https://twitter.com/vitalvegas/status/1667000853822324736?s=46&t=GGszWiD6DLadfPNF5gTL-AQuote:First look at a new roulette variation, Birthday Bet. Only @Downtown_Grand at the moment. Interview with the inventor, Ryan Chinn, on the podcast.

From a non-AP perspective I think this is a good idea, there are a ton of people into astrology, especially females, even if they don't actually believe in all the astrology mumbo jumbo they still enjoy reading horoscopes, being proud of their sign, and having fun with it.Quote:DJTeddyBearScott / Vital Vegas tweeted about a new game at DTG:

https://twitter.com/vitalvegas/status/1667000853822324736?s=46&t=GGszWiD6DLadfPNF5gTL-AQuote:First look at a new roulette variation, Birthday Bet. Only @Downtown_Grand at the moment. Interview with the inventor, Ryan Chinn, on the podcast.

link to original post

This looks like something that could be combined with Chinese Horoscope Roulette, where each sign is assigned three consecutive spots on the wheel. Of course, that would require a much larger layout, but I don't see people associating their zodiacal signs with those particular sets of numbers.

Quote:ThatDonGuyI get an ER of 108 / 133, which is a house edge of about 18.8%

Ouch! I may have done the math wrong, but 18.8% is like playing on a wheel with 8 zeroes.

But even simple reasoning, such as what I put in my own Twitter post, makes you realize the edge is considerably larger than Roulette’s standard edge of 5.26%.

Quote:My Twitter replyClever concept. Terrible payout.

You could easily bet $1 on any street. It pays $11. Keep the same $6 this bet would pay and press the other $5. Then, each successive hit would pay $66 rather than $50.

Want a better, fun side bet?

Poker for Roulette.

http://www.davemillergaming.com/pfr/index.html

Quote:DJTeddyBearNot that I doubt his math, I’m not sure how Don came up with 108/133 and I’m too lazy to try to figure it out.

But even simple reasoning, such as what I put in my own Twitter post, makes you realize the edge is considerably larger than Roulette’s standard edge of 5.26%.

link to original post

Yes, it is, because that first win pays 6-1 instead of 11-1. If the first win pays anything less than 155/21 to 1 (about 7 3/8-1), then the edge > the standard edge.

I'm pretty sure my math is correct; it matches in simulation.

1 win (pays 6): 3/38 x 35/38

2 wins (pays 56): (3/38)^2 x 35/38

3 wins (pays 106): (3/38)^3 x 35/38

and so on

The total ER is:

3/38 x 35/38 x (6 + 3/38 x 56 + (3/38)^2 x 106 + (3/38)^3 x 156 + ...)

= 3/38 x 35/38 x (6 + (3/38 x 6 + 3/38 x 50) + ((3/38)^2 x 6 + (3/38)^2 x 100) + ((3/38)^3 x 6 + (3/38)^3 x 150) + ...)

= 3/38 x 35/38 x (6 + (3/38 x 6 + (3/38)^2 x 6 + (3/38)^3 x 6 + ...) + (3/38 x 50 + (3/38)^2 x 100 + (3/38)^3 x 150 + ...))

= 3/38 x 35/38 x 6 x (1 + 3/38 + (3/38)^2 + ...) + 3/38 x 35/38 x 3/38 x 50 x (1 + 2 x 3/38 + 3 x (3/38)^2 + ...)

= 3/38 x 35/38 x 6 x (1 / (1 - 3/38)) + 3/38 x 35/38 x 3/38 x 50 x (1 + 3/38 + (3/38)^2 + ...)^2

= 3/38 x 6 + 315 x 50 / 38^3 x 38^2 / 35^2

= 9/19 + 315 x 50 / (38 x 35^2)

= 108/133

y = (1 / (1 - 3/38) - 1 )* 50

Solve for x, which is 108/133

Geometric series

Side bets are sucker bets about 99% of the time. In blackjack, for example, there are side bets with edges well over 20%. And blackjack (played properly) has an edge under 1%Quote:DJTeddyBearNot that I doubt his math, I’m not sure how Don came up with 108/133 and I’m too lazy to try to figure it out.

But even simple reasoning, such as what I put in my own Twitter post, makes you realize the edge is considerably larger than Roulette’s standard edge of 5.26%.

