Initial buy-in when you arrive at the casino to maximize comps???

[jerseyshop101]

Initial buy-in when you arrive at the casino to maximize comps???

I've seen one player who always buys in for as much as $10K, and bets small ($10/unit). He insists this helps maximize his comps. And then another player on the opposite end of this- buys in for $200 (numerous times if he has to) and bets $50 or $100 a hand, again saying this also maximizes his comps.

Is there any truth to either one of these methods? I thought the most important factors are the time spent at the tables and how much we play per hand.

 

[bejammin075]

I'm currently reading "Comp City"

And I think I can sort this out. I haven't actually tried real world advantage play yet, but I can regurgitate some book learning for you. The first player you describe would be a plausible "Comp Counter" and not a card counter. For a card counter, buying in for 10 grand and then betting only 10 bucks a hand is going to get you backed off or barred. If on the other hand, you are there to just play basic strategy and rack up the comps, you buy in for a lot, make sure the pit boss sees you, and you bet big when he's watching, and bet a little when he's looking away. The second player you describe would be more like a possible counter who is blending in with the reglur gamblers. Since he doesn't want to get a mountain of chips and then bet 1/1,000th, it's better to go in for a small amount, and if things go negative, it's good to be seen forking over the cash, time after time after time, until EV swings the other way.

As I'm reading Comp City, there are some ways that the comp counter and card counter would have the same agenda, but probably more often, they would have opposite concerns. They would both agree, for example, on CSMs. The counter can't count CSMs, and the comp counter is forced to place too many bets per hour. But in a normal hand-shuffled game, the comp counter would like to sit at a full table, with a slow dealer, and do anything possible to slow down the game.

 

[alwayssplitaces]

And I think I can sort this out. I haven't actually tried real world advantage play yet, but I can regurgitate some book learning for you. The first player you describe would be a plausible "Comp Counter" and not a card counter. For a card counter, buying in for 10 grand and then betting only 10 bucks a hand is going to get you backed off or barred. If on the other hand, you are there to just play basic strategy and rack up the comps, you buy in for a lot, make sure the pit boss sees you, and you bet big when he's watching, and bet a little when he's looking away. The second player you describe would be more like a possible counter who is blending in with the reglur gamblers. Since he doesn't want to get a mountain of chips and then bet 1/1,000th, it's better to go in for a small amount, and if things go negative, it's good to be seen forking over the cash, time after time after time, until EV swings the other way.

As I'm reading Comp City, there are some ways that the comp counter and card counter would have the same agenda, but probably more often, they would have opposite concerns. They would both agree, for example, on CSMs. The counter can't count CSMs, and the comp counter is forced to place too many bets per hour. But in a normal hand-shuffled game, the comp counter would like to sit at a full table, with a slow dealer, and do anything possible to slow down the game.

So that brings up a dilemma, a comp counter and a card counter will hate each other if they're stuck at the same table.

 

[Dyepaintball12]

For the MOST PART, your buy-in has very little to nothing to do with your comps.

However, hosts at at least one casino I've played at (along with others here) say that buy-in does in fact effect your comps at their casino.

But buying in for $10,000 and flat betting $10/hand is just... :laugh:

 

[Most Interesting Man]

If buy in is not used for comps why is the pit so interested in recording buy-in amount? Win/Loss tracking? What if you leave without coloring up?

 

[Gamblor]

And I think I can sort this out. I haven't actually tried real world advantage play yet, but I can regurgitate some book learning for you. The first player you describe would be a plausible "Comp Counter" and not a card counter. For a card counter, buying in for 10 grand and then betting only 10 bucks a hand is going to get you backed off or barred. If on the other hand, you are there to just play basic strategy and rack up the comps, you buy in for a lot, make sure the pit boss sees you, and you bet big when he's watching, and bet a little when he's looking away. The second player you describe would be more like a possible counter who is blending in with the reglur gamblers. Since he doesn't want to get a mountain of chips and then bet 1/1,000th, it's better to go in for a small amount, and if things go negative, it's good to be seen forking over the cash, time after time after time, until EV swings the other way.

