Whoa, is this really true??
February 15th, 2011 at 12:11:55 AM
permalink
So I was just doing some calculating and I came to a strange conclusion. If my calculations are correct, it shows that basically casinos will comp back to you MORE than what you will theoretically lose. If I am expected to lose $4.05 per one hour of playing $25 a hand, the casino is expected to comp me back $12. That's an almost $8 difference. So I lose around $4 but get back $12 in comps. Say what?!?!
And, of course, this is on a bigger scale if you calculate it with a larger amount.
Is this some sort of flaw? And if not, how are casinos okay with comping back more than the amount they're making off of me in the first place??
I'm dumbfounded, but in a good way!
And, of course, this is on a bigger scale if you calculate it with a larger amount.
| Amount Wagered per Hand | Actual House Edge | Theoretical Loss per Hand | Hands Played Per Hour | Theoretical Loss Per Hour | Casino’s assumed Hold used for calculating comps | Primary Comps Expected (25%) | Express Comps Expected (15%) | Total Comps Expected (40%) | Difference between Theoretical Loss and Total Comps |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| $25 | 0.27% | $0.07 | 60 | $4.05 | 2% | $7.50 | $4.50 | $12 | -$7.95 |
| $100 | 0.27% | $0.27 | 60 | $16.20 | 2% | $30 | $18 | $48 | -$31.80 |
| $150 | 0.27% | $0.41 | 60 | $24.30 | 2% | $45 | $27 | $72 | -$47.70 |
| $500 | 0.27% | $1.35 | 60 | $81 | 2% | $150 | $90 | $240 | -$159 |
| $1000 | 0.27% | $2.70 | 60 | $162 | 2% | $300 | $180 | $480 | -$318 |
Is this some sort of flaw? And if not, how are casinos okay with comping back more than the amount they're making off of me in the first place??
I'm dumbfounded, but in a good way!
OFFICIALLY and justifiably reclaimed my title as SuperHotBlonde!
February 15th, 2011 at 12:48:03 AM
permalink
I know nothing of comps, but my Spidey Sense is tingling. Gut reaction - something in your numbers are off. Casino's couldn't possibly survive living only off the hold from non-player card holding gamblers. Could they?
The opinions of this moderator are for entertainment purposes only.
February 15th, 2011 at 1:20:16 AM
permalink
What game is it with 0.27% HA? Blackjack?
If staff sees you play perfect BS, they tend to drop the comp rate, calculating your loss closer to your actual play. And 40% in comps, not these days, and not with perfect play.
If staff sees you play perfect BS, they tend to drop the comp rate, calculating your loss closer to your actual play. And 40% in comps, not these days, and not with perfect play.
Resist ANFO Boston PRISM Stormfront IRA Freedom CIA Obama
February 15th, 2011 at 1:21:36 AM
permalink
My first reaction is that the 40% you get back playing $25 a hand is 40% of that $4.05 lost- so instead of $12 you get $1.62.- Id have to imagine that the casino's "assumed hold" is near synonamous w/ "theoretical loss"
"Although men flatter themselves with their great actions, they are not so often the result of a great design as of chance." - Francois De La Rochefoucauld
February 15th, 2011 at 1:57:18 AM
permalink
Quote: P90What game is it with 0.27% HA?
Yes. Check out the Wizard's Vegas BJ survey. I found and played at several of those tables during my last trip. And that's only if you play correct strategy on that game. https://wizardofvegas.com/guides/blackjack-survey/
Quote: P90If staff sees you play perfect BS, they tend to drop the comp rate, calculating your loss closer to your actual play.
Where would you get that idea?
Quote: P90And 40% in comps, not these days, and not with perfect play.
The casino host told me that the other day herself that they do comp back 40%.
Quote: MalaruId have to imagine that the casino's "assumed hold" is near synonamous w/ "theoretical loss"
Well, that's what I would think too. But the Wizard has said on WizardofOdds.com that the casino uses 2%.
Quote: WizardofOdds.comBlogger's Question: It's my understanding that casinos put a lot of emphasis on a player's theoretical win. I would imagine my theoretical value has a direct correlation to compatibility from a house point of view. If I am a $10.00 average Player in Blackjack and play an average of 3 hours per trip, what is the formula a casino uses to determine my theoretical value? Thank you in advance.
