("Slambo" of _The Westminster Gazette_.)
[Illustration: FIG. 1.]
The Roulette table, which is covered with a green padded cloth, and marked
out as shown in Fig. 1, is divided into two portions, the Roulette, or
Wheel as it is commonly called, itself being let into the centre of the
table between these two portions.
Fig. 1 is an illustration of one-half of the table, the other half being
marked in exactly a similar manner. It will be seen that the cloth is
divided into three long columns of figures, marked from 1 to 36. At the
bottom end of these columns there are three spaces, representing all the
numbers in the first, second, and third column respectively. There are
three similar spaces both on the right and on the left, marked 12 D, 12 M,
12 P, indicating the third (_Derniere_), the second (_Milieu_), and first
(_Premiere_) twelve (_Douzain_) numbers.
On either side of the column of figures are further spaces to mark the
_Rouge_ (or Red numbers); _Impair_ (or odd numbers), _Manque_ (all numbers
from 1 to 18 inclusive) on the one side; and the _Noir_ (or Black numbers),
_Pair_ (or even numbers), and _Passe_ (all {448} numbers from 19 to 36
inclusive) on the other side; at the top of all is the space reserved for
zero.
The Roulette, or Wheel, itself (Fig. 2) consists of a narrow circular ledge
(A. A.) fixed in the table, and sloping downwards. Within this ledge is a
brass cylinder (C. C.), suspended on a pin at its centre, and capable of
being made to revolve by means of a cross-head or handle (H. H.).
The outer edge of the brass cylinder is divided into thirty-seven small
compartments, numbered in irregular order from 1 to 36, and coloured
alternately Red and Black; the 37th compartment being the zero.
The game is played in the following manner. A croupier--styled the
_Tourneur_--calls out, "_Messieurs, faites vos jeux_," when the players
place their stakes on that portion of the cloth which indicates the chance
they wish to play upon. The _tourneur_ then says, "_Les jeux sont fait_,"
and throws a small ivory ball round the inclined ledge (A. A.) in one
direction and turns the cylinder in the opposite direction. When the ball
is coming to rest the croupier calls out, "_Rien ne va plus_," after which
no further stakes can be made. As the ball comes to rest it gradually slips
down the ledge, and finally lodges in one of the compartments in the
cylinder. The number of this compartment is the winning number, and upon
its colour, figure, &c., depend the results played for. It is announced by
the _tourneur_ in this way, "_Onze, noir, impair, et manque_," which means
that number 11, the Black, the uneven, and the _manque_ (numbers 1 to 18)
win. The losing stakes are first raked into the Bank, then the winnings are
paid, after which the _tourneur_ again says, "_Messieurs, faites vos
jeux_," and the game proceeds as before.
[Illustration: FIG. 2.]
{449}
There are no less than eight different methods of staking at Roulette.
Besides the three even chances: Red, Black; _Pair_, _Impair_; _Passe_ or
_Manque_, one single number may be backed. This is called staking _en
plein_. Or two numbers may be coupled (_a cheval_); or three numbers
(_transversale pleine_); or four numbers (_carre_); or six numbers
(_transversale simple_, or _sixaine_). In addition, the first, second, or
third dozens of numbers (_Douzaine Premiere_, _Milieu_, or _Derniere_), and
the first, second, or third column each of twelve numbers may be staked
upon. The odds offered by the Bank against backing a single number _en
plein_ is 35 to 1, and the odds against the other chances in proportion:
thus against either of two numbers appearing 17 to 1 is paid; against
either of three numbers, 11 to 1; against either of four, 8 to 1, and so
on; while obviously against each dozen, or column, 2 to 1 is paid; the Red,
Black, _Pair_, _Impair_, _Passe_, or _Manque_ being even money chances.
