What if... 1% house edge would simply be a charge?
Quote: BozHow will Roulette system players, wheel clockers, physics experts and others currently killing Roulette fare under your proposal?
Roulette system players are fools. I don't care what they think.
This idea is probably unfeasible for brick and mortar casinos. Too much hassle with the charge. Software however can handle this with ease.
Quote: onenickelmiracleI don't blame you uk
Thank you for not blaming me. In return I can assure you that I don't blame you too. :-))
I always thought that double zero American Roulette is the best proof that in gambling there is no such as a thing as customer lobby.
But this, of course, has nothing to do with the proposal. It's a side talk. ;-)
Quote: MattUKAdmin, you pay far too much attention on numbers.
At its heart, gambling is nothing more than a math problem in ALL instances. It's impossible to ever pay ENOUGH attention to numbers, unless one has perfect information. It's very possible to have perfect information on Roulette, assuming a balanced wheel or adequate RNG, there's really no simpler game to understand.
Quote:Especially my proposed variant "1 cent deducted from every 2$" which equals to 1% house edge. That would best 1 deck baccarat (1.01%) and make it the best game of chance if you don't count craps.
It would still be worse than Blackjack, (sometimes) Spanish, (sometimes) Pontoon, (sometimes) Video Poker, (sometimes)...one or two other Table Games from an Element-of-Risk standpoint. I would say 1% is okay for a base HE on a Table Game, it's not great.
Quote:True, that would be something, but it's only the tip of the iceberg. It enables better odds, but doesn't lower them automatically. This idea can work with the standard payouts (see my previous post). Which on the other hand would be great as it would reveal the real cost of gambling. We simply do it wrong, at least with roulette - we pretend that it's free while it's not and at the same time that the deal is fair while it's skewed.
Roulette could not be more obvious. There are red numbers and there are black numbers, you may bet on either, if a zero comes you always lose. If you bet equally on red and black, then you always get all your money back, unless a zero comes up...then you lose both bets. It is, literally, as obvious as a House Edge mechanism could possibly be.
Quote:My idea would put both of these lies to a long overdue end - you have to pay to play and you would know exactly how much and the deal would finally be fair. It's all about honesty. After all, if you don't want to be honest with your customers you are doing it wrong or, more likely, you are doing something wrong. So it's not about saving people wasting all their money on electronic roulette from their own fate.
Yeah, and if I'm a casino, I'll be, 'Honest,' with them for 5%, not 1%. Implement the change, the games would get worse as opposed to better. That's a promise.
You can't have an idiot wheel with a 99% RTP. It wouldn't make enough money. Blackjack makes enough money because most players play somewhat poorly. If you had a Blackjack that was played like PGP, where the dealer could unfailingly hand you a near-Optimal strategy, (and people availed themselves of that) then you wouldn't have 3:2 anywhere. Everything would be 6:5, if not even money. Blackjack makes the better part of its money on the side bets, anyway, but before that, the game hung its hat on poor player play. If people were actually all getting the Optimal House Edge, then the House Edge would have to go up.
Roulette and Keno are both brainless, that's why they have to have a high house edge. Especially Roulette, because there are generally no side bets.
Quote:On the contrary - this could work as a warning and deterrent, especially combined with other means like setting daily limit on price paid (whether someone has a lucky day or not is a different story). Please note that as currently gabmling is dishonestly portraid as free of charge there is no such a thing.
Nobody believes it is free of charge. If they do believe it is free of charge, then I would encourage them to revisit third grade.
Quote:You have to pay for a bagel but if you want to win big it's apparently free of charge. That is the mother of all lies. On a plus side this enables things like happy hour. For example - standard 1 cent deducted from every 74 (European Roulette) and from 1$ during happy hour.
Yes, this would work online or on electronic machine. Unfeasible with physical roulette table.
I'll just take 5% of all monies bet, instead.
Quote:PS: It's hidden because punters are lead to believe that they play for free. They are not charged for it. Another problem is that that charge (losing the bet on zero) itself depends on luck. On a lucky day you may not get 0 for 50 or even more spins, but you can also have 2 out of 10 or something like that.
Tell you what, how about we have zero edge games, but you have to pay $100 to be admitted to the establishment. Would that be fair?
Quote: MattUK
5dimes has a bonus roulette with RTP ranging from 99.00 to 99.24%. But they had done this by playing with each of the payouts. My way is much better. Honest, single and stable charge. No zero. Standard payouts. Fair odds. Perfect competitiveness. Happy hours. Equally divided wheel. It's genius. It wins hands down even without enhanced multiplier. Something's telling me it would be innovation of the year.
Well, since nobody is going to buy it, I guess you'll just have to open your own casino and see what happens.
Quote: onenickelmiracleI don't blame you uk, your thoughts are based on the idea casinos make too much. It's true, but they pay too much to be able to do that. The whole idea of a special building where gambling can take place is totally out of date. There is no reason to price small businesses out. If someone wants to have 50 slots in a strip mall location and call it a casino, they should be able to do it. Gamblers will get the best price, because they'll be too small to say our way or the highway to customers.
Yeah, that's totally what happens in the parlor states. No offense, but not correct. They offer games that compare very closely to what is available in the casino on the same game types. I mean, Caveman is a little better in some of those places than in the casinos, but that's the only game I've ever specifically identified that is almost uniformly better.
Quote: Mission146It would still be worse than Blackjack, (sometimes) Spanish, (sometimes) Pontoon, (sometimes) Video Poker, (sometimes)... one or two other Table Games from an Element-of-Risk standpoint. I would say 1% is okay for a base HE on a Table Game, it's not great.
You see, that's the problem. I talk about revolutionary convertion of house edge into price and you talk about superiority of skills games over brainless hiting the button. I can't agree more, but it will not make this business disappear. Huston, I am actually trying to reform it! How do you like this idea?
Quote: Mission146Roulette could not be more obvious.
Yes it can! I just did it! Especially at moderate rate "1 cent for 1$". Don't you agree?
Quote: Mission146Yeah, and if I'm a casino, I'll be, 'Honest,' with them for 5%, not 1%. Implement the change, the games would get worse as opposed to better. That's a promise.
5% equals to the rate 1 for every 40 and for you poor Americans even that is a step forward. :-) :-) :-)
But seriously now. I replied to you before that the lowest multiplier should be 74 which corresponds to European Roulette so the worst you could get is standard. Plus the multiplier and its equivalent in RTP should be visible all the time. Plus settings are already configurable by the casino manager. For example Realtime Gaming does that almost by default, so it's nothing new.
Quote: Mission146Roulette and Keno are both brainless, that's why they have to have a high house edge. Especially Roulette, because there are generally no side bets.
I would go even further - all but a few top slots with puzzle to solve are brainless. But they are legal, they are everywhere and they turn over billions. And that's why greater competitiveness is essential. Which is what my idea enable. Games of chance are as good as the highest RTP on the market. Under my proposal every casino could compete up to the second decimal point. Thank you for making the case.
Quote: Mission146Nobody believes it is free of charge. If they do believe it is free of charge, then I would encourage them to revisit third grade.
Yet no one is charged a single cent for playing. It's schizofrenic. Let's fix it where we can.
Quote: Mission146I'll just take 5% of all monies bet, instead.
Slightly better than American Roulette, but still greedy. It should start from European Roulette (74) and leave the manager free hand to set it as high as he wants.
Quote: Mission146Tell you what, how about we have zero edge games, but you have to pay $100 to be admitted to the establishment. Would that be fair?
Great question! Yes, that would be fair and a step in the right direction. Even better question is "should I enter". My answer - yes, whenever you're going to spend more than $100 on my roulette. Assuming a moderate rate 1 cent for every 1$ that's $10.000 in bets. Not that it's the best what you can do with your money, of course.
Quote: Mission146Well, since nobody is going to buy it, I guess you'll just have to open your own casino and see what happens.
Finally I've got your judgement! Why do you think it's a bad idea?
Parlors within a few miles of Mountaineer and also in the middle of nowhere I've seen in WV, all slots 7.99% hold, when Mountaineer has a casino wide average 10-11% last I heard. These have 1 nickel minimums. Still that way when the parlors are no longer full all day and night because smoking is banned by the county board of health.Quote: Mission146Yeah, that's totally what happens in the parlor states. No offense, but not correct. They offer games that compare very closely to what is available in the casino on the same game types. I mean, Caveman is a little better in some of those places than in the casinos, but that's the only game I've ever specifically identified that is almost uniformly better.
I also had never been in the internet parlors we used to have in Ohio, aka sweepstakes cafe, heard many people raved about them, they thought they had much better odds than casinos. Around the same time Hollywood opened, miraculously, the judges shut them all down. Heard lots of people made money with them when they were open, taking advantage of play bonuses and the places didn't do W2Gs.
