Anti-Couting Measures effect on Casino Profits
- Thread starter Dyepaintball12
- Start date
one clear reason is rule variation and its effect on customers i.e. whether they will play.
many casino offer bad rules either to reap a higher take or to dissuade knowledgeable players (even BS players). One example in particular is LS. LS is a benefit to those who know how to use it, it decreases the house edge when played correctly. Yet, if allowed I opine that the casino makes more money, since the majority of players MISUSE this rule, surrendering hands that have a significantly better result if they hit or stand on them.
this is speculation on my part, nothing more.
the most obvious point is penetration. the deeper the pen, the more hands an hour a casino can deal, the more money they can take. no mid shoe entry has this effect too. if you limit the number of hands a player can make, the less money you stand to make. these things hold true with BOTH ASM and hand shuffled games.
many casino offer bad rules either to reap a higher take or to dissuade knowledgeable players (even BS players). One example in particular is LS. LS is a benefit to those who know how to use it, it decreases the house edge when played correctly. Yet, if allowed I opine that the casino makes more money, since the majority of players MISUSE this rule, surrendering hands that have a significantly better result if they hit or stand on them.
this is speculation on my part, nothing more.
the most obvious point is penetration. the deeper the pen, the more hands an hour a casino can deal, the more money they can take. no mid shoe entry has this effect too. if you limit the number of hands a player can make, the less money you stand to make. these things hold true with BOTH ASM and hand shuffled games.
You would be correct assuming that less card counters actually go to the casinos in which you're suggesting anti-card counting techniques cost more money.
However, what you must understand that even if a casino is loosing money, it prevents amature counters, from either becoming to large and stop them while they still don't know all the techniques or stop even those people that are professionals, this is mearly an opinionated topic and has no real fact, so you can't do a paper on chance.
However, what you must understand that even if a casino is loosing money, it prevents amature counters, from either becoming to large and stop them while they still don't know all the techniques or stop even those people that are professionals, this is mearly an opinionated topic and has no real fact, so you can't do a paper on chance.
like what would he need? just one instance of a casino losing a signifcant amount to some wild voracious pack of AP's. 
so maybe diepaint needs to refine the parameters. for like maybe some percentage of AP's that are run of the mill types or something. just would be a theory on anybody's part i guess.
so maybe diepaint needs to refine the parameters. for like maybe some percentage of AP's that are run of the mill types or something. just would be a theory on anybody's part i guess.
Just from this thread:
(1) Shuffling does take time, so it slows down the hands per hour. But ASM's don't slow down the game THAT much, certainly not on the level of hand-shuffled shoe games. How much would shallow vs. deep penetration on an ASM-shuffled game actually cost in terms of hands per hour? How much would a good counter lose on the same penetration difference? How much would the average counter lose?
(2) Frequent shuffles do give people pause to leave the game with winnings. However, there are probably many more losers than winners - giving them opportunities to leave also. Winners are probably more likely to walk than losers, but what percentage of people actually leave as winners, and will frequent shuffling actually make them less time at the tables (as opposed to leaving but then jumping back in 5 minutes later at another table)?
(3) What percentage of people are actually aware of the rules of the game they play, and make an educated decision on where to play based on those rules?
I don't know if any casino would release that sort of information.
(1) Shuffling does take time, so it slows down the hands per hour. But ASM's don't slow down the game THAT much, certainly not on the level of hand-shuffled shoe games. How much would shallow vs. deep penetration on an ASM-shuffled game actually cost in terms of hands per hour? How much would a good counter lose on the same penetration difference? How much would the average counter lose?
(2) Frequent shuffles do give people pause to leave the game with winnings. However, there are probably many more losers than winners - giving them opportunities to leave also. Winners are probably more likely to walk than losers, but what percentage of people actually leave as winners, and will frequent shuffling actually make them less time at the tables (as opposed to leaving but then jumping back in 5 minutes later at another table)?
(3) What percentage of people are actually aware of the rules of the game they play, and make an educated decision on where to play based on those rules?
I don't know if any casino would release that sort of information.
Hey David,
I'm not skeptical about helping you. My only fear was that you are casino personnel. Now, I think I would want casino personnel to know the following facts. First of all, most bj players (ploppies) don't know BS. Most BS players are not proficient card counters with knowledge of strategy point deviations or an eyeball for deck estimation. Most proficient card counters do not properly size their bets according to their small bankrolls and retain discipline enough to play at an advantage at all times.
Lets call the proficient CC's with proper money management and discipline, "AP's." I'm estimating that only 1-in-1K to 1-in-10K of all bj players are AP's. Furthermore, I'd guess that it's a lot closer to 0.01% in 2008 as opposed to 0.1% in 1978. I'm going to guess that the average ploppy plays against a -1% edge in 2008 as opposed to a -2% in 1978. I'm also going to guess that most AP's are not proficient with a concept called advanced techniques (AT's). Therefore, let us estimate that less than 1% of all AP's are proficient with AT's. Let's say these elite soldiers play with a 5% advantage and normal AP's play with a 1% advantage. Now let's draw a mathematical map of this hypothetical ecology (Also, let's side on conservatism for the sake of the casinos):
100,000 bj players are in a hypothetical set of many casinos. Say all of MGM for one day and they all bet an average of 100 hands of bj.
