Study 04 · wheel comparison

European versus American roulette: the risk distribution

Paired-seed simulation of 20,000 sessions per wheel showing how a second zero changes terminal bankroll, drawdown, and ruin risk.

Adding double zero changes more than a label. We sent the same 20,000 session seeds through a European and an American wheel, flat-betting $10 on red for at most 1,000 spins. Pairing the seeds reduces noise in the comparison: the generator starts from the same state while the wheel geometry changes.

1.57%
European ruin rate
9.29%
American ruin rate
$727.70
European mean terminal
$478.32
American mean terminal

Configuration

Master seed
0x6d2b7a7f
Sessions
20,000 per wheel
Session
$1,000 bankroll; $10 red; 1,000-spin cap
Stopping
Stop at zero or after the final scheduled spin

The second zero compounds

WheelHouse edgeMean terminal10th–90th percentileRuinP90 drawdown
european2.703%$727.70$320$1,1401.57%$810
american5.263%$478.32$40$8809.29%$1,010
european mean terminal
$727.70
american mean terminal
$478.32
Bar lengths share one scale within this figure. Exact values appear at right.

The theoretical loss on a complete 1,000-spin schedule is $270.27on the European wheel and $526.32 on the American wheel. Simulation means were close. Early bankruptcy slightly changes total action because ruined sessions cannot place the remaining bets. The more useful comparison is the shape: American-wheel ruin was about 5.9 times as frequent under this bankroll and horizon.

Limitations

This is one flat even-money strategy. En prison and la partage rules are not modeled, and casino table limits do not matter for a fixed $10 bet. A different starting bankroll or horizon changes the ruin rate. It cannot change the expected loss per unit wagered under the stated wheel rules.

Audit the numbers.The chart data is checked in as plain CSV; the combined snapshot is also available as JSON.

Sources and implementation references