AC Conditions
- Thread starter WABJ11
- Start date
Sat afternoon Trump Plaza had half a dozen $10 and $15 tables that were S17 8D. (HE .43%) Borg has all S17, mostly 8D , but there are 6D NMSE (.43%) at the medium-high limit tables in front of the larger hi-limit room. $50 is the lowest min on a busy evening, can be $25 during the day. Trump Marina is all 8D H17 (.65%) on the main floor. (Except for the SD 6:5 H17 table . . . ) Hi-limit room there has $50 S17 6D with LS if you ask (.33%).
Did my usual rounds in AC yesterday, strictly Boardwalk, and noticed something that caught me off-guard. Perhaps my vision is getting worse but I could swear I saw TP's black-chip table 8-Decks?? 
Also, which shop do you guys think that...
sweats the most money, in terms of wins?
offers the most heat overall?
tks!!
M.
Also, which shop do you guys think that...
sweats the most money, in terms of wins?
offers the most heat overall?
tks!!
M.
The Borg's games have gotten so mediocre and boring, it is pure torture to take a shot at their low limit games. The green chip and up games may be better, but I don't want to go that route. I believe all the green chips tables I saw last trip had "graduated" to 8-deck. They keep trying to squeeze the last penny out of their dwindling customer base, and customers are leaving even more, so they resort to squeezing even more, which of course will result in a continuation of the vicious cycle. When they start approaching business from an advertising point of view (what the customer wants) instead of an accountant's "average table winnings" point of view, they will begin to reverse this suicidal trend. It doesn't matter what your average table winnings are if you have increasingly fewer tables in play. Until then I expect the PA and DE games to continue to siphon off their more knowledgeable players along with many who are influenced by them.
People like to go where the action is, and it sure ain't at AC anymore. I do everything I can to get that word out to my ploppy friends. It's just like when ploppies say, "They tightened up the slots this weekend. They ain't paying nothing!" When the word gets around, people actually do become more cautious and selective. (Actually, I don't think they ever do "tighten up" the slots; it's just that they are such a poor gamble that sooner or later it will seem like they do. And brother do the ploppies get the word out.)
Of course, it's not all poor games, it's the economy. Just seems to me that in such a poor economy, they would want to do everything possible to entice players to visit them instead of nearer PA and DE stores.
People like to go where the action is, and it sure ain't at AC anymore. I do everything I can to get that word out to my ploppy friends. It's just like when ploppies say, "They tightened up the slots this weekend. They ain't paying nothing!" When the word gets around, people actually do become more cautious and selective. (Actually, I don't think they ever do "tighten up" the slots; it's just that they are such a poor gamble that sooner or later it will seem like they do. And brother do the ploppies get the word out.)
Of course, it's not all poor games, it's the economy. Just seems to me that in such a poor economy, they would want to do everything possible to entice players to visit them instead of nearer PA and DE stores.
Can anyone confirm that TP has 8-deck $100 tables? If so, why would they do that? Does it make sense to offer such poor conditions at such high stakes and potentially drive away black-chip business?
It seems to me that they're pretty "sweaty" along with the Hilton. Even the notoriously "tight" HET/CEZ props, though they may offer inferior games at red-chip level, offer 6-deck, S17 at $50 and $100...
Thoughts?
:cool2:
It seems to me that they're pretty "sweaty" along with the Hilton. Even the notoriously "tight" HET/CEZ props, though they may offer inferior games at red-chip level, offer 6-deck, S17 at $50 and $100...
Thoughts?
:cool2:
ms069279 said:
Can anyone confirm that TP has 8-deck $100 tables? If so, why would they do that? Does it make sense to offer such poor conditions at such high stakes and potentially drive away black-chip business?
It seems to me that they're pretty "sweaty" along with the Hilton. Even the notoriously "tight" HET/CEZ props, though they may offer inferior games at red-chip level, offer 6-deck, S17 at $50 and $100...
Thoughts?
