Sorry but I Just simply gave the originating link to the original article for their credit as I would do for any article or news item that I posted about in here...
Honestly, I prefer to see a snippet of an article or news item - no matter where it is. Matters not if it's yours or someone else's - not saying you can't link back, but a simple "here" isn't particularly useful. That type of link is reminiscent of forum spam bots, if you see what I mean.
If that's the case and he is actually talking about the new table game "Texas Hold 'em Bonus" that came out about 3-4 years ago then it also will not earn him comps as fast or as easy as Blackjack would either IMO because of the percent of "House Edge Hold" that that particular game has.
Your statement is still incorrect. Comps playing Texas Hold 'em Bonus will be earned at a higher/faster rate than blackjack at any good casino - and the house edge is completely irrelevant when discussing comps. He may actually lose more money - on that count you would be right - but your statement as it stands is not correct in most situations (except crap places like the Sahara).
If his play is not the exception to the rule then he will not be able to last as long at "Texas Hold 'em Bonus" as he would playing at the standard "Blackjack" table. The "Texas Hold 'em Bonus" house edge is 2.04% according to Michael Shackleford under Las Vegas rules.
This is dependent on the size of one's bankroll, the period of time, and the amount of luck. As I have pointed out above - he may lose more quickly - but this is irrelevant to earning comps unless the comp rate is the same as for blackjack.
Agreed, it can depend on which casino he chooses to visit but as I stated above I respectfully disagree with you regarding your statement that "the rating for this will be much higher than for blackjack". The house edge hold on this poker game is much more than it is on your standard game of blackjack which in all probabilities will mean he will bust out faster which will mean less play time and money turn over at the table for this particular player. And we all know that length of playtime plus bet-size = more and better comps assuming he is playing at the rate of $50 per hand. He will also most likely play more hands per hour at the Blackjack table than he will at the Poker Bonus table.
Not correct. Length of playtime could be decreased, or size of bet could be decreased, or even both, depending on the comp rate used for that game. This is why I told him he should approach a casino host or a pit boss to see what his new requirement would be - and if the answer was still $50/hand/$5 hours I most certainly would've either checked out, or played only blackjack just to see the look on the face of the pitboss.
In a good casino, every game will have a different comp rate. When a casino quotes you a hand value and time for a table game in order to earn a comp, it is always for blackjack, which is always their worst case scenario. Any well-prepared player who does not want to play blackjack should approach a pit boss or host - but the casino is counting on the fact that many people do not know this.
It's very easy to test - the next time you go to Vegas (I am not aware of the policies of locations outside Vegas since I rarely play elsewhere), go up to the pitboss and ask how long it will take to get a comped room if you play $25/hand at any unusual table game - and then ask him "How about blackjack?" - if you get the same rate, find another casino.
Here are a few tricks you can try:
* If you've been told that you need to play 5 hours at $50/hand - this is an average number. So if the pitboss walks away, lower your bet for a hand or two.
* Take frequent bathroom breaks, at least once every half hour - if the pitboss asks, tell him you have diabetes.
* Keep your cell phone with you - if it rings, you will have to step away from the table, and thus can skip a hand or two.
* If the game requires some decision on your part, stall a bit before announcing your decision.
* Get the waitress to serve you drinks frequently - keep $1 chips or coins in your pocket, not on the table. Take time to get the $1 tip out of your pocket for the waitress each time.
* Every 3 hours, ask the pit boss if you can have a meal break (and ask him to comp that too). If you've been really friendly and chatty with the pitboss, not only will you get your meal, you may find yourself eating steak instead of at the buffet!
* Always sit at the busiest table you can find - if the table is empty, you will be playing double or triple as many hands per hour.
Think of it this way. Casinos use a calculation of say 30-40 hands per hour - so that would be $1500-$2000 wagered per hour in the above instance. What this means is - your playthrough is $7500-$10000 before they will give you airfare.
If your game is blackjack - your expected loss $50-$100 under ideal circumstances - most likely cheaper than your airfare.
If your game is Texas Hold 'em Bonus - at say 5% house edge - your expected loss $500 if bound to the same bet size and time played. Obviously not as worthwhile - however, get that bet size lowered to say $25, and you'll lose $250 - much more reasonable. Or get the time cut to 3 hours... your loss is $300.
What Robwin is trying to say is that it is more cost-effective to play blackjack - which is entirely correct - but he said that you will not earn comps as fast, which is incorrect except if you're at a casino like the Sahara.
BTW, the Sahara did sort of make up for it, in that I and a friend got comped at their steakhouse for anything we wanted - and I had only been playing $5-$10 per blackjack hand for a few hours... but that was early in my Sahara period.
But never again after I found out the flat table comp rate, even though I was personal friends with the slots floor manager, had a waitress who knew exactly what I wanted every half hour (coffee and water), where most of the dealers knew me by name, and one even took me out for dinner because I spoke Thai.