MB
MB
Joined: Aug 20, 2015
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 86
December 20th, 2017 at 6:40:10 PM permalink
Iím sorry. I have no clue what youíre talking about. I asked you to be precise about how it works and you talk about HE.

Iím asking about more basic stuff. I walk up to this new craps variant. Do I have dice? Chips? Can I make all the same bets? Is the only difference the payouts? Do I have to make a contract bet before rolling the dice?
MattUK
MattUK
Joined: Jul 25, 2017
  • Threads: 13
  • Posts: 138
December 20th, 2017 at 9:08:51 PM permalink
Quote: MB

Iím sorry. I have no clue what youíre talking about. I asked you to be precise about how it works and you talk about HE.
Iím asking about more basic stuff. I walk up to this new craps variant. Do I have dice? Chips? Can I make all the same bets? Is the only difference the payouts? Do I have to make a contract bet before rolling the dice?


I think you misunderstood the discussion. It's not a craps variant. It's an idea how to think about odds in games of chance and how to calculate Return To Player. I think we are all in a geocentric, pardon - casinocentric model based on a double lie - that play is for free and that odds are fair. There is however similarity to craps which I desribed in a previous post.
MB
MB
Joined: Aug 20, 2015
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 86
December 21st, 2017 at 6:24:42 AM permalink
Sure. But, you have to still make it tangible. Every bet has an implied HE. You have to change something about the games being offered to achieve your objective.

A theoretical discussion is nominally interesting. A real example might be much more interesting.
MattUK
MattUK
Joined: Jul 25, 2017
  • Threads: 13
  • Posts: 138
December 21st, 2017 at 6:47:26 AM permalink
Quote: MB

A theoretical discussion is nominally interesting. A real example might be much more interesting.



Real example are craps with everything other than odds bets simplified into a single fee.
FleaStiff
FleaStiff
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
  • Threads: 265
  • Posts: 14484
December 21st, 2017 at 6:47:53 AM permalink
Quote: MB

A theoretical discussion is nominally interesting. A real example might be much more interesting.

It takes someone with real clout and real guts to turn theory into practice.

I'm reminded of the elderly married couple who went to a gay bar in Hollywood because the free appetizers were so good. I think its the same way with gamblers: they will go to a casino if there is only one game that is attractive to them. It doesn't have to be a general policy. One airport set their dollar bill changing machines to return an extra nickel ... they got good publicity but not any long lines of moochers.
MB
MB
Joined: Aug 20, 2015
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 86
December 21st, 2017 at 7:48:53 AM permalink
Quote: MattUK

Real example are craps with everything other than odds bets simplified into a single fee.



Are you changing the payouts of place bets? Hardaways?
KevinAA
KevinAA
Joined: Jul 6, 2017
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 281
January 4th, 2018 at 11:10:47 PM permalink
Sometimes I like to play roulette with just one spin.

Current setup:

I put $50 on red. The ball lands on a black spot (or green). Oh well, off to the next game.

Proposed setup:

I put $50 on red, and I hand $1.35 to the dealer for the privilege of playing this game. The ball lands on a black spot (or green). Now I'm pissed because I just lost $1.35 more. How is this supposed to make me feel any better?

The same is true if the ball lands on a red spot. In the current setup, my $50 turns into $100. Very simple. Under your proposed setup, my $50 turns into $100 but I still have to fork over $1.35. I won't play a game like that because it's dumb to do that, even though I know the house edge is exactly the same either way. It's unnecessarily complicated, and that's not even addressing your ideas of a lower charge during happy hour, or for VIP customers, etc.

The players club promotions can be complicated but at least it's free. If I had to pay to participate, I wouldn't have a player's club card. Simple as that.

Reducing the house edge to zero in exchange for a "pay to play" fee is the same type of argument used by the airlines when they introduced checked bag fees. Instead of the cost of checking a bag being some unknown mysterious amount of your ticket, now it's plain as day -- $25. Same for paying for a meal on board. And paying for a seat assignment (which sucks if you're flying with someone else and the free seat assignments at check in are nonadjacent). It's called being nickeled and dimed to death. No one likes it! So don't do it!

