Casino 1995 Aspect Ratio
- Aspect Ratio Calculator
- Casino 1995 Aspect Ratio Formula
- Casino 1995 Aspect Ratio Definition
- Aspect Ratio Tires
Casino is a 1995 American epic crime film directed by Martin Scorsese, produced by Barbara De Fina and distributed by Universal Pictures.The film is based on the nonfiction book Casino: Love and Honor in Las Vegas by Nicholas Pileggi, who also co-wrote the screenplay for the film with Scorsese.It stars Robert De Niro, Sharon Stone, Joe Pesci, Don Rickles, Kevin Pollak and James Woods. Ever needed to work out what aspect ratio an object uses? The easy Aspect Ratio Calculator allows you to calculate aspect ratios or use an aspect ratio to calculate sizes. RATIO Calculate an Aspect Ratio by entering a Width and Height. SIZES Calculate Sizes by entering an Aspect Ratio. EXAMPLE Displays an example box using the Aspect Ratio http. Get access to helpful solutions, how-to guides, owners' manuals, and product specifications for your Curved Gaming Monitor (CRG90 Series) from Samsung US Support.
Introduction
At its core the business of casino gaming is pretty simple. Casinos make money on their games because of the mathematics behind the games. As Nico Zographos, dealer-extraordinaire for the 'Greek Syndicate' in Deauville, Cannes, and Monte Carlo in the 1920s observed about casino gaming: 'There is no such thing as luck. It is all mathematics.'
With a few notable exceptions, the house always wins - in the long run - because of the mathematical advantage the casino enjoys over the player. That is what Mario Puzo was referring to in his famous novel Fools Die when his fictional casino boss character, Gronevelt, commented: 'Percentages never lie. We built all these hotels on percentages. We stay rich on the percentage. You can lose faith in everything, religion and God, women and love, good and evil, war and peace. You name it. But the percentage will always stand fast.'
Puzo is, of course, right on the money about casino gaming. Without the 'edge,' casinos would not exist. With this edge, and because of a famous mathematical result called the law of large numbers, a casino is guaranteed to win in the long run.
Why is Mathematics Important?
Critics of the gaming industry have long accused it of creating the name 'gaming' and using this as more politically correct than calling itself the 'gambling industry.' The term 'gaming,' however, has been around for centuries and more accurately describes the operators' view of the industry because most often casino operators are not gambling. Instead, they rely on mathematical principles to assure that their establishment generates positive gross gaming revenues. The operator, however, must assure the gaming revenues are sufficient to cover deductions like bad debts, expenses, employees, taxes and interest.
Despite the obvious, many casino professionals limit their advancements by failing to understand the basic mathematics of the games and their relationships to casino profitability. One casino owner would often test his pit bosses by asking how a casino could make money on blackjack if the outcome is determined simply by whether the player or the dealer came closest to 21. The answer, typically, was because the casino maintained 'a house advantage.' This was fair enough, but many could not identify the amount of that advantage or what aspect of the game created the advantage. Given that products offered by casinos are games, managers must understand why the games provide the expected revenues. In the gaming industry, nothing plays a more important role than mathematics.
Mathematics should also overcome the dangers of superstitions. An owner of a major Las Vegas strip casino once experienced a streak of losing substantial amounts of money to a few 'high rollers.' He did not attribute this losing streak to normal volatility in the games, but to bad luck. His solution was simple. He spent the evening spreading salt throughout the casino to ward off the bad spirits. Before attributing this example to the idiosyncrasies of one owner, his are atypical only in their extreme. Superstition has long been a part of gambling - from both sides of the table. Superstitions can lead to irrational decisions that may hurt casino profits. For example, believing that a particular dealer is unlucky against a particular (winning) player may lead to a decision to change dealers. As many, if not most, players are superstitious. At best, he may resent that the casino is trying to change his luck. At worst, the player may feel the new dealer is skilled in methods to 'cool' the game. Perhaps he is even familiar with stories of old where casinos employed dealers to cheat 'lucky' players.
Understanding the mathematics of a game also is important for the casino operator to ensure that the reasonable expectations of the players are met. For most persons, gambling is entertainment. It provides an outlet for adult play. As such, persons have the opportunity for a pleasant diversion from ordinary life and from societal and personal pressures. As an entertainment alternative, however, players may consider the value of the gambling experience. For example, some people may have the option of either spending a hundred dollars during an evening by going to a professional basketball game or at a licensed casino. If the house advantage is too strong and the person loses his money too quickly, he may not value that casino entertainment experience. On the other hand, if a casino can entertain him for an evening, and he enjoys a 'complimentary' meal or drinks, he may want to repeat the experience, even over a professional basketball game. Likewise, new casino games themselves may succeed or fail based on player expectations. In recent years, casinos have debuted a variety of new games that attempt to garner player interest and keep their attention. Regardless of whether a game is fun or interesting to play, most often a player will not want to play games where his money is lost too quickly or where he has a exceptionally remote chance of returning home with winnings.
