My last visit to Las Vegas, I played casino roulette on a video machine - same rules, betting options, payoffs and odds as the regular table game. I started to think about why gamblers would choose to play “live” table games with a “human” dealer/croupier, if everything else was equal.
Of course, “craps” wouldn’t be as exciting without your fellow bettors cheering you on, and poker will always have a human element, but the modern Las Vegas/Atlantic City casino has eliminated the “human” element from all other games.
I’m sure a lot of gamblers still savor the human dealer and the feel of chips in their hands, but if the casino could save costs, and pass the savings on to the patrons (in the form of a smaller house advanage), would we go for it?
Example: would a player patronize an electonic roulette game with “one zero” , or insist on the “human croupier” version with “two zeroes” (less favorable players odds).
Or would we just all stay home and gamble on the Internet?
I should start out by stating that I belive gambling is basically a tax on people who are bad at math. Unless you really enjoy the experience, you should remember that the odds are not in your favor, and if you play enough, you’ll average a net loss.
Anyway, here’s my take on electornic gambling. I find that I would have a harder time trusting a computer, because it can easilly be programmed to make me lose more often, without that effect being easilly noticible. With a live dealer, I can be reasonably assured that he/she is not cheating. With a computer, I really don’t know.
That’s a matter of opinion, not a mathematical fact. A 1/1000 chance to obtain $1000 is not necessarily worth $1. It depends on many factors such as how much effect the loss of $1 will have on you, and what $1000 will do to your life.
I’m just talking about averages here, not lucky winning streaks or anything like that. Sure, you might get lucky. But if you keep playing, your will slowly settle on an average that has you losing money. After all, if the average wasn’t in the casino’s favor, they wouldn’t be able to operate.
heh, I’d never gamble on the internet, because what is there to say that the program lets you win for a certain number of times, and then when u’ve got X amount of money or your bet has increased to X it makes you lose. I’d say the same thing applies to machines in casinos, there’s nothing to say that it isn’t cheating you out of money.
I’ve seen professional dealers/magicians/cheaters displaying illegal shuffling/dealing techniques on TV shows about such things. When they were doing their ‘tricks’ at full speed, you would never notice they were cheating you unless you are trained to notice those kinds of things.
Having said that, I still prefer human games to computerized games. The social aspect of gambling is lost when you’re staring at a computer.
Sorry if this is a bit close to IMHO, but I think a lot of the appeal of casinos is the glamor of it (see James Bond movies, or for a sign of how the glamor rapidly fades the film Swingers), with the well-dressed croupiers, the chance to watch rich people from around the world, and to drink late into the night in plush surroundings.
I go to casinos and horse-races sometimes, reckoning that I’ll probably lose, but I’ve never seen the point of internet gambling. The Las Vegas casinos offer a spectacular venue, and if you reduced that to a bunch of computer screens it just wouldn’t be the same. Casinos aren’t just selling gambling, they’re offering a taste of luxury and spectacle.
I’ll second the glamour/human interaction aspect of it. I remember one experience I had with my husband where we both lost about $100 each playing an hour of blackjack, but because the dealer was so personable and entertaining we left the table in high spirits. A lot of people would spend that much on a meal or show (or therapy!) and might not have had as good an experience.
The way a lot of the casinos are cutting down on human overhead now is with the self-service change making/coin redemption machines. Some are also installing printers in the slots that print your winnings that you can either cash in or feed into another machine rather than having to carry stacks of nickels around. This way you need less employees to change coins or make large hand payouts. The “Vegas Experience” remains largely unchanged. After all, no one really goes to Vegas to hang out with the change guy.
Well, there is something to say that a Vegas machine isn’t cheating you out of money…and that’s called the Nevada Gaming Commission.
Think about it. Look at the ungodly amount of money casinos are raking in without having to resort to using their computer games to cheat gamblers. The Nevada Gaming Commission routinely checks machines for evidence of cheating, so if any casino tried to pull this, they’d have a decent chance at getting caught. And if they were caught, they’d have a very good chance at losing thier gaming license. And that would put them out of business.
So why would any casino risk losing their license to “print money” over a scheme to take in a little more money? It doesn’t make any sense at all!
Now, those Internet gambling sites, on the other hand, I wouldn’t be so sure about. But I’d trust the Vegas computer games just as much as the ones with real live people. And you can take that to the bank!
Gambling shouldnt be about trying to make money, its a form of entertainment in which you pay money. Why would you gamble with real money on a machine when you ould do just as well gambling with fake money at home.
Most people who visit casinos play ONLY the electronic games (slots, video poker, etc). So the majority of casino gamblers already “trust” the machines, and don’t seem to care about the social aspect! Or play machines because they are initimidated by table games!
Thanks to “voguevixen” for the story about the “personable and entertaining” dealer – I thought casinos now teach their dealers “not to smile”.
If the casinos gave a 1/1000 chance to win $1000, you might be right. However, they give you a 1/1000 chance to win $950 (if you’re pick the right game; sometimes they give you a 1/1000 chance to win $600).
Do you really think casinos are in the business of giving away money?
I wouldn’t trust a computer game simply because it’s all to easy to screw with the odds.
A book I personally recommend is Las Vegas Behind the Tables by Barney Vinson. This, and its “sequel” book (Part 2) discuss all the ins and outs of popular casino games, hence “behind the tables.” Among other topics, the books cover at length how much power the Nevada Gaming Commission has over casinos and how strictly most games are regulated. A detailed breakdown of odds is also given for many games as well as how much of an edge the house has over the player (e.g. 5.26% in roulette, for example, because of the inclusion of the double zero space.)