Is it better for casual players to play casino games with high table limits or games with lower stakes that allow them to play longer?
A professor of mathematics and computer science in New York says that players should make the higher bets because they have a better chance of winning in the long run. Kingsborough Community College professor Christopher Ingrassia was one of the first-day presenters at UNLV’s three-day conference on gambling and risk taking at the Bellagio.
Ingrassia is one of more than 500 attendees at the conference, which is put on by UNLV’s International Gaming Institute every three years. The conference has brought together gaming industry executives with academics for sessions on several topics involving the gaming industry. Participants from 25 countries have come to this year’s conference with research articles or to participate as speakers or panelists.
In a panel dedicated to changes in casino games that offer different odds and payouts to players, Ingrassia noted that blackjack tables that offer 3:2 payouts are harder to come by than those with 6:5 returns.
In a 3:2 game, players win $15 on a $10 bet if they hit 21, while they only win $12 on a $10 bet on 6:5 tables.
“Should the typical Las Vegas weekender step into the high-limit room and bet on it with their modest bankroll, or should they just grind it out on the $10 table?” Ingrassia asked. “That’s really the question I’m going to try to answer here. So, at the risk of becoming persona non grata here and floating in the fountain, I’ll just say that casino games have become increasingly disadvantageous to the player.”
Ingrassia focused most of his talk on triple-zero roulette and whether it’s beneficial to spend more per bet with better odds on a double-zero or single-zero game.
“Playing for a larger dollar amount is really a different mindset than the recreational player is used to,” Ingrassia said.
Ingrassia’s study on playing high-limit roulette with $100 spins as opposed to $10 plays concluded that the high-stakes game is more profitable for the player given the better odds that come with a lower house edge.
In roulette, with 1:1 payouts — bets that include black vs. red, odd vs. even, and 1-18 vs. 19-36, the odds are 19:18 on games with one zero, but 7:6 on three zeros. On sessions with 2:1 payouts — bets that include columns or 1-12, 13-24 and 25-36, the actual odds are 25:12 on games with one zero, but 9:4 on three zeroes.
Ingrassia’s test included simulating 600 spins. The results were what a mathematician would expect: Players are more likely to win more with better odds, despite the length of the session.
Ingrassia said a reasonable expectation in single-zero roulette is a 20 percent win, and the chances of doubling your money are slim. These expectations are shattered when a second or third zero is added to the wheel.
“It’s hard to double your money on both tables regardless. But bottom line, yes, you should go to the high-limit room and play the better game.
“Don’t put up with this triple-zero nonsense,” he said. “The players have to fight back.”
Fighting back, in this context, likely means not condescending triple-zero roulette wheels or 6:5 blackjack.
–