A player wishing to stake on any of the even chances, or the dozens, or the
columns, places his money on the portion of the cloth marked out for that
chance. To back a single number, the stake is placed where that number is
painted on the cloth; to back both of two numbers, the stake is placed _a
cheval_--that is, on the line between these two numbers. To stake on three
numbers with one coin, the amount is placed on the border-line of the
outside number of three numbers. Four numbers are backed when the coin is
so placed that it touches all four numbers, and six numbers are combined in
one bet by placing the stake on the outside of the line dividing these six
numbers. Zero may also be staked upon by placing the coin in the zero area;
also zero, {450} 1, 2, 3 (_quatre premieres_), by putting the stake on the
outside of the line dividing zero from 1, 2, 3; or zero coupled with 1 and
2; or 2 and 3 in a similar manner. In the illustration (Fig. 1) an example
is given of staking in all these various ways. It will be noticed that
consecutive numbers on the table can only be staked upon in combination,
not consecutive numbers on the Wheel. Thus to combine the three _voisins_,
or adjacent numbers, 0, 26, 15 on the Wheel, three separate stakes would be
required.
Any two dozens may be combined, or any two columns, by placing the stake on
the line between the two; and the player, when successful, receives
one-half of the amount risked. Also any two even chances, such as _Rouge_
and _Impair_, whose position is adjacent on the cloth, may be combined with
one stake by placing the coin on the dividing line between the two; the
player is paid even money when both events turn up, and he only loses when
neither event appears. But to bet on both _Passe_ and _Noir_ or _Rouge_ and
_Manque_ at the same time, two separate states would be required.
The maximum stake allowed on the even chances is 6000 francs (L240)--on a
single number 180 francs is the highest possible stake; the maximum stakes
on the other chances are in proportion--thus 3000 francs on a dozen or
column, and 720 francs on a _carre_ of four numbers. In each case the
minimum stake is 5 francs, except when two dozens or two columns are
combined with one stake, when at least 10 francs must be risked.
Each table is presided over by two _chefs-de-partie_, who sit on elevated
chairs on either side of the Wheel. There are four croupiers, who sit at
the _Banque_ (one {451} being the _tourneur_), whose duty it is to pay out
the winners and rake in the losings. In addition, there is a croupier
sitting at either end of the table, who looks after the interests both of
the players and of the Bank generally.
There being thirty-seven compartments in the Wheel, and as the odds of 35
to 1 only are paid on the winning number, it follows that on all stakes on
numbers, or combination of numbers, the Bank has one chance in
thirty-seven, or a percentage of slightly under 3 per cent. in its favour.
The percentage in favour of the Bank on all monies staked on the even
chances, however, is only one-half of this amount. On the appearance of
zero, all the money at stake is swept into the Bank, with the exception of
that on zero itself--which is paid at the same rate as any other
number--and the amounts on the even chances--_Rouge_, _Pair_, _Manque_,
&c.: these stakes are placed on the lines on the outside of the table (see
Fig. 1), and are then said to be in prison.
On the next coup, if the stakes happen to be on the winning chance, they
are allowed to be withdrawn by the player. The reader will please notice
that this is theoretically exactly the same thing as if the punter halved
his stake with the Banker, and this he is allowed to do if he chooses.
Should two zeros appear consecutively the stakes are placed still further
over these lines; they are now doubly in prison, and have to be doubly
released therefrom before the player gets his own money back.
Thus it will be seen that, theoretically, once in every thirty-seven spins
the Bank wins _half_ of all money staked on the even chances; on which
chances, consequently, the Bank may be said to have a percentage {452} of
slightly under 1-1/2 per cent. in its favour. This difference in the
percentage in favour of the Bank is either unknown to, or totally
disregarded by, the great majority of punters at Monte Carlo; but the
player, by judicious methods of staking, to a great extent, can despoil the
Bank of its higher percentage. An examination of the illustration (Fig. 1)
will show that the following are Red numbers, viz. 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 12, 14,
16, 18, 19, 21, 23, 25, 27, 30, 32, 34, and 36. Thus _Impair_ contains 10
Red numbers, and but 8 Black ones. The first column includes 6; the second
column 4; and the third column 8 Red numbers. Thus a player staking on
Black and _Impair_ has no less than twenty-eight numbers in his favour, on
eight of which he wins both his stakes, and on twenty he neither wins nor
loses. Or a punter staking on the third column and Black, is guarded by
twenty-six numbers, on four of which (the four Black numbers in column 3)
he receives 1-1/2 times his stakes, on eight (the eight Red numbers in
column 3) he receives 1/2 times his stakes, and on the remainder he neither
wins nor loses. Similar wagers can of course be made by combining Red and
_Pair_, or the first column and Red, and so on. Now a player wishing to
stake on a great many numbers (which is a very frequent occurrence, and is
popularly known as "plastering the table"), instead of placing his money on
the various _transversales_, _carres_, and _en pleins_, by which method he
loses all his money if zero appears, should rather stake the equivalent
amount on Black and _Impair_, or Red and _Pair_, which, as explained,
covers twenty-eight numbers. By this method he loses only one-half of his
money if zero appears. Nothing is more usual than to see a player stake _a
cheval_ on two dozens. A more idiotic method {453} of gambling cannot be
conceived. The equivalent amounts (supposing the _douze_ P and the _douze_
M are selected) should be staked on _Manque_, and the _transversale_ of 19
to 24. Now if zero appears half the stake on _Manque_ is saved, but in the
former case the entire stake would be lost!
Many similar instances of good and bad staking could be quoted, but the
average player at Monte Carlo considers the percentage against him to be so
insignificant that it is scarcely worthy of his notice. However, as its
_insignificance_ represents a gain of some hundreds of thousands of pounds
sterling per annum to the Administration, it should be worthy of a passing
thought at any rate.
Nearly every player at Monte Carlo has a system of some sort, generally
played on the even chances. There are, however, systems for playing on
numbers, dozens, &c., but these for the most part are of the most fantastic
and insane order. The writer has actually known a player whose system was
to back thirty-five out of the thirty-six numbers, on the principle that,
having but two numbers against him, he would be very unlucky not to win one
unit per coup!
Hundreds of people play on one particular number after the appearance of
some other particular number, and are confident in themselves that, for
example, 3 always turns up after 25; or 10 after 0. A very favourite stake
is zero _et les quatre premiers_--that is, zero _en plein_, and zero
coupled with 1, 2, 3. Another very general stake is _les voisins de
zero_--or zero and the numbers on either side of it on the Wheel. This is a
simple bet to make by putting one coin _a cheval_ between 0 and 3, one
between 32 and 35, and one each on 26 and 15. The underlying idea of these
{454} zero bets is that the Bank cheats; that it wants zero to turn up; and
that the _tourneur_ is skilful enough to throw zero when he wishes. A more
ridiculous assumption could not be made--in the first place, because the
_tourneur_ cannot throw the ball even to a particular section of the Wheel,
much less into zero itself; and in the second place, because the gambling
could not possibly be carried out in a more straight-forward manner than it
is by the Administration at Monte Carlo. If the _tourneur_ could throw the
ball into any compartment he chose, he could, through his friends, ruin the
Bank whenever he wished.
If I had space I could tell a story of how M. Blanc offered to give a
certain player a year's practice at spinning the Wheel, and then to allow
him to be his own croupier and stake as he chose. This is a fact; and yet I
have often heard the following class of whispered conversation in the
rooms: "Now's our time--there's a lot of money on the even chances--wait
till the ball is spun and then bet on zero."
Some players back their age, when not too old--an eventuality that can
occur only to the sterner sex. A sweet and blushing maiden of some fifty
summers may be observed always to place her stake on No. 28--"Because it's
my age, my dear, and to-day is my birthday!" Others back the number of
their cloak-room ticket, or the number of the hymn for the day (if they
should happen to have been present at church to hear it sung)--indeed
everybody has a pet number; and why not? One number is just as likely to
appear as any other. These are not systems in the true sense of the word,
but they constitute a systematic method of staking, which is always
advisable for play--be they ever so weird and fantastic--as they keep the
player {455} within certain limits, and prevent him from losing his head,
and making wild plunges to retrieve all his losses by one lucky spin of the
Wheel.
The more business-like systems are played on the even chances. Many are
exceedingly ingenious, and on paper would appear certain to "break the Bank
at Monte Carlo!"
The underlying principle of all such systems is to play a Martingale--that
is, after each loss to increase the stake in various proportions until all
previous losses have been recouped, and a profit is shown. The commonest
and simplest to play is the "_Montant et demontant_," which consists in
increasing the stake after a loss by one unit per coup until the player is
one unit to the good. Thus if the first stake be lost, the next stake would
be two units, which is also lost, as is the next one of three units. The
player would now have lost six units in all. His next stake becomes 4,
which, supposing it to be won, would leave him a net loser of two units.
