Bellagio has been disemboweled, eviscerated, gutted.

[Dan2]

It's no horror show. It's just business. Actually, you answered your own question with your last comment:
"As would a silly man in love with a promiscuous slut, I still like Bellagio..."

The Bellagio attracts GAMBLERS with lots of money to throw away, so they don't have to offer games that we would consider attractive. What is it that you like about the Bellagio? I find it mostly gaudy. Now the Venetian -- that's beautiful and luxurious. But I have never dropped a penny in either of those casinos since neither has any full pay Deuces Wild or Double Bonus.

Dan

mubowor wrote:

···

Not long ago the best quarter play at Bellagio, 9/7 DB, was
downgraded to 9/6. The horror show continues.

Remember those twelve multi denomination multi game VP machines,
starting in nickels, not too far from check in? Six five play
machine, six ten play? Those that not really too long ago had 10/7
DB in nickels, Airport Deuces in nickels, 9/6 JB in half-dollars?
They are gone forever. In their place there is now a new walkway.

Can you play 8/5 JB at Bellagio? I could only find 7/5 JB where they
used to have 8/5.

How about 9/5 DDB? The dozens and dozens of machines with that game,
in single line or multi play, have all been magically converted to
8/5.

Did they leave dollars machines alone? Well, a lot of dollar 9/6 DDB
is now 9/5. They still have single line 9/6 JB (Is it "only for
now", as they sing in `Avenue Q'?) but all the multi play machines I
checked have been downgraded to 9/5 JB.

Stay at Bellagio, pay for your room, play at Caesars or Palms, you
will save money.

My question to the group is, why did they do this? I have some
possible conjectures:

1. To finish paying for the new Spa Tower.

2. To create a mob of customers for the new Wynn Resorts.

3. To get rid of annoying VP players who refuse to buy a $15
Oreo Martini at Caramel.

4. To fatten a capital in order to build some boutique hotels
between Bellagio and Monte Carlo.

5. To prepare for the Mandalay Bay merger.

6. All or part of the items above.

7. Greed and/or stupidity.

8. Something else.

As would a silly man in love with a promiscuous slut, I still like
Bellagio, so I welcome any guesses. Thanks.

--
Dan Paymar
Author of best selling book, "Video Poker - Optimum Play"
Editor/Publisher of VP newsletter "Video Poker Times"
Developer of VP analysis/trainer software "Optimum Video Poker"
Visit my web site at www.OptimumPlay.com

"Chance favors the prepared mind." -- Louis Pasteur

[Carlos_Lebron]

You're not attracted to the $1000/credit slot machines??

C'mon Dan, live a little!

carlos

It's no horror show. It's just business. Actually, you answered

your

own question with your last comment:
"As would a silly man in love with a promiscuous slut, I still like
Bellagio..."

The Bellagio attracts GAMBLERS with lots of money to throw away, so
they don't have to offer games that we would consider attractive.
What is it that you like about the Bellagio? I find it mostly

gaudy.

Now the Venetian -- that's beautiful and luxurious. But I have

never

dropped a penny in either of those casinos since neither has any

full

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Dan Paymar <Dan@O...> wrote:

pay Deuces Wild or Double Bonus.

Dan

[mubowor]

I liked Bellagio since I first visited it in 1998. I liked the
music, the Chihuly lamp, the restaurants, the Conservatory, the
Gallery, the comfort of the rooms, Petrossian, the awnings, the
ventilation system, breakfast at the Caffe, the latte at Palio, the
Gelato, the muffins, the croissants, the comfort, the space, the
walkways by the pools. A lot of the 'feel' of the place has been
changed by the devastation since MGM took over. It still used to
have decent VP, enough for me as a tourist: 9/6 JB with 0.33 in
comps and 0.33 in cash back plus some added little incentives was
enough to keep me happy. With all the hideous changes and the VP
gone to pot, I'm looking for a home. Will Wynn provide it? Some
people might not care about the changes, but I do. It used to be
that on the room elevators they would play Schubert's 'Trout
Quintet'. I was last week at the new Spa Tower and the elevator
toots a strident sound on every floor. I joked to a lady that they
were still celebrating New Year's Eve. Later, I was told that the
elevators were probably set that way now to help blind people. If
so, it is a good cause; but they could have chosen a jingling bell,
or a resonant gong, not the unpleasant sound they have, to torture a
hangover guy. A little detail, yes, but add a million like those,
and the new Bellagio is like the Chinese torture of a drop of water
every thirty seconds. I still like Bellagio, but I'm no Immanuel
Raht after Lola Lola in 'The Blue Angel'. Mister Wynn, please,
please, deliver something nice, and make the quarter DDB 9/6, at
least, like dumpy little old Claridge in Atlantic City has, not 8/5.

Dan, I enjoy your posts and your articles and books on VP. Regards,

E

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Dan Paymar <Dan@O...> wrote:

What is it that you like about the Bellagio?

[Lucky_Lucy]

E,

I think you are right on the money. It's not the big things, the B
still looks the same, it is in the details. We noticed a difference
the first time we stayed there after MGM took over -- little things;
the ballpoint pen went from a nice retractable to a cheap Bic with a
plastic cap, no bed turned down with mint on the pillow, etc. Later
visit: fitted sheets gone, cheaper quality (lower thread count),
replaced the classy little metal keys with plastic cards, ... and the
list goes on. Following MGM policy, comps became harder to get and
machines got tighter. And worst of all, they quit sending us offers
for free rooms.

Rick

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "superquadfullhousroyalistic"
<erchalb@c...> wrote:

···

I liked Bellagio since I first visited it in 1998. I liked the
music, the Chihuly lamp, the restaurants, the Conservatory, the
Gallery, the comfort of the rooms, Petrossian, the awnings, the
ventilation system, breakfast at the Caffe, the latte at Palio, the
Gelato, the muffins, the croissants, the comfort, the space, the
walkways by the pools. A lot of the 'feel' of the place has been
changed by the devastation since MGM took over. It still used to
have decent VP, enough for me as a tourist: 9/6 JB with 0.33 in
comps and 0.33 in cash back plus some added little incentives was
enough to keep me happy. With all the hideous changes and the VP
gone to pot, I'm looking for a home. Will Wynn provide it? Some
people might not care about the changes, but I do. It used to be
that on the room elevators they would play Schubert's 'Trout
Quintet'. I was last week at the new Spa Tower and the elevator
toots a strident sound on every floor. I joked to a lady that they
were still celebrating New Year's Eve. Later, I was told that the
elevators were probably set that way now to help blind people. If
so, it is a good cause; but they could have chosen a jingling bell,
or a resonant gong, not the unpleasant sound they have, to torture a
hangover guy. A little detail, yes, but add a million like those,
and the new Bellagio is like the Chinese torture of a drop of water
every thirty seconds. I still like Bellagio, but I'm no Immanuel
Raht after Lola Lola in 'The Blue Angel'. Mister Wynn, please,
please, deliver something nice, and make the quarter DDB 9/6, at
least, like dumpy little old Claridge in Atlantic City has, not 8/5.

Dan, I enjoy your posts and your articles and books on VP. Regards,

E

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Dan Paymar <Dan@O...> wrote:

> What is it that you like about the Bellagio?

[Victoria_Rosado]

As said before, it is just business. The Bellagio can
fill most of its rooms with tourists and uneducated
(perhaps rich but uneducated) gamblers, paying about
full rate. The restuarants are busy with people who
are not comped for their meals but paying. The casino
has enough bad players loosing. If this is the
situation, why in the world should they offer good
games, what is their incentive to do so?
It is more than just degrading VP, many casinos have
for instance changed from staying on soft 17 to
hitting on it in blackjack. Add the infamous 6/5
single deck to this. Simply, since business has
returned to Vegas after it went down after 9/11, the
casinos are maximizing their profits when they can.
Today you need to hunt for good games. Places that
might not be filling their rooms, downtown, older
strip properties are more likely to have some good
games depending upon the type of management they have.

Simply, if you ran the Bellagio, and needed to get the
best return possible, what would you do?
Victoria

···

--- Dan Paymar <Dan@OptimumPlay.com> wrote:

It's no horror show. It's just business. Actually,
you answered your
own question with your last comment:
"As would a silly man in love with a promiscuous
slut, I still like
Bellagio..."

The Bellagio attracts GAMBLERS with lots of money to
throw away, so
they don't have to offer games that we would
consider attractive.
What is it that you like about the Bellagio? I find
it mostly gaudy.
Now the Venetian -- that's beautiful and luxurious.
But I have never
dropped a penny in either of those casinos since
neither has any full
pay Deuces Wild or Double Bonus.

Dan

mubowor wrote:
>Not long ago the best quarter play at Bellagio, 9/7
DB, was
>downgraded to 9/6. The horror show continues.
>
>Remember those twelve multi denomination multi game
VP machines,
>starting in nickels, not too far from check in? Six
five play
>machine, six ten play? Those that not really too
long ago had 10/7
>DB in nickels, Airport Deuces in nickels, 9/6 JB in
half-dollars?
>They are gone forever. In their place there is now
a new walkway.
>
>Can you play 8/5 JB at Bellagio? I could only find
7/5 JB where they
>used to have 8/5.
>
>How about 9/5 DDB? The dozens and dozens of
machines with that game,
>in single line or multi play, have all been
magically converted to
>8/5.
>
>Did they leave dollars machines alone? Well, a lot
of dollar 9/6 DDB
>is now 9/5. They still have single line 9/6 JB (Is
it "only for
>now", as they sing in `Avenue Q'?) but all the
multi play machines I
>checked have been downgraded to 9/5 JB.
>
>Stay at Bellagio, pay for your room, play at
Caesars or Palms, you
>will save money.
>
>My question to the group is, why did they do this?
I have some
>possible conjectures:
>
>1. To finish paying for the new Spa Tower.
>
>2. To create a mob of customers for the new Wynn
Resorts.
>
>3. To get rid of annoying VP players who refuse to
buy a $15
>Oreo Martini at Caramel.
>
>4. To fatten a capital in order to build some
boutique hotels
>between Bellagio and Monte Carlo.
>
>5. To prepare for the Mandalay Bay merger.
>
>6. All or part of the items above.
>
>7. Greed and/or stupidity.
>
>8. Something else.
>
>As would a silly man in love with a promiscuous
slut, I still like
>Bellagio, so I welcome any guesses. Thanks.
>

--
Dan Paymar
Author of best selling book, "Video Poker - Optimum
Play"
Editor/Publisher of VP newsletter "Video Poker
Times"
Developer of VP analysis/trainer software "Optimum
Video Poker"
Visit my web site at www.OptimumPlay.com

"Chance favors the prepared mind." -- Louis Pasteur

=====

test'; ">

[Charles]

Say "E" or "mu", did you happen to notice if any changes were done
to the quarter Double Bonus progressive by the Change Booth?

