the object is to get as close to 21 as possible without going over."
I teach a lot of people how to play, and people yeah, are bad. And I have seen the grind it is as far as the house goes. But are there enough sharps that it has killed it for the house?
Quote: racquetMy original post includes the phrases "I've heard", and "Supposedly".
Well, not exactly....
Quote: racquetEffective June 1st at Mohegan CT:
8 deck
H17
6:5
Supposedly the high roller pits/tables ($50 min?) will retain 3:2 blackjack. Not known whether 8 deck and/or H17 will be universal.
The only "Supposedly" there was if the high limit pits would remain 3:2. This thread was started and stated as fact! Now it turns out to be nothing more the supposition. While I very much agree that the empty suits running casinos these days are just stupid enough to do this, in this particular case, I'm suspect.
The fact that MGM is coming to Springfield later this year does NOT make this the time to change your BJ from a very good
6 Deck
S17
3:2
To an awful
8 Deck
H17
6:5
Perhaps they will, but I think more highly of Mohegan Sun than that. I also think more of Foxwoods than that, and rather than follow suit, I think they would market the heck out of their 3:2 BJ just 15 minutes away.
If your information is correct, Mohegan Sun will have lost a customer in me not only in CT but also in PA (where they must pay 3:2) but I would boycott in favor of other nearby casinos like Mt. Airy or Resorts World Catskills which also (must) pay 3:2.
