4 year math degree guy vs. 15 years experienced gambler
I'll admit, mostly the reason why I avoid roulette not because of the house edge but because I don't find much entertainment in it.
As far as knowing the math, a University degree in mathematics helps. One can play a game for a thousand years without knowing or learning its math. You learn math by studying it as a discpline, not by playing games.
Fair roulette is an unskilled game, in contrast with blackjack, poker, VP, etc. Knowing the math won't increase your odds of winning any given roulette bet, so to that extent it doesn't help. Math knowledge is useful in other ways, but those have little to do with roulette per se and more with general probabilities. There are rules of thumb like "don't make the 5-number bet because the EV is worse" or, on a single-zero roulette wheel with partage, "only make outside bets". But you don't need math knowledge to learn those rules. I suppose knowing probabilities might help you understand why the streak of numbers on the readerboard gives you no useful information about where to bet, and thus disabuse you of the Gambler's Fallacy, but believing in the Gambler's Fallacy doesn't actually hurt you relative to your overall handle. The only time it's a problem is when you bet more under false assumptions (like "black is due"). Then you're increasing your handle and therefore your theoretical dollar loss.
Quote: MathExtremistI'm both, but you can't be a "better" roulette player than someone else. (How would one judge "better"? Won more? That's easy, just bet bigger...)
Fair roulette is an unskilled game, in contrast with blackjack, poker, VP, etc. Knowing the math won't increase your odds of winning any given roulette bet, so to that extent it doesn't help. Math knowledge is useful in other ways, but those have little to do with roulette per se and more with general probabilities. There are rules of thumb like "don't make the 5-number bet because the EV is worse" or, on a single-zero roulette wheel with partage, "only make outside bets". But you don't need math knowledge to learn those rules. I suppose knowing probabilities might help you understand why the streak of numbers on the readerboard gives you no useful information about where to bet, and thus disabuse you of the Gambler's Fallacy, but believing in the Gambler's Fallacy doesn't actually hurt you relative to your overall handle. The only time it's a problem is when you bet more under false assumptions (like "black is due"). Then you're increasing your handle and therefore your theoretical dollar loss.
Hey man, if you dont like the word 'better', use whatever word makes you feel most comfortable. The question ITSELF, does not change. Ken
Quote: MathExtremistThere are rules of thumb like "don't make the 5-number bet because the EV is worse"
? Why?
((36-N)*N/38 - (38-N)*N)/38)/N = -2/38
What's special about N=5?
Or is "5-number bet" not what I think it is (betting on five numbers at once)?
Quote:or, on a single-zero roulette wheel with partage, "only make outside bets".
What is "partage"?
I actually thought I knew everything about roulette before I found this side :) I mean what's there to know, right? :D
The only way my math degree is helping here is making sure I will never actually play roulette.
Quote: TriplellI'm going to say the mathematician. He doesn't have 15 years of losing money under his belt, only 4 ;)
Well met!
See the Wizard's House Edge chart.
Quote: weaselmanWhat's special about N=5?
Or is "5-number bet" not what I think it is (betting on five numbers at once)?
It is, but it only pays 6-1 (or 7 for 1) which is equivalent to 35 for 5. All other roulette bets which cover N numbers pay 36 for N, so the EV is worse on the 5 number bet, something like 7.9% instead of 5.26%.
Quote:
What is "partage"?
The French rule where if you lose an outside bet to a zero (single zero tables, remember), you only lose half the bet instead of all of it. That cuts the edge roughly in half, from 2.7% to a hair over 1.35%.
I might play roulette if I could get those odds. Do they even offer that in Vegas anywhere, even at high-roller action?
Quote: MathExtremistThe French rule where if you lose an outside bet to a zero (single zero tables, remember), you only lose half the bet instead of all of it. That cuts the edge roughly in half, from 2.7% to a hair over 1.35%.
I might play roulette if I could get those odds. Do they even offer that in Vegas anywhere, even at high-roller action?
Even at low roller action. Check out the single zero wheel on the main floor of the MGM. Also offered in the high limit room at Bellagio.
Quote: mrjjjSo which one is the better roulette player? Ken
The Gambler with 15 years experience. But, only if they're an AP.
Quote: mrjjjHey man, if you dont like the word 'better', use whatever word makes you feel most comfortable. The question ITSELF, does not change. Ken
I'm very comfortable with the word "better"; I just don't know what *you* mean by it.
