Roulette wagering - why forbid red and black?

This week-end in Las Vegas, I tried my hand at roulette the first time. While I put some chips on red, my girlfriend simultaneously placed some on black.

Shaking his head at our naivete, the croupier informed us that such a bet was against casino rules.

Why would they care if we make a stupid move? It can't be to the disadvantage of the bank, since we would eventually lose it all anyway when the resulting number is a zero or double zero.

[Gaudere]

Usually you have to bet a higher amount if you bet red or black; say, the minimum is $10 and you can scatter $1 here and there on the numbers as long as the total is $10, but if you bet red or black you have to put the whole $10 on one. I doubt the croupier cared that you and your girlfriend were betting red and black.

------------------
"Eppur, si muove!" - Galileo Galilei

Playing red and black does make a difference. Since the payout is 2-1, betting red or black gives one of you almost a 50-50 chance of winning. Since you two were together, that would mean the earnings from one of you would go directly to the another - the casino wouldn't have a chance to make a buck. You are correct in saying you can land on 0 or 00 (which is why it's almost a 50-50 chance), but the casino likes its odds to be much higher than the player's.

If you two pretended that you didn't know each other, the dealer might have let you. But you still technically wouldn't have gotten any money from the casino (which is the goal!).

A couple of points, Melanie:

a) Suppose I bet x chips on red and my girlfriend bets an equal amount of chips on black. Then since one of us will lose and the other will win, the best we can hope for is break even, so it would be the same as if we weren't betting at all, except that we would lose for a 0 or 00.

b) The croupier said "you can't have chips of the same colour on red and black." If we each had our own set of chips, then we could have bet on both colours at once.

------------------
Jacques Kilchoer
Workers of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains.

[manhattan]

That’s exactly right, Jacques. And that’s why you can’t make the bet. Believe it or not, the casino is trying to increase your odds of winning. (Winning on black or red does not pay 2 to one, but rather 2 for one as you say)

You are already stupid for going into a casino, but you know that. I’ll be stupid later this month when I head out to Vegas myself.

But the Vegas Casino Control people want to limit exactly how stupid you are, to keep the casinos in line and prevent them from taking more advantage of you than they already are. For this reason, a casino will often not allow you to make a bet which you have no possibility of winning. You can’t hit on 21, you can’t bet red and black simultaneously, etc.

They also give you grief if you make really stupid bets, even if you can win somehow. Try splitting tens sometime. The dealer is required to call out "Splitting Tens" and the pit boss has to come over to take a look. If you’re pretty obviously out of it, they may not take the bet. If you’re just being a wiseguy, they will. Same thing happens if you try to bet equally on "Pass" and "Don’t Pass."

P.S. Do they have double zero out there? I’d have thought competition would have sent most of the places to a 37-slot wheel.


------------------
Livin' on Tums, Vitamin E and Rogaine

I realize that what I said was repeating exactly what Melanie said. Sorry! I realize that betting on both red and black means your money will be just sitting there most of the time, but I don't understand why the casino forbids it.

------------------
Jacques Kilchoer
Workers of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains.

Thank you manhattan. I guess that makes sense. I have experienced what you say myself, i.e. the casino employees don't like you doing something stupid. I suppose it's because they feel sorry for you or else their professional expertise is outraged. Once, feeling in a puckish mood, I decided to hit on a hard 17, and the dealer gave me a little speech on how to play blackjack.

Do they have double zero out there?

Well, since I'm cheap and didn't want to lose a whole lot of money, I found a casino (Imperial Palace, across the street from Cesar's Palace) with a $2.00 roulette wheel. Maybe that explains the difference? But I think all the roulette wheels I saw had a 00, though I'm not sure.

I’d have thought competition would have sent most of the places to a 37-slot wheel.

I don't know how often you go to Las Vegas, but in the "new" Las Vegas, the competition is for bigger and fancier casinos, not better odds for the players. Go look at Paris, New York New York, Bellagio and the Venetian. Casinos are now shopping centers and fine restaurants. A grilled cheese sandwich, mini-quiche, and two drinks at the Paris casino cost us $20.00.


------------------
Jacques Kilchoer
Workers of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains.

Thanks, Manhattan - good job clarifying. I can't remember if the wheels there have just one 0 or both, but I threw it in there just for fun.

Jacques, as a paranoid gambler, I believe the casino does everything to make a buck (free drinks so you have more confidence, comps so you stay at the tables longer, etc). I have a GREAT book called _Guerilla Gambling_ - I would recommend it to anyone. I will check to see what the book says on this and get back to you tomorrow.

