'Beating Slots' Interview
i agree but the AP may give back some of the winning.Quote: gamerfreakI realize that there is a cost to collecting bonuses and must hit progressives.
I am saying that among jackpot winners, ploppies will keep playing and give a large amount back to the casino, while vultures will give back virtually none.
Quote: gamerfreakI realize that there is a cost to collecting bonuses and must hit progressives.
I am saying that among jackpot winners, ploppies will keep playing and give a large amount back to the casino, while vultures will give back virtually none.
If you polled average ploppies (not addicted players) they most likely will tell you they gamble sporadically. Perhaps once or twice a year even. Maybe once a month.
These players will take that Jackpot and go home, have a vacation "on the casino"
The vultures meanwhile are there everyday risking their money and yes they do risk it. Their risk is just a different EV.
Your assumption is that ALL POOPIES never leave after winning a Jackpot. Quite a few are afraid of "giving it back"
No one is arguing that the machines are performing as expected, the hold is the hold either way on a slot machine.Quote: darkozThey don't add nor take away. The machines are performing as expected and obtaining the same profits
How can they not add or take away if they are making money? Explain where is the money coming from that the vultures make?
Quote: AxelWolfNo one is arguing that the machines are performing as expected, the hold is the hold either way on a slot machine.
How can they not add or take away if they are making money? Explain where is the money coming from that the vultures make?
It’s going to take a simple hypothetical to convince DarkOz. I can already tell he’s dug into his mathematically incorrect position.
Quote: AxelWolfNo one is arguing that the machines are performing as expected, the hold is the hold either way on a slot machine.
How can they not add or take away if they are making money? Explain where is the money coming from that the vultures make?
The vultures are making the money from the ploppies.
If there were no vulturing, the ploppies would make the money, because the ploppies would experience the same wins the vultures do
Your argument is that ploppies never stop gambling causing them to return whatever they win. While there are quite a few ploppies who do that there are just as many casual gamblers who would leave after a big win.
In fact the only players guaranteed to keep playing are the vultures.
Take a progressive Jackpot that prior to being won is disabled. The progressive Jackpot has to be given back to the players in some manner, moving the progressive to a different machine or some type of promotion. The casino doesn't get to keep that money because it's not theirs.
You get that concept?
Any money won by a vulturable opportunity belongs to the players (not the casino) regardless of whether they leave or keep playing afterwards
Quote: unJonIt’s going to take a simple hypothetical to convince DarkOz. I can already tell he’s dug into his mathematically incorrect position.
The hold on the slot doesn't alter if a vulture or a ploppie wins the vulturable situation.
Do you agree?
How does an unchanged mathematical hold mean the Casinos losing more if a vulture wins?
Take the $10,000 Must-hit. The progressive is coming from a fraction of what previous players have put in. That money doesn't belong to the casino. It belongs to whomever wins, be he ploppie or vulture.
The casino has made it's money regardless
Quote: darkozThe vultures are making the money from the ploppies.
If there were no vulturing, the ploppies would make the money, because the ploppies would experience the same wins the vultures do
Your argument is that ploppies never stop gambling causing them to return whatever they win. While there are quite a few ploppies who do that there are just as many casual gamblers who would leave after a big win.
In fact the only players guaranteed to keep playing are the vultures.
Take a progressive Jackpot that prior to being won is disabled. The progressive Jackpot has to be given back to the players in some manner, moving the progressive to a different machine or some type of promotion. The casino doesn't get to keep that money because it's not theirs.
You get that concept?
Any money won by a vulturable opportunity belongs to the players (not the casino) regardless of whether they leave or keep playing afterwards
I don't care who the money belongs to since I said... vultures hurt the casinos bottom line. The casino makes less money because there are vultures.
IIRC there are statistics on how much the average gambler loses per year($300). The average gambler has a budget. All gamblers have a limited amount of money they can spend gambling, individually, and as a whole. If Advantage players are taking any of that away from them, then it stands to reason that it must hurt the casinos bottom line since it's less money the gamblers have to lose in the casino.
If a ploppy who only has $300 is on his way to the casino, and somehow an advantage player steals $150 from his wallet when he first enters the casino, that's $150 less the ploppy has to lose in the casino, thus hurting the casinos bottom line. Vultures are " stealing" the gamblers value, that value = money. Thats less money the ploppy has to lose in the casino.
