In Sin City, Identical Titles Don't Equate to Identical Experiences.

Short pay on electronic roulette game

My friend Kristina and I dedicated a considerable amount of time unraveling the perplexing mystery behind the Venetian's sic-bo machine, specifically the perplexing occurrence of 13 bets that fail to meet the minimum 75% return mandated by gaming regulations. Our exhaustive investigation led us to an unexpected revelation: the machine in question is not truly a sic-bo game at all. Rather, it is a cleverly designed slot machine that cleverly simulates the mechanics of sic-bo, complete with enticing multipliers and unpredictable jackpots that deviate from the traditional live version of the game.

Las Vegas is facing a problem that demands immediate attention: the inability to calculate the payout on an electronic table game, which is completely unacceptable. It is crucial that a gaming machine, which is marketed as a live table game, accurately replicates the same gameplay or is given a distinct name. This issue is increasingly prevalent and needs to be addressed promptly.

Insufficient payouts on electronic table games at Casino Wizard.

In our Las Vegas Table Game Survey, we recently delved into the realm of electronic table games after a hiatus of five years. It was an opportune moment to explore the latest additions, such as the innovative Casino Wizard machines. Our meticulous examination involved scrutinizing the pay tables of numerous electronic games, comparing them to their live table game counterparts. It is worth mentioning that the majority of them aligned perfectly, ensuring a seamless transition for players. However, it seems that, regrettably, we overlooked at least one electronic game that deviates from this norm.

Earlier this week, while I was playing at the casino, I stumbled upon a fascinating discovery. It turns out that there was a peculiar Casino Wizard machine that seemed to be intentionally shortchanging players in the game of craps. What struck me as particularly sneaky was the fact that these unfavorable payouts were cleverly hidden within the depths of the help files, completely absent from the game screen.

In this particular establishment, the pass line boasts a rather significant 9.7% advantage. Now, let's talk about the house edge on a regular game of craps - it stands at a respectable 1.4%. However, brace yourself for some disappointing news: unlike in a traditional craps game, the odds on this machine do not offer a full 100% return. In fact, they fall quite short. The house edge on the odds for rolling a 4 or 10 is a staggering 8%. As if that weren't bad enough, the odds for rolling a 5 or 9 carry a house edge of 9.3%, while the odds for rolling a 6 or 8 are not much better, with a 9% house edge.

At the Casino Wizard, this game is known as craps on their slot machines, and players have high hopes for the payouts, just like in the live version.

On these Casino Wizard machines, it is worth noting that the baccarat payouts have been reported to be considerably inferior. In a regular game, the house edge is just over 1%, yet on these machines, it jumps to 6-7%.

There are instances when the availability of craps odds and the payout ratio of 6:5 in blackjack may be absent.

In the realm of electronic table games, the disclosure of craps odds is a clandestine affair, tucked away from prying eyes. The veil of secrecy extends to video blackjack machines, where the ill-fated 6:5 payouts are cunningly concealed within the labyrinthine depths of the rules screen, far removed from the prying gaze of unsuspecting players. The impact of these covert regulations is not to be underestimated, for they have the power to tip the scales of the house edge by a significant margin, surpassing the 1% threshold with ease.

Certain vertical roulette machines offer reduced payouts for unlikely outcomes.

At US Casino Advantage, I came across an interesting observation made by Kristina in a previous article. She mentioned that there are certain single-player roulette machines available which feature only one zero on their wheel. However, what caught our attention was the fact that these machines offer significantly lower payouts compared to the standard roulette. While traditional roulette pays out 35 on straight bets and 17 on split bets, these machines only pay as little as 31 on straights and 15 on splits. This might deceive some players into thinking they're getting a good deal with the single zero, but in reality, these machines are even worse than the usual six-zero roulette when it comes to these particular bets.

Live table games are equally culpable.

According to the data we have gathered, it has been revealed that a significant majority, specifically 69%, of the blackjack tables located on the Las Vegas Strip follow a 6:5 payout ratio. Unfortunately, this crucial information often goes unnoticed by players who simply observe the table without any prior knowledge.

It is crucial to provide clear disclosure regarding 6:5 blackjack tables.

At times, the 6:5 payout is boldly displayed on the casino table, catching the eye of unsuspecting players. Alternatively, some establishments opt to convey this information discreetly through a well-placed placard. Nevertheless, a significant number of casinos choose to downplay the significance of the 6:5 payout by using minuscule font size on the placard, rendering it virtually invisible to those seated closest to the sign.

Las Vegas, renowned for its vibrant gambling scene, is known to offer a variety of blackjack games to eager players. However, it is crucial to note that not all games are created equal. While traditional blackjack typically pays out at a favorable rate of 3:2, there is a prevailing trend in the Las Vegas market where a less generous payout of 6:5 is more widespread. This difference in payout may come as a surprise to visitors hailing from other cities, who often assume that the games in Las Vegas mirror those found in their local casinos. It is unfortunate that some blackjack games in Las Vegas have adopted rules that negatively impact the player's potential returns. In order to prevent unsuspecting players from falling into this trap, one might argue that it is necessary to mandate larger signage at the tables, clearly disclosing any unfavorable rules that may diminish the player's chances of success.

Compulsory additional wagers in the game of blackjack.

In Las Vegas, there are a handful of casinos that offer blackjack games with a compulsory side bet of either $1 or $2. These establishments include Binion's, Four Queens, Fremont, and Golden Nugget. However, it's important to note that these particular casinos are known for dealing the three least favorable blackjack games in the city.

Optional side bets are a customary feature of blackjack games. However, it would be appropriate to designate any blackjack variant that mandates a side bet under a different name, as such a game significantly diverges from the standard version. At the very least, it should be obligatory for casinos to prominently display a conspicuous sign, explicitly alerting players to this unfavorable rule.

At the Golden Nugget Lucky Cat Blackjack tables, I calculated the house edge to be 8.95% for the minimum bet, which includes a required $2 side bet. Surprisingly, this is over 1% greater than the house edge for triple zero roulette.

At Fremont and Golden Nugget, the Binion’s and Four Queen games stand out as slightly more favorable options compared to the other mandatory bet games. What sets them apart is the 3:2 payout, which is proudly advertised on eye-catching signs. These signs seem to be an enticement for players who believe they possess superior knowledge and would rather avoid the 6:5 games. However, it's worth noting that the signs conveniently omit the fact that there is a mandatory side bet involved.

In my estimation, the house advantage in the $10+1 obligatory side bet games conducted by these two establishments is roughly equivalent to that of a $50 wager in a traditional 3:2 blackjack match.

Employing a gambling establishment emblem to represent the third zero while playing roulette.

Triple zero roulette poses yet another concern, as numerous casinos attempt to conceal it by incorporating their emblem as the third zero on the roulette wheel. This subtle alteration may easily escape the attention of unsuspecting players. In virtually every other market, roulette tables are equipped with two zeros. Therefore, if a casino opts to deviate from this norm, it is imperative that they provide clear and explicit information to all players.

What actions are possible to take?

I have noticed that not every casino is to blame for this issue. In fact, the majority of them are doing things correctly. However, there are certain casinos that are attempting to conceal their unfavorable games, and unfortunately, this is negatively impacting the entire industry. I strongly believe that it is high time for the regulatory authorities in Nevada to take action and resolve this problem. The trust of visitors in Las Vegas is dwindling at an alarming speed, and this situation must be rectified promptly.

When it comes to approving an electronic table game in Nevada, in my opinion, it should adhere to the identical rules as the live iteration of the game. If the blackjack payout ratio is 6:5, it is imperative that the game be labeled as "6:5 blackjack" on the menu, rather than simply "blackjack," or alternatively, the detrimental rule should be clearly disclosed. This principle should also extend to live games where uncommon rules have a detrimental impact on players' financial outcomes.

If a virtual tabletop game wants to borrow the title of a real-life counterpart, it must exhibit a significant resemblance. It would be inappropriate to incorporate flashy slot machine elements while retaining the same name. Consider the case of sic-bo, as mentioned previously; in such circumstances, a more appropriate designation would be "dice-bo" or "slot-bo."

Nevada Gaming Regulations 5.011 and 5.012 were put in place to ensure fairness and transparency in the world of electronic gaming. As an avid player myself, I believe it is essential for games to accurately display their odds and payouts. If a virtual game deliberately reduces payouts without informing the players upfront, it is simply deceiving them. It's like sitting at a poker table and realizing that the rules are completely different from what you expected. That's just not right. The virtual felt should be a reflection of the live game, or it should be given a distinct name to avoid confusion. It's common sense, really. Players deserve to know what they're getting into and make informed decisions based on accurate information. Hiding a significantly worse house edge deep within the help screen is not acceptable. It undermines the integrity of the game and goes against the principles of fair play. We should strive for transparency and honesty in the gaming industry, ensuring that players can trust the games they are engaging in.