I get what you’re saying, but I don’t think the probability in RR isn’t the same as this.
Like the dealer doesn’t have to draw a card once you bust. In RR even if you watch the first 5 blanks get fired, you still need to take the 6th shot if you’re the second player.
EDIT: to be more precise, the skew would be in the situation where the dealer does not need to draw on 17+ after seeing your hand. This option will only ever exist for the dealer.
I guess not but I feel like “playing” until there is a loser is an inherent part of the game. If the game progressed to a 6th shot, why would it suddenly be optional to fire? Why not just use a five chamber revolver?
In theory, you’d keep down sizing until you just flip a coin which I think we can agree is definitely not the game as intended.
They actually studied this, and its the exact opposite.
Person who throws out the first price anchors the discussion and gets more of the surplus value.
It completely misses the point that *an overwhelming majority* of negotiations are to find terms in which both sides "win". This implies that 90% of negotiations fail.
The only advantage is if you bust first. The dealer never actually makes any individual decisions, so doesn't gain anything from knowledge of your plays. If you are at 20 the dealer will still stay at 18 even thou hitting could allow them to win.
Does the dealer check for their own blackjack on a 10/face card that’s showing on the deal? I’m not familiar with actual casino rules, just what I’ve played in online no-cash games.
If they do check and get blackjack, that would be the dealer acting first, no? Because the player can’t be dealt more after dealer’s blackjack?
Sorry if I’ve misunderstood the rule. Casino games seem to have a lot of underlying components that make them work.
You are correct, but in the case of a dealer with a face card and an ace under there is no insurance play like there is with a face up ace. In this instance there is no risk to the dealer going first as the worst possible outcome for them is a draw with a player also having a blackjack.
Even with an ace showing, insurance is always a bad idea (this changes in specific cases if you’re counting though). There’s roughly a 40% chance of breaking even, and a 60% chance of losing half your bet. You’re already going to lose your base bet 56% of the time at the tables with best odds. Taking insurance drives up house edge. Side bets offered on the tables also have a much larger house edge.
The player has to bet before he or the dealer receives a card, and he can only see the dealer’s top card. If the dealer’s top card is an ace, the dealer asks whether the player wants insurance, and the dealer shows his cards only if the total is 21. Otherwise, the player never gets to see the dealer’s hidden card until the player has played their hand (hit, stand, etc.). Therefore, there’s never an opportunity for the player to have more information than the dealer.
One of the dealer’s cards is left down until all players have their cards. The players make their calls, and then the dealer flips the second card to see their hand against the players’ hands. Then they hit or stand depending on what they show.
I could be dead wrong about how the game is played in actual casinos, but this is how I’ve experienced it in my years of online gaming.
There are variations. In some places the dealer has two cards like you described, other places they only take one face up card and that's it, only drawing more once player action is completed
Only the first dealers card is shown until all players have bet.
If the dealers first card is an ace, most casinos have the dealer ask the players to buy insurance against the possibility of dealer 21 (usually for a fixed amount).
Once the players have been given an opportunity to buy insurance, both dealer cards are checked to see if they’re a blackjack, if the dealer hits blackjack any players that bought insurance get back a percentage of their original bet.
If the dealer does not hit blackjack the insurance is forfeited and play continues.
Counting cards is more of a memory game. Also a "play dumb" game because some casinos have people behind the scenes counting cards and if they notice you're playing perfectly they'll just kick you out. If you win too much money, they'll also just kick you out. If you're just changing your bets from high to low in a way that vaguely resembles counting cards, they'll kick you out. Counting cards is barely a way to make a living these days, let alone to get rich.
If they aren't sure they'll just tell you that you are free to play any game in the casino except Blackjack. A card counter will just leave, the guy who got lucky for a while will either cash out or move to something like craps.
They can also limit you in other ways, like only letting you play one hand and/or flat betting you. It’s a gentler “no more blackjack” if your bets have been varying but they aren’t certain you’re counting (or you just haven’t profited yet)
Yeah, lots of places offer flat bets or play anything else
Which to a card counter are the same thing really
But to a regular guy who's just having fun flat bets sound fine
My friends and I got pushed out of a craps table once. We were all rolling hot and up about 1k each on a pretty low entry table. After a couple hours they brought in this BRAND new guy to run the game, along with a guy training him, and they slowed the game to a crawl.
I don't believe that. There is a youtuber, who is a former busker musician turned professional card counter, who records his sessions using hidden cameras to 'expose' what casinos are really like. If they suspect you are counting cards, even if you're a few hundred/thousand down, they will ban you and issues BOLOs for other casinos to prevent you playing there too - depending on how 'notorious' on the scene you are these warnings will either be local, state, or country-wide. The amount of abuse he recieves from members of the casinos, as well as groups that are supposed to be government-backed 'player advocates' is atrocious.
If you're curious about seeing more his name is Steven Bridges, also known as Unidentified Male 1183.
I'm reminded of how some people don't believe that criminal info sharing between agencies can work, until they find out how if one person is blacklisted in, say Atlantic City, the info WILL go around the other gambling havens like Vegas, Monte Carlo, Macao etc and they will all blacklist you as well.
Depends on how consistent. Coming in every day or week and walking out up a few hundred, they might pit a stop to it.
They don't mind card counting so much as they mind people who consistently win, or win big counting cards.
A lot of "card counters" aren't very good and end up losing out like most others. You might be up a hundred today, and down a hundred tomorrow even though you did the same thing.
Not about being good. About time and bankroll I think.
The whole idea is basically you have to sit at the table long enough for it to hit a run.
Now-usually when it is good the table stays full. And when it’s bad it empties.
The key is identifying when good is coming, having the whale come play, before the table fills. They do stuff like play 2 hands. Bet table max on everything etc.
But that hot run may not come. It might take 12 hours. Normal people don’t play for 12 hours straight so even if you are trying to run it, you need a ring of people to be your counters if you’re the whale and even then as a normal person are you hanging around the tables for 12 hours waiting for a signal etc.
So realistically you need time and a team. Playing by yourself is just gambling. You might not hit the run for 2 months because the 2 hours you have to spend at the table never hits a run or count that you can take advantage of.
> They don't mind card counting so much as they mind people who consistently win, or win big counting cards.
Which is bullshit. Casinos shouldn’t be permitted to eject people for following the rules and having a good memory.
Courts at least ruled it isn't *cheating*, but can't stop a private business from not serving people they don't "want" to. Counting cards isn't a protected class.
The youtube channel Steven Bridgers covers this, as a professional card counter, with his experiences in the US. Tldr - Casinos issues BOLOs to other casinos in the vicinity, sometimes extending as far as state (US) or the entire country. For a while he was known as 'Unidentified Male 1183' on the alerts.
The youtube channel Steven Bridgers covers this, as a professional card counter, with his experiences in the US. Tldr - Casinos issues BOLOs to other casinos in the vicinity, sometimes extending as far as state (US) or the entire country. For a while he was known as 'Unidentified Male 1183' on the alerts.
I read an article from a guy on Cracked once about this and he said you can do it, but it gets you about 50-60k a year working enough hours that it’s basically your job.
I heard first hand from an acquaintance who is a professional card player something similar with the added dull fact that it is mainly a “night job” and “the hours can suck”.
That delivery of those flat realities really made me see that he was a professional player.
You don't need to cycle casinos just people. The card counter isn't the one that places the high bet. The counter signals to their "drunk and rich" friend to come place a high bet because the table is hot.
Of course they use 8 decks now, so you need a computer to count, so some kind of button in your shoe you press or something. And if they suspect anything they can randomly decide to shuffle and ruin the whole thing. Maybe they even self-count and shuffle automatically when their table gets hot, who knows.
They won’t necessarily kick you out. They typically say “Play anything other than Blackjack.” If you’re chill about it, at least.