Wizard's Answer: Yes, the casinos do calculate the value of a player's play and then comp back a certain percentage. 2% is generally considered the house edge in blackjack for the average player. The average number of hands per hour is about 60. So in your example the value of this play would be 0.02*$10*60*3=$36. If the casino comps back 1/3 of the play then you could expect to get a comp worth $12. Aug. 7, 2003
Hopefully the Wizard will see this blog and respond.
OFFICIALLY and justifiably reclaimed my title as SuperHotBlonde!
February 15th, 2011 at 2:01:07 AM
permalink
The only thing I can think is maybe The Wizard incorrectly thought the casino's hold is 2% instead of 0.02%. I'm curious.
OFFICIALLY and justifiably reclaimed my title as SuperHotBlonde!
February 15th, 2011 at 2:08:44 AM
permalink
Actually, the 0.02% wouldn't be correct either cuz then the Total Comps would be $0.12, $0.48, $0.72, $2.40 and $4.80 respectively, and that's for an entire hour of play. That seems way too low.
Help!
Help!
OFFICIALLY and justifiably reclaimed my title as SuperHotBlonde!
February 15th, 2011 at 2:13:02 AM
permalink
Quote: HotBlondeWhere would you get that idea?
They usually do that, at least at blackjack. 2% is only assumed as the first guess. $25/hand is a sufficient amount to warrant at least a cursory glance, especially before awarding 40% comps (very good for these days). Plenty of players do under 2%. What casino is it specifically?
Resist ANFO Boston PRISM Stormfront IRA Freedom CIA Obama
February 15th, 2011 at 2:13:58 AM
permalink
Quote: HotBlondeThe only thing I can think is maybe The Wizard incorrectly thought the casino's hold is 2% instead of 0.02%. I'm curious.
I think there are very few players who come close to playing perfect basic strategy. Once you deviate "a little" the house edge goes up. Think about all those people just playing by "feel" who likely give the house a 5% or better advantage. If they calculated the theo on players playing perfectly, comps would be almost non-existent for blackjack players.
The HA is based on each bet. The "hold" is the casino win for a table or group of tables.
February 15th, 2011 at 2:39:54 AM
permalink
Quote: RonCWhat casino is it specifically?
A host at The Mirage told me. And I think she was refering not only to The Mirage but to all the MGM properties.
OFFICIALLY and justifiably reclaimed my title as SuperHotBlonde!
February 15th, 2011 at 2:40:21 AM
permalink
Sorry, I meant to quote P90, my bad.
OFFICIALLY and justifiably reclaimed my title as SuperHotBlonde!
February 15th, 2011 at 3:08:22 AM
permalink
well, these days the "advantage players" do figure in their comps, so you could be right. You would be wrong to think the casinos don't wish to send A.P.'s packing though [from what I hear]
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
February 15th, 2011 at 9:41:52 AM
permalink
Yes, you can certainly make more off of comps than you lose in Blackjack. You must figure out how much those comps are worth to you, however. Is it the dollar value of the comp, or something less? It is certainly worth less to the casino, otherwise they wouldn't be comping you so much.
The Wizard talks about this in his blackjack video--the "niceties" the casino gives you often outweigh your expected loss.
The Wizard talks about this in his blackjack video--the "niceties" the casino gives you often outweigh your expected loss.
"Dice, verily, are armed with goads and driving-hooks, deceiving and tormenting, causing grievous woe." -Rig Veda 10.34.4
February 15th, 2011 at 10:21:43 AM
permalink
I'm not sure...
However, where I play, they give you your average back, in comps, for every 6 hours you play.
So I play craps, with a $5 pass and 3/4/5x odds. They "rate" me at a $30 average. (double if I play a single come bet with the pass, which i sometimes will), and I play for 6 hours at a time, and I get $30 (or $60) in comps.
What is my expected loss? Not nearly what they're giving me, right?
However, where I play, they give you your average back, in comps, for every 6 hours you play.
So I play craps, with a $5 pass and 3/4/5x odds. They "rate" me at a $30 average. (double if I play a single come bet with the pass, which i sometimes will), and I play for 6 hours at a time, and I get $30 (or $60) in comps.
