EV of Blackjack vs. Slot Machines

[squiffy]

I am taking my Dad to Chukchansi Indian Casino in December. He generally plays $1 slots. But I am wondering if it would be wiser to have him play BlackJack at the minimum bet. I think it is 6 deck with $5 minimum bet.

I know this question is not well defined and has lots of hard to define variables, like how fast you push the slots button vs. how fast the dealer deals each hand and how many other players are at the table. But does anyone have a WAG as to which would COST ME LESS MONEY per hour????

My guess is that I should get my Dad to switch to playing Blackjack, which would probably be slower and cost me less money.

I have always heard that slots are the biggest moneymaker for casinos. But that may be in part because you don't have to pay them salaries or health benefits. And they take up much less space than a poker table or a blackjack table.

Though I wonder how many $1 slots it takes to earn as much profit as a BlackJack table -- Considering the expense of paying the dealer's salary and health benefits, etc.

[Nottom]

I would think that a $1 slot machine probably makes significantly more than the casino makes from a $5 BJ player.

The difference in the number of bets/hour seems huge plus the edge is probably bigger to begin with.

[ChipWrecked]

If he frequents the casino, i.e. has lots of trials on the slots, no question in my mind that blackjack would serve him better if he knows basic strategy. I have a former card counter's hatred of slots so my opinion is biased. If casino trips are a now-and-then thing, SD probably makes it a wash. I'd be interested in Homer's opinion on this.

However, one thing I love to do in Vegas is get into a small buy-in slot tourney like at the Stardust. Spend a couple hours banging away on the thing as fast as you can and get it out of your system. I am actually net winner at this (as the older folks tire more easily /images/graemlins/wink.gif).

[Homer]

I know this question is not well defined and has lots of hard to define variables, like how fast you push the slots button vs. how fast the dealer deals each hand and how many other players are at the table. But does anyone have a WAG as to which would COST ME LESS MONEY per hour????

I'm fairly certain the answer is blackjack, generally speaking, but I'll spit out some ballpark numbers just for comparison purposes. You'll see that his worst possible average loss in blackjack is still more favorable than his best possible average loss in slots.

Note that I did not factor in comps. Just for the sake of completeness, slot players get ~.25% cashback (http://lasvegasadvisor.com/greatdeals-slotpromotions.cfm) ($1.5-$2 per hour), and blackjack players get ~.8% (2% HA assumed * 40% rebate) in comps (http://www.casinoguru.com/features/0501/comps.asp) ($2-3 per hour).

Slots

Cost per game = $1

Games per hour = 600-800

- This is a combination of my best guess and some searching on the net. This seems about right since a very fast VP player can crank out ~600 hands per hour. Slot play requires no thought, so you should be able to crank out at least that many hands if not a few more.

Average slot payback percentage = 94-96%

- Source is internet casino statistics (http://www.godofgambling.com/best_casino_payout_percentage.shtml).

Average loss per hour = $27-48

- Where I got these numbers - $1*600*.045 = $27 & $1*800*.06 = $48

Blackjack

Cost per game = $5

Games per hour = 50-80

- This is a function of the number of other people at the table. With three other players at the table, you will get in ~80 hands per hour, and with six others you will get in ~50. Being an Indian casino, the tables will probably be packed, so expect to get in 50 hands/hr. BTW, to approximate the number of hands you'll get in an hour for any number of players at the table, solve for 400/n (where n is the total number of participants at the table, including the dealer) and you'll probably come close.

House advantage = .4%-5.5%

- If he follows basic strategy (http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Realm/2009/BJC/Chart.html) (shouldn't be hard, you can even print out a BS sheet and use it in the casino) it will be .4%, if he follows a "no bust" strategy (never hit 12 or above) it will be 3.9%, and if he follows a "mimic the dealer" strategy (hit 16 or less, stand 17 or more) it will be 5.5%.

Average loss per hour = $1-22

- Where I got these numbers - $5*50*.004 = $1 & $5*80*.055 = $22

-- Homer

[Bozeman]

"BTW, to approximate the number of hands you'll get in an hour for any number of players at the table, solve for 400/n (where n is the total number of participants at the table, including the dealer) and you'll probably come close."

Really? I would have guessed that you would get considerably more than poker since they don't have to shuffle.

Craig

[doormat]

Homer,
This is a very good comparison you have presented. It does however depend on the player being disciplined enough to follow basic strategy and bet the minimum every hand. As you point out, a player deviating from basic can lose ten times as much - more if they chase their losses or let winnings ride. I have had a lot of friends and relatives come through Vegas and convincing them not to play "hunches" on bets and strategy deviations is a difficult task. As much as I hate slots, they can be cheaper for a novice since you can't easily go on tilt (I suppose a hopeless gambler could play several machines at once). So the human aspect is worth considering. I advise visitors playing slots to place all of their bets with coins instead of by pushing the button, which really slows down their hands per hour. Of course there are some indian casinos that don't allow this.

doormat

[Ed Miller]

He will lose far less playing $5/hand blackjack than he will playing $1 slots, basically no matter how poorly he plays blackjack. Most of it is because he will get far less action playing blackjack (particularly at a full table) than he will playing slots, especially for dollars.

