Banking in Pai Gow and Pai Gow Poker

As I watched the Wizard play Pai Gow Tiles a week ago Sunday, I observed how he and the Young Man next to me both banked. Each played what appeared to be their maximum comfortable bet when playing against the House in order to get the House to reciprocate when they chose to be the banker. If I remember correctly each of them backed down their bets when the other player was banking; I assume to minimize the liability to each other.

Although I did not attempt to Bank at that time in that casino, mainly due to my limited bankroll not being able to cover the larger bets, I did try it at The Orleans playing Pai Gow Poker. A friend of mine set directly to my left and we were both banking with his turn preceding my own. When it was my friends turn to bank, I bet the table minimum, $10, for the reason mentioned above. The Orleans would not allow me to revert to my higher bet of $25, which is what I bet the hand before my friend banked i.e. when the House was the banker. I guess my question is what determines the amount that you are allowed to bet as the banker: the last amount wagered, the last amount wagered against the house, or something else? I will note that The Orleans banking sequence was just as the hands were ordered or you were offered to bank once every eight hands.

Later in the week, I was playing PGP at Excalibur and when the table emptied and it was just me and the dealer I asked the Pit Boss and he let me bank every other hand, alternating with the dealer. That was nice even though there were no copies to which I would have won. I got extra enjoyment knowing that I was playing at the lowest house advantage possible.

I don't think the casino is right, and I would have taken it to the pit to see why they ruled that way.

Casinos get sensitive at the Pai Gow table when players play together and sometimes will treat the bankroll as one unit instead of two. For that reason, when you are backing down to $10 while your friend banks, they are treating your bet as the smaller one. But I don't really understand the logic as they have the advantage both when you are banking and you are not. If you are betting $25 and the house has the bank, you should be able to bet $25 when it is your turn to bank. The solution to this issue is to simply play $25 when your friend banks and have him repay your loss, or to take your business elsewhere.

Do you notice that when the bank is circulating that the dealer places the chips the next banker bets in the tray to let them know how much you are allowed to bank when it is your turn?

I think it is good pai gow etiquette that if another players wants to bank, and you know he may be uncomfortable with what you want to bet, then pull back some of it to where he is comfortable. That was indeed what was happening at the Palace Station -- a good example of good pai gow manners.

In pai gow tiles the rules are very firm that the turn to bank rotates around the table counterclockwise. When it is your turn to bank the dealer will bet against you up to 110% of what you bet against the dealer the last time the dealer banked. You may request the dealer bet less. Most of the time players request the dealer bet exactly what they bet against the dealer. If a lot of other players are also betting against me, I'll sometimes ask the dealer to decrease his/her bet, to limit my downside.

In pai gow poker there is much less consistency. I think players invoke the right to bank in that game so seldom that the dealers, and sometimes the floor, don't know what to do. Often the turn to bank won't rotate, but zig-zag between the dealer and the players. I've also seen it that if there is an empty seat, the turn reverts to the dealer. When I was reviewing the South Point I was surprised that when I asked to bank in pai gow poker, the dealer bet against me what I bet against the player to my left (JB) the previous turn. I made a small bet against him, because he is a low roller. So the next turn the dealer bet $10 against me, when I bet $100 against the dealer two turns ago. It made no sense.

Quote: Wizard

In pai gow poker there is much less consistency. I think players invoke the right to bank in that game so seldom that the dealers, and sometimes the floor, don't know what to do.

That reminds me of the time I lost a hand and still made money.

I was once at Barbary Coast playing PG Poker and it was just the dealer and me, so I was banking every other turn. I had reached a point where I decided I was either going to double up or go broke and leave to find my friends, who were at another casino. So, I increased my bet by putting all I had out there, making it about 3 times my normal bet size. The hand was a push.

Coincidentally, at that point my friends arrived from the other casino, and I told them "one more hand" as it was now my turn to Bank. However, I had come to my senses and decided to abandon my double-up or go broke strategy, so I asked the dealer to take the house bet back down to my "normal" bet size, or one-third my last bet.

The dealer refused to do so. He said the house bet amount was required to be the amount of my last bet. I tried to explain to him it was to my detriment to play for less, as the house edge was lower when I was Banking, but the dealer didn't want to hear it. (And in his defense, I'm sure he has to deal with plenty of player know-it-alls who want to tell him he's doing his job wrong when he's doing it right.) We then debated back and forth, both of us stubborn that our opinion was correct. He got moderately upset over it. I got mildly upset over it. I eventually gave up and told him okay, I'll play for the larger amount, but asked him to call the floor over for an "official" ruling so I'd know the next time I tried to bank for less.

He agreed and called the floor over, but was still so flustered about our disagreement that at the time he picked up the non-played hands at the empty seats, he realized he had mis-dealt. Even though the cards came out of the Shufflemaster machine, he had distributed the hands as if the house was the bank, not me. Plus, the dice and my seat position were such that I had the house hand and, of course, the house had the banker hand. At this point, the floor came over in response to his earlier request. Of course by now we had done away with the banking-for-less argument and were onto what to do about the dealing error.

The floor, probably anticipating an argument if we just switched hands to correct the problem, told the dealer to switch the hands, but if I lost, count it as a push. I agreed because since the cards are random I honestly would have been fine with just giving everybody the right hand and playing it as the fates intended. The hands were switched to make them correct. The floor stayed and watched how the hand turned out. I had a so-so hand, the specifics of which I can't remember. When the dealer turned over his cards, there might as well have been 7 Aces. It was a monster. I had lost, but per our agreement should've got a push. The floor stared at the dealer's hand and just shook his head for about 5 seconds, before uttering "go ahead and pay him anyway." The dealer didn't even question the floor; he promptly paid as if I had won.

I paid the commission, found my friends, and forever left the Barbary Coast. I say forever because even though I've been back to the building several times on trips since, it's obviously now Bill's Gamblin' Hall. But the Barbary Coast will always be the casino where I lost a hand and still won.

Mind if I clear up some doubts about banking?

I think I understand it, but I'm not sure. So let's try this example:

I chose to bank and everyone, dealer included, bets $10. First question, do I also palce a bet? If I do, then I assume the dealer (acting as the house) pays it off if I win, takes it if I lose.

Next, let's say there are a total of five bets on the table, excluding mine. If I lose to everyone I have to pay each player $10 minus the 5% comision, have I got that right? If I win over everyone, I take everyone's bets, no comission, right? So I stand to gain $50 but I stand to lose $47.50 plus my own bet in either case? And of course any number of in bewteen cases where I win some and lose others. Naturally I must have enough cash on hand, in the form of chips, to cover every bet.

And in the case of a tie (copy), I win the hand. But not in the case of a push. Right?

Yeah, I find the player banking thing confusing.

Other than that I'm developing a taste for Pai Gow Poker (sorry), but I find Tiles inscrutable thus far.

Quote: Nareed

Mind if I clear up some doubts about banking?

I think I understand it, but I'm not sure. So let's try this example:

I chose to bank and everyone, dealer included, bets $10. First question, do I also palce a bet? If I do, then I assume the dealer (acting as the house) pays it off if I win, takes it if I lose.

When you ask to bank, tell the dealer how much you wish the house to bet against you. "I'd like to bank for $10, please." The dealer will place the banker tile in your betting circle, and will place $10 in front of him/herself to cover you're bet. If the dealer knows I'm banking regularly, I'll indicate my intention by placing $10 next to my banking circle instead of in it. If you lose, the dealer will request the $10 from you, as well as any other player bets you may have lost.

Quote: Nareed

Next, let's say there are a total of five bets on the table, excluding mine. If I lose to everyone I have to pay each player $10 minus the 5% comision, have I got that right? If I win over everyone, I take everyone's bets, no comission, right? So I stand to gain $50 but I stand to lose $47.50 plus my own bet in either case? And of course any number of in bewteen cases where I win some and lose others. Naturally I must have enough cash on hand, in the form of chips, to cover every bet.

No, only winners pay commission. If you lose to everyone, the dealer will request $50 from you, pay $10 to each player, and receive $0.50 commission back from each winner. If you win, the dealer will give you $50, and ask for $2.50 in commissions on your win. As the banker, you pay commission on the net win. So if you win 4 $10 bets, including your own, and lose 2 $10 bets, you win a net of $20 and pay a $1 commission.

Quote: Nareed

And in the case of a tie (copy), I win the hand. But not in the case of a push. Right?

Yes. Banker wins all copy hands. But pushes are still pushes.

