Table Spreads

The determination of table gaming spreads and matching table openings with variable demand levels.
By Andrew MacDonald
Gaming Analyst, Adelaide Casino, 1992

Introduction | Variable Volume Rostering | Optimising Profits | Conclusion |

Of potential interest is the use of the arbitrary “optimal” number of players per table. With seven playing spots (boxes) on a Blackjack table it is necessary to consider comfort, access and the desire of some players to play multiple spots. Thus an “optimal” number of six players per table was used for lower limit Blackjack games. The same considerations were also used for other games with an additional factor included on higher limit games which relates to the fact that on higher limit games, spreading players out may in fact enhance profits.

The following example most aptly demonstrates this.

Sevens players who flat bet $100 per hand wish to play Blackjack for one hour. Is the casino better off financially by having these players all accommodated on one table or on seven separate tables?

If the buy in (drop) per player had been $1000 and assuming theoretical results had been achieved the hold percentage under scenario A is 8.25% and for scenario B is 33.0%.

These numbers surprise many casino managers as they may often equate enhanced efficiency with reduced costs. In the extreme example shown enhanced profitability is achieved at maximum cost through increased turnover. Clearly this is an extreme example, however, it demonstrates that an analysis of costs in conjunction with betting levels may lead to more high limit games being offered, less betting spots available on high limit games and as a consequence greater customer comfort and satisfaction all very profitably intertwined.

The converse may be necessary for low limit games. Using the same example but for $5 players we have:-

If the buy in (drop) per player had been $1000 and assuming theoretical results had been achieved the hold percentage under scenario A is 8.25% and for scenario B is 33.0%.