Party blackjack is attracting some sick gamblers - Page 3

gabyyyyy · #21 12-15-2005, 05:23 AM

Here is a question to Bob or anyone else for that matter.

If you could afford to blow thousands playing online blackjack why wouldnt you just go to vegas? You know you are getting a guaranteed fair game and I am sure it would be a hell of a lot more fun.

Heck I cant see any intelligent person on this forum with 20 grand to blow playing BJ online.

So why do people do it? Just insanely wealthy or what?

MicroBob · #22 12-15-2005, 05:35 AM

well...for 20 grand of losing who knows??

obviously when they start playing they don't plan on losing that much. They think they are going to run hot...or use some sort of progressive doubling-up betting system and hopefully win big.
Then they've suddenly deposited for the 5th time that night and they are DEEP in the hole.

Some people don't have time to fly to Vegas and aren't into that scene.
Personally, I was not blown away by Vegas. I would rather play poker online actually. If I'm going out I'd usually rather be doing something OTHER than poker.

Casinos are smoky and kind of loud.
Lots of people are able to get in a gambling fix from home, work or college.

Some people liked playing blackjack so much AT the live casino that when they find out they can play it for real money on the internet they decide to do that BETWEEN live casino junkets.

Sick day or vacation day at home and nothing to do??
10 hours of online-blackjack is just the ticket for some folks to kill off the day.

There are lots of reasons.
Same reasons why lots of bad poker-players are playing online and aren't playing live.

The VP-90 folks may be deluding themselves into believing that they are bluffing their opponents out of every pot and their 'system' of raising and raising is a winning strategy...just like an online blackjack or online-roulette player can convince themselves that their double-up betting system is somehow +EV.

gabyyyyy · #23 12-15-2005, 05:46 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Some people don't have time to fly to Vegas and aren't into that scene.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good Stuff. However, the quote above kind of confused me.

If you are a big wig and making enough coin to drop 20 grand in a day playing online blackjack you have enough time to go to vegas. Regardless I don't buy the argument of these people being loaded. Wealthy buisness people, doctors, buisness owners, work hard for their money and would never blow it online like that.

I have a feeling the people on the top of that list are on the low income spectrum in society. 75 Percent probably maxed out their credit cards, and because of their little binge won't be able to get their children gifts for the holidays. Half of those who maxed their credit cards will end up disputing the charge, or E-CHECK. Thus fueling the debate for banning online gambling in the U.S. Not only that but these games are taking money away from the same people many on here profit from week in and week out.

That is my no spin take on the matter.

SNOWBALL138 · #24 12-15-2005, 06:14 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Regardless I don't buy the argument of these people being loaded. Wealthy buisness people, doctors, buisness owners, work hard for their money and would never blow it online like that.

[/ QUOTE ]

thats not true. Every group you mentioned has a good amount of gambling members.

[ QUOTE ]
I have a feeling the people on the top of that list are on the low income spectrum in society. 75 Percent probably maxed out their credit cards, and because of their little binge won't be able to get their children gifts for the holidays. Half of those who maxed their credit cards will end up disputing the charge, or E-CHECK. Thus fueling the debate for banning online gambling in the U.S. Not only that but these games are taking money away from the same people many on here profit from week in and week out.

That is my no spin take on the matter.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not everyone who loses a lot of money gambling can afford it, but those who lose the most usually are the wealthiest, and CAN afford it. An exception would be the guy in Owning Mahoney.

MicroBob · #25 12-15-2005, 07:37 AM

I know a guy who was pretty wealthy and owned several restaurants and bars who was a pretty wacky gambler. He could certainly afford it. Went to Vegas 2 or 3 times per year (super heavy drinker....insane).
We went on a trip to Alaska one time and he sat at this bar buying up these scratch-off lottery tickets 100 or 200 at a time (which is the only gambling in Alaska I think...but they can sell them at bars).

Haven't seen him for a few years but I can almost guarantee that he sometimes gambles online just for recreation and probably has swings of $1k-$5k on occasion.

But doctors and lawyers and others certainly are there too.
I dealt BJ at a smallish casino for 8 months and I dealt to a handful of doctors and lawyers who dropped through a few thousand.
And they weren't really even our market.
Go to some of the other casinos in the area to see the more affluent types dropping some big bucks.

Just looking at some of the people at the casino who are varying their bets from $25-$100 per hand in live blackjack is kind of appalling to many people on low-ish to regular incomes who haven't seen that type of thing before.
Then when some regular looking 50-year-old guy walks up and slaps 5 black chips down for a single bet it can be quite jaw-dropping.
And this barely gets you toward some of the high-ish gambling that takes place in live casinos from Vegas to Atlantic City to Tunica ALL the freaking time.

It boggles my mind too....but it's far too common amongst semi-regular folk to just write it all off as people who are taking food out of their kids mouths (I've dealt to people like this too...coming to the casino wearing their uniform from the grocery store...and promptly dropping $500 or so which is likely their whole pay-check).

Certainly some of those on the top of the list are as Gabbyyyy imagines.

People who make $200k a year or so aren't exactly everywhere...but there are certainly a lot of them. Some people do have more money than they know what to do with....and some of those people are spending some of it on online poker or blackjack.

So, in short, it's likely a mixture of idiot degenerates running up a huge debt they can't afford...and idiot degenerate richer folk who actually can make it back or can afford the losses.

scott8 · #26 12-15-2005, 01:55 PM

[ QUOTE ]
According to Wizardofodds.com blackjack calculator the edge is about .55% with perfect play.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this is correct than Party manipulates the game to gain an extra 4% edge?

BruinEric · #27 12-15-2005, 02:04 PM

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.

bpb · #28 12-15-2005, 02:13 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
According to Wizardofodds.com blackjack calculator the edge is about .55% with perfect play.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this is correct than Party manipulates the game to gain an extra 4% edge?

[/ QUOTE ]

What the hell are you talking about?

scott8 · #29 12-15-2005, 02:24 PM

Bpb,

Since you have shown such intelligence and class, I will dignify your question with a response.

When you play blackjack, do you normally have a 45% edge?

With nothing but respect,

Caldarooni

bpb · #30 12-15-2005, 02:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Bpb,

Since you have shown such intelligence and class, I will dignify your question with a response.

When you play blackjack, do you normally have a 45% edge?

With nothing but respect,

Caldarooni

[/ QUOTE ]

When people refer to a casino game as having an edge of x%, the are almost always refering to the house edge. Party's blackjack has a house edge of around .55%. So there's an expected loss of $5.50 per $1000 wagered. That of course assumes perfect basic strategy. Your average player is probably averaging closer to 1% house edge.

If you don't understand a statistic that someone has posted, ask for a clarification. It's a pet peeve of mine when people start pulling out the "it's rigged" stick with no justification.