Comments on: Ironic Onion http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/ I am an astronomer, writer, and skeptic. I likes reality the way it is, and I aims to keep it that way. My real name is Phil Plait, and I run the Bad Astronomy blog. Mon, 13 Feb 2012 20:50:40 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Chad in Vegas http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-144024 Chad in Vegas Tue, 30 Dec 2008 02:44:25 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-144024 TSP: Right on the money (pun intended). Payouts are 17:1 on the greens. QD: It wasn't me, I swear! I just do slots, not blackjack. But you're absolutely right about the mafia running Vegas; they knew how to treat customers. But I'm probably less likely to be whacked by my employer though. :-P I could go on, but in the interests of brevity and discretion, I'll leave you with these: - The only game where you can consistently take away the house advantage is video poker (with the right pay table and strategy). - "Smithers, gambling is the perfect industry! Your customers come in, give you all their money and then leave!" -C. Montgomery Burns TSP: Right on the money (pun intended). Payouts are 17:1 on the greens.
QD: It wasn’t me, I swear! I just do slots, not blackjack. But you’re absolutely right about the mafia running Vegas; they knew how to treat customers. But I’m probably less likely to be whacked by my employer though. :-P
I could go on, but in the interests of brevity and discretion, I’ll leave you with these:
- The only game where you can consistently take away the house advantage is video poker (with the right pay table and strategy).
- “Smithers, gambling is the perfect industry! Your customers come in, give you all their money and then leave!” -C. Montgomery Burns

]]> By: Quiet Desperation http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-143884 Quiet Desperation Mon, 29 Dec 2008 19:07:29 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-143884 <i>As a statistician for a large Vegas-strip casino</i> Really? Whose idea was the 6:5 blackjack payout on single deck? Or reducing the two pair/three of a kind payout on video poker from 2:1/3:1 to 1:1/2:1. Those are just pure, supervillian evil. :-P Kick out the soulless hotel corporations and put the mob back in charge in Vegas. Organized crime actually screwed the customers less. As a statistician for a large Vegas-strip casino

Really? Whose idea was the 6:5 blackjack payout on single deck? Or reducing the two pair/three of a kind payout on video poker from 2:1/3:1 to 1:1/2:1. Those are just pure, supervillian evil. :-P

Kick out the soulless hotel corporations and put the mob back in charge in Vegas. Organized crime actually screwed the customers less.

]]> By: The Science Pundit http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-143830 The Science Pundit Mon, 29 Dec 2008 16:21:44 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-143830 Thanks Chad! So 7.8% must mean that the net payout (after subtracting the original bet) for landing on green is between $16 and $17 per $1 bet. And since the odds of landing on 0 or 00 are 18:1, that's more money for the house. It's truly a sucker's game. Let me add (since I haven't seen it mentioned in the comments yet) that it's not the two green slots <i>per se</i> that shift the odds away from a fair game and tilt them towards the house, it's the disparity between the odds of winning and the payout for winning. The casino could achieve pretty much the same same advantage by eliminating the 0 and 00 but only paying out $1.95 for winning bets. Of course this gets a little messier and more importantly, the gamblers would all <i>intuitively feel</i> that they were getting ripped off. By "concealing" the house advantage in the two green numbers, people tend to <i>feel</i> that it's a fair game and so they continue to bet. Thanks Chad! So 7.8% must mean that the net payout (after subtracting the original bet) for landing on green is between $16 and $17 per $1 bet. And since the odds of landing on 0 or 00 are 18:1, that’s more money for the house. It’s truly a sucker’s game.

Let me add (since I haven’t seen it mentioned in the comments yet) that it’s not the two green slots per se that shift the odds away from a fair game and tilt them towards the house, it’s the disparity between the odds of winning and the payout for winning. The casino could achieve pretty much the same same advantage by eliminating the 0 and 00 but only paying out $1.95 for winning bets. Of course this gets a little messier and more importantly, the gamblers would all intuitively feel that they were getting ripped off. By “concealing” the house advantage in the two green numbers, people tend to feel that it’s a fair game and so they continue to bet.

]]> By: MH http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-143805 MH Mon, 29 Dec 2008 14:55:48 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-143805 And the obvious thing for me to do would be to read the comments to see if anyone beat me to my point, which they have. But why start now? And the obvious thing for me to do would be to read the comments to see if anyone beat me to my point, which they have. But why start now?

]]> By: MH http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-143804 MH Mon, 29 Dec 2008 14:45:43 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-143804 The obvious way out of the conundrum is that no one <i>prays</i> for the house to win. All prayers were for either red or black. Duh! The obvious way out of the conundrum is that no one prays for the house to win. All prayers were for either red or black. Duh!

]]> By: Tom Hill http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-143797 Tom Hill Mon, 29 Dec 2008 13:27:06 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-143797 True event My wife: "I want to play roulette, how do I do it?" Me: "The easiest way is to pick red or black, and bet on one." (Wife picks black, bets on it) Ball comes up on green 00 Me: "Oh, yeah. There's also these green spaces..." The dance continues. True event

My wife: “I want to play roulette, how do I do it?”

Me: “The easiest way is to pick red or black, and bet on one.”

(Wife picks black, bets on it)

Ball comes up on green 00

Me: “Oh, yeah. There’s also these green spaces…”

The dance continues.

]]> By: quasidog http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-143788 quasidog Mon, 29 Dec 2008 09:30:25 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-143788 @ kkozoriz Says : "I always tell people, that when they play lotto, they might as well play the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7……. I almost always get a response along the lines of: “that is the most unlikely sequence of all”." Ha. I actually did that at the pub one day with some mates. I don't gamble usually and after coercing me to play 'Keeno', which is sort of like bingo, I chose exactly that sequence on the card, in 7 games. There are 40+ numbers on the card. Everyone else was picking their 'lucky' numbers and other spaced out sequences, and one mate laughed at me in the same way as you mentioned. He thought I was an idiot. After a few hours, and a few beers, we all rolled up to check in our cards. I walked away with more wins than two others and tied in winnings with one. In other words, I basically won the most most out of them all, except for one that tied with me. Got a few snarky comments and felt very satisfied that the point had been proven. It is just random chance. It doesn't matter what number you pick and there is absolutely no method involved. Just pick anything. It's all got the same chance. But I still don't gamble. By not gambling in fact, I know I usually have more money at the end of the day than most gamblers. Odds are a bitch, but most gamblers don't see it. @ kkozoriz Says : “I always tell people, that when they play lotto, they might as well play the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7……. I almost always get a response along the lines of: “that is the most unlikely sequence of all”.”

Ha. I actually did that at the pub one day with some mates. I don’t gamble usually and after coercing me to play ‘Keeno’, which is sort of like bingo, I chose exactly that sequence on the card, in 7 games. There are 40+ numbers on the card. Everyone else was picking their ‘lucky’ numbers and other spaced out sequences, and one mate laughed at me in the same way as you mentioned. He thought I was an idiot.

After a few hours, and a few beers, we all rolled up to check in our cards. I walked away with more wins than two others and tied in winnings with one. In other words, I basically won the most most out of them all, except for one that tied with me.

Got a few snarky comments and felt very satisfied that the point had been proven. It is just random chance. It doesn’t matter what number you pick and there is absolutely no method involved. Just pick anything. It’s all got the same chance.

But I still don’t gamble. By not gambling in fact, I know I usually have more money at the end of the day than most gamblers. Odds are a bitch, but most gamblers don’t see it.

]]> By: Bo Babbyo http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-143783 Bo Babbyo Mon, 29 Dec 2008 07:25:34 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-143783 "There are no fools so troublesome as those with wit." I'm just trying to figure out whether this aphorism is most applicable to a) The Onion writer who felt safe satirizing organized religion but who either -- i)failed to do the research necessary to stave off the wrath of math geeks or ii) failed to think it would matter; or b) the Editorial staff of the Onion, ditto; or c) The BA for geeking an ONION item to death; or d) the BA's readers for following him into the geeky breach; or e) ME, for pointing out such crap at 1:24 CST when I have plenty of other things to do. I'd offer an "all of the above" at this point but I think I'll go to bed instead. “There are no fools so troublesome as those with wit.” I’m just trying to figure out whether this aphorism is most applicable to a) The Onion writer who felt safe satirizing organized religion but who either — i)failed to do the research necessary to stave off the wrath of math geeks or ii) failed to think it would matter; or b) the Editorial staff of the Onion, ditto; or c) The BA for geeking an ONION item to death; or d) the BA’s readers for following him into the geeky breach; or e) ME, for pointing out such crap at 1:24 CST when I have plenty of other things to do. I’d offer an “all of the above” at this point but I think I’ll go to bed instead.

