Is player banking in Pai Gow Poker dying?

I went to a nearby casino to play Pai Gow poker for the first time a few days ago, and was surprised to find that they do not allow player banking. I've also heard that a lot of players do not like it even when it is allowed because they don't want to lose money to another player (ridiculous, I know).

For those of you in other areas of the country, is this also the case? Or is my experience an anomaly (the state lottery commission, which regulates the casinos, is notorious for silly and overzealous regulations like this.)

Here in Vegas you rarely see players invoking their right to bank in pai gow poker, even playing one on one against the dealer. You see it more often in pai gow tiles. It is true that many players, especially Asians, don't like to play against other players. Some of them will deliberately bet a lot more than they usually do against you, just to make you back down.

To dilute the effect of player banking, some casinos only allow it on a rotational basis, and sometimes the turn will zig-zag between the players and dealer, with the dealer banking every other hand. If a player chooses not to bank, the turn reverts to the dealer. I've even seen it where if a seat is empty, the turn reverts to the dealer, so a player could only bank once every 14 hands.

I predict that player banking will fade away, either with rule changes like the one you mentioned, or with variants like EZ Pai Gow Poker that don't allow it to begin with.

I don't bank, but will play when someone else banks.

I DO notice that most other players will sit out the hand when a player is banking.

Me? I tend to win more when a player is banking! Don't know why, but I'll keep playing!

Quote: Wizard

It is true that many players, especially Asians, don't like to play against other players. Some of them will deliberately bet a lot more than they usually do against you, just to make you back down.

Seems like that's exactly what you'd want as a banker assuming you were sufficiently bankrolled to handle the swings--get more money in when the odds are with you. I'll have to give it a shot.

Quote: Wizard

To dilute the effect of player banking, some casinos only allow it on a rotational basis, and sometimes the turn will zig-zag between the players and dealer, with the dealer banking every other hand. If a player chooses not to bank, the turn reverts to the dealer. I've even seen it where if a seat is empty, the turn reverts to the dealer, so a player could only bank once every 14 hands.

This happened to me at Boulder Station when I was playing $5 pai gow (the every 14 hands rule). The pit boss yelled at the poor dealer for letting me bank every other hand. We bought agreed he was an a**hole. What a bush league rule!

Quote: dk

Quote: Wizard

It is true that many players, especially Asians, don't like to play against other players. Some of them will deliberately bet a lot more than they usually do against you, just to make you back down.

Seems like that's exactly what you'd want as a banker assuming you were sufficiently bankrolled to handle the swings--get more money in when the odds are with you. I'll have to give it a shot.

When I was playing tiles one time with one other Asian guy, I tried to bank and he pushed all in to try and get me to back down. I pulled out my bankroll from my pocket and laid it on the table to cover him. He re-backed down pretty quickly!

Quote: teddys

When I was playing tiles one time with one other Asian guy, I tried to bank and he pushed all in to try and get me to back down. I pulled out my bankroll from my pocket and laid it on the table to cover him. He re-backed down pretty quickly!

Is it true that there is no table limit on bets between players when a player is banking? What happens if a player (or group of players) bets more than the banker can cover?

Quote: dk

Is it true that there is no table limit on bets between players when a player is banking? What happens if a player (or group of players) bets more than the banker can cover?

I'm not sure about your first question since I have never seen anyone try to bet more than the table max against a player banker. But for your other question, the casino will not let you bank unless you have enough chips/cash on the table to cover everyone else's bet (including the dealer's). If you don't have enough, they won't let you bank.

I don't know about the unlimited bet rule when a player is banking. It would make sense, but in Vegas I doubt that is the policy. In Macau, in baccarat, they have a maximum "differential" rule, meaning that the most they can lose in one round on either side is about one million Hong Dollars. So, if one player wants to bet 10 million on Player, and another 10 million on Banker, then the casino would be happy to accept both wagers. However, in Vegas they don't have that policy. I think they should.

I just asked about this at the Red Rock. Two dealers and a supervisor all said they would not allow going over the maximum in a player banking situation. When I pressed the supervisor about why ,she said that they have to get their maximums approved by the Gaming Control Board, and it would violate Gaming regulations to exceed them.

Gaming Control Board.

Yeah, that actually makes a LOT of sense.

Plus it guarantees that the posted limit is the maximum that a player can risk in a single hand.

Of course, that begs the question: What if you're playing BJ and betting the maximum? Does this limit your ability to split and double down?

Quote: DJTeddyBear

What if you're playing BJ and betting the maximum? Does this limit your ability to split and double down?

No. The limit applies to each initial wager. You can still double, split, and bet more than one spot. I've seen it happen where a player wanted to bet more than the maximum, and the dealer suggested betting the max on two hands.

Quote: Wizard

I just asked about this at the Red Rock. Two dealers and a supervisor all said they would not allow going over the maximum in a player banking situation. When I pressed the supervisor about why ,she said that they have to get their maximums approved by the Gaming Control Board, and it would violate Gaming regulations to exceed them.

I just asked the same question at the Mandalay Bay, and they said that increasing a maximum bet has to get approved pretty high up, I think a casino vice president. They added it is usually only done to known good customers. When I asked if Gaming needs to approve, they said 'no.' Then I asked about the pai gow poker situation, and they said it would be unlikely to be approved, just on the principle that they don't like to raise their maximum bets to unknown customers.

Quote: Wizard

I predict that player banking will fade away, either with rule changes like the one you mentioned, or with variants like EZ Pai Gow Poker that don't allow it to begin with.

I've always felt that Banking was as helpful or as useful to Pai Gow poker as it was to Blackjack and roulette - which never had it or never needed it! It is a vestage of its card room beginings, and is as unnecessary as boobs on a bull. I mean, if you wish to bank, you can play Pai Gow Poker in player-banked card rooms without disrupting a house-banked pit game.

I designed my EZ Pai Gow poker to "very strongly discourage" player banking, but to allow it if the house insists that it somehow helps. The Ameristar group eliminated it for EZ Pai Gow, while at the Fiesta, we force only the Banker to pay commissions, - letting the players go commission-free against the banker.