Quote: Nareed

Yeah, I find the player banking thing confusing.

Other than that I'm developing a taste for Pai Gow Poker (sorry), but I find Tiles inscrutable thus far.

I too find some aspects of banking confusing. Of course, I don't bank because I don't have the bankroll for it.

You do NOT place a bet when you bank. You're the banker. Much like when the dealer is the banker and the rack has to be sufficient to cover the player's bets, your stack has to cover the player's bets, as well as the dealer's bet. As has been discussed, the dealer will bet the same amount you bet the last time the dealer banked.

Quote:

I stand to gain $50 but I stand to lose $47.50

I'm 99% sure you got that backwards.

I.E. If you lose, you pay the bets at even money. The players then pay the 5% to the house. If you win, you collect the bet but then pay the house 5%.

Quote:

And in the case of a tie (copy), I win the hand. But not in the case of a push. Right?

Right. And that's the only advantage of banking, when you're the only player.

A push is still a push.

Thank you both very much. I'm quite sure I get it now.

I probably wouldn't bank at Pai Gow Poker with other players, no bankroll for it either, but I'd bank against the dealer now.

As with most other games, I suppose the path to full understanding is play itself, but it heps to know the rules beforehand.

Quote: Nareed

I probably wouldn't bank at Pai Gow Poker with other players, no bankroll for it either,

I'm definitely a low roller; playing the table minimums almost exclusively. But, I have not feared banking against a couple other players as long as they are playing the minimum also. Just remember how often pushes happen. Even if you have to put up $30 to cover yourself and two others; you very seldom payout the entire amount. I have no statistical data to support this, but I would venture to guess that even though collecting the entire $30 (minus the $1.50 commission) happens very seldom also, it probably happens more often than losing the entire $30.

Quote: Nareed

but I'd bank against the dealer now

Absolutely! If you can get to an empty table and go head to head against the dealer go for it. See if you can get the pit boss to let you bank every other hand like I did at Excalibur.

It hasn't been brought up in this thread, but for anyone who is completely new to banking in PGP, I should mention if you are worried about covering that possible monster bonus side bet (sucker bet) don't. The house covers that because the house collects it if the player loses.

Quote:

The dealer refused to do so. He said the house bet amount was required to be the amount of my last bet. I tried to explain to him it was to my detriment to play for less, as the house edge was lower when I was Banking, but the dealer didn't want to hear it.

I'm new to pai gow, but this statement makes me think I'm missing something about the odds when banking or exactly how it works. Isn't is actually still to your detriment to play for more (even when banking) because it's still an negative EV game whether or not you're banking?

This could just be something I'm misunderstanding about EV, does your overall EV increase when you bet more when your EV is "less negative" and bet less when it's "more negative"?

-C

Quote: cburke

I'm new to pai gow, but this statement makes me think I'm missing something about the odds when banking or exactly how it works. Isn't is actually still to your detriment to play for more (even when banking) because it's still an negative EV game whether or not you're banking?

This could just be something I'm misunderstanding about EV, does your overall EV increase when you bet more when your EV is "less negative" and bet less when it's "more negative"?

-C

Well it's just samantics I guess. What I meant with the phrase "to my detriment" is that I'm reducing my bet when the house edge is lower, and increasing it when the house edge is higher, and that is certainly to the casino's benefit, and so to my detriment. I'll agree with you that just sitting down to play a -EV game is to the detriment of my bankroll. So my statement related more to the entire time I'd spent at the table, or at least the last 2 hands, and not just the present hand that the dealer and I were arguing about.

the best situation a player can find himself in playing tiles is to find a full table of asians who are betting amounts you are comfortable with.....you then play the table min but bank every chance you get (which a great deal of the time will be every other hand)

Reviving old threads...

I've a question about the etiquette of banking. from what I've read here and elsewhere, it would seem it's good manners to abstain from playing when a player banks, thus leaving the player alone against the house.

This makes sense only if all or most players bank, and if the house alternates banking every other hand (zig-zag, one player banks, then the house, then another player, then the hosue again). This way players get the benefit of banking part of the time, but don't have to wait out several hands in order to play.

It doesn't make sense if only one or two players choose to bank, because then you're skipping half the play time to the benefit of the minority, while getting no benefit in return.

I'm asking about PGP specifically. And I will ntoe all the times I've played no one but the house banked. Call it about 5 hours spread over three sessions, all at Excalibur, $10 minimum

So, have I got it right or anywhere close?

Quote: Nareed

I've a question about the etiquette of banking. from what I've read here and elsewhere, it would seem it's good manners to abstain from playing when a player banks, thus leaving the player alone against the house.

The propper etiquette is: you should just ask.

What is often unspoken is that a banker may be offended that you're willing to lose to the house but not to another player.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

The propper etiquette is: you should just ask.

That is so sensible, rational and simple, it can't possibly be so :P

Quote:

What is often unspoken is that a banker may be offended that you're willing to lose to the house but not to another player.

I'd rather lose to a player than the house. A player might feel generous and give something back.

But there's a flip side. Some people may resent a player winning their money rather than the house's money. Which is ridiculous, since the house gets the money from all players anyway.

I agree that I'd rather lose to a player than the house. Additionally, since the banker wins ties, the players as a whole maximize their money by banking as much as possible against each other.

I've only ever seen another player bank maybe 2 or 3 times in several hundred hours of play. I bank maybe 25% of the times I play, depending on my perception of the dealers' skill and how long I intend the session to be. it really does slow the game down, and sometimes that's enough of a negative to make me want to avoid it.

Quote: rdw4potus

it really does slow the game down, and sometimes that's enough of a negative to make me want to avoid it.

What does the slow-down consist of? I assume the dealer ahs to explain player banking to the rest of the table.

I've another question. Some casinos offer a bet caleld Pai Gow Insurance. Prior to this trip, I'd never heard about it. I just went on the assumption that all side bets are sucker bets and should be avoided, so I avoided it. However, I dind't see any player make that bet either.

So I read about it at the Wizard's site. My understanding is that if your hand is Pai Gow, meaning you got squat, PG Insurance pays according to what the high hand is. I don't have a pay table handy, but as I recall it pays highest for a 9 and lowest for an ace.

Anyway, when a player banks he's likely to take a huge hit, especially when banking against a full table, if he hits a Pai Gow. Does it make sense then to place the insurance bet? is it even allowed?

Quote: Nareed

What does the slow-down consist of? I assume the dealer ahs to explain player banking to the rest of the table.

I've another question. Some casinos offer a bet caleld Pai Gow Insurance. Prior to this trip, I'd never heard about it. I just went on the assumption that all side bets are sucker bets and should be avoided, so I avoided it. However, I dind't see any player make that bet either.

So I read about it at the Wizard's site. My understanding is that if your hand is Pai Gow, meaning you got squat, PG Insurance pays according to what the high hand is. I don't have a pay table handy, but as I recall it pays highest for a 9 and lowest for an ace.

Anyway, when a player banks he's likely to take a huge hit, especially when banking against a full table, if he hits a Pai Gow. Does it make sense then to place the insurance bet? is it even allowed?

When the dealer banks, they settle each player's hand in and out of their tray. When a player banks, they have to note the starting amount and ending amount so that they charge the correct net commission to the banking player. That seems to be the part that "bad" dealers have a hard time keeping straight, and only paying commission on the NET win is very important to the banking player.

Yes, Pai Gow insurance is available to a banking player (at least at the Majestic Star in East Chicago). I hadn't thought about taking it because the HA is so high, but I guess it might be a reasonable hedge. In my experience, a banker's pai gow is by far the most noticeable place where winning ties comes in handy. By winning copies on the top, my pai gow hands as a dealer is usually somewhat protected from having to take a total loss on a hand.

Here are some of my thoughts.

I don't feel obligated (or even expected) to sit out when another player is banking in PGP. I figure that they're taking my typical bet into consideration when deciding to bank. If I'm betting more than they're comfortable covering, they shouldn't ask to bank and expect me to reduce my bet or sit out the hand.

I've seen a player ask to bank, and then another player raises their bet from $50 to $500 in an effort to dissuade the player from banking. This seems to me to be a dooshy thing to do.

I think most players have a certain comfort level playing against the house. A player/banker upsets this comfort. They feel that you're trying to put something over on them. And there are a number of ways that this can APPEAR to be true:

If they get a lousy hand, they only got that hand because you banked. Otherwise, they'd have gotten a different set of cards.

If the dealer shows a lousy hand, well they could've beaten that hand but not yours. Nevermind that they wouldn't have been playing against the dealer's cards under any circumstances.

So basically everybody at the table might end up pissed at you, unless you give them a bunch of your money by losing the hand.

When I bank in PGP (very rare) I'll let the table know of my intentions to make sure that this won't freak anybody out. I enjoy the camaraderie of PGP, and I don't want to upset anyone. Most people have never experienced player banking, and they're curious to participate the first time.

I've seen a full table of PGT where each player banked in turn, and all the other players sat out. I have no interest in playing in a game like this.

One of my favorite activities is playing with another player or two in PGT, and playing along with each other as we bank. Both of us playing together against the house with one hand. We both win or we both lose. Big fun!

I'm sure I've said it before: PGP for me is about fun and camaraderie. There's too many ways that player/banking can screw that up, so I rarely do it. PGT players are more sophisticated about such things, and player/banking seems to be a much more accepted practice.

Quote: PapaChubby

I've seen a full table of PGT where each player banked in turn, and all the other players sat out. I have no interest in playing in a game like this.

Not a bad idea if you are trying to limit losses! (E.g., with a group of friends getting free drinks). Sounds boring, though, and I bet the casino HATES it.

Quote: rdw4potus

Yes, Pai Gow insurance is available to a banking player (at least at the Majestic Star in East Chicago). I hadn't thought about taking it because the HA is so high, but I guess it might be a reasonable hedge.

On the other hand it might increase your loses if you win a minority of hands while banking. That's the problem with hedging.

BTW I heard one dealer say almost no one takes the insurance bet because, in his words, "players feel they're inviting a bad hand." I wish I could say that surprised me, but it didn't.

Quote: Nareed

BTW I heard one dealer say almost no one takes the insurance bet because, in his words, "players feel they're inviting a bad hand." I wish I could say that surprised me, but it didn't.

That's the same reason I won't buy life insurance. It only pays off if you die. Who wants to bet on that?

Quote: PapaChubby

That's the same reason I won't buy life insurance. It only pays off if you die. Who wants to bet on that?

I don't know how to respond to rhetorical jokes.

I'm baffled. Why would etiquette require that a player sit out, or even ask, when another player is banking? This is utter nonsense. When a player chooses to bank, he is willingly changing the game from a ho-hum battle against the corporate casino to a spirited challenge to his fellow man, i.e. REAL gambling, as God and cowboys intended. In my view, nobody who would shy away from such a proposition has any business in a casino.

And remember, etiquette is precisely what you decide etiquette will be, no more and no less. Setting the boundaries of etiquette involves a formula of two parts leadership to one part class. You know you've successfully established it when everybody is still smiling.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

I too find some aspects of banking confusing. Of course, I don't bank because I don't have the bankroll for it.

You do NOT place a bet when you bank. You're the banker. Much like when the dealer is the banker and the rack has to be sufficient to cover the player's bets, your stack has to cover the player's bets, as well as the dealer's bet. As has been discussed, the dealer will bet the same amount you bet the last time the dealer banked.

This confuses me as well.i play pgp not tiles. i have never seen the house make a bet against you. the houses sets up your hand for you as you when you are the banker. there is no bet by the house. is this in tiles only? or do you hAve to ask for the house to place a bet? super confused

Technically, the house is placing a bet against you, but really you are still placing the bet. You tell the house how much to bet against you so it is the same thing. You can have the house bet up to your prior bet (or I have heard as much as 5% over your prior bet).

The main difference in banking is not the amount of the bet or whether the house bets your or vice versa. the main difference is that you win "copy" hands. That is a "free" advantage. You should bank whenever possible. The only time I would recommend not banking is if you are at a table with players you do not know. You can not control what others bet against you and they may bet more than you are comfortable betting. If you are at a table alone with the dealer, there is absolutely no reason not to bank.

Read the Wizard's strategy for banking. As the number of players goes up, the banker's percentage advantage also goes up. If you can cover five other bets at the table, do it every chance you get. Anyone want to challenge this, I'm happy to learn.

What's too old when it comes to bringing up an old thread? Anyway, this one was helpful to me.

I keep thinking I'm missing something when it comes to player banking. It seems to me that 'copies' are rare enough. Sure, the 2 card hand sometimes is a tie, but for the 5 card hand it seems much more rare, and these things have to happen at the same time to matter. Yet it is judged to be quite valuable. Can someone help me with this?

Quote: odiousgambit

What's too old when it comes to bringing up an old thread? Anyway, this one was helpful to me.

I keep thinking I'm missing something when it comes to player banking. It seems to me that 'copies' are rare enough. Sure, the 2 card hand sometimes is a tie, but for the 5 card hand it seems much more rare, and these things have to happen at the same time to matter. Yet it is judged to be quite valuable. Can someone help me with this?

There is an analysis on the wizardofodds website about it. It shows how much the house edge is reduced by banking. I've found in PGP, that I am rarely alone with the dealer since the game is so popular. But, in Pai Gow Tiles, I often bank since it is far less popular and I usually am alone with the dealer when I play.


https://wizardofodds.com/games/pai-gow-poker/

Quote: Wulfgar1224

There is an analysis on the wizardofodds website about it. It shows how much the house edge is reduced by banking.

see below

Quote:

I've found in PGP, that I am rarely alone with the dealer since the game is so popular. But, in Pai Gow Tiles, I often bank since it is far less popular and I usually am alone with the dealer when I play.

I think it can be a matter of being first there. If you are banking and somebody else shows up, instantly say something like "I bank whenever possible, just so you know". Perhaps if there is only one other person at the table, even if that develops briefly later, you can try to establish it as a 'banking table'. The matter of establishing this when first at the table I think Wizard brings up in his video on tiles. Something to practice I think.

I don't speak from experience, btw. I have played PGP exactly once in a casino, intending to bank and forgetting all about it due to nervousness.

Regarding the Wizard page, I went back and looked at what he shows.

The charts seem to be for head to head with the dealer. Wizard says this with optimal strategy" increases expected value by 2.47%", which is about 1 in 40. Does that mean the 'copies' occur about one time in 20, half going in player's favor when banking??? Notice the question marks, not sure about that. If it is about right, then I'd have to say I do not get the impression it is that frequent when using the practice game.

edit: there is a scenario that I can grasp now that probably makes all that to be nonsense. See next post

Even if that is about right, it surprises me it has so much effect. Could be it's like '12 pushes' in darkside Craps play. That changes that game from being +EV to -EV to almost exactly the same amount reversed; it just doesn't seem like it could make that much difference.

OK ... apology!

I finally know what I wasn't getting. Sorry! then again, no one guessed what it was that I didn't get either.

I was paying more attention to the WoV practice game. This situation occurred: I was banking and when the cards were shown I lost the 5 card hand, but with the 2 card hand we tied with KQ each. This resulted in a Push where it is easy to see the casino again wins without this player banking ability.

I guess plenty of you are shaking your heads, but I didn't visualize this happening. I was only thinking of the scenario where a tie would occur in both the 5 card hand and the 2 card hand, resulting in a win when banking I suppose but clearly a fairly rare event. This scenario resulting in a push, which I hadn't thought of, I can see happening more often.

Again, I apologize.

I don't know how it goes in PGP, but in Tiles banking is awesome because you get to slow the game down a lot more by doing all that ritualistic and superstitious stuff with the tiles and dice, and then once the tiles are passed out you can waste time discussing how to set the hand with the other players. Banking is a lot of fun and very social if there's a lot of people at the table.

Quote: odiousgambit

OK ... apology!

I finally know what I wasn't getting. Sorry! then again, no one guessed what it was that I didn't get either.

I was paying more attention to the WoV practice game. This situation occurred: I was banking and when the cards were shown I lost the 5 card hand, but with the 2 card hand we tied with KQ each. This resulted in a Push where it is easy to see the casino again wins without this player banking ability.

I guess plenty of you are shaking your heads, but I didn't visualize this happening. I was only thinking of the scenario where a tie would occur in both the 5 card hand and the 2 card hand, resulting in a win when banking I suppose but clearly a fairly rare event. This scenario resulting in a push, which I hadn't thought of, I can see happening more often.

Again, I apologize.

It's easy to win this way, too. When banking, 5 card win and 2 card tie is a win; but it pushes if the house banks.

Quote: rdw4potus

It's easy to win this way, too. When banking, 5 card win and 2 card tie is a win; but it pushes if the house banks.

good point.