…a quick word on: THE HOUSE EDGE

[Number Six]

...a quick word on: THE HOUSE EDGE

Playing the small wheel is a war, and one the method has to fight in hostile territory.  In battle the player's army is comparable to Caesar's legions of Rome and roulette's to the Gaulish hordes of Vercingetorix.  Both have their pros and cons and it makes for an interesting clash.

The player's army is very small and highly manoeuvrable, sophisticated, intelligent and well-equipped.  Roulette's army is huge, formidable and unpredictable, but poorly organised and primitive; its main, and obvious qualities, are randomness and numerical supremacy (never fear!)

At the town of Alesia in 52 BC, Caesar's Roman legions of 60,000 ended up being hemmed in by 350,000 Gauls commanded by Vercingetorix.  The Romans were attempting to conquer Gaul, which would condemn much of the Gaulish population to slavery.  The battle in 52 BC revolved around the Roman siege of Alesia, the last Gaulish stronghold, and Caesar, prone to odd bouts of clemency and cruelty, was particularly merciless on this occasion towards the civilians he had encircled. 

What happened and why?  Vercingetorix had led a revolt against the Roman subjugation of Gaul, and when his initial army of 80,000 was confronted by Caesar in the field, he decided to hotfoot it and took refuge in the impregnable Alesia, with Caesar in pursuit.  An assault on the walls by the Romans would have been irrational, so Caesar's legions besieged the Gauls and constructed a ring of fortifications all round the town, hoping to starve Vercingetorix into a quick surrender.  Vercingetorix, however, intended to hold out for a relief force.  It arrived.  And it was enormous; some historians believe it could have numbered 1 million men, but most agree that it was probably 250,000-280,000.  Caesar, though, had anticipated this event early in the siege and had ordered his legions to build double-sided fortifications.  Alesia was surrounded by the Romans, and the Romans were surrounded by the Gaulish relief force.  Things were growing tense, the Gauls furious that Caesar had refused to spare the women and children of Alesia by snubbing their pleas to be allowed through the Roman barricade.  The town was now out of supplies and the final engagement was inevitable.  Caesar and his men would not be fighting for victory, but for their very lives.

So, who won?  Of course, it was Caesar.  Why...because he was a brilliant tactician adept at using the resources available to him and manipulating situations to suit his own needs.  And he was helped by the fact that the Gauls were passionately incensed at the deaths of the women and children (they starved) and also derived false confidence from their superabundant numerical power.  The Gauls got emotional and lost control.  250,000 of them were slaughtered to the Romans' 12,800.  Moral of the story: numerical disadvantages are an illusion and can be cancelled out, and always remain disciplined.   

In roulette the house edge is represented by the odds-payout discrepancy.  Technically this is caused by the zero, as an extra number, but the zero should never be thought of as taboo.

Back to the war zone...

Roulette's army is tough and impervious to a sustained assault.  The longer it is attacked in one sitting, the greater the chance the house edge has of devastating a conventional system.  To offset this, the player should arrange the bulk of his army (the logic) at the rear and squadrons of skirmishers (the formulas) at the front.  This disposition constitutes a method.  The formulas will scout for weaknesses in the enemy's line (exploitable patterns in sequences, runs, changes and movements) and then shift to the flanks so the logic can charge in for the kill.  When enough damage has been inflicted, the logic withdraws to reoccupy its previous position and the formulas close up the front.  The process repeats (in intervals) until the enemy is either routed or counterattacks, at which point the conditions can be considered unfavourable and the player should retreat or take a different approach.  Only attack when it's advantageous, not because a rule says so.  And by attacking in systematic short bursts, the player minimises the method's level of exposure to the house edge.  With the right blend of short-term tactics and long-term strategy, the player should never have to worry about negative expectancy. 

Sun Tzu said: Thus it is that in war the victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory.

Feel free to discuss the house edge in this thread.

[Spike]

In roulette, the house edge is represented by the odds-payout discrepancy.  Technically this is caused by the zero>>>

The house edge comes from all the bets having unfair payout's. The zero is just an extra pocket. The dozens should be 3/1, the columns 3/1, a street should be 12/1, double street 6/1, the inside 37/1, etc. Its impossible to beat a game using a mechanical system where all the payouts are so skewed in favor of the house.

[Number Six]

Oh, God, here we go again 

The devil's advocate has reared his head.

In roulette, the house edge is represented by the odds-payout discrepancy.  Technically this is caused by the zero>>>

You replied:

The house edge comes from all the bets having unfair payout's.

Yes we know, what you've said is only a reworded version of what I said in the original post. You also said that zero was an extra pocket...so, then, that extra pocket is where the discrepancy comes from and makes the payouts unfair.
Examples of the discrepancy:

Straight Up Odds: 36/1     
Payout: 35/1

Split Odds: 17.5/1
Payout: 17/1

Street Odds: 11.33/1
Payout: 11/1

But thanks for reiterating what I already told you.

Its impossible to beat a game using a mechanical system where all the payouts are so skewed in favor of the house.

Spike, I don't mean to offend you but this is just more of that bigotry you are famous for. It really is about time you got over this phase and tried to look at the game differently, instead of just seeing the obstacles. If everyone thought like you humanity literally would have got nowhere.

[Lanky]

Back to the war zone...

Roulette's army is tough and impervious to a sustained assault.  The longer it is attacked in one sitting, the greater the chance the house edge has of devastating the player's system.  To offset this, the player should arrange the bulk of his army (the system) at the rear and squadrons of skirmishers (the formulas) at the front.  The formulas will scout for weaknesses in the enemy's line, and then move to the flanks so the system can charge in for the kill.  When enough damage has been inflicted, the system withdraws to reoccupy its previous position and the formulas close up the front.  The process repeats (in intervals) until the enemy is either routed or counterattacks, at which point the conditions can be considered unfavourable and the player should go virtual until they improve.  By attacking in systematic short bursts, the player minimises the system's level of exposure to the house edge.  With the right strategy, the player should never have to worry about negative expectancy. 

Hi Number Six.

I really enjoyed Your use of that Metaphor Mate.

There is a heck of a lot of wisdom in there Cobber.

Therein lies the Core of any success that Other Grinders like Victor, Natural9 and Myself are likely to have while playing sessions with the Time-Line Strategy Methods with the use of the Lw's.

Play the Good Trams (Times/Runs) as much as Possible.
And.
Avoid the Bad Trams as Quick as You can by Going Virtual....and in some Cases calling it a Day & walking away with being Even or Loseing the least as Possible.

Good Post 6 thanks for doing it Mate.

Your Friend.

Lanky.

[Number Six]

Lanky,

Thanks for the compliment, mate.

You are right, of course, it's all about effective tactics in-game regarding the good runs and the bad ones. Astute tactics and unbeatable strategy behind the scenes is a winning combination. Naturally there will be losses...but casualties should be expected!

Strategy, such as long-term plans and goals etc, is simply essential. A well-modelled strategy will save you when the storm clouds gather overhead.

6

[Spike]

If everyone thought like you humanity literally would have got nowhere.>>

I've beaten roulette with a non-mechanical method. Perhaps I don't belong here, where the seekers gather.. Everyone need to discover the truth for himself.

[sniper]

Hello Number Six,

You are truly a man of wisdom. I fully agree with what you have posted above. As I said earlier, all we need to do is use Victor's LW + Lanky's Divisor + a bit of creativity = Profitable system. I strongly believe we can build not one but many winning systems by following this superb formula. We will not find the universal holy grail. We will definitely find our personal grail. All we want is to be profitable in the long term and Lanky has proven that without doubt. What more can we ask for? We should start working out our grail, all the tools needed is here and already laid out in this forum. Why are we still arguing every now and then? We should either work together in small group as a team to build our common grail. Otherwise we can choose to build our personal grail. I believe Victor and Lanky will be happy to help those who sincerely work hard to find their grail.