We have been down this road before, he rarely, if ever, admits when he is wrong or uses obviously flawed logic. Just go read the thread where I was joking when I said I wouldn't buy free play for x percentage and he claimed he wouldn't buy it for 50% of face value.Quote: unJonIt’s going to take a simple hypothetical to convince DarkOz. I can already tell he’s dug into his mathematically incorrect position.
Quote: AxelWolfI don't care who the money belongs to since I said... vultures hurt the casinos bottom line. The casino makes less money because there are vultures.
IIRC there are statistics on how much the average gambler loses per year($300). The average gambler has a budget. All gamblers have a limited amount of money they can spend gambling, individually, and as a whole. If Advantage players are taking any of that away from them, then it stands to reason that it must hurt the casinos bottom line since it's less money the gamblers have to lose in the casino.
If a ploppy who only has $300 is on his way to the casino, and somehow an advantage player steals $150 from his wallet when he first enters the casino, that's $150 less the ploppy has to lose in the casino, thus hurting the casinos bottom line. Vultures are " stealing" the gamblers value, that value = money. Thats less money the ploppy has to lose in the casino.
So now vulturing is stealing?
You really believe that? That's the Casino mentality to AP players. You don't really believe it's stealing in the legal sense I hope
.
Let's take two ploppies
Ploppie A lost $300 and leaves behind a vulturable opportunity.
Ploppie B sits down and wins his $50 vulture but continues to play.
You believe Ploppie B robbed Ploppie A? Ploppie A has lost value?
Or you believe it's only theft if the second player leaves after winning?
Quote: darkozThe hold on the slot doesn't alter if a vulture or a ploppie wins the vulturable situation.
Do you agree?
How does an unchanged mathematical hold mean the Casinos losing more if a vulture wins?
Take the $10,000 Must-hit. The progressive is coming from a fraction of what previous players have put in. That money doesn't belong to the casino. It belongs to whomever wins, be he ploppie or vulture.
The casino has made it's money regardless
Let’s say that a ploppy will play variable state slots for four hours or until he loses $300. Let’s say that an AP will only play vulturable situations then leave.
If the ploppy plays the vulturable play worth $50, there’s an increased chance he hits his time limit before his stop loss. If so, the ploppy leaves based on time at least $50 ahead of his loss limit, the casino hold is the same whether the AP or the ploppy did the vulturable situation.
But there’s some chance the ploppy hits the play worth $50 and still ends up hitting the stop loss of $300 or being within $50 of that when the time limit runs. If so, then the casino “got back” a part of the vulturable play. It would not have “got back” the money if the AP had done the play. So the casino hold is increased by the ploppie doing the vulturable situation.
This is simply math modeled on some reasonable assumptions. It’s not making any value judgments. It’s not calling anything theft. It’s just showing why rational casinos prefer to not have AP vultures if ploppy behavior is as I assumed in this hypothetical.
Quote: unJonLet’s say that a ploppy will play variable state slots for four hours or until he loses $300. Let’s say that an AP will only play vulturable situations then leave.
If the ploppy plays the vulturable play worth $50, there’s an increased chance he hits his time limit before his stop loss. If so, the ploppy leaves based on time at least $50 ahead of his loss limit, the casino hold is the same whether the AP or the ploppy did the vulturable situation.
But there’s some chance the ploppy hits the play worth $50 and still ends up hitting the stop loss of $300 or being within $50 of that when the time limit runs. If so, then the casino “got back” a part of the vulturable play. It would not have “got back” the money if the AP had done the play. So the casino hold is increased by the ploppie doing the vulturable situation.
This is simply math modeled on some reasonable assumptions. It’s not making any value judgments. It’s not calling anything theft. It’s just showing why rational casinos prefer to not have AP vultures if ploppy behavior is as I assumed in this hypothetical.
Well, Casinos are not the bastion of logical math to begin with.
For example if you queried most of the world's general population with the following:
Player A loses $1000 in a single day.
Player B lose $200 for thirty days straight.
99% of the general world population would say, of course the guy who lost $200 for 30 days straight is a more valuable customer.
Yet it's player A who gets the better treatment.
Casinos have always gone with faulty math expectations
Can you imagine going on a big shopping jaunt of $1000 in groceries. The manager comes out and says you are a great customer. He will send you some fantastic offers.
Then when you get home you realize you forgot the ketchup and toilet paper.
Next day you arrive and the manager sees you on line spending only $5. He comes up to you and says you aren't such a good customer after all and says you can forget about those great offers he was planning on sending you.