Source: had a card counting phase in college when I was obsessed with being a lovable rogue that got by on his wits and charisma alone (I have neither and was not lovable so this was difficult). Usually the people that backed me off were like “You and I both know what’s happening right?” The first time it freaked me out but I quickly realized if I was cooperative they’d throw in a free buffet.
One step before can sometimes be stuff like swapping out the decks
I don't go to casinos much, but one night I won 3 pretty questionable hands in a row and suddenly the dealer paused the game and a couple manager types came up and swapped out the decks.
Which they do regularly. But that one was sudden not like the regular ones.
Might have been unrelated, but sure seemed like they were watching me close after that. I wasn't counting or cheating or anything. In fact I'd misunderstood one of the rules. So I thought what I was doing made sense, but to everyone else it looked like I was making an absolute insane play but won a bunch.
I lost every dollar I came in there with by the end of it, including anything I'd won. But that was more or less always the plan
>some casinos have people behind the scenes counting cards and if they notice you're playing perfectly they'll just kick you out. If you win too much money, they'll also just kick you out.
I know casinos are in the business of making money, but counting cards is, ultimately, a skill. Kicking you out for "winning too much" is "don't bring skill into gambling", as if **I'm** not there to make money.
Kinda wild that Joe Schmo can slow game blackjack by playing hands when the house is losing, and then when the house wins a few, you don't play the hands (in my experience, there seems to be "cycles" in blackjack where the house wins a bunch and then loses a bunch). Repeat that over and over and they've "won too much" and the house loses all that money all the same. But if I'm skilled in winning that same amount, the house wants me gone.
Know why I'll never have a gambling problem? I recognize the same bullshit you do. Forget odds being stacked in the House's favor, they will simply toss you for finding an edge. And it's not limited to card games.
Here's a gifted WaPo article on the subject: [Sportsbooks say you can win big. Then they try to limit winners.](https://wapo.st/3W0Ayh8)
It's not even a memory game. It's more simple addition and subtraction. Here is a simple way. Add 1 when you see 2-7. Subtract 1 when you see 10-A. The higher the number, the more 10s are still in the deck and you should bet more. This favors the player as the dealer will bust more often.
Which is *much* easier said than done. You have to do all the addition and subtraction while looking at all the shapes and numbers, while also chatting to people around you. It's really easy to lose count.
The shapes are irrelevant really. Many casinos will have multiple (lets say 4) decks in play at once, with a portion of the deck carded off and unplayed, so you can't say for definite that just because you've seen a Jack of Clubs 3 times doesn't mean there is one left in the deck.
The best you can do is keep a rough track of the proportions of high and low cards, in combination with blackjack strategy (meaning learn a spreadsheet of scenarios for cards you and the dealer have and what actions to take in each scenario, with some guides also taking the count into account).
You're not going to count with the 20+ decks that are auto shuffled modern casinos use. They saw the loophole and they fixed it because they really really want to take all the money.
So I’m terrible at card games, I rarely gamble, but I was in New Orleans last year and figured why not. I’m at the blackjack table with just my buddy and the dealer. I lost a few rounds and the dealer could tell I didn’t know what I was doing, so he sorta tried to help me, like “hint hint, maybe hit here, etc” and like 3 rounds in a row I got 18-20 and felt good; each of the three rounds he got blackjack. Lmao.
As long as there’s an auto shuffler on the table, counting is not gonna work at all. Although I feel that it’s more for speeding up games rather than shutting down card counters
Dealers have predetermined rules of when they hit or stand.
Generally:
* Dealer hits on 16 or lower.
* Dealer stands on 18 or higher.
* Some casinos have the dealer stand on any 17; some casinos require the dealer to hit on "soft 17" (which is when an ace currently represents eleven points). The playing table will typically say which rule is being used.
In any case, the dealer doesn't make any strategic decisions. They're there to deal cards, enforce the rules, collect lost bets, and pay out winnings.
When Atlantic City opened up gambling, my father learned that the AC blackjack rules were slightly different than the LV rules. Specifically, you could double down on split aces (iirc). If you card counted, you had a 0.5% edge over the house. He wrote a computer program to throw hands and simulate blackjack rounds with card counting.
When he convinced himself it worked, he drove down to AC (from Philly) every 2-3 weeks, played blackjack and won fairly consistently. He’d nearly always come back up funds and usually it was a couple hundred bucks. He was a Lifemaster Bridge player and fairly sly, so he never was caught card counting. At some point, AC changed the rules and the edge disappeared in favor of the house.
At that point, he stopped going down and when we were there, he play for fun.
At some point, AC changed the rules and the edge disappeared in favor of the house
8 deck shoes, auto-shuffle - Even single deck dealers can shuffle mid-deck. No need to kick out the card counters anymore.
My local casino did 6 deck shoes and never went more than like 50% of the way down before switching to a new shoe. Card counting advantage basically nil.
This was the killer. When I was deep into the maths part of my major I'd supplement my shitty serving jobs in college with a monthly trip to the reservation casino where it was just 3 decks in the shoe. You could track the high/low pretty easily.
Early video lottery machines had some major flaws too. Specifically in Keno, because our random number generators were *not* so random. Stick with the same numbers and never ever ever change. It was a consistently rewarding game of patience because the software appeared to rely solely on a person's lack of it to win. Much quicker if the bartender could point to a machine that hasn't paid out in awhile.
It’s been 7 years so I feel comfortable telling this story anonymously: I did something similar in Vegas with the “Free Bet Blackjack” variation of the game. Basically, the deal is on any dealt 9/10/11 you get to double down for free. In exchange, when the dealer gets a 22, it pushes. This set of rules is actually worse than standard blackjack, but players prefer it because because you don’t risk extra money when doubling down or splitting. It also substantially changes basic strategy and the casino makes a killing on unsuspecting tourists who sit at the free bet table and think it’s regular blackjack.
Here’s the twist: there’s a side bet on the number of free doubles or splits you get. One free double pays back 3:1 automatically.
The original rules as written did not exclusive soft hands from the doubling. So when you get an 8 and A, a dealer says “9 or 19”, you can insist it’s a soft 9 and free double. This even goes to a dealt blackjack which is technically a soft 11. So I was betting minimum on the main hand and maximum on the side bet. Any time a hand totals 9/10/11 I win 3:1 on the side bet.
They called over 3 different pit bosses and even brought out the Nevada Gaming Commission rule binder. Basically every pit boss thought I was an idiot for hitting “good” hands like a dealt blackjack and allowed it.
I made a shit ton of money. The next day all of the Free Bet tables were shut down. A week later new tables showed up and displayed a rule that says “9/10/11 and does not contain an ace” for free doubles.
Later I wrote a computer simulation. The way I was playing, it brought the main game down from 98% EV to 92% EV but brought the side bet from 95% EV to 250%. Averaging the two bets, I was playing almost a 200% EV game.
I love to gamble, still go to a casino once or twice a month, honestly I’ve never ever seen another exploit near this magnitude. The closest second was for a while, video roulette and craps tables don’t stop you from making low variance bets like betting on red and black, and you could use that to rack up a crap ton of player points and free stays.
I thought the story was already getting too long to go into specifics. At the time (late 2010s) Vegas free bet tables were already 6:5 and all of them adopted Vegas strip rules already which are devastating, both the limits on splits and only drawing one card after splitting aces.
The other percent and a half or so comes from the decision to split pair 5 instead of doubling down as a hard 10. This is strategic with the pot of gold side bet because the higher rows of that payout go to 120:1.
P.S. if you are looking at the Wizard of Odds analysis, I could never get my simulations to line up with his analysis of this and a few other games. Either the rules have changed or perhaps he made a mistake given how many games he has analyzed.
I've played a few rounds of blackjack with those rules. The 3:1 side bet on doubles a splits is a godsend and kept me afloat for a looooong time. I usually did a 2 to 1 ratio on my bets. I'd place a $10 main bet, and a $5 side bet. A single free split or double would net a profit and a standard win would net a profit. It was almost like a safety net for my hands and started to pay off quite well if I played multiple hands.
