Can we quibble about winning money from the "casino"?

In another thread, the following was mentioned:

Quote: 24Bingo

If you're serious about making money from casinos, play poker, or maybe sports book. Blackjack and video poker, when you start to win, the casino has every incentive to stop you, which you can see in booting counters, CFMs, changing pay tables, etc. Poker, they don't care. Sports book, the bookmakers do care, but like your fellow players in poker, there's only so much they can do - then again, if it weren't working out for them, it wouldn't be there, so who knows?

The bolding is my doing, because my quibble is with that part of the statement.

When you play poker, and we're not talking about video poker, you're not actually making money from the casino, but rather from the other players. Tournaments are extremely obvious that this is the case. Technically, promotions, such as bad beats, splash pots, etc, would be funded by the casino, but I would argue that most serious players would not consider that to be the primary methodology by which to win money, and that winning it from other players is the best process. (One could argue that promotions monies are coming indirectly from the players, via the rake, however that same argument is true for any game in the casino, including slot machines and table games, so I won't use that argument.)

My understand of sports betting is that the money you are winning is coming from the players who lost betting the opposite way that you did. (If I'm wrong on this, then I apologize. I don't participate in sports betting, but my understand is that it is parimutuel.) So, again, you aren't winning the money from the casino, but from the other players.

In these cases, the casino is really just a way of ensuring order and perhaps fairness in the betting. But you aren't actually winning money from the casino. And, again, I'm not talking about table games and slot machines, where the casino takes the money from one player, and then pays it to another. Poker and sports betting seem like games in which the money is moved from one player to the other, directly in the case of poker, indirectly in the case of sports betting, with a rake or vig removed.

Yes, in poker its pretty much the casino supplies the table, the cards and the dealer and takes its rake. Its the players wining and losing their money.

In a sports book it MAY be true that the Book is more or less offset but its the book that guaranties the bet irrespective of the book perhaps taking a beating on it.

As to people who have won money at a casino game and refer to it as "playing with the casino's money" it is of course not true, its the player's money. He just won it. We only feel that since we are "up" we can get crazy.

Quote: konceptum

My understand of sports betting is that the money you are winning is coming from the players who lost betting the opposite way that you did. (If I'm wrong on this, then I apologize. I don't participate in sports betting, but my understand is that it is parimutuel.) So, again, you aren't winning the money from the casino, but from the other players.

Not exactly. The sportsbook, which is inside of but not part of the casino, is a "market maker." It is just like on the floor of the NYSE, but there they call it a "specialist." (Or at least they used to) There the MM matches buy and sell orders. There are 10,000 buys for US Steel and 11,000 sells. So he matches up the buys and the sells and is forced to buy 1,000 himself. 11,000 buys and 10,000 sells and he has to sell 1,000 of his own shares. If there are more buys and his shares are running low he will bump the price up, if there are more sells he will lower it. MMs have to keep a pretty good amount of stock onhand, but the return for the risk is they get the "vig" being able to buy the bottom of the spread and sell the higher. Of course on Wall Street they call it "spread" not "vig."

The sports book is the same. Small bettors could be betting on the Steelers all morning. But unless you want to lay a huge bet, the book will take your action 99.9% of the time as long as the bet is on the board. The book may adjust the line, vig, or both to stimulate action. All they are doing is "hedging" so the action equals out. But there is no guarantee it will balance. The book gets the same "vig" advantage of taking most bets at -110.

Since the closure of sites like betcha.com, which was a matching service, you do win or lose from the sportsbook. Sportsbooks can and do get clobbered when no matter what the line they cannot balance the action.

I've read from several sources that bookmakers aren't always looking to balance the lines, but to get a bet at favourable odds. They can be 2-1 sided on a bet, but the real odds (to the maker) is Evens. They got a +200 bet at -100. Value!

Several source are misguided. Occasionally a book will take action in the manner described, but those occasions are rare indeed.

That's why the line is changing to try and balance the books. And there is a nickel line available to big bettors, when books are unbalanced too much.

It's called bookmaking, not gambling. The Sopranos got that right on one episode !

Quote: thecesspit

I've read from several sources that bookmakers aren't always looking to balance the lines, but to get a bet at favourable odds. They can be 2-1 sided on a bet, but the real odds (to the maker) is Evens. They got a +200 bet at -100. Value!

What I read was that they do not care that every last game is balanced, but that the total pool is balanced. Say there are 8 NFL Games going first half of the day. Even if they are out of balance on all 8 the chances of being wrong on all 8 is what, 0.625%? Then they figure that the betting public is stupid and will be wrong more than they will be right. So instead of a layoff (can legit places legally lay off action?) and giving a vig they just take the chance.

Now if 1 of those 8 is off by $100K and the rest by $10K then they have a problem. Othewise they take their chances, it evens out in the end, meanwhile the manager guzzles Malox(R) for his meals.

Quote: konceptum

Technically, promotions, such as bad beats, splash pots, etc, would be funded by the casino, ...

I'm not sure what a splash pot is, but Bad Beats are NOT funded by the casino.

