Really, when you think about it, an advantage player like me and the casino model are not all that different. Just the advantage flips sides. As an (card counter) AP, I could go in guns blazing playing bigger limits, win more money over a shorter time at the expense of long-term winning, which there wouldn't be any because I wouldn't be allowed to play. OR I can figure out what limits that I can play, and be welcome back to play over and over guaranteeing long-term profits. (longevity)
Casinos have the same choice. For some inexplicable reason the business school idiots chose brief short-term increase in profits over longevity.
A perfect analogy is blackjack. 3-2 blackjack has a house advantage of about .5% depending on number of decks and exact rules. But that is if a player knows and is playing near perfect basic strategy which most players are not. So when you add in all the goofy ways players play (standing on 14 vs 9 because they dôn't want to break), the overall house advantage has to be well over 1%.
But that wasn't good enough for the pencil pushers. So they say if we go to 6-5 blackjack we can increase the house edge by 3 fold.
What they never considered is all the players that would refuse to play 6:5. Increase your profit a little bit, but lose half your customers is NOT a good business decision. And these same kinds of decisions have happened over and over and over on the casino floors over the last 20 years by people looking and thinking short-term instead of considering long-term results and effect.
Reply With Quote