Is there a reason why he plays the dollar slots and not the quarter slots? I assume it's because he doesn't find the quarter slots to be stakes high enough to keep him entertained. If that's so, you will be very hard-pressed to keep him entertained playing $5/hand blackjack. He will feel like he's not winning or losing any money at all. Playing dollar slots, you can have $1000 or more swings in a matter of a couple of hours. You'd have to play $5/hand blackjack for pretty damn long to see a $1000 swing one way or the other.

Because you are playing at an Indian casino, it is likely that the slots and video poker machines will be very tight (at least by Las Vegas standards). But even so, it will almost certainly be preferable for him to play video poker rather than a reel slot, even if he plays poorly. And if he is willing to spend a hour getting the jist of video poker strategy, he should do significantly better at VP.

[ChipWrecked]

[ QUOTE ]
Is there a reason why he plays the dollar slots and not the quarter slots?

[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't speak for his dad, but I've been told many times by slot players that "The dollar machines payoff better than quarters or nickels."

[CORed]

I think you may be underestimating the loss rate for slots. Most dollar slots have 2 or 3 maximum coin in. If you play less than maximum coins, the payout of the top jackpot is usually reduced, or there is some other gimmick that makes playing less than maximum coin a poorer EV on a percentage, if not absolute loss per hour basis. If you are playing maximum coin, your losses per hour can be multiplied by 2 or 3, depending on the machine.

[Homer]

Good points. I totally forgot about having to put in 2-3 coins to get maximum payback percentage.

-- Homer

[Brian]

That's f*cking hilarious man. When I turn 21 I am going to try that, because after all these years of going with my family to the casinos for the buffets, I certainly have a lot of slot machine rage in me. Not that I really want to play them, I just want to pound on them as hard as possible.

-Brian

[DrPhysic]

Squiffy,
I must preface this by saying that while I am a newbe in hold'em, blackjack is one game I have really studied hard and usually win at. I have never played at an indian casino, so the following assumes Vegas rules.

At the slots, the house always and forever has the odds in their favor. I am told that the $1 slots are usually looser than quarters or nickels. I am also told that the indian casinos run tight. Both second hand but good information. You can assume that you (or dad) are giving the house a 1% to 4% (maybe even 5%) advantage playing the slots. 1% would assume a loose house in Vegas or Laughlin, on dollar slots at 4AM.

Blackjack is another story. You need to teach dad a little of how to play it. The little old lady who never hits 16 "because I always lose" fails to understand that she loses 72% of the time when she hits 16, and 78% of the time when she doesn't. She hits when the dealer shows 5 or 6 "because I don't have 21 yet!", doesn't split cards, doesn't double down, and NEVER varies her bet (it is always the minimum for the table.

Buy any good blackjack book, and copy the basic strategy table for 4-6 decks. Basic Strategy is a chart that shows what to do with any two card total depending on what the dealer has. It is computer generated and is statistically unarguable. Teach dad the basics. When to stand, when to split, when to double, never to take a hit that could bust him with the dealer showing 4, 5, or 6, etc. Teach him to never buy insurance. (You ever see another bet that the house ALWAYS asks if you want? Think about it.)

All the subtleties of a basic strategy table are nice (and needed if you plan to win regularly), but the basics are easy to learn. The little old lady may be giving the house as much as a 10% - 15% edge. Her pile of chips goes down fast. A player playing perfect basic strategy and never varying his bet is giving the house .4% to .6% depending on whether the house hits a soft 17. (better for you if they don't).

In short order with memorization of a few simple rules, and some common sense about the rest of the table he didn't memorize, Dad can be playing blackjack only one or two percent behind the house.

Re common sense: If you read enough to know that 18 is a losing hand, only wins 43% of the time, it doesn't take much to decide what to do with a soft 18 when the dealer shows 7 or better.

Get a copy of the 4 deck basic strategy for 21, from The World's Best Blackjack Book, Humble and Cooper, 1980 Doubleday, pp 405. It's the easiest one I have ever seen to memorize. Goes on a cigarrette pack size paper. Most houses used to, (may still) allow you to take your cheatsheet to the table if you ask.

Finally, if he wants to learn to win money at Blackjack, spend some time reading and studying on the subject, but do not miss a little 1/4" thick paperback book called Winning Blackjack Without Counting Cards, by David S. Popik, Carol Paperbacks, 1984.

Hope this helps. Dad can lose money at either the slots or blackjack, and he can get lucky and win money on a given night at either one, but if he will learn just a little about the game his chances are considerably better with Blackjack.