[manhattan]

I don't know how often you go to Las Vegas, but in the "new" Las Vegas, the competition is for bigger and fancier casinos, not better odds for the players. Go look at Paris, New York New York, Bellagio and the Venetian. Casinos are now shopping centers and fine restaurants. A grilled cheese sandwich, mini-quiche, and two drinks at the Paris casino cost us $20.00.Funny you should mention that. That’s exactly why I’m going to Vegas. The landscape there has changed so much in the past few years that I’ve got to go there to get the lay of the land if I’m going to return to investing in it. I’ve been out of the sector since the explosion of riverboats. That worked out fairly well, since in recent years, about the only worse thing than betting in a casino has been betting on one.

If it’s any consolation, things may get a little better for the consumer, at least in the short run. There has been a lot of room-building lately, and some analysts believe that there will be a "catch-up" period where occupancies will go down. Some even think there are more rooms than the total available transportation capacity in and out of the city. If this turns out to be the case, some really good deals may pop up.

Is it the case? I have no idea. I may have a SWAG when I get back.

------------------
Livin' on Tums, Vitamin E and Rogaine

[Mac]

As for why would the dealer give you a hard time for making a dumb bet?

I was in Reno a few years ago at a blackjack table. I was sitting between two high rollers on my left and an idiot on my right. Our cards totaled up to (from right to left) 17,14,11,10 and the dealer had a 5 showing. Guess who took my 5 and busted. I got a king and busted. Next guy gets 3 and a jack busted. Last guy gets 4 and a 8 busted.
The two guys on my left got up and left. The dealer was pissed and let the idiot know it. Then my brother-in-law, oops I mean the idiot, said why do you care who wins or loses its not your money. The dealer replied "LOSERS DON'T TIP".


Just in case he checks this message board "just kidding" ;)

------------------
Ive always found it easer to get forgiveness rather than permission.

[andros]

Why were you hitting a 14 against a 5? Nothing personal, but I'd have been grumpy with you as well.

-andros-

------------------
"Listen Children Eternal Father Eternally One!" Exceptions? None!
-Doc Bronner

[andros]

Hold on. I just re-read the numbers. With a five showing, neither of the people to your left should have taken second cards.

Either a) the dealer didn't have a 5 showing (no big deal), or b) the "high rollers" were not all that hot.

Sorry to pick nits. I'm a really big fan of 21.

-andros-

[Sam Stone]

Here's the straight dope on these questions:

The reason the casino doesn't want you betting red and black at the same time simply has to do with their comp policies. A casino will sometimes give out coupons or $100 in chips, or whatever to new players as a promotion. By betting red and black at the same time, it allows you to lower your variance, which means you've got a better chance of keeping the money from those coupons. Look at it this way: If you take $100 and bet red only, the chance that you'll get your $100 back is very slim. You may win a bunch or lose a bunch. If you put $50 on red and $50 on black, then you get exactly $100 back unless the wheel lands on 0 or 00, in which case you lose it all. Still, that's only a 1/18 chance, so it's an easy way to convert those pay-to-play coupons to cash. Of course, the whole point of the coupons from the casino's standpoint is to hook you into playing more, so they won't allow it.

The house still has a 5.26% advantage on your bet, since if you didn't notice the 0 and 00 are not red or black, and if the ball lands in either one you lose both bets.

There is no combination of bets in roulette that will get you better than a 5.26% house advantage. It doesn't matter if you bet a single number, a group of four, twelve, or red or black. In the long run, the casino gets 5.26% of all the money placed on the table. The only exception is the '5-way' bet at the top of the board, which is even worse. There are no 'hot' numbers, or 'cold' numbers, or any combinations of bet amounts that change the fact that the house gets 5.26% of all the action. Roulette systems are for suckers (there are two exceptions - 'biased' wheels and computers. One is extremely difficult to do and the other is a felony).

In blackjack, the reason the dealer has to call out 'Splitting tens' is twofold - one, a sign of a card counter is someone who will split face cards when the count is high enough. If the pit is alerted when you split tens, they'll start to watch your play. The only people who split them are card counters or idiots, and it's pretty easy to tell which is which very quickly. If they decide you're a card counter they'll punt you out of the casino, refuse to let you play blackjack, or limit your bet spreads.

The other reason they call 'splitting tens' is because there's a type of low-level scam that involves the player half-heartedly indicating a split, then claiming he didn't want to if he gets a bad card. Since splitting tens is such an obviously bad move, they'll argue that they aren't that stupid and the dealer obviously misunderstood. In these cases the casino will usually cave in rather than make a scene, pay you off, and ask you to leave. By calling out 'splitting tens' they make it absolutely clear that everyone knows what is going on.

Forget about other players hurting your chances in blackjack by making stupid plays. Your expected win rate has nothing to do with how other players at the table play. Chances are, if you believe this myth your probably one of the bad players anyway, since the truly good players understand this.

[Steviant]

There's a possibility there might be some relation to the heat casinos get from the authorities concerning customers laundering money. You and your girlfriend might have been "smurfs" or whatever, bringing in loads of small bills from a drug business, betting red and black to run the chips through the table without losing much, and then cashing in for bigger clean bills. Your play may have fit the profile of small time money launderers.

[torq]

The other thing that occurred to me is that maybe they've had to deal with people who thought they could get away with plopping some of the chips on or very near the line, and then trying to claim "those were on red" (or black, whichever works out in their favor) once the ball stops.

The issue isn't whether they'll really get away with it or not; of course they won't... but it would be easier to deal with it preemptively by not allowing the same color of chips to be on both red and black at the same time.

[Sam Stone]

Mac: Everyone at your table played their hand VERY badly. The proper plays against a dealer's 5 showing are:

17 - Stand
14 - Stand
11 - Double
10 - Double

In fact, those are the plays for any dealer upcard from a 2 to a 6.

If you are making plays like hitting a 14 against a five, you are probably playing with something like a 3% disadvantage against the house. With perfect basic strategy play, you would normally only be playing a disadvantage of between 0% and 0.7%, depending on the game in question. If you are card counting, you can gain as much as a 2% advantage over the house.

[Mac]

Hey I never claimed to be good at cards. I was trying to remember the cards from about five years ago. But my point was that the dealers interest in who won or lost was what he said "Losers don't tip."

------------------
Ive always found it easer to get forgiveness rather than permission.

[the first supraliminal]

dhanson has everything correct. There are but few gamblers who know the true workings in a casino.

I can only add that casinos are not trying to rip you off unfairly. They'll take your money sooner or later. If there's a dispute on a matter of 5 or 10 bucks, they usually just let it go. Nickel and dime players never get any respect.

Also, dealers are on the players side, after all, it is true that losers don't tip.

As for forbidden plays, such as red and black, perhaps it is comps, but it is generally preferable for the casino to stop dumb plays. They'd rather be seen as fair and "honest" and have you come back than cheat you so you never come back.



------------------
There's always another beer.

[Atrael]

Ok...I usually stay away from these types on conversations....since most people tend to believe that only their system is right. However, I want to state that I have had success when splitting 10's....or any other face cards. I usually only split when the dealer has a low card showing...and there has been a streak of low cards before me. The odds of a higher card coming up for me is better this way. No, I'm not a card counter, but I do look at the pattern of cards that have been delt. If there have been 4 or 5 face cards delt, the odds of the next card being a face is lower. Likewise, if there have been a lot of low cards, the odds that the next one will be high increases. This system works for me...I win every time I play...true, I stick to smaller bets, but always come out ahead. Following that same logic explains why the other players at the table matter a great deal to the outcome of the game...

------------------
<i>I haven't lost my mind, I have a tape backup around somewhere.</i>

[AWB]

Mac: I was in Reno a few years ago at a blackjack table. I was sitting between two high rollers on my left and an idiot on my right. Our cards totaled up to (from right to left) 17,14,11,10 and the dealer had a 5 showing. Guess who took my 5 and busted. I got a king and busted. Next guy gets 3 and a jack busted. Last guy gets 4 and a 8 busted.
The two guys on my left got up and left. The dealer was pissed and let the idiot know it. Then my brother-in-law, oops I mean the idiot, said why do you care who wins or loses its not your money. The dealer replied "LOSERS DON'T TIP".

Granted, your idiot-in-law probably pissed them off with his play. You probably did too. But their play indicated they didn't know what they were doing either. From the sounds of it, it sounds like they were doing the dealer's strategy: Hit on 16 or lower, stand on 17 or higher. This sometimes pays off in the short run, because it's approximates "ideal" play on certain point totals. But their not doubling a 10 and 11 when the dealer has a 5 is pretty stupid.

If they'd played strategy correctly after you and yours-in-law busted, they would've had 16 & 20 (r-l). The dealer could've had anything from a 7 to a 16, with 15 most probably (4/13). From a 15, more than half the cards in the shoe would've busted him.

If you all had played correcty and not knowing what the dealer's hole card was, the last guy would've then had a 1/13 chance of losing (dealer 21), 1/13 of pushing, and 11/13 of winning (11:1:1); the other guy had 5:8 win:loss possible; you had 5:8 too; b-i-l had 5:1:7 win:push:loss.

Remember: the strategy is not to get as close to 21 without going over; it's to make the dealer bust.

[Enright3]

dhanson sez...Forget about other players hurting your chances in blackjack by making stupid plays. Your expected win rate has nothing to do with how other players at the table play. Chances are, if you believe this myth your probably one of the bad players anyway, since the truly good players understand this.

Right on. It truly amazes me how so may people think it's the *first* or the *last* person at the table that ruined their chances, or kept the dealer from busting or [insert excuse here].

It's all about math.