Mathematics also plays an important part in meeting players' expectations as to the possible consequences of his gambling activities. If gambling involves rational decision-making, it would appear irrational to wager money where your opponent has a better chance of winning than you do. Adam Smith suggested that all gambling, where the operator has an advantage, is irrational. He wrote 'There is not, however, a more certain proposition in mathematics than that the more tickets [in a lottery] you advertise upon, the more likely you are a loser. Adventure upon all the tickets in the lottery, and you lose for certain; and the greater the number of your tickets, the nearer you approach to this certainty.'
Aspect Ratio Calculator
Even where the house has an advantage, however, a gambler may be justified if the amount lost means little to him, but the potential gain would elevate him to a higher standing of living. For example, a person with an annual income of $30,000 may have $5 in disposable weekly income. He could save or gamble this money. By saving it, at the end of a year, he would have $260. Even if he did this for years, the savings would not elevate his economic status to another level. As an alternative, he could use the $5 to gamble for the chance to win $1 million. While the odds of winning are remote, it may provide the only opportunity to move to a higher economic class.
Since the casino industry is heavily regulated and some of the standards set forth by regulatory bodies involve mathematically related issues, casino managers also should understand the mathematical aspects relating to gaming regulation. Gaming regulation is principally dedicated to assuring that the games offered in the casino are fair, honest, and that players get paid if they win. Fairness is often expressed in the regulations as either requiring a minimum payback to the player or, in more extreme cases, as dictating the actual rules of the games offered. Casino executives should understand the impact that rules changes have on the payback to players to assure they meet regulatory standards. Equally important, casino executives should understand how government mandated rules would impact their gaming revenues.
The House Edge
The player's chances of winning in a casino game and the rate at which he wins or loses money depends on the game, the rules in effect for that game, and for some games his level of skill. The amount of money the player can expect to win or lose in the long run - if the bet is made over and over again - is called the player's wager expected value (EV), or expectation. When the player's wager expectation is negative, he will lose money in the long run. For a $5 bet on the color red in roulette, for example, the expectation is -$0.263. On the average the player will lose just over a quarter for each $5 bet on red.
When the wager expectation is viewed from the casino's perspective (i.e., the negative of the player's expectation) and expressed as a percentage, you have the house advantage. For the roulette example, the house advantage is 5.26% ($0.263 divided by $5). The formal calculation is as follows:
EV = (+5)(18/38) + (-5)(20/38) = -0.263
(House Advantage = 0.263/5 = 5.26%)
When this EV calculation is performed for a 1-unit amount, the negative of the resulting value is the house edge. Here are the calculations for bets on a single-number in double-zero and single-zero roulette.
Double-zero roulette (single number bet):
EV = (+35)(1/38) + (-1)(37/38) = -0.053
(House Advantage = 5.3%)
Single-zero roulette (single number bet):
EV = (+35)(1/37) + (-1)(36/37) = -0.027
(House Advantage = 2.7%)
The house advantage represents the long run percentage of the wagered money that will be retained by the casino. It is also called the house edge, the 'odds' (i.e., avoid games with bad odds), or just the 'percentage' (as in Mario Puzo's Fools Die). Although the house edge can be computed easily for some games - for example, roulette and craps - for others it requires more sophisticated mathematical analysis and/or computer simulations. Regardless of the method used to compute it, the house advantage represents the price to the player of playing the game.
Because this positive house edge exists for virtually all bets in a casino (ignoring the poker room and sports book where a few professionals can make a living), gamblers are faced with an uphill and, in the long run, losing battle. There are some exceptions. The odds bet in craps has zero house edge (although this bet cannot be made without making another negative expectation wager) and there are a few video poker machines that return greater than 100% if played with perfect strategy. Occasionally the casino will even offer a promotion that gives the astute player a positive expectation. These promotions are usually mistakes - sometimes casinos don't check the math - and are terminated once the casino realizes the player has the edge. But by and large the player will lose money in the long run, and the house edge is a measure of how fast the money will be lost. A player betting in a game with a 4% house advantage will tend to lose his money twice as fast as a player making bets with a 2% house edge. The trick to intelligent casino gambling - at least from the mathematical expectation point of view - is to avoid the games and bets with the large house advantages.
Some casino games are pure chance - no amount of skill or strategy can alter the odds. These games include roulette, craps, baccarat, keno, the big-six wheel of fortune, and slot machines. Of these, baccarat and craps offer the best odds, with house advantages of 1.2% and less than 1% (assuming only pass/come with full odds), respectively. Roulette and slots cost the player more - house advantages of 5.3% for double-zero roulette and 5% to 10% for slots - while the wheel of fortune feeds the casino near 20% of the wagers, and keno is a veritable casino cash cow with average house advantage close to 30%.
Games where an element of skill can affect the house advantage include blackjack, video poker, and the four popular poker-based table games: Caribbean Stud poker, Let It Ride, Three Card poker, and Pai Gow poker. For the poker games, optimal strategy results in a house edge in the 3% to 5% range (CSP has the largest house edge, PGP the lowest, with LIR and TCP in between). For video poker the statistical advantage varies depending on the particular machine, but generally this game can be very player friendly - house edge less than 3% is not uncommon and some are less than 1% - if played with expert strategy.
Blackjack, the most popular of all table games, offers the skilled player some of the best odds in the casino. The house advantage varies slightly depending on the rules and number of decks, but a player using basic strategy faces little or no disadvantage in a single-deck game and only a 0.5% house edge in the common six-deck game. Despite these numbers, the average player ends up giving the casino a 2% edge due to mistakes and deviations from basic strategy. Complete basic strategy tables can be found in many books and many casino-hotel gift shops sell color-coded credit card size versions. Rule variations favorable to the player include fewer decks, dealer stands on soft seventeen (worth 0.2%), doubling after splitting (0.14%), late surrender (worth 0.06%), and early surrender (uncommon, but worth 0.24%). If the dealer hits soft seventeen it will cost you, as will any restrictions on when you can double down.
Probability versus Odds
Probability represents the long run ratio of (# of times an outcome occurs) to (# of times experiment is conducted). Odds represent the long run ratio of (# of times an outcome does not occur) to (# of times an outcome occurs). If a card is randomly selected from a standard deck of 52 playing cards, the probability it is a spade is 1/4; the odds (against spade) are 3 to 1. The true odds of an event represent the payoff that would make the bet on that event fair. For example, a bet on a single number in double-zero roulette has probability of 1/38, so to break even in the long run a player would have to be paid 37 to 1 (the actual payoff is 35 to 1).
Confusion about Win Rate
There are all kinds of percentages in the world of gaming. Win percentage, theoretical win percentage, hold percentage, and house advantage come to mind. Sometimes casino bosses use these percentages interchangeably, as if they are just different names for the same thing. Admittedly, in some cases this is correct. House advantage is just another name for theoretical win percentage, and for slot machines, hold percentage is (in principle) equivalent to win percentage. But there are fundamental differences among these win rate measurements.
The house advantage - the all-important percentage that explains how casinos make money - is also called the house edge, the theoretical win percentage, and expected win percentage. In double-zero roulette, this figure is 5.3%. In the long run the house will retain 5.3% of the money wagered. In the short term, of course, the actual win percentage will differ from the theoretical win percentage (the magnitude of this deviation can be predicted from statistical theory). The actual win percentage is just the (actual) win divided by the handle. Because of the law of large numbers - or as some prefer to call it, the law of averages - as the number of trials gets larger, the actual win percentage should get closer to the theoretical win percentage.
Because handle can be difficult to measure for table games, performance is often measured by hold percentage (and sometimes erroneously called win percentage). Hold percentage is equal to win divided by drop. In Nevada, this figure is about 24% for roulette. The drop and hold percentage are affected by many factors; we won't delve into these nor the associated management issues. Suffice it to say that the casino will not in the long term keep 24% of the money bet on the spins of roulette wheel - well, an honest casino won't.
To summarize: House advantage and theoretical win percentage are the same thing, hold percentage is win over drop, win percentage is win over handle, win percentage approaches the house advantage as the number of plays increases, and hold percentage is equivalent to win percentage for slots but not table games.
· Hold % = Win/Drop
· Win % (actual) = Win/Handle
· H.A. = Theoretical Win % = Limit(Actual Win %) = Limit(Win/Handle)
· Hold Percentage ¹ House Edge
Furthermore, the house advantage is itself subject to varying interpretations. In Let It Ride, for example, the casino advantage is either 3.51% or 2.86% depending on whether you express the advantage with respect to the base bet or the average bet. Those familiar with the game know that the player begins with three equal base bets, but may withdraw one or two of these initial units. The final amount put at risk, then, can be one (84.6% of the time assuming proper strategy), two (8.5%), or three units (6.9%), making the average bet size 1.224 units. In the long run, the casino will win 3.51% of the hands, which equates to 2.86% of the money wagered. So what's the house edge for Let It Ride? Some prefer to say 3.51% per hand, others 2.86% per unit wagered. No matter. Either way, the bottom line is the same either way: assuming three $1 base bets, the casino can expect to earn 3.5¢ per hand (note that 1.224 x 0.0286 = 0.035).
The question of whether to use the base bet or average bet size also arises in Caribbean Stud Poker (5.22% vs. 2.56%), Three Card Poker (3.37% vs. 2.01%), Casino War (2.88% vs. 2.68%), and Red Dog (2.80% vs. 2.37%).
For still other games, the house edge can be stated including or excluding ties. The prime examples here are the player (1.24% vs. 1.37%) and banker (1.06% vs. 1.17%) bets in baccarat, and the don't pass bet (1.36% vs. 1.40%) in craps. Again, these are different views on the casino edge, but the expected revenue will not change.
That the house advantage can appear in different disguises might be unsettling. When properly computed and interpreted, however, regardless of which representation is chosen, the same truth (read: money) emerges: expected win is the same.
Volatility and Risk
Statistical theory can be used to predict the magnitude of the difference between the actual win percentage and the theoretical win percentage for a given number of wagers. When observing the actual win percentage a player (or casino) may experience, how much variation from theoretical win can be expected? What is a normal fluctuation? The basis for the analysis of such volatility questions is a statistical measure called the standard deviation (essentially the average deviation of all possible outcomes from the expected). Together with the central limit theorem (a form of the law of large numbers), the standard deviation (SD) can be used to determine confidence limits with the following volatility guidelines:
Volatility Analysis Guidelines
· Only 5% of the time will outcomes will be more than 2 SD's from expected outcome
· Almost never (0.3%) will outcomes be more than 3 SD's from expected outcome
Obviously a key to using these guidelines is the value of the SD. Computing the SD value is beyond the scope of this article, but to get an idea behind confidence limits, consider a series of 1,000 pass line wagers in craps. Since each wager has a 1.4% house advantage, on average the player will be behind by 14 units. It can be shown (calculations omitted) that the wager standard deviation is for a single pass line bet is 1.0, and for 1,000 wagers the SD is 31.6. Applying the volatility guidelines, we can say that there is a 95% chance the player's actual win will be between 49 units ahead and 77 units behind, and almost certainly between 81 units ahead and 109 units behind.
A similar analysis for 1,000 single-number wagers on double-zero roulette (on average the player will be behind 53 units, wager SD = 5.8, 1,000 wager SD = 182.2) will yield 95% confidence limits on the player win of 311 units ahead and 417 units behind, with win almost certainly between 494 units ahead and 600 units behind.
Note that if the volatility analysis is done in terms of the percentage win (rather than the number of units or amount won), the confidence limits will converge to the house advantage as the number of wagers increases. This is the result of the law of large numbers - as the number of trials gets larger, the actual win percentage should get closer to the theoretical win percentage. Risk in the gaming business depends on the house advantage, standard deviation, bet size, and length of play.
Player Value and Complimentaries
Using the house advantage, bet size, duration of play, and pace of the game, a casino can determine how much it expects to win from a certain player. This player earning potential (also called player value, player worth, or theoretical win) can be calculated by the formula:
Earning Potential = Average Bet ´ Hours Played ´ Decisions per Hour ´ House Advantage
For example, suppose a baccarat player bets $500 per hand for 12 hours at 60 hands per hour. Using a house advantage of 1.2%, this player's worth to the casino is $4,320 (500 ´ 12 ´ 60 ´ .012). A player who bets $500 per spin for 12 hours in double-zero roulette at 60 spins per hour would be worth about $19,000 (500 ´ 12 ´ 60 ´ .053).
Many casinos set comp (complimentary) policies by giving the player back a set percentage of their earning potential. Although comp and rebate policies based on theoretical loss are the most popular, rebates on actual losses and dead chip programs are also used in some casinos. Some programs involve a mix of systems. The mathematics associated with these programs will not be addressed in this article.
Casino Pricing Mistakes
In an effort to entice players and increase business, casinos occasionally offer novel wagers, side bets, increased payoffs, or rule variations. These promotions have the effect of lowering the house advantage and the effective price of the game for the player. This is sound reasoning from a marketing standpoint, but can be disastrous for the casino if care is not taken to ensure the math behind the promotion is sound. One casino offered a baccarat commission on winning banker bets of only 2% instead of the usual 5%, resulting in a 0.32% player advantage. This is easy to see (using the well-known probabilities of winning and losing the banker bet):
EV = (+0.98)(.4462) + (-1)(.4586) = 0.0032
(House Advantage = -0.32%)
A casino in Biloxi, Mississippi gave players a 12.5% edge on Sic Bo bets of 4 and 17 when they offered 80 to 1 payoffs instead of the usual 60 to 1. Again, this is an easy calculation. Using the fact that the probability of rolling a total of 4 (same calculation applies for a total of 17) with three dice is 1/72 (1/6 x 1/6 x 1/6 x 3), here are the expected values for both the usual and the promotional payoffs:
Usual 60 to 1 payoff: EV = (+60)(1/72) + (-1)(71/72) = -0.153
(House Advantage = 15.3%)
Promotional 80 to 1 payoff: EV = (+80)(1/72) + (-1)(71/72) = +0.125
(House Advantage = -12.5%)
In other promotional gaffes, an Illinois riverboat casino lost a reported $200,000 in one day with their '2 to 1 Tuesdays' that paid players 2 to 1 (the usual payoff is 3 to 2) on blackjack naturals, a scheme that gave players a 2% advantage. Not to be outdone, an Indian casino in California paid 3 to 1 on naturals during their 'happy hour,' offered three times a day, two days a week for over two weeks. This promotion gave the player a whopping 6% edge. A small Las Vegas casino offered a blackjack rule variation called the 'Free Ride' in which players were given a free right-to-surrender token every time they received a natural. Proper use of the token led to a player edge of 1.3%, and the casino lost an estimated $17,000 in eight hours. Another major Las Vegas casino offered a '50/50 Split' blackjack side bet that allowed the player to stand on an initial holding of 12-16, and begin a new hand for equal stakes against the same dealer up card. Although the game marketers claimed the variation was to the advantage of the casino, it turned out that players who exercised the 50/50 Split only against dealer 2-6 had a 2% advantage. According to one pit boss, the casino suffered a $230,000 loss in three and a half days.
