4 ms·

There's almost no point in playing a casino today. Nearly everything is digital and biased towards the house, even moreso than straight probabilities would tell

There's almost no point in playing a casino today. Nearly everything is digital and biased towards the house, even moreso than straight probabilities would tell you. If you ever do win big, "payouts are void in the event of machine malfunction".

Nextgrid 5y ago
Some games like blackjack, roulette, etc still have physical versions. Obviously, a casino should never be seen as a money-making option but as an entertainment option. Walk in with a set budget you are happy to lose and don’t gamble beyond that. Most will allow you to set a limit and they won’t let you buy chips beyond that even if you tried. Drinks are very cheap even in high cost of living places so if you can control your gambling (which is more difficult than you imagine - speaking from experience here - that’s how casinos make their money) you can get relatively cheap entertainment. They’re also open until very late (some are 24/7) which is a nice perk.
- bikingbismuth 5y ago
  When I attend conferences in Vegas, I set a $300 budget for craps. I try to find $5 tables (really tough to do anymore) and just play for as long as possible getting drinks and having fun. I make it out ahead about 40% of the time, but I always enjoy myself. I rationalize it that I am just paying to have a unique, yearly experience (even if it makes little economic sense).
  - dimitrios1 5y ago
    This is exactly how to treat a casino. It's a Dave and Busters with better prizes if you win.
    - jxf 5y ago
      A nearly perfect description. (That is, barring the few cases where it _is_ legally possible to beat the house, e.g. card-counting in blackjack.)
- Karellen 5y ago
  > Walk in with a set budget you are happy to lose I prefer to think of it as a budget I am happy to spend. That way I can place it in the same mental bucket as going out to a gig, or a nice restaurant, or some other form of entertainment. I find I'm also less tempted by the notion to "win it back" if I don't consider it as a loss to begin with. I spent my money, I got my entertainment, it's a fair trade. And if I don't spend all of it (or somehow spend a negative amount) - bonus!
dec0dedab0de 5y ago
biased towards the house, even moreso than straight probabilities would tell you. That's called the house edge, or the vig. Without that, casinos wouldn't make money. I usually explain it to people by saying that the casino doesn't make money from the losers. It uses the money from the losers to pay the winners, but charges the winners a fee.
- ectopod 5y ago
  No. If you calculate the straight probabilities of blackjack or roulette, say, the house has a small advantage. That's the house edge. OP is saying that the digital versions give the house an additional edge.
  - dec0dedab0de 5y ago
    American roulette is 38 numbers, but pays 35 to one. Those extra three are the house edge, and they are the same in the digital version. Other digital games like slot machines generally have a much higher house edge. I think the other poster was mostly lamenting that casinos aren't fair.
    - mysterydip 5y ago
      No, I was saying as ectopod better described, that digital versions have no actual need to hold to mathematical probabilities. For example, a six-sided die could be programmed to result in a 1 more than 1/6th of the time. How would you know?
      - htrp 5y ago
        Nevada Gaming Commission has all kinds of rules about what you can and can't do with your digital games. Yes you could obfuscate the code, but it's way easier to make the money legally (and casino licenses are worth more than their weight in gold, so why would you risk it).
  - genewitch 5y ago
    the house would be shut down in Las Vegas and probably Atlantic City as well. The house makes enough with the 35:1 payout on a 38:1 odds in roulette. enough people bet big 6/8, hardways, and specific die configurations on craps to pay the light bill. If you play craps perfectly, you can take the vig / house edge / rake to 0.13%, which is 13 cents on $100, as it ought to be. House edge on slots is ~1%, really poor bets on roulette and craps could be 3% or higher. But none of the games are allowed to cheat.
LeoPanthera 5y ago
This sounds like people only ever went to casinos with the expectation of winning. You should not ever do this, even before the digital era. Casinos are places where you can trade money for the hope of maybe winning a larger prize. For a lot of people, that is fun, and worth the expense. Seen from that perspective, there is still a "point".
- GrifMD 5y ago
  I wish I could get into that, but apart from poker with friends, gambling and losing isn't fun.
exo-pla-net 5y ago
You can count cards to give yourself a winning edge. Making several thousand per day is feasible. You'll eventually get kicked out of a given casino, but it doesn't matter: they have to give you your money.
- jedberg 5y ago
  Most casinos use continuous auto-shufflers to prevent this. Every deal is basically a new shoe. It's getting harder and harder to find hand shuffled games, and usually when you do they are in the high limit area.

