No chip for blackjack payoff

There's a casino where minimum bet on blackjack is 5€, but they don't have 0,5 or 2,5€ chip, so they can not payout blackjack.
So if you bet 5€ and get blackjack, you get payoff 1:1 (5€) and another 5€ is put aside, and whoever wins next hand, gets this 5€.
I know that dealer wins more hands than player so this rule favors house. But how much exactly it increases house edge?

The player wins, IIRC, 42% of hands with realistic advanced strategy. This number is virtually independent of TC. Another 10% push, and 48% lose.

Blackjacks being 2.3% of player's ER, this rule decreases return by a 0.14% if pushes don't count, and 0.37% if dealer takes pushes. The number is higher if you use imperfect basic or simplified strategy, so I'd chalk up at least 0.15%/0.4% for a regular skilled player.

Not having E2.5 chips is bulldung, they just want the extra edge. Well, at least it's not as bad as 6:5.

Quote: hogar

There's a casino where minimum bet on blackjack is 5€, but they don't have 0,5 or 2,5€ chip, so they can not payout blackjack.
So if you bet 5€ and get blackjack, you get payoff 1:1 (5€) and another 5€ is put aside, and whoever wins next hand, gets this 5€.
I know that dealer wins more hands than player so this rule favors house. But how much exactly it increases house edge?

The 5€ chip that had been set aside should be paid to the next player who gets a winning blackjack and who had bet an odd number of 5€ chips. This would be a fairer system with no extra house advantage. And if a 5€ chip is waiting to be paid out, I would bet an odd number of chips, and if there is no chip waiting, I would bet an even number of chips. Playing that way, I could win someone else's chip but never be short changed.

That system would be unfair to the player, however, in terms of conventional blackjack, as well as giving advantage to new players and disadvantage to current ones.

A fair system could be either holding the chip till the next BJ or surrender, resolving it by flipping if a half-chip remains upon leaving, or a straight 50/50 decision like if the next card is red or black.
This is just done for the extra edge, which is not inconsiderable.

I think you should have the option of either arm-wrestling the dealer for it or answering a trivia challenge question.

Just let it be resolved ab gladio.

Quote: P90

That system would be unfair to the player, however, in terms of conventional blackjack, as well as giving advantage to new players and disadvantage to current ones.

A fair system could be either holding the chip till the next BJ or surrender, resolving it by flipping if a half-chip remains upon leaving, or a straight 50/50 decision like if the next card is red or black.
This is just done for the extra edge, which is not inconsiderable.

I think some 50/50 decision is the fairest. Waiting for the next blackjack forces you to play further, and maybe you don't want to play any more.