Why Bother Betting a Losing Proposition?

Why do players invest so much into playing games with built-in house advantages?

Are people with masochistic tendencies especially attracted to the casino environment?

Playing an "optimal" strategy simply means prolonging an inevitable descent into insolvency.

How can a trip to Vegas involving hardcore gambling and whore-mongering really sound so appealling when one is consciously aware of the fact that one is getting screwed in more than one sense of the word?

:)

I call it "entertainment". Some people like golf, some people like movies, others like sports, and some like gambling.

When I think about the gambling experience, I go into it knowing that the odds are against me as soon as I walk in. I trade those odds for the experience of playing games for money. For example, I accept the 1.4% house advantage in craps and the expected 14 cent loss per come out roll in craps that I expect (on a $10 pass line). If it costs me, on average $4/hour to throw dice, I can accept that.

On average, entertainment, be it a movie, a golf course, a bowling alley, etcetera costs about $10/hour. If a craps table, video poker machine, or other game can offer the same cost, I am in.

Quote: boymimbo

I call it "entertainment".

I agree completely, not just about gambling, but the whores as well.

Quote: Wizard

... the whores as well.

You are so BAD!

I can remember when I thought that the casinos packed in people who didnt realize the house had an edge. Now I realize everybody there knows that. But are there for the entertainment. Some are recklessly foolish about it and some aren't.

>Why do players invest so much into playing games with built-in house advantages?
Because I don't have enough money to own the casino and therefore have that advantage in my favor.

>Are people with masochistic tendencies especially attracted to the casino environment?
When a woman says "Beat me! Beat me!" she is a masochist, but does my replying "No" make me a sadist? I think people who are attracted to a casino environment are about as posessed of masochistic tendencies as people who are attracted to golf or bowling alleys.

>Playing an "optimal" strategy simply means prolonging an inevitable descent into insolvency.
I believe most sermons involve discussions of optimal strategy and inevitable consequences. Its called life. Make of it what you choose.

>How can a trip to Vegas involving whore-mongering really sound so appealling...
The Las Vegas Whores Union has a good publicity agent who plants interesting items in the papers.

Not masochistic.
---------------------
The house edge is not readily apparent on any one given trip (or even on multiple trips). It seems like you are getting a fair game. If the house had a coin-flip game where heads paid even money and tails paid $.95 cents, the patrons would riot. Yet, that's about the same house edge as a roulette game.
-------------------
The genius of most casino games is the illusion that you are getting a fair shake. Of course, once you've been going for awhile, you realize you mostly lose and then start seeking out advantage plays, etc. (or stop playing!)

I NEVER thought I was getting a "fair shake" at a casino, at least in regards to the odds being equal or in my favor. Those darned places don't get built, or make a profit, for free. I want a fair game (changing rules to increase the house edge, like with 6:5 BJ, push the edges of fair games) and a good atmosphere.

Then it is time to have a little fun and enjoy gambling...as long as I stay above my loss limit and cash out ahead when I am "up" a bit, I have a great time.

What I've often thought about is, why are games with worse odds but higher rewards more fun than games with lower odds but lower wins? (For me, anyhow.) I enjoy 3 Card Poker, but for me the game isn't any fun without playing the pairs plus, which I know isn't as good a bet as the ante/raise. But I like the idea of hitting the straight flush or 3 of a kind, so when I play 3 Card, I bet the pairs plus. (Actually since the AC casinos dropped the flush bonus from 4 to 3, I don't like the game any more. But that's a different story.) At craps, I get all pumped up when the point is 4 or 10, but I'm not so excited over 6 or 8. Blackjack bores me (in addition to the anti-social nature of many players, ie "YOU SCREWED UP THE SHOE!" when the right play is to take the hit), because I have no patience for hand after hand of win a little, lose a little.


I know, it's probably just me. The wife and I gamble as a junket (trip to AC) maybe once or a couple times a year, so it's not like I need that juice to stay alive; but my blood doesn't start pumping until the reward looks bigger.

Quote: Mosca

What I've often thought about is, why are games with worse odds but higher rewards more fun than games with lower odds but lower wins? (For me, anyhow.) I enjoy 3 Card Poker, but for me the game isn't any fun without playing the pairs plus, which I know isn't as good a bet as the ante/raise. But I like the idea of hitting the straight flush or 3 of a kind, so when I play 3 Card, I bet the pairs plus. (Actually since the AC casinos dropped the flush bonus from 4 to 3, I don't like the game any more. But that's a different story.) At craps, I get all pumped up when the point is 4 or 10, but I'm not so excited over 6 or 8. Blackjack bores me (in addition to the anti-social nature of many players, ie "YOU SCREWED UP THE SHOE!" when the right play is to take the hit), because I have no patience for hand after hand of win a little, lose a little.

To take it to an extreme, why do people play the lottery, or keno, for that matter? I guess it depends how much you gamble? If you are at the casino once a week playing with $500 / week, you'll likely get killed at the "carnival games". If you go gambling twice a year, it probably really doesn't matter what game you play because the variance is high enough to give you a decent shot at a good win over a few hours no matter what game you play. For me, when I get tired of craps or blackjack, I'll play a carnival game and I set my maximum at so many hands (usually 20).