C or Mister O

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "superquadfullhousroyalistic"
<erchalb@c...> wrote:

I liked Bellagio since I first visited it in 1998. I liked the
music, the Chihuly lamp, the restaurants, the Conservatory, the
Gallery, the comfort of the rooms, Petrossian, the awnings, the
ventilation system, breakfast at the Caffe, the latte at Palio, the
Gelato, the muffins, the croissants, the comfort, the space, the
walkways by the pools. A lot of the 'feel' of the place has been
changed by the devastation since MGM took over. It still used to
have decent VP, enough for me as a tourist: 9/6 JB with 0.33 in
comps and 0.33 in cash back plus some added little incentives was
enough to keep me happy. With all the hideous changes and the VP
gone to pot, I'm looking for a home. Will Wynn provide it? Some
people might not care about the changes, but I do. It used to be
that on the room elevators they would play Schubert's 'Trout
Quintet'. I was last week at the new Spa Tower and the elevator
toots a strident sound on every floor. I joked to a lady that they
were still celebrating New Year's Eve. Later, I was told that the
elevators were probably set that way now to help blind people. If
so, it is a good cause; but they could have chosen a jingling bell,
or a resonant gong, not the unpleasant sound they have, to torture a
hangover guy. A little detail, yes, but add a million like those,
and the new Bellagio is like the Chinese torture of a drop of water
every thirty seconds. I still like Bellagio, but I'm no Immanuel
Raht after Lola Lola in 'The Blue Angel'. Mister Wynn, please,
please, deliver something nice, and make the quarter DDB 9/6, at
least, like dumpy little old Claridge in Atlantic City has, not 8/5.

Dan, I enjoy your posts and your articles and books on VP. Regards,

E

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Dan Paymar <Dan@O...> wrote:
  
What is it that you like about the Bellagio?

[jaydavidson118]

I don't think Bellagio's strategy is a wise one, or profit
maximizing. Everytime I'm at Bellagio it seems as if 80% of the
machines are empty. With so many machines why not target machines
more effectively to several niches of gamblers. Give bad pay
schedules to those who demand them...and some people seem to demand
them...give decent pay schedules to those who demand them, these
machines are still profitable to casinos...I'm talking about the 99%+
not 100%+ ones.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Victoria Rosado <ros4144@y...> wrote:

As said before, it is just business. the
casinos are maximizing their profits when they can.
Today you need to hunt for good games.
Simply, if you ran the Bellagio, and needed to get the
best return possible, what would you do?
Victoria
--- Dan Paymar <Dan@O...> wrote:

> It's no horror show. It's just business. Actually,
> you answered your
> own question with your last comment:
> "As would a silly man in love with a promiscuous
> slut, I still like
> Bellagio..."
>
> The Bellagio attracts GAMBLERS with lots of money to
> throw away, so
> they don't have to offer games that we would
> consider attractive.
> What is it that you like about the Bellagio? I find
> it mostly gaudy.
> Now the Venetian -- that's beautiful and luxurious.
> But I have never
> dropped a penny in either of those casinos since
> neither has any full
> pay Deuces Wild or Double Bonus.
>
> Dan
>
> mubowor wrote:
> >Not long ago the best quarter play at Bellagio, 9/7
> DB, was
> >downgraded to 9/6. The horror show continues.
> >
> >Remember those twelve multi denomination multi game
> VP machines,
> >starting in nickels, not too far from check in? Six
> five play
> >machine, six ten play? Those that not really too
> long ago had 10/7
> >DB in nickels, Airport Deuces in nickels, 9/6 JB in
> half-dollars?
> >They are gone forever. In their place there is now
> a new walkway.
> >
> >Can you play 8/5 JB at Bellagio? I could only find
> 7/5 JB where they
> >used to have 8/5.
> >
> >How about 9/5 DDB? The dozens and dozens of
> machines with that game,
> >in single line or multi play, have all been
> magically converted to
> >8/5.
> >
> >Did they leave dollars machines alone? Well, a lot
> of dollar 9/6 DDB
> >is now 9/5. They still have single line 9/6 JB (Is
> it "only for
> >now", as they sing in `Avenue Q'?) but all the
> multi play machines I
> >checked have been downgraded to 9/5 JB.
> >
> >Stay at Bellagio, pay for your room, play at
> Caesars or Palms, you
> >will save money.
> >
> >My question to the group is, why did they do this?
> I have some
> >possible conjectures:
> >
> >1. To finish paying for the new Spa Tower.
> >
> >2. To create a mob of customers for the new Wynn
> Resorts.
> >
> >3. To get rid of annoying VP players who refuse to
> buy a $15
> >Oreo Martini at Caramel.
> >
> >4. To fatten a capital in order to build some
> boutique hotels
> >between Bellagio and Monte Carlo.
> >
> >5. To prepare for the Mandalay Bay merger.
> >
> >6. All or part of the items above.
> >
> >7. Greed and/or stupidity.
> >
> >8. Something else.
> >
> >As would a silly man in love with a promiscuous
> slut, I still like
> >Bellagio, so I welcome any guesses. Thanks.
> >
>
> --
> Dan Paymar
> Author of best selling book, "Video Poker - Optimum
> Play"
> Editor/Publisher of VP newsletter "Video Poker
> Times"
> Developer of VP analysis/trainer software "Optimum
> Video Poker"
> Visit my web site at www.OptimumPlay.com
>
> "Chance favors the prepared mind." -- Louis Pasteur
>

