Future of BJ

[ihate17]

Why there are not more CSM's is a very old and now silly question

I am the only person on this board and maybe in the world who goes to the casino and expect to lose. So what I do is to try and minimise my losses.

As for winning I get lucky once awhile but in the long run, as sure as 2+2=4, I will lose. As you could find me on my earlier postings I play for the Comps.

Can somebody here explain to me this peculiar US phenomena. With the advent of the CSM why do so many Americans still play BJ and think BJ is still beatable. Better still can somebody tell me why the US casinos don't use the CSM like elsewhere in the world if card counting is a real threat. It must surely cost the casinos much more to use the shoe game. Labour and speed of play costs. Since the US casinos are still using the shoe game I must presume it is still highly prifitable to them. Like the 5% for Roulette and other popular US table games. 0.50% HA must apply to only a tiny fraction of players.

Maybe some well informed person here can tell me what the real HA is for BJ in the US casinos.

When CSM's first became available Vegas loaded up on them and perhaps all of those managers who bought them were soon looking for other jobs because of their absolute stupidity in not taking their customers preferences into consideration. Simply, the American blackjack player has a choice and the casinos that did not put in CSM's got all of the big players and since that time the percentage of CSM's have gone down and are only available on the lowest of low limit tables. Simply the reason the U.S. is not flooded with CSM's is that casinos want to make money!
Also, you really over estimate the amount of money that cardcounters take from casinos. The winning cardcounter is really rare and most do not have the bankroll that would make them significant at all. Most counters give in to human emotional traps and low bankroll and will lose. The only counters that are any kind of threat are well funded teams. The casinos at least understand that they will make much more money dealing to every mid to large player even if counters skim a little than if they forced CSM's onto their players because they learned they would have no players.

What is HA in blackjack in the U.S.?

The mathematical House advantage is all over the place here. There are single deck and double deck games where the edge is less than .2% but there are also single and double deck games with a HA of over 1.5% There are 6 deck shoes with a .26% edge but most are higher. You must look at the rules.
The average is something a little above .5%.
But remember the average player plays at a level of 3-4 times worse than the basic strategy player and most casinos believe they make between 1.5-2% and that number is after all the counters in the world have taken their little profits. Kill of all the counters with CSM's and since counters are so rare perhaps that 1.5% would go all the way up to 1.5001% and then take away 50-75% of the money played on your tables by putting in CSM's and it becomes very easy to understand why you should be looking for a new job.

CSM's work only in isolated areas (no competition) or in places where ownership has all agreed to have only CSM's, if there is real competition this does not happen.

ihate17

 

[Katweezel]

CSM + no competition = great for Kasinos

When CSM's first became available Vegas loaded up on them and perhaps all of those managers who bought them were soon looking for other jobs because of their absolute stupidity in not taking their customers preferences into consideration. Simply, the American blackjack player has a choice and the casinos that did not put in CSM's got all of the big players and since that time the percentage of CSM's have gone down and are only available on the lowest of low limit tables. Simply the reason the U.S. is not flooded with CSM's is that casinos want to make money!
Also, you really over estimate the amount of money that cardcounters take from casinos. The winning cardcounter is really rare and most do not have the bankroll that would make them significant at all. Most counters give in to human emotional traps and low bankroll and will lose. The only counters that are any kind of threat are well funded teams. The casinos at least understand that they will make much more money dealing to every mid to large player even if counters skim a little than if they forced CSM's onto their players because they learned they would have no players.

What is HA in blackjack in the U.S.?

The mathematical House advantage is all over the place here. There are single deck and double deck games where the edge is less than .2% but there are also single and double deck games with a HA of over 1.5% There are 6 deck shoes with a .26% edge but most are higher. You must look at the rules.
The average is something a little above .5%.
But remember the average player plays at a level of 3-4 times worse than the basic strategy player and most casinos believe they make between 1.5-2% and that number is after all the counters in the world have taken their little profits. Kill of all the counters with CSM's and since counters are so rare perhaps that 1.5% would go all the way up to 1.5001% and then take away 50-75% of the money played on your tables by putting in CSM's and it becomes very easy to understand why you should be looking for a new job.

CSM's work only in isolated areas (no competition) or in places where ownership has all agreed to have only CSM's, if there is real competition this does not happen.

ihate17

Yeah, good post 17. Your final sentence is the reason in a nutshell, why we have about 95% CSMs down under... no competition. Grrrr

 

[Mr. T]

Good posting 17. No this aversion to the CSM is a unique US phenomena. Take Macau. There is as much competition amongst the casinos as in LAS. Yet every BJ table is with the CSM.

The common talk or hearsay is the casinos get about 2% HA from the BJ players. My gut feeling is it is over 10%. I am trying to put up some figures together for this. What is the HA when the players commonly don't double 11 vs 6, split 8 vs 6, stand A6 vs 6 and ad infinitum. And I am not talking about some other dasterly play which is almost beyond comprehension.

 

[Blue Efficacy]

Good posting 17. No this aversion to the CSM is a unique US phenomena. Take Macau. There is as much competition amongst the casinos as in LAS. Yet every BJ table is with the CSM.

The common talk or hearsay is the casinos get about 2% HA from the BJ players. My gut feeling is it is over 10%. I am trying to put up some figures together for this. What is the HA when the players commonly don't double 11 vs 6, split 8 vs 6, stand A6 vs 6 and ad infinitum. And I am not talking about some other dasterly play which is almost beyond comprehension.

Ummmmm....


You do know you are supposed to split 8 vs 5-6, right? Assuming DAS is offered. Even if it isn't, it isn't an extremely poor, stupid play like not doubling 11 v 6 or standing on soft 17.

 

[Mr. T]

Oh! Oh! I should have made it perfectly clear that I meant splitting a pair of 8's.

 

[Blue Efficacy]

Oh! Oh! I should have made it perfectly clear that I meant splitting a pair of 8's.

Don't we "always split 8's?" (except an h17 shoe game with LS...)

 

[ihate17]

Macau has no competition when the subject is the CSM

Good posting 17. No this aversion to the CSM is a unique US phenomena. Take Macau. There is as much competition amongst the casinos as in LAS. Yet every BJ table is with the CSM.

The common talk or hearsay is the casinos get about 2% HA from the BJ players. My gut feeling is it is over 10%. I am trying to put up some figures together for this. What is the HA when the players commonly don't double 11 vs 6, split 8 vs 6, stand A6 vs 6 and ad infinitum. And I am not talking about some other dasterly play which is almost beyond comprehension.

Granted the casinos in Macau compete with each other when it comes to getting customers, especially the big customers in the door but that is not the subject of either of our posts.
When it comes to the CSM either laws are in place or all of the owners have colluded to not offer hand shuffled or even ASM games, so as a blackjack player there is NO COMPETITION IN MACAU!

Where do you think the blackjack revenue in Macau would go if one of the large casinos tossed all of their CSM's away? The fact that no one has yet done this is proof enough for me that there is no competition.

ihate17

 

[Mr. T]

Granted the casinos in Macau compete with each other when it comes to getting customers, especially the big customers in the door but that is not the subject of either of our posts.
When it comes to the CSM either laws are in place or all of the owners have colluded to not offer hand shuffled or even ASM games, so as a blackjack player there is NO COMPETITION IN MACAU!

Where do you think the blackjack revenue in Macau would go if one of the large casinos tossed all of their CSM's away? The fact that no one has yet done this is proof enough for me that there is no competition.

ihate17

Boy oh Boy. I normally do no like to belabour this topic. But where do you get your fact that there is no Competition in Macau.

To quote you The fact that no one has yet done this is proof enough for me that there is no competition

This is like saying nobdy outside America like eating apple pie is because there is some resriction outside America against eating apple pie.

 

[Automatic Monkey]

Boy oh Boy. I normally do no like to belabour this topic. But where do you get your fact that there is no Competition in Macau.

To quote you The fact that no one has yet done this is proof enough for me that there is no competition

This is like saying nobdy outside America like eating apple pie is because there is some resriction outside America against eating apple pie.

For the sake of keeping it real, Macau is controlled by Red China, so you can be certain that all money in Macau casinos is eventually headed to the same pockets. You can't ever consider enterprises running in a non-free country to be competing for the benefit of the customer. They may be competing for customers, but not competing against one another, any more than two HET properties in the same venue are competing against one another.

 

[Mr. T]

For the sake of keeping it real,[B]B] Macau is controlled by Red China, so you can be certain that all money in Macau [/B]casinos is eventually headed to the same pockets.[/B][ You can't ever consider enterprises running in a non-free country to be competing for the benefit of the customer. They may be competing for customers, but not competing against one another, any more than two HET properties in the same venue are competing against one another.

This is just Madness

 

[ihate17]

I did say there was competition

Boy oh Boy. I normally do no like to belabour this topic. But where do you get your fact that there is no Competition in Macau.

To quote you The fact that no one has yet done this is proof enough for me that there is no competition

This is like saying nobdy outside America like eating apple pie is because there is some resriction outside America against eating apple pie.

To put things in the simpliest form, they do not compete in how they deal the cards when dealing blackjack in Macau. It would be interesting if they did.

ihate17

 

[Mr. T]

To put things in the simpliest form, they do not compete in how they deal the cards when dealing blackjack in Macau. It would be interesting if they did.

ihate17

And your heading I did say there was competition

Sorry, I can't understand your statements