[Performify]

The winner pays 100% of the vig, and its not even close.

Do you see why?








[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]









if not, its exactly as detailed by a couple people above. the winner should be paid 110 for his 110 bet but is paid 10:11. this money withheld from the winner (only) is the juice.

In other words, both betters are not risking 110 to win 100, even though it looks that way. They're both risking 110 to win 110, but the agreement is that the "house" only pays the winner 10:11. The loser drops 100% of their risked wager, not any more.

The casino table games are the perfect example. Do the casinos take their profit from people who win or people that lose at roulette / craps / etc?

While your first instinct might be that the losers are the ones that keep the lights on in Vegas, casinos take their longterm profits from each person that wins a bet, by paying them less than what they should (less than the true odds of the action happening). and this is why most people lose money over time, because they're playing a -EV game.

You can see this another way, by looking at if you went to a roulette table and placed a bet on every number (including 0 and 00 if you're in a US casino) you'd lose money, because the house is taking a percentage of your winnings as juice. If the house wasn't taking juice from the winner, you'd be breaking even.

Same thing with red/black on roulette: they should be paying more than 1:1 because of the 0/00 factor, and since they're not you have a longterm -EV expectation because they're witholding the extra 2%/4% from your payout on red/black.