Sands Roulette
Poll
 | 1 vote (2.5%) | ||
| | 3 votes (7.5%) | ||
| | 2 votes (5%) | ||
| | 28 votes (70%) | ||
| | 1 vote (2.5%) | ||
| | 1 vote (2.5%) | ||
| | 1 vote (2.5%) | ||
| | 8 votes (20%) | ||
| | 1 vote (2.5%) | ||
| | 10 votes (25%) |
40 members have voted
Quote: darkozQuote: JoemanI think Babs was referencing Pokeradict's post:
I read this as 0 and 00 being included in the dozens. I was hoping he would stop back here and verify/clarify this.Quote: PokeraddictI visited the game. It pays just as double zero roulette does with two exceptions. The 0 is in the 2nd 12 and 00 is in the 3rd 12. The "Sands" (000) is not on the first 12. I asked the dealer and he confirmed. There is also a green bet that pays 11-1, which would be the same as betting all zeros on the felt. I guess it is just in an easier spot to reach.
Two people were playing it when there were ample open seats at double zero games.
If that is actually the case, there would be no edge on those dozens bets. But I agree with you, DJTB, it doesn't make much sense to have 2 zero edge bets when all of the other bets on the layout carry an 8% edge.
Unless that is their selling point of offering a pair of zero edge bets in return for a high edge elsewhere. I was curious wat the outside even money bets offer in relation to zeros. It seems strange to make the dozens the differing bets
Also how r the columns bets affected
All the payouts remain the same...any column gets 2 to 1 with the zeros not included (because including zeros wouldn't make Sheldon money and obviously Sheldon loves money.), so now with three zeros...the house edge is 3/39 = 7.69% for all common roulette bets including columns. Unless I'm terribly missing something about this.
Quote: tringlomaneQuote: darkozQuote: JoemanI think Babs was referencing Pokeradict's post:
I read this as 0 and 00 being included in the dozens. I was hoping he would stop back here and verify/clarify this.Quote: PokeraddictI visited the game. It pays just as double zero roulette does with two exceptions. The 0 is in the 2nd 12 and 00 is in the 3rd 12. The "Sands" (000) is not on the first 12. I asked the dealer and he confirmed. There is also a green bet that pays 11-1, which would be the same as betting all zeros on the felt. I guess it is just in an easier spot to reach.
Two people were playing it when there were ample open seats at double zero games.
If that is actually the case, there would be no edge on those dozens bets. But I agree with you, DJTB, it doesn't make much sense to have 2 zero edge bets when all of the other bets on the layout carry an 8% edge.
Unless that is their selling point of offering a pair of zero edge bets in return for a high edge elsewhere. I was curious wat the outside even money bets offer in relation to zeros. It seems strange to make the dozens the differing bets
Also how r the columns bets affected
All the payouts remain the same...any column gets 2 to 1 with the zeros not included (because including zeros wouldn't make Sheldon money and obviously Sheldon loves money.), so now with three zeros...the house edge is 3/39 = 7.69% for all common roulette bets including columns. Unless I'm terribly missing something about this.
Well, I would be betting the dozens if what poker addict said was correct. 13 numbers paying 2:1 for each of the higher 2 dozens, rather than 12 numbers, has to be the best bet on the table.
Quote: beachbumbabsQuote: tringlomaneQuote: darkozQuote: JoemanI think Babs was referencing Pokeradict's post:
I read this as 0 and 00 being included in the dozens. I was hoping he would stop back here and verify/clarify this.Quote: PokeraddictI visited the game. It pays just as double zero roulette does with two exceptions. The 0 is in the 2nd 12 and 00 is in the 3rd 12. The "Sands" (000) is not on the first 12. I asked the dealer and he confirmed. There is also a green bet that pays 11-1, which would be the same as betting all zeros on the felt. I guess it is just in an easier spot to reach.
Two people were playing it when there were ample open seats at double zero games.
If that is actually the case, there would be no edge on those dozens bets. But I agree with you, DJTB, it doesn't make much sense to have 2 zero edge bets when all of the other bets on the layout carry an 8% edge.
Unless that is their selling point of offering a pair of zero edge bets in return for a high edge elsewhere. I was curious wat the outside even money bets offer in relation to zeros. It seems strange to make the dozens the differing bets
Also how r the columns bets affected
All the payouts remain the same...any column gets 2 to 1 with the zeros not included (because including zeros wouldn't make Sheldon money and obviously Sheldon loves money.), so now with three zeros...the house edge is 3/39 = 7.69% for all common roulette bets including columns. Unless I'm terribly missing something about this.
Well, I would be betting the dozens if what poker addict said was correct. 13 numbers paying 2:1 for each of the higher 2 dozens, rather than 12 numbers, has to be the best bet on the table.
I went by what the dealer told me. On 2nd 12 and 3rd 12 there is a 0 and 00 respectively on the felt. I asked the dealer if those spins were included in those bets and he said yes. I wasn't about to play 000 roulette to test it out.
Quote: Pokeraddict
I went by what the dealer told me. On 2nd 12 and 3rd 12 there is a 0 and 00 respectively on the felt. I asked the dealer if those spins were included in those bets and he said yes. I wasn't about to play 000 roulette to test it out.
I would also believe that dealer was incorrect in his interpretation of those column bets.
Quote: tringlomaneI would also believe that dealer was incorrect in his interpretation of those column bets.
If so, I'm sure the Venitian folks are very happy to read this.........
Quote: tringlomaneI would also believe that dealer was incorrect in his interpretation of those column bets.
I tend to agree but what else could putting the zero on the felt in the bet mean?
Quote: PokeraddictI tend to agree but what else could putting the zero on the felt in the bet mean?
I've seen roulette table where there's a "0-00" circular spot between the second and third dozens. As far as i know, it was nothing more than a convenience for people on that side of the table.
Quote: PokeraddictI went by what the dealer told me. On 2nd 12 and 3rd 12 there is a 0 and 00 respectively on the felt. I asked the dealer if those spins were included in those bets and he said yes. I wasn't about to play 000 roulette to test it out.
Sounds to me like you're saying the column bets cover 13 numbers and pay 2 to 1. That would be a house edge of 0.00%. Somehow this doesn't seem in line with the Venetian's business philosophy. I tend to think the dealer was mistaken or misunderstood the question.
Business philosophy? You mean, like, to make a profit?Quote: WizardSounds to me like you're saying the column bets cover 13 numbers and pay 2 to 1. That would be a house edge of 0.00%. Somehow this doesn't seem in line with the Venetian's business philosophy. I tend to think the dealer was mistaken or misunderstood the question.
Careful there Wiz. You're coming dangerously close to revealing some LVS secrets that are covered by the nondisclosure document that you never signed 😜
Quote: WizardI finally saw Sands Roulette with my own eyes yesterday. The minimum bet was $15. At a double-zero wheel near it the minimum was $10. From what I hear, it is performing very well.
So can u verify the 2nd and 3rd dozens include the zero and doublr zero respectively for a zero house edge
Quote: darkozSo can u verify the 2nd and 3rd dozens include the zero and doublr zero respectively for a zero house edge
*snort* I was too embarrassed to ask.
BTW, the the spots on the betting layout for zeros are like double-zero roulette, with the spot for the S straddling the 0 and 00.
Quote: WizardI finally saw Sands Roulette with my own eyes yesterday. The minimum bet was $15. At a double-zero wheel near it the minimum was $10. From what I hear, it is performing very well.
So to answer our question from the beginning of the thread about average players not noticing/caring... Not only do they not care, but they are happy to play at a higher min table with a 3% less favorable house edge, while a cheaper more favorable game is sitting right next to it (or close to it) on the floor???
Quote: mrsuit31So to answer our question from the beginning of the thread about average players not noticing/caring... Not only do they not care, but they are happy to play at a higher min table with a 3% less favorable house edge, while a cheaper more favorable game is sitting right next to it (or close to it) on the floor???
With the exception of the 3%, this sentence could be used to describe 6:5. My faith in humanity dwindles, can't believe this is happening again. What's next, 7 is a push on the come out for craps?
Quote: ahiromuWith the exception of the 3%, this sentence could be used to describe 6:5.
I almost wonder if non-mathematical players are falling for the same fallacy that they did with 6:5 blackjack. "6 and 5? Those are bigger numbers than 3 and 2. It must be a better payout!" "There are more spaces on the wheel? More ways to win!"
Quote: DeucekiesI almost wonder if non-mathematical players are falling for the same fallacy that they did with 6:5 blackjack. "6 and 5? Those are bigger numbers than 3 and 2. It must be a better payout!" "There are more spaces on the wheel? More ways to win!"
We should interview players after they lose to find out why they're playing such a bad game. I'm sure Venetian would love that.
Quote: DeucekiesI almost wonder if non-mathematical players are falling for the same fallacy that they did with 6:5 blackjack. "6 and 5? Those are bigger numbers than 3 and 2. It must be a better payout!" "There are more spaces on the wheel? More ways to win!"
I can personally attest to meeting someone who admonished me for playing single zero as u had one extra number to win on in double zero. He asked why i would play a game the casino was cheating me on by removing that extra number
Quote: mrsuit31Not only do they not care, but they are happy to play at a higher min table with a 3% less favorable house edge, while a cheaper more favorable game is sitting right next to it (or close to it) on the floor???
That is absolutely right.
Quote: WizardThat is absolutely right.
After the WoV G2E dinner at I ♥️ Burgers, I requested that Mike take us to that table so we could see the damn thing.Quote: WizardOne of the many field trial games out there right now is Sands Roulette. Still no WoV member has seen it.
The table was full!
I got the attention of a floor person and asked him about it. He basically said that the people playing the game don't care, but that it's a $10 table, while others are $15 or more. When that Sands (000) spot hits, they just shrug it off as if it was just any other green hit. They just don't realize how much it's costing them. Really not much different than 6:5.
He also said that he believes that introducing such a game ought to be illegal. While I agreed, I was tempted to ask him why they have double zero. Shouldn't that also be illegal and force players to play single zero?
Quote: DJTeddyBearAfter the WoV G2E dinner at I ♥️ Burgers, I requested that Mike take us to that table so we could see the damn thing.
The table was full!
I got the attention of a floor person and asked him about it. He basically said that the people playing the game don't care, but that it's a $10 table, while others are $15 or more. When that Sands (000) spot hits, they just shrug it off as if it was just any other green hit. They just don't realize how much it's costing them. Really not much different than 6:5.
He also said that he believes that introducing such a game ought to be illegal. While I agreed, I was tempted to ask him why they have double zero. Shouldn't that also be illegal and force players to play single zero?
Did any one ask about the column bets?
When I was talking to the floor man, I did ask, So everything is identical to a regular roulette game except there's one extra house number and the higher edge? He said yes.
Quote: onenickelmiracleAmerican roulette is called so because of double zero. To me, I've always associated this terminology implies greed, so how a company wants to be associated with super greed is beyond me. If it is called Sands roulette by the public, it will be. It would only be a logical conclusion anything you bet on there should be assumed to be terrible.
I guess Adelson needs more money to bribe, err donate to the politicians.
Quote: DJTeddyBearAfter the WoV G2E dinner at I ♥️ Burgers, I requested that Mike take us to that table so we could see the damn thing.
The table was full!
I got the attention of a floor person and asked him about it. He basically said that the people playing the game don't care, but that it's a $10 table, while others are $15 or more. When that Sands (000) spot hits, they just shrug it off as if it was just any other green hit. They just don't realize how much it's costing them. Really not much different than 6:5.
He also said that he believes that introducing such a game ought to be illegal. While I agreed, I was tempted to ask him why they have double zero. Shouldn't that also be illegal and force players to play single zero?
For what it worth, at least it's a cheaper table and. It a more expensive one like me and Mike originally thought...
Quote: mrsuit31
For what it worth, at least it's a cheaper table and. It a more expensive one like me and Mike originally thought...
I went with Mike the previous day, and Sands Roulette was $15 min vs $10 for all the other tables, but there were only 2 players (with an empty Double Zero table adjacent to it). The next day, it was packed with a $10 min.
On the wheel, that third green spot had the Sands logo, not 000. Ditto for the history display. I think the ploppy public will adopt the name while intelligent bettors like us will continue to call it Triple Zero.Quote: onenickelmiracleIf it is called Sands roulette by the public, it will be.
I think the name is a psychological thing to get people to not realize that it's triple zero / third house number.
The only thing that has me scratching my head is, how will other casinos react, particularly because of the name.
On a side note, the Sands in PA is my regular home casino. I'll keep an eye out for its arrival.
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/las-vegas-strip-revenue-down-164412163.html
thought it was either mgm, caesars or Wynn? (and casino Royale)
wow.. never knew the Venetian was owned by Sands.
surprised they didn't add the Sands name in there somewhere.
peons like me would have assumed Sands went out of business because there's a street named after them but no casino next to it.
(Just like the Sharaha casino is out of business even tho the street named for them still exists.)
And the poker room USED to be the Sands Poker Room, complete with a large Sands logo on the entrance wall. But that got changed since I was there last. It's now smaller, and called the Venetian Poker Room.
But you're right. The average person might not notice or connect the dots.
Who is the 'you' ??Quote: WizardThe question for the poll is would you play Sands Roulette?
We all know some casinos have European wheels and right next to them American wheels. Yet each gets action.
What is roulette 5.25 percent house edge... so 7.69 is about 2.45 percent higher?
2.45 percent of a hundred dollars is just about what most people tip for drinks in an hour of play.
So it won't make no difference to thems as does math, and it sure won't make no difference to thems as are already too drunk to do math.
The music is the same, the women are the same, the little white ball is the same... the players want action ... stop holding things up with a soliquoy 'bout house edge and lets have some action.
Quote: onenickelmiracleAmerican roulette is called so because of double zero. To me, I've always associated this terminology implies greed, so how a company wants to be associated with super greed is beyond me. If it is called Sands roulette by the public, it will be. It would only be a logical conclusion anything you bet on there should be assumed to be terrible.
American Roulette is a moniker to soften the connotation, like "gaming" versus "gambling.
This version could be called "American Greed Roulette," with Stacy Keach's voice narrating the tote board.
Today's (9/30/2016) Question of the Day at LVA discusses casinos tweaking games to bump up hold, and how it's done.
Quote: PaigowdanToday's (9/30/2016) Question of the Day at LVA discusses casinos tweaking games to bump up hold, and how it's done.
And this is what happens when they do as I posted above.
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/las-vegas-strip-revenue-down-164412163.html
Can someone explain why they need to hold 8% on roulette? A game that is rarely targeted by most advantage players?
Quote: AxelWolfI thought the reason casinos were going to 6:5 Blackjack was because of Advantage Players?
You thought right in this particular case. AP players reduce the table hold (profit), and 6:5 BJ brings it back up. Blackjack had either very low holds, or negative holds (loses), and 6:5 helps address this. In this case, this was considered a need-to-do by the operator, and was done without apology.
Quote: AxelWolfCan someone explain why they need to hold 8% on roulette? A game that is rarely targeted by most advantage players?
There was no real need to increase the house edge on roulette to 8%. What there was, was a desire to increase profits here.
Nothing a casino can do can damage the integrity of gaming. Think of this, now slots are going to have roulette wheels, and use Sands roulette. Next thing you know they're going to have video poker with double 5,6,7,8,9s in the deck, but it's going to be called smart video poker. Maybe gaming will not approve this game and have second thoughts thinking they're going too far.Quote: AxelWolfI thought the reason casinos were going to 6:5 Blackjack was because of Advantage Players?
Can someone explain why they need to hold 8% on roulette? A game that is rarely targeted by most advantage players?
Quote: PaigowdanYou thought right in this particular case. AP players reduce the table hold (profit), and 6:5 BJ brings it back up. Blackjack had either very low holds, or negative holds (loses), and 6:5 helps address this. In this case, this was considered a need-to-do by the operator, and was done without apology.
There was no real need to increase the house edge on roulette to 8%. What there was, was a desire to increase profits here.
What there was, was a need to blame someone for their extreme greed. Advantage Players were the perfect scapegoats. As I before, Advantage Players or not they would've eventually went to 6:5. Would love to know why they have $5 6/5 JOB especially since 8/5 would be more than sufficient to foil most AP.
This 8% roulette is just more proof of that it has nothing to do with advantage players and everything to do with greed.
Keno originally held so much because it was a slow game. Original video keno was significantly faster but still slow compared to VP and slots so 8% to 9% might have been justified. Nowadays with fast 4 card and 20 card higher denomination keno there's absolutely no reason to hold that much other than pure greed knowing people will play it.
Let's not forget it was card counting and advantage play that made Blackjack extremely popular and raised profits in the first place.
Their only hope for the future is to convince people they can gain an advantage with skill gaming. If they keep raping people they better keep building clubs and new non gaming entertainment and hope the economy doesn't tank.
Scared? Hardly.Quote: darkozYeesh it seems everyone is too scared embarrassed to ask about the columns bet.
Embarrassed? Nope.
Try: Forgot.
The fact is, the layout does NOTHING to suggest that any of the greens are part of any column.
The 0 and 00 are at the top, LIKE NORMAL and are 1.5 columns wide making it look like they are not part of any column.
Similarly, the Sands spot is above them, centered, about 2 columns wide. Also, not part of a column.
Note that the layout still allows the 5 number basket bet. There is no green street, but a spot where the two corners and bottom meets to provide betting on all three.
Quote: AxelWolfWhat there was, was a need to blame someone for their extreme greed. Advantage Players were the perfect scapegoats. As I before, Advantage Players or not they would've eventually went to 6:5. Would love to know why they have $5 6/5 JOB especially since 8/5 would be more than sufficient to foil most AP.
Blackjack was definitely losing money to AP (with AP's proud of it), so the argument that 6:5 is at least partly due to game protection needs is logical and valid.
Quote: AWThis 8% roulette is just more proof of that it has nothing to do with advantage players and everything to do with greed.
In this case I would say so. American Roulette (double zero) held well as it was. I do not think triple-zero was necessary, just desired.
Quote: awLet's not forget it was card counting and advantage play that made Blackjack extremely popular and raised profits in the first place.
A positive side effect indeed that appealed to the greed among the players, and their dreams of taking down the house. Greed doesn't discriminate, all sides embody it.
Quote: awTheir only hope for the future is to convince people they can gain an advantage with skill gaming. If they keep raping people they better keep building clubs and new non gaming entertainment and hope the economy doesn't tank.
We'll see if casinos run themselves out of business. I think they'd loosen it up before going to the edge of that precipice.
Quote: darkozYeesh it seems everyone is too scared embarrassed to ask about the columns bet. If i was in vegas i would hav gotten the answer already
I asked in an indirect way. My question was "Are all the rules and pays the same as double-zero roulette?" The answer was "yes."
Again, it isn't like there is a zero on top of each column. The 0 and 00 take up 1.5 columns and the S straddles those two. So, yes, I would view it as a stupid question and would be embarrassed to ask.
Quote: AxelWolfThis 8% roulette is just more proof of that it has nothing to do with advantage players and everything to do with greed.
I don't think the Venetian/Sands ever said they're not trying to make money.
I don't want to reveal any sources, but I know a lot of people at the highest levels of casino management. Those that view their casinos as amenities, as the Venetian does, say that most players will play under any rules as long as the limits are comfortable for them. The success of 6-5 blackjack as proven that to be true. Yes, lousy rules will drive some players away, but those are not profitable players to begin with. Better to get rid of them to make more room for ignorant players who will play at whatever table feels lucky, which is how my mother chooses which video poker machine to play, and what is a pay table?
Which is probably the same for the MBA types at casinos...
We know there is a mix.
APs who would split a penny if they could and change casinos for some advantage measured in nano-pennies.
Drunks too soused to care what happens.
Wives too rich to care what game they are playing.
Gamblers who want booze and commaraderie (so use spell check before you read my posts)
Gamblers who loudly proclaim Never Buy Insurance Its A Rip Off but couldn't explain why.
Gamblers who proclaim always take insurance.
Yes. Grown men cried when Vegas ripped out craps tables by the dozen and put in blackjack tables and female dealers. Even female dealers cried when the casinos installed dance poles and hired some girls who did their nails while dealing and got hired solely due to skimpy costumes and great cleavage.
Casinos have no loyalty to anything but the dollar. And a dollar from any game is good.
Remember casinos book losses as loans to be repaid at ANY casino, so all they want are customers flocking in and preferably flocking back again.
They don't much care what games they offer...as long as the junkies show up, they will get served.
Quote: darkozI can personally attest to meeting someone who admonished me for playing single zero as u had one extra number to win on in double zero. He asked why i would play a game the casino was cheating me on by removing that extra number
Wouldn't you rather have the extra "choice" that a double zero wheel would give you? If you explain the math to the player, they may counter with the belief that the casino "rigs" the wheel to make up for the one less zero.