As I'm reading Comp City, there are some ways that the comp counter and card counter would have the same agenda, but probably more often, they would have opposite concerns. They would both agree, for example, on CSMs. The counter can't count CSMs, and the comp counter is forced to place too many bets per hour. But in a normal hand-shuffled game, the comp counter would like to sit at a full table, with a slow dealer, and do anything possible to slow down the game.

I can't help get the feeling this is something a casino person might write.

 

[blackjack avenger]

varies

The minimal amount that gets called out to the pit boss, usually $100 and/or enough for a few bets. One does not want to buy in to much due to cage heat and potential pay refusal. So $100 to $500 will work for most situations.

 

[FLASH1296]

This topic is a perennial one.

Your buy-in amount has NOTHING whatsoever to do with your comp's.

The floor-person has the responsibility of tracking cash/chips IN and chips OUT.

The A.P. camouflage tactic is to buy in lightly and re-buy as needed.

Thus you create an image of someone playing with "scared money"

You would rather appear as a bumpkin than a well-capitalized A.P.

Think about it from the pit critter's point of view.

If betting RED buy in for $100 per instance.

If you are betting GREEN $200 suffices.

 

[jaygruden]

This topic is a perennial one.

Your buy-in amount has NOTHING whatsoever to do with your comp's.

The floor-person has the responsibility of tracking cash/chips IN and chips OUT.

The A.P. camouflage tactic is to buy in lightly and re-buy as needed.

Thus you create an image of someone playing with "scared money"

You would rather appear as a bumpkin than a well-capitalized A.P.

Think about it from the pit critter's point of view.

If betting RED buy in for $100 per instance.

If you are betting GREEN $200 suffices.

If playing $15 6D table and spreading 1-15 that isn't even enough to get one max bet out. Don't you think it's more suspicious to reach into your pocket to get a max bet out when you still have 5-8x table min in front of you than to have bought in for 2 to 3 x max bet at the beginning? This is what I nomally do. Do think that is a flawed strategy?

 

[FLASH1296]

What you are doing is signaling the pit critters that you are prepared to bet a goodly amount of money.

NOT what you want to communicate.

You want to give the impression that you are a loser, if not a bona fide degenerate, "down on your luck", and playing with "scared money".

The money is too "scared" to make an appearance.

This is also reminiscent of little old Chinese ladies as well.

They wear a huge diamond ring, but they just grab a benjamin or two as needed, all night long.

 

[Thunder]

What you are doing is signaling the pit critters that you are prepared to bet a goodly amount of money.

NOT what you want to communicate.

You want to give the impression that you are a loser, if not a bona fide degenerate, "down on your luck", and playing with "scared money".

The money is too "scared" to make an appearance.

This is also reminiscent of little old Chinese ladies as well.

They wear a huge diamond ring, but they just grab a benjamin or two as needed, all night long.

In general Flash is correct, however in Atlantic City due to massive layoffs, they often times only have 1 pit person per 8 tables or so. As a result, I have noticed that overall, they tend to record far less buyins than they used to. Instead, they seem far more concerned with coloring you up. I have confirmed this by asking lately how much they have me buying in for. In the past 10 instances where I bought in for more, they only gave me the correct figure once!!! This is problematic as you can imagine. It also depends on the table you're playing at as they're obviously going to devote more resources to the higher limit tables vs. say a red chip table.

 

[blackjack avenger]

important

You have to buy in so as to be recorded.
If $100 doesn't do it quickly put $200 more on table, to force the recognition.

 

[markmcdonald]

From one of my friend's casino hosts in Vegas:

Buy in with cash, not large chips (assuming that your only priority is to get rated better).

This disregards any size bets obviously, but all else equal the cash guys get rated more favorably (I have no idea why).

 

[FLASH1296]

L O L

You expect to hear the truth from a casino host !

L O L

I have played BJ for decades, perhaps since before you were born.

I know of what I speak. I kid your not.

 

[blackjack avenger]

sometimes

Cash & large buy ins do matter. If they think you have a lot of money to lose. The most extreme example is front money, where a whale will make a large deposit with the casinno. The casino will treat them well hoping to clean them out.

For most situations you probably can't buy in enough to tip the scales.

 

[FLASH1296]

re: Thunders post above from yesterday begs comment.

My (recent) experience is the precise opposite of his.

He has had his buy-ins under-reported 90% of the time.