As, for my roulette method? I know you are going to ask me before you will bother to answer my question, you are too predictable. I play the math guy's method. I see a high house edge, and I don't play based on my mathematical observation.
I know some will play this and I'll never hear a word from them, I accept that. Some might even rip the method AND still play it. This is no betting. I use no units of $15, $10 and $5 but use whatever fits your budget of zero dollars the best. I try and separate fact from idiocy. A fact is, in 'X' number of spins, we will get a house edge of 5.26%. I do have to thank Einstein ahead of time, he helped me a bit.
What jjj is really doing here is employing a timeworn tactic: if you don't have knowledge, sneer at those who do.
And, of course, if both people do play roulette for some reason, the proper answer is: neither. It actually isn't possible to play roulette well or badly, so it isn't possible to play it better or worse than anybody else.*
*There are a few bets on the layout that are even worse than the 5.26% house edge, so TECHNICALLY, one person can play even worse than another.
Did the math guy just graduate? He might not have any disposable income to gamble at all ... might not have a job.
Must they both actually play/bet? If not I'll take the guy that is not playing. If they both must play then they both will be equally bad. One will be luckier and so I will take that guy -- the luckier one! So 4-year Math Guy vs. 15 year experienced gambler on who is luckier is anybody's call.
Are both guys alive? If one is dead then I take that guy, he won't lose any money. Although he did pay the ultimate price for living. If both are living and must play then again I will go with the luckier one. He will be the one with diarrhea and be stuck sitting on the throne while the other guy is playing roulette.
I am just going to go with saying roulette sucks ... sucks to play ... sucks to watch ...
Just so I understand. (I want to make sure everyone is consistent, that also goes for you KELLY at GG). If I slam back after reading this lovely post, it'll be another post from me and I'm 'causing trouble', correct? lol Also, where are the responses from others telling MarieBicurie to cool it? DOAQuote: MarieBicurieThis question is vague and not well thought out. There are a lot of delluded gamblers who think they are experienced, Mrjjj is a great case in point. But considering roulette can't be beaten, I say it takes the math guy 5 seconds to figure out the game is unbeatable while your 15 year gambler is busy trying to become a 20 year gambler. I'd love to hear your definiton of "experienced gambler".
As, for my roulette method? I know you are going to ask me before you will bother to answer my question, you are too predictable. I play the math guy's method. I see a high house edge, and I don't play based on my mathematical observation.
I know some will play this and I'll never hear a word from them, I accept that. Some might even rip the method AND still play it. This is no betting. I use no units of $15, $10 and $5 but use whatever fits your budget of zero dollars the best. I try and separate fact from idiocy. A fact is, in 'X' number of spins, we will get a house edge of 5.26%. I do have to thank Einstein ahead of time, he helped me a bit.
"The better player is the one who doesn't play it at all, so the answer is, math guy" >>> This is the ONLY part of the post that is an answer. Thanks mkl for the response. KenQuote: mkl654321The better player is the one who doesn't play it at all, so the answer is, math guy.
What jjj is really doing here is employing a timeworn tactic: if you don't have knowledge, sneer at those who do.
And, of course, if both people do play roulette for some reason, the proper answer is: neither. It actually isn't possible to play roulette well or badly, so it isn't possible to play it better or worse than anybody else.*
*There are a few bets on the layout that are even worse than the 5.26% house edge, so TECHNICALLY, one person can play even worse than another.
Quote: MathExtremistIt is, but it only pays 6-1 (or 7 for 1) which is equivalent to 35 for 5.
Wow! So they make you pay for convenience of putting one stack of chips instead of five? :) That's really smart!
Next time I am in a casino, I am going to watch for how many people are actually betting on it. I just love this kind of unorthodox business logic, that defies common sense so much that there is no way in hell it could work ... yet it does :)
Quote: weaselmanWow! So they make you pay for convenience of putting one stack of chips instead of five? :) That's really smart!
Next time I am in a casino, I am going to watch for how many people are actually betting on it. I just love this kind of unorthodox business logic, that defies common sense so much that there is no way in hell it could work ... yet it does :)
I don't think it was planned that way. It's just that the topmost street in American roulette covers 5 numbers - 0, 00, 1, 2, 3, instead of just 4 in single-zero roulette. 5 doesn't divide into 36 evenly so the casino rounded down. The "same edge as everything else" payout would be 6.2 to 1. Though it would be nice if the casino didn't take breakage on stacks of 5 or multiples thereof. There's no reason (other than dealer training and a slight dip in hold) they couldn't pay 36 for 5 on that bet if you actually bet 5.