The stake would now be dropped to three units; for the object is to be but
one unit to the good. Should this stake win, the game would be started all
over again with one unit. On the other hand, if the 3 had been lost, the
next stake would be 4, and so on. There are many other systems. The general
principle of them all is exactly the same; the calculations and paper
results being nothing more nor less than an ingenious method of juggling
with figures.
The Fitzroy system aims at winning one unit per coup played. For the
working of this system it is necessary to keep a column in which
_imaginary_ losses are written down: the player assuming that he loses one
unit more and wins one unit less than he actually does. The stakes are
increased by unity as in the {456} "_Montant et demontant_" system, with
the exception of the second stake, which (after a loss) is three instead of
two units, until the _imaginary_ losses column comes out clear. Here is an
example of ten coups played on the Fitzroy system:--
+--------+-------+--------+--------++--------+-------+--------+--------+
| Stake. | W. | Net | Imagy. || Stake. | W. | Net | Imagy. |
| | or L. | + or - | Loss. || | or L. | + or - | Loss. |
+--------+-------+--------+--------++--------+-------+--------+--------+
| 1 | L.1 | -1 | -2 || 6 | W.6 | -3 | -9 |
| 3 | L.3 | -4 | -6 || 7 | W.7 | +4 | -3 |
| 4 | W.4 | 0 | -3 || 4 | L.4 | -0 | -8 |
| 4 | L.4 | -4 | -8 || 5 | W.5 | +5 | -4 |
| 5 | L.5 | -9 | -14 || 5 | W.5 | +10 | +/-0 |
+--------+-------+--------+--------++--------+-------+--------+--------+
Showing ten units won for ten coups played, the imaginary
loss column now reading +/-0.
Another very ingenious scheme is that known as the "_Labouchere_" system.
To play this so many figures are written down that their total equals the
"_grand coup_"[109] that is being played for. Ten is the customary coup,
and the figures 1, 2, 3, 4 are written down on a piece of paper. The method
of play is to stake the sum of the extreme figures, and if a win is scored,
these two figures are erased; while if a loss is incurred the amount of the
stake is written down at the end of the row of figures, and the next stake
is the sum of the new extremes. When all the figures have been erased the
coup is made, and the player either begins a fresh game or retires from the
table. Here is an example: 1, 2, 3, 4: first stake 5, which is lost. The
row now reads 1, 2, 3, 4, 5; and the next stake (6) is won, the row reading
=1=, 2, 3, 4, =5=; the next stake (2+4) is lost, when we have =1=, 2, 3, 4,
=5=, 6. {457} The next stake is 8, which is won, and we read =1=, =2=, 3,
4, =5=, =6=; the next stake being 7, which is won, the 4 and 3 are erased,
when it will be found that the net profit is 10 units.
Example of a bad run at a "_Labouchere_" system. The "_grand coup_" is 10;
so the starting figures are 1, 2, 3, 4. The player is supposed to stake on
Red throughout. The dot shows which colour wins.
The Figures. The Stake. R. B. Net + or -
=1= 1 + 4 5 . +5
=2= 2 + 3 5 . +/-0
=3= 2 + 5 7 . -7
=4= 2 + 7 9 . +2
=5= 3 + 5 8 . -6
=7= 3 + 8 11 . +5
=8= 5 5 . +/-0
=5= 5 + 5 10 . -10
=10= 5 + 10 15 . -25
=15= 5 + 15 20 . -45
=20= 5 + 20 25 . -70
=25= 5 + 25 30 . -40
=25= 5 + 20 25 . -15
=35= 10 + 15 25 . -40
10 + 25 35 . -75
10 + 35 45 . -30
=40= 15 + 25 40 . -70
55 15 + 40 55 . -125
=70= 15 + 55 70 . -195
15 + 70 85 . -110
80 25 + 55 80 . -190
=105= 25 + 80 105 . -295
25 + 105 130 . -165
120 40 + 80 120 . -285
160 40 + 120 160 . -445
=200= 40 + 160 200 . -645
40 + 200 240 . -405
215 55 + 160 215 . -620
270 55 + 215 270 . -890
Showing 29 coups, of which the player wins 9, with a net loss of 890 units.
