The few, the proud, the preyed upon

[bj bob]

Just daydreaming here, but I sometimes wonder about the perspective of AP's as to the casino management community. That is, how many effective card counters do they really think are prowling about their sacred pits on any given day? From what I've seen in person viz a viz ridiculous rule changes ala. mid-shoe restrictions ,6D abounding, enemic (and time consuming) penetration , and my favorite, 6:5 BJ, one would think that there are massive hords of us invading blackjack pits every night and day. Is their paranoia even remotely rational?
My best wild guess is that, given the current US population of~300 Mil., that 100 Mil. are underage, another 100 Mil. cannot afford to play in casinos and, out of the remaining 100 Mil maybe there are 10 Mil BJ players. If one assumes that 1/100 can play BS, that leaves maybe 100,000 and out of those(being generous here) 1/10 are "theoretical" AP's meaning they could play +EV but don't or cannot support a functional bankroll to actually affect the casino's bottom line. So, I figure 1/2 of that amount actually can cause the house any problems, thus resulting in a paltry 5,000 AP's nationwide.
Anyone have their own best guesses?

 

[positiveEV]

They just want to make as much money as possible, they have annalists getting paid big bucks to change the games to maximize their profits. If I had a corporation, I would do the same thing, it's normal. If they make more money this way, why would they return to the old way?

 

[EasyRhino]

To be fair, a single AP is probably going to flog a casino like a rented mule as long as it lets him. While a ploppy just shows up, loses some money, and leaves. In other words, the effect of the AP is much higher than mere numbers would suggest.

Also, certain modifications (like 6:5) aren't really specifically targeted to AP's, they just increase the edge in general.

Nontheless, I like the thesis of your argument. I think I remember some stuff from Bill Zender arguing that many anti-AP countermeasures could actually reduce profit.

 

[Automatic Monkey]

To be fair, a single AP is probably going to flog a casino like a rented mule as long as it lets him. While a ploppy just shows up, loses some money, and leaves. In other words, the effect of the AP is much higher than mere numbers would suggest.

Also, certain modifications (like 6:5) aren't really specifically targeted to AP's, they just increase the edge in general.

Nontheless, I like the thesis of your argument. I think I remember some stuff from Bill Zender arguing that many anti-AP countermeasures could actually reduce profit.

They almost all do. Bad pen decreases hands per hour. Bad rules and 6:5 turn off a lot of players. But on the other hand, the players that got turned off are the educated ones such that the house doesn't make much money on them anyway.

All today's casinos really care about are slots. Slots, slots, and more slots. There's little labor involved and little security required. They don't even have to buy the slots, they can just lease them. Every non-slot game has to answer this question to management: "How much money are we losing by having this game here instead of a bank of slots?" While it's true that table games bring in some whales and some other players who aren't going to play slots no matter how many are offered, I am sure every table games manager has to fight hard to justify the existence of his domain. It's no surprise that 6:5 and most of the new non-BJ games have house edges around that of a slot machine. Casinos have little interest in risking floor space to offer a table game that has a 0.40% edge or God forbid an 0.18% edge over a Basic Strategy player, minus whatever the AP's can get out of them.

 

[bluewhale]

To be fair, a single AP is probably going to flog a casino like a rented mule as long as it lets him. While a ploppy just shows up, loses some money, and leaves. In other words, the effect of the AP is much higher than mere numbers would suggest.

Also, certain modifications (like 6:5) aren't really specifically targeted to AP's, they just increase the edge in general.

Nontheless, I like the thesis of your argument. I think I remember some stuff from Bill Zender arguing that many anti-AP countermeasures could actually reduce profit.

i think er is right on the money. if casinos dealt till the bottom on single deck games and didn't look for counters, then none of us would be here talking about, we'd all be out there plundering. to the point that it would severely hurt their bottom line. from what i understand, the mit group who took a lot of money, did it on fairly bad rules, had they been around in the 70's, they would have absolutely butchered the place (and possibly been butchered themselves ).

 

[21forme]

Don't forget no mid-shoe entry. Lots of people stand around just waiting to play after a shoe ends.

 

[bj bob]

In response

Your point is well taken Easy, however the reality of the situation is that the best AP's can only hope to "hose" the house out of maybe 3 units/ hr. In order to significantly affect their bottom line, you would need one hell of a lot of top AP's playing at high stakes all shift long. In the meantime the house is cutting into a very significant amount of "handle" time by interrupting the dealer's timing. I have a hard time justifying all these counterproductive measures(no pun) as a response to a very few theoretical negative forces that may or may not be playing at the tables while the quantifiable affect of negative "dead time" is a known derterrent to pit profits. Just think of how many stupid bets by drunk ploppies are delayed or missed entirely by a 10-15 min. delay caused by no mid-shoe entry and manual reshuffle of 6-D. Barring a highly effective and high stake team, I see no threat to them. BTW I do remember something about the post which you were referring to.
All that aside, I would still like to hear about your estimate of AP's in the US.

 

[bj bob]

Slots vs. table games

They almost all do. Bad pen decreases hands per hour. Bad rules and 6:5 turn off a lot of players. But on the other hand, the players that got turned off are the educated ones such that the house doesn't make much money on them anyway.