Quote: weaselmanWow! So they make you pay for convenience of putting one stack of chips instead of five? :) That's really smart!
Next time I am in a casino, I am going to watch for how many people are actually betting on it. I just love this kind of unorthodox business logic, that defies common sense so much that there is no way in hell it could work ... yet it does :)
There are similar such sets of bets in craps, where just moving the chips to another bet wins on the same event, but at better odds. For example the big 6/8, place 6/8, and buy 6/8 are all bets that 6/8 will be rolled before a 7, but all have different odds (7 to 6 on the place bets, 23 to 21 on the buy bets, and 1 to 1 on the "big" bets). Same with the "any 7" bet, which pays 4 to 1. You could get 13 to 3 by dividing the bet evenly between the 1-6, 2-5, and 3-4 easy hops, assuming the usual 15 to 1 odds.
Quote: Scotty81The Gambler with 15 years experience. But, only if they're an AP.
The Gambler with 15 years experience and a degree, but only f they're an AP player.
Quote: KeyserThe Gambler with 15 years experience and a degree, but only f they're an AP player.
How the heck are you suppose to win with gamblers fallacy (AP)? lol Ken
Advantage Play is not the gambler's fallacy.
If you don't understand the difference between the two, then you should visit the wizardofodds.com website.
-Keyser
Quote: KeyserMr. Jjj,
Advantage Play is not the gambler's fallacy.
If you don't understand the difference between the two, then you should visit the wizardofodds.com website.
-Keyser
But he did say "lol". Lol.
WRONG...it is very much gamblers fallacy. Most know this and the ones who dont, are in denial. lol KenQuote: mkl654321But he did say "lol". Lol.
He is the current World and Olympic champion in all disciplines associated with internet forum ascendancy.
No amount of vitriol, coercion or praise will deter him from his cause.
He has more stamina than the Albanian Laughing Goose.
Quote: mrjjjWRONG...it is very much gamblers fallacy. Most know this and the ones who dont, are in denial. lol Ken
Okay, I'll try this... what IS the Gambler's Fallacy according to you?
"The gambler's fallacy is the mistaken notion that the odds for something with a fixed probability increase or decrease depending upon recent occurrences." (Yes, the dictionary) If my way of playing is GF, lets not leave too many others out. AP is a joke and only REAL roulette players know this. SIDENOTE: This was called answering your question. You may not like or agree with the answer but at least I put the time in out of courtesy to respond back to you. KenQuote: thecesspitOkay, I'll try this... what IS the Gambler's Fallacy according to you?
Now what I don't get, is what this has to do with Advantage Play, which is the process of try to find games where the player has the advantage (positive EV) (card counting, hole carding etc...)?
They would appear to me very different things.
I can only speak for roulette, keep that in mind. What advantage? Please dont say...searching for a tilted wheel. KenQuote: thecesspitThat's cool, we have (roughly) the same definition. I was worried what you meant was different from everyone else, with your conviction that AP if the Gambler's Fallacy.
Now what I don't get, is what this has to do with Advantage Play, which is the process of try to find games where the player has the advantage (positive EV) (card counting, hole carding etc...)?
They would appear to me very different things.
Quote: thecesspitNow what I don't get, is what this has to do with Advantage Play, which is the process of try to find games where the player has the advantage (positive EV) (card counting, hole carding etc...)?
They would appear to me very different things.
The Gambler's Fallacy is just a false belief. It doesn't change anything - the wheel, dice, or cards don't care what you believe. All other things being equal, if someone who mistakenly believes in the maturity of chances bets $10,000 on roulette in a weekend, he'll have exactly the same EV as a Ph.D. combinatorialist betting the same action. It's just less likely that the latter will actually bet that much. But whether you think Black is "due" doesn't change the fact that it isn't, and my next bet on Black has exactly the same edge as yours.
For the most part, true +EV players know about and do not believe in the maturity of chances. I don't mean the folks who think the pattern of past numbers in roulette matters; I mean card-counters, good sports handicappers, +100% VP players, good poker players, etc. All of those +EV plays are based on *non*-independent random events, whereas the Gambler's Fallacy refers only to *independent* random events. So yes, they're entirely different things.