What is my expected loss? Not nearly what they're giving me, right?
Gambling calls to me...like this ~> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Nap37mNSmQ
February 15th, 2011 at 10:31:56 AM
permalink
Quote: HotBlondeSo I was just doing some calculating and I came to a strange conclusion. If my calculations are correct, it shows that basically casinos will comp back to you MORE than what you will theoretically lose. If I am expected to lose $4.05 per one hour of playing $25 a hand, the casino is expected to comp me back $12. That's an almost $8 difference. So I lose around $4 but get back $12 in comps. Say what?!?!
Is this some sort of flaw? And if not, how are casinos okay with comping back more than the amount they're making off of me in the first place??
I'm not sure where you got your numbers, but your results ($12 in comps on $4 in theo) don't work out to a 40% comp rate. That's a 300% comp rate. If the casino comped 40% of theo, you'd be looking at about $1.60 in comps.
"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
February 15th, 2011 at 10:43:35 AM
permalink
Quote: TIMSPEEDSo I play craps, with a $5 pass and 3/4/5x odds. They "rate" me at a $30 average. (double if I play a single come bet with the pass, which i sometimes will), and I play for 6 hours at a time, and I get $30 (or $60) in comps.
What is my expected loss? Not nearly what they're giving me, right?
I think it is fantastic that your casino has decided to rate the odds bet. The vast majority of casinos in Las Vegas do not.
Let us assume that at an average craps table, a total of 40 points are made per hour. A $5 pass line bet x 40 points, x 1.414% = $2.83 theoretical loss per hour. Multiply that by six hours and you get $16.97 of theoretical loss. And you stated you are getting $30 in comps.
So my advice is to keep playing at that casino! And pray that they don't change their comp policy regarding odds bet.
February 15th, 2011 at 10:43:37 AM
permalink
Keep in mind, most comped things in a casino have a higher than normal price tag, plus one has to tip.
February 15th, 2011 at 10:47:07 AM
permalink
Quote: JIMMYFOCKERKeep in mind, most comped things in a casino have a higher than normal price tag, plus one has to tip.
In most cases, one will be off longterm playing baccarat.
This is where the Asians thrive, because they hammer the comp system, they are sharper than most bears.
February 15th, 2011 at 10:47:30 AM
permalink
Quote: JIMMYFOCKERIn most cases, one would be better off longterm playing baccarat.
This is where the Asians thrive, because they hammer the comp system, they are sharper than most bears.
February 15th, 2011 at 10:49:29 AM
permalink
I'm surprised this is even worthy of a large discussion. Yes, clearly, small stakes blackjack players who play perfect basic strategy and who ask for comps and who play at non-Harrahs* casinos have a positive expectation on paper. Why don't the casinos go out of business?
Macro level:
1) Not eveyone has a players card.
2) Not everyone with a card asks for comps.
3) KEY - Not everyone plays well enough to average > 99.5% pre-comp return.
Micro level:
1) Comps are of different values to the player and the casino. If I'm planning to drink and go to the casino buffet anyways, and I get two free drinks and a buffet comp, that's worth >$20 to me. To the casino, their marginal cost is like $5. If my expected loss is between $5 and $20 then both the casino and I win.
____
* As discussed elsewhere Harrah's properties shift comps for table game players away from in-casino comps and towards room offers and other travel incentives.
Macro level:
1) Not eveyone has a players card.
2) Not everyone with a card asks for comps.
3) KEY - Not everyone plays well enough to average > 99.5% pre-comp return.
Micro level:
1) Comps are of different values to the player and the casino. If I'm planning to drink and go to the casino buffet anyways, and I get two free drinks and a buffet comp, that's worth >$20 to me. To the casino, their marginal cost is like $5. If my expected loss is between $5 and $20 then both the casino and I win.
____
* As discussed elsewhere Harrah's properties shift comps for table game players away from in-casino comps and towards room offers and other travel incentives.
February 15th, 2011 at 11:15:28 AM
permalink
Your table amounts to 40%*2%=0.80% for comps, which is clearly larger than your assumed 0.27% for the house edge.
Your assumed house edge is close to 0.273% which is the house edge of someone taking full free odds on 3-4-5X craps.
