when the house edge is almost nothing

A roulette player is extremely vulnerable to the game's large 5.26% house edge. But for players disciplined enough to seek out 20x odds in craps, the casino's 0.099% house edge isn't much of a threat. I don't doubt that the 20x odds craps player will eventually lose in the long run, but it might take a while. Seems to me that the house's real advantage for offering 20x odds is the casino's enormous bankroll. The casino's bankroll can withstand a lengthy losing streak. The player's can't.

Is this correct?

Quote: reno

The casino's bankroll can withstand a lengthy losing streak. The player's can't.
Is this correct?

Yes. Also the casino can OFFER the 20x to everyone, knowing that many will be impressed by the offer but not take them up on it. So its good advertising for them. If someone comes in and wants to go to 20x, fine. If they lose their bankroll faster, someone else will take their place at the craps table. If they win, both he and their money will be back.

Quote: reno

A roulette player is extremely vulnerable to the game's large 5.26% house edge. But for players disciplined enough to seek out 20x odds in craps, the casino's 0.099% house edge isn't much of a threat. I don't doubt that the 20x odds craps player will eventually lose in the long run, but it might take a while. Seems to me that the house's real advantage for offering 20x odds is the casino's enormous bankroll. The casino's bankroll can withstand a lengthy losing streak. The player's can't.

Is this correct?

The house knows that odds bet cost the house nothing, except the overhead needed to book them (paying the dealers, etc.). So offering 20X odds is an essentially free way to entice players to your casino. And yes, they don't really care about the individual outcomes of the odds bets--the casino knows those outcomes will sum to zero.

Main Street Station downtown offers 20X, and its crap tables are always busy--but I don't see 1 in 100 players taking that full 20X odds.

Quote: mkl654321

Main Street Station downtown offers 20X, and its crap tables are always busy--but I don't see 1 in 100 players taking that full 20X odds.

Heck, Casino Royale famously offers 100X odds, but I doubt there's much of anyone who takes advantage of that.

Great advertising, though!

Yes. Advertising. Thats about it. If a high roller elsewhere wanted higher odds he would probably get them. Players who complain of a table being only 5x will often never go beyond 2x themselves. SouthPoint is considered stingy for being 2x and perhaps they are, but just how many people would actually be going higher even if they could?

Marquee, websites, signage, print ads ... its good advertising. I don't know what the return on their advertising is, but its real cheap advertising no matter what.

How often do you actually see someone take full 20x or 100x odds? I know mkl said less than 1 in 100 for 20x but what do you think would be a reasonable estimate if you had to put an actual figure on it?

I ain't never seen anyone taking 100x odds and think that most of the people playing at a 100x table have neither the bankroll nor the balls to take 100x odds!

Now 10x or 20x ... yeah thats far more likely. Estimates? Heck... I don't know. IF some sort of poll were to be taken of dice dealers, I doubt I'd trust the results to be accurate but I'd expect most dealers to come in at more than 1 out of a hundred. I'd love to do some research on this at Main Street Station or at the Eastside Cannery. The reasons for this research would relate more to the beers that are available at those places than to the actual data collection. There is a place in Tunica that offers 100x (or atleast used to about two years ago). I spoke to a Floorman in Florida who used to work in several cities and had most recently come from Tunica. He commented that he had never seen anyone get up to 100x even when the line bet minimums were really low. Now Tunica is not Vegas. I would expect someone on a day trip or weekend trip out of Memphis to not have the bankroll for 100x. I would expect people in Vegas to generally have the bank roll for it. Terribles in Vegas gets players who don't have the bankroll and has dealers whom the casino wouldn't want handling bets that size anyway. Decent casinos in Vegas generally get players ABLE to do 100x, but that does not mean that you see them actually doing it.

Yeah, and the house still has an edge, so it's not like one can beat it with 100x odds. A sufficiently large casino, or one that has reinsurance, can survive with extremely low edge, as long as the physical expenses are covered. Essentially 100x odds is another way of saying "any you like, within reason".

I got up to 20X odds at Main Street last trip. (Of course sevened out immediately). My friend went above 20X; he had to increase his line bet to $10 to put $200 behind.

I could see him getting to 100X if things got really hot. He presses after wins. In my lifetime!

Considering that most people who congregate at Casino Royale or Main Street are fleas, they rarely see people take advantage of the full odds anyway. Take Royale, for example. Let's say that you're normally a $25 player, which is good money in the craps world.

So, you put $25 on the line and back it up with 3x odds all the time for $100 combined pass and odds. You're looking at an expected Value of (.$.354) per resolved bet. Over 5 hours of playing, the most probable outcome (I didn't say likely) is a loss of $70.70 (200 come out rolls). Winning bets with the odds pay $115, $138, and $175 for the 6/8, 5/9, 4/10 respectively.

That same player goes to the Royale and puts down $3 with 32x odds for a $99 combined pass and odds. Here, your expected loss is only ($.0424) per resolved bet. Over 5 hours of playing, the most probably outcome is a loss of $8.48 (200 come out rolls). Wiinning bets with the odds pay $118, $147, and $195 respectively. The difference in payouts is indeed respectful, not so much on the 6/8.

Quote: ElectricDreams

Heck, Casino Royale famously offers 100X odds, but I doubt there's much of anyone who takes advantage of that.

Great advertising, though!

I've been to Casino Royale several times and the craps tables are almost always packed. I've played their $1 table with $100 odds behind it and seen maybe a handful do the same, but the vast majority play it like they would a single odds table. You'll see people make a pass line bet of $5 with no odds, and when they win stack it on the pass line again. One time I saw two guys each betting a dollar on the pass and don't pass simultaneously, and then backing up just the pass line with $100 odds. I still wonder what they were thinking about...

Quote: clarkacal

I saw two guys each betting a dollar on the pass and don't pass simultaneously, and then backing up just the pass line with $100 odds. I still wonder what they were thinking about...

Sober? I'd only drink bottled beer at Casino Royale but at a one dollar line bet, I guess it doesn't matter too much if they throw the opposite one away. Perhaps they were on the passline with odds but they were putting the dealers on the Don'ts.

Still, the underlying theme of your observations is that the vast majority of craps players stay well below the maximum odds that the table offers to them and therefore such offers are more akin to advertising. The few players who really take advantage of it and go to maximum odds from time to time or even routinely are accommodated and perhaps even welcomed by the dealers but its still a small percentage of the players.

Quote: FleaStiff

Sober? I'd only drink bottled beer at Casino Royale but at a one dollar line bet, I guess it doesn't matter too much if they throw the opposite one away. Perhaps they were on the passline with odds but they were putting the dealers on the Don'ts.

Yeah they were definitely sober. Not only that, they were keeping track in a little notebook like you see some roulette players do...

snips on original comment:

Quote: reno

...for players disciplined enough to seek out 20x odds in craps, the casino's 0.099% house edge isn't much of a threat.

Not sure that's the way to look at it. If you want to bet $100 or $200 per hand [or more] it's a good way to go. If your actually only comfortable with substantially less than that per hand, it makes no sense.

Quote: reno

I don't doubt that the 20x odds craps player will eventually lose in the long run, but it might take a while.

Unless he truly spends hours every day playing, the 20x craps player could actually go pretty much a lifetime and have a good chance of coming out ahead or near even. That's the paradox, since it is also quite likely he will get crushed with no hope of ever getting out of the hole.

Quote: reno

The casino's bankroll can withstand a lengthy losing streak. The player's can't.

More to the point, the casino is going to get the benefit of the law of large numbers. The player doesnt know if the distribution of numbers he is going to get is going to be favorable or not.

Not trying to be a wet blanket, but when you wander into this kind of thinking, the thoughts shouldnt be that this is a way to make the house edge go to nothing. If you think about it long enough, IMO, seeking low table minimum looms larger.

Quote: odiousgambit

Not trying to be a wet blanket, but when you wander into this kind of thinking, the thoughts shouldnt be that this is a way to make the house edge go to nothing. If you think about it long enough, IMO, seeking low table minimum looms larger.

The best way to look at it is that your expected loss is the same whether you take no odds, 2X odds, or 100X odds.

Quote: reno

A roulette player is extremely vulnerable to the game's large 5.26% house edge. But for players disciplined enough to seek out 20x odds in craps, the casino's 0.099% house edge isn't much of a threat. I don't doubt that the 20x odds craps player will eventually lose in the long run, but it might take a while. Seems to me that the house's real advantage for offering 20x odds is the casino's enormous bankroll. The casino's bankroll can withstand a lengthy losing streak. The player's can't.

Is this correct?

Not mathematically correct. The Wizard has weighed in on this point. The idea is that the casino with it's relatively unlimited bankroll has an advantage over the player because it can't go broke. The casino has a larger advantage than the calculated small house edge.

Many people think that this advantage extends to zero house edge, where the casino will make money on the players going bust.

The reasoning is not mathematically sound.

I think that Boyd simply made a tactical move downtown. They offer 2X free odds on the craps tables at Fremont and California, and 20X odds at Main Street. They herd all the serious craps players to a few tables at Main Street. Most of them don't have the money to keep playing 20X odds, and they are more enamored of the idea than anything else.

It would be nice to see the break-out of gaming and non-gaming percentage for each of Boyd's divisions. They only breakout overall revenue (which is lower for downtown than the Vegas local's market), but that doesn't tell you anything since the Orleans, Suncoast, Sam's Club and Gold Coast are larger casinos.
Bill Boyd made a brief appearance on Forbe's billionaire list in 2005 & 2006, but he has not been on since then.

When I play there, I routinely take 10X odds, and I'm often the only one betting that much. 2X or even 1X is the norm. I think Casino Royale is playing this one pretty smart. Remember Binion's stayed in business for a long time with 100X odds. It was just mismanagement that brought that great casino down.

For gamblers trying to double a bankroll $100K I have no idea why they would play baccarat. If you go to Rampart Casino and play 100X craps the odds are astronimically better that you will double your bankroll before going bankrupt then playing baccarat.

The expectation is negative either way. Perhaps they want to play baccarat. Well, the sad excuse for baccarat that is offered in US, but nevertheless.

The Horseshoe in Bossier City, LA has 100x odds on its craps tables. Not too shabby for a Harrah's property, if I do say so. I am relatively new to the game of craps, so I have yet to back up my bets with full odds. I've gone up to 20x on occasion. I've seen others push it up to 100x, but then again they are the ones buying in for 5-10k.

I'll be in Vegas for March Madness, and I'm pretty sure that the 3x-4x-5x odds will be quite a letdown from my "local" (the drive for me is over 4 hours) casino. When a table gets "hot," I'll just have to get more creative in my betting.

Quote: imperialpalace

I'll be in Vegas for March Madness, and I'm pretty sure that the 3x-4x-5x odds will be quite a letdown from my "local" (the drive for me is over 4 hours) casino. When a table gets "hot," I'll just have to get more creative in my betting.

You can play 100X craps at Casino Royale on the Strip. Aslo at the Rampart, though that requires a rental car or a cab.

For 20X try Main Street Station Downtown or Sam's Town on Boulder (the latter operates free shuttles). I believe El Cortez and other Downtown properties offer 10X, as does the Stratosphere.

Thank you for the heads up. Of the casinos you mentioned, I've only been to Casino Royale and the Stratosphere. I was planning to try my luck at crapless craps. I think I'll definitely check out Main Street Station and the El Cortez. There seems to be a lot of love for those casinos among the faithful here. I want to play craps exclusively on this trip, so I'm glad I found this site. The company formerly known as Harrah's is comping my stay at the Imperial Palace (naturally) and Paris, but the craps payouts are atrocious (as well as VP, blackjack,etc.). After reading posts from this site, I'm not even sure if I'll gamble at Harrah's properties at all.

Quote: imperialpalace

Thank you for the heads up. Of the casinos you mentioned, I've only been to Casino Royale and the Stratosphere.

Casino Royale has to have the most ironic name in Vegas. Otehr than that it's perfectly nice, and a good stop-over for weary, over-hated travelers trudging along the Strip.

Quote:

I was planning to try my luck at crapless craps.

Careful. I've heard the game likes to mess with your mind. There's no Don't pass/don't come bet, either.

Quote:

I think I'll definitely check out Main Street Station and the El Cortez.

If you'll stick to craps, you migth as well go to the better games. 20x and 10x odds has 3,4,5x beat all hollow. Careful Downtown. At the Fremont and California the game is 2x only.

Quote: Nareed

Casino Royale has to have the most ironic name in Vegas.

But, but, but it's Bond's casino of choice! Surely it must be larger on the inside than it looks on the outside...

Quote: P90

But, but, but it's Bond's casino of choice! Surely it must be larger on the inside than it looks on the outside...

That's just it. You expect a swank joint with a James Bond theme, or a secret agent theme (Bond's owners charge royalties). Instead you get the closest thing on the Strip to a dump (or second closest? I haven't seen the rooms).

It brings up an interesting question regarding comps. I know there have been discussions here before on whether odds bets count towards comps, and I think it depends on the casino.

Assuming you do get comps on the odds bets, would you rather have
a) The comps and expected loss that comes from making $300 odds bets at Casino Royale?
or
b) The comps and expected loss that you get playing $300 bets at the blackjack tables of the surrounding strip casinos?

Where would you have more fun?

Quote: dudestupid

It brings up an interesting question regarding comps. I know there have been discussions here before on whether odds bets count towards comps, and I think it depends on the casino.

Assuming you do get comps on the odds bets, would you rather have
a) The comps and expected loss that comes from making $300 odds bets at Casino Royale?
or
b) The comps and expected loss that you get playing $300 bets at the blackjack tables of the surrounding strip casinos?

Where would you have more fun?

(b), no question. $300/hand will get you great comps even at places like Wynn and Caesars. Who wants an Outback Steakhouse comp?

Quote: mkl654321

The best way to look at it is that your expected loss is the same whether you take no odds, 2X odds, or 100X odds.

I think this is a much more useful way to look at pass/odds than to figure the combined HA, as craps books do. The expected loss is always 1.414% of the line bet, since the expected loss on the odds is zero. However, at the same time, the variance is mostly a function of the odds bets, since they have more variance per dollar bet and now you're talking about up to 100 times the line bet. The expected loss gets "buried" by the variance. Even for 10,000 $5 pass bets with 100X odds, the ev is -$707 while the SD is over $50,000.

The high variance increases the probability of overcoming the small expected loss, but never forget that it's symmetrical about the ev. You're just as likely to lose big as win big.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA

Quote: pacomartin

Not mathematically correct. The Wizard has weighed in on this point. The idea is that the casino with it's relatively unlimited bankroll has an advantage over the player because it can't go broke. The casino has a larger advantage than the calculated small house edge.

Many people think that this advantage extends to zero house edge, where the casino will make money on the players going bust.

The reasoning is not mathematically sound.

Paco- Help me out, because I still don't understand. Here's a different example: the Santa Ana Star casino in New Mexico offers a couple craps bets with no house edge: buy bets on the 4 and 10 with no vig. (Presumably, the casino's motive is to increase foot traffic to their craps tables where most players will place additional wagers on prop bets with high house edges.)

But for those few disciplined players who bet exclusively on the 4 and 10, the house still benefits from the law of large numbers and an enormous bankroll. I highly doubt that the Santa Ana Star is making zero profit from these disciplined players. Craps is a volatile game, and it doesn't take much of a losing streak to wipe out a small bankroll.

Quote: reno

But for those few disciplined players who bet exclusively on the 4 and 10, the house still benefits from the law of large numbers and an enormous bankroll. I highly doubt that the Santa Ana Star is making zero profit from these disciplined players. Craps is a volatile game, and it doesn't take much of a losing streak to wipe out a small bankroll.

True, but it's also true that the lucky few who win will, on the average, win as much as all those other players lost. They won't win *less*, which is the key point, because there is no vig on those bets. The law of large numbers says that the results will converge on the mean, but the mean on the no-vig 4 or 10 is break-even.

Similarly, any other break-even game (fair coin flip, roulette with no zeroes, etc) results in a long-term push with the house. Variance describes the swings, but the mean is zero.

Quote: reno

Paco- Help me out, because I still don't understand. Here's a different example: the Santa Ana Star casino in New Mexico offers a couple craps bets with no house edge: buy bets on the 4 and 10 with no vig. (Presumably, the casino's motive is to increase foot traffic to their craps tables where most players will place additional wagers on prop bets with high house edges.)

But for those few disciplined players who bet exclusively on the 4 and 10, the house still benefits from the law of large numbers and an enormous bankroll. I highly doubt that the Santa Ana Star is making zero profit from these disciplined players. Craps is a volatile game, and it doesn't take much of a losing streak to wipe out a small bankroll.

Real Life Example
I talked to the pit boss at Santa Ana Star casino. He said that the "no vig, buy bet" on the craps tables for all practical purposes functions like "free odds" as it is an incentive to come to the casino. He implied that if anyone started "abusing us" (his words), presumably someone with enough money to relentlessly make max bets solely on the "no vig, buy bet" and without tipping the boys, would result in shutting down the table or in politely asking the player to back off.


Hypothetical No House Edge Casino
Assume a hypothetical zero house edge casino where the paybacks on all the table games and the "collective slot machines" were set at true odds, but maximum bets were imposed so as avoid the possibility of breaking the casino with million dollar bets. We all agree that the majority of people who played in this casino (as in a real casino) would lose their bankroll. They would be pursuing multiples of their original bankroll and the probability is far greater that they would lose their bankroll before they hit the limits of their greed.

Your question is "would the bankroll advantage of the casino mean that they would make money since the majority of people go away with zero?" The wizard says, no, the casino should "break even" subject to a standard deviation. Basically he said that statistically the majority of people who lose their bankroll would have lost more money if they had more money to play. The minority of people who make money will win all the money that the majority lost.

I agree that it is difficult to accept at face value. I may simulate it if I have time.

Pay to Play Casino
I have suggested that as an alternative to normal casino play, that a casino could simply charge a fee by the minute for the opportunity to play a game with zero house advantage. Or, a casino could set aside certain off-hours for "pay to play" casino time. This idea made sense to me for certain small casinos (like Hooters) that were experiencing dismally low slot and table revenue on a per machine or per table basis. Revenue would be achieved from the "pay to play" fee and from ancillary sales of drinks and food. It seems better than supporting a staff for a casino with hardly any patrons.

So far no casino has tried this tactic. The only "pay to play" games I have heard of are reserved seats at low minimum tables in Chicago. Presumably if you are bankrolling your wife and mother in law who insist on playing their instincts, you are better off reserving seats at a price at the low roller table than you are letting them play at normal minimums. I can't imagine paying $30/hour for the right to play at a $5 minimum table that still pays 6:5.

Quote: pacomartin

For gamblers trying to double a bankroll $100K I have no idea why they would play baccarat. If you go to Rampart Casino and play 100X craps the odds are astronimically better that you will double your bankroll before going bankrupt then playing baccarat.

and besides, baccarat is soooo boring.