You can just never tell who might be reading QoD and we've had feedback over the years from all kinds of unexpected quarters, including Bob Dancer, who wrote in and asked if he could add something to a Question of the Day we'd run on video poker tournaments, to which, of course, we replied, "Please, be our guest."
A similar situation arose following the July 22 QoD about time and motion studies and how they affect game procedures, in which we referenced former casino executive Bill Zender, who has some controversial thoughts on the subject. It just so happened that Bill read our answer and wrote to us with some additional insights. Here they are:
"Your QoD was correct with regard to what we did at the Aladdin. Most casinos are afraid to emphasize issues of T&M (time and motion), because it usually means reducing the sacred 'card-counter-protection' procedures. Even though a large number of casinos actually get it that loosening the games will be better in the long run, they’re afraid of being accused of neglect [by higher-ups or stockholders] if they experience negative fluctuation in the short run. It's known as 'casino survival' (or 'cover your ass').
"The reality is, many in the industry pick their game procedures because the other guy is doing it -- 'Blah, blah, blah is restricting mid-game entry. If they’re doing it, maybe we should too.'
"I once asked the live-games manager from a Colorado casino why he cut off 1-1/2 decks from his 6-deckers, knowing that no one could count cards and beat his game (state law mandates a $5 maximum bet, so there’s no way for even the best counters to get the bet-spread necessary to beat the game for significant money, regardless of the cut point). He told me he did it because everyone cuts off a deck and a half. When I posed the argument that cutting off more than 26 cards is done only as a card-counting countermeasure, and since they didn’t have to worry about card counting, cutting off 1-1/2 decks made no sense, he gave me this deer-in-the-headlights look and said, 'Cutting off one-and-a-half decks is an industry standard.'
"That’s what goes on out there. At the Aladdin, where big spreads could be accomplished, we still proved that cutting off 26 cards worked. Sure, some players could beat us, but there were so many others who couldn’t that they more than made up for it from the gains in time and motion that resulted in more hands and more decisions (and we eventually picked off and weeded out the best ones anyway; the necessary bet spreading gave them away). Why then don’t any others follow suit? I thought the casinos were supposed to be greedy (and always figured 6:5 blackjack proved it). It doesn't make much sense.
"By the way, the only casino in the country that cuts off less than one deck from a 6-decker these days is Mystic Lake in Minnesota. They made the change after studying T&M at length, and have had great successes in their blackjack results because of it."
Editor’s Note: Bill Zender's excellent book Advantage Play for the Casino Executive is one of the few non-Huntington Press books that we continue to stock, due to the level of information in it. And we’re proud to announce that HP will publish Bill's next book, targeted to the casino industry. It hasn’t been titled yet, but think "Advantage Management" and you’ll get the idea.