The next stake would have to be 55 + 270 (325), _i.e._ if the game had been
played {458} with a one louis unit, a heavier stake than is allowed at
Roulette.
Systems are very amusing and profitable to play, provided nothing abnormal
occurs. But something abnormal will occur sooner or later, and the amounts
staked and lost become colossal, and finally the maximum is reached: no
higher wager can be made, so the system fails. The flaw in all systems is
that the losses on an unfavourable run are out of all proportion to the
gains on a favourable one. A "_Labouchere_" runs into hundreds in no time,
and is in fact one of the most treacherous systems to play for this reason.
Let the reader dissect the play of a _Labouchere_ on such a run as that on
p. 460, which is a far from uncommon one.
This tableau, in which the player only wins 9 out of 29 coups--or, say, one
in three--may be said to be far out of proportion, as the player is
"entitled" to win as many coups as he loses (leaving zero out of the
question). Let it be noted at this point that zero does not affect a system
played on the even chances in any degree whatsoever. Any system worthy of
the name can withstand zero, even two or three zeros. It is the Bank's
limit, and the limit alone, that proves the downfall of all systems. To
resume. Of course a player "ought" to win two coups out of four, and so he
will as a rule, and systems are devised so that a player may be a winner,
even if he loses three and four times as many coups as he wins. A glance at
those figures not yet erased in the example quoted will show that had the
punter not been debarred from staking, owing to the Bank's limit, with
three successive wins he would have got all his money back and been ten
points to the good on the whole transaction, and {459} still have only won
twelve times against the Bank's twenty. What no system, played with a
Martingale, has yet been able to accomplish, is to prevent the stakes
becoming colossal when the series of losses turn up in some particular
sequence or disposition.
The best method to keep the stakes within reasonable limits, and to guard
against arriving at the Bank's maximum on an adverse run, is to employ a
varying unit. Thus after a net loss of so many single units, operations are
re-started with a double unit; if an equal number of double units are lost,
the play is re-started with a triple unit, and so on; the same unit being
employed until all previous losses have been retrieved, and a gain of one
"single" unit made.
A "_Montant et demontant_" system can be played very easily in this manner,
by increasing the unit employed after each complete loss of ten
units--_e.g._ after a loss of 10 single units, the system is started afresh
with a double unit; when 10 double units have been lost, or a net loss of
30, the system is started afresh with a 3 unit stake, and so on.
This system may be varied by changing the unit after successive losses of
10, 20, 30, 40, &c., and by staking sufficient to show a net win of the
amount of the unit employed. Thus when playing with a double unit, to try
and win 2; or if playing with a unit of 5, to try and win 5 units net.
Every system has its Waterloo--it will succeed for days, possibly weeks,
and small gains be made; but finally the occasion must and will arrive when
all previous profits and the system player's capital will be swamped. At
the end of this article will be found a scheme devised by the writer
whereby the punter puts himself into the position of the Banker as nearly
{460} as possible, and consequently is enabled to win such vast stakes as
are lost by a system player in the ordinary course, when that particular
sequence of events occur which demolishes his system.
Here is an example of a "_Montant et demontant_" played in the usual
method, and played with an increasing unit after each net loss of 10 units.
The player is supposed to stake on the Red throughout; and the dot
indicates which colour wins.