Enright3

[Diane]

I don't know how often you go to Las Vegas, but in the "new" Las Vegas, the competition is for bigger and fancier casinos, not better odds for the players. Go look at Paris, New York New York, Bellagio and the Venetian. Casinos are now shopping centers and fine restaurants. A grilled cheese sandwich, mini-quiche, and two drinks at the Paris casino cost us $20.00.

I live within a few hours of driving distance or a $49.00/50 minute plane ride (With the time difference, you actually get to Vegas 10 minutes before you leave SLC.) and loving Vegas as much as I do, I go there 7 or 8 or 10 times a year. In fact, there is a big possibility that I will be there this weekend for our annual office softball tournament/wild-ass party.

Anyway. . . .

Yes, the place has turned into much more than gambling. They are taking your money in other ways but even so, you can find some pretty good deals on quality rooms, food, entertainment, etc. You just have to go through certain avenues to get them. For instance, you can get a $140 room for $65 dollars if you don't use an agent and go on a weeknight. You can get the same $20.00 meal for half (or less) the price if you walk across the street to another casino. In fact, I have found that the cheaper the price, the better the food. Entertainment can be a lot of $$$ (Seigfried and Roy are $80+ if I remember right - I may be wrong), but there are other things that are low or no charge (Treasure Island pirate show (hint: Nab yourself a patio seat at the lounge before the show starts), the Medieval dinner at the Excaliber ($35 ?), Volcano at the Mirage, The God/Goddess show in Caesar Palace Mall, the magic shop in New York, New York, and one of my favorites, the rocket ride at the top of the Stratosphere.

Anyway, the point I am trying to make is that with a tiny bit of research, Vegas can be fairly inexpensive with little or no change to the quality.

As far as the Roulette, betting against yourself (same color chips) would keep you even, the house doesn't win, you don't win, therefore, you are taking up space and wasting time (that sounded snottier than I intended - sorry).

Dealers want someone sitting in the seats who are going to donate some cash or win enough to keep them interested in donating some more cash. You were doing neither.

JMHO - With two of you, you should have been betting craps.


------------------
>^,,^<
KITTEN
Coffee, chocolate, men . . . Some things are just better rich.

[Sam Stone]

Diane Says:
<HR><BLOCKQUOTE>As far as the Roulette, betting against yourself (same color chips) would keep you even, the house doesn't win, you don't win, therefore, you are taking up space and wasting time (that sounded snottier than I intended - sorry).

Dealers want someone sitting in the seats who are going to donate some cash or win enough to keep them interested in donating some more cash. You were doing neither.</BLOCKQUOTE><HR>

Not true. The casino always gets 5.26% of your money in roulette (if the wheel has a 0 and 00. A single zero roulette wheel has a house advantage of 2.63%). In the case of betting red and black, you lose both bets when the ball lands on 0 or 00.

Beeruser: You say that the casino has an interest in preventing you from making really stupid plays... That's not true either. There are some games in Vegas with truly horrendous odds. The field and hardways bets in craps, the big six wheel, Keno, the tie bet in baccarat, etc. In fact, the casinos routinely 'salt' otherwise good games with sucker bets in order to fleece the especially stupid.

Atrael: The subject of the 'correct' plays in blackjack is simply not open to debate. Blackjack can be completely dissected by computer, and the mathematical expectation for every optional play is known for every composition of the deck. The exact correct strategy for every combination of dealer's and player's cards has been known since the mid 1960's. Arguing that your way is better is like arguing that 2+2=5.

For the record, splitting two face cards is correct in a multi-deck game under the following circumstances: If there are six extra 10 value cards for each deck left, you can split 10's against a dealer's 4, 5, or 6. If there are five extra 10 value cards per deck, you can split against a 5 or 6. If there are 4 extra 10's per deck, you can split against a 6.

Note that your way of doing it 'when you see a lot of low cards go by' almost certainly isn't good enough. True counts of +4,+5, and +6 are quite rare. In a six deck shoe, you would have have to see 30 extra low cards go by in the first couple of hands to make the bet correct against a 4, for instance.

I played professional blackjack for a long time, and even though I was willing to split 10's in some casinos I still only got to do it perhaps once in a month, playing 8 hours a day.

Thanks everybody for their answers, I believe I have more insight know into the reasoning behind the "no black and red" rule.

Steviant: I thought "smurfs" (aka "schtroumps") were the little blue men invented by comic strip artist Peyo, not money launderers. I would hope that children aren't watching cartoons promoting illegal activities!

dhanson: Thank you for the tutorial. Maybe I should take the time and memorize the "basic" blackjack rules (i.e. those not involving card-counting), and stick to that. I've always been told that blackjack has the best odds, as long as you stick to the rules and don't follow your "hunches". Though a friend of mine claims that "pai-gow" has better odds than blackjack.

------------------
Jacques Kilchoer
Workers of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains.

