FleaStiff
FleaStiff
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
  • Threads: 265
  • Posts: 14484
August 2nd, 2011 at 11:32:54 AM permalink
Quote: DorothyGale

They reinvest and another 1M (20%) in mailers with room offers, free play & match play coupons, shows, buffets, etc.

How much in printing postage and handling could be saved if casinos would get rid of those darned mailers and go all electronic. Simply send an email telling them what has already been added to their card account and will remain there for thirty days. I think casinos have no idea how annoying those oversized mailers are.
FleaStiff
FleaStiff
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
  • Threads: 265
  • Posts: 14484
August 2nd, 2011 at 11:41:28 AM permalink
>(1) Hitting on anything until they get to 17 or more (no matter what card is showing).
Egads, yes! How could I have forgotten "playing dealer" as if they should mimic the dealer's instructions. I did that on my first trip to Vegas and thought I was so clever.
>(2) Never doubling (no matter what's showing).
Yeah, that too. Or atleast never doubling past their first Double Martini.
>(7) Staying on all soft 18s
Yeah, that too. Certainly staying on all Soft 19s.

Players are indeed a "mix" and when you add alcohol to the recipe you get even more of a variable mix.

Casinos know how much they really make from a blackjack table and it sure is not any 0.13 percent, even at the Hacienda at Hoover Dam.
DrEntropy
DrEntropy
Joined: Nov 13, 2009
  • Threads: 27
  • Posts: 199
August 2nd, 2011 at 12:00:13 PM permalink
Quote: DorothyGale

That is a bit of research, isn't it? I'm certainly not up to it.

--Ms. D.



Many of these types of questions can be answered by looking here:
http://wizardofodds.com/blackjack/appendix9-6dh17r4.html

For example, you can see that hitting or standing on a 16 vs dealer 10 is very close call, and hence a very minor error.
I sometimes do it just because I feel like it, and knowing it costs almost nothing.
"Mathematical expectation has nothing to do with results." (Sklansky, Theory of Poker).
Alan
Alan
Joined: Jun 14, 2011
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 582
August 2nd, 2011 at 12:07:19 PM permalink
Quote: DrEntropy

Many of these types of questions can be answered by looking here:
http://wizardofodds.com/blackjack/appendix9-6dh17r4.html

For example, you can see that hitting or standing on a 16 vs dealer 10 is very close call, and hence a very minor error.
I sometimes do it just because I feel like it, and knowing it costs almost nothing.



Me too, especially after busting and busting and busting; the hell with it I'm staying this time.
MathExtremist
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 6526
August 2nd, 2011 at 12:20:12 PM permalink
Quote: DorothyGale

Most operators I know don't do a side-by-side comparison of theo vs. actual for table games ... table games staff leaves the theo up to marketing ... their job is recording the actual (drop/win/hold/fills, etc) and giving out discretionary and other comps based on what the software says they can give ... marketing is only interested in the theo and doesn't pay attention to actual. Really, it's like this ... mainly because the slot model says that these two values are always approximately equal (theo && actual).

--Ms. D.


The two values *are* approximately equal in the slot world, but that's because you can accurately track coin-in (handle) and, for the few games that permit it like VP or video blackjack, any strategic impacts to RTP. There's no good way to do either of those things for table play, so you're stuck with drop, avg. bet, and guessing whether a player should be rated "soft" or "hard". The problem isn't that actual and theo are different, the problem is that you can't accurately calculate theo for a table player. Several technologies have been developed to try to track that for felt tables (since e-tables can do it automatically) and you'll undoubtedly see several at G2E this year. They typically fall into one of two categories: RFID chip tracking and optical chip/card tracking. Here's an example of the optical approach. I would think that if the ROI were really there, however, you'd see a lot more of these systems and a lot fewer "old-school" ratings programs a la Kilby/Fox/Lucas. Or maybe the operators are still too technophobic.

By the way, I should note that I've contributed to hijacking this thread; perhaps the Wizard or another admin would see fit to move it to its own topic.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
DorothyGale
DorothyGale
Joined: Nov 23, 2009
  • Threads: 40
  • Posts: 639
August 2nd, 2011 at 1:18:11 PM permalink
Quote: MathExtremist

By the way, I should note that I've contributed to hijacking this thread; perhaps the Wizard or another admin would see fit to move it to its own topic.

I'm satisfied with arriving at a value of 1.40% -- it is relatively close to the 1.43% that Bill Zender quoted somewhere (but I can't recall where). You have my permission to hijack ...

--Ms. D.
"Who would have thought a good little girl like you could destroy my beautiful wickedness!"
Alan
Alan
Joined: Jun 14, 2011
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 582
August 2nd, 2011 at 1:24:29 PM permalink
Quote: DorothyGale

I'm satisfied with arriving at a value of 1.40% -- it is relatively close to the 1.43% that Bill Zender quoted somewhere (but I can't recall where). You have my permission to hijack ...

--Ms. D.



Coincidentally the pass line bet in craps w/o odds..how cool!
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 111
  • Posts: 7983
August 2nd, 2011 at 1:26:40 PM permalink
Quote: FleaStiff

How much in printing postage and handling could be saved if casinos would get rid of those darned mailers and go all electronic. Simply send an email telling them what has already been added to their card account and will remain there for thirty days. I think casinos have no idea how annoying those oversized mailers are.



I love the oversized mailers. Just booked my trip to Vegas (Rio) for Oct 19 -22. Hope to see you locals there!
MathExtremist
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 6526
August 2nd, 2011 at 1:53:33 PM permalink
Quote: DorothyGale

I'm satisfied with arriving at a value of 1.40% -- it is relatively close to the 1.43% that Bill Zender quoted somewhere (but I can't recall where). You have my permission to hijack ...

--Ms. D.


Well, to bring it back on-topic, there are at least two sources for numbers that should allow you to do this analysis directly rather than via simulation. One set is at BJMath.com and the Wizard has another. The specific table you're looking for is here. When you dump that into a spreadsheet, you have the odds and impact of every decision a player can make. Taking the MAX() of the possibilities gets you the basic strategy so all you'd need to do is add in the weighted differences for each of your exception/mistake cases. No simulation required. To make it configurable, what I'd do is create a column which identifies the best play for each hand and another column that you can use to override that best play, then just have everything automatically recalculate every time you add in a change to the basic strategy.

(n.b. to use the BJMath numbers you have to account for post-peek probabilities.)
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
boymimbo
boymimbo
Joined: Nov 12, 2009
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 5994
August 2nd, 2011 at 2:47:40 PM permalink
Quote: Alan

Me too, especially after busting and busting and busting; the hell with it I'm staying this time.




And inevitably the next card is a 5.
----- You want the truth! You can't handle the truth!

  • Jump to: