-
Welcome
to BookAndReader! We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!
Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.
The Man Who Broke Atlantic City
- Thread starter sparkchaser
- Start date
753C
Active Member
That is very interesting. I never thought that a casino would give an edge to a high roller, but I guess it makes sense. My Dad booked numbers for a living and so I grew up around gambling of all types. I always remember two great lines he used to tell my brother and me when we were little regarding booking bets and gambling in general :
"This business is funny. We're eatin' chicken tonight, but tomorrow we might have to turn around and eat the feathers."
and more importantly, when I asked him once if I could bet a number :
"We book em son, we don't bet em."
"This business is funny. We're eatin' chicken tonight, but tomorrow we might have to turn around and eat the feathers."
and more importantly, when I asked him once if I could bet a number :
"We book em son, we don't bet em."
A bookie, eh? Interesting.
Will
Active Member
Really interesting article, thanks for sharing. One thing which I took from it was that the casinos are themselves acting in the same way as a desperate gambler; that is, times are so hard for them they are taking risks that they would not otherwise take, thus opening themselves up to these mouthwatering losses from the high-roller player-base. There's also the fact that such games as these - when the stories of them break to the press etc. - must generate a fair amount in marketing for the casinos, in getting those who think they stand a chance of similar in through the doors to hand over their cash.
I I enjoy the odd game of Blackjack (not for cash, just for fun) as it's a simple pick up and play game with added complexity there if you're in the mood to examine such.
I I enjoy the odd game of Blackjack (not for cash, just for fun) as it's a simple pick up and play game with added complexity there if you're in the mood to examine such.
Will
Active Member
This is key:
Johnson did not miss the math. For example, at the Trop, he was willing to play with a 20 percent discount after his losses hit $500,000, but only if the casino structured the rules of the game to shave away some of the house advantage. Johnson could calculate exactly how much of an advantage he would gain with each small adjustment in the rules of play. He won’t say what all the adjustments were in the final e-mailed agreement with the Trop, but they included playing with a hand-shuffled six-deck shoe; the right to split and double down on up to four hands at once; and a “soft 17” (the player can draw another card on a hand totaling six plus an ace, counting the ace as either a one or an 11, while the dealer must stand, counting the ace as an 11). When Johnson and the Trop finally agreed, he had whittled the house edge down to one-fourth of 1 percent, by his figuring. In effect, he was playing a 50-50 game against the house, and with the discount, he was risking only 80 cents of every dollar he played. He had to pony up $1 million of his own money to start, but, as he would say later: “You’d never lose the million. If you got to [$500,000 in losses], you would stop and take your 20 percent discount. You’d owe them only $400,000.
Johnson did not miss the math. For example, at the Trop, he was willing to play with a 20 percent discount after his losses hit $500,000, but only if the casino structured the rules of the game to shave away some of the house advantage. Johnson could calculate exactly how much of an advantage he would gain with each small adjustment in the rules of play. He won’t say what all the adjustments were in the final e-mailed agreement with the Trop, but they included playing with a hand-shuffled six-deck shoe; the right to split and double down on up to four hands at once; and a “soft 17” (the player can draw another card on a hand totaling six plus an ace, counting the ace as either a one or an 11, while the dealer must stand, counting the ace as an 11). When Johnson and the Trop finally agreed, he had whittled the house edge down to one-fourth of 1 percent, by his figuring. In effect, he was playing a 50-50 game against the house, and with the discount, he was risking only 80 cents of every dollar he played. He had to pony up $1 million of his own money to start, but, as he would say later: “You’d never lose the million. If you got to [$500,000 in losses], you would stop and take your 20 percent discount. You’d owe them only $400,000.
753C
Active Member
I think that is the key too, Will. I wondered about why he requested a hand shuffled deck though? I googled the hell out of it and from what I could find the only disadvantage to the player of a machine shuffled deck is that it simply saves time for the house. The dealer spends less time shuffling and more time dealing which, in a normal game, means that the house has more opportunity to use it's odds advantage to wear down the players bank. In Johnson's case though where the odds were almost level it seems like this might work against him, or at least, it wouldn't offer any advantage to him.
Will
Active Member
Could it be that it's one more thing for the dealer to have to contend with? Physically/psychologically it means he/his hands are more tired, he's more prone to making mistakes and such... just a thought. One of those tiny things than adds another small notch to the probability being factored into account...