[Enright3]

dhanson sez...That's not true either. There are some games in Vegas with truly horrendous odds. The field and hardways bets in craps, the big six wheel, Keno, the tie bet in baccarat, etc. In fact, the casinos routinely 'salt' otherwise good games with sucker bets in order to fleece the especially stupid.

This reminds me of National Lampoons's Vegas Vacation. It cracks me up when they're at the 'casino' where they have games like: "Guess what number I'm thinking of", and "How many fingers am I holding up behind my back?" Now THAT'S funny!

Enright3

Diane says:
Anyway, the point I am trying to make is that with a tiny bit of research, Vegas can be fairly inexpensive with little or no change to the quality.

I agree with you 100%. However, when you're with your girlfriend and two other couples, there is the "peer" pressure of not wanting to look cheap. I already felt embarassed for insisting on a $80 hotel room when our friends were staying at the Paris for $190. (They did have to fight for that price though, since the Paris hotel claimed that the rate was $290 and they had no record of a $190 reserved room.)

JMHO - With two of you, you should have been betting craps.

Again, that's probably true. But I make the common mistakes that most beginners probably make, viz.
- High stakes scare me, so I go for the low stakes games, which are probably the worst odds (I'm ashamed to admit I even played some slot machines and video poker!) I realize it's probably smarter to risk $50 on a craps table than $10 on a 25cent slot machine.
- I don't understand most casino games, only the simple ones like blackjack and roulette, so I'm afraid the other players will get impatient and/or I'll do something really stupid (like we did on roulette, which I though I understood.)

------------------
Jacques Kilchoer
Workers of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains.

[DSYoungEsq]

Pai gow has a terrible vig, almost as high as roulette. This is because they rake 5% of the winning bets. Even if the game is played with true 50/50 odds, you lose 5% over time.

The absolute best guaranteed odds in the house are almost always at the craps table, assuming you are allowed double free odds or more (in Vegas, almost everyone allows at least that). In a true indication of how a gambling establishment makes money, you won't even find a space for this bet on the table. If I remember my stats on it correctly, the vig gets lowered to something like .63% with double odds on a pass/don't pass bet. Blackjack, without counting, won't get you below 1%, again if I recall correctly. Someone with a book on the subject could fill in the precise #s.

Vegas has sure changed from when I first went there in 1967!

[BoBettie]

FWIW,
At Casino Niagra I went to join my husband who was winning at craps. They would not let me play with his chips, but he could hand me a stack, I put them in my own area, and made my bets myself. I think it's just casino policy that each better must be playing with their own chips, that's all.



------------------
Some mornings it just doesn't seem worth it to gnaw through the leather straps.
http://www.angelfire.com/ny3/zettecity/index.html

[Steviant]

mon cher Jacques, "Smurfs" is cop slang for low level drug money launderers. It's generally used for people whose occupation is wandering from bank to bank all day and making small cash deposits, deposits too small to require reporting to the authorities.

[Sam Stone]

DsYoungEsq: The exact house edge in blackjack depends on the rules, and is almost never above 1%. Some single deck games with good rules actually give the basic strategy player a slight edge without counting. Your average Vegas multiple-deck game probably has a house edge of between 0.4% and 0.7%, putting it in the same range as craps with double odds.

An average blackjack player who doesn't do anything horrible like stand on a 12 against a 6 or double a hard 15 against a ten, but who DOES make common errors like standing on a 16 against a 7-10, not hitting a soft 17 or soft 18 against a ten, doubling down on a hard 8 against a 5, etc. is probably playing with about a 1.5-2% house advantage.

If you play 'mimic the dealer' and always hit anything below 17, the house will have close to a 6% advantage.

I don't think Pai Gow is as bad as you make out. I'm not a Pai Gow player, but as I understand it you only pay the 5% when you are banking, and the banker has more than a 5% edge. The house banks for one round and then the bank rotates around the table. Since you have the advantage when you are banking, and play against many other hands when you are banking, it is actually possible to gain the advantage in Pai Gow if the other players don't know what they are doing, or if they bet a lot more against you when you are the bank than you do when they are the bank.

If you want to play an 'even money' type of game where you have roughly a 50/50 chance of winning, stay away from red/black on roulette. Your best bets for this are to bet the bank in baccarat (house edge around 1.17%), or bet the pass or don't pass line in craps and take odds (house edge around 0.8%)

Any other game in the casino that offers odds as good as this also requires some skill. Baccarat requires no skill, as there is no strategy (despite the losers you see frantically writing patterns down on the little sheets the casino supplies). Just put your money down on bank or player (bank is slightly better) and hope you win. In blackjack, you better have completely memorized the basic strategy table for the game you are playing, or you'll be giving the house at least twice as much of your money as the other games.

