Re: Party blackjack is attracting some sick gamblers
 

This discussion just reminded me of a good read if anyone is interested: Double Down

Autobiographical story from Donald Bartheleme's brothers about losing lots of money at blackjack and slots and getting accused of cheating the casino. This is at least where some of the money comes from.

Here is a blurb from Amazon:

[ QUOTE ]
At first, this dark memoir seems like a simple confessional about how two fiftyish writer-academics lost a quarter-million-dollar inheritance in the late-night world of Mississippi riverboat casinos.... As book-smart gamblers, the Barthelmes indulge in overtipping and betting ludicrous amounts; they are smarter-than-thou, which is their downfall...

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Party blackjack is attracting some sick gamblers
 

FWIW, I know a highly intelligent & wealthy doctor who regularly go's to the casino, and was convinced he was a winner using his own "doubling up system" until I proved it to him otherwise.

Re: Party blackjack is attracting some sick gamblers
 

[ QUOTE ]
Your average player is probably averaging closer to 5 or 10% house edge.


[/ QUOTE ]

FYP (I've watched people play in the casino, the amount they vary from basic strategy is ridiculous).

Re: Party blackjack is attracting some sick gamblers
 

They're not (as far as we can tell) dropping $20k in a day. They're making $20k worth of wagers. If we assume they're playing such that the house edge is 1%, then they're dropping $200 in a day. 5% would be $1,000 in a day.

A lot different than your original "I can't believe" claim.

Re: Party blackjack is attracting some sick gamblers
 

[ QUOTE ]
They're not (as far as we can tell) dropping $20k in a day. They're making $20k worth of wagers. If we assume they're playing such that the house edge is 1%, then they're dropping $200 in a day. 5% would be $1,000 in a day.

A lot different than your original "I can't believe" claim.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unless I'm confusing threads, we are in fact talking about people losing $20,000. They're wagering millions.

Re: Party blackjack is attracting some sick gamblers
 

[ QUOTE ]
FWIW, I know a highly intelligent & wealthy doctor who regularly go's to the casino, and was convinced he was a winner using his own "doubling up system" until I proved it to him otherwise.

[/ QUOTE ]

It always amazes me how smart people can be so dumb when it comes to gambling. I have a very smart friend, who ironically was a math major, who tried to argue with me that someone can beat craps by picking the right time to bet on a hot roller.

Re: Party blackjack is attracting some sick gamblers
 

Nobody's mentioned that the their edge playing bj is hell of a lot better (better=not as bad) than if they were playing 100/200.

Re: Party blackjack is attracting some sick gamblers
 

[ QUOTE ]
Not to be a broken record...but BJ on the Party site still ticks me off -- and this information only makes it worse.

All the pushback about how online poker is different (i.e. game of skill, etc.) and should therefore be de-emphasized in governmental scrutiny of online gambling is going for naught.

The integration of gambling games where the house has an "interest" in the player losing with poker is not helpful at all for poker long-term.

Of course, it IS tremendously helpful for Party Poker short term. And given the bad press that resulted from the inevitable "we can't meet the absurd growth expectations we'd hinted at prior to our IPO" they need the revenue.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep it should tick you off but not because of poker public relations. Party is taking money out of your pocket by enticing gamblers to wager on unbeatable blackjack and sucker flop bets.

Re: Party blackjack is attracting some sick gamblers
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Not to be a broken record...but BJ on the Party site still ticks me off -- and this information only makes it worse.

All the pushback about how online poker is different (i.e. game of skill, etc.) and should therefore be de-emphasized in governmental scrutiny of online gambling is going for naught.

The integration of gambling games where the house has an "interest" in the player losing with poker is not helpful at all for poker long-term.

Of course, it IS tremendously helpful for Party Poker short term. And given the bad press that resulted from the inevitable "we can't meet the absurd growth expectations we'd hinted at prior to our IPO" they need the revenue.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep it should tick you off but not because of poker public relations. Party is taking money out of your pocket by enticing gamblers to wager on unbeatable blackjack and sucker flop bets.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think both of your points are right on -- I'm ticked at both.

Re: Party blackjack is attracting some sick gamblers
 

Other comments on this actually interesting thread:

1. Plenty of doctors and lawyers and executive enjoy playing for significnat money, even knowing that they will be long-term losers. I've seen plenty of them in Atlantic city, including an accountant on a hot streak who turned $1000 into $36000 in one shoe of blackjack playing solo against the dealer. The scary thing is that after getting up to $36k, he was up $2000 for the night. Again, this was an accountant. They enjoy the gamble and the rush it gives them.

2. The point about $100 BJ being better for the players than $100/200 poker is true. If they can't play poker well, but they insist on playing high stakes for fun, they keep their cost down by playing a game like blackjack.

3. Most folks do NOT play to anything like 10% disadvantage at blackjack. It's hard to hit -10% without intentionally trying to lose. Many deviations to Basic -- the most common ones, in fact -- are not that harmful. People routinely get chastised for not hitting hard 15 or 16 against a dealer T, when it really makes little or no differnce what they do. It's a high-percentage loser either way, and the difference is very tiny.

4. On people knowing better: years ago, I deal with a major published author of a book on blackjack who was convinced that he was reading tells from blackjack dealers who were checking for blackjacks using a hole-card reader system at casinos in Atlantic City. He did not understand how the readers worked, and thought that the dealers would know know, when there was no blackjack, whether the dealer held a stiff or not. They dealers could NOT. I knew this because I had used the card readers and had trained people to use them. It took me a long time to explain to him how and why they worked, after which he realized that they dealers really had no knowledge of the down card. Meanwhile, during those same weeks, he had been playing, 'reading tells,' and compiling data to evaluate how well he was reading the tells. Incidentally, his numbers were pretty good -- but within variance. On days that he was running bad, he critized his skill at reading the dealer. People can convince themselves of anything as long as they think it's possible!

5. On the fairness of Party BJ: I would trust Party as much as any major house in Vegas, and vice-versa. I would worry about smaller houses in Vegas before worrying about Party, and I have doubts about smaller BJ sites online, as well. No sizable gambling organization risks their good name (and enormous profit flow) on attempts to juice their game by cheating. If they want more juice, they just add an unfavorable rule for the player. The only places that cheat are those that get so little business they have nothing to lose, so they just try to tap out whoever they can entice to walk in.

6. Aren't I a windbag?