Casino gambling fall in here!!!

[jw5]

My field report on RWS and MBS.

Overall, the thumbs up will go to Marina Bay Sands. The tables are well segregated compared to RWS.

Toilets are bigger and walking space around the casino as well. Even at peak hours, you do not get to see barriers of people crowding around the tables watching. RWS is just too plain crowded with people and a good 30% at least who don't gamble at all.

There are enough tables for Blackjack. Baccarat also plenty. No big crowds crowding, a good 80% can be seen gambling. Aunties/uncles not as many as compared to RWS, probably they like the membership over at RWS more.

The best thing is I find the crowd at MBS more civilized and not as naggy as players in RWS. You don't get people giving you comments that you must hit your cards in Blackjack etc.

Will definitely spend time to visit MBS again. RWS not more chance.

The only lacking will be MBS does not have as many eateries as RWS in casino. But that is not the main concern.

If you go to casinos in Australia or S Korea, you will very rarely get people crowding round watching the games or people making comments on whether you should hit or stay.
If RWS is going to have lots of this type around, then the real gamblers are gradually going to move away. It's like Genting Malaysia in the very old days. Even in Macau, you only get such comments from the prc national tourists who have just come out from their farms for the first time. The serious gamblers either play or keep their mouths shut when they watch.
Have you ever told people who make comments to go and play their own game?

 

[silverfox@]

The serious gamblers either play or keep their mouths shut when they watch.
Have you ever told people who make comments to go and play their own game?

I will tell them why not they buy my bets from me and I let them decide. No need talk so much to them also. It's normally a 13,14,15,16 situation and no one will want to buy your bets anyway.

 

[Heart Break Kid]

I will tell them why not they buy my bets from me and I let them decide. No need talk so much to them also. It's normally a 13,14,15,16 situation and no one will want to buy your bets anyway.

In MBS, playing Blackjack when I surrender a 15 points of a $50 bet one S'pore uncle make a lot comment .
I bought insurance he thought I am against him. I moved tables because this old asshole

In RWS, playing Pontoon when I surrender a 15 points of a $75 bet the PRC gamblers were shocked
as if they never see anyone SURRENDER before. They keep asking me why


In RWS, playing Pontoon I ever saw a few SG uncles commenting loudly on one PRC man for drawing a card which lead to the dealer drawing to 20 points for the House. That PRC man bang the table hard shouting back at them

" wo xi huan zhe muk DU jiu zhe muk DU"

 

[Heart Break Kid]

One more thing to share.....


I dun like those poor old ladies to tobang her $5 bet my chips Of $50 or $100 per bet on Pontoon tables.
When preparing for double up, they alway got difficulty taking an additional $5 to top up her bet

That I prefer NO STANDING PLAYER tables

 

[silverfox@]

In MBS, playing Blackjack when I surrender a 15 points of a $50 bet one S'pore uncle make a lot comment .
I bought insurance he thought I am against him. I moved tables because this old asshole

In RWS, playing Pontoon when I surrender a 15 points of a $75 bet the PRC gamblers were shocked
as if they never see anyone SURRENDER before. They keep asking me why


In RWS, playing Pontoon I ever saw a few SG uncles commenting loudly on one PRC man for drawing a card which lead to the dealer drawing to 20 points for the House. That PRC man bang the table hard shouting back at them

" wo xi huan zhe muk DU jiu zhe muk DU"

I supposed you buy insurance at $25 when dealer has an ACE card while you have 15 points. Because when dealer has ACE there is no option for players to surrender.
I read from a book recently, it said probability of dealer having ACE busting is very low if the dealer can stand on soft 17. Player has 3 choices, to hit, stand or insurance

Insurance choice is putting down extra $25 down on top of a $50 bet. If dealer does not have a 10 card, $25 lose. Dealer get 17-20 points also quite high, $50 probability of losing is high.

To hit, probability to bust is higher than getting between 17-21 and if get another Ace is 16, and have to draw a 4th card.

To stand, is virtually lose $50, only hope is to wait for dealer bust which the dealer have a hard time of busting when they have an ACE.


What I read from the book is
The best situation would be to hit and hope for 2,3,4,5,6 (you got 5 cards and hope the dealer can push or bust). buying insurance would be risking 1/2 bet just to hope for a push. It defeats the fundamental of us gambling where we should aim to win more and lose less and not put extra bets at risk to win nothing. If the dealer has an ACE card, you buy insurance, 2nd card turn up is 5, your insurance bet of $25 taken and he gets another 3rd card which is 5 again, your main bet of $50 is again taken because dealer has 21 which is not a blackjack.

