Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 32 of 32

Thread: $5 craps at Caesars

  1. #21
    Okay jbjb what's your idea about why the Firebet was removed from this one table?

  2. #22
    Honestly, no clue. Makes no sense to me for sure. I'd still take anything a dealer or pit supervisor tells me with a grain of salt. But if what they said was true, I seriously would expect them to remove it from all tables.

  3. #23
    I think what they said makes perfect sense: too many big payouts on a low revenue table. When i was there most of the players had a $5 pass bet with no odds. I saw three shooters have 15-20 minute rolls with less than $20 on the table. That won't subsidize a Firebet.

  4. #24
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    I think what they said makes perfect sense: too many big payouts on a low revenue table. When i was there most of the players had a $5 pass bet with no odds. I saw three shooters have 15-20 minute rolls with less than $20 on the table. That won't subsidize a Firebet.
    It's very possible. I'm not saying it'll never happen. Like I said, even some casino managers are superstitious. I've seen crappy double deck blackjack games get removed because of short term positive variance on the players side. And I'm talking about civilians, not card counters or other forms of blackjack AP.

  5. #25
    At Rincon a few years ago the $100 video poker machines were removed because too many royals had been hit. They were all negative expectation games but the Tribe was tired of issuing $400,000 checks. I had dinner with Rincon's top gun and he said the Tribe didn't care about short term variance they just wanted those games outta there.

  6. #26
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    At Rincon a few years ago the $100 video poker machines were removed because too many royals had been hit. They were all negative expectation games but the Tribe was tired of issuing $400,000 checks. I had dinner with Rincon's top gun and he said the Tribe didn't care about short term variance they just wanted those games outta there.
    They probably don't have the bankroll for it.

  7. #27
    Originally Posted by jbjb View Post
    They probably don't have the bankroll for it.
    Probably right -- they don't have the bankroll for $100 video poker. I guess that's why Rincon gives away $1-million twice a year, and ten other months out of the year they give away $100,000 per month.

  8. #28
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Probably right -- they don't have the bankroll for $100 video poker. I guess that's why Rincon gives away $1-million twice a year, and ten other months out of the year they give away $100,000 per month.
    That's different, because they can "control" that (give that money away to people who they KNOW will give it right back.
    The $100 royals came off of PURE LUCK, and therefore cannot be guaranteed that the player will play again, so that $400k CAN walk out the door.

    Casinos are very short-sighted, often times.
    Sure they don't care if you hit a WAP, because they're not the ones who has to pay them (Megabucks, ShuffleMaster, etc)
    But hit a super lucky "standard" hit (ie: $100 VP RoyalFlush) and the casino manager/higher-ups will shit their pants and react in panic!
    For example, I was pretty frequent at JANugget in Reno; so I was friends with a lot of the employees, including the senior casino manager...he told me that once, a non-player came in, and hit a super-lucky DEALT royal on $1 10-play (highest amount royal you could win in this casino; $40k) and the Ascuagas FLIPPED OUT and wanted any video poker that would allow for higher than a $8000 royal removed! He tried to calm them down as much as he could.. But they still ended up removing a LOT of $5 denom single-line, and all their $1/$2 multiplay...

    The Ascuagas sold it finally, and they now have the FireBet, but it's the crappy payoff one (starts paying at 3 points, and I think only pays 200:1 on all 6)

  9. #29
    Originally Posted by timspeed View Post
    The $100 royals came off of PURE LUCK, and therefore cannot be guaranteed that the player will play again, so that $400k CAN walk out the door.
    Really? You think some random guy walked in off the street, inserted five Benjamins into a video poker machine, pressed the deal button and the good fairy gave him a royal... and then showed him to the door after making him swear never to play again?

  10. #30
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Really? You think some random guy walked in off the street, inserted five Benjamins into a video poker machine, pressed the deal button and the good fairy gave him a royal... and then showed him to the door after making him swear never to play again?
    That's more probable than someone who "wins" one of those casino drawings, NOT giving the money back.

  11. #31
    Large casinos like Caesars are willing to take chances on high variance games, provided the math shows that it's +EV for them in the long run.

    Small operations like the Rincon are much more risk-averse, as the odd big jackpot from a non-regular can really hurt their bottom line, and they often have a hard time waiting for the "long run", fearing that a few lucky high rollers can really cause them fits.
    Check out my poker forum, and weekly internet radio show at http://pokerfraudalert.com

  12. #32
    Just getting back to the topic: why was the Firebet REMOVED when the Forum craps game was reduced to $5 minimum bet?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •