Why can't they ban the panhandlers and their dogs? Surely they can invent a crime to charge them with...they do it to card counters all the time. Loitering? Vagrancy? Trespassing? Remaining after Forbidden? Safety Hazard?

The complaint here is that other casino companies spent a lot of money to build their own arena's (MGM Grand and Orleans). Now Harrah's wants taxpayers to fix the situation they've found themselves in because they spent all their money on an ill fated buy-out.

Really, this place had the tightest games and worst buffet. Six deck games with 6/5 payoffs?? This place deserved to close just on that account. Complete lack of creativity.

Riviera is next!

CTR's are filed in the background by the casino without your knowledge whenever you buy-in or cash-out for more than $10,000. It has nothing to do with whether you win or lose. It is not fraud to play under a phony name, but it can be fraud if you KNOWINGLY buy-in for more than $10,000 and KNOWINGLY allow the casino to rely on that phony name and SSN when filling out required government forms. Sometimes the casino screws up and says you're in for more than $10,000 when you really aren't, in that case you can just refuse to give the info and walk out. Of course that name will be banned from further play but it's better to piss off the casino when they make a mistake than to piss off the government. When playing under an alias you had better be damned sure you don't violate any laws that require your real identity. Unfortunately casinos, in their continuing quest to mine data on it's customers, put enormous pressure on players to give a name when some players would rather, for a variety of reasons that have nothing to do with the law, keep their gaming activities private.

What a craphole. And for the first poster above, Riv isn't screwing their creditors...their creditors simply made a bad investment and screwed themselves.

Absent a collective bargaining agreement, the employer is who determines tip policy and how they are split. Bartenders tip out barbacks, waitresses tip out bartenders. Management always has the final decision on the percentages at each place. Management can even decide not to allow dealers to accept tips at all if they wish. (although they'd have to make up the difference in salary if they want to stay competitive with regards to hires). If the employees don't like it they can always use their union voice and go on strike.

Of course the Wynn Dealers want to keep all their tips...they'd probably also prefer to keep their own rather than pooling. They don't get the final say...Mr Wynn does as it's his casino.

They should let all of us players who have been thrown out of there go back and and spread $25-2x$1000 at single deck for a few hours and put them out of their misery. Maybe they could do another match the competitor coupon deal.

Seriously, I'm sorry to see them go, I used to play very politely there and thought their SPA, Hotel, and Restaurants were all some of the best in Reno. Sometimes a basically good product can be done in by a bad business plan and initially Sienna did not have a clue on the marketing side as to who to go after. They totally eschewed local business and only wanted higher end tourists. This was a mistake from which they never fully recovered.

Sorry Peterp to disagree with you.

You said "A $5 bettor playing 6/5 will lose less per hour, on average, than a $25 player at a 3/2 table."

Hate to break it to you, but a $5 bettor playing perfect basic strategy at 6/5 will still lose MORE per hour, on average than a comparable 3/2 game. The House edge at a typical 6/5 single deck game is 1.45%. A typical 3/2 shoe game on the strip at $25 bet levels has a house edge of 0.26%. The $25 bettor loses on average $3.90 per hour and the $5 bettor on a 6/5 single deck loses $4.35 per hour. The $25 bettor also gets better comps.

A few comments
1. Despite Zender's comment that casinos can make 2x the profits with half the action, this isn't the case. Most tourists only have a few hundred bucks. Pure variance wipes almost all of them out regardless of the house edge. The 6/5 payoff just does it more quickly.

2. If players are wiped out more quickly they put less overall money into action and have less frequent winning sessions. More losing players, especially at the beginner level, do not develop into fans of the game and are less likely to frequent casinos not only in Vegas but back home. No matter how high the house advantage is if $0 dollars are wagered the house makes nothing. Newbies are already making enough mistakes to keep blackjack hugely profitable. The 6/5 payoff simply chases away the informed customers who are the ones who will bet serious money year in and year out.

3. The overall mix of games and limits in Vegas is all screwed up right now. The boom is over, it's time to convert those $100 min games to $50 and those $50's to $25. If $3 and $5 games are too low to be profitable raise them up to $10 (with inflation $10 today is like $5 in 1990 and like $3 in $1980. People will play $10 games if you give them value for their money. Overall I'd say there were too many non-gaming oriented bean counters in the kitchen and not enough casino savvy sharps who know how to give a good gamble.

Where's Jack Binion when you need him? Maybe we'll get lucky and he'll buy the Rio from Loveman's Evil Empire.