Quote: darkozWell, Casinos are not the bastion of logical math to begin with.
For example if you queried most of the world's general population with the following:
Player A loses $1000 in a single day.
Player B lose $200 for thirty days straight.
99% of the general world population would say, of course the guy who lost $200 for 30 days straight is a more valuable customer.
Yet it's player A who gets the better treatment.
Casinos have always gone with faulty math expectations
Can you imagine going on a big shopping jaunt of $1000 in groceries. The manager comes out and says you are a great customer. He will send you some fantastic offers.
Then when you get home you realize you forgot the ketchup and toilet paper.
Next day you arrive and the manager sees you on line spending only $5. He comes up to you and says you aren't such a good customer after all and says you can forget about those great offers he was planning on sending you.
This point has nothing whatsoever to do with the topic that was being debated imo.
Problem is there are some vultures (me) that will go play -EV games, and will utilize the high priced restaurants as well. And the costs to actually enforce a ‘no vulture’ rule would include mistakes (getting rid of a non-vulture) and the costs of personnel.
Same can be said for a low level card counter. It’s not just the few $ per hour they make, it’s the personnel needed to keep that game going, the security needed to keep the casino open, gas, electric, etc....
There are stores that now allow self checkout. They EXPECT a level of stealing. But they have decided with the present minimum wage that the wage minus theft amount is greater than zero. If they could eliminate theft AT A REASONABLE COST of course they would.
Quote: mcallister3200Some, many even but not most, slot hustlers are a negative for the action a casino gets from normies because they run off recreational players with their creepy behavior.
If they are creeping out customers that can be a problem but that should be true of any ploppie who creeps out other customers as well.
A good vulture should not be camped out at one machine but roaming the floors looking for opportunities.
At least that is what I see. Although I never vultures slots I did do a similar move when I started years ago that could be called creepy (leaving my player's card in slots for other people to play) and I made certain not to creep anyone out for the most part
Quote: SOOPOODark.... bottom line is the presence of vultures is a negative for casinos. If all they had to do was snap their fingers and all vultures would be gone, and only vultures that only vulture, it would be a good business decision.
Problem is there are some vultures (me) that will go play -EV games, and will utilize the high priced restaurants as well. And the costs to actually enforce a ‘no vulture’ rule would include mistakes (getting rid of a non-vulture) and the costs of personnel.
Same can be said for a low level card counter. It’s not just the few $ per hour they make, it’s the personnel needed to keep that game going, the security needed to keep the casino open, gas, electric, etc....
There are stores that now allow self checkout. They EXPECT a level of stealing. But they have decided with the present minimum wage that the wage minus theft amount is greater than zero. If they could eliminate theft AT A REASONABLE COST of course they would.
Agreed. Casinos would do that for all AP's. Snap their fingers and get rid of them
um no.Quote: gamerfreakI really think your casino B scenario is flawed.
Ploppies give a large percentage of jackpot winnings back to the casino.
Vultures give 0% back.
if bored waiting for a play, i'll play Crazy Money II if the progressive is at least 4x max bet.
sometimes i make $, sometimes i lose $700 getting that $100 progressive which is now closer to $200.
and it's a minimum 90% return machine! :(
https://gaming.itsgames.com/games/crazy-money-ii-v55
Quote: DRichYou give the majority of Slot Directors way too much credit. You would be surprised by how little slot directors know about the games and features. Mostly they just know which areas of the floor are doing well and which ones aren't.
Damn, the one time in my entire life I try to give casino staff credit for something and I'm wrong.
Quote: AxelWolfFYI for a second i forgot who i was addressing and the, "I doubt I would even let you in the door😉" was meant for Mission.
I will talk about how vulturing AP's affect the casinos bottom line later.
I don't blame you; I wouldn't let me in the door either.
Quote: darkozThat's precisely why Axel is wrong.
Example 1:
Ploppie A has $300 stop loss. Loses $300 leaving vulturable opportunity behind.
Ploppie B sits down and wins the $50. Then proceeds to lose it back. The vulturable machine has moved $50 closer to it's next vulturable position.
Example 2:
Ploppie A has $300 stop loss and leaves behind vulturable opportunity.
AP comes along and wins $50.
