vpFREE2 Forums

Caesers downgrades

In a message dated 11/20/2006 4:54:55 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
skiphughes@earthlink.net writes:

for a Strip casino, paytables and cashback
that add up to close to a theoretical 100% with perfect play, would be
my definition. This yields the casino an adequate hold, since most
players (even the ones who know the difference in pay tables) will not
come close to that.

When I was playing at Wynn last week, a lady a few seats down asked me if
she only was dealt a Jack when she was playing JorB, should she hold it! When
I replied she should, she told me she was only "saving" straights and
flushes....and then the casinos think they have to lower their paytables.

Sandy

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

That is another reason why I think the casinos should keep some
decent games - because many players have absolutely no clue about
strategy - but even those players will have a vague idea of how fast
their money disappears. If they feel like their 80 quarters
disappear in 3 minutes they will likely not play that game again. If
it lasts a little longer then they might decide to feed in another
$20.

Or maybe it really doesn't matter, but when I go into casinos that
have no "playable" VP for $1 or less, there never seems to be much
action on the machines.

My recent experience like yours was sitting next to two drunk girls
playing on a row of NSUD machines at Caesars (back in the good old
days). The one who was playing got a throwaway hand and asked her
friend "what should I keep here? Should I keep the ace?" and the
other answered "yes, you always keep an ace!". That's when I felt
confident that Harrah's would keep the good paytables. In retrospect
I should have offered to help them - that might have been more
rewarding!

In a message dated 11/20/2006 4:54:55 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
skiphughes@... writes:

for a Strip casino, paytables and cashback
that add up to close to a theoretical 100% with perfect play,

would be

my definition. This yields the casino an adequate hold, since most
players (even the ones who know the difference in pay tables) will

not

come close to that.

>>>

When I was playing at Wynn last week, a lady a few seats down asked

me if

she only was dealt a Jack when she was playing JorB, should she

hold it! When

I replied she should, she told me she was only "saving" straights

and

flushes....and then the casinos think they have to lower their

paytables.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, SAbramo102@... wrote:

Sandy

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I agree the casinos should keep some decent games, but it is pretty
easy to predict what might happen. As the inventory of good games
continues to dwindle, APs (of which there are more every year) will
focus on the few remaining machines, tying them up for most of the
time. So the less informed players will have a difficult time getting
on them. The return to management will drop, reinforcing the decision
to kill them in the first place.

Does anyone have a more rosy picture than this?

- John

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "larsonsm" <larsonsm@...> wrote:

That is another reason why I think the casinos should keep some
decent games - because many players have absolutely no clue about
strategy - but even those players will have a vague idea of how fast
their money disappears. If they feel like their 80 quarters
disappear in 3 minutes they will likely not play that game again. If
it lasts a little longer then they might decide to feed in another
$20.

Or maybe it really doesn't matter, but when I go into casinos that
have no "playable" VP for $1 or less, there never seems to be much
action on the machines.