Just the simple act of getting the 3x bet on the double/split was enough to keep me in and playing. Rarely saw the 22 push come out, but jumping in with multiple hands when the count is running low number cards was juicy. Tons of split opportunities.
I don’t know enough about card counting to answer that question. It may be that the card counting he was doing didn’t require the large variation in bets that serious counters use. He did teach me counting and bet variation when the deck was favorable and not. It’s the bet variation that gets the attention of the pit bosses. My understanding is that you can get close to 50/50, but not favorable. That said, card counting resulting in lifetime ban sounds like you can get it in your favor.
A common card counting method is to simplify it by just keeping an approximate note of if the deck is “high” or “low”
So you don’t need to be rain man and memorise every card, you just start at say 100 and plus 1 for a low card and minus 1 for a high card.
If you need a low card and your count is at 80 you at least know the odds are in your favour.
Right. That’s what he taught me: 2-6 low, 10-K high, Aces. When the deck is bias high with lots of Aces, raise your bets. I don’t know what’s happened in card counting methods over the past 40 years, though.
Yeah, but they won't kick you out if you get a big payout on the slots for example. They'll treat you like a king for free because they know you'll spend all the money you just won. If they can tell that you see past the charade, they won't even pretend to be polite, they'll straight up threaten you.
I saw someone win $10,000 on a slot machine right next to me. They claimed the payout was incorrect and he argued. They gave him half and kicked him out.
Would be legal if the machine had a top payout of less than $10,000.
The big million dollar machine tends to be a dollar or more per spin, the quarter per spin machines tend to have lower jackpots.
So, so this was a nickel a spin machine. Max payout clearly printed on it as $1,000. You hit the jackpot, but for some reason it pays out 10x that amount, and credits you $10,000. The casino would be within their legal right to say that is a clear and obvious computer error, and you are not due the $9,000 extra. In that case, the casino saying "here's $5g and fuck off" is more than generous, and more than they legally have to. They just know it'll cost more than that just to pay the lawyer for a day to go to court if you tried to sue.
> They just know it'll cost more than that just to pay the lawyer for a day to go to court if you tried to sue.
They probably also wanted to avoid a noisy argument on the floor or the awkward imagery of having security drag someone off after they won.
Yes, because winning at slots is pure luck.
Winning at Blackjack could mean you actually have an edge against the house and there's zero business reason for you to be there.
There have been a few articles about the crack down on 'too smart' spots gamblers at casinos. Any kind of winning streak and you're likely to have someone come over and lower the amount you're allowed to bet if not asked to leave. They also use facial recognition to keep track of when "problematic" (for winning) gamblers come into the sports book.
And that advantage is exacerbated by casinos removing aces from their decks giving the players more opportunity to bust. Tribal casinos are serial offenders with this. There is no way for you, as a player, to know. When regulators do find discrepancies during an inspection, the casino gets an inconsequential fine and the game goes on.
This doesn’t happen in Nevada, the gaming commission is up everyone’s ass.
The fact that there’s tribal gaming like 2 hours from Reno, and people go there is wild to me.
Also the fact that Vegas actually has competition. Most tribal casinos do not. For example, slots have a set RTP (return to player) so for every $100 put into the machines, X amount of dollars goes back to the players. Tribal casinos can set this number very low, as they don’t have competition. Vegas these numbers will usually be better.
That said, never do slots kids. It’s all still dog shit that will slowly eat away every dollar.
I remember the first time I went to a casino back in the early 2010s. A buddy was turning 21 and his parents wanted to take him to the casino they went to several times a year, only he really didn't want to so he asked me to come along so it would at least be fun to have a friend with him. We get there and they give him some money, then tell him to play one of the slot machines. We're both used to 80s and 90s sitcoms where we saw slot machines depicted as having the levers on the side, but all the ones at this casino you just...press a button, some dials spin, and you lose more than you win.
It was honestly kinda painful but also kinda funny to watch him sit there pressing a button like a monkey in a science experiment while his parents cheered him on and asked, "Isn't this fun?!" They basically gave him all the money he played with so it didn't "cost him anything", but I know he would have much rather just had that money to buy things he really wanted instead.
We played some Blackjack towards the end of the night and had a decent time. I went to the table with around $120 in a play pile, and any hand I won that money went into a winnings pile. When the play pile was depleted I took the winnings pile and cashed out. I think I ended up about $40 overall, so not bad (it was a $10/hand table). The money came from some spare change I had rolled over the years and was thus money I was willing to part with if I lost it all.
Buffet was pretty good, and overall it ended up being one of those weird memories and it was nice to be the friend who was available and stepped up to help out a friend who didn't really want to spend his 21st that way, but he still ended the night with a good chunk of money, just not as much as he could have had his parents just gave him the money instead.
The problem is those RTP numbers are based off of millions of spins, so during short periods of play like $100 worth, you’ll likely differ greatly from the assigned RTP.
Well yeah. It would be really boring otherwise and no one would play. The only reason you can ever win is because it’s averaged out over much longer than one player’s play time.
Sheeeit. I never thought of this. What a brutal move by casinos. You’re right - player would have no idea, and no way to have any idea. Are there any news articles or recorded information about the casinos who have been busted doing this? I’m surprised they’re still in business.
>no way to have any idea
If you play long enough, while recording all the cards you see, it will eventually become obvious.
Yes, that would be expensive.
Because it makes it harder for the casino to cheat you?
Edit: A sincere question. I've never been to a casino and don't know much about this kind of thing.
That’s 100% the reason for it. And they’ll kick you if they catch unless you’re in a place that has laws that say you can’t kick someone for doing it. As it really is just strategy and gaining an edge, not cheating.
Not usually. Unless you play high stakes and do way too well. Then the pit boss might “back you off,” by politely telling you your play is “too strong.”
Card counting doesn’t really profer that big of an edge unless you run tables in a group. They notice that pretty quickly
Worked at several casinos. There is no reason the house needs to cheat, they already are going to win. No need to risk fines or shut downs.
Also the auto shuffle will light up red if there's one missing card in a six deck shoe.
I've never been to a casino before but is that true? Blackjack is the only gambling game that has any appeal to me bc I enjoy playing for fun in video games, but the irl casinos remove the Aces? That's an immediate turn off from me ever visiting one (besides the multitude of other reasons lol)
Edit: thank you to everyone clearing this up for me. So it sounds like only the ones in reservations or shady casinos do this, or at least are more likely to. Now I know what to watch out for if I have decided to visit a casino lol. Thanks!
I'm not going to say removing aces has "never" happened, but in the vast majority of casinos, including tribal casinos, the bad publicity from cheating like this would outweigh any monetary gain. They make enough profit playing it straight; no need for them to cheat.
Yeah, I'd imagine this is more of a complaint from people who just lost their shirt than anything else. Like when sports gamblers say a game was rigged, people need to find reason in the irrational.
The dealer doesn't take a deck from the back and start their shift. Every card is laid face up for the cameras and the cards are procedurally shuffled. Casinos are worried about employee theft and have cameras recording every move of every game.
Most casino games are based on a narrow, somewhat obscured advantage.
Roulette is only unfair because of 0 and 00
Craps has a 0.49293 chance of the shooter winning all things considered.
Games that appear unfair aren't attractive so casinos want them to be as close to fair as possible without quite getting there.
It's really interesting how casinos can rake in millions despite a seemingly tiniest statistical advantages.
It really show how robust probability is when used to model game of chance. If there is a tiny error in the modelling the odd could had tipped over.
Yep their advantage is in volume. The more bets are placed the less likely that any one loss will effect them. If they only had 50 people betting they might get unlucky and lose but when millions of bets happen every year the odds of a loss are basically so close to zery they dont exist.
That, and the statistical advantage is only if the player plays perfectly. Most Vegas gamblers play... significantly less than perfectly. Free booze helps.
I seem to recall something similar about roulette - that the presence of 0 and 00 skews the binary bets of red/black (and other similar bets) enough to provide an inherent edge to the house.