Quote: boymimbo

Quote: Mosca

What I've often thought about is, why are games with worse odds but higher rewards more fun than games with lower odds but lower wins? (For me, anyhow.) I enjoy 3 Card Poker, but for me the game isn't any fun without playing the pairs plus, which I know isn't as good a bet as the ante/raise. But I like the idea of hitting the straight flush or 3 of a kind, so when I play 3 Card, I bet the pairs plus. (Actually since the AC casinos dropped the flush bonus from 4 to 3, I don't like the game any more. But that's a different story.) At craps, I get all pumped up when the point is 4 or 10, but I'm not so excited over 6 or 8. Blackjack bores me (in addition to the anti-social nature of many players, ie "YOU SCREWED UP THE SHOE!" when the right play is to take the hit), because I have no patience for hand after hand of win a little, lose a little.

To take it to an extreme, why do people play the lottery, or keno, for that matter? I guess it depends how much you gamble? If you are at the casino once a week playing with $500 / week, you'll likely get killed at the "carnival games". If you go gambling twice a year, it probably really doesn't matter what game you play because the variance is high enough to give you a decent shot at a good win over a few hours no matter what game you play. For me, when I get tired of craps or blackjack, I'll play a carnival game and I set my maximum at so many hands (usually 20).

Thanks, that pretty much sums up how we play. When we were going to AC monthly, I played a lot of craps; when we cut back to twice a year, I started playing the "carnival games". And I set my limits by time, usually an hour. I'm fully aware of the odds, my goal is to stay within my limits and maximize my fun. I love that feeling right before looking at my cards in 3 Card or 4 Card, with enough money out there so that a good hand can make my day, but each individual loss is an acceptable fraction of what I have budgeted for the session.

I’m thinking that most people who go to Las Vegas make the trip once or twice a year. Very few invest time reading about “house advantages” and get intimidated when it comes to craps or blackjack. It’s easy to make a mistake and look foolish in front of a bunch of people on those low house advantages games. Slot machines have no complicated rules or etiquette to follow compared to craps. You just put your money in and lose 8-10% of what you gamble. The really big casinos have about 4,000 slot machines and fewer than 10 craps tables. When I play craps I’ll statistically lose only 0.374% taking 3-4-5X odds, but I had to do a little homework and get over the first time jitters. Of course the only way to completely remove the house advantage in a casino is to get a job there.

Quote: teddys

The house edge is not readily apparent on any one given trip...

People may never know the exact percentage, but it doesn't take a brain surgeon to know it exists.

When a novice asks about a game, have you ever responded: "First you put your money down, then the casino takes it"? Probably. And you probably got a knowing laugh, followed by "But really, how do you play?"

People bother betting on a losing proposition, because they also know that sometimes you put your money down, and the casino doubles it.

From that point on, they are looking to turn that 'sometimes' into 'often'.

---

Just this past Saturday, right before I left for my A.C. trip, I got the advice to play roulette, but play like this: Bet on two of the columns every time (or two dozens). You have a high chance of winning one of them. If it loses, double the bet.

Yeah, it's the Martingale. And I told him so. But he said he knew it, but betting on two of the 2 to 1 bets, it's like getting a positive expectation on an even money bet.

It was the way he phrased it, that caused me to think about it almost the entire drive. I decided that anything that sounds like a Martingale is no good, so instead I would simply press my bet a little every time I won. I figured that since I'd win 63% of the time, this system might actually work.

So I played it. I sat at a Rapid Roulette screen. $2.50 min bet. Nice and comfortable level to test the theory. I put $20 in. It was working. I had it up to about $45 when I wanted to quit and run the numbers when I got home.

Except, I had ordered a drink and was waiting for it. And waiting for it. I hit a string of misses, and was down to about $12 when the waitress finally brought it. So then I was possessed to get back to at least my $20 buy in.

It never happened. When I was down to $2, I cashed out, and left it as a tip.

It was when I was driving home that I figured it out.

It wasn't a positive expectation of an even money bet at all. It was a good expection of a HALF payment. I.E. 1 to 2!


Why Bother Betting a Losing Proposition?

You know the guy that gave me the idea is gonna tell me my mistake was to not run the Martingale as intended....

Well, we all know that if you play long enough, you lose. So the only thing that separates winners from losers is when they stop. Winners are the ones who didn't play long enough.

Quote: Mosca

Winners are the ones who didn't play long enough.

Probably quite true. A gambler who is seeing his bankroll climb is not going to walk away from the table unless he really has good self control. That house edge is best overcome by making ONE bet, but that is not much fun and if it loses, it sure makes the rest of your trip to Vegas pretty boring. Now if you make that one bet and come away a winner ... great! You've better luck than I have and better will-power!! We all seem to walk away from the table knowing we should have done it sooner and should have stayed on the PassLine instead of going to the Dark Side. Or whatever... .