Buying insurance when dealer has ACE is a winning move for blackjack tables. Why would tables want to eat half your bets when dealer has an ACE and could jolly eat up full bets most of the time.

I got a personal experience of buying insurance when dealer has an ACE. I have a 20, dealer has an ACE. I buy insurance because everyone was saying if I buy, I wouldn't lose anything at all if dealer has a blackjack and my 20 is very strong already. dealer has a 5, my insurance bet taken, I think nevermind still can win my main bet or push if dealer has 20. However, dealer gets a 3rd card which is another 5, I lost my main bet. Your 15pts you buy insurance, mine is 20pts I buy insurance already lose more and your chances of losing more is far greater than mine. This lesson taught me a lot. Never buy insurance already. I risked 1/2 bet and lose 1.5bets. It's like the dealer got a good deal out of me.

That's why in such situations, anything below 16, dealer has ACE, just hit till 16 or above and wait for dealer's hand. No one can predict the next card, but if we know the probability well enough, even dealer has strong up cards, there is no need to fear them.

I don't comment on people when they buy insurance or splits or doubles or surrenders. Because its their money. We never know what's the next card coming out. Neither can we count the cards. So the card counting and basic strategy don't really work on blackjack tables already

 

[silverfox@]

One more thing to share.....


I dun like those poor old ladies to tobang her $5 bet my chips Of $50 or $100 per bet on Pontoon tables.
When preparing for double up, they alway got difficulty taking an additional $5 to top up her bet

That I prefer NO STANDING PLAYER tables

In MBS there is no tobang of misc chips. There is a unit limit on every table.

Let's say the unit limit is $25, and on a $50 min bet table, someone already place $50 and I want to tobang $10, this is not allowed. even if I put $20 also not allowed. This is very good because the dealer don't have to waste time giving out small change chips.

Btw, never play PONTOON, Pontoon is short of 10 cards and your advantage cards are missing and dealer's advantage to have less 10s in deck.

 

[Heart Break Kid]

hi bro silverfox,

In MBS, playing Blackjack normally I will buy insurance for $75~$100 when the dealer surface card is ACE assuming my bet is $50 regardless how many I had in hand. I dun think MBS set a low limit on insurance unlike RWS set half of what your initial bet.

One occasion in MBS I was playing Blackjack for 4 hours straight.. 10 times dealer with surface card is ACE, 7 times the dealer achieved a Blackjack.

Insurance payout 2 to 1 - $100 bet on insurance I got $200 in return.

I won nett $1,100 in that 4 hours in MBS playing Blackjack alone

 

[Heart Break Kid]

In MBS there is no tobang of misc chips. There is a unit limit on every table.

Let's say the unit limit is $25, and on a $50 min bet table, someone already place $50 and I want to tobang $10, this is not allowed. even if I put $20 also not allowed. This is very good because the dealer don't have to waste time giving out small change chips.

Btw, never play PONTOON, Pontoon is short of 10 cards and your advantage cards are missing and dealer's advantage to have less 10s in deck.

I would think it is very comfortable to play Blackjack in MBS.

Blackjack has a two advantages over Pontoon.

(1) Can surrender anytime regardless what is the dealer surface is ? Pontoon only can surrender if dealer draw ACE or PICTURE

(2) The amount bet on insurance can higher than the initial bet.

For example,

I initial bet $50 then I bet on insurance at $100 when dealer has a ACE.

In RWS, Pontoon- insurance amount was set at 50% of your initial bet say your initial bet is $50 to buy insurance only at $25

 

[aurvandil]

Here is something interesting aboout odds and baccarat.

Very often, people go to the casino and play baccarat. They bet "modestly" (e.g. $100 per hand) but end up leaving the casino losing quite a lot of money. Here is a simple reason why.

Assuming that you are:

1) Playing non-comission baccarat where B6 pays 50%.
2) Betting $100 per hand.

The house edge for no-commission baccarat where B6 pays 50% is

Banker - 1.40%
Player - 1.24%

This means that for every $100 hand you play, you can expect to lose the following amounts if you bet on banker and player respectively

Banker - $1.40
Player - $1.24

No-commision baccarat is a fast paced game. If you are playing with seasoned croupiers in Las Vegas, time motion studies show that on average, it is possible to play 200 hands in 1 hour.

Given that the croupiers in RWS are inexperienced and slow, let us assume that that game proceeds at a more leisurely 100 hands per hour.

Hence if you bet $100 per games, you are in fact betting (100x$100) = $10,000 over a 1 hour period.

Your expected loss over a 1 hour period is therefore

Banker - $140
Player - $124

Hence if you spend 4 hours in the casino and bet non-stop, you are in fact betting $40,000 even though each bet is only a modest $100.

Your expected loss after playing for 4 hours is

Banker - $560
Player - $496

 

[Heart Break Kid]

I normally go for the Non-Commission Baccarat tables min $25 when I go RWS.

Squeezing cards no longer an innovation to mi.. as long as luck is with mi.

I can win $$$$$$$

 

[silverfox@]

hi bro silverfox,

In MBS, playing Blackjack normally I will buy insurance for $75~$100 when the dealer surface card is ACE assuming my bet is $50 regardless how many I had in hand. I dun think MBS set a low limit on insurance unlike RWS set half of what your initial bet.

One occasion in MBS I was playing Blackjack for 4 hours straight.. 10 times dealer with surface card is ACE, 7 times the dealer achieved a Blackjack.

Insurance payout 2 to 1 - $100 bet on insurance I got $200 in return.

I won nett $1,100 in that 4 hours in MBS playing Blackjack alone

Most people if bet $50, then their insurance bet will be $25 which is half of their main bet as insurance payout is 1 to 2.

If you place $100 on insurance and got $200 in return and won $1100, that will be assuming you place $200 per hand. If buy main bet and place insurance. If dealer blackjack, bets are pushed. If dealer no blackjack, insurance makan, and your main bet win is overall win half bets.

Last week I had a very great game hitting 15 blackjacks in 100 hands. That is considered above average. Average would be around 5-8 blackjacks in 100 hands. But I won only 5 units. On another day when I have less blackjacks, I won more units.

In the long run if you are a frequent blackjack player, insurance will actually drain your winnings. Occasionally you get dealers on a good run of blackjacks but not every time when you play.

I ever read this from 1 of the books I bought online. Most books encourage insurance play, but this article written is very different. It said

Why is the option of surrendering allowed when dealer has 2-10s cards but not ACE? Why does dealer have ACE, the insurance option is given and not surrender option?

Because if you count by probability and real life playing statistics over thousands of hands, surrendering when dealer has 2-10s will eat your profits. If the surrender option is present when dealer has ACE, it will be advantage to the players, that is why the casinos change it to Insurance to get players to place extra bets to cover. Placing insurance reduces the edge for players.

 

[silverfox@]

I would think it is very comfortable to play Blackjack in MBS.

Blackjack has a two advantages over Pontoon.

(1) Can surrender anytime regardless what is the dealer surface is ? Pontoon only can surrender if dealer draw ACE or PICTURE

(2) The amount bet on insurance can higher than the initial bet.

For example,

I initial bet $50 then I bet on insurance at $100 when dealer has a ACE.

In RWS, Pontoon- insurance amount was set at 50% of your initial bet say your initial bet is $50 to buy insurance only at $25

Bro,

(1) Answer is in earlier post. Playing pontoon is a waste of time actually. The odds are not even fair to players when the 10 value cards are gone.

(2) Considering that insurance bet can be higher than initial bet, but the odds are really not good.

I share some info which I get from my readings.
Dealer ACE,
13 number cards, if we go by payout, buying insurance should have a payout of 3.25, so getting a payout of 1:2 is grossly unfair. Anything from 2.5-3 payout for every $1 would actually be much fairer.

Actually I am not dissuading you from buying insurance, just trying to tell you how unfair the odds are when we place certain bets on blackjack which will write off our winnings more times than we win them.

 

[aurvandil]

(1) Answer is in earlier post. Playing pontoon is a waste of time actually. The odds are not even fair to players when the 10 value cards are gone.

The main problem with pontoon is that it is a very non standard game.
In return for removing the 10s the casinos are supposed to give a good set of alternative payouts that are more favourable than Blackjack.

The problem is that these are non standard and vary from casino to casino.

As mentioned before, a very minor and subtle tweak to the rules can result to a very large shift in the odds. Genting leverages on this to introduce all kinds of "innovations" to their pontoon game. This makes it very difficult for the lay person to calcuate the house edge or to formulate what is an optimum strategy. Simulations show that if you play pontoon or blackjack using a non optimum strategy, the house edge can ballon to as much as 2% to 2.5% !

Also of note is that both blackjack and pontoon are much slower games than baccarat. The same time motion study which found that you can play 200 hands of baccarat an hour in Vegas found that you can play only about 50 hands of blackjack. This is because of all the splitting, raising and other decisions that have to be made by the players sitting round the table.

Hence if you find that you are doing better at blackjack/pontoon, it could be because you are actually wagering less. For example if you are betting about $10,000 an hour at $100 a hand baccarat, you would be betting an equivalent of about $2,500 an hour playing $100 a hand blackjack/pontoon.

 

[silverfox@]

The main problem with pontoon is that it is a very non standard game.
In return for removing the 10s the casinos are supposed to give a good set of alternative payouts that are more favourable than Blackjack.

Also of note is that both blackjack and pontoon are much slower games than baccarat. The same time motion study which found that you can play 200 hands of baccarat an hour in Vegas found that you can play only about 50 hands of blackjack. This is because of all the splitting, raising and other decisions that have to be made by the players sitting round the table.

Hence if you find that you are doing better at blackjack/pontoon, it could be because you are actually wagering less. For example if you are betting about $10,000 an hour at $100 a hand baccarat, you would be betting an equivalent of about $2,500 an hour playing $100 a hand blackjack/pontoon.

With less 10 value cards in the deck, dealers will bust less than the number of times when they are in a blackjack game. That is why pontoon is a very unfair game.

Initially I thought that baccarat is a better game than blackjack. After seeing how my friend plays blackjack, he doesn't just play 1 base per hand, he plays a few.

In a baccarat game, we can either bet on player banker or tie, but in blackjack, we can play 1 base or a few more bases. That means 1 base lose, 1 base win or 2 bases win or 2 bases lose. It could be seen as exposing ownself to house edge but my friend ever said he won via betting few bases because you spend time playing 1 hour few bases and if you use the right strategy, you will see your chips grow many times in an hour and that is all you need.

 

[aurvandil]

In a baccarat game, we can either bet on player banker or tie, but in blackjack, we can play 1 base or a few more bases. That means 1 base lose, 1 base win or 2 bases win or 2 bases lose. It could be seen as exposing ownself to house edge but my friend ever said he won via betting few bases because you spend time playing 1 hour few bases and if you use the right strategy, you will see your chips grow many times in an hour and that is all you need.

I don't think that there is any strategy that can work if you are playing against a continuous shuffle machine. This can only work if you are using a shuffle tracking technique to track aces in the shoe. If you are controlling several bases and you know that there are aces coming up, you can then get an advantage over the casino. This is however not useful against a continuous shuffler. To date, there has been no blackjack technique that can beat the shuffler

 

[silverfox@]

I don't think that there is any strategy that can work if you are playing against a continuous shuffle machine. This can only work if you are using a shuffle tracking technique to track aces in the shoe. If you are controlling several bases and you know that there are aces coming up, you can then get an advantage over the casino. This is however not useful against a continuous shuffler. To date, there has been no blackjack technique that can beat the shuffler

There is. A lot of blackjack players when they see the dealer has a 8,9,10,J,Q,K, they start to hit and hit their cards to get as high as possible, based on what they studied from Basic Strategy. Sometimes we read too much basic strategy until the strategy kills us.

My friend ever taught me that most blackjack players are very short sighted. They assume dealer has a big enough card to kill players when his up card is 10, but the dealer has a very big chance of busting when it has a 10 value card. So he understands that basic strategy in fact helps casinos to make money because every player is so afraid when dealer has a 10. They mind start running wild. Most of the time the player will commit suicide by hitting till bust before the dealer even picks his 2nd card.

Another thing is we are always taught not to double down when dealer has a up card of 10. Do you know by not doing this, you are cutting away your advantage which does not come very often. By doubling down, you will win more times than you lose. So it is worth it even if dealer has a so-called strong up card of 10.

This line maybe I put in which I pick up from a book.
Your advantage is not to put yourself at a disadvantage.

Let me finish the book and analyse through playing in casinos. I have been applying their system which does not involve card counting and it seems it can reap profits between 4 - 12 units in 2 hours of gameplay.

 

[aurvandil]

There is. A lot of blackjack players when they see the dealer has a 8,9,10,J,Q,K, they start to hit and hit their cards to get as high as possible, based on what they studied from Basic Strategy. Sometimes we read too much basic strategy until the strategy kills us.

My friend ever taught me that most blackjack players are very short sighted. They assume dealer has a big enough card to kill players when his up card is 10, but the dealer has a very big chance of busting when it has a 10 value card. So he understands that basic strategy in fact helps casinos to make money because every player is so afraid when dealer has a 10. They mind start running wild. Most of the time the player will commit suicide by hitting till bust before the dealer even picks his 2nd card.