99,000 are ploppies and bet an average of $25 against a -1% edge for 100 hands. [House Cum. Take (HCT) = $2,475,000.]
500 are perfect BS players but know nothing else, betting $25 against a -0.5% edge for 100 hands. [HCT = $2,481,250.]
400 are proficient CC's with bad money management skills, betting $50 with a +0.25% advantage for 100 hands. [HCT = $2,476,250. (They took MGM for $5K today.)]
99 are proficient CC's with proper money management skills, betting $75 with a +1% advantage for 100 hands. [HCT = $2,468,825. (These soldiers took MGM for $7,425 today.)]
1 CC with proficient AT's, betting $100 with a 5% advantage for 100 hands. [HCT = $2,468,325. (This prodigal took'em for $500 today.)
So, this latter group of 500 proficient CC's cut into the casino's take of close to $2.5M by 0.52%. Now, what if penetration on these games was 5/6 instead of 4.5/6? Well, they would 11% LESS OFTEN! As you can see, the House Take wouldn't change much. They would now be playing 111 hands as opposed to 100 but let's say the Take only increased by 10% because of those darn CC's? [HCT = $2,715,157. (An increase far exceeding the previous take?)]
SO, LESSENING PENETRATION IN A MANUALLY SHUFFLED GAME IS A STUPID IDEA FOR A CASINO CORP. MGM HAS ALREADY IMPLEMENTED THIS STRATEGY.
Well, what if they switch every single game to an ASM? Let's say they can now increase to 110 hands per day (10%). No edge changes except they temporarily eliminated the prodigal who was taking $500 and did not replace him. However, 100 ploppies who were averaging $500 per hand just got up and went to a different casino where they're not hit with a hurricane of cards without end. [The take went down by $49,500 and then up by 10% to $2,674,925.] This is good for the casino, right?
ASM MAKES IT HARDER FOR 0.2% OF ALL CARD COUNTERS AND MOST HIGH ROLLING PLOPPIES WHILE INCREASING OVERALL CASINO TAKE BY ABOUT 10%. HOWEVER, THE MACHINES COST MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, ANNUALIZED. YOU WILL LOSE MOST OF YOUR HIGH ROLLERS. HET HAS ALREADY IMPLEMENTED THIS STRATEGY AND IT WORKED WELL FOR THEM.
Let's look at "NMS". This may have cut 10% of all proficient CC's down to a 0.5% edge as opposed to a 2% edge. So, say 50 of them were averaging $60 per hand with a 2% advantage. That's a difference of $4,500 but now your players are playing about 5% less hands. Say they're now playing 95 hands. Plus, you would double or triple the amount of "trackers" and "sequencers" (those 5% dudes) because it's good for them. So you're really only saving $4,000 but then losing about $120,000.
NMS MAKES IT HARDER FOR ABOUT 10% OF ALL CARD COUNTERS AND A LITTLE BIT (5%) OF ALL YOUR PLAYERS. THIS IS AN EXTREMELY STUPID IDEA FOR A CASINO CORP. TRMP HAS ALREADY IMPLEMENTED THIS STRATEGY.
I could go on and on about every single countermeasure but alas, it's time for a conclusion. If you are thinking that casino corporations are IDIOTS WHEN IT COMES TO RUNNING A GAMBLING HOUSE, YOU ARE CORRECT! What you're not realizing is that they don't want to gamble! THEY WANT EVERYONE TO BE A PLOPPY WITH 1% AGAINST THEM, EVEN IF THIS MEANS THERE WILL ONLY BE 50k OF THEM INSTEAD OF 100k. WITH THE HELP OF SOCIALIST GOVERNMENTS THIS IS ALREADY THE WAY IT IS IN OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD. THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT WE DO AND IT SCARES THEM. If the customer base of all casinos goes down by 50% (and it will if the gambling public thinks that any and all games are absolutely "unbeatable"), many corporations will go bankrupt. They're all too scared to switch all games to CSM but they all want to. Why, they fear us and I say, "Boo! This little bother's watching you too."
I'm not skeptical about helping you. My only fear was that you are casino personnel. Now, I think I would want casino personnel to know the following facts. First of all, most bj players (ploppies) don't know BS. Most BS players are not proficient card counters with knowledge of strategy point deviations or an eyeball for deck estimation. Most proficient card counters do not properly size their bets according to their small bankrolls and retain discipline enough to play at an advantage at all times.
Lets call the proficient CC's with proper money management and discipline, "AP's." I'm estimating that only 1-in-1K to 1-in-10K of all bj players are AP's. Furthermore, I'd guess that it's a lot closer to 0.01% in 2008 as opposed to 0.1% in 1978. I'm going to guess that the average ploppy plays against a -1% edge in 2008 as opposed to a -2% in 1978. I'm also going to guess that most AP's are not proficient with a concept called advanced techniques (AT's). Therefore, let us estimate that less than 1% of all AP's are proficient with AT's. Let's say these elite soldiers play with a 5% advantage and normal AP's play with a 1% advantage. Now let's draw a mathematical map of this hypothetical ecology (Also, let's side on conservatism for the sake of the casinos):
100,000 bj players are in a hypothetical set of many casinos. Say all of MGM for one day and they all bet an average of 100 hands of bj.