=====

test'; ">

[Irv_Siegel]

Victoria,

  One minor quibble with your message: Staying on soft 17 is better
for the casinos than hitting it. Although a knowledgable player will
prefer that the casino stands on soft 17, there are so many
*unknowledgable* players who won't hit a fifteen or sixteen against
an ace, that standing on soft 17 is worse for the casino than hitting
it. The published house advantage at blackjack is based on players
who use correct basic strategy. So, a casino that stands on soft 17
will have less of an edge over such players, but that is more than
compensated for by the advantage that the casinos gain over the
ploppies who don't play correct basic strategy.

Irv

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Victoria Rosado <ros4144@y...> wrote:

As said before, it is just business. The Bellagio can
fill most of its rooms with tourists and uneducated
(perhaps rich but uneducated) gamblers, paying about
full rate. The restuarants are busy with people who
are not comped for their meals but paying. The casino
has enough bad players loosing. If this is the
situation, why in the world should they offer good
games, what is their incentive to do so?
It is more than just degrading VP, many casinos have
for instance changed from staying on soft 17 to
hitting on it in blackjack. Add the infamous 6/5
single deck to this. Simply, since business has
returned to Vegas after it went down after 9/11, the
casinos are maximizing their profits when they can.
Today you need to hunt for good games. Places that
might not be filling their rooms, downtown, older
strip properties are more likely to have some good
games depending upon the type of management they have.

Simply, if you ran the Bellagio, and needed to get the
best return possible, what would you do?
Victoria

[Victoria_Rosado]

Irv

I only tinker at VP, and am an advantage blackjack
player, so I know the difference in my case.
Concerning what you said, you may be correct,
depending how the bad player plays, but the casinos
definately do not agree with your thinking. When many
of them made moves to worsen games in the last few
years the big two moves were, 6/5 single deck and
going from S-17 to H-17. Many casinos only offer the
S-17 game to the higher limit players and I do not
think their reasoning is that these are bad players.
Their reasoning is, they need to do this to keep their
higher rollers. H-17 to the lower level players so
they can increase the rent they charge on that low
limit seat at the table.
But perhaps you know something the casinos have not
figured out yet. In the meantime you can find me at
the S-17 tables.
Victoria

···

--- irvsiegel <isiegel@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

Victoria,

  One minor quibble with your message: Staying on
soft 17 is better
for the casinos than hitting it. Although a
knowledgable player will
prefer that the casino stands on soft 17, there are
so many
*unknowledgable* players who won't hit a fifteen or
sixteen against
an ace, that standing on soft 17 is worse for the
casino than hitting
it. The published house advantage at blackjack is
based on players
who use correct basic strategy. So, a casino that
stands on soft 17
will have less of an edge over such players, but
that is more than
compensated for by the advantage that the casinos
gain over the
ploppies who don't play correct basic strategy.

Irv

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Victoria Rosado
<ros4144@y...> wrote:
> As said before, it is just business. The Bellagio
can
> fill most of its rooms with tourists and
uneducated
> (perhaps rich but uneducated) gamblers, paying
about
> full rate. The restuarants are busy with people
who
> are not comped for their meals but paying. The
casino
> has enough bad players loosing. If this is the
> situation, why in the world should they offer good
> games, what is their incentive to do so?
> It is more than just degrading VP, many casinos
have
> for instance changed from staying on soft 17 to
> hitting on it in blackjack. Add the infamous 6/5
> single deck to this. Simply, since business has
> returned to Vegas after it went down after 9/11,
the
> casinos are maximizing their profits when they
can.
> Today you need to hunt for good games. Places
that
> might not be filling their rooms, downtown, older
> strip properties are more likely to have some good
> games depending upon the type of management they
have.
>
> Simply, if you ran the Bellagio, and needed to get
the
> best return possible, what would you do?
> Victoria

=====

test'; ">

[Victoria_Rosado]

Yes it may not be wise and they may change it someday,
but today at every mega palace in Vegas there are tons
of machines that sit idle constantly. Recently, on
one of those travel channel shows on Vegas, it was
mentioned that the average tourist coming to Vegas is
spending less than $500 on gambling total for three
days. Well if their room cost them $700 for three
days, the hotel is extracting more cash from these
people for the room than their play.
Anyway, wisdom and greed definately do not have to go
together, and the cost accountants are running the
show.
Victoria

···

--- jaydavidson118 <jaydavidson118@yahoo.com> wrote:

I don't think Bellagio's strategy is a wise one, or
profit
maximizing. Everytime I'm at Bellagio it seems as if
80% of the
machines are empty. With so many machines why not
target machines
more effectively to several niches of gamblers. Give
bad pay
schedules to those who demand them...and some people
seem to demand
them...give decent pay schedules to those who demand
them, these
machines are still profitable to casinos...I'm
talking about the 99%+
not 100%+ ones.

