The "symbol" in Triple Zero Roulette
Recently, the Jacobslifeinvegas channel on YouTube ranted about how casinos are "deceiving" roulette players by not only having triple-zero roulette, but somehow "disguising" the third green space by using a logo or symbol rather than "000" - it starts at 2:24 (anybody know if there's a way to put the timecode into a [youtube] tag?):
The Miles to Memories Las Vegas channel picked up on it - it starts at 18:45:
I brought up the possibility that there just wasn't enough room on the wheel itself to have a "000" space without making the digits smaller, in which case, the complaints would be, "They're trying to hide the 000 by making it smaller on the wheel!"
I know this started when these wheels first appeared, with the symbol in question being an "S" for Sands, as it first appeared at the Venetian, which is owned by the Las Vegas Sands corporation, but was it ever determined just why they did it this way? Was it a trademark of some sort, that other casinos just picked up on? Do other casinos do it this way, with their own logos, as part of some licensing agreement that lets them use the game in the first place?
Quote: ThatDonGuyThis seems to be making the rounds online...
Recently, the Jacobslifeinvegas channel on YouTube ranted about how casinos are "deceiving" roulette players by not only having triple-zero roulette, but somehow "disguising" the third green space by using a logo or symbol rather than "000" - it starts at 2:24 (anybody know if there's a way to put the timecode into a [youtube] tag?):
The Miles to Memories Las Vegas channel picked up on it - it starts at 18:45:
I brought up the possibility that there just wasn't enough room on the wheel itself to have a "000" space without making the digits smaller, in which case, the complaints would be, "They're trying to hide the 000 by making it smaller on the wheel!"
I know this started when these wheels first appeared, with the symbol in question being an "S" for Sands, as it first appeared at the Venetian, which is owned by the Las Vegas Sands corporation, but was it ever determined just why they did it this way? Was it a trademark of some sort, that other casinos just picked up on? Do other casinos do it this way, with their own logos, as part of some licensing agreement that lets them use the game in the first place?
link to original post
I mean it's clearly an extra pocket. They could have called it number 39 and told everyone it was a lucky number added and the stupid ploppies would bet like crazy on it.
Quote: darkozI mean it's clearly an extra pocket. They could have called it number 39 and told everyone it was a lucky number added and the stupid ploppies would bet like crazy on it.
link to original post
Exactly. They could have even made them three different colors, similar to the two colors of the highest payout on whatever the Big Six wheel is called nowadays, although then they couldn't have the green "11-1" space between the red and black ones. Meanwhile, none of the blackjack tables on the Strip (except maybe in the high roller rooms - okay, maybe the shoe/CSM-dealt games at TI do now; I haven't been there recently to check) bother to say what a blackjack pays, and nobody is in an uproar about how "misleading" that is. Well, either that, or everybody is convinced that they know how to count well enough to beat a 6-5 game.
I know you're looking for some documentation of 'why', but I got nothing, except it may have been mentioned in this WoV tread about Sands Roulette, which, I believe is the first WoV thread about it.Quote: ThatDonGuy...I know this started when these wheels first appeared, with the symbol in question being an "S" for Sands, as it first appeared at the Venetian, which is owned by the Las Vegas Sands corporation, but was it ever determined just why they did it this way? Was it a trademark of some sort, that other casinos just picked up on? Do other casinos do it this way, with their own logos, as part of some licensing agreement that lets them use the game in the first place?
link to original post
Personally, I think it was more of a branding thing than any devious purpose, since Venetian was the first in Vegas with 000. Maybe once the pencil pushers realized just how stupid some gamblers can be, that the logo instead of 000 became a default thing.
No they couldn't.Quote: darkoz... They could have called it number 39 and told everyone it was a lucky number added and the stupid ploppies would bet like crazy on it.
link to original post
That would start all kinds of trouble since '39' is legitimately odd, high, etc.
The more I think, the more I lean towards the branding thing.Quote: DJTeddyBearPersonally, I think it was more of a branding thing than any devious purpose...
It's only recently that they changed the name of the convention center from Sands Expo to Venetian Expo. Similarly, until recently, the exterior wall of the poker room proclaimed Sands Poker.
And the one Sands branding thing that always made me laugh was the original TV commercials for the Sands Casino in Bethlehem PA. One shot included some guy exclaiming to the otter's in the scene, "It's a 'Sands'!" as if the name alone gave the casino some sort of cachet...
For the record, it's players club was never linked to the Venetian's club. It's now Wind Creek, owned by a tribe in Alabama with severel casinos in that area, and I believe their clubs ARE linked.
On a side note, the Resorts World in Monticello NY (Catskills), isn't linked to the RW in Vegas, either.
Quote: DJTeddyBearQuote: DJTeddyBearPersonally, I think it was more of a branding thing than any devious purpose...
On a side note, the Resorts World in Monticello NY (Catskills), isn't linked to the RW in Vegas, either.
link to original post
They are indeed linked as they are both owned by the same parent company Genting in Malaysia.
If you mean the players club cards are not linked you are correct. Each Genting property requires its own separate players card and has its own system of delivering offers.
Cross property offers are rare but occasionally handed out.
Quote: darkozI mean it's clearly an extra pocket. They could have called it number 39 and told everyone it was a lucky number added and the stupid ploppies would bet like crazy on it.
link to original post
You've written quite a number of posts about how you played roulette and thought Martingale was the Holy Grail.
How long did all that last? Shorter or longer than the alleged years living in the subway. Which how is it possible to live in the subways for years on end?
My experimentation with Martingale lasted one session only when I was barely of legal gambling age. That's how long it took me to realize that both roulette and Martingale were not for me.
MDawg is darting and quick with ability to learn, adapt or change with the times.
Quote: MDawgQuote: darkozI mean it's clearly an extra pocket. They could have called it number 39 and told everyone it was a lucky number added and the stupid ploppies would bet like crazy on it.
link to original post
You've written quite a number of posts about how you played roulette and thought Martingale was the Holy Grail.
How long did all that last? Shorter or longer than the alleged years living in the subway. Which how is it possible to live in the subways for years on end?
My experimentation with Martingale lasted one session only when I was barely of legal gambling age. That's how long it took me to realize that both roulette and Martingale were not for me.
MDawg is darting and quick with ability to learn, adapt or change with the times.
link to original post
The old adage Martingale Betting Systems Work... until they don't... would apply here.
For some of those who live and die, it's often about the Amount of Winning sessions and not the actual Amount of profit made or lost that matters. Not saying that applies to anyone here, but the system sellers on YT would certainly fall in that category!
Quote: MDawgQuote: darkozI mean it's clearly an extra pocket. They could have called it number 39 and told everyone it was a lucky number added and the stupid ploppies would bet like crazy on it.
link to original post
You've written quite a number of posts about how you played roulette and thought Martingale was the Holy Grail.
How long did all that last? Shorter or longer than the alleged years living in the subway. Which how is it possible to live in the subways for years on end?
My experimentation with Martingale lasted one session only when I was barely of legal gambling age. That's how long it took me to realize that both roulette and Martingale were not for me.
MDawg is darting and quick with ability to learn, adapt or change with the times.
link to original post
I never said Martingale was the holy grail and I challenge you to post where I said such a quote.
I mentioned I experimented with it which you also just admitted to.
This post seems nothing but an attempt to disparage my knowledge of AP and has come seemingly out of nowhere as this conversation wasn't about me but the placement of an extra number on roulette.
Show the post where I claim (in all seriousness and not some long forgotten joke or platitude or saying its the holy grail for suckers which would mean i was claiming the exact opposite) that I considered the martingale the holy grail for roulette.
Retract your statement or I will press charges.
I also challenge that you are calling me a liar by referring to my years homeless on the subway as "alleged"(as if anyone would want to lie about that smh). And remind you that calling you an "alleged" lawyer was grounds more than once for calling you a liar.
Quote: DJTeddyBear
No they couldn't.Quote: darkoz... They could have called it number 39 and told everyone it was a lucky number added and the stupid ploppies would bet like crazy on it.
link to original post
That would start all kinds of trouble since '39' is legitimately odd, high, etc.
link to original post
Touche.
However they could add numbers 37 and 38, eliminate the double zero and then advertise they offer single zero roulette to their players.
Now that would fall in line with the OP's post about trying to disguise what they were doing.
EDIT: And clearly I meant add number 37 in my above post, not 39. Funny no one called me out on that faux pas
Separately, I have no knowledge of the history but my bet is the symbol was done originally to hide that it was another zero. I’ve overheard enough people asking about it in a way that suggests they DON’T think it’s the same as the zero to believe that the casino execs did it intentionally (or thought it was a free roll for the house)
Quote: WizardUsing a symbol instead of 0-0-0 doesn't bother me either. There are much more unethical things the casinos do that they should save their energy to rant about.
link to original post
Why get upset about something one will never play?
000 is just one more reason to skip the strip.
