Calculating Average for Roulette

  • Thread starter Thread starter KFC
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Average
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating averages in roulette, highlighting the importance of specifying game rules for accurate calculations. It explains that the average outcome for a roulette game, considering the house edge, results in a 52.63% chance of losing when betting on a color. The conversation also addresses how this average can differ in biased scenarios, such as a roulette where a specific number appears more frequently, leading to an average of 105.26. Participants emphasize that averages only hold meaning when outcomes can be summed, similar to rolling a die. The complexities of calculating averages in games of chance are underscored, particularly in relation to the central limit theorem.
KFC
Messages
477
Reaction score
4
In basic statistic, we consider mean, mode and variance. Take a die as example, there are 6 possible values so the average is (1+2+3+4+5+6)/6= 3.5. For a roulette, besides 1 to 36, there are two special sections 0 and 00. So how do we calculate the average? Take 0 and 00 as numerical ZERO?

In one text, it said that for roulette, in 2000 spins, the average is 52.63 and standard derivation is 7.16. But how come it get an average that large?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
You have to specify rules of the game

The average only makes sense if you can add outcomes. In case of a die, if you get $1 for each dot that you roll ($1 for 1, $2 for 2, ...) you can add them and you can say that the average (expected earnings per roll) is $3.5.

52.63% is the chance for the casino to win (and for you to lose) if you put money on a color. Say, you bet on red, if the roulette rolls red, you win, if it rolls black or either zero, you lose. The chance to lose is 20/38 = 52.63%.
 
Thanks for reply. But I don't think the average (52.63) is the payoff odds or (rate to lose) because in the context of the book, it mentioned it is the average (mean) which later central limit theorem will be applied. And the author consider the same game on a biased roulette in which 17's appear at the chance 1/19 instead of the 1/38, and the average now becomes 105.26 instead of 52.63. Following your idea to get 52.63, I don't see how to get 105.26 in this case

hamster143 said:
You have to specify rules of the game

The average only makes sense if you can add outcomes. In case of a die, if you get $1 for each dot that you roll ($1 for 1, $2 for 2, ...) you can add them and you can say that the average (expected earnings per roll) is $3.5.

52.63% is the chance for the casino to win (and for you to lose) if you put money on a color. Say, you bet on red, if the roulette rolls red, you win, if it rolls black or either zero, you lose. The chance to lose is 20/38 = 52.63%.
 
KFC said:
In basic statistic, we consider mean, mode and variance. Take a die as example, there are 6 possible values so the average is (1+2+3+4+5+6)/6= 3.5. For a roulette, besides 1 to 36, there are two special sections 0 and 00. So how do we calculate the average? Take 0 and 00 as numerical ZERO?

In one text, it said that for roulette, in 2000 spins, the average is 52.63 and standard derivation is 7.16. But how come it get an average that large?
52.63 is impossible on the face of it. You might want to include more text material from the article or book you are referring to.
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...

Similar threads

Back
Top