The first hit pays 7

Subsequent successive hits pay 50, 100, 200, 400, and so on

Note these are combined; five hits in a row pays a total of 7 + 50 + 100 + 200 + 400 = 757 (minus the 1 you lose on the sixth spin).

The HA is 7.73%; if the first hit pays 6, it's 15.625%

If the payouts are N, 50, 100, 200, 400, ...:

ER = 35/38 x 3/38 x N

+ 35/38 x (3/38)^2 x (N + 50)

+ 35/38 x (3/38)^3 x (N + 50 + 100)

+ 35/38 x (3/38)^4 x (N + 50 + 100 + 200)

+ 35/38 x (3/38)^5 x (N + 50 + 100 + 200 + 400)

+ ...

= 35/38 x 3/38 x N x (1 + 3/38 + (3/38)^2 + ...)

+ 35/38 x (3/38)^2 x 50 x (1 + 3/38 + (3/38)^2 + ...)

+ 35/38 x (3/38)^3 x 2 x 50 x (1 + 3/38 + (3/38)^2 + ...)

+ 35/38 x (3/38)^4 x 2^2 x 50 x (1 + 3/38 + (3/38)^2 + ...)

+ 35/38 x (3/38)^5 x 2^3 x 50 x (1 + 3/38 + (3/38)^2 + ...)

+ ...

= 3 N / 38

+ 35/38 x (3/38)^2 x 50 x (1 + 3/38 + (3/38)^2 + ...)

+ 35/38 x (3/38)^2 x 50 x 2 x 3/38 x (1 + 3/38 + (3/38)^2 + ...)

+ 35/38 x (3/38)^2 x 50 x 2^2 x (3/38)^2 x (1 + 3/38 + (3/38)^2 + ...)

+ 35/38 x (3/38)^2 x 50 x 2^3 x (3/38)^3 x (1 + 3/38 + (3/38)^2 + ...)

+ ...

= 3 N / 38

+ 35/38 x (3/38)^2 x 50 x 38/35

+ 35/38 x (3/38)^2 x 50 x 2 x 3/38 x 38/35

+ 35/38 x (3/38)^2 x 50 x 2^2 x (3/38)^2 x 38/35

+ 35/38 x (3/38)^2 x 50 x 2^3 x (3/38)^3 x 38/35

+ ...

= 3 N / 38 + (3/38)^2 x 50 x (1 + 3/19 + (3/19)^2 + ...)

= (3 N x 32 + 450) / (38 x 32)

= (48 N + 225) / 608

HE = 1 - (48 N + 225) / 608 = (383 - 48 N) / 608

This is 15.625% for N = 6 and 7.73% for N = 7

Meanwhile, I had another idea - something similar to the Small/Tall/All bet in craps, where you would win if all 12 signs were hit before any green number - but the probability of winning isn't as low as I expected (it's only slightly worse than 1/6), and the expected number of spins needed for a win (an example of the "coupon collector's problem") doesn't justify the low payout.

The rows indicate what the first hit pays, and the columns indicate what the second hit pays; each hit after the second pays double what the previous one paid (so the 6 row and 50 column is for 6, 50, 100, 200, 400, and so on)

Blanks indicate a negative HE (i.e. an AP)

There are three tables - single-zero, double-zero, and triple-zero wheels

0 | 20 | 25 | 30 | 35 | 40 | 45 | 50 | 55 | 60 | 65 | 70 | 75 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

5 | 43.92057906 | 40.03585895 | 36.15113885 | 32.26641875 | 28.38169865 | 24.49697855 | 20.61225845 | 16.72753835 | 12.84281825 | 8.958098147 | 5.073378046 | 1.188657945 |

6 | 35.81247095 | 31.92775085 | 28.04303075 | 24.15831064 | 20.27359054 | 16.38887044 | 12.50415034 | 8.619430241 | 4.73471014 | 0.849990039 | ||

7 | 27.70436284 | 23.81964274 | 19.93492264 | 16.05020254 | 12.16548244 | 8.280762335 | 4.396042234 | 0.511322133 | ||||

8 | 19.59625473 | 15.71153463 | 11.82681453 | 7.942094429 | 4.057374328 | 0.172654227 | ||||||

