| So
says the sign heralding one of the biggest corporate
rip-offs in gaming history. The use of "whopping"
should win some kind of award for deceptive advertising.
What next? Single numbers at roulette pay a "whopping"
30-1? Sports wagers pay off at a "whopping"
8/10? Change machines pay off at a whopping 90
cents to every dollar inserted?
Why
is this game so bad? Well, a number of studies
have been done already, and what it boils down
to is this: you lose eight times faster than at
a game of regular blackjack.
This
game has spread to an alarming number of casinos
all over Las Vegas. Now, let's be blunt. Clued-up
gamblers won't touch the game with a bargepole.
A straw poll of my gambling buddies and on the
online forums came up with some interesting names
for this new form of blackjack...almost all of
which are not suitable for a family newspaper.
Lets say that "scumjack" was the mildest
one any one came up with.
No,
6:5 blackjack is aimed straight at that section
of Joe Public who wears his ignorance on his sleeve
as some kind of badge of honour. As unethical
as it is to offer such a dreadful game to the
public, the players who accept the game are ultimately
responsible for having to put up with it. Don't
be one of them, refuse to patronize casinos that
offer this game.
Am
I worried? Not really. I can make money off this
game. It is not easy, but if you've been reading
my columns for a while you'll know there is always
some angle (a tip: many break-in dealers have
trouble getting the weird pay-out right). I mention
this because some casinos seem to get off on the
fact that the pros can't beat the game, despite
the fact that they are saving quarters at the
expense of dollars. Well, sorry guys, we can.
We always find a way.
In
any case, I doubt it will last.
Here's
what happens with funky new blackjack rip-off
games. Some bean-counter decides that if they
double the house edge in a blackjack game, they
will make more money. To compensate, there will
be some gimmick or other to keep the public interested
(in this case, single-deck blackjack is the carrot).
The public is curious about the new game for a
short time and the bean-counter is promoted to
bean-counter heaven. Then the public gets it:
they are being swindled. They probably don't understand
the house percentages or probability laws, but
they don't have to. Fewer people are winning,
and losers don't come back, and some of them do
listen to the experts. Ultimately almost everyone
loses--the casinos and the players lose--everyone
except the bean-counter.
Ultimately
these ideas are doomed, because they use vulgar
statistical methods that grossly undervalue or
ignore the importance of "goodwill"
and repeat wagering induced by giving the gambler
a fair whack.
It
would be better if some wise casino exec decided
to kick the bean-counter next time one comes up
with a bright idea. To misquote Oscar Wilde, "These
guys know the price of everything and the value
of nothing."
|