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Victoria Rosado
<ros4144@y...> wrote:
> As said before, it is just business. the
> casinos are maximizing their profits when they
can.
> Today you need to hunt for good games.
> Simply, if you ran the Bellagio, and needed to get
the
> best return possible, what would you do?
> Victoria
> --- Dan Paymar <Dan@O...> wrote:
>
> > It's no horror show. It's just business.
Actually,
> > you answered your
> > own question with your last comment:
> > "As would a silly man in love with a promiscuous
> > slut, I still like
> > Bellagio..."
> >
> > The Bellagio attracts GAMBLERS with lots of
money to
> > throw away, so
> > they don't have to offer games that we would
> > consider attractive.
> > What is it that you like about the Bellagio? I
find
> > it mostly gaudy.
> > Now the Venetian -- that's beautiful and
luxurious.
> > But I have never
> > dropped a penny in either of those casinos since
> > neither has any full
> > pay Deuces Wild or Double Bonus.
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > mubowor wrote:
> > >Not long ago the best quarter play at Bellagio,
9/7
> > DB, was
> > >downgraded to 9/6. The horror show continues.
> > >
> > >Remember those twelve multi denomination multi
game
> > VP machines,
> > >starting in nickels, not too far from check in?
Six
> > five play
> > >machine, six ten play? Those that not really
too
> > long ago had 10/7
> > >DB in nickels, Airport Deuces in nickels, 9/6
JB in
> > half-dollars?
> > >They are gone forever. In their place there is
now
> > a new walkway.
> > >
> > >Can you play 8/5 JB at Bellagio? I could only
find
> > 7/5 JB where they
> > >used to have 8/5.
> > >
> > >How about 9/5 DDB? The dozens and dozens of
> > machines with that game,
> > >in single line or multi play, have all been
> > magically converted to
> > >8/5.
> > >
> > >Did they leave dollars machines alone? Well, a
lot
> > of dollar 9/6 DDB
> > >is now 9/5. They still have single line 9/6 JB
(Is
> > it "only for
> > >now", as they sing in `Avenue Q'?) but all the
> > multi play machines I
> > >checked have been downgraded to 9/5 JB.
> > >
> > >Stay at Bellagio, pay for your room, play at
> > Caesars or Palms, you
> > >will save money.
> > >
> > >My question to the group is, why did they do
this?
> > I have some
> > >possible conjectures:
> > >
> > >1. To finish paying for the new Spa Tower.
> > >
> > >2. To create a mob of customers for the new
Wynn
> > Resorts.
> > >
> > >3. To get rid of annoying VP players who refuse
to
> > buy a $15
> > >Oreo Martini at Caramel.
> > >
> > >4. To fatten a capital in order to build some
> > boutique hotels
> > >between Bellagio and Monte Carlo.
> > >
> > >5. To prepare for the Mandalay Bay merger.
> > >
> > >6. All or part of the items above.
> > >
> > >7. Greed and/or stupidity.
> > >
> > >8. Something else.
> > >
> > >As would a silly man in love with a promiscuous
> > slut, I still like
> > >Bellagio, so I welcome any guesses. Thanks.
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Dan Paymar
> > Author of best selling book, "Video Poker -
Optimum
> > Play"
> > Editor/Publisher of VP newsletter "Video Poker
> > Times"
> > Developer of VP analysis/trainer software
"Optimum
> > Video Poker"
> > Visit my web site at www.OptimumPlay.com
> >
> > "Chance favors the prepared mind." -- Louis
Pasteur
> >
>
>
> =====
>
>
> test'; ">

=====

test'; ">

[Irv_Siegel]

Victoria,

   Well, that's the way that it was years ago. Maybe players are
hitting those stiffs more against an ace than they used to, making
the change to H-17 a profitable move. Or, maybe the casinos are so
scared of good players that they are willing to penalize the good
players while helping the others.

Irv

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Victoria Rosado <ros4144@y...> wrote:

Irv

I only tinker at VP, and am an advantage blackjack
player, so I know the difference in my case.
Concerning what you said, you may be correct,
depending how the bad player plays, but the casinos
definately do not agree with your thinking. When many
of them made moves to worsen games in the last few
years the big two moves were, 6/5 single deck and
going from S-17 to H-17. Many casinos only offer the
S-17 game to the higher limit players and I do not
think their reasoning is that these are bad players.
Their reasoning is, they need to do this to keep their
higher rollers. H-17 to the lower level players so
they can increase the rent they charge on that low
limit seat at the table.
But perhaps you know something the casinos have not
figured out yet. In the meantime you can find me at
the S-17 tables.
Victoria
--- irvsiegel <isiegel@s...> wrote:

>
> Victoria,
>
> One minor quibble with your message: Staying on
> soft 17 is better
> for the casinos than hitting it. Although a
> knowledgable player will
> prefer that the casino stands on soft 17, there are
> so many
> *unknowledgable* players who won't hit a fifteen or
> sixteen against
> an ace, that standing on soft 17 is worse for the
> casino than hitting
> it. The published house advantage at blackjack is
> based on players
> who use correct basic strategy. So, a casino that
> stands on soft 17
> will have less of an edge over such players, but
> that is more than
> compensated for by the advantage that the casinos
> gain over the
> ploppies who don't play correct basic strategy.
>
> Irv

[Victoria_Rosado]

Irv

I think the answer is the casinos know that H-17 is a
worse game but if what you say is true about bad
players, the casinos have not figured that out, so it
very well may be costing them money. It is easy to
run numbers through a computer for basic strategy or
even for a counting method and add the indices to it,
because every perfect BS player would do the same
thing in the same situation and the same for a counter
who knew all applicable indices. But how do you run
the numbers for the ploppies who play every situation
differently depending on their gut and the mythical
but sacred flow of the cards?

As far as their worrying about advantage players, I
would think that they concentrate their worrying on
their better game, which happens to be S-17 and higher
limit. Since my spread is $25-$300 on a shoe, the
only time I have ever played there was during a dead
period where they lowered the minimums. Being on a
table with several players betting much more than
myself I felt no heat, played about two hours and left
with a nice win. I really do not think they sweat the
money when it comes to most people's levels. In the
future that might change, since I know the MGM has a
tendency to eventually stop a player like myself.
They have not yet but I overheard enough of one end of
a call to the pit that I knew was about me. I then
left.

Of course, I am off topic, talking blackjack, but if
the ploppies will play any machine and people like
yourself only play machines that return 99% plus
comps, do they really want your business? Just look
at the percentage of VP to slots on the strip and
compare it to many of the locals casinos. The strip
loves slots! The customer of the locals places
insists on VP, the customer of the strip, most of
them, are just disadvantage gamblers who if they are
going to play, will play anything.

Let them begin having problems filling their hotel and
management might improve things and try to bring in
gamblers. People like myself can stay at an older mid
level strip hotel, in a suite with full RFB, or pay a
high rate and maybe get a meal now and then at the big
B. So to me it is an unimportant place.
Victoria

···

--- irvsiegel <isiegel@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

Victoria,

   Well, that's the way that it was years ago.
Maybe players are
hitting those stiffs more against an ace than they
used to, making
the change to H-17 a profitable move. Or, maybe the
casinos are so
scared of good players that they are willing to
penalize the good
players while helping the others.

Irv

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Victoria Rosado
<ros4144@y...> wrote:
> Irv
>
> I only tinker at VP, and am an advantage blackjack
> player, so I know the difference in my case.
> Concerning what you said, you may be correct,
> depending how the bad player plays, but the
casinos
> definately do not agree with your thinking. When
many
> of them made moves to worsen games in the last few
> years the big two moves were, 6/5 single deck and
> going from S-17 to H-17. Many casinos only offer
the
> S-17 game to the higher limit players and I do not
> think their reasoning is that these are bad
players.
> Their reasoning is, they need to do this to keep
their
> higher rollers. H-17 to the lower level players
so
> they can increase the rent they charge on that low
> limit seat at the table.
> But perhaps you know something the casinos have
not
> figured out yet. In the meantime you can find me
at
> the S-17 tables.
> Victoria
> --- irvsiegel <isiegel@s...> wrote:
>
> >
> > Victoria,
> >
> > One minor quibble with your message: Staying
on
> > soft 17 is better
> > for the casinos than hitting it. Although a
> > knowledgable player will
> > prefer that the casino stands on soft 17, there
are
> > so many
> > *unknowledgable* players who won't hit a fifteen
or
> > sixteen against
> > an ace, that standing on soft 17 is worse for
the
> > casino than hitting
> > it. The published house advantage at blackjack
is
> > based on players
> > who use correct basic strategy. So, a casino
that
> > stands on soft 17
> > will have less of an edge over such players, but
> > that is more than
> > compensated for by the advantage that the
casinos
> > gain over the
> > ploppies who don't play correct basic strategy.
> >
> > Irv

=====

test'; ">

[Irv_Siegel]

Victoria,

   I've been told that someone on Stanford Wong's Green Chip (paid)
message board ran a simulation on this subject (after noticing our
exchange here) and determined that a player who stands on stiffs
verus an ace benefits slightly from H17 versus S17. The simulation
assumed that the player otherwise played correct basic strategy.

Irv

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Victoria Rosado <ros4144@y...> wrote:

Irv

I think the answer is the casinos know that H-17 is a
worse game but if what you say is true about bad
players, the casinos have not figured that out, so it
very well may be costing them money. It is easy to
run numbers through a computer for basic strategy or
even for a counting method and add the indices to it,
because every perfect BS player would do the same
thing in the same situation and the same for a counter
who knew all applicable indices. But how do you run
the numbers for the ploppies who play every situation
differently depending on their gut and the mythical
but sacred flow of the cards?

As far as their worrying about advantage players, I
would think that they concentrate their worrying on
their better game, which happens to be S-17 and higher
limit. Since my spread is $25-$300 on a shoe, the
only time I have ever played there was during a dead
period where they lowered the minimums. Being on a
table with several players betting much more than
myself I felt no heat, played about two hours and left
with a nice win. I really do not think they sweat the
money when it comes to most people's levels. In the
future that might change, since I know the MGM has a
tendency to eventually stop a player like myself.
They have not yet but I overheard enough of one end of
a call to the pit that I knew was about me. I then
left.