:cool2:
It seems to me that they're pretty "sweaty" along with the Hilton. Even the notoriously "tight" HET/CEZ props, though they may offer inferior games at red-chip level, offer 6-deck, S17 at $50 and $100...
Thoughts?
:cool2:
TP has been up to something no good for APs. The bad news: some time ago, it has changed all its 6decker-discard-trays into 8decker-discard-trays in both the $25 pit and the $100 pit. The good news: the games in the aforementioned pits are still 6deckers even though dealers have used the 8decker-discard-trays. However, those games will be changed to 8deckers without notice. Since the 8decker-discard-trays have been already installed, 6deckers can be changed over to 8deckers at any time if the new management decides to go for all monstrous decks in the entire house.
I can't figure out AC management. Except for Tropicana for the last 2 months, all casinos' revenues have been dropping like rocks...Why don't they improve their games to keep patrons from going to PA and DE casinos? Go figure.
I keep saying, it's because of the accountants. They meet with other management and tell them that the earnings per table has been going down. Their answer is to make the games harder to beat, thereby raising per table earnings. The only trouble with their reasoning is that they are losing players with their poor rules, CSMs, poor pen, and 8-deckers. So what they get is better earnings per table and fewer tables, which translates to lower overall earnings.
What they need is to turn the table decisions over to the marketing people. They can then advertise no CSMs, the best rules in town, and 6-deck games. You don't advertise pen, but the news gets around.
Part of the trouble at Borgata may be related to the dropping out of MGM from casino ownership. MGM resorts is a very customer-friendly organization. They do have a glut of CSMs in Vegas, but they also do have hand-shuffles and ASMs, 6-deck games, S17, and decent pen. Boyd Gaming (Orleans, Suncoast, Gold Coast, Sam's Town, California, Fremont, Main Street Station, et al), I would argue, while they have beatable games are not as customer friendly as MGM properties. I believe this is carrying over into the Borgata. The next move would be to H-17 games like practically everyone else in AC. We'll see if they go that far.
What they need is to turn the table decisions over to the marketing people. They can then advertise no CSMs, the best rules in town, and 6-deck games. You don't advertise pen, but the news gets around.
Part of the trouble at Borgata may be related to the dropping out of MGM from casino ownership. MGM resorts is a very customer-friendly organization. They do have a glut of CSMs in Vegas, but they also do have hand-shuffles and ASMs, 6-deck games, S17, and decent pen. Boyd Gaming (Orleans, Suncoast, Gold Coast, Sam's Town, California, Fremont, Main Street Station, et al), I would argue, while they have beatable games are not as customer friendly as MGM properties. I believe this is carrying over into the Borgata. The next move would be to H-17 games like practically everyone else in AC. We'll see if they go that far.
Thunder said:
Don't despair, there is a very juicy game going on right now (the best in the past year) that everyone can play and it's S17 Let's just say the cat and mouse games are in full swing. Sometimes it pays to scout. That's all I'm going to say.
That's all I'm going to say.
Aslan,
As much as I would like to agree with you, there is a SLIGHT problem with your reasoning.
You are assuming most players of blackjack actually understand the effects that BJ rules have on the game. In short, you're assuming they are reasonably rational and informed about the game of blackjack and what the optimum conditions for a player are.
This is not true for the mass market (broadly speaking, red chippers). Most of them do not know much about the game.
There is a market segment which DOES understand what rules are the best for players; Advantage Players and Basic Strategy Players. The former, over the long run, are NOT profitable for the casino (by themselves, although in small quantities they generate a positive externality that attracts more Ploppies) and the latter are the Scottish gamblers that are the hardest to squeeze money out of.
If a casino markets itself, sincerely, as "best for the player" and actually has the best rules; it is these INFORMED gamblers that will flock to the casino first.
So, to use game theory terminology, there's a "first mover disadvantage," i.e. if only one casino goes for good rules there's a significant chance it will attract the least profitable players (and even those that cause losses to the casino) as opposed to ploppies.
I admit, I haven't done any quantitative analysis on this so I am only speculating about which effects will dominate. It is quite possible that I am wrong.
If the more informed players are, on average, higher betters (I think this is a reasonable speculation to make), then this would imply a casino with the best rules that markets itself accordingly will attract a very strong slice of the high roller market.
Additionally, genuinely competent advantage players rare indeed rare, but again if it is just one casino that goes for good rules, that one casino will have the entire AP market flocking into their property.
Finally, penetration is one area where AP's interests and the interests of both BSP's and Ploppies genuinely conflict. AP's want deep pen for counting purposes, but BSP's and Ploppies benefit from lower-pen shoes because it means more frequent shuffling and thus fewer hands per hour (and thus more Free-Drinks-Per-Hand-Played).
I think that if the populace in general were more intelligent regarding finding a good game, you'd absolutely be right that "we're the best chance you have" promotions would make killings. But I think in real life, that's less certain.
It is, however, a possibility that if casinos market as "lowest house edge, best blackjack rules," this advertising MAY encourage prospective players to analyze their chances more intelligently and thus, in effect, help the market get more educated. So I'm not saying you are necessarily wrong... just that as much as I wish you were absolutely correct, I don't think you necessarily are (although you may be).
As much as I would like to agree with you, there is a SLIGHT problem with your reasoning.
You are assuming most players of blackjack actually understand the effects that BJ rules have on the game. In short, you're assuming they are reasonably rational and informed about the game of blackjack and what the optimum conditions for a player are.
This is not true for the mass market (broadly speaking, red chippers). Most of them do not know much about the game.
There is a market segment which DOES understand what rules are the best for players; Advantage Players and Basic Strategy Players. The former, over the long run, are NOT profitable for the casino (by themselves, although in small quantities they generate a positive externality that attracts more Ploppies) and the latter are the Scottish gamblers that are the hardest to squeeze money out of.
If a casino markets itself, sincerely, as "best for the player" and actually has the best rules; it is these INFORMED gamblers that will flock to the casino first.
So, to use game theory terminology, there's a "first mover disadvantage," i.e. if only one casino goes for good rules there's a significant chance it will attract the least profitable players (and even those that cause losses to the casino) as opposed to ploppies.
I admit, I haven't done any quantitative analysis on this so I am only speculating about which effects will dominate. It is quite possible that I am wrong.
If the more informed players are, on average, higher betters (I think this is a reasonable speculation to make), then this would imply a casino with the best rules that markets itself accordingly will attract a very strong slice of the high roller market.
Additionally, genuinely competent advantage players rare indeed rare, but again if it is just one casino that goes for good rules, that one casino will have the entire AP market flocking into their property.
Finally, penetration is one area where AP's interests and the interests of both BSP's and Ploppies genuinely conflict. AP's want deep pen for counting purposes, but BSP's and Ploppies benefit from lower-pen shoes because it means more frequent shuffling and thus fewer hands per hour (and thus more Free-Drinks-Per-Hand-Played).
I think that if the populace in general were more intelligent regarding finding a good game, you'd absolutely be right that "we're the best chance you have" promotions would make killings. But I think in real life, that's less certain.
It is, however, a possibility that if casinos market as "lowest house edge, best blackjack rules," this advertising MAY encourage prospective players to analyze their chances more intelligently and thus, in effect, help the market get more educated. So I'm not saying you are necessarily wrong... just that as much as I wish you were absolutely correct, I don't think you necessarily are (although you may be).
I don't think they're ignoring the competition as much as choosing to not actively compete against it. That would involve work and risk, which is something management doesn't get rewarded for. My feeling about AC is that they would have welcomed shutting down their table games and laying off all that staff for a while now, which is why it surprised me when PA actually went through with getting them. Neither AC nor PA will ever be a destination for whales or really any clientele beyond what they already have so there is very small reward for offering any great games.
My observation of PA is that the players are even worse than in AC.
My observation of PA is that the players are even worse than in AC.