Another thing is we are always taught not to double down when dealer has a up card of 10. Do you know by not doing this, you are cutting away your advantage which does not come very often. By doubling down, you will win more times than you lose. So it is worth it even if dealer has a so-called strong up card of 10.

This line maybe I put in which I pick up from a book.
Your advantage is not to put yourself at a disadvantage.

Let me finish the book and analyse through playing in casinos. I have been applying their system which does not involve card counting and it seems it can reap profits between 4 - 12 units in 2 hours of gameplay.

This might work if you are playing a single deck game where the number of cards used in a single round can have an impact on the odds. The problem with the continuous shuffler if that it utilises a huge number of decks (heard rumours of as many as 20). Unlike a human person doing the shuffling, the mechanical process can allows the continuous shuffler to handle decks beyond the capacity of what a person can normally handle. Because of the large number of decks used, the odds of drawing an ace or 10 practically do not change no matter how many cards are used in a single round.

For all practical purposes, the blackjack game has been "fixed" with technology so that you cannot beat it using the conventional methods written in the books.

Unless of course you walk around the casino and manage to find a table where they are using a manual shoe. I have noticed this happens occasionally at Genting during the peak periods when there are not enough machines to cater to the crowd. Even then however, it is only 1 or 2 pontoon tables.

 

[Heart Break Kid]

Most people if bet $50, then their insurance bet will be $25 which is half of their main bet as insurance payout is 1 to 2.

If you place $100 on insurance and got $200 in return and won $1100, that will be assuming you place $200 per hand. If buy main bet and place insurance. If dealer blackjack, bets are pushed. If dealer no blackjack, insurance makan, and your main bet win is overall win half bets.

Bro silverfox,

Just to clarfiy my Blackjack situation in Marina Bay Sands Casino.

My INSURANCE strategy

(1) Every bet I make is consistently $50

(2) If the dealer draw an ACE, I will push in a $100 on insurance but the dealer did not mention any limit set the insurance that I bought.

(3) In the situation where I bought insurance I won't double up if I had 11 points.

(4) If the dealer draw a PICTURE + ACE = BLACKJACK, I won $200 less $50 = $150

Of course if dealer draw other cards, I lost $100 but still left $50 initial bet to fight on.

 

[Heart Break Kid]

Bro,

(1) Answer is in earlier post. Playing pontoon is a waste of time actually. The odds are not even fair to players when the 10 value cards are gone.

(2) Considering that insurance bet can be higher than initial bet, but the odds are really not good.

I share some info which I get from my readings.
Dealer ACE,
13 number cards, if we go by payout, buying insurance should have a payout of 3.25, so getting a payout of 1:2 is grossly unfair. Anything from 2.5-3 payout for every $1 would actually be much fairer.

Actually I am not dissuading you from buying insurance, just trying to tell you how unfair the odds are when we place certain bets on blackjack which will write off our winnings more times than we win them.

Technically I do agree with you...

On the flipside, 70% of time if dealer had an ACE in hand. The dealer is likely to draw a PICTURE to acheive a Blackjack a situation
that always flavour the House. My point why dun we take advantage of the Insurance despite only 2 to 1.

 

[silverfox@]

This might work if you are playing a single deck game where the number of cards used in a single round can have an impact on the odds. The problem with the continuous shuffler if that it utilises a huge number of decks (heard rumours of as many as 20). Unlike a human person doing the shuffling, the mechanical process can allows the continuous shuffler to handle decks beyond the capacity of what a person can normally handle. Because of the large number of decks used, the odds of drawing an ace or 10 practically do not change no matter how many cards are used in a single round.

fyi,
RWS use 4 decks shuffling
MBS use 6 decks shuffling

They can even use 100 decks to shuffle. You just need to find a method that doesn't need to count cards that's all.

Maybe card counting can give a player an edge where he can earn 10-20 units in an hour. But I believe without card counting, after reading up, and also after playing a couple of times, you can earn 5-12 units in an hours.

I bought a system where it teaches how to stand when we are supposed to hit, when to double when we are supposed to hit. In fact, it goes against the direction of basic strategy. Well, such situations just need to test it out. So far been winning some units and I am surprised to learn that dealers bust quite often when it has a 10 up card

For all practical purposes, the blackjack game has been "fixed" with technology so that you cannot beat it using the conventional methods written in the books.

Unless of course you walk around the casino and manage to find a table where they are using a manual shoe. I have noticed this happens occasionally at Genting during the peak periods when there are not enough machines to cater to the crowd. Even then however, it is only 1 or 2 pontoon tables.

I think most people read too much onto card counting and MIT famous story of card counting to beat the casinos. Nowadays use shuffler, how to card count.