Stay far, far away from slot machines. Some of them actually only have a house edge of 1% or so, but the problem with slots is speed of play. You can pull the handle 400 times an hour, so your bankroll will be eaten away very quickly. A $1 slot with a 2% house advantage will cost you $8/hr on average, but that includes the jackpots. While you are waiting for a big jackpot you'll probably bleed close to double that. In contrast, if you play basic strategy blackjack very well, and play at $5 tables, you'll only play maybe 50 hands in an hour, at a total long-run cost of maybe $1.25/hr.

Not many newbies in Vegas will realize that playing the $1 slots will cost you 16 times as much money per hour as playing $5 blackjack. Playing the .25 cent clots still costs you five times as much as $5 blackjack, and probably more than that because the lower-cost slots have a higher house advantage.

If you go away for a weekend and play 16 hours, the house profit in the blackjack game will only be $20, yet you may put $4000 in chips into play during that time. You can see that your luck only has to be slightly better than average for you to come home a winner.

If you play $1 slots, you'll put $6400 in cash into action, but the house profit is $128. It takes a lot more luck to come out ahead in that case. Oh, and I should point out that to get the best odds on a slot machine you always have to pay the maximum amount of coins, so you're putting $5 per spin into the slot machine, and a weekend's worth of slot fun will therefore cost you $640 vs $20 for $5.00 blackjack.

[Sam Stone]

Here's a quick hint for saving money in Vegas: The next time you book a room, tell the front desk that you want the 'casino rate'. They will transfer you to the casino floor, who will tell you the requirements for that rate. It may be something like 4 hours of blackjack a day with a $25 bet or something similar. Maybe a lot less, depending on the time of year. If you agree to that, you will be a preferred guest of the casino. When you arrive you can go to the VIP line, etc.

The last time I was in Vegas, the casino rate for a suite at the MGM Grand was $119, while the regular rate was $379.

Casino rate at the Mirage is $79 per night. Some of the smaller casinos like the Stardust have casino rates as low as $39.

[DoctorJ]

An average blackjack player who doesn't do anything horrible like stand on a 12 against a 6

It is correct to stand on 12 against a 6, unless the true count is less than -1. Right?

I stayed at the Imperial Palace for four weeknights in August. It was $20/night for the first two night, free for the third, and $35 for the fourth. No minmum play. I wouldn't call it luxurious, but it's clean and it's right across from Caesar's and the Mirage. Can't beat it on the college budget.

The single-deck game at Slots-A-Fun (outside Circus Circus) is in the player's favor. It is also home of the Giant 1/2 Pound Hot Dog for only 99 cents! Oddly, after playing blackjack and drinking until 5:30 AM, this sounds like a good idea. It is not. At least I didn't add cheese, chili, and sauerkraut for 50 cents each, which would have sent me directly to the Toilets-A-Fun.

The Tournament of Kings at the Excalibur is fun, in a WWF-meets-Renaissance-Faire sort of way. Each section represents a country, and you can yell for your knight. We were Austria. Where else can you yell "France sucks!" and "You suck, Spain!"?

Dr. J

[Sam Stone]

er, yeah. I meant HIT a 12 against a 6, but this isn't even a very good example because that play happens to be very close. A better example would be to hit a 14 or 15 against a six, which would be a big error.

But the most common errors are doubling errors, splitting errors, etc. One of the costliest mistakes is to not split aces, but I've seen a lot of players do this. You should always split 8's, but a lot of players stand on 88 against a ten.

Maybe the most common error is to stand on a soft-18 against an 8, 9 or a ten. The correct play is to hit. Taking insurance also costs a lot of money, unless you are counting.

[Steviant]

With all due respect to dhanson, who seems quite knowledgeable on the wonderful world of gambling ("human fantasy meets mathematical reality with inevitable results"), the correct basic strategy play for soft 18 is hit against 9 and 10, and only hit against ace if the game you're in requires the dealer to hit soft 17. Do not hit soft 18 against 8. Soft 18 is also an excellent double-down that most players miss. If this is going to turn into a blackjack thread it might as well truck on over to Great Debates.

[the first supraliminal]

True. I'm glad we have resolved the 12 against dealers 6 question.

dhanson, my point was this: there are a lot of sucker bets in the casino (if you even play roulette, you are a sucker), but for the casino to condone stupidity on top of the sucker bet is going too far. Like I said, casinos would prefer "fair" play to promote an image of good guy than to milk every dollar out of their customers and ensure their never coming back. Pointing out a dumb play will always look good, and in the long run will benefit the casino. After all, it's all about the long run.

As for the casino's actual policy on this, I don't know. But advice from floormen and dealers seem to reflect this.

As for the big 6 and big 8 on craps. Hell, everyone knows you get better odds on the place bets. But gamblers in heat don't care about odds, they go for the emotion of winning, even against the odds. But the red/black doesn't fit into this, it's just plain stupidity.




------------------
There's always another beer.

[Sam Stone]

Stevient's right. I've gotta stop drinking so much cough syrup.

