Under/Over and Field Idea
I want to create an under/over 7 felt with the following games on it and their specific rules. sure to use it later at some private parties. could you
tell me if that makes sense?
under/over 7 and under (2-3-4-5-6) and over (8-9-10-11-12) will pay 1:1 and if a seven is rolled it will be NO bet, so no bet on under or over will lose. but if there is a winner on under or over, the house will take 1% at payout. for example 100$ on under and the bet wins the player will get 198$.
any player can bet at any roll of the dice on 7 and house will pay 4:1
now additional I want to add to this felt the "Field" with the 2 and 12 paying triple so HE would be sero. but I want to take 1% from winning bets like 100$ bet wins and payout will be 198$.
I didnt think yet about the minimum and maximum bet, but I want it as low as possible. son now what is Your opinion? did I miss something here?
any opinion is very much appreciated
cheers
Just out of curiosity, why are you so keen on creating bets with a House Edge of 0%? (I also saw one of your previous threads)
Quote: Beethoven9thI've seen these bets before (Under-7 and Over-7), so they're not new. They aren't very common, but I've seen at least one table that had them.
Just out of curiosity, why are you so keen on creating bets with a House Edge of 0%? (I also saw one of your previous threads)
thanks for your question. I am looking to give better odds for the player to make it more attractive to play those games. I think that in the long run 1% commission/edge can and should be a lot and the player can longer play with his bank roll = has more fun to play those 1% games. or am I totally wrong with this kind of thinking?
Quote: sevenif this is the wrong place for this posting could the admin please move it to the right forum.
I want to create an under/over 7 felt with the following games on it and their specific rules. sure to use it later at some private parties. could you
tell me if that makes sense?
under/over 7 and under (2-3-4-5-6) and over (8-9-10-11-12) will pay 1:1 and if a seven is rolled it will be NO bet, so no bet on under or over will lose. but if there is a winner on under or over, the house will take 1% at payout. for example 100$ on under and the bet wins the player will get 198$.
any player can bet at any roll of the dice on 7 and house will pay 4:1
now additional I want to add to this felt the "Field" with the 2 and 12 paying triple so HE would be sero. but I want to take 1% from winning bets like 100$ bet wins and payout will be 198$.
I didnt think yet about the minimum and maximum bet, but I want it as low as possible. son now what is Your opinion? did I miss something here?
any opinion is very much appreciated
cheers
The problem with taking a commission is you're forced to use breakage on a lot of small bets, and you said you wanted a low minimum. You can't actually pay a 1% commission on a $5 field bet winner; you need a $100 bet if the commission is actually going to work out to the right percentage. But a 1% commission on a $5 bet is a nickel and you don't have those on your table; and a $1 commission is 20%, way too high.
If you want a true zero-edge bet, there are lots of options:
3x/3x field
no-vig buy bets at true odds
under/over 7 at even-money with 7 push
odd/even at even-money
But if you want a very small house edge, you have far fewer options. One of them would be my patented Odd and Even Craps bets:
Even pays 1-to-1 for 4, 6, 8, and 10, and Even craps (2 or 12) pays 4-to-5
Odd pays 1-to-1 for 5, 7, 9, and 11, and Odd craps (3) pays 4-to-5
Both have a house edge of just 1.11%. The minimum wager to avoid breakage is just $5 rather than something much higher, like $20 or $100. PM me if you want to use it. US Pat. No. 7,377,513.
You could also skim through some of the craps and other dice literature (Scarne, Wizard's site, etc.) for more ideas.
Quote: Beethoven9thI've seen these bets before (Under-7 and Over-7), so they're not new. They aren't very common, but I've seen at least one table that had them.
They're normally spread where betting on Under wins on 2-6 and loses on 7+, so it's a terrible bet. That's why they're not very common.