In the gaming business, it's all about 'bad math' or 'good math.' Honest games based on good math with positive house advantage minimize the short-term risk and ensure the casino will make money in the long run. Players will get 'lucky' in the short term, but that is all part of the grand design. Fluctuations in both directions will occur. We call these fluctuations good luck or bad luck depending on the direction of the fluctuation. There is no such thing as luck. It is all mathematics.
Gaming Regulation and Mathematics
Casino gaming is one of the most regulated industries in the world. Most gaming regulatory systems share common objectives: keep the games fair and honest and assure that players are paid if they win. Fairness and honesty are different concepts. A casino can be honest but not fair. Honesty refers to whether the casino offers games whose chance elements are random. Fairness refers to the game advantage - how much of each dollar wagered should the casino be able to keep? A slot machine that holds, on average, 90% of every dollar bet is certainly not fair, but could very well be honest (if the outcomes of each play are not predetermined in the casino's favor). Two major regulatory issues relating to fairness and honesty - ensuring random outcomes and controlling the house advantage - are inextricably tied to mathematics and most regulatory bodies require some type of mathematical analysis to demonstrate game advantage and/or confirm that games outcomes are random. Such evidence can range from straightforward probability analyses to computer simulations and complex statistical studies. Requirements vary across jurisdictions, but it is not uncommon to see technical language in gaming regulations concerning specific statistical tests that must be performed, confidence limits that must be met, and other mathematical specifications and standards relating to game outcomes.
Back to Top
Summary Tables for House Advantage
The two tables below show the house advantages for many of the popular casino games. The first table is a summary of the popular games and the second gives a more detailed breakdown.
| House Advantages for Popular Casino Games | |
| Game | House Advantage |
| Roulette (double-zero) | 5.3% |
| Craps (pass/come) | 1.4% |
| Craps (pass/come with double odds) | 0.6% |
| Blackjack - average player | 2.0% |
| Blackjack - 6 decks, basic strategy* | 0.5% |
| Blackjack - single deck, basic strategy* | 0.0% |
| Baccarat (no tie bets) | 1.2% |
| Caribbean Stud* | 5.2% |
| Let It Ride* | 3.5% |
| Three Card Poker* | 3.4% |
| Pai Gow Poker (ante/play)* | 2.5% |
| Slots | 5% - 10% |
| Video Poker* | 0.5% - 3% |
| Keno (average) | 27.0% |
| *optimal strategy | |
| House Advantages for Major Casino Wagers | ||
| Game | Bet | HA* |
| Baccarat | Banker (5% commission) | 1.06% |
| Baccarat | Player | 1.24% |
| Big Six Wheel | Average | 19.84% |
| Blackjack | Card-Counting | -1.00% |
| Blackjack | Basic Strategy | 0.50% |
| Blackjack | Average player | 2.00% |
| Blackjack | Poor Player | 4.00% |
| Caribbean Stud | Ante | 5.22% |
| Casino War | Basic Bet | 2.88% |
| Craps | Any Craps | 11.11% |
| Craps | Any Seven | 16.67% |
| Craps | Big 6, Big 8 | 9.09% |
| Craps | Buy (any) | 4.76% |
| Craps | C&E | 11.11% |
| Craps | don't pass/Don't Come | 1.36% |
| Craps | don't pass/Don't Come w/1X Odds | 0.68% |
| Craps | don't pass/Don't Come w/2X Odds | 0.45% |
| Craps | don't pass/Don't Come w/3X Odds | 0.34% |
| Craps | don't pass/Don't Come w/5X Odds | 0.23% |
| Craps | don't pass/Don't Come w/10X Odds | 0.12% |
| Craps | Don't Place 4 or 10 | 3.03% |
| Craps | Don't Place 5 or 9 | 2.50% |
| Craps | Don't Place 6 or 8 | 1.82% |
| Craps | Field (2 and 12 pay double) | 5.56% |
| Craps | Field (2 or 12 pays triple) | 2.78% |
| Craps | Hard 4, Hard 10 | 11.11% |
| Craps | Hard 6, Hard 8 | 9.09% |
| Craps | Hop Bet - easy (14-1) | 16.67% |
| Craps | Hop Bet - easy (15-1) | 11.11% |
| Craps | Hop Bet - hard (29-1) | 16.67% |
| Craps | Hop Bet - hard (30-1) | 13.89% |
| Craps | Horn Bet (30-1 & 15-1) | 12.50% |
| Craps | Horn High - any (29-1 & 14-1) | 16.67% |
| Craps | Horn High 2, Horn High 12 (30-1 & 15-1) | 12.78% |
| Craps | Horn High 3, Horn High 11 (30-1 & 15-1) | 12.22% |
| Craps | Lay 4 or 10 | 2.44% |
| Craps | Lay 5 or 9 | 3.23% |
| Craps | Lay 6 or 8 | 4.00% |
| Craps | Pass/Come | 1.41% |
| Craps | Pass/Come w/1X Odds | 0.85% |
| Craps | Pass/Come w/2X Odds | 0.61% |
| Craps | Pass/Come w/3X Odds | 0.47% |
| Craps | Pass/Come w/5X Odds | 0.33% |
| Craps | Pass/Come w/10X Odds | 0.18% |
| Craps | Place 4 or 10 | 6.67% |
| Craps | Place 5 or 9 | 4.00% |