But if you think it's a great business model, feel free to open your own casino and see if it works. Excluding slot machines, gambling is complicated enough for the average player. Charge them a "convenience fee" and you'll be out of business very quickly.
MattUK
MattUK
Joined: Jul 25, 2017
  • Threads: 13
  • Posts: 138
January 6th, 2018 at 9:28:07 PM permalink
Quote: KevinAA

I put $50 on red, and I hand $1.35 to the dealer for the privilege of playing this game. The ball lands on a black spot (or green). Now I'm pissed because I just lost $1.35 more. How is this supposed to make me feel any better?



Thank you for your opinion Kevin. Actually to get the same RTP as on European Roulette the fee is 1 cent for every 74, so let's say you bet 74$ to spin 73$ versus beting 74$ on a standard game. It may be confusing at first, but it's half of what you appear to think because you won't double the "gross" bet but the "net" amount. But you've got the idea. Of course the difference is that you will never get the losing green zero or more accurately that you will never lose more than the expected value. You pay 1/74 with every spin instead of risking losing the whole bet with every spin.

Quote: KevinAA

It's unnecessarily complicated



I think it's the current model that is dishonest and complicated. Here if you want to play you pay a small fee and you have fair odds, no house advantage at all. I think it's genius.

Quote: KevinAA

and that's not even addressing your ideas of a lower charge during happy hour, or for VIP customers, etc.



You're wring. The casino manager can increase the "RTP equivalent" as close to 100% as he wants by increasing the amount from which 1c is deducted. That's the best feature of this game. It beats any competition hands down here.

Quote: KevinAA

The players club promotions can be complicated but at least it's free. If I had to pay to participate, I wouldn't have a player's club card. Simple as that.



I think you misses the fact that this game works just like simplified and errorless craps, with all the sucker bets removed. If you want to be consistent you should not even think of playing craps! But jokes aside, you have touched the just here - it's in human nature to prefer convenient lies (that gambling is free of charge) over the inconvenient truth (that you pay for playing in the form of green zero). What you've just said is "I prefer self-deception". But that is exactly what I see as a selling point! What you criticize I see as a great advantage - it's brutal honesty. I really think it's a good enough reason to give it a try. Of course, charging 1c from every 1$ (98% RTP equivalent) makes it already one of the best slots.
KevinAA
KevinAA
Joined: Jul 6, 2017
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 281
January 8th, 2018 at 12:54:21 AM permalink
Quote: MattUK

Thank you for your opinion Kevin. Actually to get the same RTP as on European Roulette the fee is 1 cent for every 74, so let's say you bet 74$ to spin 73$ versus beting 74$ on a standard game. It may be confusing at first, but it's half of what you appear to think because you won't double the "gross" bet but the "net" amount. But you've got the idea. Of course the difference is that you will never get the losing green zero or more accurately that you will never lose more than the expected value. You pay 1/74 with every spin instead of risking losing the whole bet with every spin.



I understand all the math behind this. What I'm trying to say is that you're making this way too complicated. Betting $74 or $73 on a spin? How ridiculous. I want to plop down a single $50 bill and put a $50 chip on red and say "spin the wheel!". It's entertaining. It's not a positive EV game, so I'm not going to do a bunch of calculations and decide to bet $74. I have a math degree. If I'm not interested in this, how many non-math-degreed gamblers at the roulette wheel will be interested? Probably zero.

Quote:

I think it's the current model that is dishonest and complicated. Here if you want to play you pay a small fee and you have fair odds, no house advantage at all. I think it's genius.



You're wring. The casino manager can increase the "RTP equivalent" as close to 100% as he wants by increasing the amount from which 1c is deducted. That's the best feature of this game. It beats any competition hands down here.



Casino managers play around with VP paytables and no one has any idea (unless you pay attention to the VP paytables, and I have seen a change occur one time at a place in Mesquite NV). Most players aren't aware nor do they care. But if you switch to 100% payback VP and charge to play, then everyone benefits if the casino manager cuts the rate. What is the point of that? I WANT other people to be given the opportunity to play poorly so that I can play those 99%+ VP games optimally. In other words, I personally benefit from allegedly "opaque" information (which it's not if you simply look up paytables and the RTP). Clear and concise "cost of playing" evens the playing field, which is great for bad players, and bad for good players... so no thanks!