Quote: charliepatrickExcept for California, I've only ever come across one game with a 1% commission and that was Trente et Quarante in Monte Carlo (see http://www.montecarlocasinos.com/Trente-et-Quarante,1426.html ). My recommendation would be to have the player pre-pay and use a collection system, alternatively somehow use three dice and have 1/216 or 2/216 chances for the house edge.
trente et quarante is not a popular game. I want to go for popular games. under/over and field is kind of craps so more attractive IMHO. 3 dice game is not that attractive either IMO
Quote: MathExtremistThe problem with taking a commission is you're forced to use breakage on a lot of small bets, and you said you wanted a low minimum. You can't actually pay a 1% commission on a $5 field bet winner; you need a $100 bet if the commission is actually going to work out to the right percentage. But a 1% commission on a $5 bet is a nickel and you don't have those on your table; and a $1 commission is 20%, way too high.
If you want a true zero-edge bet, there are lots of options:
3x/3x field
no-vig buy bets at true odds
under/over 7 at even-money with 7 push
odd/even at even-money
But if you want a very small house edge, you have far fewer options. One of them would be my patented Odd and Even Craps bets:
Even pays 1-to-1 for 4, 6, 8, and 10, and Even craps (2 or 12) pays 4-to-5
Odd pays 1-to-1 for 5, 7, 9, and 11, and Odd craps (3) pays 4-to-5
Both have a house edge of just 1.11%. The minimum wager to avoid breakage is just $5 rather than something much higher, like $20 or $100. PM me if you want to use it. US Pat. No. 7,377,513.
You could also skim through some of the craps and other dice literature (Scarne, Wizard's site, etc.) for more ideas.
thank you very much for the answer and interesting offer. I dont want to offer a true zero edge game without taking the 1%. the 3x/3x field and under/over 7 at even money with 7 push is exactly what I planned to offer. just wasnt that sure how to handle the 1% and if it is not to risky.
the odd/even sounds good to me, the only headache I have if I should add it to the field and under/over or take out under/over and replace it with Odd/Even?
I will definitely PM You.
Quote: sevenI dont want to offer a true zero edge game without taking the 1%.
Now I'm confused. In another post, you said that you wanted to create a bet with a 0% House Edge. Now you're saying that you don't want to do that.
Quote: Beethoven9thNow I'm confused. In another post, you said that you wanted to create a bet with a 0% House Edge. Now you're saying that you don't want to do that.
yes all the games I have to find and start with are zero HE. next step would be to add a 1% commission. why should any one offer zero HE and not taking commission?
You're the one who keeps inquiring about a bet with a 0% HE, so that's why I'm asking.Quote: sevenyes all the games I have to find and start with are zero HE. next step would be to add a 1% commission. why should any one offer zero HE and not taking commission?
Anyway, if you're only paying out 99% instead of even money on a 50/50 bet, then you are effectively giving the house an advantage.
Quote: seven...the house will take 1% at payout. for example 100$ on under and the bet wins the player will get 198$.
That's 2%. And it assumes the $198 is the total returned to the player (i.e. It includes the original $100.)
But even if you correct it to be a payout of $99 + $100, who is going to be $100 on this? Anything less and the edge/commission goes up.
The only chance of this working is with craps machines, and internet casinos. There, you CAN pay 99¢ for a $1 wager.
And by the way, this isn't a zero edge game. It's a zero odds game. The 1% commission IS the edge.
Quote: Beethoven9thYou're the one who keeps inquiring about a bet with a 0% HE, so that's why I'm asking.
Anyway, if you're only paying out 99% instead of even money on a 50/50 bet, then you are effectively giving the house an advantage.
maybe there is a misunderstanding, because the aim is to be the house. and if I didnt explained myself clear enough, sorry for that.
Quote: DJTeddyBearThat's 2%. And it assumes the $198 is the total returned to the player (i.e. It includes the original $100.)
But even if you correct it to be a payout of $99 + $100, who is going to be $100 on this? Anything less and the edge/commission goes up.