I have yet to have that happen to me, in spite of my

numerous miniature buy-ins.

There are two possible reasons for this. Commonly ...

the failure to make sure that the buy-ins are recorded

within minutes of the transaction, so the dealer can verify it.

The other reason ...

Alienating the pit will negate their (already minimal) motivation to

focus on customer-satisfaction, seriously eroded by the recent

reductions in supervisory staffing. Alienating overworked staff by

asking for the correction in an impolite, anxious, or strident manner,

as opposed to a pleasant, gracious, relaxed, fashion will accomplish this.

Good camouflage has a nucleus of "social engineering" wherein a manifest

personality that is engagingly friendly is crucial to manipulating others in

order to get what you want.

 

[FLASH1296]

re: blackjack avenger's post above begs comment:

He states:

Cash & large buy ins do matter. If they think you have a lot of money to lose. The most extreme example is front money, where a whale will make a large deposit with the casinno. The casino will treat them well hoping to clean them out.

For most situations you probably can't buy in enough to tip the scales."

Decades ago, in Nevada, I frequently "wired" 5 and 6 figure sums to casino cages, especially where I was an unknown player.

In every case, if the player fails to play in a fashion demonstrating that they are willing to risk a large portion of their "front money"
they will be treated no differently than anyone else - as their comps will be reviewed by the Shift Manager.

e.g. If you deposit $50,000 and play BJ 4 hrs. a day with an average bet of $100 your "front money" becomes perfectly transparent
to the casino brass; as they despise people who try to "game the system" by "playing for comps"; trying to break even or win a
modest sum while collecting maximum comps and avoiding "heat"

Taking big markers (e.g. $5,000 each) is something that they are looking for, as evidence that your attitude toward losing most of your
"good faith money" is one of insouciance; but that MUST be backed-up by a big average wager over sufficient hours of play.

So ... not only is this a poor tactic, but it readily "backfires" by revealing your true motivation.

p.s. "Wired" money may need defining.

It is a transaction wherein money is moved between bank accounts electronically.
In pre-computing times, telegraph and telephones were employed, hence the term "wired".

The process is done by the Federal Reserve Banking System that links all banks.
To do this, one needs the routing address and account numbers of the two banks
and the physical addresses as well. Most banks charge a fee of about $30 for this.
I have been comped the fee in some cases. A point to be made is that banks across
the country utilize this system primarily in the afternoon and it cannot be done at
night or on weekends. Do it in the morning and it is likely to be completed in under an hour.
Do it after noon and you may wait until the next day for completion. Banks move
profound sums after 3:00 p.m. in order to earn interest on (extremely short) loans,
measured in hours and days.

Did you really think that your money just collects dust while the moon is shining ?

 

[Shoofly]

If playing $15 6D table and spreading 1-15 that isn't even enough to get one max bet out. Don't you think it's more suspicious to reach into your pocket to get a max bet out when you still have 5-8x table min in front of you than to have bought in for 2 to 3 x max bet at the beginning? This is what I nomally do. Do think that is a flawed strategy?

If you do not have enough in front of you to make a large bet, go all in with what you do have. If you win, you will then either have enough for the next bet or parlay the win. If you lose, you can then go to your pocket and appear to be steaming.

 

[bejammin075]

I can't help get the feeling this is something a casino person might write.

I've been reading about and practicing BJ ever since my work had a "Casino Night" about 2 or 3 months ago, and I got hooked. Prior to that, I'd played a total of maybe 50 cumulative hours of BJ over about a 15 year span, at $5 tables, using basic strategy. I was always fascinated by it. My regular day job is as a research scientist in the pharmaceutical industry. If I was working for casinos, why would I want to post here and be helpful? Or did you think my post was full of harmful disinformation?

 

[Gamblor]

I've been reading about and practicing BJ ever since my work had a "Casino Night" about 2 or 3 months ago, and I got hooked. Prior to that, I'd played a total of maybe 50 cumulative hours of BJ over about a 15 year span, at $5 tables, using basic strategy. I was always fascinated by it. My regular day job is as a research scientist in the pharmaceutical industry. If I was working for casinos, why would I want to post here and be helpful? Or did you think my post was full of harmful disinformation?

Nah, not at all, no disinformation at all, very sound information, maybe a little too sound :laugh: