No guest this week as we once again dip into the mail bag.
We welcome your questions – send them to us at [email protected], or you can find me at @RWM21 on Twitter or https://www.facebook.com/GamblingWithAnEdge.
Show Notes
[00:00] Introduction
[00:36] Comments on commercials
[02:27] Probability of royal flushes on 9/6 Jacks
[03:56] Vetting of GWAE guests
[07:25] New casino table games
[09:43] Double Joker video poker
[11:40] W2G jackpoint threshold
[13:30] What’s the best way to listen to GWAE?
[14:44] RFID and TITO at Resorts World table games
[16:15] Return on card counting
[17:51] Will the Mirage poker room ever re-open
[18:06] $1 to $3 Limit Hold/em in Vegas
[19:04] Why do casinos allow Bob to play?
[19:37] VideoPoker.com strategy corrections
[21:26] Card counting advice for a new player without a network
[25:02] Burning cards on double-deck games
[27;31] What edge can a recreational player get?
[29:06] Comp hustling
[30:15] Split Card Poker
[32:41] Software used by casinos to catch card counters
[33:19] $125/hand video poker comps
[36:13] IRS reporting requirements on table games
[39:01] Why wasn’t the card maker in Phil Ivey’s edge-sorting case charged?
[41:09] South Point Casino September Promotions – City Lights Shine giveaway, Hot Seat promotions, South Point 400 tickets
[42:20] BlackjackApprenticeship.com – card counting training website and community with many betting, tracking, and analytical tools
[43:03] VideoPoker.com/gwae – Gold Membership offers correction on most games, free Pro Membership trial for GWAE listeners
[44:10] Using side bets in blackjack to reach table minimum when the count is high
[46:33] Can banks deny service to professional gamblers?
[48:27] Transitioning from a recreational gambler to a professional gambler
[51:55] A match-play dispute on craps
[54:50] Recommended: Advantage 32 rubber bands, Here Today
Sponsored Links:
Links Referenced:
Recommended:
Advantage 32 rubber bands https://amzn.to/2VrhRqk
Never miss another post
Near the end of the podcast, Richard Munchkin says dealers hate Matchplay players. Can you explain why? Does this affect an advantage player negatively? And do you have any recommendations to minimize such a negative effect (if there is any)?
For the caller who asked for 1/3 limit hold em, the smallest game in Las Vegas is 2/4 at the Orleans. The Golden Nugget used to have 2/4, but appears to have switched to 3/6. The smaller games in general are going to be found off-strip.
Personally I HATE commercials. We are bombarded with then everyday, everywhere. People say they help “pay the bills”, I get that. I still hate them – they detract form whatever you are watching or listening to. Normally I will switch channels when commercials are thrust upon whatever I am watching/listening to. I am sure that there are many others who share my sentiments.
Burning cards on double-deck games: @25:54. I have to disagree with Richard on burning 1/4 of a deck or more cards in a double-deck BJ game. I’ve never seen such done in a casino and I’ve always seen it where only 1 card gets burned be it a pitch BJ game or a double-deck shoe dealt game. If I seen such I would probably call the pit boss over and tell them they have a dealer who needs to be retrained and leave the game. I’ve seen female dealers 4′ 10″ who can handle a double deck of cards and pitch cards with no problem. Burning 1/4 of a deck or more in a double-deck BJ game is an excuse for a bad BJ dealer to offer a less than favorable game to the players. That’s unacceptable and shows a lack of professionalism on the part of house and dealers who don’t have the right people doing the right job.
[Blitzkrieg: “I’ve never seen such done in a casino”] I haven’t listened to the episode yet, but it sounds like what we call the “Harrah’s Cut” and I’ve seen it plenty of times. It just means that the pen is 1/4 of a deck less, though it deceives the counter who walked up after the shuffle. The counter sees the dealer almost run out of cards, and thinks the pen is great. Then the next shuffle the counter sees the dealer burn a quarter deck. It supposedly helps a dealer with small hands handle the deck(s) more easily, and I actually agree that it does help some dealers do that. Whether that is the true reason the procedure was created/maintained is a separate question.