99,000 are ploppies and bet an average of $25 against a -1% edge for 100 hands. [House Cum. Take (HCT) = $2,475,000.]
500 are perfect BS players but know nothing else, betting $25 against a -0.5% edge for 100 hands. [HCT = $2,481,250.]
400 are proficient CC's with bad money management skills, betting $50 with a +0.25% advantage for 100 hands. [HCT = $2,476,250. (They took MGM for $5K today.)]
99 are proficient CC's with proper money management skills, betting $75 with a +1% advantage for 100 hands. [HCT = $2,468,825. (These soldiers took MGM for $7,425 today.)]
1 CC with proficient AT's, betting $100 with a 5% advantage for 100 hands. [HCT = $2,468,325. (This prodigal took'em for $500 today.)
So, this latter group of 500 proficient CC's cut into the casino's take of close to $2.5M by 0.52%. Now, what if penetration on these games was 5/6 instead of 4.5/6? Well, they would 11% LESS OFTEN! As you can see, the House Take wouldn't change much. They would now be playing 111 hands as opposed to 100 but let's say the Take only increased by 10% because of those darn CC's? [HCT = $2,715,157. (An increase far exceeding the previous take?)]
SO, LESSENING PENETRATION IN A MANUALLY SHUFFLED GAME IS A STUPID IDEA FOR A CASINO CORP. MGM HAS ALREADY IMPLEMENTED THIS STRATEGY.
Well, what if they switch every single game to an ASM? Let's say they can now increase to 110 hands per day (10%). No edge changes except they temporarily eliminated the prodigal who was taking $500 and did not replace him. However, 100 ploppies who were averaging $500 per hand just got up and went to a different casino where they're not hit with a hurricane of cards without end. [The take went down by $49,500 and then up by 10% to $2,674,925.] This is good for the casino, right?
ASM MAKES IT HARDER FOR 0.2% OF ALL CARD COUNTERS AND MOST HIGH ROLLING PLOPPIES WHILE INCREASING OVERALL CASINO TAKE BY ABOUT 10%. HOWEVER, THE MACHINES COST MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, ANNUALIZED. YOU WILL LOSE MOST OF YOUR HIGH ROLLERS. HET HAS ALREADY IMPLEMENTED THIS STRATEGY AND IT WORKED WELL FOR THEM.
Let's look at "NMS". This may have cut 10% of all proficient CC's down to a 0.5% edge as opposed to a 2% edge. So, say 50 of them were averaging $60 per hand with a 2% advantage. That's a difference of $4,500 but now your players are playing about 5% less hands. Say they're now playing 95 hands. Plus, you would double or triple the amount of "trackers" and "sequencers" (those 5% dudes) because it's good for them. So you're really only saving $4,000 but then losing about $120,000.
NMS MAKES IT HARDER FOR ABOUT 10% OF ALL CARD COUNTERS AND A LITTLE BIT (5%) OF ALL YOUR PLAYERS. THIS IS AN EXTREMELY STUPID IDEA FOR A CASINO CORP. TRMP HAS ALREADY IMPLEMENTED THIS STRATEGY.
I could go on and on about every single countermeasure but alas, it's time for a conclusion. If you are thinking that casino corporations are IDIOTS WHEN IT COMES TO RUNNING A GAMBLING HOUSE, YOU ARE CORRECT! What you're not realizing is that they don't want to gamble! THEY WANT EVERYONE TO BE A PLOPPY WITH 1% AGAINST THEM, EVEN IF THIS MEANS THERE WILL ONLY BE 50k OF THEM INSTEAD OF 100k. WITH THE HELP OF SOCIALIST GOVERNMENTS THIS IS ALREADY THE WAY IT IS IN OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD. THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT WE DO AND IT SCARES THEM. If the customer base of all casinos goes down by 50% (and it will if the gambling public thinks that any and all games are absolutely "unbeatable"), many corporations will go bankrupt. They're all too scared to switch all games to CSM but they all want to. Why, they fear us and I say, "Boo! This little bother's watching you too."
Like I said...
Switching to all ASM's worked out great for HET because they could afford to pay less via "economies of scale" and it saved them a lot of time shuffling. ShuffleMaster Inc. also profited on this great deal. They eliminated the 0.001% of all their bj players who are expert shuffle trackers and probably about 50% of their high rollers which they don't really want anyway. Those guys increase variation! Who needs them? HET is just dandy taking money from poor and middle class gamblers.
Switching to all ASM's worked out great for HET because they could afford to pay less via "economies of scale" and it saved them a lot of time shuffling. ShuffleMaster Inc. also profited on this great deal. They eliminated the 0.001% of all their bj players who are expert shuffle trackers and probably about 50% of their high rollers which they don't really want anyway. Those guys increase variation! Who needs them? HET is just dandy taking money from poor and middle class gamblers.