[MSU Don]

Blackjack question:

I saw a $5-$5000 limit table when I was recently in Vegas. To me there is a no-lose strategy as long as you have lots of "walkin around money". This involves always starting out at $5 and each time you lose simply double your bet until you win. After you win, and each time you win, immediately drop back to $5. I've often wondered if this strategy would work and would like to get the opinion of the more experienced blackjack players out there.

In this scenario you'd have to lose 10 hands in a row before the system breaks down. Doesn't that seem pretty unlikely following the basic strategy rules? Or is it?

The bets would be (assuming you keep losing):

5
10
20
40
80
160
320
640
1280
2560

This would require you to have $5115 of "walking around money" to play. Remember, you always bet only $5 after each WIN. It seems you would slowly build up money in $5 increments. Each double bet (after a loss) gets the previously lost money back.

Would this work???? Opinions?

[divemaster]

I can personally attest to losing streaks of 7 or more hands in a row at a Blackjack table. Sometimes, that's just the way it goes. There is certainly a better chance of losing 8 to 10 hands in a row than there is winning 8 to 10 in a row (due to the inherent house odds). Yes, there are times when you can gain a slight advantage based on counting and correct strategy, but overall the player is at a disadvantage (else, the casino would not offer the game).

According to your theory (called the Martingale system), a person losing 8 hands in a row would have to bet $1280 just to get back to a net of zero! Who among us has the nerve to plunk down $1280 at his point? Remember, the cards have no memory of the previous 8 hands. And what if the deck has an unfavorable count? You should be lowering your bets, not raising them.

Any bettor in this situation would be best advised to cut his losses rather than chase them. I speak from general casino experience. Believe me, the theoretical breaks down under actual playing conditions of a sustained losing streak.

[Stephen]

It's called the 'Martingale' and in the long haul, it's a loser. You can see detailed explanations by doing a Deja search with alt.fan.cecil-adams in the forum field.

------------------
Stephen
Stephen's Website (http://stephen.fathom.org)
Satellite Hunting 1.1.0 visible satellite pass prediction
shareware available for download at
Satellite Hunting (http://stephen.fathom.org/sathunt.html)

[Stephen]

Your 'can't lose' system is called the 'Martingale'. If it actually worked, roullette wouldn't exist in any 'for profit' establishment.

------------------
Stephen
Stephen's Website (http://stephen.fathom.org)
Satellite Hunting 1.1.0 visible satellite pass prediction
shareware available for download at
Satellite Hunting (http://stephen.fathom.org/sathunt.html)

[Sam Stone]

There are a zillion variations on the Martingale and other betting systems. They all add up to exactly the same thing: The house gets its percentage multiplied by the amount of money you put into action.

If a wager has a negative expectation, no combination of bets on that wager can ever give you a positive expectation.

If you really want to win in the casino, here are pretty much the only ways to do it:

- Play blackjack and learn to count.
- Play poker and learn to play well
- Bet the sports book and know what you're doing
- Play 9/6 video poker perfectly
- Play progressive slots when the progressive is high enough

Those are the main ways that gambling professionals earn their living, with blackjack and poker being the #1 and #2 choices (poker's a better deal, but takes longer to learn).

On the fringes are biased wheels in roulette, taking advantage of overly-generous comp policies, finding games with a mechanical or logical flaw in them (the Keno coup I mentioned earlier, a casino that let patrons spin their own big six wheel, etc). Baccarat seems to have some vulnerability to team play, but those in the know are keeping pretty quiet about it.

That's about it. Any other 'system' you hear about is probably bogus. Likewise, nonsense like quitting when you're ahead, setting stop limits on losses, etc. is a complete waste of time.

[voltaire]

Believe it or not, I've never been to a casino. I'm not much of a gambler when it comes to real money in the multiple digits.
I consider myself pretty good at the casual game of poker or blackjack between friends though. I also like to think I'm pretty good at solitaire too. (Yeah, me and every other one of the zillion Windows-solitaire playing wanna-be's) So what's the scoop on solitaire in casinos? Do most casinos have it? What kinda odds do you get to make your money back? As I understand it, you pay for the deck beforehand, then you earn a certain amount for all the cards you place. Is this the true sucker's game? What gives?

[manhattan]

Likewise, nonsense like quitting when you're ahead, setting stop limits on losses, etc. is a complete waste of time.I’ll agree that they are a complete waste of time for the professional (or even serious) gambler, but these are quite good rules of thumb to follow for those who want to make gaming a part of their vacation plans or a casual weekend activity.

Many people find that a visit to a casino can be tons of fun, even if they lose money, because of the high-stakes surroundings, the thrill of the (interim) victories while the casino takes their money, or whatever. That’s OK. But to be safe, decide how much you want to spend (lose) and stick to it. And if you find yourself up a few bucks you should make a conscious decision, away from a gaming table, about how much you are willing to give back to the house.

I apologize if I seem preachy, dhanson, especially on a nit that was not the main thrust of your post. But most of the readers of this thread do not share the savvy, experience and resources of you and some of the other posters. Having seen friends ruin vacations and even lives in a casino, I thought that little aside was important.

------------------
Livin' on Tums, Vitamin E and Rogaine

[Stoid]

Forget roulette. The only way you stand a chance in hell, statistically speaking, of beating the house is craps. Play the pass line and take all the odds they'll give you. The higher the odds are , the better percentages. If it goes 10x, you get very nearly an even chance, with the house having only the tiniest smidge of an advantage.

The rest of it is just throwing your money away. But fun!

Oh...and if you really like to PLAY? Pai-Gow poker. There's so much pushing going on (usually) that you can sit with $100 and play all night.

stoid

------------------
*************
This is a non-smoking area. If we see you smoking, we will assume you are on fire and act accordingly.

[Sam Stone]

Manhatten: It's a double-edged sword. On the one hand, stop limits are good for losing gamblers because it limits the amount that they play, causing them to lose less.

On the other hand, even when playing a losing game there will often be times when you are temporarily ahead, and many compulsive gamblers keep coming back because they feel that the 'secret' is to just have more discipline to leave when they are ahead. I've spent a lot of time in casinos, and I can't count the number of times I've heard that.

I believe the #1 weapon against compulsive gambling is education. Slot players won't quit because they become convinced that they are 'due' and more likely to win if they keep playing. If you can show them how a slot machine works, they might understand that it makes no difference. This won't help the truly addicted, but a good understanding of probability and the mechanism of casino games may keep casual gamblers from becoming addicted.

[brad_d]

Originally posted by MSU Don
Blackjack question:

I saw a $5-$5000 limit table when I was recently in Vegas. To me there is a no-lose strategy as long as you have lots of "walkin around money". This involves always starting out at $5 and each time you lose simply double your bet until you win. After you win, and each time you win, immediately drop back to $5. I've often wondered if this strategy would work and would like to get the opinion of the more experienced blackjack players out there.


Like several people have said, this is called the Martingale progression and, no, it doesn't work. Details depend (slightly) on the actual house advantage in the game. You don't mention what game, so I'll make one up - say the house has a 1% advantage.

Actually, what I really mean is that, when the smoke clears, you have a 49.5% chance of winning one particular "hand" (or spin, or whatever). Am I correct in thinking that that's a 1% house advantage?

Regardless, I'll work with the 49.5% figure. This sounds good - you keep doubling your bet until you win. Let's call each of these consecutive hands a Sequence. A Sequence ends when you win (for a net $5 profit), at whcih point you start over with a new Sequence. You're fine until you lose 10 consecutive hands, as you point out - then your next bet (called for by the progression) would be above the table maximum.

How likely is this to happen? I figure that it has a 0.108% chance of occuring. By this I mean that 99.892% of your Sequences will terminate with a win somewhere in the first 10 hands, and a $5 profit.

Sounds great, right? Well, the problem is that when you do get 10 consecutive losses in a sequence, you're down $5115 for that sequence (total of all 10 lost bets).

Do all of your $5 wins make up for that? No, they don't. On a given Sequence, you have a 99.892% chance of winning $5, and a 0.108% chance of losing $5115. In the long haul that works out to an expected per-Sequence loss of about $0.52.

You may very well go a long time before you get that 10-loss Sequence. When you do, though, it will bury whatever winnings you've gotten and are likely to get in the near future.

Changing the house advantage will change the details, but not the ultimate result: it doesn't work. Ya can't beat the odds. :)

[brad_d]

I'm an idiot. MSU Don, you did mention the game. Sorry. Somebody more knowledgeable than me could provide a more accurate house advantage for Blackjack - I made one up for a generic game.

It still doesn't change the result. You'll have lots of small victories, and the occasional HUGE loss. The losses will be just big enough (and just frequent enough) to cancel out the wins over time.

[divemaster]

Hey, brad_d, if you were going for a one year anniversary post, you only missed it by a day. :)

[Philster]

Your wasting time and space, two valuable casino commodities.

GREAT RULE! It's their house, don't waste their time.:cool:

[jesuslynch]

Damn! I think we have a new leader.

[RickJay]

They also give you grief if you make really stupid bets, even if you can win somehow. Try splitting tens sometime. The dealer is required to call out "Splitting Tens" and the pit boss has to come over to take a look.

I gotta tell you, I've played blackjack in a dozen casinos or more and split tens against a dealer's six in just about all of them (and it works almost every time) and I *never* saw it checked with a pit boss.

[brad_d]

Originally posted by divemaster
Hey, brad_d, if you were going for a one year anniversary post, you only missed it by a day. :)

Ahhh! I'm going to run and hide now. :eek:

All the while scratching my head trying to figure out how I managed to do this....