Why is it profitable for the casinos to offer no zero roulette?

[VLSroulette]

DISPERSION, that's the reason why.

Without any % edge they rely on dispersion of hits to clean up players.

The larger the played sample, the larger the expected dispersion for the players, meaning eventually they will face an asymmetrical tram in which hits are way too dispersed from their ideal values and this erodes player's bankroll inevitably.

Casino's ability to face the long run isn't the same as the player's long run facing one.

Only the casino with its virtually unlimited funds can have an unlimited long run, the player has a limited bankroll hence he can't stand the continuous (in theory infinite) sample exposure casinos can.

In a zero sum game where funds come and go from hand to hand, the player with the largest bankroll will get it all, hence casinos will wipe up every player with their no zero game.

So, as you can see, they aren't exactly depicted as charitable fellows for offering no zero roulette, they know perfectly well about dispersion of hits, plus the psychological factors in game.

Granted, they provide you a fair game in theory (fair payout), but still in practice long-term odds are stacked against the limited-bankroll players.

If dispersion is such a decisive factor in no zero roulette imagine its impact on regular roulette!

Victor

[VLSroulette]

Speaking of no zero roulette... they are all RNG.

Hum... perhaphs their argument is no house edge, why should they pay the dealer?

[VLSroulette]

-