The only chance of this working is with craps machines, and internet casinos. There, you CAN pay 99¢ for a $1 wager.
And by the way, this isn't a zero edge game. It's a zero odds game. The 1% commission IS the edge.
thanks for taking the time to correct my mistakes. appreciate it very much. it looks like that I have problem explaining myself, and sometimes the math is not 100 clear to me. but at the end all mistakes will be corrected with the help of all the kind users here.
199$ sounds even better than 198$ :)
If you had a game which was on its own a fair game (HE=0) but charged 1% to play it (California used to have this rule but only against a player banker), but what if casinos (yourself or charity evenings) actually offered games like this against the house.
(a) Baccarat - each player gets their own cards and can play how they like even if the dealer has a natural, the dealer will always draw to 5 even if the player has a natural (we tried this at a charity evening and it worked very well).
(b) Poker based games - dealer always qualifies (and/or dealer uses perfect strategy e.g. Pai Gow), highest hand pays evens (obviously no skill required!).
(c) Dice, Roulette or similar based games where fair odds are paid for predicting outcomes (which is the basis of your original post).
Personally, from a mechanical point of view, I guess it's easier to have a game which was even money but there's about 1% chance, ie you win under specific conditions, where you don't get paid [so much] - this is where the Pai Gow and Punto 2000 variants come from. Sadly with one roll of two-dice there's only 36 possible outcomes, so unless you're paying 1/2 or 4/5 (e.g. low 1-1 pays 1/2), it's difficult!
Quote: charliepatrickAfter a bit of thought I think there's some very interesting concepts here.
If you had a game which was on its own a fair game (HE=0) but charged 1% to play it (California used to have this rule but only against a player banker), but what if casinos (yourself or charity evenings) actually offered games like this against the house.
(a) Baccarat - each player gets their own cards and can play how they like even if the dealer has a natural, the dealer will always draw to 5 even if the player has a natural (we tried this at a charity evening and it worked very well).
(b) Poker based games - dealer always qualifies (and/or dealer uses perfect strategy e.g. Pai Gow), highest hand pays evens (obviously no skill required!).
(c) Dice, Roulette or similar based games where fair odds are paid for predicting outcomes (which is the basis of your original post).
Personally, from a mechanical point of view, I guess it's easier to have a game which was even money but there's about 1% chance, ie you win under specific conditions, where you don't get paid [so much] - this is where the Pai Gow and Punto 2000 variants come from. Sadly with one roll of two-dice there's only 36 possible outcomes, so unless you're paying 1/2 or 4/5 (e.g. low 1-1 pays 1/2), it's difficult!
thank You for the interesting posting/opinion. I fully agree with You in all points. I chose Under/Over because of the 1:1 bet if 7 is a push and it is a one roll bet. also I added the 3x/3x Field bet with same reasoning. I believe in one roll bets and quick outcome games.
MathExtremist made a very good point regarding the minimum wager and taking 1% commission. and this actually convinced me that comparing Under/Over and Odd/Even the Odd/Even payout is much better as my idea of 1% commission deduction after each bet.
Quote: ParadroidHow about paying 4:3 for a over/under 7 wager? That would be a bet with a 2.78% edge, like the field where 12 pays 3x.
where would You prefer to bet? under/over 7 at even-money with 7 push and 1% commission taken from winner or under/over paying 4:3 with HE of 2.78%?
Quote: sevenwhere would You prefer to bet? under/over 7 at even-money with 7 push and 1% commission taken from winner or under/over paying 4:3 with HE of 2.78%?
You keep saying "even money". If someone is betting $100 and only winning $99 (on a 50/50 bet), then that is not even money.
Quote: Beethoven9thQuote: sevenwhere would You prefer to bet? under/over 7 at even-money with 7 push and 1% commission taken from winner or under/over paying 4:3 with HE of 2.78%?
You keep saying "even money". If someone is betting $100 and only winning $99 (on a 50/50 bet), then that is not even money.
ok now that we know that it is not an even money bet, where would You put Your money? on the HE 2.78 or not the even money bet with 1% commission.
I am sure You understood my question very well even it was not correct worded. the chance is 50/50 and for this 50/50 chance I have to pay 1% commission. I would prefer this bet and not the 2.78% bet
Anyway, the 2.78% bet is better for the house.
Quote: ParadroidI would bet the 2.78% because I could get the correct payout with a $6 bet rather than needing to bet $100.
You're right, the 2.78% bet is better all around. lol!
I don't know why the OP is fixated on this 1% commission thing. With the exception of an online casino, it's more trouble than it's worth.
Quote: sevenif this is the wrong place for this posting could the admin please move it to the right forum.
I want to create an under/over 7 felt with the following games on it and their specific rules. sure to use it later at some private parties. could you
tell me if that makes sense?
under/over 7 and under (2-3-4-5-6) and over (8-9-10-11-12) will pay 1:1 and if a seven is rolled it will be NO bet, so no bet on under or over will lose. but if there is a winner on under or over, the house will take 1% at payout. for example 100$ on under and the bet wins the player will get 198$.
any player can bet at any roll of the dice on 7 and house will pay 4:1
now additional I want to add to this felt the "Field" with the 2 and 12 paying triple so HE would be sero. but I want to take 1% from winning bets like 100$ bet wins and payout will be 198$.
I didnt think yet about the minimum and maximum bet, but I want it as low as possible. son now what is Your opinion? did I miss something here?
any opinion is very much appreciated
cheers
Over / Under / 7
under will pay 1:1
over will pay 1:1
7 pays 4 to 1
the wheel layout looks like:
OUOU7OUOU7OUOU7OUOU7
Lose the 1% as it's not needed.
if 7 come out then Over & Under Both Lose. That is enough.
Those betting the 7 have a chance of 1 in 4 to win 4 to 1
That's it That's all, Make sure you have tons of 5.00 bills and 1.00 Coins to make change and have a minimum or $1.00 and max of $5.00
If you play with Dice, they have it already called "Sic Bo"
Good luck with your endeavors.
Quote: Beethoven9thYes, but this thread has been confusing. First you said you wanted a game with a 0% house edge, and later you said you weren't looking for 0% after all.
Anyway, the 2.78% bet is better for the house.
thanks for the answer
I will repeat what I already said. for me the starter is to find an acceptable game for both sides with zero HE like under/over 7 with 7 push and add a small commission for the house. I (as the house) would prefer to add 1% commission but also could go for 0.5%. a better game would be the Odd/Even with 1.11% HE that MathExtremist owns because the payout would be build in the HE by paying at shorter than the true odds.
Quote: varmentiOver / Under / 7
under will pay 1:1
over will pay 1:1
7 pays 4 to 1
the wheel layout looks like:
OUOU7OUOU7OUOU7OUOU7
Lose the 1% as it's not needed.
if 7 come out then Over & Under Both Lose. That is enough.
Those betting the 7 have a chance of 1 in 4 to win 4 to 1
That's it That's all, Make sure you have tons of 5.00 bills and 1.00 Coins to make change and have a minimum or $1.00 and max of $5.00
If you play with Dice, they have it already called "Sic Bo"
Good luck with your endeavors.
thanks for the answer but it looks like that You missed one important point.
"under/over 7 and under (2-3-4-5-6) and over (8-9-10-11-12) will pay 1:1 and if a seven is rolled it will be NO bet"
MathExtremist called it under/over 7 with 7 push as a zero HE game
Quote: Beethoven9thYou're right, the 2.78% bet is better all around. lol!
I don't know why the OP is fixated on this 1% commission thing. With the exception of an online casino, it's more trouble than it's worth.
thanks for mentioning this. I fully have to agree with You. so lets go online :)