| Craps | Place 6 or 8 | 1.52% |
| Craps | Three, Eleven (14-1) | 16.67% |
| Craps | Three, Eleven (15-1) | 11.11% |
| Craps | Two, Twelve (29-1) | 16.67% |
| Craps | Two, Twelve (30-1) | 13.89% |
| Keno | Typical | 27.00% |
| Let It Ride | Base bet | 3.51% |
| Pai Gow | Poker Skilled player (non-banker) | 2.54% |
| Pai Gow Poker | Average player (non-banker) | 2.84% |
| Red Dog | Basic bet (six decks) | 2.80% |
| Roulette | Single-zero | 2.70% |
| Roulette | Double-zero (except five-number) | 5.26% |
| Roulette | Double-zero, five-number bet | 7.89% |
| Sic Bo | Big/Small | 2.78% |
| Sic Bo | One of a Kind | 7.87% |
| Sic Bo | 7, 14 | 9.72% |
| Sic Bo | 8, 13 | 12.50% |
| Sic Bo | 10, 11 | 12.50% |
| Sic Bo | Any three of a kind | 13.89% |
| Sic Bo | 5, 16 | 13.89% |
| Sic Bo | 4, 17 | 15.28% |
| Sic Bo | Three of a kind | 16.20% |
| Sic Bo | Two-dice combination | 16.67% |
| Sic Bo | 6, 15 | 16.67% |
| Sic Bo | Two of a kind | 18.52% |
| Sic Bo | 9, 12 | 18.98% |
| Slots | Dollar Slots (good) | 4.00% |
| Slots | Quarter Slots (good) | 5.00% |
| Slots | Dollar Slots (average) | 6.00% |
| Slots | Quarter Slots (average) | 8.00% |
| Sports Betting | Bet $11 to Win $10 | 4.55% |
| Three Card Poker | Pair Plus | 2.32% |
| Three Card Poker | Ante | 3.37% |
| Video Poker | Selected Machines | -0.50% |
| *House Advantages under typical conditions, expressed 'per hand' and including ties, where appropriate. Optimal strategy assumed unless otherwise noted. | ||
Back to Top
Note: This summary is the intellectual property of the author and the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Do not use or reproduce without proper citation and permission.
Details At A Glance
| Category | Drama | Theatrical Trailer(s) | Yes, 1 - 1.66:1 non-16x9, Dolby Digital 2.0 |
| Rating | Other Trailer(s) | None | |
| Year Released | 1995 | Commentary Tracks | None |
| Running Time | 170:56 | Other Extras | Production Notes Cast And Crew Biographies |
| RSDL/Flipper | RSDL (87:29) | ||
| Start Up | Movie | ||
| Region | 2,4 | Director | Martin Scorsese |
Distributor | Columbia TriStar | Starring | Robert De Niro Sharon Stone Joe Pesci Alan Rickles James Woods |
| RRP | $34.95 | Music | Various |
| Pan & Scan/Full Frame | No | MPEG | None |
| Widescreen Aspect Ratio | 2.35:1 | Dolby Digital | 5.1 |
| 16x9 Enhancement | Soundtrack Languages | English (Dolby Digital 5.1, 384Kb/s) German (Dolby Digital 5.1, 384Kb/s) Italian (Dolby Digital 2.0 , 192Kb/s) Spanish (Dolby Digital 2.0 , 192Kb/s) Polish (Dolby Digital 1.0, 96Kb/s) Czech (Dolby Digital 2.0 , 192Kb/s) | |
| Theatrical Aspect Ratio | 2.35:1 | ||
| Macrovision | Yes | Smoking | Yes |
| Subtitles | English Portuguese Danish Dutch Norwegian German | Annoying Product Placement | No |
| Action In or After Credits | No | ||
Plot Synopsis
Casino is the story of a time when the Mafia had complete control of Las Vegas by proxy of the Teamsters Union, and how the egos and mistakes of the men most directly in charge of the operation lost it for them. Ordinarily, this wouldn't seem like a particularly exciting concept, but the Goodfellas-style narration keeps the film from plummeting into boredom. Central to the action are Sam 'Ace' Rothstein (Robert De Niro), his duplicitous wife Ginger (Sharon Stone), and his best friend Nicky Santoro (Joe Pesci), who just happens to be one of the mob's most feared enforcers. Now, I am personally at a loss to explain why Robert De Niro is repeatedly cast as a Jew or an Irishman. The man couldn't look any less Irish (or Jewish) to me if he grew a Swastika birthmark in the middle of his face. Then there's Joe Pesci as a mob hitman. Granted, he's the most weasly man in Hollywood, but he has also become synonymous with Leo Getz. Anyway, as a decent human being, I have to warn you that the film really drags at many points as every important plot point is firmly etched into the viewer's brain. Not that there's necessarily anything wrong with that, but it can get on the nerves at times when you're waiting for the film's pace to get more into the Goodfellas territory. Throughout this picture, director Martin Scorsese exhibits a major tendency to forget that his job is to make an enjoyable story using sound and pictures, not to make a documentary.Anyway, for those who aren't scared of a film that isn't a thrill-per-minute affair, here's a brief shakedown of the plot. The film begins in the year 1980, when casino manager Sam Rothstein (Robert De Niro) gets into his car and is blown up. Or is he? From there, we go into those credits which Jane Austen's Mafia!sent up so well (let's face it, this credit sequence was just begging for it). We then rewind back to the year 1970, and voiceovers by Sam describing how great a bookmaker and gambler he is, and how that led to him being given paradise on Earth - the leadership of the Tangier's hotel. He then proceeds to describe the great truth about Las Vegas operations, and Martin Scorsese gives us a view of the dirty politics in Las Vegas and how easily they allowed the Mafia to control the city in an under-the-table sort of manner. Once he is done explaining the dirty workings of the system, we are treated to a bizarre and memorable demonstration of how casinos dealt with cheats in those days - with cattle prods and hammers. Unfortunately, once the pace is picked up by this memorable exchange, the film goes back to a dull plod for a while. This is common throughout the whole film - the film will move along at the pace of a particularly relaxed sloth, and then an exciting moment will come out and lift the pace for about ten minutes. It's hard to get used to, and even harder to put up with on the first viewing.
In spite of its shortcomings, the film is rewarding if one waits patiently for the dividends. It doesn't quite justify its R rating, but I still wouldn't really recommend allowing your kids to see it unless they're at least old enough to get into MA films without your supervision. Some of the dissections of Las Vegas politics which Scorsese presents are quite amusing to look at and hear, especially with the unique view Scorsese has injected into these films ever since his work on Goodfellas - the Mafia is not a bunch of cowboys flaunting society at any and all opportunity, but a business. Just as Francis Ford Coppola enhanced the Godfather series by taking the rather unusual in Hollywood tack of making it a story about a family, Scorsese's thoroughly scientific view of organized crime has lifted Casino far above most other films in the same category simply with its believability.
Transfer Quality
Video
The video transfer of this film is a superlative job, but with a major qualifier. When the actors are too brightly lit on the casino sets, it shows up quite well in this DVD. Like the Las Vegas of days gone by, the lighting is appropriately vomitous and overdone. I really feel that the overlighting should have been toned down a little for this release, as the superior resolution makes the resultant losses of definition which you'd barely notice on a VCR stick out like a lump of camel dung on the casino sets with this DVD. During the aforementioned sequence in which two casino cheats are caught out, Robert De Niro often has enough light shining off him to blind the viewer. Many other sequences follow in which the lighting seems to have been adjusted to a high level to compensate for VHS limitations, with not a thought for the fact that a new format might take over. The film is presented in an aspect ratio of 2.35:1, and it is not 16x9 enhanced. The only reason that the transfer looks so good and faithful to the original theatrical presentation is that it was created via a downconversion from a high-definition master of some kind. Thankfully, unlike The Thing(a review I sorely wish I could re-do using my new equipment), the most likely source for this transfer is a 1920x1080 HDTV master, as opposed to the cruddy limitations of a recycled laserdisc transfer. Nonetheless, 16x9 enhancement would have been much preferred with this disc, as there are still some noticeable problems as a result of the high-contrast lighting used in the photography.Film artefacts are minimal, with the only noticeable film artefacts being the aforementioned overlighting problems. These problems, however can pretty much be blamed squarely on the director or the cinematographer, although these are magnified by the lack of enhancement. Most of the brightly-lit sequences, especially the aforementioned scene with the professional cheats, are so brightly lit that small, and thankfully mostly unimportant, amounts of detail are lost. Conversely, shadow detail ranges from crystal clear to slightly smudged. Details in dark scenes are well-rendered enough to ensure that they are easily understood. Again, this appears to be because the lighting controls were adjusted in such a way as to make everything seem twenty percent brighter than how it came out on the negative. Moiré effects were abundant in the surprisingly rare scenes involving monitors and televisions, but that lends a certain authenticity, given that this film's events are supposed to be occurring in the days when televisions often showed moiré effects without the assistance of a video camera.
The disc is an RSDL disc, with the layer change placed at 87:29, which is when Rothstein's comment about his position in the Tangier's Hotel management is shown in a headline. This scene and layer change comes between the interview in which the ill-timed commentary is made by Rothstein and the moment a bitter County Commissioner formulates a plan to hang him with it. While the layer change is rather noticeable, especially if you have seen the film before, it is not disruptive to the film. It certainly beats the hell out of having to get up and turn the disc over. (I have a confession to make: I realized recently that I definitely am a complete DVD addict. When asked what the best Martin Scorsese film was, I really did answer by stating Casino was because of its RSDL formatting.)
Audio
The audio is a wonderful job, with each sound coming out like a sickening punch in the gut. The dialogue is presented in six different flavours - English, German, Italian, Spanish, Polish, and Czech. The English and German tracks are presented in Dolby Digital 5.1, which really does this film justice. The Italian, Spanish, and Czech dubs of the dialogue are presented in Dolby Digital 2.0, which sounds kind of flat and tinny. Then there's the Polish dub, which is presented in mono. All in all, we have more choices than we'll ever need. This leads me to the conclusion that Columbia TriStar are streets ahead of the competition in knowing how to satisfy the customer - six languages, six sets of subtitles, plus bonus material, and they still didn't resort to making it a flipper. It would not surprise me in the future to see directors like Martin Scorsese signing deals with studios according to caveats on the way they can format his releases on our beloved discs. Let's hope flippers are soon banned because their existence is less justified every time a disc like this comes out.Getting back to the audio for a while (you can tell I am really not fond of flippers, can't you?), the music is also a great job. Consisting of (mostly) vibrant and powerful tunes from the sixties and seventies, it is an interesting journey back into the time when even pop music required some musical skill to play. The inclusion of such weirdo-disco hits as Devo's Whip It make for a very esoteric sort of soundtrack as mob-based dramas go. All in all, this disc is a great piece of work in the audio department. Joe Pesci's description of the casino operation's frontman ('He was the perfect frontman, I mean... what else could he be? He didn't know too much, he didn't wanna know too much...'), as played by Kevin Pollak is almost worth a third of the asking price by itself.
The surround channels were mostly used to support the music and sound effects, most notably the sounds of rolling dice. Overall, the soundtrack is mainly focused on the front channels, although no channel is left idle for too long. The subwoofer was given plenty to do by the incessant sounds of gunshots, music, and other explosive sounds. While this film doesn't exploit the 5.1 channels to their full effect, you certain have to give it credit for justifying the encoding. In most of the overdubbed languages, the original dialogue is still vaguely audible, which is either annoying or pleasant depending on how you look at it.
Extras
The extras range from pleasant to blah.Menu
The menu is presented in a graphical style themed around the movie. While the menu itself looks pleasant, the use of icons, especially the way in which they are used, makes it somewhat confusing at times.Theatrical Trailer
The theatrical trailer is not 16x9 enhanced, and appears to be an artefact-riddled carry-over from rental VCRs. In spite of that, it is a great summation of the film in 141 seconds. It is presented in widescreen, at an aspect ratio of 1.66:1 (I think), in Dolby Stereo.Production Notes
A detailed description of the making of the film. It would have been nice if they'd presented this in a video form instead of the usual text, but that might have exceeded the storage limit, given the massive length of the film itself. So I'll let that pass. As it stands, this extra warrants the once-over read.Biographies - Cast and Filmmakers
Biographies of all the important players in the film. Robert De Niro,
Sharon Stone, Joe Pesci, Don Rickles, Alan King, Kevin Pollak, and James Woods round out the cast, with the usual spot reserved for director Martin Scorsese. Again, this extra justifies one read, or maybe several if you're really bored. R4 vs R1
The Region 4 version of this disc misses out on;- 16x9 Enhancement
Summary
Casino is an interesting, but slow, film presented on a very well-made DVD.The video quality is wonderful, and this is an excellent film to show off your DVD player with.
The audio quality is mostly wonderful. A few slips here and there, but these are the result of the filmmaking itself.
The extras aren't exactly threadbare, but they're nothing to rave about, either.
Ratings (out of 5)
Casino 1995 Aspect Ratio Formula
| DVD | Grundig GDV 100 D and Toshiba SD-2109 |
| Display | Samsung CS-823AMF, 4:3 mode, using composite input and S-video input |
| Audio Decoder | Built In |
| Amplification | Sony STR-DE835 |
| Speakers | Panasonic S-J1500D Front Speakers, Sharp CP-303A Back Speakers, Philips FB206WC Centre Speaker, JBL Digital 10 Subwoofer |