The answer is that it is highly unlikely for a pit boss to assume 2% for the loss if you are taking full free odds in craps. Most of the time they give you no credit for the free odds bet, if they do give you credit it would not be at an assumed 2% loss.
Clearly if you are playing a good game of blackjack and keeping your expected loss under 1%, then your comps (if the pit boss assumes 2%) will equal your expected loss.
Your assumed house edge is close to 0.273% which is the house edge of someone taking full free odds on 3-4-5X craps.
The answer is that it is highly unlikely for a pit boss to assume 2% for the loss if you are taking full free odds in craps. Most of the time they give you no credit for the free odds bet, if they do give you credit it would not be at an assumed 2% loss.
Clearly if you are playing a good game of blackjack and keeping your expected loss under 1%, then your comps (if the pit boss assumes 2%) will equal your expected loss.
February 15th, 2011 at 11:43:37 AM
permalink
I think what HotBlonde is saying is that if the Actual edge is .27 percent but they comp you at (.02 x .4) .8 percent, then you are actually being comped at 296 percent (.8 / .27) of theoretical loss.
I think the assumption however is the Casino assumed hold of 2 percent which is at the top range of the assumed hold range. For a .27 percent game, they may lower that to 1 percent. Still, if you play the blackjack game perfectly, your expected comps will probably be greater than your theoretical loss.
And if you are at a Harrah's property, your calculation is based on something much more dreary than that, on the order of about 3 - 4 percent of theoretical. My theory at Harrahs is that they grant you points the same way they do for slots. In slots, you get something like a 0.5 percent return which represents about 5 - 10 percent of theoretical loss. I think they do the same for table games, giving you about 5 - 10 percent of theoretical loss instead of the 40 percent that other properties will give you.
I think the assumption however is the Casino assumed hold of 2 percent which is at the top range of the assumed hold range. For a .27 percent game, they may lower that to 1 percent. Still, if you play the blackjack game perfectly, your expected comps will probably be greater than your theoretical loss.
And if you are at a Harrah's property, your calculation is based on something much more dreary than that, on the order of about 3 - 4 percent of theoretical. My theory at Harrahs is that they grant you points the same way they do for slots. In slots, you get something like a 0.5 percent return which represents about 5 - 10 percent of theoretical loss. I think they do the same for table games, giving you about 5 - 10 percent of theoretical loss instead of the 40 percent that other properties will give you.
-----
You want the truth! You can't handle the truth!
February 15th, 2011 at 12:05:13 PM
permalink
Where is this video? I'd like to watch it.Quote: teddysThe Wizard talks about this in his blackjack video--the "niceties" the casino gives you often outweigh your expected loss.
That's true if they were comping me back based on my theoretical loss, but the Wizard says they use 2.0% as an estimate for my loss even though my play lowers the house edge to 0.027% if I'm sitting at the right table and playing according to BS. And even if I'm playing at a table where the house edge is the highest, one with a 0.78% house edge while playing with correct BS, I'm still getting comped back more than I theoretically lose.Quote: MathExtremistI'm not sure where you got your numbers, but your results ($12 in comps on $4 in theo) don't work out to a 40% comp rate. That's a 300% comp rate. If the casino comped 40% of theo, you'd be looking at about $1.60 in comps.
| Amount Wagered per Hand | Actual House Edge | Theoretical Loss per Hand | Hands Played Per Hour | Theoretical Loss Per Hour | Casino’s assumed Hold used for calculating comps | Primary Comps Expected (25%) | Express Comps Expected (15%) | Total Comps Expected (40%) | Difference between Theoretical Loss and Total Comps |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| $25 | 0.78% | $0.20 | 60 | $11.70 | 2% | $7.50 | $4.50 | $12 | -$0.30 |
| $100 | 0.78% | $0.78 | 60 | $46.80 | 2% | $30 | $18 | $48 | -$1.20 |
| $150 | 0.78% | $1.17 | 60 | $70.20 | 2% | $45 | $27 | $72 | -$1.80 |
| $500 | 0.78% | $3.90 | 60 | $234 | 2% | $150 | $90 | $240 | -$6 |
| $1000 | 0.78% | $7.80 | 60 | $468 | 2% | $300 | $180 | $480 | -$12 |
I'm glad to know this. I usually play at just the MGM properties, but was considering making the rounds at the Harrah's properties. So, good to know cuz now I probably won't. I've even heard The Wizard say that the Harrah's properites are "stingy", I think is how he put it, as far as having more rules that favor the house compared to other places.Quote: sunrise089* As discussed elsewhere Harrah's properties shift comps for table game players away from in-casino comps and towards room offers and other travel incentives.
From what I was told by the host each game has it's own hold. So the 2% only applies to the game of blackjack, it's most likely different with craps. She wouldn't tell me what the holds were for each game, I only found out about the 2% from blackjack from reading one of The Wizard's Q&A pages.Quote: pacomartinThe answer is that it is highly unlikely for a pit boss to assume 2% for the loss if you are taking full free odds in craps. Most of the time they give you no credit for the free odds bet, if they do give you credit it would not be at an assumed 2% loss.
This may be true. I was hoping someone with some "insider" information would be able to shed some light on this subject.Quote: boymimboFor a .27 percent game, they may lower that to 1 percent.
BTW, I'm new on here. Does the Wizard actually comment on any of these blogs??
OFFICIALLY and justifiably reclaimed my title as SuperHotBlonde!
February 15th, 2011 at 12:40:32 PM
permalink
Sometimes he does, sometimes he doesn't.
These are techically forum posts, and the blogs are handled elsewhere (the difference is a blog is more like a diary people can comment on, where as forum post is a free ranging discussion. Potato, Tomato)
These are techically forum posts, and the blogs are handled elsewhere (the difference is a blog is more like a diary people can comment on, where as forum post is a free ranging discussion. Potato, Tomato)
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
February 15th, 2011 at 1:01:07 PM
permalink
Quote: HotBlondeAnd even if I'm playing at a table where the house edge is the highest, one with a 0.78% house edge while playing with correct BS, I'm still getting comped back more than I theoretically lose.
The difference between 0.80% and 0.78% is very small and slightly in the players favor. But you are going to use those comp dollars to buy food or items from the retail store which have more than 0.02% markup.
You can see that it is possible to come out even by playing blackjack very well. You can also see why casinos are anxious to get rid of low minimum full play blackjack.
But the casinos make it all up on bad blackjack players. It would be bad policy to rate players and comp them at different rates. Supposedly Terence Watanabe who lost $105 million to Ceasars Corp. had no concept of how to play the game.
February 15th, 2011 at 2:29:07 PM
permalink
I think your calc table is off. Most places comp 5-25% of theo loss. Even if you factor in a house hold, it would be something like theo loss of $11.7*(.98)*(.05 through .25) is what you should expect in comps.
Your section of Primary Comps and Express comps is what's throwing it off. Expected comp is a % of theo losses. You are probably subtracting 1-comp rate and multiplying theo loss thus showing the house benefit as oppose to the player benefit.
Your section of Primary Comps and Express comps is what's throwing it off. Expected comp is a % of theo losses. You are probably subtracting 1-comp rate and multiplying theo loss thus showing the house benefit as oppose to the player benefit.
February 15th, 2011 at 4:49:50 PM
permalink
Here it is.Quote: HotBlondeWhere is this video? I'd like to watch it.
I also recommend "Comp City" by Max Rubin. Outdated, but the principles still apply. He says only Blackjack is the game where you can make up more on comps than your expected loss.
The Wizard does comment here. He must be on a break now.
"Dice, verily, are armed with goads and driving-hooks, deceiving and tormenting, causing grievous woe." -Rig Veda 10.34.4
February 15th, 2011 at 8:07:43 PM
permalink
Like I said before, I'm going on what the casino host at the Mirage told me, which she said is 40%. And maybe you're not taking into account their brand new express comp system as well.Quote: AsswhoopermcdaddyI think your calc table is off. Most places comp 5-25% of theo loss.
Thanks doll!Quote: teddys
And I think I heard of COMP CITY but with the brand new MGM comp system that includes the express comps, I'm going to look at that as too outdated to read at this point.
Am I the first person to write on this new express comp system on here? I thought there would be others who would know what I'm talking about. :(
OFFICIALLY and justifiably reclaimed my title as SuperHotBlonde!