Nextgrid 5y ago

Some games like blackjack, roulette, etc still have physical versions. Obviously, a casino should never be seen as a money-making option but as an entertainment option. Walk in with a set budget you are happy to lose and don’t gamble beyond that. Most will allow you to set a limit and they won’t let you buy chips beyond that even if you tried. Drinks are very cheap even in high cost of living places so if you can control your gambling (which is more difficult than you imagine - speaking from experience here - that’s how casinos make their money) you can get relatively cheap entertainment. They’re also open until very late (some are 24/7) which is a nice perk.

bikingbismuth 5y ago
When I attend conferences in Vegas, I set a $300 budget for craps. I try to find $5 tables (really tough to do anymore) and just play for as long as possible getting drinks and having fun. I make it out ahead about 40% of the time, but I always enjoy myself. I rationalize it that I am just paying to have a unique, yearly experience (even if it makes little economic sense).
- dimitrios1 5y ago
  This is exactly how to treat a casino. It's a Dave and Busters with better prizes if you win.
  - jxf 5y ago
    A nearly perfect description. (That is, barring the few cases where it _is_ legally possible to beat the house, e.g. card-counting in blackjack.)
Karellen 5y ago
> Walk in with a set budget you are happy to lose I prefer to think of it as a budget I am happy to spend. That way I can place it in the same mental bucket as going out to a gig, or a nice restaurant, or some other form of entertainment. I find I'm also less tempted by the notion to "win it back" if I don't consider it as a loss to begin with. I spent my money, I got my entertainment, it's a fair trade. And if I don't spend all of it (or somehow spend a negative amount) - bonus!

dec0dedab0de 5y ago

biased towards the house, even moreso than straight probabilities would tell you. That's called the house edge, or the vig. Without that, casinos wouldn't make money. I usually explain it to people by saying that the casino doesn't make money from the losers. It uses the money from the losers to pay the winners, but charges the winners a fee.

ectopod 5y ago
No. If you calculate the straight probabilities of blackjack or roulette, say, the house has a small advantage. That's the house edge. OP is saying that the digital versions give the house an additional edge.
- dec0dedab0de 5y ago
  American roulette is 38 numbers, but pays 35 to one. Those extra three are the house edge, and they are the same in the digital version. Other digital games like slot machines generally have a much higher house edge. I think the other poster was mostly lamenting that casinos aren't fair.
  - mysterydip 5y ago
    No, I was saying as ectopod better described, that digital versions have no actual need to hold to mathematical probabilities. For example, a six-sided die could be programmed to result in a 1 more than 1/6th of the time. How would you know?
    - htrp 5y ago
      Nevada Gaming Commission has all kinds of rules about what you can and can't do with your digital games. Yes you could obfuscate the code, but it's way easier to make the money legally (and casino licenses are worth more than their weight in gold, so why would you risk it).
- genewitch 5y ago
  the house would be shut down in Las Vegas and probably Atlantic City as well. The house makes enough with the 35:1 payout on a 38:1 odds in roulette. enough people bet big 6/8, hardways, and specific die configurations on craps to pay the light bill. If you play craps perfectly, you can take the vig / house edge / rake to 0.13%, which is 13 cents on $100, as it ought to be. House edge on slots is ~1%, really poor bets on roulette and craps could be 3% or higher. But none of the games are allowed to cheat.

LeoPanthera 5y ago

This sounds like people only ever went to casinos with the expectation of winning. You should not ever do this, even before the digital era. Casinos are places where you can trade money for the hope of maybe winning a larger prize. For a lot of people, that is fun, and worth the expense. Seen from that perspective, there is still a "point".

GrifMD 5y ago
I wish I could get into that, but apart from poker with friends, gambling and losing isn't fun.

exo-pla-net 5y ago

You can count cards to give yourself a winning edge. Making several thousand per day is feasible. You'll eventually get kicked out of a given casino, but it doesn't matter: they have to give you your money.

jedberg 5y ago
Most casinos use continuous auto-shufflers to prevent this. Every deal is basically a new shoe. It's getting harder and harder to find hand shuffled games, and usually when you do they are in the high limit area.