9 | 11.48814662 | 7.603426522 | 3.718706421 | |||||||||

10 | 3.380038515 |

0, 00 | 20 | 25 | 30 | 35 | 40 | 45 | 50 | 55 | 60 | 65 | 70 | 75 | 80 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

5 | 45.72368421 | 42.02302632 | 38.32236842 | 34.62171053 | 30.92105263 | 27.22039474 | 23.51973684 | 19.81907895 | 16.11842105 | 12.41776316 | 8.717105263 | 5.016447368 | 1.315789474 |

6 | 37.82894737 | 34.12828947 | 30.42763158 | 26.72697368 | 23.02631579 | 19.32565789 | 15.625 | 11.92434211 | 8.223684211 | 4.523026316 | 0.822368421 | ||

7 | 29.93421053 | 26.23355263 | 22.53289474 | 18.83223684 | 15.13157895 | 11.43092105 | 7.730263158 | 4.029605263 | 0.328947368 | ||||

8 | 22.03947368 | 18.33881579 | 14.63815789 | 10.9375 | 7.236842105 | 3.536184211 | |||||||

9 | 14.14473684 | 10.44407895 | 6.743421053 | 3.042763158 | |||||||||

10 | 6.25 | 2.549342105 |

0, 00, 000 | 20 | 25 | 30 | 35 | 40 | 45 | 50 | 55 | 60 | 65 | 70 | 75 | 80 | 85 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

5 | 47.55244755 | 44.05594406 | 40.55944056 | 37.06293706 | 33.56643357 | 30.06993007 | 26.57342657 | 23.07692308 | 19.58041958 | 16.08391608 | 12.58741259 | 9.090909091 | 5.594405594 | 2.097902098 |

6 | 39.86013986 | 36.36363636 | 32.86713287 | 29.37062937 | 25.87412587 | 22.37762238 | 18.88111888 | 15.38461538 | 11.88811189 | 8.391608392 | 4.895104895 | 1.398601399 | ||

7 | 32.16783217 | 28.67132867 | 25.17482517 | 21.67832168 | 18.18181818 | 14.68531469 | 11.18881119 | 7.692307692 | 4.195804196 | 0.699300699 | ||||

8 | 24.47552448 | 20.97902098 | 17.48251748 | 13.98601399 | 10.48951049 | 6.993006993 | 3.496503497 | 0 | ||||||

9 | 16.78321678 | 13.28671329 | 9.79020979 | 6.293706294 | 2.797202797 | |||||||||

10 | 9.090909091 | 5.594405594 | 2.097902098 | |||||||||||

11 | 1.398601399 |

and the fact that you have to put triple zero wheels into this is crazy you know we live in a greedy future if we have regulated triple zero wheels

$1 (pays 11) take $6

$6 (pays 66) take $50

$22 (pays 242) take $200

$64 (pays $704) take $500

$268 (pays $2948) ....

or $1 (11) $7 > $5 (55) $50 > $10 ($110) $100 > $20 ($220) $200 > $40 ($440) etc.

btw sometime ago there was a wheel which had the 12 signs of the zodiac, but there were segments around the wheel ignoring 0. There was also one with 12 famous racehorses which I took this picture (in 2006).

Quote:charliepatrickbtw sometime ago there was a wheel which had the 12 signs of the zodiac, but there were segments around the wheel ignoring 0.

I mentioned this in my first post in this thread, but it was with the Chinese signs instead of the Western ones (this is what "Chinese Horoscope Roulette" is). I saw it in Australia back in 2011.

I finally heard that podcast episode. It dropped on 8/21. I actually forgot I started this thread about it. A google search brought me here. 🤪Quote:DJTeddyBearScott / Vital Vegas tweeted about a new game at DTG:

https://twitter.com/vitalvegas/status/1667000853822324736?s=46&t=GGszWiD6DLadfPNF5gTL-AQuote:First look at a new roulette variation, Birthday Bet. Only @Downtown_Grand at the moment. Interview with the inventor, Ryan Chinn, on the podcast.

Anyway, it’s in the Vital Vegas podcast, episode 159, which is an hour and a half long. The interview starts about an hour in.

I stayed at DTG 7/29-7/31. I don’t remember seeing it.