Regards

sniper

[Stepydan]

Hello all   

First off, thanks to N° 6 for this group. You have brought new and interesting ways to how I consider the challenge of roulette. What I particularly appreciate is the idea of finding out and trying to exploit simple but very true facts.
"The Law" is one that means solid ground to me. Although the qualification of "Law" might be discussed, the phenomenon that it describes can be verified by experiment, over and over.

Now, regarding the house edge I have a question. To my knowledge, there are two online casinos that pretend to have games without house edge : Bet Voyager, and Bet Fair.
At Bet Voyager I can confirm their no house edge claim to be correct when it comes to  single bets at the single 0 roulette : Straight Up Odds: 37/1, Payout: 37/1.

At Bet Fair they pretend to have removed the house edge by removing the 0 from the wheel and from the table layout. If I am not mistaken, that gives : straight up odds : 36/1, so I should expect : payout : 36/1. This is not the case when you look at the payout table : 35/1.

So either I don't get something, in which case I would gladly appreciate to be better informed, or else, the house edge is still there, though reduced (discrepancy of 1 = 36 - 35, instead of 2 = 37 - 35).

Cheers   

Stepydan.

[Stepydan]

I have found this at gamblingchitchat.com :

You can calculate the roulette house edge to play the game online by subtracting the theoretical payment without the house edge from the actual payoff that is publicized in the casino. Multiply this figure with the mathematical probability of gaining your bet. Multiply the sum further by 100 to arrive at the percentage house edge.

For instance, in American Roulette there are 38 pockets on the wheel (36 numbers and 2 zero pockets). If the casino payoff is 1:35, the probability of your winning is 1:37. Thus, we calculate the house edge as: [37/1 - 35/1] x 1/38 x 100 = 5.263%.

If this is the case with European Roulette, there are 37 pockets on the wheel (36 numbers and a zero pocket). If the casino payoff is 1:35, the probability of you winning is 1:36. The house edge is calculated as: [36/1 - 35/1] x 1/37 x 100 = 2.703%.

The above analysis is a pointer to always go for European Roulette unless you especially like wagering on the 00 pocket.

The house in roulette has the same edge on all other kinds of bets, because the payouts are set as if the zero square(s) did not exist. The only exclusion are the 5 numbers bet where the house edge is substantially greater (7.89% on the American wheel) and the 'even money' bets in some of the European roulette games, where it is halved because half the stake is lost when a zero comes up.

Ok, I am better informed now 

Cheers 

Stepy.

[Shorty]

The payout at Betfair remains at 35-1. Which means there is zero house edge.

[Number Six]

Stepydan, hi. I think you managed to answer yourself 

But:
Yep, the Bet Fair table is the European version, which pays 35-1 straight up.

If you bet all 37 numbers on a Euro single 0 table, you would receive only 36 units back. That is the discrepancy and it's caused by an extra number, the zero. When you remove the zero you get fair payouts (36 back when you cover all 36 numbers).

At Betvoyager it's confusing. For starters their conventional American game pays 36-1 (compared to real casino odds of 35-1). But on other games they have increased the payouts and left the zeros in. This also removes the vig as the payouts are fair (it's actually 36-1 for European and 37-1 for American).

I hope your confusion has cleared 

[spiderheinz]

Sure, this game was invented to fill the pockets of the inventor(now the casinos) more than 200 years ago.  In my opinion the house edge can be be beaten ,when you play your own rules- find a situation and use it with a short attack - or a longer attack,when using a progression.  Like in trading, accept  losses but win much more attacks.   
Many of systems i have seen are to complicated-so I use my own approaches. 
best ,spiderheinz

[gavind]

Like in trading, accept  losses but win much more attacks.   

No change yet. I still see this trend even for this year.

[gavind]

-