Gambling - Small Table Games Issues

[rewt]

Is anyone else having issues with the small table games gambling option paying out very frequently? I get that gambling isn't supposed to be consistent income and that you can win or lose but I have been finding that I am always losing money on small table games. Through the gambling tab I have seen that the gambling option is always losing me money over 3 months and and frequently I see 2-3 players sitting at the table on over 2k. If they have a 1:20 chance for a win, with 5 players it should be happening every 4 turns, but it feels more like every 3 turns.

I don't know if this is just me but does anyone else have any suggestions for making small table games work consistently?

[Bear]

Check in regularly with your casino managers. At times they may recommend you kick certain players out, either because they're winning too much, or because they're scaring the other patrons. That will help a bit with maintaining a profit.

But the point really isn't to make a lot of money (except maybe the big casinos available in Atlantic City), but rather to get gamblers in debt so you can then lean on them to get goodies in return - vehicles, good business contacts, contacts with other outfits and hoodlums, or - best of all - the occasional free building.

[rewt]

I get that gambling debts are OP with the ability to get free buildings and can be far more valuable than the money sometimes. Though gambling should be rigged in the houses favour without modifiers. Also, I do kick out scary patrons however, with other gambling options letting winners continue usually regains me my money.

I have just followed this up with an experiment;
Chicago base map with latest update
3 small table games across 3 gambling dens
All the managers have zero relevant skills to assess base odds without modifiers
Kicked every patron after a win so no repeat winners
I didn't roll over any debts so no repeat losers
Which resulted in, over 13 turns, 116 bets placed, with 13 wins
This gives a probability of ~1:9 win chance over my sample compared with the 1:20 stated in game
Assuming that the win probability is independent and the p=0.05 my sample has a 1:489 chance of occurring or 0.2% - so should be very unlikely

It is more likely that the small games tables is not really a 1:20 probability but rather much higher making this gambling option a statistical loss maker on average. I could repeat the experiment with a larger sample size but unless anyone says otherwise I think people should avoid small table games in Chicago

[rewt]

Follow on from my previous post

Sorry, I should have been more patient.
I carried it on from before and eventually got 21 winners out of 308 bets placed which is very close to the 1:15 expected. This included 1 winner in the last 81 bets. So over the very long term the odds do average out, even if starts badly.

I don't know if anyone has said this before but it looks like the gambling is pseudo-random with a rather long sample period. Though, I might be completely wrong again

[Bear]

Good job. Keep pushing it. I suspect there may still be some bugs in gambling. In one recent game (Cincinnati) I started encountering a problem where all patrons stop visiting my dens. Something definitely not working as intended there.

[rewt]

Originally posted by Bear:

Good job. Keep pushing it. I suspect there may still be some bugs in gambling. In one recent game (Cincinnati) I started encountering a problem where all patrons stop visiting my dens. Something definitely not working as intended there.

Thanks. I might try more over the weekend to better understand it but there are definitely some bugs. I noticed a vast slow down in new regular customers after a point. Maybe each gambling den has a fixed number of regulars? Or did it affect walk-ins as well, I didn't check.