No edge Craps.

Dumb question that I thought of in another thread.

Would the casino still make money on Craps if the house edge was removed and true fair odds were paid out on the bets?

Are you referring to place bets, or to every bet on the table? If every bet on the table had no house advantage, where is the incentive to host the game, and how would the dealers/floor/pit be paid? I don't think any business can (for long) provide a product that does not make money. Are you suggesting that casinos should host craps as a loss leader?

Every bet on the table.
Here is the scenario that I see a lot of the time.
Point established.
15 people at the table make their place bets, so figure everyone has 4 numbers cover. Three place bets and the point.
Seven out.

Also, all the hardway bets that people place, and the hop and one roll bets, even at paying 36-1, the casino will win that bet most of the time.

Quote: SkittleCar1

Dumb question that I thought of in another thread.

Would the casino still make money on Craps if the house edge was removed and true fair odds were paid out on the bets?

If the casino only took half the pass line bet if you bet an even amount of money on the 12 on the comeout, that would make the pass line a free bet.

Similarly, awarding half the bet on the don't pass on the 12 on the first roll of a don't pass or don't come would make that free and/or to a slight (negligible) player advantage.

It would not change the game hardly at all because all the money is made on other bets. Such a game should be operated with no odds bets, however, and a maximum bet on the pass line should be reduced in order to prevent excessive exposure to the casino.

IE: the game could be vulnerable to a lucky player with high enough limits on odds or on the line bet.

If the "free" part of the game were limited to say $50-$500 pass line bet max and/or if free bets only applied to over-sized line bets and odds could be taken on bets of $5 or $10, there would be VERY little difference in the amount of money the casino made from the table.

It's possible they could make money and it's possible that could lose money... i guess that is always the case, but the difference is it would no longer be more likely for the casino to win, than the player.

If 10,000 $10 fair bets were made with 0.00% house edge.. the casino could reasonably expect to be somewhere in the range of [-$2,000, $2000]. (just a very rough estimate). The tails of that range are less likely than the center.

I think it would be a good idea for a legitimate business like a bar, to offer 0 house edge gambling. I think I've seen that idea floated around this site before.

Quote: chrisr

It's possible they could make money and it's possible that could lose money... i guess that is always the case, but the difference is it would no longer be more likely for the casino to win, than the player.

If 10,000 $10 fair bets were made with 0.00% house edge.. the casino could reasonably expect to be somewhere in the range of [-$2,000, $2000]. (just a very rough estimate). The tails of that range are less likely than the center.

I think it would be a good idea for a legitimate business like a bar, to offer 0 house edge gambling. I think I've seen that idea floated around this site before.

All the money in craps is generally ONLY made on the STUPID bets. Take out the STUPID bets from even a craps game with only single odds, and the house would lose money.

IE: remove the ability to place the numbers, make field bets, make hardway bets, and hop bets, and the table would not make more money than it lost from operations.

I've often wondered the same thing about roulette. A wheel with no zeros also mean that all payouts are true which has the benefit of requiring no additional training.

I predict that on such a table, the house would still win from all those people who go broke by using a system that doesn't work or people that hit table limits or bankroll limits.

Quote: SkittleCar1

Would the casino still make money on Craps if the house edge was removed and true fair odds were paid out on the bets?

Casinos might amke money now and then that way, but overall they'd tend towards the median, i.e. zero. In other words the casinos would be gambling with their own money. Casinos do not like to gamble.

What's even LESS obvious to folks is that if a game doesn't not make a critical MINIMUM amount of money, it's a not profitable. There is overhead for all games, even videos, with electricity, air conditioning, land value, etc.

People often think that just because they lost the casino is profitable.

Gaming income does not ensure profitability. There's a critical minimum amount of gaming income in order to break even, and many casinos fail to achieve this even when they are "making money" from gaming, which is almost ALWAYS, it's still sometimes not enough.

The folks on this website, as a general rule, are not big money-makers for the casino.

Quote: Ahigh

What's even LESS obvious to folks is that if a game doesn't not make a critical MINIMUM amount of money, it's a not profitable. There is overhead for all games, even videos, with electricity, air conditioning, land value, etc.

People often think that just because they lost the casino is profitable.

I'm always surprised by people who think this way. I talk to many people during the course of a workday, and I am struck by how often people do not understand how a casino could go under. It is a business. Like any other business, income>expenses or it isn't a business for very long.

Quote: SkittleCar1

Would the casino still make money on Craps if the house edge was removed and true fair odds were paid out on the bets?

No. Some incorrectly believe that the casino would still make money, because it has a larger bankroll than any given player. However, that doesn't matter. In the long run, the casino would still break even mathematically. However, there are large labor costs to dealing the game, which would turn it negative.

Quote: Wizard

No. Some incorrectly believe that the casino would still make money, because it has a larger bankroll than any given player. However, that doesn't matter. In the long run, the casino would still break even mathematically. However, there are large labor costs to dealing the game, which would turn it negative.

Well I was going to respond, but there's no need to now. Thanks WIZ! lol

So yeah, this.

Quote: Wizard

No. Some incorrectly believe that the casino would still make money, because it has a larger bankroll than any given player. However, that doesn't matter. In the long run, the casino would still break even mathematically.

I don't think that this is true. Even if the game is fair, it doesn't mean that every player will break even in the long run. Many players who have small bankrolls will be ruined and quit.

Quote: BlackjackLover

I don't think that this is true. Even if the game is fair, it doesn't mean that every player will break even in the long run. Many players who have small bankrolls will be ruined and quit.

If this is true, open up your own table. You will see fairly quickly that the profits don't add up the way you are expecting.

Quote: FCBLComish

If this is true, open up your own table. You will see fairly quickly that the profits don't add up the way you are expecting.

If a casino breaks even in the long run, it means every player breaks even in the long run, right? In practice, however, this isn't the case as I said. Many players will be broke and stop playing. Players who can keep playing until they break even at some point are players who have large bankrolls or bet carefully. Even if a game is fair, if your bankroll is $500 and you bet $500, you may be broke after your first bet. How can you break even after you are broke?

Quote: BlackjackLover

If a casino breaks even in the long run, it means every player breaks even in the long run, right?

No, it doesn't. Many players will go broke, but some will multiply their bankrolls many times over. When you add up all the player results, the net win will be close to zero.

Quote: Wizard

No, it doesn't. Many players will go broke, but some will multiply their bankrolls many times over. When you add up all the player results, the net win will be close to zero.

I may simulate this someday. Or if someone has already simulated this, please let me know.

By the way, BetVoyager holds No Zero Roulette tournaments regularly, and it seems that most players were broke. In the latest Wednesday Bonus Tournament Freeroll (Dec 26th, 2018), there were 87 participants, and 58 players were ruined. The sum of the bankrolls of the other 29 players is 45,686. The players started with 1,000, so the break-even point is 87,000. It's by no means long term, though. The free time is only 10 minutes. Players can buy more chips, but I think most players don't.

The previous Wednesday Bonus Tournament Freeroll (Dec 19th, 2018) had 99 participants, and 67 players were ruined. The sum of the bankrolls of the other 32 players is 60,072.