Quote: darkozHowever they could add numbers 37 and 38, eliminate the double zero and then advertise they offer single zero roulette to their players.
link to original post
Er, wouldn't that make it the best roulette game on the Strip? Bets of "low", "high", "odd", and "even" now have 19 winning numbers and 20 losing numbers, so the HE drops to 2.56%.
They are testing the limits of how dumb people are. You let them be in that business, then you want them to show constraint?
I know so many people who love playing scratchers in Arizona where the EV is -50%! So they aren't even coming close to the greatest fraud possible by adding a logo-sucks-your money on a roulette wheel.
I think gamblers should just be in awe of the fact that games with 2% to 10% house edges still exist. It's like living during a brief window in time when you can still see a giraffe in the wild. Savor it.
My solution is legislating that gambling can only be legal with 0% EV, i. e. fair. It can only be used as entertainment to attract players to businesses that sell a real product or service. Flame me all you want, the first state that legalizes fair gambling will suck all the gamblers away from unfair gambling states.
Quote: ThatDonGuyQuote: darkozHowever they could add numbers 37 and 38, eliminate the double zero and then advertise they offer single zero roulette to their players.
link to original post
Er, wouldn't that make it the best roulette game on the Strip? Bets of "low", "high", "odd", and "even" now have 19 winning numbers and 20 losing numbers, so the HE drops to 2.56%.
link to original post
Yeah that's how they would justify it.
Meanwhile straight up numbers pay 35:1 for 38:1 odds. Disguises!
BTW I saw something like that in AC with e-roulette. The outside paid even money like normal but the inside numbers paid 34:1. And I seem to recall seeing even 33:1.
This was a number of years ago.
Quote: darkozQuote: DJTeddyBear
No they couldn't.Quote: darkoz... They could have called it number 39 and told everyone it was a lucky number added and the stupid ploppies would bet like crazy on it.
link to original post
That would start all kinds of trouble since '39' is legitimately odd, high, etc.
link to original post
Touche.
However they could add numbers 37 and 38, eliminate the double zero and then advertise they offer single zero roulette to their players.
Now that would fall in line with the OP's post about trying to disguise what they were doing.
EDIT: And clearly I meant add number 37 in my above post, not 39. Funny no one called me out on that faux pas
link to original post
Total of 741?
Someone will definitely find this unlucky.
Quote: MDawgSaying that you do not believe what someone has DONE is okay here.
Saying that you do not believe what someone has represented himself TO BE, is calling him a liar, and is a major insult here.
Would be like if I said "I don't believe you're even a doctor" to SooPoo or started calling him "the alleged anesthesiologist" or calling Wizard the "alleged mathematician" - those are all insults, especially the first two because they go to someone's profession.
The word alleged as used above goes to HOW MANY years you spent living in the subways. You have claimed years - and yes, I choose not to believe that it was for YEARS. Have a problem with that?
Indeed I recall posts where you qualified the living in the subways claim with that you would interpose this with time spent staying with friends or family - couching, so to speak, or at least showing up for showers or meals - so right there, that gainsays the years of living in the subway claim.
As far as the other thing, the words you used were to the effect of describing how you had Discovered the Martingale and viewed it as the bees knees (not your exact words, nor did you refer to it as the holy grail, I did not quote any of these words), until you determined that it was not. You deny that? The question posed above, is how long did it take you to figure this out? It took me one session not long after I had entered a casino for the first time.
Quote: MDawgHow does one survive in a casino environment that I assume requires precise thinking, and yet be so frequently imprecise with his legal thinking, including in your voluminous absurdly hard to follow or make sense of, "appeals," of suspensions you have posted here.
Quote: MDawgSaying that you do not believe what someone has DONE is okay here.
Saying that you do not believe what someone has represented himself TO BE, is calling him a liar, and is a major insult here.
Would be like if I said "I don't believe you're even a doctor" to SooPoo or started calling him "the alleged anesthesiologist" or calling Wizard the "alleged mathematician" - those are all insults, especially the first two because they go to someone's profession.
The word alleged as used above goes to HOW MANY years you spent living in the subways. You have claimed years - and yes, I choose not to believe that it was for YEARS. Have a problem with that?
As far as the other thing, the words you used were to effect of describing how you had Discovered the Martingale and viewed it as the bees knees (not your exact words, nor did you refer to it as the holy grail, I did not quote any of these words), until you determined that it was not. You deny that? The question posed above, is how long did it take you to figure this out? It took me one session not long after I had entered a casino for the first time.
link to original post
Well then, I choose not to believe you have achieved a law degree.
Quote: darkoz
Well then, I choose not to believe you have achieved a law degree.
link to original post
Quote: MDawgQuote: darkoz
Well then, I choose not to believe you have achieved a law degree.
link to original post
link to original post
I am free to believe you haven't done what you claim just like you are free to believe I was never homeless for very long like I claim
Quote: MDawgso right there, that gainsays the years
link to original post
Holy crap a word I've never seen before. 'Gainsays.' I even looked it up, what a cool word.
gain·say
/ˌɡānˈsā/
verb formal
3rd person present: gainsays
deny or contradict (a fact or statement).
"Gainsay, a verb, means "contradict" or "speak out against." When you challenge authority, you gainsay, as in teachers don't like it when unruly students gainsay them."
I'm going to find a way to use it in conversation. It's even a good name for a cat, if I named my cats.. The word is used in the Bible a lot apparently but I don't remember it but then they use a lot of unfamiliar words in the Bible.
The "hot/cold" numbers and other stats listed on the board are much more nefarious than using a symbol. Implying that some outcomes are "lucky" or "due" misrepresents how the wheel works. In other games, it is the dummies themselves tracking game results and finding "patterns." Not the casino.
Quote: itsmejeffThe "hot/cold" numbers and other stats listed on the board are much more nefarious than using a symbol. Implying that some outcomes are "lucky" or "due" misrepresents how the wheel works. In other games, it is the dummies themselves tracking game results and finding "patterns." Not the casino.
link to original post
Shots fired....
Quote: darkozQuote: MDawgHow does one survive in a casino environment that I assume requires precise thinking, and yet be so frequently imprecise with his legal thinking, including in your voluminous absurdly hard to follow or make sense of, "appeals," of suspensions you have posted here.
Quote: MDawgSaying that you do not believe what someone has DONE is okay here.
Saying that you do not believe what someone has represented himself TO BE, is calling him a liar, and is a major insult here.
Would be like if I said "I don't believe you're even a doctor" to SooPoo or started calling him "the alleged anesthesiologist" or calling Wizard the "alleged mathematician" - those are all insults, especially the first two because they go to someone's profession.
The word alleged as used above goes to HOW MANY years you spent living in the subways. You have claimed years - and yes, I choose not to believe that it was for YEARS. Have a problem with that?
Indeed I recall posts where you qualified the living in the subways claim with that you would interpose this with time spent staying with friends or family - couching, so to speak, or at least showing up for showers or meals - so right there, that gainsays the years of living in the subway claim.
As far as the other thing, the words you used were to the effect of describing how you had Discovered the Martingale and viewed it as the bees knees (not your exact words, nor did you refer to it as the holy grail, I did not quote any of these words), until you determined that it was not. You deny that? The question posed above, is how long did it take you to figure this out? It took me one session not long after I had entered a casino for the first time.
link to original post
Well then, I choose not to believe you have achieved a law degree.
link to original post
I said what I said because I believe genuinely that you did not spend YEARS living in the subways. I never said that you were not homeless.
On the other hand, you just said what you said merely to lash out and be insulting, which in the wake of your already being suspended once for a similar statement, is just plain wrong.
So, let's just both be suspended, so that the precedent is made clear that it is not okay to question someone's licensable profession at this forum, once he has made himself out to be something or other.
Quote: MDawgSo, let's just both be suspended, so that the precedent is made clear that it is not okay to question someone's licensable profession at this forum, once he has made himself out to be something or other.
link to original post
I accept this proposal. Let me use this opportunity to explain forum policy and precedent.
I have said it is allowed to say you don't believe someone. When I said that, I meant it for incredible claims like 18 yo's in a row and 80% win rates on games that pay even money.
However, this limited policy doesn't supersede the longstanding policy against personal insults. At the end of the day, I go by feel on that one. If someone said they didn't believe I was a former actuary, I would feel insulted. However, I could make the claim I was homeless the summer of 1990. If someone challenged that, based on the definition of "homeless," I could take that. The truth there is I slept on a couch in a friend's garage at that time in my life, for lack of anywhere else to live and being broke.
In this instance, I'm going to suspend both darkoz and mdawg, in the interests of consistency. However, I feel darkoz committed the greater sin.
Quote: Wizard
I have said it is allowed to say you don't believe someone. When I said that, I meant it for incredible claims like 18 yo's in a row and 80% win rates on games that pay even money.
link to original post
Hey, wait a minute.
"I resemble that remark." Groucho Marx in the movie Animal Crackers
