The Palms $5 blackjack table: rules / conditions / outcome

We were in Vegas last week and I spent a fair amount of time (about 12 hours total) at the Palms one and only 24/7, $5, 3:2 blackjack game. The rules were DA2, DAS, RSA to four hands, late surrender, and H17. The game is dealt via CSM and I played very early mornings during the week to limit competition for a seat. I was always able to get on at these rooster times. The house edge on this game was calculated at .48%. I often played two hands ( $10 - $30 per hand) to reduce variance and more often than not there were other players at the table; I don't know how much EV was affected if at all by the conditions ( it was always negative). I estimated that I played an average of 80-90 hands per hour ( $1600 -$2000+ action per hour at 2 hands) over the entire course of play. I eeked out a small 3-figure win after 4 days of this type play. The fifth day was the house's catch up day; I was dealt stiff after stiff and 14 seemed to be the typical hand for me during this am session. I lost roughly half of what I'd accumulated the previous four sessions. A somewhat typical swing of blackjack outcomes for a basic strategy player ( although  a small win for four consecutive sessions is likely not typical but quite possible; the mathematicians can calculate those probabilities). Despite all that, 3:2 tables with low limits and decent rules in Vegas are a rarity and , sum total, it was an enjoyable overall experience. 

The downside of playing when it's not busy is that you get more hands per hour, which increases your expected loss for any given time frame. That's why I prefer to play at a full table and watch other players struggle to add 7 and 8 ("is that a 21?").

Putting $1800 per hour into action x 12 hours is $21,600 total action. That's an EV of right about -$100, assuming you play perfect Basic Strategy.

Guessing that your small three-figure win was, let's say, $150, and you lost back half of that, you won $75 overall--when your expectation was to lose $100. Doing this calculation in my head, you were about 1.5 standard deviations above the mean, which translates to about a 16% probability. You'll only do that well in one trip out of every six. Rejoice!

Note: I'm assuming that you played 80-90 hands per hour, as you stated, not 80-90 deals. Given that you were playing two hands per deal, the former would be quite slow and the latter would be quite fast. That's why I used your hourly action estimate.

I played two hands about 75% of the time and I estimated they dealt about 80-90 rounds ( as a better term) an hour depending on how occupied the table was. It probably averaged 2 other players  as a wild guess, though I had several heads up interludes too. Yipee-ty-yay.

80-90 rounds per hour is quite fast and illustrates how much a CSM speeds up the game. When I dealt handheld single deck back in the 1980s, we were told that we were doing quite well if we managed 60 rounds per hour on a full or mostly full table.

When I played, it was with basic card counting on single deck, so I had a small advantage and wanted to get in as many hands as possible, but let's say you're a Vegas turista (Spanish for "sucker") playing $25 6:5 shitjack at the Golden Commode. If you take a bathroom break, you don't play, say, ten hands, so you don't lose (2.5%) x ($250), or $6.25. Peeing instead of playing saves you enough for a Starbucks coffee, which will make you want to pee again, which will save you more money, and thus continues the great circle of life.