Roulette Payouts

5.26% on a double-zero American wheel and 2.70% on a single-zero European wheel. It is the same for every bet on the layout, with two exceptions. The five-number bet (0, 00, 1, 2, 3) on an American wheel is worse at 7.89%. And at a table that returns half an even-money stake when a zero lands, red, black, odd, even, 1 to 18 and 19 to 36 are better: 2.63% on the double-zero wheel and 1.35% on the single-zero one. Both headline figures assume a wheel with one or two green pockets. On the triple-zero wheel a number of Las Vegas floors now run, every bet costs 7.69% instead.

It pays 35:1. A fair game would pay 37:1 on an American wheel and 36:1 on a European one, given the pockets each has. The missing units are the casino's margin.

Yes, on one group of bets, and it is the only rule in the game that does. Some tables give you half your stake back instead of taking all of it when the ball lands in a zero. Atlantic City calls this surrender and applies it on the double-zero wheel; European tables call the same thing la partage. It covers only the six even-money bets (red, black, odd, even, 1 to 18, 19 to 36), and because the green pockets are the entire house edge on those bets, forgiving half of that loss halves the cost exactly: 5.26% becomes 2.63%, and 2.70% becomes 1.35%. Nothing else about the game changes, and no other bet on the layout is affected.

Not always, and this is the one case where the usual advice is wrong. A surrendered even-money bet on a double-zero wheel costs 2.63%, which is fractionally less than the 2.70% the same bet costs on a single-zero wheel with no half-back rule. So the rule matters more than the pocket count on those six bets. On every other bet the single-zero wheel wins easily, at 2.70% against 5.26%, because surrender and la partage do not apply to them at all. Ask which rule the table is running before assuming the wheel decides it.

It costs 7.69% on every bet, against 5.26% on an ordinary double-zero wheel, so the same $10 wager gives up about 77 cents on average instead of 53. The arithmetic is the identity every row in the table above follows: a 39-pocket wheel still returns 36 units on a winning straight-up number, and 36 units across 39 pockets is a loss of 3 in 39, or 1 in 13. The wheel premiered at the Venetian in Las Vegas in September 2016, where it is branded Sands Roulette and the extra green carries a logo instead of the digits 000, and it has since spread to other Strip, downtown and locals floors. The only wager anywhere on this page that costs more is the five-number bet on a double-zero layout, at 7.89%. The five even-money tables a US player can actually walk up to (by wheel and by zero rule) are ranked cheapest first in the ladder further up this page, rather than typed out here where they cannot move if the maths behind them ever does. The pocket count is printed on the wheel and on the layout, which makes it the cheapest check on this page to actually make.

It pays 11 to 1 and it costs exactly what the rest of the wheel costs, which is the interesting part. Any green is a single wager on 0, 00 or 000, so it covers 3 pockets of 39 and returns 12 units on a hit, a loss of 3 in 39, or 7.69%. Compare that with the double-zero wheel, where the layout's own odd wager is the trap: the five-number bet covers 5 pockets of 38 for 6 to 1 and costs 7.89% against that wheel's 5.26%. The reason the two behave differently is one line of arithmetic. Three pockets paying 11 to 1 is the standard price of a street, and a street is what any three pockets on any roulette wheel already pay, so any green folds into the single edge the layout carries rather than sitting outside it. It is neither a trap nor a way around one: on a triple-zero wheel the expensive part is the wheel. Sourced from wizardofodds.com's roulette basics page, retrieved 2026-09-12, which states the added bet on any green at 11 to 1.

Because we cannot source the one thing a spin needs. A spin has to land in a named pocket, and that requires the wheel's physical pocket order, which is a transcription rather than something you can work out. Nobody publishes one for the 39-pocket wheel: wizardofodds.com, which documents the wheel and its 7.69% edge, states plainly that it does not know the order of the numbers on it. We could invent an order that looked entirely convincing and no reader could tell, so we have not, and the page says so where the demo would be rather than hiding the control. Nothing else on the page depends on it. What a bet pays, how often it wins and what it costs come from the pocket count and the posted payout, which are printed on the wheel and on the felt, so the payout table, the session panel and the house edge are all priced for this wheel. The order only matters once there is a ball. It is also why announced bets (Voisins, Tiers, Orphelins and neighbours) are not offered on this layout: those are defined by which pockets sit next to which.

Close, but not identical, and pages that treat them as one rule are glossing over the difference. Under la partage your half stake is returned immediately. Under en prison the whole stake is held for one more spin: win it and you get the stake back with no winnings, lose it and it is gone. That works out slightly worse for the player than la partage, and how much worse depends on what the table does if the imprisoned bet meets another zero, which varies by house. The figures on this page price la partage and surrender, which are unambiguous. They do not price en prison, because there is no single version of it to price.

It matters to everything except the average. Over 100 spins on an American wheel a straight-up number finishes ahead about 49% of the time and its middle result is a loss of 28 stakes, while red or black finishes ahead about 27% of the time and its middle result is a loss of 6. Same expected cost, very different demands on a bankroll. The panel on this page computes both figures for the session length and stake you enter.

Each is a package of several bets settled on one spin, so a hit wins on one part of it and loses the rest, and the answer is the difference. Voisins du Zero stakes 9 chips and covers 17 pockets: landing on 0, 2 or 3 returns 15 chips net, and every other covered number returns 9. Tiers du Cylindre stakes 6 and returns 12 net on any of its 12 pockets. Orphelins stakes 5 and returns 13 net, except on 1 and on 17, which return 31, because 17 sits in two of its splits and pays twice. All three carry the same 2.70% house edge as a straight-up number on the same wheel.

They are not cheaper. Every part of an announced bet is an ordinary layout wager, so the package costs the same 2.70% of what you stake as any other bet on a single-zero wheel. What changes is the spread of results: covering 17 of 37 pockets hits far more often than a straight-up number and wins much less when it does, which is a different shape of session rather than a smaller expected loss. Announced bets are laid out on the single-zero wheel only, because they are defined by which pockets sit next to each other on it.

No. Progressions like the Martingale change the shape of your results but not the expected value, the edge is fixed on every spin.

It matches almost exactly for a single-zero wheel. Pragmatic Play publishes 97.3% RTP for Roulette (reconfirmed 2026-09-29, unchanged since first read), equal to the 97.30% return this page's 2.70% single-zero edge implies. It does not publish a figure for an American double-zero wheel or a triple-zero one, so this page's 5.26% and 7.69% rows have no published real-software comparison yet. A second studio, Play'n GO, published a matching 97.3% figure for European Roulette Pro until it withdrew the page that figure was read from; actfap.com/rtp no longer carries a Play'n GO comparison for that reason. actfap.com/rtp carries the Pragmatic Play figure, dated and linked to the provider's own page.