Wagers, bettor losses set record

Xan and Chef are nodding in agreement.

 

Thanks. Based on that link you posted, the margins, like most commodity businesses, are razor-thin. $227M among 30-add books ain't much in a multi-billion dollar industry. Sounds like the books are a loss leader primarily. Too bad journos don't get a cut, we are so central to the books' business plan.

 

Sorry, you're being sold something. That is far too transparent and easily entered a market for such an approach to work.

Sports books earn their money via the vig, whether you've said so a hundred or a thousand times.

 

So, with 75 percent of the public money on the Patriots for the Super Bowl, why hasn't the line shifted dramatically in recent days in an attempt to get the number closer to 50-50?

 

There is a .25% tax on the Nevada books, that's the official vig. So that number is larger because of the vig from the point spreads?

 

Dear Jack Reacher: What I mean is, any gambler can bet on blackjack every 20 seconds, whereas one NFL bet takes three hours to win or lose. The gambler doesn't lose all the bets in blackjack, probably, so if he loses say $500 in three hours at a table, he's bet much more than that in total, as opposed to the NFL bettor who lost $500 on the Packers or whoever. The handle is higher.

 

Did anyone question that? I was just posting the numbers. I found them interesting. But thanks for explaining that, I guess.

 

I read somewhere long ago that craps had the smallest house edge of any casino game, and it was very low indeed, like less than two percent. Don't know if that's true, but of course the churn in craps is very high.

 

I've tried to play more craps over the past year. Had some good runs and some bad runs. There's nothing quite like getting on a roll at the table, though. By far the most fun game (when you're winning). Also, the second most miserable when you're losing, behind only blackjack.

And yeah, a lot of the betting options at the table cut the house edge considerably.

 

Yes, on a standard (i.e., NOT "crapless") table, the straight pass-line bet (or its "dark side" equivalent, the don't pass bet) has a house edge of about 1.4%.

 

Because, only this week, recreational bettors focus on one game. Recreational betters are putting more money on the SB than the professional betters, thus far. Most of the professional bettors like Seattle and are waiting on the recreational bettors to drive the line up another half point or point and will lay the money on Seattle.

 

I helped with the bottom line. During our trip to Las Vegas in August, I gave the casinos (namely Palace Station, Riviera and the LV Hilton - now the Westgate) a princely profit of $137. All of my "futures bets" (win-loss totals and NFL Division Champion picks) have been accounted for. I wagered $484 (on 26 different bets) and won only $347 back and lost all of the long-shot parlays (Week 1 college & NFL 5-, 6- and 9-teamers).

However, I look at gambling a bit differently than most as I was a blackjack dealer while in college. I can count down a 6-deck game but I really don't feel there is as much to an advantage to that as to proper money management.

While I am a lousy sports bettor, I am a strong blackjack player. Play basic strategy (except I hit 13 v 2 way too often) but I see playing blackjack as strictly to make money. I don't consider it "fun" but I like the action of playing heads up with a dealer, getting 4 or 5 hands a minute, maybe more. Usually play green chips with the goal to go up 4 units ($100) or leave when down 16 units ($400). Once up $100, I stop the session. Perhaps I'll pick it up at the same casino a few minutes later. Perhaps I'm done for the day.

The tricky part is the session. I don't count cards but I do count the "wins and losses" (a push isn't counted) with a separate side count for double down hands. Once at 20 decisions, then I re-assess. If, say, I'm at 7-13 (and down $150), I'll bump up the bets to $50 a hand. That way, when the pendulum swings back and, say, I win 6 of 9 hands, then I'm back to even and needing only two plus units to win the session.

I've had a session that ended in 3 hands (two winners and a double down winner). Had seven sessions during the August trip, won $100 in each of them ($125 in one of them as it ended on a double-down that I won at Vegas Club). Two of them were sieges. At South Point, I started out 4-16 (down $325 as I lost a double-down, too), bumped it straight to $75 -- I was a bit on tilt. Won 8 of 11 with two blackjacks and a double-down to finish up $200. The other one was a choppy (win one/lose one) 90 minutes at the Club Fortune. Finally broke through but couldn't get any traction.

Blackjack is my preferred gambling vice because I like the control and the pace. No one else to rely on when I play "heads up". Preferably no one else at the table. I also write the session results down and can even tap them into my phone every twenty hands.

If I *have* to kill an hour in a casino, I'll play craps but I find it pretty boring. Bet on the "pass" line, back it up once the point is made. It's just too slow for me.

The blackjack winnings - 7 sessions ($700) across the four days - paid for all of the sports betting that I did do. Yet I didn't mind losing the $137 because it did enhance my enjoyment of the NFL and college football season... at least until UCLA choked against Stanford and the freaking Lions and Cowboys each won more than 8 games.