Perfect BS Flat Betting + Comps= Even with Caisno?
- Thread starter Carmine782
- Start date
You need to spend more times in casinos,less time watching convicted tax frauds.
There should be no reason for a fight between myself and Flash. Its just that he keeps posting figures that are off the wall and when asked for their source,I'm told they are common knowledge.Now,I know a thing or two about comps and disagree with his figures.Most of the figures I've cited on this thread are straight out of Max Rubins great book "Comp City" with a few twists I've gotten along the way.I'd like to know where his come from. Thats all.But theres no fight,just a disagreement.
There should be no reason for a fight between myself and Flash. Its just that he keeps posting figures that are off the wall and when asked for their source,I'm told they are common knowledge.Now,I know a thing or two about comps and disagree with his figures.Most of the figures I've cited on this thread are straight out of Max Rubins great book "Comp City" with a few twists I've gotten along the way.I'd like to know where his come from. Thats all.But theres no fight,just a disagreement.
Mimosine
Well-Known Member
"P I M P"shadroch said:
i'm with shaddy mcgee on this one. flash is talking junk. 20 year pro? no one asked, no one cares, where did the numbers come from. If you're a 20 year pro at BJ, retired, turned play poker, why are you on BJINFO spouting numbers that everyone seems to call into question.... I smell a LVHCM member!
FLASH1296
Well-Known Member
Max Rubin vs. Flash1296 <?>
Comp City by Max Rubin was valuable in it's time, but it is an old book. Copyrighted 1994. Repinted, (but unedited) in 1997. There may be a newer edition, but I do not have it.
Look at page 21, the first page of Chapter 2 "Today's Comp System"
He used 60 hands per hour. I was more generous at 100.
He used 2% disadvantage. 2% is a ploppies number.
He uses 40% in comp returns. Ditto - for ploppies only.
Adjusting his $100 average bet to my (posted) $25 average bet reduces his $48 comp equivalent per hour to $12 per hour.
Ergo ... for the 4 hours (I used) Max Rubin produces $48 in comps (a generation ago) while I got $24, which is what he would have gotten as well if he used a more realistic 20%. As I pointed out, Basic Strategy players are generally given 24% at most properties.
I have respect and admiration for Mr. Rubin; but he had an axe to grind when he published "Comp City", so if his figures were slightly on the high side that was understandable.
Comp City by Max Rubin was valuable in it's time, but it is an old book. Copyrighted 1994. Repinted, (but unedited) in 1997. There may be a newer edition, but I do not have it.
Look at page 21, the first page of Chapter 2 "Today's Comp System"
He used 60 hands per hour. I was more generous at 100.
He used 2% disadvantage. 2% is a ploppies number.
He uses 40% in comp returns. Ditto - for ploppies only.
Adjusting his $100 average bet to my (posted) $25 average bet reduces his $48 comp equivalent per hour to $12 per hour.
Ergo ... for the 4 hours (I used) Max Rubin produces $48 in comps (a generation ago) while I got $24, which is what he would have gotten as well if he used a more realistic 20%. As I pointed out, Basic Strategy players are generally given 24% at most properties.
I have respect and admiration for Mr. Rubin; but he had an axe to grind when he published "Comp City", so if his figures were slightly on the high side that was understandable.
FLASH1296
Well-Known Member
Comps in a time warp
Clearly my figures are not from the 1990's and I have no (publishing) axe to grind. It seems that you are only interested in flaming me without cause. Try re-reading what I posted.
Rubin uses 60 hands,you use 100. You overestimate by 66%.
It is true that CROWDED shoe games at low stakes will get around 60 hands per hour, but a heads up game will get between 150 and 200 hands per hour. My figure is far more accurate. Besides, by using only 60 hands per hour, that argues in favor of Rubin's figures being inflated. Also, you have chosen to imagine that pit critters are (universally) too stoopid to know that -2% is an absurd e.v. for a Basic Strategy player.
Rubin uses 40% comp rate,you use 20%. You underestimate by 100%
AS I SAID - only a complete sucker gets 40% I discussed this in person with several real-life friends (with a combined 120 yrs. of high-stakes play between them). They all agree that a generation ago, it was perhaps possible for players to get as much as 40% without being a complete buffoon at the table - but those days are long gone.
Two figures. Do you see why I question your figures?
btw- Comp City was redone in great part in 2002.
I have not read that newer edition. I assume that he had retooled the figures. Perhaps you can provide the figures used by Rubin and put this issue to rest.
Clearly my figures are not from the 1990's and I have no (publishing) axe to grind. It seems that you are only interested in flaming me without cause. Try re-reading what I posted.
Rubin uses 60 hands,you use 100. You overestimate by 66%.
It is true that CROWDED shoe games at low stakes will get around 60 hands per hour, but a heads up game will get between 150 and 200 hands per hour. My figure is far more accurate. Besides, by using only 60 hands per hour, that argues in favor of Rubin's figures being inflated. Also, you have chosen to imagine that pit critters are (universally) too stoopid to know that -2% is an absurd e.v. for a Basic Strategy player.
Rubin uses 40% comp rate,you use 20%. You underestimate by 100%
AS I SAID - only a complete sucker gets 40% I discussed this in person with several real-life friends (with a combined 120 yrs. of high-stakes play between them). They all agree that a generation ago, it was perhaps possible for players to get as much as 40% without being a complete buffoon at the table - but those days are long gone.
Two figures. Do you see why I question your figures?
btw- Comp City was redone in great part in 2002.
I have not read that newer edition. I assume that he had retooled the figures. Perhaps you can provide the figures used by Rubin and put this issue to rest.
moo321
Well-Known Member
Flash, I routinely get room offers and free food for play at $5 tables. I'm sorry that you read those figures in a book somewhere, but they aren't always accurate. You're simply not accounting for hustling comps, for variables in different systems, and you're also assuming that the house can tag you as a BS player. They can't; I've never even met a boss who actually knew basic strategy.
FLASH1296
Well-Known Member
Hard and Soft Comps.
"I routinely get room offers and free food for play at $5 tables."
Let us be clear here. A room comp is a "soft comp" It has no actual cost to the casino - (unless the rooms are 100% sold out.)
Food comps are "semi-soft comps" because the actual cost of the food is typically 20% to 25% of the tab.
When I get actual cash for airfare for my spouse and myself that is the best example of a "hard comp."
Back in the 90's, (if I lost enough) the better strip casinos would have a host walk me over to the cage and actually hand me a fat wad of cash that they always referred to as "walking around money." Usually that would be 5 - 10 % of my total losses. Those days are long gone.
I really hould have been much more clear about this issue. I apologize for my thoughtless oversight.
"I routinely get room offers and free food for play at $5 tables."
Let us be clear here. A room comp is a "soft comp" It has no actual cost to the casino - (unless the rooms are 100% sold out.)
Food comps are "semi-soft comps" because the actual cost of the food is typically 20% to 25% of the tab.
When I get actual cash for airfare for my spouse and myself that is the best example of a "hard comp."
Back in the 90's, (if I lost enough) the better strip casinos would have a host walk me over to the cage and actually hand me a fat wad of cash that they always referred to as "walking around money." Usually that would be 5 - 10 % of my total losses. Those days are long gone.
I really hould have been much more clear about this issue. I apologize for my thoughtless oversight.