]]> By: Chad in Vegas http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-143780 Chad in Vegas Mon, 29 Dec 2008 06:31:45 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-143780 As a statistician for a large Vegas-strip casino, let me just say that roulette is for suckers. As mentioned above, the house advantage on every bet (except the zeros where it is 7.8%) is 5.26% and, unlike some games, there is absolutely nothing you can do to change that. But what I can't believe is that we have a couple of video roulette machines where is declares in large print that payouts are "32-1", making the house advantage something like 12%, and it is one of our most popular games. The innumeracy of Americans scares me sometimes. As a statistician for a large Vegas-strip casino, let me just say that roulette is for suckers. As mentioned above, the house advantage on every bet (except the zeros where it is 7.8%) is 5.26% and, unlike some games, there is absolutely nothing you can do to change that. But what I can’t believe is that we have a couple of video roulette machines where is declares in large print that payouts are “32-1″, making the house advantage something like 12%, and it is one of our most popular games. The innumeracy of Americans scares me sometimes.

]]> By: Bad Albert http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-143769 Bad Albert Mon, 29 Dec 2008 03:16:14 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-143769 The BA seems to know far too much about gambling. Good thing the JREF $1,000,000 is in a protected account. The BA seems to know far too much about gambling. Good thing the JREF $1,000,000 is in a protected account.

]]> By: Davidlpf http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-143768 Davidlpf Mon, 29 Dec 2008 02:59:19 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-143768 You actually could take your eyes off of Wil. You actually could take your eyes off of Wil.

]]> By: Phil Plait http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-143766 Phil Plait Mon, 29 Dec 2008 02:46:10 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-143766 Lisa, Picard's communicator was never on the wrong side. Lisa, Picard’s communicator was never on the wrong side.

]]> By: Jigsaw Man http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-143765 Jigsaw Man Mon, 29 Dec 2008 02:44:56 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-143765 Is it sad that I proceeded to look up Birthright, part two? Memory Alpha makes no mention of the error. I'll have to watch the episode now. I hope you're happy. Is it sad that I proceeded to look up Birthright, part two? Memory Alpha makes no mention of the error. I’ll have to watch the episode now. I hope you’re happy.

]]> By: Lisa http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-143761 Lisa Mon, 29 Dec 2008 01:15:27 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-143761 BA, you're the the guy at the sci fi conventions that wants to know why Capt. Picard's communicator was worn on the wrong side in Episode 143 at exactly 12 minutes and 47 seconds. Aren't you? :) BA, you’re the the guy at the sci fi conventions that wants to know why Capt. Picard’s communicator was worn on the wrong side in Episode 143 at exactly 12 minutes and 47 seconds. Aren’t you? :)

]]> By: Quiet Desperation http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-143759 Quiet Desperation Mon, 29 Dec 2008 01:00:52 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-143759 Wow. Just in time to win the Pedantry Of Year award for 2008. I tease. Oh, and stay away from the single deck blackjack that only pays 6:5 for a blackjack hand instead of the traditional 3:2. Wow. Just in time to win the Pedantry Of Year award for 2008.

I tease.

Oh, and stay away from the single deck blackjack that only pays 6:5 for a blackjack hand instead of the traditional 3:2.

]]> By: shane http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-143746 shane Sun, 28 Dec 2008 23:32:19 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-143746 Ah prayers to Jesus. He is the same one who apparently can get my mother car park on cue but can't save the babies in Dafur. Ah prayers to Jesus. He is the same one who apparently can get my mother car park on cue but can’t save the babies in Dafur.

]]> By: Thomas Siefert http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-143744 Thomas Siefert Sun, 28 Dec 2008 22:52:42 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-143744 Jack Haggertyy Said: "Aaaach! kkozoriz beat me to it while I was typing! What are the odds of that?" Quite big, recent estimates (by me) have put the percentage of nerds on Earth to 11.214% Jack Haggertyy Said: “Aaaach! kkozoriz beat me to it while I was typing!
What are the odds of that?”

Quite big, recent estimates (by me) have put the percentage of nerds on Earth to 11.214%

]]> By: Jack Hagerty http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-143741 Jack Hagerty Sun, 28 Dec 2008 22:29:51 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-143741 Aaaach! kkozoriz beat me to it while I was typing! What are the odds of that? - Jack Aaaach! kkozoriz beat me to it while I was typing!

What are the odds of that?

- Jack

]]> By: Jack Hagerty http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-143739 Jack Hagerty Sun, 28 Dec 2008 22:29:03 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-143739 csrster Says: "123456… is a very stupid sequence to play at Lotto." That's the combination on my luggage! - Jack csrster Says: “123456… is a very stupid sequence to play at Lotto.”

That’s the combination on my luggage!

- Jack

]]> By: kkozoriz http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-143737 kkozoriz Sun, 28 Dec 2008 21:57:03 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-143737 I always tell people, that when they play lotto, they might as well play the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7……. I almost always get a response along the lines of: “that is the most unlikely sequence of all”. Dark Helmet: So the combination is... one, two, three, four, five? That's the stupidest combination I've ever heard in my life! The kind of thing an idiot would have on his luggage! -Spaceballs I always tell people, that when they play lotto, they might as well play the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7……. I almost always get a response along the lines of: “that is the most unlikely sequence of all”.

Dark Helmet: So the combination is… one, two, three, four, five? That’s the stupidest combination I’ve ever heard in my life! The kind of thing an idiot would have on his luggage!
-Spaceballs

]]> By: Ian O'Neill http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-143735 Ian O'Neill Sun, 28 Dec 2008 21:40:29 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-143735 Lol too funny. I too am in the black after countless visits to Vegas.... but probably only by $50 total ($100 definitely makes you a high-roller Phil). However, it may be hard to put down a large bet on the roulette wheel, it is even harder to walk away when you've just lost said bet. It helps that you know the odds of winning the cash back though... probably best to stay away from the table all together... but... but... just one more, $20 on red please! ;-) Lol too funny. I too am in the black after countless visits to Vegas…. but probably only by $50 total ($100 definitely makes you a high-roller Phil). However, it may be hard to put down a large bet on the roulette wheel, it is even harder to walk away when you’ve just lost said bet. It helps that you know the odds of winning the cash back though… probably best to stay away from the table all together… but… but… just one more, $20 on red please! ;-)

]]> By: Davidlpf http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-143733 Davidlpf Sun, 28 Dec 2008 21:27:12 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-143733 @Evolving Squid I wonder how many would go for Russian Roulette. @Evolving Squid
I wonder how many would go for Russian Roulette.

]]> By: IVAN3MAN http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-143732 IVAN3MAN Sun, 28 Dec 2008 21:25:14 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-143732 Thomas Siefert: "Well, for starters, they didn’t pray". Maybe they did, but they 'did not pray hard enough'! :-) Thomas Siefert: “Well, for starters, they didn’t pray”.

Maybe they did, but they ‘did not pray hard enough’! :-)

]]> By: quasidog http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-143723 quasidog Sun, 28 Dec 2008 19:45:00 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-143723 It says a few things, that half the people at the table are idiots. That just because a bunch of idiots think Jesus is helping them to win doesn't mean he is going to comply anyway. That trying to 'pay out' Jesus (and in turn trying to debunk prayer itself) by paying out the fools a the table would somehow constitute that Jesus doesn't exist or that prayer doesn't work... even if that wasn't implied ... but I know lots of readers are probably taking that angle here. Not only is the story lame, but debunking any aspect of it is lame .... except for the obvious bit of probability being the main factor here. So basically this is a testimony to the fact people need to study more in math class. It also says that you could get the same humor value by paying out people who think Hobbits are real. Actually that is kinda funny. It says a few things, that half the people at the table are idiots. That just because a bunch of idiots think Jesus is helping them to win doesn’t mean he is going to comply anyway. That trying to ‘pay out’ Jesus (and in turn trying to debunk prayer itself) by paying out the fools a the table would somehow constitute that Jesus doesn’t exist or that prayer doesn’t work… even if that wasn’t implied … but I know lots of readers are probably taking that angle here. Not only is the story lame, but debunking any aspect of it is lame …. except for the obvious bit of probability being the main factor here. So basically this is a testimony to the fact people need to study more in math class.

It also says that you could get the same humor value by paying out people who think Hobbits are real. Actually that is kinda funny.

]]> By: Thomas Siefert http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/comment-page-1/#comment-143722 Thomas Siefert Sun, 28 Dec 2008 19:30:42 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/12/28/ironic-onion/#comment-143722 Nomen Publicus Said: "What did the others do to deserve such treatment?" Well, for starters, they didn't pray :-) Nomen Publicus Said: “What did the others do to deserve such treatment?”

Well, for starters, they didn’t pray :-)

]]>