All today's casinos really care about are slots. Slots, slots, and more slots. There's little labor involved and little security required. They don't even have to buy the slots, they can just lease them. Every non-slot game has to answer this question to management: "How much money are we losing by having this game here instead of a bank of slots?" While it's true that table games bring in some whales and some other players who aren't going to play slots no matter how many are offered, I am sure every table games manager has to fight hard to justify the existence of his domain. It's no surprise that 6:5 and most of the new non-BJ games have house edges around that of a slot machine. Casinos have little interest in risking floor space to offer a table game that has a 0.40% edge or God forbid an 0.18% edge over a Basic Strategy player, minus whatever the AP's can get out of them.

You bring up an interesting point, Mr. Monk. If I recall correctly, you come fram a casino family* background (*given the Italian you use, I'm not sure which family) so you could probably tell the rest of us if /sq.ft. casino profit is higher for slots or tables, keeping in mind that the average table player brings a lot more action than does a slot junkie.
And.........just out of curiosity, what's your best guess as to the number of AP(E)S currently slithering about?

 

[ihate17]

An interesting point of view

I come from a "casino family" background. An uncle was a table manager in Havana pre Castro and his daughters worked in AC and some of their kids worked in casinos throughout the U.S.
One of them worked in a casino that considered anyone who played at a 2% or less disadvantage in blackjack as expert players?? They did not back them off, but severly curtailed any comps to them as they expect to make an average of over 2% on blackjack.
This kind of thinking has more to do, in my opinion, with rules such as 6/5, hitting soft 17, and limiting doubles than anything to do with real cardcounting, even though the same casino will let you use a basic strategy card on their tables.

ihate17

 

[Automatic Monkey]

You bring up an interesting point, Mr. Monk. If I recall correctly, you come fram a casino family* background (*given the Italian you use, I'm not sure which family) so you could probably tell the rest of us if /sq.ft. casino profit is higher for slots or tables, keeping in mind that the average table player brings a lot more action than does a slot junkie.
And.........just out of curiosity, what's your best guess as to the number of AP(E)S currently slithering about?

Not me, I've never worked for a casino and have no known relatives who did. Must be the other monkey!

It would have to be more profitable per square foot to have machines. The reason being you have a dealer, floor people, surveillance to pay instead of just a change girl. With the new TITO machines and automatic ticket redemptions you can cut payroll to near zero with machines. When traditional casinos go out of business it has nothing to do with losses at the tables, just mismanagement and excessive expenses. So I'd have to assume expenses are the big issue with casinos, not wins and losses. These "racinos" that have nothing but slots aren't having any financial problems, and most of them aren't that eager to put in table games. When I visited the racino in the Catskills it was obvious there were very few people working.

As far as the number of AP's, I couldn't say, other than that the percentage of them varies tremendously depending on venue. Play all day in Vegas and you'll encounter one every day on the average, whereas in the East you'll see one once a week or month. Although Basic Strategy is a little more common around here. And of all the people who attempt to count, I'd say less than half are competent enough to be a threat. Either way, the casinos have nothing to be concerned about. The few profitable AP's make the game look good and other people who think they can do what we do are going to lose more than we win.

 

[EasyRhino]

Bob, good point that an AP can only "hose" any casino for so much. But they're still more likely to put in the hours, given no countermeasures. A full-timer in Vegas would be doing 40 hours a week, as opposed to the tourist who does 20 hours a year.

One nice (?) thing about California's crazy gaming laws are that the tribes are limited on their slot capacity by state compacts, but not on tables, I think. Ergo, some places may be more likely to build more table games after they reach supermax slot capacity.

 

[bj bob]

Not me, I've never worked for a casino and have no known relatives who did. Must be the other monkey!


As far as the number of AP's, I couldn't say, other than that the percentage of them varies tremendously depending on venue. Play all day in Vegas and you'll encounter one every day on the average, whereas in the East you'll see one once a week or month. Although Basic Strategy is a little more common around here. And of all the people who attempt to count, I'd say less than half are competent enough to be a threat. Either way, the casinos have nothing to be concerned about. The few profitable AP's make the game look good and other people who think they can do what we do are going to lose more than we win.

So you do agree with the premise that AP's(barring teams) are really much ado about nothing as far as the casino's bottom line goes. Moreover, it sounds as though the fact that there are AP's at a certain club could actually be a drawing card to many wannabes.

 

[Automatic Monkey]

So you do agree with the premise that AP's(barring teams) are really much ado about nothing as far as the casino's bottom line goes. Moreover, it sounds as though the fact that there are AP's at a certain club could actually be a drawing card to many wannabes.

Yes, within limits. A guy like me could go to a SD place like, say, Baldini's or Rail City and if allowed to do whatever I want for as long as I want, in a couple of weeks they are going to be in trouble. In a big East Coast, Strip or CA store there can be me and a dozen guys like me in there every night and it won't even register on their table holds. The size of the places and the way the game is dealt is enough protection for the house. And BJ is the most popular table game in the house partly because the public knows it can be beaten. They just don't know everything it takes to do it.