Table Games Casino Win Percentages - Crazy Stuff

UNLV paper for 2013

Crazy that the craps win percentage for casinos was 13.55% statewide. 3 card poker was over 30%.

Full report: http://gaming.unlv.edu/reports/2013NevadaGamingWin.pdf

 

thanks for posting... I always wondered what the theoretical drop was for each casino game. One would imagine that a house edge dictates how much a casino would "win" in the long run. Its simply not true, because most players don't have the bankroll for a "long run" scenario. Plus, the sucker bets add up too!

I had heard on other boards that the average craps drop was near 20%, and the carny games such as 3-card were closer to 30-35%.

So this report doesn't surprise me a bit. I bet the slots numbers include video poker, which may contribute to the lower percentages at higher denominations.

 

Thanks for the post OP.

 

You could probably also factor in how often gamblers chase their losses with big bets that don't pan out.

 

I read it too. 3 Card is over 33%.

OK, The comps formula is based in part of money wagered per hour * house advantage * 40%.

I don't know about the rest of you, but the next time I'm playing 3 Card Poker, I'll telling the pit boss to base my comps on THEIR house advantage of 33%.

 

Do realize that the numbers in that report are not what are used for comp purposes.

The report gives no number for total coin in(or whatever you want to call it for table games).

 

Pai Gow is high win % for each listing. Lol. Time to play Pai Gow.

Not surprised BJ is not the highest win %.

 

It was a joke.

Yes, they take 33% and comp as little as possible, or none, since the readings here indicate table comps are going away, unless betting LARGE....

 

Great info!!! Thanks!!!

 

The 30% (+/-) on 3-card is no surprise at all. The pair-plus bet is played by virtually every player of the game...and it is one of worst sucker-bets out there. You'll get a win about every 5 or 6 plays, yet most of those are only paid 1:1 (a pair). If 3-card were analyzed for ante/play only, I'd bet that the casino win% would be more like 20%...so, more in line with blackjack or craps.

Now, as for the blackjack numbers (roughly 20%), that is a reflection of just how many hands are played incorrectly and the popularity of "betting systems"...and, I'm sure the proliferation of 6:5 has played in role in it as well.

True blackjack, played with proper basic strategy and no count is really very close to a 50/50 proposition. Sure, there are swings, but at lower limits it's easy enough to ride them out - even with a modest bankroll.
Add in even the simplest of "counts" (tracking 10s & Aces only), with a very-modest spread of 1-3, and you likely have a very slight edge over the house.
The report reflects, (in my opinion), the poor play of gamblers. The actual HA for table games is well-known, and solid math.
Any blackjack table with a house edge of 0.7% or less is a great value, especially at lower limits.
An hour of play with a $10 base bet will often result in a $10 to $30 swing, one way or another. So, let's say the average is an even distribution of $20 wins and $20 losses per session, and you quit a 2-hour session on a loss.
If you drink, you've been basically entertained "for free", while having a decent chance to actually win.

That's enough to keep bringing me back.

 

I agree...but as an advantage player this is fine with me. Allows my casino to comp me more. So all those poor players keep going to Vegas so that you can pay for my comps......

 

This has been posted here over and over and people still keep making the same mistake.

These win% are TABLE HOLDS which is a very different thing than HOUSE EDGE. The table hold is the amount won divided by the drop.

You buy in for $100 at a blackjack table, play perfectly for hours and hours, and walk away down $50, then the hold against you was 50% even though the house edge may have been under 1%.

 

Thanks KC. This is ALWAYS misinterpreted by tons of people when they see casino hold reports. The house edge on 3CP is NOT 33%. That number only looks like that because people wager vastly more than their original buy-in.

There IS no calculation of the 'coin-in' at table games, because it would be far too tedious to calculate it (and basically impossible barring full RFID chip tracking). They only can keep track of money held vs. the customer buy-ins.

 

Anyone that can explain the discrepancy between Baccarat and Mini-baccarat?
3% difference is a lot for a game with nearly identical rules.

 

KC...I do get it.
My comment has to do with why it would be 20% for blackjack.
It's not because of the inherent rules of the game - it is because of poor play or poor betting habits by players.

After all - the "hold" would be -50% if that same player played perfectly for hours & hours and walked away up $50. And, as you point out, even when that happens, it is no reflection of the HA for the game.

If all players played "properly", all buying in for $100 and all flat-betting $10 on a 0.6% HA game, that 'hold' percentage would be much closer to that HA.

Where 6:5 versus 3:2 comes in is with not only the HA, but also the hold, assuming most players have a session bankroll when they sit down.

A 6:5 game will felt a losing player more quickly than a 3:2 game, on average. Those few extra unplayed hands could easily inflate the hold by eliminating a bankroll 'early' (earlier than a 3:2 game) and prevent otherwise-winning hands from ever being played.

I understand that the hold is a table hold...or, in the case of this report, a hold for the game itself in each respective region. The fact that it is so high tells me that there are more "poor" gamblers than there are "good" ones.

I've lost 100% of my buy-in plenty of times...but I have had many more sessions when I've left the table up...sometimes just a little, sometimes with 2,3 and even 5 or 6-times my buy-in.

If the overall blackjack "hold" for me personally is nowhere near 20%, what explanation would you suggest as the reason it is, overall?

 

No, it's because people recycle their winnings. That's it.

But ONLY if they all just made 10 bets of $10 and left. These large numbers for hold percentage ONLY reflect the fact that players play through their buy-in over and over again. They reflect next to NOTHING to do with the skill of the players. Actually, the most skillful players might account for higher hold percentages because they manage to keep their buy-in alive a lot longer, thus playing more hands on the original buy-in.

You can infer nothing from hold percentages about the skill of the players. Only how much they recycle their money. The 'recycle' factor swamps anything that you could measure about the HA each player is actually playing at. Look at the hold numbers for baccarat. In a basically no-skill game with a 1% edge (barring side bets or tie bets), they can get holds up to 25% or 30%.

 

WWW has it right, plus the reality that most people are severely under bankrolled for the game/stakes they are playing. They quit when they have lost their roll, not while ahead or when they get to the longer term.

 

I must still be missing something.
If a player buys-in for $100 and recycles that $100 for hours, eventually leaving the table up $30, the hold percentage for that player is negative-30%, correct?
So, if 4 players do this and 2 players lose their $100 bankroll, that's a $600 drop and a net-win (for the casino) of $80. That would be a hold of just under 14%, correct?
If the numbers were 5 winning $30 & 1 losing $100, it would be a net casino loss of $50, or a hold of negative 8% or so.
If the numbers were split - 3 players winning $30 each and 3 losing their $100, the casino wins $210, or a hold of just over 31%. Correct?

So, it would seem to me that the caliber of play by blackjack players would have a very direct impact on the table hold percentage.
What am I missing?

 

Only thing I can think of is that I see more players making pair and tie bets at the big tables rather than the mini-tables

 

I would have liked to see Ultimate Texas Hold'em on the report. I have been told by several dealers/pit bosses in the past that it was their highest dropping table game.