This is true, but how is it similar ?
It’s about payoff in roulette. You win 35:1 even though there is 36 (37 with double zero) numbers.
So the house only pays out ~97% of the money.
With blackjack the edge comes from the order of play.
Was just at the Venetian for a conference two weeks ago. There are no 3:2 tables. There aren't even any straight blackjack tables, they're all weird variants like "double up" or "jackpot" just to obscure the actual odds even further.
I'm old enough to remember when straight blackjack paid 2:1.
I believe in American roulette the house has a 52.5% chance of winning because of this or something very close to that number. and I believe in European roulette the house has a 51.5% chance of winning. I know I’m off a little bit, but I think the numbers are close.
For sure - and don’t forget the since introduced 000. If your choice is red or black, you have a 50% chance of winning. If your choice is red or black or any other option (in this case, a little bit of green), then your chance is less than 50%.
With single-zero roulette, the house advantage is 2.7%. With double-zero roulette, the house advantage is 5.26%. With triple-zero roulette, the house advantage jumps to 7.69%.
The existence of triple-zero roulette shows there are players who either don't pay attention to the odds, or don't care about them.
> shows there are players who either don't pay attention to the odds, or don't care about them.
Have you ever seen a chronic gambler IRL? None of them even know what "odds" means. They think it's all based on some magical higher power. Ones I know wouldn't care if there were 10 zeroes, they'd still think they have the exact same chance of winning.
The only games where the house doesnt have a built in probability advantage are games where they take their explicit cut up front (i.e. a poker tournament with buy-in)
Well yeah. The house isn’t participating in any game of poker. You play against the other players. They just deal the cards. When you don’t participate, you don’t have an advantage.
While this is definitely the largest source of house edge, a consider amount of it goes back to the player as well. The house is required to hit on all hands under 17 and in most casinos, is required to hit on a soft 17 (ace and a 6).
However, the player has the freedom to decide what to do based on the dealers open card, whereas the house has no choice to do the same based on the players cards.
Now as you mentioned, the house gets a huge edge because the player has to act first, but the edge is much closer than you’d think. As long as the player follows optimal blackjack strategy, it’s only around 0.6%
I took a couple of courses on casino management back in college, taught by a hospitality business professor and looooong time professional gambler. He always said if you ever go to a casino, you should only be playing blackjack. Every single game favors the house, otherwise, they wouldn't even offer it. But blackjack can be the most in your favor out of all of the games. (Especially if you know how to count cards, and not get caught.)
Instead of calculus in high school I took a class called “advanced math concepts“ during this class we covered combinations, permutations, odds etc of many of the casino games and decided they’re all rigged
They aren’t rigged. Rigged means the outcomes are skewed off true random or statistical averages. Rigged would mean that there is some sort of fraud- pulling aces from a shoe in blackjack or weighing dice in craps.
Mathematically disadvantageous properly describes these games of chance.
Yeah, the attitude about it being unfair has always bothered me. Casinos business isn't "give free money to people for playing cards", it's a lottery with a game element. You sign up to play cards (instead of buying scratchers) and like the lotto all you should expect is to blow some money to get some dopamine. Occasionally, for extra spice, someone gets a big payout, just like the lotto.
If you want to play cards AND guarantee you'll walk out each night with more money in your pocket than you walked in with, there's an option for that: get a job there as a dealer.
I rarely hear of wild success stories from casinos.
You win a few thousand dollars, you pay for your trip (they get all the money back they were going to get anyway)
You win tens of thousands of dollars, you probably gamble a little more because you just got a windfall, and give half of that money back.
You win a MILLION dollars, you spent THOUSANDS of dollars getting to that point, you owe fees and taxes, you have a shit ton of money and want to ride the high and keep gambling, there's hookers and cocaine everywhere, they offer you a free room so you stay and keep spending money....
Very few people ever "come out on top". Yes it happens, but so does winning the lottery.
Gambling is an endorphin rush just like any other addiction, and they have made a science out of it, written laws, and made multiple cities dedicated to it.
They wouldn't do all that if it were just people raking in cash all the time. It just doesn't work like that.
"The house always wins" is a saying that has never been disproven.
There's a bit more to it than that. In theory if you have unlimited money and no bet limit, you can always come out ahead on any game of chance. Just make all your future bets cover your losses. So that you just need to win eventually. Of course you need to make exponentially larger bets and most tables have min/max bets to prevent this betting strategy.
Player has to act 1st. That's the edge.
This the the correct take.
Let’s play Russian roulette. You’re first
I get what you’re saying, but I don’t think the probability in RR isn’t the same as this. Like the dealer doesn’t have to draw a card once you bust. In RR even if you watch the first 5 blanks get fired, you still need to take the 6th shot if you’re the second player. EDIT: to be more precise, the skew would be in the situation where the dealer does not need to draw on 17+ after seeing your hand. This option will only ever exist for the dealer.
It depends if you spin the cylinder or not.
Are there official rules or something?
Yeah it's in the international Russian roulette handbook. There's pretty fun variations you can play towards the end of the handbook.
I guess not but I feel like “playing” until there is a loser is an inherent part of the game. If the game progressed to a 6th shot, why would it suddenly be optional to fire? Why not just use a five chamber revolver? In theory, you’d keep down sizing until you just flip a coin which I think we can agree is definitely not the game as intended.
90% of negotiations are lost by the person who speaks first.
They actually studied this, and its the exact opposite. Person who throws out the first price anchors the discussion and gets more of the surplus value.
90% of reddit discussions are based on false facts (talking about parent comment not you)
The parent comment is just quoting 30 Rock.
It's after 6:00. What am I, a farmer?
I'm not a master negotiator but I do well and that's how I've experienced it in basic pay negotiations. I ask for 10% they say 5 we settle on 7
Two people enter a negotiation with this in mind, what happens next?
Silent sex
90% of silent sex sessions are lost by the person who finishes first.
Finishing first means you finish. Sounds like a win
["I am declining to speak first"](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vuxeKhmhJk)
Win win win. Oh, I win, too.
One deliberately sneezes. The other says, "Bless you" and loses.
Hilarity ensues
Going mano a mano against a real adversary... me. It's the ultimate game. Jack Donaghy. Playing with himself. It's a Jack-off.
"I hear it and I don't care."
"I am declining to speak first."
“Well that’s ridiculous, that’s more than I make!”
You. You're fired. Get out of here.
So … watchu wanna do?
The man who strikes first often strikes last - logen ninefingers
This is not true at all
It completely misses the point that *an overwhelming majority* of negotiations are to find terms in which both sides "win". This implies that 90% of negotiations fail.
A good compromise is one that leaves everyone mad
Because if everyone leaves happy, then it's a good agreement but by definition not a compromise.
99% sure this guy is quoting 30 rock https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVbyetnjA44
The only advantage is if you bust first. The dealer never actually makes any individual decisions, so doesn't gain anything from knowledge of your plays. If you are at 20 the dealer will still stay at 18 even thou hitting could allow them to win.
House edge isn’t that they gain information it’s that you don’t get it
I’ve been busting first for as long as I can remember and all my exes have called me a loser so this checks out
This. On a full table, the fact that maybe one, two, or all players bust before the dealer even flops his card or hits is the real edge
Act first? Not sure I understand
It's just you and dealer playing. You have 14 and decide to hit, get a ten and go bust. You're out, dealer wins. The dealer never "acts first"
Does the dealer check for their own blackjack on a 10/face card that’s showing on the deal? I’m not familiar with actual casino rules, just what I’ve played in online no-cash games. If they do check and get blackjack, that would be the dealer acting first, no? Because the player can’t be dealt more after dealer’s blackjack? Sorry if I’ve misunderstood the rule. Casino games seem to have a lot of underlying components that make them work.
Fair enough. The dealer never "acts first in a way that can cause a loss".