February 15th, 2011 at 10:30:29 PM
permalink
Quote: HotBlonde
Is this some sort of flaw? And if not, how are casinos okay with comping back more than the amount they're making off of me in the first place??
I'm dumbfounded, but in a good way!
They aren't comping you anything that costs them a large amount of money. I will say good luck finding a 0.27% $25 table at the mid/top tier casinos. 0.50-0.60 is much more common.
A few have mentioned they also inflate some prices. I recently stayed at the Mirage. Total bill would have been $630 I think for 3 nights(only room, no food). I know for a fact I could have booked the same room through the Mirage website using no comps for about $150/night.
I'm still not sure how accurate the casinos hands per hour are though. On a full $25 table, I could see 60 an hour. On one with 2-3 people though, I don't think it is that uncommon to see 100+ an hour. If they still assume 60 an hour, that just almost doubled your expected loss and depending on how they count the hands, they may have not increased your comps.
March 1st, 2011 at 11:33:00 AM
permalink
You're on to something with the hands per hour. I know at the casino I work at, they comp based on a very, VERY conservative hands per hour amount. I deal through about 6 six deck shoes per hour. That is WELL above 60 hands per hour so that definitely brings the total expected loss a lot higher.
Founder and Editor-in-Chief, GamblersGrind.com and HoopsHabit.com.
March 10th, 2011 at 4:49:48 PM
permalink
I just googled him and read up on his story. Pretty crazy. They're saying that now they think he lost over $200 million. And I think he played baccarat, not blackjack.Quote: pacomartinSupposedly Terence Watanabe who lost $105 million to Ceasars Corp. had no concept of how to play the game.
OFFICIALLY and justifiably reclaimed my title as SuperHotBlonde!
March 10th, 2011 at 5:03:43 PM
permalink
Sorry if this was said before, but according to my theoretical table, blackjack is assumed to have a 0.75% house advantage. If I said 2% somewhere, please tell me, so I can correct it.
It is still possible get more in comps than you give back in the house edge, but it isn't a huge difference. The way I view it is a smart gambler can basically get a free vacation, if he can handle the ups and downs.
It is still possible get more in comps than you give back in the house edge, but it isn't a huge difference. The way I view it is a smart gambler can basically get a free vacation, if he can handle the ups and downs.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
March 10th, 2011 at 5:16:54 PM
permalink
I must have missed this thread in its entirety when it was first posted.
May I now present the following observations.
Hand per hour: There are various values used by casinos for this but most are from historical figures that pre-date the use of shoes and shufflers and chip muckers. Those historical figures were further debased by being rounded off so casino critters could do quick math to evaluate a player's compability. (Yeah, I know: no such word). Also, I note the use of the term "hold" that is a defined term.
Also, alcohol intake and fatigue take a toll on playing skills. So one who plays perfect Basic Strategy when he first starts playing will be unlikely to stay at that level. Many players are half looped when they start a game and think Basic Strategy means Get Free Drinks and Ogle The Lovely Ladies. (Although it took place in Connecticut, not Nevada, the Craigslist Killer despite playing black chips spent so much time staring at a player's breasts that it was wondered if he was even looking at his cards. This was not the sole cause of his gambling debt induced murder spree, though. I merely mention it as an extreme example of how skilled players allow themselves to become distracted and impair their adherence to Basic Strategy).
I believe Wantanabee's claims were rooted in his being so drunk he didn't know what casino he was in or what game he was playing.
May I now present the following observations.
Hand per hour: There are various values used by casinos for this but most are from historical figures that pre-date the use of shoes and shufflers and chip muckers. Those historical figures were further debased by being rounded off so casino critters could do quick math to evaluate a player's compability. (Yeah, I know: no such word). Also, I note the use of the term "hold" that is a defined term.
Also, alcohol intake and fatigue take a toll on playing skills. So one who plays perfect Basic Strategy when he first starts playing will be unlikely to stay at that level. Many players are half looped when they start a game and think Basic Strategy means Get Free Drinks and Ogle The Lovely Ladies. (Although it took place in Connecticut, not Nevada, the Craigslist Killer despite playing black chips spent so much time staring at a player's breasts that it was wondered if he was even looking at his cards. This was not the sole cause of his gambling debt induced murder spree, though. I merely mention it as an extreme example of how skilled players allow themselves to become distracted and impair their adherence to Basic Strategy).