@James G. I suppose the “Harrah’s Cut” must be a courtesy that is provided in casinos out West or in AC. Would doing such reduce hands per hour for the player from what you’ve seen and wouldn’t that play into the favor of the casino if they were shaving off 1/4 of a deck or more in a double deck game? I suppose if the cut card is moved further back to account for the 1/4 shaving before the deal begins it wouldn’t matter. But on the other hand It seems like the Harrah’s Cut could turn into a Caesar’s Sabre depending on the placement of the cut card by the dealer with that 1/4 shaving to possibly reduce hands for the player and penetration. Thus swinging the pendulum back in favor of the house.
I think we started calling it the Harrah’s Cut because we first saw it at Harrah’s Las Vegas (or was it Harrah’s Reno?), and it spread to other properties in the chain. They would typically cut off about half a deck on a double deck, and then give maybe 80% pen on the remaining 75% of the pack, for a net pen of 60%. But when you see only 15.6 cards left in the dealer’s hand (20% remaining of the 1.5 decks in her hand), that gives the appearance of an 85% game, if you didn’t see the original Harrah’s Cut. So a 60% game masquerading as 85% would be irritating to counters, but they generally can’t Wong into a double deck, and when they sit there and wait for the next shuffle, they’re going to see the bait and switch. So it just made the game unattractive to counters, and offensive. Reducing the pen would mean more shuffling time, hence fewer rounds per hour for the recreational players, which would hurt the casino. I’m not really sure what the true rationale was, but I’d love to know what Table Games Manager thought this move was so clever.
There was a time when I saw, at least one tribal casino, advertising a hand held “Double Deck” game when in reality it was an 8 decker that popped up 2 of the 8 decks from the ASM (not to be confused with CSM) for the dealer to deal out.
YES, I saw that! Can’t remember where, but I think that has disappeared, because I can’t recall seeing that in ages. At the time, that was simultaneously infuriating and hilarious!
Question:
I was playing blackjack against one of those machines featuring busty avatars. This is a non-racino so it’s legit blackjack rather than bingo that looks like blackjack.
There is a set of machines that have a progressive on them. This is for a dealer and player Royal Match (don’t remember if dealer and player have to have the same suite). I studiously avoid side bets (which apparently angers other players when the 25-1 events happen). The progressive usually hits before it gets to $23k. Yesterday I noticed that it was at $41k.
The required wager is $1.
I don’t believe there is a “hit by” amount on this progressive.
Was this progressive high enough for a positive EV? House edge on the blackjack game itself is .32
For a 1-deck game: Chance you get Royal Match = 4/1326, since there are four Royal Matches (KsQs, KdQd, KcQc, KhQh) out of the (52 x 51)/2 = 1326 starting hands. Then the dealer has 3/1225 chance to catch one of the three remaining Royal Matches out of (50 x 49)/2 = 1225 hands. So overall probability is 1 in 135363. So if the only possible payoff is the jackpot, it’s nowhere close to being positive. But there are probably a bunch of lesser payoffs, such as just getting a Royal Match without the dealer getting one, etc. I doubt that $41k is high enough to get excited about yet.
Thanks James.
My gut said that it wasn’t positive so I didn’t play. The only other payout is for a straight flush combo of player and dealer hand and it’s quite small.
.
Concerning the discussion of CTRs resulting from casino cashouts and bank deposits–note that it’s really doubtful that taking a check instead of cash, and depositing the check instead of cash to your bank account, will result in the government getting less information. Banks are required to maintain detailed records of account transactions–and of course they’d need to do so anyway to ensure the accuracy of their handling of accounts–and there are many circumstances under which they will be required to disclose them to the government. There’s a statute with the Machiavellian name, “Bank Secrecy Act,” the main features of which are that customers do NOT by and large have the right to keep banking information secret from the government, and that banks are required to keep most disclosures to the government secret from their customers.
On this subject:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/taxes/biden-proposal-to-give-irs-more-access-to-your-bank-account-a-truly-dumb-idea-rep-kustoff/ar-AAP7LwS?ocid=winp1taskbar