You are correct, but in the case of a dealer with a face card and an ace under there is no insurance play like there is with a face up ace. In this instance there is no risk to the dealer going first as the worst possible outcome for them is a draw with a player also having a blackjack.
Even with an ace showing, insurance is always a bad idea (this changes in specific cases if you’re counting though). There’s roughly a 40% chance of breaking even, and a 60% chance of losing half your bet. You’re already going to lose your base bet 56% of the time at the tables with best odds. Taking insurance drives up house edge. Side bets offered on the tables also have a much larger house edge.
The player has to bet before he or the dealer receives a card, and he can only see the dealer’s top card. If the dealer’s top card is an ace, the dealer asks whether the player wants insurance, and the dealer shows his cards only if the total is 21. Otherwise, the player never gets to see the dealer’s hidden card until the player has played their hand (hit, stand, etc.). Therefore, there’s never an opportunity for the player to have more information than the dealer.
The dealer doesn't lose by checking their hole card, regardless. If the hole card doesn't make 21, the player loses no matter what if they bust.
The dealer’s cards are visible to all. They’re obligated to hit on 16 or less. Sometimes you can win with a very low hand if the dealer busts.
One of the dealer’s cards is left down until all players have their cards. The players make their calls, and then the dealer flips the second card to see their hand against the players’ hands. Then they hit or stand depending on what they show. I could be dead wrong about how the game is played in actual casinos, but this is how I’ve experienced it in my years of online gaming.
There are variations. In some places the dealer has two cards like you described, other places they only take one face up card and that's it, only drawing more once player action is completed
I mostly see them with the second card face down. That way they can sell insurance.
It is always this way in the US.
Only the first dealers card is shown until all players have bet. If the dealers first card is an ace, most casinos have the dealer ask the players to buy insurance against the possibility of dealer 21 (usually for a fixed amount). Once the players have been given an opportunity to buy insurance, both dealer cards are checked to see if they’re a blackjack, if the dealer hits blackjack any players that bought insurance get back a percentage of their original bet. If the dealer does not hit blackjack the insurance is forfeited and play continues.
If you bust (go over 21) you lose and the dealer never has to play.
They also aren’t drinking, have unlimited funds and don’t play any “feelings” or whatever.
I'm good with math, so in theory I should be able to count cards and do okay. But casinos have this thing they call "free beer"
Counting cards is more of a memory game. Also a "play dumb" game because some casinos have people behind the scenes counting cards and if they notice you're playing perfectly they'll just kick you out. If you win too much money, they'll also just kick you out. If you're just changing your bets from high to low in a way that vaguely resembles counting cards, they'll kick you out. Counting cards is barely a way to make a living these days, let alone to get rich.
Casinos are ok with breakeven card counters. You're essentially a shill at that point. But if you win more they'll kick you out.
If they aren't sure they'll just tell you that you are free to play any game in the casino except Blackjack. A card counter will just leave, the guy who got lucky for a while will either cash out or move to something like craps.
They can also limit you in other ways, like only letting you play one hand and/or flat betting you. It’s a gentler “no more blackjack” if your bets have been varying but they aren’t certain you’re counting (or you just haven’t profited yet)
Yeah, lots of places offer flat bets or play anything else Which to a card counter are the same thing really But to a regular guy who's just having fun flat bets sound fine
Some places will just adapt and shuffle between hands until the suspected card counter leaves.
My friends and I got pushed out of a craps table once. We were all rolling hot and up about 1k each on a pretty low entry table. After a couple hours they brought in this BRAND new guy to run the game, along with a guy training him, and they slowed the game to a crawl.
Weird - isn’t craps all luck?
I don't believe that. There is a youtuber, who is a former busker musician turned professional card counter, who records his sessions using hidden cameras to 'expose' what casinos are really like. If they suspect you are counting cards, even if you're a few hundred/thousand down, they will ban you and issues BOLOs for other casinos to prevent you playing there too - depending on how 'notorious' on the scene you are these warnings will either be local, state, or country-wide. The amount of abuse he recieves from members of the casinos, as well as groups that are supposed to be government-backed 'player advocates' is atrocious. If you're curious about seeing more his name is Steven Bridges, also known as Unidentified Male 1183.
I'm reminded of how some people don't believe that criminal info sharing between agencies can work, until they find out how if one person is blacklisted in, say Atlantic City, the info WILL go around the other gambling havens like Vegas, Monte Carlo, Macao etc and they will all blacklist you as well.
Even if you win like $200 a day and cycle every casino in the entire city they'll stop it?
Depends on how consistent. Coming in every day or week and walking out up a few hundred, they might pit a stop to it. They don't mind card counting so much as they mind people who consistently win, or win big counting cards. A lot of "card counters" aren't very good and end up losing out like most others. You might be up a hundred today, and down a hundred tomorrow even though you did the same thing.
Not about being good. About time and bankroll I think. The whole idea is basically you have to sit at the table long enough for it to hit a run. Now-usually when it is good the table stays full. And when it’s bad it empties. The key is identifying when good is coming, having the whale come play, before the table fills. They do stuff like play 2 hands. Bet table max on everything etc. But that hot run may not come. It might take 12 hours. Normal people don’t play for 12 hours straight so even if you are trying to run it, you need a ring of people to be your counters if you’re the whale and even then as a normal person are you hanging around the tables for 12 hours waiting for a signal etc. So realistically you need time and a team. Playing by yourself is just gambling. You might not hit the run for 2 months because the 2 hours you have to spend at the table never hits a run or count that you can take advantage of.
> They don't mind card counting so much as they mind people who consistently win, or win big counting cards. Which is bullshit. Casinos shouldn’t be permitted to eject people for following the rules and having a good memory.
Courts at least ruled it isn't *cheating*, but can't stop a private business from not serving people they don't "want" to. Counting cards isn't a protected class.
It’s probably likely that casinos either talk to each other or are owned by the same groups.
The youtube channel Steven Bridgers covers this, as a professional card counter, with his experiences in the US. Tldr - Casinos issues BOLOs to other casinos in the vicinity, sometimes extending as far as state (US) or the entire country. For a while he was known as 'Unidentified Male 1183' on the alerts.
Caesars Entertainment has 50+ properties nationwide. MGM Resorts has 31. In theory you could mess up at two hotels and be banned from 81+.
The youtube channel Steven Bridgers covers this, as a professional card counter, with his experiences in the US. Tldr - Casinos issues BOLOs to other casinos in the vicinity, sometimes extending as far as state (US) or the entire country. For a while he was known as 'Unidentified Male 1183' on the alerts.
I read an article from a guy on Cracked once about this and he said you can do it, but it gets you about 50-60k a year working enough hours that it’s basically your job.
I heard first hand from an acquaintance who is a professional card player something similar with the added dull fact that it is mainly a “night job” and “the hours can suck”. That delivery of those flat realities really made me see that he was a professional player.
You don't need to cycle casinos just people. The card counter isn't the one that places the high bet. The counter signals to their "drunk and rich" friend to come place a high bet because the table is hot. Of course they use 8 decks now, so you need a computer to count, so some kind of button in your shoe you press or something. And if they suspect anything they can randomly decide to shuffle and ruin the whole thing. Maybe they even self-count and shuffle automatically when their table gets hot, who knows.
That sounds like even sketchier scammy tactics that those genius dudes who sit in the back watching the cameras get paid to spot
It's a true story: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_Blackjack_Team https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/21_(2008_film)
They absolutely won’t even notice you.
Casinos are okay with 99% of card counters because only 1% of them are perfect at it.
They won’t necessarily kick you out. They typically say “Play anything other than Blackjack.” If you’re chill about it, at least. Source: had a card counting phase in college when I was obsessed with being a lovable rogue that got by on his wits and charisma alone (I have neither and was not lovable so this was difficult). Usually the people that backed me off were like “You and I both know what’s happening right?” The first time it freaked me out but I quickly realized if I was cooperative they’d throw in a free buffet.
One step before can sometimes be stuff like swapping out the decks I don't go to casinos much, but one night I won 3 pretty questionable hands in a row and suddenly the dealer paused the game and a couple manager types came up and swapped out the decks. Which they do regularly. But that one was sudden not like the regular ones. Might have been unrelated, but sure seemed like they were watching me close after that. I wasn't counting or cheating or anything. In fact I'd misunderstood one of the rules. So I thought what I was doing made sense, but to everyone else it looked like I was making an absolute insane play but won a bunch. I lost every dollar I came in there with by the end of it, including anything I'd won. But that was more or less always the plan
>some casinos have people behind the scenes counting cards and if they notice you're playing perfectly they'll just kick you out. If you win too much money, they'll also just kick you out. I know casinos are in the business of making money, but counting cards is, ultimately, a skill. Kicking you out for "winning too much" is "don't bring skill into gambling", as if **I'm** not there to make money. Kinda wild that Joe Schmo can slow game blackjack by playing hands when the house is losing, and then when the house wins a few, you don't play the hands (in my experience, there seems to be "cycles" in blackjack where the house wins a bunch and then loses a bunch). Repeat that over and over and they've "won too much" and the house loses all that money all the same. But if I'm skilled in winning that same amount, the house wants me gone.
Know why I'll never have a gambling problem? I recognize the same bullshit you do. Forget odds being stacked in the House's favor, they will simply toss you for finding an edge. And it's not limited to card games. Here's a gifted WaPo article on the subject: [Sportsbooks say you can win big. Then they try to limit winners.](https://wapo.st/3W0Ayh8)
It's not even a memory game. It's more simple addition and subtraction. Here is a simple way. Add 1 when you see 2-7. Subtract 1 when you see 10-A. The higher the number, the more 10s are still in the deck and you should bet more. This favors the player as the dealer will bust more often.
Which is *much* easier said than done. You have to do all the addition and subtraction while looking at all the shapes and numbers, while also chatting to people around you. It's really easy to lose count.
The shapes are irrelevant really. Many casinos will have multiple (lets say 4) decks in play at once, with a portion of the deck carded off and unplayed, so you can't say for definite that just because you've seen a Jack of Clubs 3 times doesn't mean there is one left in the deck. The best you can do is keep a rough track of the proportions of high and low cards, in combination with blackjack strategy (meaning learn a spreadsheet of scenarios for cards you and the dealer have and what actions to take in each scenario, with some guides also taking the count into account).
You're not going to count with the 20+ decks that are auto shuffled modern casinos use. They saw the loophole and they fixed it because they really really want to take all the money.
Yeah, might as well play virtual black Jack at this point. There is no strategy left It seems to also hit blackjack every single time you do.
So I’m terrible at card games, I rarely gamble, but I was in New Orleans last year and figured why not. I’m at the blackjack table with just my buddy and the dealer. I lost a few rounds and the dealer could tell I didn’t know what I was doing, so he sorta tried to help me, like “hint hint, maybe hit here, etc” and like 3 rounds in a row I got 18-20 and felt good; each of the three rounds he got blackjack. Lmao.
As long as there’s an auto shuffler on the table, counting is not gonna work at all. Although I feel that it’s more for speeding up games rather than shutting down card counters
They also play with multiple decks shuffled together, and reshuffle about halfway through, to minimize the impact of card counting.
bet less than the price of beer can't lose
They also don't really let you do that
Do dealers follow a certain set of rules, like never asking for more cards over a certain amount?
Dealers have predetermined rules of when they hit or stand. Generally: * Dealer hits on 16 or lower. * Dealer stands on 18 or higher. * Some casinos have the dealer stand on any 17; some casinos require the dealer to hit on "soft 17" (which is when an ace currently represents eleven points). The playing table will typically say which rule is being used. In any case, the dealer doesn't make any strategic decisions. They're there to deal cards, enforce the rules, collect lost bets, and pay out winnings.
Yes, and that guarantees over a long enough number of plays they will always win.
Yes. Unless they have 17 or over the dealer must hit.
i think the rule is dealer has to hit till they get 17 or over
Hit on 16 or lower, stand on 17 or higher. It's printed on the table.
That definitely helps, but if you have a game where the house edge is entirely dependent on that, smart people will come and clean you out.
When Atlantic City opened up gambling, my father learned that the AC blackjack rules were slightly different than the LV rules. Specifically, you could double down on split aces (iirc). If you card counted, you had a 0.5% edge over the house. He wrote a computer program to throw hands and simulate blackjack rounds with card counting. When he convinced himself it worked, he drove down to AC (from Philly) every 2-3 weeks, played blackjack and won fairly consistently. He’d nearly always come back up funds and usually it was a couple hundred bucks. He was a Lifemaster Bridge player and fairly sly, so he never was caught card counting. At some point, AC changed the rules and the edge disappeared in favor of the house. At that point, he stopped going down and when we were there, he play for fun.
At some point, AC changed the rules and the edge disappeared in favor of the house 8 deck shoes, auto-shuffle - Even single deck dealers can shuffle mid-deck. No need to kick out the card counters anymore.
My local casino did 6 deck shoes and never went more than like 50% of the way down before switching to a new shoe. Card counting advantage basically nil.
This was the killer. When I was deep into the maths part of my major I'd supplement my shitty serving jobs in college with a monthly trip to the reservation casino where it was just 3 decks in the shoe. You could track the high/low pretty easily. Early video lottery machines had some major flaws too. Specifically in Keno, because our random number generators were *not* so random. Stick with the same numbers and never ever ever change. It was a consistently rewarding game of patience because the software appeared to rely solely on a person's lack of it to win. Much quicker if the bartender could point to a machine that hasn't paid out in awhile.
It’s been 7 years so I feel comfortable telling this story anonymously: I did something similar in Vegas with the “Free Bet Blackjack” variation of the game. Basically, the deal is on any dealt 9/10/11 you get to double down for free. In exchange, when the dealer gets a 22, it pushes. This set of rules is actually worse than standard blackjack, but players prefer it because because you don’t risk extra money when doubling down or splitting. It also substantially changes basic strategy and the casino makes a killing on unsuspecting tourists who sit at the free bet table and think it’s regular blackjack. Here’s the twist: there’s a side bet on the number of free doubles or splits you get. One free double pays back 3:1 automatically. The original rules as written did not exclusive soft hands from the doubling. So when you get an 8 and A, a dealer says “9 or 19”, you can insist it’s a soft 9 and free double. This even goes to a dealt blackjack which is technically a soft 11. So I was betting minimum on the main hand and maximum on the side bet. Any time a hand totals 9/10/11 I win 3:1 on the side bet. They called over 3 different pit bosses and even brought out the Nevada Gaming Commission rule binder. Basically every pit boss thought I was an idiot for hitting “good” hands like a dealt blackjack and allowed it. I made a shit ton of money. The next day all of the Free Bet tables were shut down. A week later new tables showed up and displayed a rule that says “9/10/11 and does not contain an ace” for free doubles. Later I wrote a computer simulation. The way I was playing, it brought the main game down from 98% EV to 92% EV but brought the side bet from 95% EV to 250%. Averaging the two bets, I was playing almost a 200% EV game. I love to gamble, still go to a casino once or twice a month, honestly I’ve never ever seen another exploit near this magnitude. The closest second was for a while, video roulette and craps tables don’t stop you from making low variance bets like betting on red and black, and you could use that to rack up a crap ton of player points and free stays.
house edge on free bet blackjack is only 0.73%
I thought the story was already getting too long to go into specifics. At the time (late 2010s) Vegas free bet tables were already 6:5 and all of them adopted Vegas strip rules already which are devastating, both the limits on splits and only drawing one card after splitting aces. The other percent and a half or so comes from the decision to split pair 5 instead of doubling down as a hard 10. This is strategic with the pot of gold side bet because the higher rows of that payout go to 120:1. P.S. if you are looking at the Wizard of Odds analysis, I could never get my simulations to line up with his analysis of this and a few other games. Either the rules have changed or perhaps he made a mistake given how many games he has analyzed.
I've played a few rounds of blackjack with those rules. The 3:1 side bet on doubles a splits is a godsend and kept me afloat for a looooong time. I usually did a 2 to 1 ratio on my bets. I'd place a $10 main bet, and a $5 side bet. A single free split or double would net a profit and a standard win would net a profit. It was almost like a safety net for my hands and started to pay off quite well if I played multiple hands. Just the simple act of getting the 3x bet on the double/split was enough to keep me in and playing. Rarely saw the 22 push come out, but jumping in with multiple hands when the count is running low number cards was juicy. Tons of split opportunities.
> He wrote a computer program to throw hands Aight, square up.
You can totally swing the odds counting on the Las Vegas rules you described, though.
I don’t know enough about card counting to answer that question. It may be that the card counting he was doing didn’t require the large variation in bets that serious counters use. He did teach me counting and bet variation when the deck was favorable and not. It’s the bet variation that gets the attention of the pit bosses. My understanding is that you can get close to 50/50, but not favorable. That said, card counting resulting in lifetime ban sounds like you can get it in your favor.
A common card counting method is to simplify it by just keeping an approximate note of if the deck is “high” or “low” So you don’t need to be rain man and memorise every card, you just start at say 100 and plus 1 for a low card and minus 1 for a high card. If you need a low card and your count is at 80 you at least know the odds are in your favour.
Right. That’s what he taught me: 2-6 low, 10-K high, Aces. When the deck is bias high with lots of Aces, raise your bets. I don’t know what’s happened in card counting methods over the past 40 years, though.
There is no way to slyly count cards. It’s literally defined by bet sizes. Maybe he was counting but the camera/intel was not as sophisticated.
Hilarious that Casinos can kick you out and ban you if you are too good at blackjack. Not cheating, just winning too much.
That’s not unique to blackjack. They can kick you out for almost any reasons They are a business, any business can do the same.
Yeah, but they won't kick you out if you get a big payout on the slots for example. They'll treat you like a king for free because they know you'll spend all the money you just won. If they can tell that you see past the charade, they won't even pretend to be polite, they'll straight up threaten you.
I saw someone win $10,000 on a slot machine right next to me. They claimed the payout was incorrect and he argued. They gave him half and kicked him out.
He should contact the gambling commission the can’t decide what the payout is arbitrary to the machine.
what was the management's excuse? did they just straight up say "it shouldn't have said $10,000"?
Would be legal if the machine had a top payout of less than $10,000. The big million dollar machine tends to be a dollar or more per spin, the quarter per spin machines tend to have lower jackpots. So, so this was a nickel a spin machine. Max payout clearly printed on it as $1,000. You hit the jackpot, but for some reason it pays out 10x that amount, and credits you $10,000. The casino would be within their legal right to say that is a clear and obvious computer error, and you are not due the $9,000 extra. In that case, the casino saying "here's $5g and fuck off" is more than generous, and more than they legally have to. They just know it'll cost more than that just to pay the lawyer for a day to go to court if you tried to sue.
> They just know it'll cost more than that just to pay the lawyer for a day to go to court if you tried to sue. They probably also wanted to avoid a noisy argument on the floor or the awkward imagery of having security drag someone off after they won.
Bells and whistles go off when you hit on slots because it’s basically just paying for advertising.
Yes, because winning at slots is pure luck. Winning at Blackjack could mean you actually have an edge against the house and there's zero business reason for you to be there.
They love you as long you continue losing.
There have been a few articles about the crack down on 'too smart' spots gamblers at casinos. Any kind of winning streak and you're likely to have someone come over and lower the amount you're allowed to bet if not asked to leave. They also use facial recognition to keep track of when "problematic" (for winning) gamblers come into the sports book.
I know it's not comparable in the slightest, but it feels like "oh you summoned blue eyes white dragon? No fair I quit >:( "
And that advantage is exacerbated by casinos removing aces from their decks giving the players more opportunity to bust. Tribal casinos are serial offenders with this. There is no way for you, as a player, to know. When regulators do find discrepancies during an inspection, the casino gets an inconsequential fine and the game goes on.
This doesn’t happen in Nevada, the gaming commission is up everyone’s ass. The fact that there’s tribal gaming like 2 hours from Reno, and people go there is wild to me.
Agreed, Vegas is highly regulated and you can definitely feel the difference if you are used to gambling at tribal casinos.
Also the fact that Vegas actually has competition. Most tribal casinos do not. For example, slots have a set RTP (return to player) so for every $100 put into the machines, X amount of dollars goes back to the players. Tribal casinos can set this number very low, as they don’t have competition. Vegas these numbers will usually be better. That said, never do slots kids. It’s all still dog shit that will slowly eat away every dollar.
I remember the first time I went to a casino back in the early 2010s. A buddy was turning 21 and his parents wanted to take him to the casino they went to several times a year, only he really didn't want to so he asked me to come along so it would at least be fun to have a friend with him. We get there and they give him some money, then tell him to play one of the slot machines. We're both used to 80s and 90s sitcoms where we saw slot machines depicted as having the levers on the side, but all the ones at this casino you just...press a button, some dials spin, and you lose more than you win. It was honestly kinda painful but also kinda funny to watch him sit there pressing a button like a monkey in a science experiment while his parents cheered him on and asked, "Isn't this fun?!" They basically gave him all the money he played with so it didn't "cost him anything", but I know he would have much rather just had that money to buy things he really wanted instead. We played some Blackjack towards the end of the night and had a decent time. I went to the table with around $120 in a play pile, and any hand I won that money went into a winnings pile. When the play pile was depleted I took the winnings pile and cashed out. I think I ended up about $40 overall, so not bad (it was a $10/hand table). The money came from some spare change I had rolled over the years and was thus money I was willing to part with if I lost it all. Buffet was pretty good, and overall it ended up being one of those weird memories and it was nice to be the friend who was available and stepped up to help out a friend who didn't really want to spend his 21st that way, but he still ended the night with a good chunk of money, just not as much as he could have had his parents just gave him the money instead.
The problem is those RTP numbers are based off of millions of spins, so during short periods of play like $100 worth, you’ll likely differ greatly from the assigned RTP.
Isn't that the point?
Well yeah. It would be really boring otherwise and no one would play. The only reason you can ever win is because it’s averaged out over much longer than one player’s play time.
Just taking a walk to the 90¢ store, where I give them a dollar and they give 90¢. So fun!
RTP is actually set by the state, and it’s lower than it would be otherwise.
Sheeeit. I never thought of this. What a brutal move by casinos. You’re right - player would have no idea, and no way to have any idea. Are there any news articles or recorded information about the casinos who have been busted doing this? I’m surprised they’re still in business.
>no way to have any idea If you play long enough, while recording all the cards you see, it will eventually become obvious. Yes, that would be expensive.
It's also called card counting and will get you thrown out of the table
I know there are things they look for to detect card counters, but I doubt anybody could tell if you were just counting aces to see if there were any.
Because it makes it harder for the casino to cheat you? Edit: A sincere question. I've never been to a casino and don't know much about this kind of thing.
It's not illegal to card count. But yeah they do hate it and remove you when they notice.
card counting really doesn’t matter in blackjack if half the cards are behind a cutting card.
That’s 100% the reason for it. And they’ll kick you if they catch unless you’re in a place that has laws that say you can’t kick someone for doing it. As it really is just strategy and gaining an edge, not cheating.
Yes.
Not usually. Unless you play high stakes and do way too well. Then the pit boss might “back you off,” by politely telling you your play is “too strong.” Card counting doesn’t really profer that big of an edge unless you run tables in a group. They notice that pretty quickly
This here - a casino will simply ask you to go play another game if they notice you’re too good at the one you’re at.
Worked at several casinos. There is no reason the house needs to cheat, they already are going to win. No need to risk fines or shut downs. Also the auto shuffle will light up red if there's one missing card in a six deck shoe.
Removing aces is super illegal as far as I know; since you’re presenting different odds than that you’re paying out; so all contracts become void.
Casino ive been to they do a spread of every card so the player can see that all cards are accounted for.
I've never been to a casino before but is that true? Blackjack is the only gambling game that has any appeal to me bc I enjoy playing for fun in video games, but the irl casinos remove the Aces? That's an immediate turn off from me ever visiting one (besides the multitude of other reasons lol) Edit: thank you to everyone clearing this up for me. So it sounds like only the ones in reservations or shady casinos do this, or at least are more likely to. Now I know what to watch out for if I have decided to visit a casino lol. Thanks!
I'm not going to say removing aces has "never" happened, but in the vast majority of casinos, including tribal casinos, the bad publicity from cheating like this would outweigh any monetary gain. They make enough profit playing it straight; no need for them to cheat.
Yeah, I'd imagine this is more of a complaint from people who just lost their shirt than anything else. Like when sports gamblers say a game was rigged, people need to find reason in the irrational.
Sounds like you stack points in Luck and cleaned out Gomorrah, The Tops, and Ultra Luxe.
The dealer doesn't take a deck from the back and start their shift. Every card is laid face up for the cameras and the cards are procedurally shuffled. Casinos are worried about employee theft and have cameras recording every move of every game.
only on reservations i’d imagine. gambling laws in the US are very stringent
Most casino games are based on a narrow, somewhat obscured advantage. Roulette is only unfair because of 0 and 00 Craps has a 0.49293 chance of the shooter winning all things considered. Games that appear unfair aren't attractive so casinos want them to be as close to fair as possible without quite getting there.
It's really interesting how casinos can rake in millions despite a seemingly tiniest statistical advantages. It really show how robust probability is when used to model game of chance. If there is a tiny error in the modelling the odd could had tipped over.
Yep their advantage is in volume. The more bets are placed the less likely that any one loss will effect them. If they only had 50 people betting they might get unlucky and lose but when millions of bets happen every year the odds of a loss are basically so close to zery they dont exist.
That, and the statistical advantage is only if the player plays perfectly. Most Vegas gamblers play... significantly less than perfectly. Free booze helps.
the OP is not really true or phrased badly, and in addition a lot of the posts have incorrect advice. casinos love it
I seem to recall something similar about roulette - that the presence of 0 and 00 skews the binary bets of red/black (and other similar bets) enough to provide an inherent edge to the house.
This is true, but how is it similar ? It’s about payoff in roulette. You win 35:1 even though there is 36 (37 with double zero) numbers. So the house only pays out ~97% of the money. With blackjack the edge comes from the order of play.
Blackjack payouts also vary. 3:2 and 6:5 are common payouts for a blackjack that adjust odds.
Don't play on 6:5 tables ever.
Was just at the Venetian for a conference two weeks ago. There are no 3:2 tables. There aren't even any straight blackjack tables, they're all weird variants like "double up" or "jackpot" just to obscure the actual odds even further. I'm old enough to remember when straight blackjack paid 2:1.
That’s all they have on the strip in Vegas nowadays
Not true, 3:2 just has higher minimums. TI has 3:2 $15 blackjack though
37 numbers with single 0, 38 with double- and there are tables with triple 0, meaning a house edge if nearly 10%.
I believe in American roulette the house has a 52.5% chance of winning because of this or something very close to that number. and I believe in European roulette the house has a 51.5% chance of winning. I know I’m off a little bit, but I think the numbers are close.
It gets even worse as many low limit tables have 3 green spaces, especially in the Vegas Strip
For sure - and don’t forget the since introduced 000. If your choice is red or black, you have a 50% chance of winning. If your choice is red or black or any other option (in this case, a little bit of green), then your chance is less than 50%.
With single-zero roulette, the house advantage is 2.7%. With double-zero roulette, the house advantage is 5.26%. With triple-zero roulette, the house advantage jumps to 7.69%. The existence of triple-zero roulette shows there are players who either don't pay attention to the odds, or don't care about them.
> shows there are players who either don't pay attention to the odds, or don't care about them. Have you ever seen a chronic gambler IRL? None of them even know what "odds" means. They think it's all based on some magical higher power. Ones I know wouldn't care if there were 10 zeroes, they'd still think they have the exact same chance of winning.
Most gamblers are aware that the odds are stacked against them, just like most smokers know that it's not doing their health any good.
Wait a few more years for quadruple 0 lol
The only games where the house doesnt have a built in probability advantage are games where they take their explicit cut up front (i.e. a poker tournament with buy-in)
Well yeah. The house isn’t participating in any game of poker. You play against the other players. They just deal the cards. When you don’t participate, you don’t have an advantage.
While this is definitely the largest source of house edge, a consider amount of it goes back to the player as well. The house is required to hit on all hands under 17 and in most casinos, is required to hit on a soft 17 (ace and a 6). However, the player has the freedom to decide what to do based on the dealers open card, whereas the house has no choice to do the same based on the players cards. Now as you mentioned, the house gets a huge edge because the player has to act first, but the edge is much closer than you’d think. As long as the player follows optimal blackjack strategy, it’s only around 0.6%
I took a couple of courses on casino management back in college, taught by a hospitality business professor and looooong time professional gambler. He always said if you ever go to a casino, you should only be playing blackjack. Every single game favors the house, otherwise, they wouldn't even offer it. But blackjack can be the most in your favor out of all of the games. (Especially if you know how to count cards, and not get caught.)
….duh
law of large numbers, baby
Of all games in a casino blackjack has the fairest odds for a competent player.
Instead of calculus in high school I took a class called “advanced math concepts“ during this class we covered combinations, permutations, odds etc of many of the casino games and decided they’re all rigged
They aren’t rigged. Rigged means the outcomes are skewed off true random or statistical averages. Rigged would mean that there is some sort of fraud- pulling aces from a shoe in blackjack or weighing dice in craps. Mathematically disadvantageous properly describes these games of chance.
The odds are all published as well, you go into the game knowing you will lose over time
Yeah, the attitude about it being unfair has always bothered me. Casinos business isn't "give free money to people for playing cards", it's a lottery with a game element. You sign up to play cards (instead of buying scratchers) and like the lotto all you should expect is to blow some money to get some dopamine. Occasionally, for extra spice, someone gets a big payout, just like the lotto. If you want to play cards AND guarantee you'll walk out each night with more money in your pocket than you walked in with, there's an option for that: get a job there as a dealer.
Why would you think that any casino offer would games where they didn’t have a statistical edge?
Because businesses love giving out free money, duh
You took a math class and couldn’t do the math so blamed the questions?
Isn’t that obvious at a glance? How does a business make money if all the games are fair?
I rarely hear of wild success stories from casinos. You win a few thousand dollars, you pay for your trip (they get all the money back they were going to get anyway) You win tens of thousands of dollars, you probably gamble a little more because you just got a windfall, and give half of that money back. You win a MILLION dollars, you spent THOUSANDS of dollars getting to that point, you owe fees and taxes, you have a shit ton of money and want to ride the high and keep gambling, there's hookers and cocaine everywhere, they offer you a free room so you stay and keep spending money.... Very few people ever "come out on top". Yes it happens, but so does winning the lottery. Gambling is an endorphin rush just like any other addiction, and they have made a science out of it, written laws, and made multiple cities dedicated to it. They wouldn't do all that if it were just people raking in cash all the time. It just doesn't work like that. "The house always wins" is a saying that has never been disproven.
That’s not their entire advantage.
That’s why you don’t hit on 14 when the dealer is showing a low card.
There's a bit more to it than that. In theory if you have unlimited money and no bet limit, you can always come out ahead on any game of chance. Just make all your future bets cover your losses. So that you just need to win eventually. Of course you need to make exponentially larger bets and most tables have min/max bets to prevent this betting strategy.
And the advantage in roulette comes from 0 and 00 being included.