Is Caribbean Stud falling out of favor?
Thread Rating:
We're not worthy!
As that is an expense that cuts into the overall profitability of the game (for the house), I could see why fewer places offer it.
Anytime an expense is increased, the business must find a way to maintain profitability.
I'm sure there are many factors involved, so please do not take the above as gospel. Increased royalty fees could be conjecture that I have heard; another strong possibility could be loss of game popularity.
If indeed the expense for the house has increased, the house has a few options to keep the game, not that those options are necessarily preferable or even viable.
1. Reduce game expense elsewhere. Examples could include paying the dealer less, not changing layouts or carpet, ect.
2. Increase total action on the game. This could be done by:
a. Increasing table minimums. Not a popular option.
b. Increasing popularity (volume of players).
c. Increasing speed of the game.
d. Any combination of a., b., and c.
If house expense has somehow increased, the game is not popular enough, and the house has no market for required minimums, then there is very little the house can do to keep the game.
Quote: rob45
1. Reduce game expense elsewhere. Examples could include paying the dealer less, not changing layouts or carpet, ect.
2. Increase total action on the game. This could be done by:
a. Increasing table minimums. Not a popular option.
b. Increasing popularity (volume of players).
c. Increasing speed of the game.
d. Any combination of a., b., and c.
If house expense has somehow increased, the game is not popular enough, and the house has no market for required minimums, then there is very little the house can do to keep the game.
Seems to me, if the game is proven but is just slipping in popularity, they would try to leverage a smaller royalty first. Of course, I know nothing about the fine details when it comes to this subject.
Table games finder for CET says it is still in a lot of their AC casinos.
Quote: charliepatrickMany years ago it was one of the few new allowed games, so appeared in most casinos. It's certainly fading from the UK and sometime ago the jackpot bet was taken out of several chains. Personally I think the main problem was getting good hands and not being paid. I saw a few variants on my overseas travels: Russian Poker (or whatever it is called) and Oasis Poker, but neither in the UK.
I wouldn't play without the progressive. It's a bona fide sucker bet, but it's the only one I'll take at the casino. It pays out for a flush or better and even a straight flush could yield a pretty nice payday. I just couldn't stomach hitting "the hand" and not playing the $1 bonus.
This game does have something going for it given the rather simple decisions except Ace-King, but even then, the up-card tells the tale.
A LOT of processor-time went into the game-rules to develop a coherent Ace-King Strategy. I don't think OASIS ever got physical-table time (buy a card).
Have to agree a big progressive say $150K is a natural draw, even though its a no-play below 200K in most offerings.
side: I've always thought an elevated ante (pays more than 1x ante on a good hand, say 3oak or better, if Dealer No Qualify) and 1x call could even better the popularity. /side
Quote: MoscaAs a carnival game player, Caribbean is frustrating. It's tough to get a nice hand and have the dealer not qualify; you need to pick up that play bet on the two pairs and trips hands, not to mention the straights and flushes. I stopped playing because of that.
I also played it a lot 15-20 years ago, and stopped for the same reasons as Mosca. I've heard but can't quote a source that the game became very unpopular for exactly that reason (the qualifier killed a lot of good hands and frustrated the players).
Quote: JimmerSeems to me, if the game is proven but is just slipping in popularity, they would try to leverage a smaller royalty first. Of course, I know nothing about the fine details when it comes to this subject.
Table games finder for CET says it is still in a lot of their AC casinos.
The monthly lease or royalty is a VERY small factor if the game is still popular. 1 or 2 days and the game is paid for the month if the game still has a strong following. It's all about how many people want to play the game.
ZCore13
Quote: beachbumbabsI also played it a lot 15-20 years ago, and stopped for the same reasons as Mosca. I've heard but can't quote a source that the game became very unpopular for exactly that reason (the qualifier killed a lot of good hands and frustrated the players).
Back in the early 90's, I had a straight flush at Foxwoods. Dealer's hand did not qualify, and I missed out on what would have been a huge payday for me at the time. I immediately cashed out, and have never played another hand of the game since then.
Too bad if true.Quote: beachbumbabsI've heard but can't quote a source that the game became very unpopular for exactly that reason (the qualifier killed a lot of good hands and frustrated the players).
It's one of my favorites. I am not particularly frustrated at non-qualification, because more often than not it pays my ante when I have a doubtful hand. Think probabilities: it is quite rare to have such beautiful hands, and it can be shown that a player's having a good hand increases the probability of qualification by the dealer (however slightly).
Here where I play, the table is usually full and there is a queue. Yet the casino does not open a second table and has reduced table opening hours. I surmise they are not winning enough money on that game. And this seems consistent with the fact that I feel it as one of the best return-for-value propositions in the casino. (But then I use my own calculation of "Element of Risk"...)
Quote: teliotCS is doing very well in Macau.
It's not doing well in Malaysia. I think royal has something to do with it because the game was replaced with a similar game.
Quote: WizardThe Venetian and Palazzo are among the few places in Vegas to still have it.
I did a scouting report on it a year or so ago and I also found it at Monte Carlo and Bally's. It had just been pulled from Wynn and Encore at the time. I went in every Las Vegas Strip and downtown casino and those were the only four places I found. If I recall Palazzo was the only place that had more than one table.
I was doing the report for someone that was based in Macau. It is apparently still very popular there.
So what? Any game shows runs of bad luck. Nothing special about CS. Better look at the average returns.Quote: 24BingoUgh, Carribean Stud. Just losing hand after hand, winning the occasional ante, very rarely winning on a pair, and then finally hitting a solid hand... just to see the dealer fail to qualify.
I think the break even point on the progressive sidebet is for the progressive to be at approximately $240k???
US gamblers have gotten progressively more smart and you are less likely to see them take to a game that is a complete rip off such is the progressive on CSP. They will much rather migrate to games with lower H/A's such as 3CP.
Quote: IbeatyouracesThe first time I ever played LIR, I bought in for $300 and cashed out $1500 about 11 hours later on a $5 then later $10 game. Just one of those days where practically anything dealt turned into a winner. Nothing better than full houses either. Subsequent sessions were never good though. All this was when I first started gambling and had no clue what I was doing.
Same experience I had with it; I had no idea I started out with such luck on it. Thought it was just that easy.
Quote: 24BingoIn my mind, the perfect carnival game is LIR: the edge is steep but not exorbitant (SD/EV passes that all-important 100 mark, whereas TCP is under 50 and Carribean Stud barely clears 40), hefty payouts on five cards with no ifs ands or buts, and rare to lose more than one unit in a hand. You can catch me there if it gets down to $5 and I've got some twenties to burn, or even $10 if I'm feeling very lucky (in which case take my keys).
Agree 100%!
Best. Carnival. Game. EVER.
Quote: Mission146Agree 100%!
Best. Carnival. Game. EVER.
For a dealer with a bum shoulder...
Worst. Carnival. Game. EVER.
:)
Quote: ParadigmHey Scooter, I am interested in your comment......can you tell me what makes CSP worse than other carnival games for a dealer with a bum shoulder? I am trying to design successful table games and any insight into the dealer's mindset is important to me. Thanks for you input.
I was actually referring to Let it Ride.
On that game, you're pushing back two bets x seven players (5 of which you should be using the right hand for) every hand in addition to reaching back to the Shufflemaster machine for each set of cards and of course revealing/paying/taking bets at the end of the hand.
CSP is bad too, but LIR is an RSI waiting to happen :)