Ploppie B still comes along and loses $50 of his own money and the machine is still $50 closer to it's next vulturable opportunity. Same coin-in, same profit. (Of course different player who wins but bottom line to Casino remains the same)
The fact AP left with $50 is offset by the Ploppie B who plays after him.
Let's put it another way. After a month of play, the profit recorded by the vulturable machine (amount won - RTP) will be identical regardless of whether an AP, ploppie or other combination played the vulturable game
Suppose you could freeze a single second in time in a casino:
In that one second, there is a finite amount of cash money in the casino at that particular time. More to the point, there is a finite amount of cash money (and tickets/credits on machines) on the casino floor.
If the hustler goes in there and wins money on the machine and takes it out of the casino, then that money is no longer available to the casino. The hustler has also taken out of circulation the money that he brought in. As we all know, if you could play indefinitely, (money aside) you would eventually lose everything. So, let's look at this in isolation.
HUSTLER: BRINGS IN $300, WINS $75, LEAVES.
Okay, so the Hustler brought $300 into circulation and left with $375, which means the $300 he had is gone from the casino as is the $75, because it was used to pay the hustler when he cashed his ticket. There are now $75 fewer dollars cash in the casino compared to when the hustler arrived, all else being equal.
The difference between a hustler and, "Regular player," doing this is that the hustler will (or, at least should) always be avoiding -EV games. The money that goes to the hustler has to come from somewhere and it's not like the regular player is directly handing it to him.
Imagine if a, "Regular player," wins the money. The money remains in circulation on the casino floor (and might well never leave that machine) because the player remains in the casino. It doesn't happen 100% of the time, but the hustler should be playing -EV games 0% of the time unless there is something outside of the game itself that makes it positive. Another exception would be testing/gathering data.
You're just thinking in terms of the W/L of the spins on the machine, but in real money terms, the hustler wins some amount (or loses, but was at a positive expectation) and then takes any winnings out of the casino and results in cash money that is not available to the casino to win (all else equal) anymore.
Quote: darkozThen it's your belief that vultures never lose?
When there are ultimate X multipliers every hand is a winner?
If they do, then they lost despite being (or believing they were) playing at a positive expectation.
Quote: Sgi agree but the AP may give back some of the winning.
There are plenty of vultures who definitely do. Not to mention casual players who know some of the plays but go to the casino with the intent of either getting lucky or losing whatever they are going to lose that day.
Quote: billryanI snickered at the "roving gangs", but it's a blip in an otherwise outstanding video.
Thanks!
I don't believe it's stealing, that's why I put stealing in quotes.Quote: darkozSo now vulturing is stealing?
You really believe that? That's the Casino mentality to AP players. You don't really believe it's stealing in the legal sense I hope
.
Let's take two ploppies
Ploppie A lost $300 and leaves behind a vulturable opportunity.
Ploppie B sits down and wins his $50 vulture but continues to play.
You believe Ploppie B robbed Ploppie A? Ploppie A has lost value?
Or you believe it's only theft if the second player leaves after winning?
Quote: AxelWolfI don't care who the money belongs to since I said... vultures hurt the casinos bottom line. The casino makes less money because there are vultures.
IIRC there are statistics on how much the average gambler loses per year($300). The average gambler has a budget. All gamblers have a limited amount of money they can spend gambling, individually, and as a whole. If Advantage players are taking any of that away from them, then it stands to reason that it must hurt the casinos bottom line since it's less money the gamblers have to lose in the casino.
If a ploppy who only has $300 is on his way to the casino, and somehow an advantage player steals $150 from his wallet when he first enters the casino, that's $150 less the ploppy has to lose in the casino, thus hurting the casinos bottom line. Vultures are " stealing" the gamblers value, that value = money. Thats less money the ploppy has to lose in the casino.
We're not stealing any value, though. I totally disagree with that. Vultures certainly are not the ones who put a negative EV machine there in the first place. Also, if the vultures aren't doing anything to encourage play on a particular machine (creators,) or doing anything to change the gambling decisions of the regular gambler, then we're just taking the value that someone else left behind...but not stealing anything. We didn't cause them to leave a valuable situation there in the first place.
Quote: 100xOddsum no.Quote: gamerfreakI really think your casino B scenario is flawed.
Ploppies give a large percentage of jackpot winnings back to the casino.
Vultures give 0% back.
if bored waiting for a play, i'll play Crazy Money II if the progressive is at least 4x max bet.
sometimes i make $, sometimes i lose $700 getting that $100 progressive which is now closer to $200.
and it's a minimum 90% return machine! :(
https://gaming.itsgames.com/games/crazy-money-ii-v55
I did not mean that literally every vulture ever has never given money back to the casino.
When I am talking about vultures hurting casino profits, I am talking about AP’s who are doing this for income and are only there to extract as much value from the casino as possible.
There is obviously middle ground between AP’s and ploppies. People like you, SOOPOO, and myself who go to the casino for entertainment, and might casually do some “AP moves” to lower the cost of that trip.
Non-AP’s will also give more money back to the casino in Food, Beverage, and entertainment. AP’s are only visiting the casino with the sole intent of earning income, and thus giving as little back to the casino as possible.
And to be totally clear, I am not trying to demonize AP’s or suggest casinos need to 86 anyone for vulturing. All I’m saying is that the notion that the value earned by AP has no effect casino profit is ridiculous.
Quote: mcallister3200Some, many even but not most, slot hustlers are a negative for the action a casino gets from normies because they run off recreational players with their creepy behavior.
******* campers. I usually call them out on the spot when I see them. Sitting close to the target machine, breathing smoke a person's way, circling them a bunch of times. They're most of the impetus for the countermeasures, I'm sure, casinos really shouldn't mind someone like me.
Quote: darkozIf they are creeping out customers that can be a problem but that should be true of any ploppie who creeps out other customers as well.
A good vulture should not be camped out at one machine but roaming the floors looking for opportunities.
At least that is what I see. Although I never vultures slots I did do a similar move when I started years ago that could be called creepy (leaving my player's card in slots for other people to play) and I made certain not to creep anyone out for the most part
I certainly wouldn't vulture in this situation, but if there are only as many target machines as there are vultures in a given place...
Quote: AxelWolfI don't believe it's stealing, that's why I put stealing in quotes.
Well that's good.
My umbrage is that Casino employees like to call AP "stealing" as well.
I have had employees tell me to my face I am "stealing"
My reply is they should call the cops.
They never do. Because what I do isn't stealing under the law.
I suppose I should ask those employees if they meant "stealing" in quotes?
EDIT: and when I say call the cops and the Casino worker who says it's stealing says they don't want to...
You know just who really believes that it's stealing. They know it's not. Just like to keep using that fallacious term
Quote: gamerfreak
Non-AP’s will also give more money back to the casino in Food, Beverage, and entertainment. AP’s are only visiting the casino with the sole intent of earning income, and thus giving as little back to the casino as possible.
(Quote clipped, relevance)
I wouldn't quite go that far. I have to eat somewhere that day, so it makes no difference to me if it is a casino restaurant (even if I'm not comped, but consider it decent value) or somewhere else. I'm also a very generous tipper. I might disagree with some of the things that casinos do, but in general, I feel no animus to the industry (on the whole) and don't mind spending a little of my gains if they have something else I want.
Quote: darkoz
I have had employees tell me to my face I am "stealing"
Most casino employees are morons, just like most of the population. I have always told casinos if you don't like what they are doing punish them. I tell them to take their slot cards away and if that doesn't work just 86 them from the premises
Quote: DRichMost casino employees are morons, just like most of the population. I have always told casinos if you don't like what they are doing punish them. I tell them to take their slot cards away and if that doesn't work just 86 them from the premises
Can you call them back and tell them to quit skipping the first step, please?
It seemed like a great deal if the winner kept the token because instead of paying out $10, the casinos cost was only a fraction of it.
The games disappeared because the casinos found that players tended to keep the tokens. Award a token and it is gone. Award $10 in slot credits and the money is played back.
Most ploppies will playback any jackpot they win, most vultures will take the money and run.
While it most certainly isn't stealing, it does have a negative effect on the casinos bottom line.
They are called Silver Strikes. I used to collect them until my collection was stolen or misplaced(long story, however, I was compensated). They still have machines around, I think there are some downtown and I believe have seen new versions in various other places during my travels.Quote: billryanTwenty years ago, Silver Streak slots were very popular. Instead of awarding bonus games, the player would win a token that contained some silver in it. Depending on the price of silver, it was worth anywhere from $6-$9 dollars or it could be exchanged at the cashier for $10.
It seemed like a great deal if the winner kept the token because instead of paying out $10, the casinos cost was only a fraction of it.
The games disappeared because the casinos found that players tended to keep the tokens. Award a token and it is gone. Award $10 in slot credits and the money is played back.
Most ploppies will playback any jackpot they win, most vultures will take the money and run.
While it most certainly isn't stealing, it does have a negative effect on the casinos bottom line.
This explains why the machines disappeared, it seems that they would actually make money when players took the coins home. https://www.cdcgamingreports.com/a-silver-strike-comeback
It's their vulturability that makes them so attractive to ALL players and is the primary marketing move.
Ploppies are educated by the machines themselves in some cases with instructions right up front.
It doesn't take much with these machines for ploppies to become vultures even if it's on a small scale. Even if on the way to play roulette they make it a point to "check" denom positions.
If these machines were truly causing losses to the casino by vultures they would be removed.
Or simply altered. How difficult to make ocean magic where bubbles burst when they get closer to position in the same spin thereby eliminating the vulture?
---------------
I also think there is some disconnect between when vultures pounce.
You guys seem to imagine vultures finding golden Egypt with first and second rows wild left behind or scarabs abandoned on the 9th spin with a bunch of scarab positions filled.
Hell no! Because even ploppies aren't that stupid to leave those behind.
Instead vulturing involves finding"soft" positions. Situations where some of the positions are filled advantageously but not enough for ploppies to recognize (read: not enough to guarantee a win either)
That means it may be several spins before a vulture succeeds in making profit. It maybe the "soft" situation doesn't line up and the vulture loses money.
Wait vultures risking money? Vultures losing? Sounds like gambling and slots doing what they are supposed to
um.. i literally sit behind the person and wait for them to leave or till they hit the progressive because of competition.Quote: Mission146******* campers. I usually call them out on the spot when I see them. Sitting close to the target machine...
They're most of the impetus for the countermeasures, I'm sure, casinos really shouldn't mind someone like me.
i try not to be in their line of sight.
Quote: darkoz
I also think there is some disconnect between when vultures pounce.
You guys seem to imagine vultures finding golden Egypt with first and second rows wild left behind or scarabs abandoned on the 9th spin with a bunch of scarab positions filled.
Hell no! Because even ploppies aren't that stupid to leave those behind.
Instead vulturing involves finding"soft" positions. Situations where some of the positions are filled advantageously but not enough for ploppies to recognize (read: not enough to guarantee a win either)
That means it may be several spins before a vulture succeeds in making profit. It maybe the "soft" situation doesn't line up and the vulture loses money.
Wait vultures risking money? Vultures losing? Sounds like gambling and slots doing what they are supposed to
(Quote clipped, relevance)
A vulture losing in a particular session, or even on a particular machine, has no real bearing on the long-term and just reflects short-term variance. It's no different than the concept that negative expectation gamblers will sometimes win and walk out of the casino with more money than they walked in with. To the same extent, the vulture will sometimes walk out with less than he or she walked in with.
When it comes to long-term expectation and assuming unlimited bankroll for hypothetical purposes, vultures will ultimately profit in the long-term, and ideally, will almost always or always play with a profitable expectation. Negative expectation players will ultimately lose money in the long-term and, if they play at a positive expectation at all, it's either an anomaly for them or happenstance. In most cases, they play a +EV situation not even knowing they did it or thinking of it in such terms.
Therefore, as has been said, the casinos will want gone the people who have a long-term expectation of taking their money away. This is at least true in the case of many casinos, though there are some who (for one reason or another---or no reason) do not care about this as much. The casinos will want to keep the people coming back who have a long-term losing expectation. It's really that simple. If you look at it in terms of, "Expected value," it's just endless adding of expected monetary value for the AP/Vulture whilst the negative expectation gambler's lifetime EV continues to become more negative, in terms of dollars.
Finally, vultures DO technically have a negative impact on other recreational players, (not the ones who left the play behind, but the next player who would otherwise be sitting down) because they take the value that would otherwise be there. If the recreational player got to, "Play off," the positive value, then the recreational player---even if he lost for the day---might feel like he got, "More bang for his buck." To that extent, vultures are detrimental to the casinos because not only are they more inclined towards taking any winnings out of there, but also because they siphon the value that would normally be going to negative expectation gamblers (the people the casinos actually really want) and enhancing their experience.
Quote: 100xOddsum.. i literally sit behind the person and wait for them to leave or till they hit the progressive because of competition.
i try not to be in their line of sight.
Perhaps the circumstances at your casino of choice make that necessary. If I had to do such a thing at the casinos I visit, then I simply wouldn't vulture anymore. I can think of few places where I dislike sitting and doing nothing than casinos. I tend to prefer getting in and out as quickly as possible.
hm.. i would like to see a game where the next spin MAY have the wild bubble bursting and no longer be a wildQuote: darkozHow difficult to make ocean magic where bubbles burst when they get closer to position in the same spin thereby eliminating the vulture?
skipping?Quote: Mission146Can you call them back and tell them to quit skipping the first step, please?
explain?
Quote: 100xOddsskipping?
explain?
He said to kill their cards and then 86 them. I was just remarking that he should call the casinos and ask them to quit skipping straight to the 86 part.
well, i have my phone and catch up on news, email or forum posts while i wait. :)Quote: Mission146I can think of few places where I dislike sitting and doing nothing than casinos. I tend to prefer getting in and out as quickly as possible.
Quote: 100xOddswell, i have my phone and catch up on news, email or forum posts while i wait. :)
All things I can do from the comfort of my bed, or compared to casinos, even a Wendy's location.
Quote: Mission146He said to kill their cards and then 86 them. I was just remarking that he should call the casinos and ask them to quit skipping straight to the 86 part.
Yeah usually they 86 first then cut off the cards
Quote: AxelWolfThey are called Silver Strikes. I used to collect them until my collection was stolen or misplaced(long story; however, I was compensated). They still have machines around, I think there is some downtown, and I believe have seen new versions in various other places during my travels.
This explains why the machines disappeared; it seems that they would actually make money when players took the coins home. https://www.cdcgamingreports.com/a-silver-strike-comeback
That is a horrible article. Poorly written and researched. Most players that won a coin kept the coin, which saw the casino make a dollar or two. Had the prize been $10 in slot credits, most players would have played on, eventually making the casino $10.
I own over 300 of these, as it is rare to go to an auction in Vegas and not find a bunch. Every one of them that walked out the door was $10 the casinos would never see.
Few of the $10 ones go for much more than $15-20 on eBay, and most barely bring their melt cost at auctions. I have a $100 Ballys and a $200 El Cortez that supposedly only 250 were made, but there seem to be less than 250 collectors willing to lay out $200 for it.
With silver around $20 or more, many of these will get melted down.
I think they are a cool piece of history, but like all my silver stash, they are gone the moment silver hits $35. I might keep a handful as some have really nice designs
Bottom line is.....you were/are wrong. My conversation was never really about the machines. I said, vultures hurt the casinos bottom line. You claimed they don't, I think it's more than obvious they do. Do these kinds of machines make more money for the casino than other types of machines? Im sure they make more than some and less than others. I think the buffalo gold machines make much more, and they are not variable state.Quote: darkozThe bottom line is these machines were specifically designed to be vulturable.
It's their vulturability that makes them so attractive to ALL players and is the primary marketing move.
Ploppies are educated by the machines themselves in some cases with instructions right up front.
It doesn't take much with these machines for ploppies to become vultures even if it's on a small scale. Even if on the way to play roulette they make it a point to "check" denom positions.
If these machines were truly causing losses to the casino by vultures they would be removed.
Or simply altered. How difficult to make ocean magic where bubbles burst when they get closer to position in the same spin thereby eliminating the vulture?
---------------
I also think there is some disconnect between when vultures pounce.
You guys seem to imagine vultures finding golden Egypt with first and second rows wild left behind or scarabs abandoned on the 9th spin with a bunch of scarab positions filled.
Hell no! Because even ploppies aren't that stupid to leave those behind.
Instead vulturing involves finding"soft" positions. Situations where some of the positions are filled advantageously but not enough for ploppies to recognize (read: not enough to guarantee a win either)
That means it may be several spins before a vulture succeeds in making profit. It maybe the "soft" situation doesn't line up and the vulture loses money.
Wait vultures risking money? Vultures losing? Sounds like gambling and slots doing what they are supp:osed to
"If these machines were truly causing losses to the casino by vultures they would be removed." No one said they were causing losses to the casinos. I'm sure the casinos are doing very well on those machines,as DRich pointed out that's all the casinos really look at, so they keep the machine without knowing how it really affects them in the long run. They may very well eventually remove and stop making variable state machines for a while. This is something they have done many times in the past. Obviously, they didn't take all of them out and completely stop but they did look for various designs to foil the Vultures and There was a frew dry spells of variable state/banking machines for a while.