They guarantee a minimum starting amount. Some people call this the "Seed Money." But that implies that the casino is actually (or even just on paper) transferring funds.

In reality, the daily increment is only a portion of the collection until the total collection covers the initial guarante amount. Sure, if it hits before they collect enough to cover, they will be out the excess, but only temporarily. The next Bad Beat will increment slowly until they cover the starting amount as well as the extra that they had to pay out previously.

This same principle applies to table game side bet jackpots and progressive slots. A portion of the coin-in is earmarked for that jackpot, while the meter increases slowly until the minimum guarantee is covered.

In many cases, a portion is allocated towards the NEXT Bad Beat or jackpot, so that after it hits, the next starting amount is already higher than the minimum.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

I'm not sure what a splash pot is, but Bad Beats are NOT funded by the casino.

They guarantee a minimum starting amount. Some people call this the "Seed Money." But that implies that the casino is actually (or even just on paper) transferring funds.

In reality, the daily increment is only a portion of the collection until the total collection covers the initial guarante amount. Sure, if it hits before they collect enough to cover, they will be out the excess, but only temporarily. The next Bad Beat will increment slowly until they cover the starting amount as well as the extra that they had to pay out previously.

This same principle applies to table game side bet jackpots and progressive slots. A portion of the coin-in is earmarked for that jackpot, while the meter increases slowly until the minimum guarantee is covered.

In many cases, a portion is allocated towards the NEXT Bad Beat or jackpot, so that after it hits, the next starting amount is already higher than the minimum.

DJ, I was just differentiating between the concept of another player's money being put into a pot that is then pushed directly toward me, vs another player's money being put into a general pool that is eventually pushed toward me, given that certain conditions are met.

Casinos like to advertise splash pots as though they are doing us a huge favor. They are adding a set amount, say $100, to a pot when something happens, like the local NFL team scores a touchdown. Great. Except, the money isn't really coming from the casino, it's coming from the promotions funds that they set aside every time they rake the pot. Which is fine, but like I said, it's just a different animal than directly winning that money from the player sitting next to me.

Oh. I understand and see what you mean.

I don't care about "balancing the action." I care about "writing the action."

The more bets I take, the more cash I make.

Quote: thecesspit

They can be 2-1 sided on a bet, but the real odds (to the maker) is Evens.

I forgot how to calculate the "real odds" on sport bets... could you explain ?

Quote: MangoJ

I forgot how to calculate the "real odds" on sport bets... could you explain ?

Real odds to the Bookmaker... he's done his calculations and thinks it's an even proposition at the line he's set, but the money has come in one sided.

Call it something else if you want.

Quote: buzzpaff

Several source are misguided. Occasionally a book will take action in the manner described, but those occasions are rare indeed.

Fair enough, here's one source of that information : http://www.professionalgambler.com/reizner.html

Don't you just love the fact that horseplayers bet $200 on a 3-5 winners and 8 dollars on that 20-1 shot winner.

Rich Riggie was giving track odds as a bookie. All he got was other bookies laying off their action with him.

Oh, yeah , and a 3 year prison sentence !

Quote: thecesspit

Fair enough, here's one source of that information : http://www.professionalgambler.com/reizner.html

Great link. Good information. This makes a lot of sense to me, and I like the explanation.

As I said, I'm not a sports better, so I had always assumed it was "get as many bets on one side as you have on the other".

If I sell someone a candy bar who happens to be a mafia thug, I am not profiting from organized crime. If I take money from a casino, I'm taking their money. They are going to take it off other people regardless.

Regarding sports: very few, if any books try and balance action perfectly as described in books and popular culture. Places like Pinnacle will completely buck the market if they think they have the best of it. You don't have to be a genius to work out that you make more money fading public teams when you are getting disproportionate action.

In any case, this only really applies to straight-up bets. It is not possible to do that with parlays and exotic bets, which in most cases comprise most sports betting action.

This may vary by jurisdiction, but every promotional penny in poker that they give out, splash the pot, free tournament tickets, gift cards for playing certain hours ALL come from the bad beat/promotional drops which vary from casino to casino from 1 to as much as $3 a pot. Some jurisdictions even allow to take an "Administrative Fee" for this, but in general most jurisdictions have a law that all jackpot/promotional drops must be paid back to the player 100%. Again it may vary by region, but in most the casino takes all of the rake and the funds for promotions, high hands, bad beats, aces cracked, give aways come from the Jackpot drops entirely.

Some of these games between the rake and jackpot take so much money off the table that the lowest limit games are mathematically unbeatable.

Here is some scary math for some low limit tables in my area. They take 10-12% of a pot up to a max of $5 a pot, plus $2 a hand jackpot drop if the pot reaches $20, in a no fold em 2/4 Limit holdem game almost every single hand reaches the $45 level which is what it takes to hit the max rake + Jackpot in this game. At these limits you probably get 30-40 hands an hour. If 10 of us sit down with $100 at the table there will be $1000 on the table, at a rough estimate of rake and JP drop of $200 an hour just about everyone would be broke in 5 hours.