Quote:

I think you misses the fact that this game works just like simplified and errorless craps, with all the sucker bets removed. If you want to be consistent you should not even think of playing craps! But jokes aside, you have touched the just here - it's in human nature to prefer convenient lies (that gambling is free of charge) over the inconvenient truth (that you pay for playing in the form of green zero). What you've just said is "I prefer self-deception". But that is exactly what I see as a selling point! What you criticize I see as a great advantage - it's brutal honesty. I really think it's a good enough reason to give it a try. Of course, charging 1c from every 1$ (98% RTP equivalent) makes it already one of the best slots.



It's not self-deception, it's simply changing the method in which the casino makes money, from no charge to play with a 1% house edge, to a 1% charge to play with a 0% house edge. It's six of one, half a dozen of the other. I happen to like the way it is right now, and if a casino changed to pay-to-play, I wouldn't play there.

There are times when you can charge to play, though.... if you're operating an Indian casino where you have no competition. In the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma (Durant and McAlester), they charge a 50 cent ante to play blackjack. That's why the blackjack table in McAlester has limited hours and plenty of empty seats. In Durant, which is a huge casino that draws most of its players from the Dallas/Ft Worth Metroplex with its 6 million population, there are people playing blackjack, because they just want to play and they don't mind (or more likely, aren't even aware) that this stupid ante means they're playing an absolutely horrible payback game. May as well just play slot machines.... so many different varieties, can win lots of money in a single spin, no one to tip, etc.
MattUK
MattUK
Joined: Jul 25, 2017
  • Threads: 13
  • Posts: 138
January 8th, 2018 at 3:51:17 AM permalink
Quote: KevinAA

I understand all the math behind this. What I'm trying to say is that you're making this way too complicated. Betting $74 or $73 on a spin? How ridiculous. I want to plop down a single $50 bill and put a $50 chip on red and say "spin the wheel!". It's entertaining. It's not a positive EV game, so I'm not going to do a bunch of calculations and decide to bet $74. I have a math degree.



You have a math degree yet you're completely wrong here. You could bet whatever you want. The charge is 1c from every 74 to get the same RTP as in European Roulette. I just made an example to show you how this works (sadly you didn't get it as you later on wrote "from no charge to play with a 1% house edge, to a 1% charge to play with a 0% house edge" which is incorrect - 1% fee equals to 2% house edge).

Quote: KevinAA

Casino managers play around with VP paytables and no one has any idea (unless you pay attention to the VP paytables, and I have seen a change occur one time at a place in Mesquite NV). Most players aren't aware nor do they care. But if you switch to 100% payback VP and charge to play, then everyone benefits if the casino manager cuts the rate. What is the point of that? I WANT other people to be given the opportunity to play poorly so that I can play those 99%+ VP games optimally. In other words, I personally benefit from allegedly "opaque" information (which it's not if you simply look up paytables and the RTP). Clear and concise "cost of playing" evens the playing field, which is great for bad players, and bad for good players... so no thanks!



Kevin, first you've said that this idea doesn't allow to boost RTP and now you're upset that it does. Make up your mind! Here you have simply said that you don't like European Roulette (or slots, for that matter) because it doesn't have sucker bets. Fair enough, but now it's about your personal taste, not the game. They will not disappear because you don't play it. It's a multi-billion industry Kevin.

Quote: KevinAA

It's not self-deception, it's simply changing the method in which the casino makes money, from no charge to play with a 1% house edge, to a 1% charge to play with a 0% house edge. It's six of one, half a dozen of the other. I happen to like the way it is right now, and if a casino changed to pay-to-play, I wouldn't play there.



Oh Kevin. YOU are in self-deception and this idea is about puting it to end. You just reaffirmed that you like your self-deception and don't want the truth about cost of playing. That is your real imput and for that I thank you. Strange that people may actively oppose the inconvienient truth, but not very suprising. This is where the problem is - some people doesn't want to know how much they pay for playing. Yet I am sure that a good chunk of gamblers would think otherwise.

  • Jump to: