Assuming the player bets only on the Banker hand, with a rolling chip commission rate of 2.4%, what edge does the house still retain?

Thank you for any experts sharing their feedback!

Banker bet: 1.2852% advantage

Player bet: 1.1003% advantage

I wish I could get these rebates.

Note that I was wrong in this post. I forgot how the rebate programs work. See correction below.

The rolling rebate is only given out in the event of a loss.

If you win the hand, you don’t enjoy the rebate, or if you tie the hand.

Since the banker house edge is calculated per bet, at minimum the rolling rebate is only half (since it’s only rebated on a losing hand)

But in fact should be even less than half, since ties don’t count either?

Quote:Ace2Assuming a 0.446 chance of losing a banker bet and a house edge of 1.06%, the edge with a 2.4% rebate should be 1.06% / 0.446 - 2.4% = 0.02% player advantage. Basically break even

link to original post

You're right. After redoing this, I get a house edge of 0.012% on the Banker bet and 0.164% on the Player bet.

Quote:MDawgI have always assumed that if the bank commission is reduced to about 2.3% it's an even 50-50 game on Bank. But I guarantee even if they did that you'd still have many high rollers betting both sides and still betting until they lost every nickel in front of them most every trip.

link to original post

I show that the way they do it in Macau, which is to base the rebate on the buy-in, exchange the the buy-in to non-negotiable chips and pay the rebate in non-negotiable chips, then at a rebate of 2.4282409% the house edge on the Banker bet is zero.

PLAYER prob : 0.4462

BANKER prob : 0.4586

TIE prob : 0.0952

Since you only bet on PLAYER, rolling chips is only given out in the event of a loss(outcome is BANKER), in order to convert all your rolling chips( $10240) to cash chips, total bet (on PLAYER) = 10240/0.4586 = $22328.83, so your expected loss = $22328.83 * 1.23508% = $275.78.

So your final cash chips = 10240 - 275.7807 = $9964.2193,

Net loss = $35.7807,

Your ev = -$35.7807/$22328.83 = -0.16024%

You can repeat above for BANKER bet.

Quote:WizardQuote:MDawgI have always assumed that if the bank commission is reduced to about 2.3% it's an even 50-50 game on Bank. But I guarantee even if they did that you'd still have many high rollers betting both sides and still betting until they lost every nickel in front of them most every trip.

link to original post

I show that the way they do it in Macau, which is to base the rebate on the buy-in, exchange the the buy-in to non-negotiable chips and pay the rebate in non-negotiable chips, then at a rebate of 2.4282409% the house edge on the Banker bet is zero.

link to original post

I don't get any rebate based on buy in because I am a credit line player. So I don't bother to look into that sort of thing. I have been on monster runs where I keep winning and winning and deposit all the chips, but other times I am just as likely to stockpile the winning chips in the hotel safe deposit box and cash them at the end.

Some of the southern California casinos have that sort of thing, rebate based on cash deposit, but I almost never play in California.

The chip commission is 2.4%, which means that the player needs to pay 2.4% of his bet as a commission. This happens when betting on the banker's hand in a baccarat game.

If a player bets 100 units, the commission fee will be 2.4% * 100 = 2.4 units.

Now, to determine the advantage of the casino, you need to take into account that if the player wins, he will get less money back due to the commission fee.

Let's assume that the banker's hand is 1:1 (the player gets his bet back along with the winnings). If the player bets 100 units and wins, he will get 100 units of the winnings plus his own bet.

But because of the commission, he has to give back 2.4 units. Thus, his actual winnings will be 100 - 2.4 = 97.6 units.

By placing a bet of 100 units, the player wins 97.6 units.

The casino's advantage can be calculated as the difference between the player's actual winnings and his initial bet:

RTP = Actual win - Initial bet

RTP = 97.6 - 100 = -2.4 units.

This means that from the player's point of view, the casino has an advantage on the banker's hand in baccarat, and this advantage is 2.4%.

Quote:MarlenSneijderTo determine the advantage that the company (casino) retains, let's look at the math under the conditions you provided.

The chip commission is 2.4%, which means that the player needs to pay 2.4% of his bet as a commission. This happens when betting on the banker's hand in a baccarat game.

If a player bets 100 units, the commission fee will be 2.4% * 100 = 2.4 units.

Now, to determine the advantage of the casino, you need to take into account that if the player wins, he will get less money back due to the commission fee.

Let's assume that the banker's hand is 1:1 (the player gets his bet back along with the winnings). If the player bets 100 units and wins, he will get 100 units of the winnings plus his own bet.

But because of the commission, he has to give back 2.4 units. Thus, his actual winnings will be 100 - 2.4 = 97.6 units.

By placing a bet of 100 units, the player wins 97.6 units.

The casino's advantage can be calculated as the difference between the player's actual winnings and his initial bet:

RTP = Actual win - Initial bet

RTP = 97.6 - 100 = -2.4 units.

This means that from the player's point of view, the casino has an advantage on the banker's hand in baccarat, and this advantage is 2.4%.

link to original post

This analysis neglects the fact that banker is more likely to occur than player.

Edit: ugh I’m pretty sure I responded to a bot.

For example, LVS predicts a 3.15% to 3.4% win rate on their rolling chip volume (most casinos have an expected win rate of over 3% on rolling chip volume).

Given that the theoretical house edge lies between 2.4% to 2.6% depending on the mix of player/banker hands that the vip Player plays, it seems as if the actual win rate for the casino is significantly higher than the actual house edge and it is statistically significant.

Is there a reason behind this? Mathematically speaking, shouldn’t the winning rate on the rolling chip volume always tend to or eventually end up being the actual house edge?