Of course, I am off topic, talking blackjack, but if
the ploppies will play any machine and people like
yourself only play machines that return 99% plus
comps, do they really want your business? Just look
at the percentage of VP to slots on the strip and
compare it to many of the locals casinos. The strip
loves slots! The customer of the locals places
insists on VP, the customer of the strip, most of
them, are just disadvantage gamblers who if they are
going to play, will play anything.

Let them begin having problems filling their hotel and
management might improve things and try to bring in
gamblers. People like myself can stay at an older mid
level strip hotel, in a suite with full RFB, or pay a
high rate and maybe get a meal now and then at the big
B. So to me it is an unimportant place.
Victoria

--- irvsiegel <isiegel@s...> wrote:

>
> Victoria,
>
> Well, that's the way that it was years ago.
> Maybe players are
> hitting those stiffs more against an ace than they
> used to, making
> the change to H-17 a profitable move. Or, maybe the
> casinos are so
> scared of good players that they are willing to
> penalize the good
> players while helping the others.
>
> Irv

[eecounter]

Victoria,

A slight correction: The simulation you mentioned assumed the player
stood on all stiffs regardless of dealer upcard, and it did indeed
show that such a player actually benefits slightly from the H17
rule. Of course, this is little compensation for the roughly 3.5%
penalty it costs the player to use a no-bust strategy. (Once a
player starts to hit some percentage of his stiff hands there will be
a crossover point where S17 again becomes the better rule for the
player.)

Frankly, I was very surprised by this result. The general assumption
has always been that H17 is bad for all players. Now, if we can just
convince the casinos that H17 is actually costing them money...

EE

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "irvsiegel" <isiegel@s...> wrote:

Victoria,

   I've been told that someone on Stanford Wong's Green Chip (paid)
message board ran a simulation on this subject (after noticing our
exchange here) and determined that a player who stands on stiffs
verus an ace benefits slightly from H17 versus S17. The simulation
assumed that the player otherwise played correct basic strategy.

[Victoria_Rosado]

and determined that a player who stands on stiffs

verus an ace benefits slightly from H17 versus S17. The

simulation

assumed that the player otherwise played correct basic strategy.

Irv

Irv

If you have observed the play of any "never bust" player then you
have to admit that basing a simulation on this guy playing anything
remotely close to basic strategy is a huge leap. Can you do a sim
for a person who has no pattern to their play except they do not
bust? Perhaps, with a margin for error that must be huge.

Victoria

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "irvsiegel" <isiegel@s...> wrote:

[Irv_Siegel]

Victoria,

   I don't think that it's such a huge leap, since no other play
(with two exceptions) would be affected by H17 versus S17. The two
exceptions would be twelve against a two or three, which a basic
strategy player would hit. A dealer two or three could be (or could
turn into) soft 17, but a player who stands on 12 against a two or
three would benefit from H17. What the player does on hands other
than stiff against an ace or twelve against a two or three doesn't
really matter (as long as the player is consistent in not hitting
stiffs against two through six). The results of other hands would
not affect the comparison of H17 versus S17. So, the conclusion
must be that for a "never bust" player, H17 is more beneficial than
S17 for the player, and S17 is more beneficial for the casino.

Irv

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Victoria Rosado" <ros4144@y...>
wrote:

and determined that a player who stands on stiffs
> verus an ace benefits slightly from H17 versus S17. The
simulation
> assumed that the player otherwise played correct basic strategy.
>
> Irv

Irv

If you have observed the play of any "never bust" player then you
have to admit that basing a simulation on this guy playing

anything

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "irvsiegel" <isiegel@s...> wrote:
remotely close to basic strategy is a huge leap. Can you do a sim
for a person who has no pattern to their play except they do not
bust? Perhaps, with a margin for error that must be huge.

Victoria

[Irv_Siegel]

Oops, just thought of another exception, and that's soft 18 versus
an ace. Most uneducated players stand on that hand, regardless of
whether the game is H17 or S17. Since the correct play is to hit a
soft 18 against an ace in an H17 game, and to stand on a soft 18 in
an S17 game, that would mitigate the slight advantage to the "no
bust" player of H17.

Victoria,

   I don't think that it's such a huge leap, since no other play
(with two exceptions) would be affected by H17 versus S17. The two
exceptions would be twelve against a two or three, which a basic
strategy player would hit. A dealer two or three could be (or

could

turn into) soft 17, but a player who stands on 12 against a two or
three would benefit from H17. What the player does on hands other
than stiff against an ace or twelve against a two or three doesn't
really matter (as long as the player is consistent in not hitting
stiffs against two through six). The results of other hands would
not affect the comparison of H17 versus S17. So, the conclusion
must be that for a "never bust" player, H17 is more beneficial than
S17 for the player, and S17 is more beneficial for the casino.