Mr. J is correct about one thing: AP Roulette opportunities are scarce.
Even if casinos let a VB player bet until the final revolution, they really have nothing to worry about. Just a small breeze from the A/C on the final revolution will cause the ball to come off differently, and with todays modern low profile wheels the bounce is randomized beyond any predictibility.
Bias opportunites are maybe a bit more common, but to find a bias where the HA of 5.26% is overcome is ...well... virtually non-existent. Any casino that is concerned about bias play is just being overly paranoid.
In fact, common countermeasures to twart bias players can actually be counterproductive for the casino. If a player should happen to win on a set of numbers, or betting a section, it is almost 100% guaranteed they are merely being lucky. Any attempt to try and "fix" or "repair" a wheel will most likely result in causing a real bias somewhere else. I have seen a few people take advantage of this, and I don't think the casino ever realized that it was their own damn idiocy that created the bias and allowed the players to get a significant score.
Note to casinos: If you have a wheel, your best strategy is to just let the wheel wear out evenly, and accept that statistical spikes will happen. They aren't related to the condition of the wheel. To try and surgically "fix" a wheel will just make matters worse and, in fact, create REAL AP opportunities.
I better go hide now, as I have just revealed (somewhat) one of the few remaining secrets of AP roulette play.
Well said. Excellent post!
-Keyser
"In fact, common countermeasures to twart bias players can actually be counterproductive for the casino. If a player should happen to win on a set of numbers, or betting a section, it is almost 100% guaranteed they are merely being lucky. Any attempt to try and "fix" or "repair" a wheel will most likely result in causing a real bias somewhere else. I have seen a few people take advantage of this, and I don't think the casino ever realized that it was their own damn idiocy that created the bias and allowed the players to get a significant score."
"Note to casinos: If you have a wheel, your best strategy is to just let the wheel wear out evenly, and accept that statistical spikes will happen. They aren't related to the condition of the wheel. To try and surgically "fix" a wheel will just make matters worse and, in fact, create REAL AP opportunities." - Scotty81
Quote: mrjjj"The gambler's fallacy is the mistaken notion that the odds for something with a fixed probability increase or decrease depending upon recent occurrences." (Yes, the dictionary) If my way of playing is GF, lets not leave too many others out. AP is a joke and only REAL roulette players know this. SIDENOTE: This was called answering your question. You may not like or agree with the answer but at least I put the time in out of courtesy to respond back to you. Ken
You didn't say "lol". I had the impression that you thought your nose would fall off or something if you didn't use that expression at least once in a post. Lol.
When there is something funny.....yes lol
Quote: scotty81
Bias opportunites are maybe a bit more common, but to find a bias where the HA of 5.26% is overcome is ...well... virtually non-existent. Any casino that is concerned about bias play is just being overly paranoid.
This is also the reason why searching for biased wheels is a fool's errand. By the time you have observed an anomaly, and then taken enough time to verify it (for you NEED to see a definite, REPETITIVE bias, and for that, you need to observe many, many trials), you will have consumed many hours of your life. And even if you DO find a verifiable bias, it will almost never be sufficient to overcome the house edge.
Another consideration is that the house DOES change the wheels every so often--at the last casino where I worked, it was done every five days on a rotating basis. Imagine your roulette AP who has identifed a JUICY BIASED WHEEL. He goes back to his hotel room after administering a good ass-whuppin' to the casino. The next day, he returns to that game--but the wheel has been changed. However, he doesn't know that (and how could he tell, short of having taken photos of the biased wheel and then minutely scrutinizing the wheel again, comparing it to his photos to see if it was still the same wheel?) The casino, of course, doesn't have to have suspected anything--the wheel change could be routine. So our hero sits down and plays (unknowingly) against the standard 5.26% edge. BUT HOW WILL HE KNOW THIS? He can't tell by RESULTS--after all, his numbers will still come up; they just won't come up quite as often as they had with the biased wheel. By the time he figures out that the present wheel is not biased, he will have dumped his previous profits down the drain.
Another consideration is that the house DOES change the wheels every so often--at the last casino where I worked, it was done every five days on a rotating basis. Imagine your roulette AP who has identifed a JUICY BIASED WHEEL. He goes back to his hotel room after administering a good ass-whuppin' to the casino. The next day, he returns to that game--but the wheel has been changed." >>> YES! I have posted that MANY times in the past, I do agree with your statement. I said it before, AP works great in theory, on paper. The concept of it is sound and I ADMIT that 100%. In todays casinos, there are too many counter measures against such play. Ken
Quote: scotty81Bias opportunites are maybe a bit more common, but to find a bias where the HA of 5.26% is overcome is ...well... virtually non-existent. Any casino that is concerned about bias play is just being overly paranoid.
That's just it. In fact, here's a quick survey to check one's intuition regarding this:
Suppose a roulette wheel has a bias, such that the numbers on one half of the wheel are 10% (ten percent) more likely to appear than the numbers on the other half of the wheel.
a) Would you guess you'd be able to tell which numbers were biased in favor of being more likely?
b) If you said "yes" in (a), would you guess that you have the edge on those numbers?
Don't do the math on (b) - just make an intuitive guess. Do you think you can beat a wheel that's 10% biased?
Quote: weaselmanDepends if it is singe zero or double zero. In the former case you'd have a decent edge, the latter is still worse than blackjack.
Whoops, I wasn't specific enough. I did mean double-zero.
Quote: mkl654321Another consideration is that the house DOES change the wheels every so often--at the last casino where I worked, it was done every five days on a rotating basis. Imagine your roulette AP who has identifed a JUICY BIASED WHEEL. He goes back to his hotel room after administering a good ass-whuppin' to the casino. The next day, he returns to that game--but the wheel has been changed. However, he doesn't know that (and how could he tell, short of having taken photos of the biased wheel and then minutely scrutinizing the wheel again, comparing it to his photos to see if it was still the same wheel?) The casino, of course, doesn't have to have suspected anything--the wheel change could be routine. So our hero sits down and plays (unknowingly) against the standard 5.26% edge. BUT HOW WILL HE KNOW THIS? He can't tell by RESULTS--after all, his numbers will still come up; they just won't come up quite as often as they had with the biased wheel. By the time he figures out that the present wheel is not biased, he will have dumped his previous profits down the drain.
I agree with mkl up to a point. It is extremely difficult to tell if a wheel has been moved, but not impossible. This has, in fact, been the downfall of many an amateur bias player - not noticing that the wheel is actually a different wheel!
But, what casinos don't realize is that the downside to moving - or even rotating their wheels - far outweighs any possible bias play that may be taking place. Here are the reasons:
First, the casino has access to far more data than the player does, and if the wheel isn't bias (which it won't be), there is no reason to move it. If it is bias, why even move it? Get rid of it. The reason casinos don't get rid of their wheels? They AREN'T biased. So, don't complicate your life and just shuffle them around.
Second, you are far more likely to introduce a bias by moving the wheel than just by leaving it alone. I've seen perfectly good wheels that have been dropped, or their spindle damaged during the process of a move. They really DID become biased. Astute players caught on to this before the casino had enough data to verify that they had fucked up the wheel. Just leave the damn wheels alone and you will be fine.
Third, whatever insurance you may think you are getting against bias play is negated by the fact you are creating additional opportunities for VB players. When wheels are rotated/moved, it is a gold mine for VB players. This is because of a concept called "compensating leveling". When wheels are leveled according to the manufacturer recomendations, the combination of the wheel and the table tend to settle in over time. In many cases, there are slight imperfections that cause a wheel to be inherently unlevel, and a table can be inherently unlevel as well.
Ask anyone who is around wheels for a very long time: It doesn't take much to get a wheel out of level. When you move a wheel to a new table, you can level it initially, but it takes about a month before the combination of the table and the wheel will settle in to a stable state. The same goes for rotating a wheel, but to a lesser extent.
There are many (well....a few) successful VB players that look exclusively for wheels that have just been moved or rotated. They know that the liklihood of an unlevel situation is magnified ten fold just after a wheel is moved or rotated - regardless of the effort a casino puts into leveling the wheel. Just the nature of the beast.
If you are keeping your wheels maintained to factory specifications, and your own data analysis is not showing any long term variations above 4 standard deviations, just leave the damn things alone and enjoy your 5.26% HA.
Quote: scotty81Even at low roller action. Check out the single zero wheel on the main floor of the MGM. Also offered in the high limit room at Bellagio.
Confirmed: there are two single-zero roulette wheels at MGM right next to the dice pit offering partage (though the floor supervisor didn't know what "partage" was - he just said "you lose half when the zero shows").
However, they were $25 tables using $5 chips, which I'm not sure qualifies as "low roller action".
Quote: MathExtremistHowever, they were $25 tables using $5 chips, which I'm not sure qualifies as "low roller action".
As low as you're going to find. Better than the $100 minimum that you find in the high limit lounges.
Quote: scotty81I agree with mkl up to a point. It is extremely difficult to tell if a wheel has been moved, but not impossible. This has, in fact, been the downfall of many an amateur bias player - not noticing that the wheel is actually a different wheel!
But, what casinos don't realize is that the downside to moving - or even rotating their wheels - far outweighs any possible bias play that may be taking place. Here are the reasons:
First, the casino has access to far more data than the player does, and if the wheel isn't bias (which it won't be), there is no reason to move it. If it is bias, why even move it? Get rid of it. The reason casinos don't get rid of their wheels? They AREN'T biased. So, don't complicate your life and just shuffle them around.
When I worked as a break-in dealer, I had to deal roulette (not for long, thank God). I was told that each roulette table came with three wheels (that was the way the manufacturer shipped them). The wheel was changed, routinely, every seven days at that casino. All that happened was that the recently used wheel was cleaned and inspected, then put at the back of the queue. The floorman told me that a surprising amount of crud and dirt gets under the wheel over the course of a week in a smoky casino. He also said that a couple of drops of bearing oil were put on the crown of the spindle of the wheel at the time it was cleaned. (We were bored at 4 AM, with no customers.)
So the casinos don't swap out wheels to try to thwart bias players; they just do it as a matter of routine. And I would imagine that the danger of introducing a biased wheel is outweighed by the benefit of cleaning and inspecting a wheel that has been in use. By removing a wheel that's been in action for a week and replacing it with a cleaned and oiled one, the casino is more likely to remove bias than introduce it.
Quote: mklWhen I worked as a break-in dealer, I had to deal roulette (not for long, thank God). I was told that each roulette table came with three wheels (that was the way the manufacturer shipped them). The wheel was changed, routinely, every seven days at that casino. All that happened was that the recently used wheel was cleaned and inspected, then put at the back of the queue. The floorman told me that a surprising amount of crud and dirt gets under the wheel over the course of a week in a smoky casino. He also said that a couple of drops of bearing oil were put on the crown of the spindle of the wheel at the time it was cleaned. (We were bored at 4 AM, with no customers.)
1. Each roulette table doesn't come with three wheels. I'm not saying you're lying, just that there are a lot of naive pit bosses that would say something like that to a dealer.
2. Casinos don't change them once a week. The most you will see is every two weeks (very very rare). A few will rotate at 30 days, and most casinos will only do so once a quarter or year, if at all. The reason is because they can get damaged or even dropped while moving the head and the bowl. Some casinos have stopped moving the wheels because they cause too much damage to them.
3. Dealers are not told when wheels are moved, and they are not told what type of maintenance is done to them. At the most, they are told that a wheel has been oiled if the dealers complain about it stopping too often.
-Keyser
Quote: Keyser1. Each roulette table doesn't come with three wheels. I'm not saying you're lying, just that there are a lot of naive pit bosses too.
2. Casinos don't change them once a week. The most you will see is every two weeks (very very rare). A few will rotate at 30 days, and most casinos will only do so once a quarter or year, if at all. The reason is because they can get damaged or even dropped while moving the head and the bowl. This can create dominant drops for VB players and is not a good idea.
3. Dealers are not told when wheels are moved, and they are not told what type of maintenance is done to them. At the most, they are told that a wheel has been oiled if the dealers complain about it stopping too often.
-Keyser
I kind of doubt that my immediate supervisor was making it all up. In any event, there definitely were three wheels, and it was the only roulette table in the entire casino. I know about the three wheels because I saw the log--the changes were done at about 4 or 5 AM, right in the middle of my shift. The wheels were individually serial numbered. And in another casino where I worked for about six months, the wheels were changed every FIVE days. Of course, this was all about twenty years ago, but roulette wheels don't appear to have changed any in the interim.
One thing that may be confusing you is that the wheel was mounted independently of the wooden bowl. The wheel itself was changed, and the interior surface cleaned.
And dealers are indeed told when the wheels are moved, if they are working the roulette wheel at the time the replacement is done. It took a good hour to get everything organized and tucked away (we had to rack up all the chips, for one thing).
In a casino, a lot of stuff happens on graveyard that hardly anybody ever sees.
