House edge under maximum aggregate payouts

As a follow-on to Mosca's recent LIR Royal Flush story:

There is a provision at many gaming tables that high-payout bets are subject to a maximum aggregate payout. A dice table might have a $50,000 maximum payout and also a $5 - $5000 bet limit. So if someone makes a $5000 hopping hard 6 and hits it, it can only pay at 10-to-1 ($50,000). That's a house edge of almost 70%. Given the regulations as to maximum house edges (Nevada <=25%), why is it legal to accept a $5000 hopping hard 6 wager and only pay at 10-to-1?

I am confused by the payout on that LIR Royal Flush hand. But that's irrelevant to your question.

In that LIR bet, there are multiple payouts for the one bet. Even with higher wagers, most are below the limit. What about that Royal Flush top prize? Does it come under the limit when the wager is the table minimum? It should. It better! I'd bet that the posted maximum payout is something between that top prize at the minimum wager, and that prize at double the minimum. Would that alone cause people to reconsider betting more than the minimum? No, because most of the time, they are unaffected by the maximum.

Would the craps rules allow a $5,000 prop bet? I've seen signs on Roulette tables with varying maximum bets all designed to achieve a common maximum payout. Perhaps there are similar rules for craps, just not posted where it can be easily seen.

Maybe the hard hops have a maximum bet of $1,666, so they pay $49,980 - and stays under the maximum.

Isn't there a difference between maximum payout and maximum aggregate payout? If two people bet the hop hard 6 for $1,000 each, then what?

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Isn't there a difference between maximum payout and maximum aggregate payout? If two people bet the hop hard 6 for $1,000 each, then what?

Well, the maximum aggregate would be per player, but there are still scenarios where two or more bets can combine to bust the limit. Hard 6 + hop 6 + line bet w/ odds could get you there.

Quote: MathExtremist

As a follow-on to Mosca's recent LIR Royal Flush story:

There is a provision at many gaming tables that high-payout bets are subject to a maximum aggregate payout. A dice table might have a $50,000 maximum payout and also a $5 - $5000 bet limit. So if someone makes a $5000 hopping hard 6 and hits it, it can only pay at 10-to-1 ($50,000). That's a house edge of almost 70%. Given the regulations as to maximum house edges (Nevada <=25%), why is it legal to accept a $5000 hopping hard 6 wager and only pay at 10-to-1?

I am not familar with a max pay on any craps table. Where have you seen that?

Quote: Ayecarumba

I am not familar with a max pay on any craps table. Where have you seen that?

In another thread, it was discussed as a "feature" of craps at Casino New Brunswick.

Quote: Doc

In another thread, it was discussed as a "feature" of craps at Casino New Brunswick.

Is that the same way that a lot of MicroSoft bugs are dismissed as a "feature" ?

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Is that the same way that a lot of MicroSoft bugs are dismissed as a "feature" ?

I know for a fact Linux cannot replicate the patented Microsoft Blue Screen of Death.

So there :P

Quote: Nareed

I know for a fact Linux cannot replicate the patented Microsoft Blue Screen of Death.

In fact, the Microsoft Blue Screen of Death has been included in many standard Linux distributions since at least 1998!

Search for "xscreensaver bsod" for more information.

Quote: fivespot

In fact, the Microsoft Blue Screen of Death has been included in many standard Linux distributions since at least 1998!

Search for "xscreensaver bsod" for more information.

I'm sure Linux, in its many flavors, can draw a blue screen. That's easy. But can it make the computer fail catastrophically and still display a BSD? That takes real genius :P