Blackjack as I've known it since the 40's is slowly but surely dieing.

And the strange thing about this slow demise is that no one seems to give a darn!

And that "no one" includes a whole lot of people who should definitely be concerned ,,,, the players, the dealers, the bosses, the "Games Committee", and the whole darn town of Las Vegas!

And while we're at it, Let's include the Mayor!

Regardless of what you play or what you drink or where you fine dine or whom you chase around your hotel room - this town was built on the blood, the sweat, the tears of one single, risk filled, game called Blackjack.

Blackjack earned those nickels and those dimes that got Fremont Street started and on its feet and on the map as a very small dot and watering hole along the L.A. - Salt Lake City corridor.

And now they are taking it and changing it and calling it by another name!

And they are doing so without most of us understanding exactly why and without a fight! We are simply letting them get away with it.

This past week I've visited many of the Las Vegas casinos to investigate the game of Blackjack and how it's been changed over the years. And what I've discovered is disheartening.

And in an attempt to make this short and bitter-sweet, I'll simply address one simple change that these casinos are making to the game that found this town and driving it to the cemetery!

They no longer pay 3 to 2 when you get that Blackjack! And that single payoff alone is/was the one major factor that offered the Player a bit of an advantage against the House but still allowed the House the House's Advantage.

Now the House is paying off with payments such as 7 to 5, 6 to 5, and in a couple of cases ..... EVEN MONEY!

And they are getting away with this because the new Players in this game of Blackjack just don't know any better and are satisfied that they don't have to make another draw or stand decision.

And if you question the Bosses about this underhanded tactic, they'll simply say that the House is giving you other "advantages" such as single deck, the surrender option, and the opportunity to make a side bet in the hope of getting a matched pair or some other far out wager.

And since they GIVE YOU that, they will only pay you even money.

You guys and gals who have been playing this game for years on end may have empathy for my current feelings about what they are presently doing to a game I really love and have played since I lost all my allowance to my dad starting at the age of 6. (He was an avid gambler who wanted to teach me a lesson. And he did. But he played by the rules and never though of cheating by changing those rules in any manner whatsoever.)

It's evident that those Players who play at any BJ table that pays less than 3 to 2 for any reason whatsoever (and that included single deck), are being taken by the casino. That is not what BJ rules originally intended.

Eventually those players are going to wake up and realize that they are being taken and will cease to play the game. Then the dealers will be looking for new jobs while the bosses take over what remains of the BJ tables, and the committee who set the rules will argue on how they let it happen in the first place, and the Mayor will get involved and read the original rules of the game and make an effort to set things right once again.

Maybe! Just - MAYBE!

PS.... If it looks like a duck, and walks like a duck, and quacks ..... it must be a duck!

RIGHT!?

But in Las Vegas, what looks like a blackjack table and plays like a blackjack game - isn't necessarily a game of Blackjack!

I think they call it something else in order to change the rules of Blackjack and pay off less than the rules established in the first place.

Simple advice -Don't sit at any table that appears to be Blackjack unless you are really sure that you'll be paid off at 3 to 2 when you get that 21 on your first two cards. It may look like a duck, but it's something else.

Do anything else and you are getting RIPPED OFF!

I doubt this will go away, Will. My personal boycott of the high price shows felt flat as a pancake too<g>. Las Vegas popularity is a twin-bladed sword - the good is the tremendous variety available, whether we're talking hotels, shows, dinner, games, shopping or whatever. The bad is that there will always be a good supply of one-time tourists that want to see what makes Las Vegas so popular. Sure, some of them (like me) will say WOW! and keep returning, but there are a lot more that have no desire to return, so they don't mind paying big bucks for a once-in-a-lifetime show/dining/gambling/sin city experience, and they don't really care about gambling odds - they just want to sample a bit of everything and go home with some good memories.

This is why I don't think your BJ world will ever return to the strip, but I join in your outrage when I go to a locals place like Sam's Town that pays even money on a blackjack. I used to play a fair amount of BJ, and I hardly notice the tables now that I'm addicted to video poker<g>, but if I ever do start playing BJ again, it won't be on an even money table!

FWIW, this is really close to my theory why those CA tribal casinos (and gas prices) won't crunch Lake Tahoe as badly as Reno - too many tourists want to see that beautiful lake.

I honestly don't think most people realize they're getting ripped off when they're getting 6 to 5 or, God forbid, even money on a blackjack. Those of us on this this board keep ourselves educated and know a rip-off when we see one. But many people are oblivious to this.

Not to change the subject, but to put it in relative terms. Do you remember what a royal flush on a video poker machine used to pay?

$1500
$1300
$1200
$1199
and now $1000

I don't have the software to plug these numbers in to see how much odds was lost on that game in percentages and odds. It sure seems like a lot. I've grumbled about gimmick games for a long time and nobody seemed to care.

When I see people playing slots, they don't seem to be looking for a way to get a 1-5 percent profit on their original investment. I hear people all the time talking about slots in terms of how the game is played, the theme, and the progressive amount.

Maybe the tourists see these games as entertainment without a serious thought about their true odds of winning.

Why should blackjack be any different? How do we define rip off?

What's next? Craps?

Sure they'll be changing Craps! Why not?

But our main advantage against them changing Craps is that Craps is mainly played by old timers who know how to play the game and the odds on every single bet made at that table.

Change those rules to give more advantage to the House and these old time experts will leave in droves.

It's different with the game of Blackjack. Most of the people playing that game have no idea that they should be receiving 3 - 2 when they get a BJ. The casino is simply taking advantage of their stupidity.

I complain to every pit boss who stands behind these "rip off" tables and each and everyone of them defends the House's position saying that you're given other advantages (such as surrender) to compensate. But little do they know that they are not speaking to some weekend casino dummy who doesn't understand the game and the odds involved better than they themselves do.

I do have to compliment two of the pit bosses I "argued with". One at the Silverton
was extremely courtious while listening to my rants and raves. I was so upset that I didn't realize he was only the Slot Host or maybe the Casino Host. I should go back and apologize to him. Better yet, I'll send him a letter.

Some Bosses justify their payoffs by calling it a different name. I actually forget the name they do call it but a duck is a duck is a duck ..... and it sure was blackjack to me, but Blackjack with a rip off pay off.

Only one of the bosses of the ten (at least) I spoke with gave what I think is the honest answer ..... "We want to increase the bottom line!".

That was a thoroughly honest man!

I ask you all to be HONEST with yourself and only play at those tables who play the game the way in which it was originally intended with a 3 - 2 payoff when you get a blackjack.

And tell your friends to do the same!

And never pass up the opportunity to politely tell the casino how you feel about this new scheme to get into our wallets.

will800:

Amen, brutha! Speak TRUTH to The Man!

I couldn't agree with you more. I'm pretty familiar with how different rule changes in blackjack affect the house edge, and paying less than 3 to 2 gives the casino a huge edge (relatively speaking, anyway. Double deck blackjack that pays 6 to 5 *still* has a house edge lower than roulette).

I remember the first time I walked into New York New York in 1997. I was stunned to find that they actually hit soft 17. On the Strip! What the hell, guys!! Hitting soft 17 is for those bozos downtown, not here on the Strip! Little did I recognize the doom approaching on the horizon.

At Horseshoe all tables on the main floor hit soft 17. In the Le Cheng gaming room and in high-limits, the game is still pure, and the dealer stands on all 17s. No goofy side bets, either. To their credit, they still pay 3 to 2 on all blackjacks. Given the uproar we heard when we started hitting soft 17, I would hope that they're not even thinking about going to 6 to 5.

I wonder if casinos worry that people are starting to find regular blackjack to be boring, and all these rule variations are there to keep players coming back to the table to see what's new.

Cheers,


Tim the Dealer

If I can add my meager thought to the BJ discussion, something that has bothered me in recent years is the increase in the price of the tables. I'm an amateur gambler at best. I like to be in a nicer casino but I can't afford a minimum of $25 a hand. I remember going to Vegas with my late husband and sitting for hours nursing $50 each at the blackjack table with a $5 minimum. It was loads of fun and a pretty good entertainment value. Nowadays that's impossible.

Thanks for your input, Tim, Gail.

I entirely agree with your minimum bet assessment, Gail. At present $5 BJ minimums are difficult to find on the Strip with minor exceptions. The Trop offers one such table which always seem crowded and Casino Royal offers a few more than that. And Slots O Fun still offers $1, $3, and $5 tables.

But to the best of my knowledge, that's about it. The "higher class" joints now start off at about $15 and naturally increase those minimums on weekends or when the major conventions are in town.

The neighbor/local casinos minimums are always lower than those on the Strip but they also increase their minimums depending on what those minimums are in their sister Strip joints.

Even Water Street casinos start at $3 now.

It wasn't too long ago that we were playing quarter craps but now the lowest Craps table I can find is $1 out on Boulder Highway at Jokers Wild.

The casinos have more than enough people willing to lose their money faster at high minimum tables and most of those Players are satisfied with even money, or 6 to 5, or 7 to 6 ..... because it appears that they just don't know any better.

And the casinos are more than willing to accept their "stupidity".

I talked to some darn nice people at the Gaming Commission this past week about this subject and strongly recommended that the casinos be enforced to lay out on the table just as they lay out "DEALER MUST HIT SOFT 17", but in ever case where that table does not pay 3 to 2 for a BJ, that table should so state - "THIS TABLE DOES NOT PAY 3 -2". That should be so stated in or under every betting spot on that BJ table.

One very polites person stated that it was a matter of enough room on the table to spell that out and could tend to confuse the Players.

I mentioned that there appears to be enough room on the tables to advertise the casino's showroom appearances and that clarifying a specific point never tends to confuse anyone no matter how stupid or unknowledgeable that person/player could be.

At present the Gaming Commission feels that a little notice in the cornor of the table and on the card at the side explaining the game is sufficient.

I respectfully DISAGREE for many reasons I won't go into right now but I do plan to draft a formal letter and send it off to Cafrson City.

(I figure I'm playing Blackjack when I sit at a Blackjack table or any game that plays according to the "rules" of the game! And BJ always pays 3-2!)

BTW, if you ever have the opportunity to talk to these folks at the Gameing Commission, you're going to be mighty impressed. In every case I've spoken to a rep who was professional to the utmost and very respectful.

OK, thanks again.

There is an economic concept called "money illusion" - people get used to an idea that money is worth a certain amount and it is very long and hard to change that.
In terms of purchasing value, a 1960's $5 table is a 2008 $25 table.
Blackjack has become like the military race between armor and gun.
Back in the day, the casinos could reliably count on ignorance of true odds and strategy. Thus they could offer a beatable game on the basis that nobody knew that it was beatable and extremely few knew how to beat it.
Now days even the first time weekend tourist has his little card with basic strategy.
The changes in rules are kind of psychological. Many people think they can count cards, most are nowhere as good as they think and this gives the casino a tactic.
Offer single deck (i.e. better for counting) and take back the edge by cutting the BJ bonus.
The casinos are targeting a return on investment. A blackjack table is an investment, if it does not pay them as much as the same area of slot machines then it will be adios BJ and hello more slots.
The bad rules (and the bizarre VP pay tables) are just a sign that the contest between the good players and the greedy casino bosses is still going on.
Also the casino bosses have to make up for the reduced opportunity to drag advantage players into the back room and pummel them.
Another external factor is that the gambling taxes, especially outside of Nevada have gotten huge. Somebody has to pay them.

Gail - I can usually find $5 tables at either Excalibur or Monte Carlo on the strip.

Thanks for the info, Mike. I'll check it out when I go in November.