Irv

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Victoria Rosado" <ros4144@y...>
wrote:
>
> and determined that a player who stands on stiffs
> > verus an ace benefits slightly from H17 versus S17. The
> simulation
> > assumed that the player otherwise played correct basic strategy.
> >
> > Irv
>
>
> Irv
>
> If you have observed the play of any "never bust" player then you
> have to admit that basing a simulation on this guy playing
anything
> remotely close to basic strategy is a huge leap. Can you do a

sim

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "irvsiegel" <isiegel@s...> wrote:

> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "irvsiegel" <isiegel@s...> wrote:
> for a person who has no pattern to their play except they do not
> bust? Perhaps, with a margin for error that must be huge.
>
> Victoria

[Victoria_Rosado]

Irv

The never bust players I have seen are just that. Do
not hit 12 vs 7,8,9,10,A or any stiff at any time. In
fact, they never ever bust. Furthermore, I watched
one recently who in addition to the above split every
pair he received. He split 5's vs dealer 8 or 9.
About 10 minutes later he actually began telling me
that I was playing wrong when I doubled a soft 18 vs
dealer stiff, I think 4. Forget the S-17 and H-17
thing, I just want to know how huge the house edge is
against these players.

Other types of horrid players, no basic strategy but
pure go with the gut types are IMHO near impossible to
sim. Hits 14 vs dealer 4, later does not. Goes with
the feeling, has the dealer been busting or not, the
flow or some other mystical factor. Stay on 6 (thats
a 4 and a 2) because he believes the dealer has a 12
and does not want to take the bust card from him (+1
count).

Victoria

···

--- irvsiegel <isiegel@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

Victoria,

   I don't think that it's such a huge leap, since
no other play
(with two exceptions) would be affected by H17
versus S17. The two
exceptions would be twelve against a two or three,
which a basic
strategy player would hit. A dealer two or three
could be (or could
turn into) soft 17, but a player who stands on 12
against a two or
three would benefit from H17. What the player does
on hands other
than stiff against an ace or twelve against a two or
three doesn't
really matter (as long as the player is consistent
in not hitting
stiffs against two through six). The results of
other hands would
not affect the comparison of H17 versus S17. So,
the conclusion
must be that for a "never bust" player, H17 is more
beneficial than
S17 for the player, and S17 is more beneficial for
the casino.

Irv

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Victoria Rosado"
<ros4144@y...>
wrote:
>
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "irvsiegel"
<isiegel@s...> wrote:
> and determined that a player who stands on stiffs
> > verus an ace benefits slightly from H17 versus
S17. The
> simulation
> > assumed that the player otherwise played correct
basic strategy.
> >
> > Irv
>
>
> Irv
>
> If you have observed the play of any "never bust"
player then you
> have to admit that basing a simulation on this guy
playing
anything
> remotely close to basic strategy is a huge leap.
Can you do a sim
> for a person who has no pattern to their play
except they do not
> bust? Perhaps, with a margin for error that must
be huge.
>
> Victoria

=====

test'; ">

[Victoria_Rosado]

And there are a ton of fools who stay on soft 17 vs
everything.
I have seen some of the most unimaginable blackjack
players, and some of them were actually betting big
bucks. Playing at a table with one once, a pit boss,
who I have known for years, came up to me and said,
"and that is why casinos will always make money."
Victoria

···

--- irvsiegel <isiegel@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

   Oops, just thought of another exception, and
that's soft 18 versus
an ace. Most uneducated players stand on that hand,
regardless of
whether the game is H17 or S17. Since the correct
play is to hit a
soft 18 against an ace in an H17 game, and to stand
on a soft 18 in
an S17 game, that would mitigate the slight
advantage to the "no
bust" player of H17.

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "irvsiegel"
<isiegel@s...> wrote:
>
> Victoria,
>
> I don't think that it's such a huge leap, since
no other play
> (with two exceptions) would be affected by H17
versus S17. The two
> exceptions would be twelve against a two or three,
which a basic
> strategy player would hit. A dealer two or three
could be (or
could
> turn into) soft 17, but a player who stands on 12
against a two or
> three would benefit from H17. What the player
does on hands other
> than stiff against an ace or twelve against a two
or three doesn't
> really matter (as long as the player is consistent
in not hitting
> stiffs against two through six). The results of
other hands would
> not affect the comparison of H17 versus S17. So,
the conclusion
> must be that for a "never bust" player, H17 is
more beneficial than
> S17 for the player, and S17 is more beneficial for
the casino.
>
> Irv
>
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Victoria Rosado"
<ros4144@y...>
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "irvsiegel"
<isiegel@s...> wrote:
> > and determined that a player who stands on
stiffs
> > > verus an ace benefits slightly from H17 versus
S17. The
> > simulation
> > > assumed that the player otherwise played
correct basic strategy.
> > >
> > > Irv
> >
> >
> > Irv
> >
> > If you have observed the play of any "never
bust" player then you
> > have to admit that basing a simulation on this
guy playing
> anything
> > remotely close to basic strategy is a huge leap.
Can you do a
sim
> > for a person who has no pattern to their play
except they do not
> > bust? Perhaps, with a margin for error that
must be huge.
> >
> > Victoria

=====

test'; ">

[Irv_Siegel]

And perhaps half a ton who will stand on soft 16, not realizing
that they can hit the hand with no possibility of breaking.
Beginners usually, but not always!

Irv

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Victoria Rosado <ros4144@y...> wrote:

And there are a ton of fools who stay on soft 17 vs
everything.
I have seen some of the most unimaginable blackjack
players, and some of them were actually betting big
bucks. Playing at a table with one once, a pit boss,
who I have known for years, came up to me and said,
"and that is why casinos will always make money."
Victoria