I believe Wantanabee's claims were rooted in his being so drunk he didn't know what casino he was in or what game he was playing.
March 10th, 2011 at 5:19:04 PM
permalink
Here is what was written:Quote: WizardIf I said 2% somewhere, please tell me, so I can correct it.
It's my understanding that casinos put a lot of emphasis on a player's theoretical win. I would imagine my theoretical value has a direct correlation to compatibility from a house point of view. If I am a $10.00 average Player in Blackjack and play an average of 3 hours per trip, what is the formula a casino uses to determine my theoretical value? Thank you in advance.
Yes, the casinos do calculate the value of a player's play and then comp back a certain percentage. 2% is generally considered the house edge in blackjack for the average player. The average number of hands per hour is about 60. So in your example the value of this play would be 0.02*$10*60*3=$36. If the casino comps back 1/3 of the play then you could expect to get a comp worth $12. Aug. 7, 2003
And here is the link where I found this:
"Ask the Wizard" on WizardofOdds.com
OFFICIALLY and justifiably reclaimed my title as SuperHotBlonde!
March 10th, 2011 at 5:51:30 PM
permalink
Quote: HotBlondeAnd here is the link where I found this:
"Ask the Wizard" on WizardofOdds.com
Thank you! At the time I wrote that answer in 2003 the 2% was the best information I had. I just updated that answer. Thanks again.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
March 10th, 2011 at 5:59:17 PM
permalink
So, Wizard, according to your "Hands per Hour and Average House Edge" table, which game can you play where you will get the most comps per each theoretical dollar lost when you figure in the real house edge (for example you have 0.28% as the real house edge listed up top on that page). I hope I asked my question clearly enough, sorry if I'm confusing you.
OFFICIALLY and justifiably reclaimed my title as SuperHotBlonde!
August 23rd, 2011 at 7:53:26 AM
permalink
Nothing in Las Vegas is real ... its a town built on illusion, rumor, hope, falsehoods and falsies. And the business of gambling is conducted amidst a background of glimpses, estimates, guesses and rules of thumb.Quote: HotBlondewhen you figure in the real house edge ...
Comps are based on a player's Amount Bet, but rarely would that actually be known. It is an estimated figure consisting of his Average Bet times his Time At Table times "Hands" per Hour. Yet each and every one of these values are simply estimates. A player's Average Bet is often determined by a very busy and distracted floorperson who has other duties to attend to, other players that concern him and other tables in that pit to which he must pay attention. Then of course the final hurdle appears, he must enter his determination of Average Bet into the computer accurately amidst the various distractions that are still applicable such as the "halo effect" of a player's tipping behavior or first-few-bets behavior.
Time at table is something that might be most accurately known but it is still an estimate. Players cards don't always get handled right away, if they do get entered they may have to be manually entered rather than swiped for any number of reasons. This undoubtedly yields some slippage into the math involved.
House edge... well one might think that a casino owner would surely know the house edge involved in his games and would have accurate information in the computer for that. I mean after all, its the business he is in. Yet, let us consider things for a moment. House Edge (for comp purposes) is a historical figure, not a recently calculated one. All the various changes in the games, the table structure, the side bets, .... surely a good deal of slippage is getting into the math at that point.
And I would venture to say that "Hands" per Hour is not only largely a historical figure that was long ago rounded off for convenience but is a figure that has been changed by technology, crowd behavior, the existence of side bets, the existence of inexperienced dealers, etc. A player is often deemed for comp purposes to be playing as one of five players at the table since that is often the Hands Per Hour rate that is in the casino's computer. Yet how many times have tables been more crowded than this or less crowded than this figure?
If we add up all this slippage and estimated stuff and factor in some of that rounded off stuff and historical stuff ...
just how accurate are these Comp Formulas and where are the most exploitable points in the calculations? Normally, I would never factor in slot points since I don't play slots, but one recent review of the Silverton casino indicated that Table Games Players actually accumulate Slot Points there and the sums, although not large, are nevertheless sufficient that they should be taken into account in any decision making.