+-------------------+-------------------+------------------------------+
| Ordinary | A varying Unit | |
| Method. | employed. | Remarks. |
+-------------------+-------------------+ |
| R. | B. | Net | R. | B. | Net | |
| | | +or- | | | +or- | |
+------+-----+------+------+-----+------+------------------------------+
| 1 | . | -1 | 1 | . | -1 | |
| 2 | . | -3 | 2 | . | -3 | |
| 3 | . | -6 | 3 | . | -6 | |
| 4 | . | -10 | 4 | . | -10 | Having lost 10 single units, |
| | | +------+-----+------+ the system is re-started |
| 5 | . | -15 | 2 | . | -12 | with a double unit. |
| 6 | . | -21 | 4 | . | -16 | |
| 7 . | | -14 | 6 . | | -10 | |
| 8 | . | -22 | 8 | . | -18 | |
| 9 . | | -13 | 10 . | | -8 | |
| 10 | . | -23 | 9 | . | -17 | As the object is to be +1, |
| 11 | . | -34 | 11 | . | -28 | 9 is a sufficiently high |
| | | | | | | stake. |
| 12 | . | -46 | 2 | . | -30 | As not more than 30 may |
| | | +------+-----+------+ be lost while employing |
| 13 | . | -59 | 3 | . | -33 | a double unit, 2 is the |
| 14 . | | -45 | 6 . | | -27 | highest stake allowed. |
| 15 . | | -30 | 9 . | | -18 | |
| 16 . | | -14 | 12 . | | -6 | |
| 15 | . | -29 | 7 | . | -13 | As explained before. |
| 16 . | | -13 | 10 . | | -3 | |
| 14 . | | +1 | 4 . | | +1 | As explained before. |
+------+-----+------+------+-----+------+------------------------------+
Had the player lost 60 units, he would have re-started the system and
played 4, 8, 12, &c.; and if this play showed a net loss of 100 units, 5,
10, 15, &c., {461} would have been staked, and continued with until either
the net loss was 150, or the net gain 1 unit, in which case the player
would begin all over again with a single unit.
Another style of play is to bet on the prospect of the colour, or even
chances, running in a particular way. Some people play for an intermittence
of colour, consequently always stake on the opposite colour to that which
turned up last. Others play for the run, and so always stake on the colour
that last appeared. A very popular wager is to stake on the "_Avant
dernier_," or on the colour that turned up the last time but one. By this
means there is only one combination of events by which the player loses,
and this is if the colours go two of one kind, followed by two of the
other; but the weak point about it is that the player may miss his first
stake and his last one, although the series goes in his favour. Yet another
common method of staking is to play "the card"--that is, to play in
expectation of previous events repeating themselves. Thus if the previous
throws have given three Blacks, followed by three Reds, the expectation is
if three Blacks immediately occur, that three Reds will also occur.[110]
Such theories, of course, have absolutely no scientific basis, and, in the
opinion of the writer, are only vexatious and a cause of trouble to the
player, who should invariably stake on the chance that is most convenient
to where he is sitting. He has an equal chance of winning, and by this
means will save himself the trouble of reaching across the table, both to
place his stake and to retrieve his winnings.
{462}
There may be, however, some reason in playing for a run on one colour or
chance, but _not staking_ until after this colour or chance has appeared.
By this means the player, if he plays flat stakes, is square on all runs of
two, wins one on all runs of three, two on all runs of four, and so on. He
loses one unit on every _intermittence_, but against this he loses nothing
at all on all runs of the opposite colour or chance.
Had this method of staking been followed in the example given on p. 460, it
will be seen that the player would have won 2 units on Red and 4 units on
Black, and the highest stake necessary on any coup would have been 3 units;
and had it been adopted in the example given on p. 457, only 70 units would
have been lost on the Red side, and the highest stake risked 16; while on
the Black, 41 units would have been won, with 9 as the highest stake.
It is advisable, when playing a system, to play on both sides of the table
at once. The calculations for both Red and Black are kept, and the
differences staked on the Red or Black as the case may be. The writer has
actually seen a player stake the full requisite amount demanded by his
system on both Red and Black _at the same time_. This of course gives the
same net result as staking the difference on one colour, provided zero does
not turn up. If it does, however, the player loses one-half of two large
stakes in the one case, instead of only one-half of a small stake in the
other case.
The advantage of playing a system on both sides of the table at the same
time is that double as much can be won with the same capital that is
required for playing on one side only. Indeed, slightly less capital is
required, for obviously the player must {463} be winning something on one
side to go against his loss on the other. The objection, of course, to this
dual system of play is, that there is a double chance of striking an
adverse run.
While on the subject of where to stake one's money, the reader, if a novice
at Monte Carlo, is recommended to hand the amount of his wager to one of
the croupiers to place on the table for him. This will ensure both the
money being placed exactly as the punter desires, and the receipt of any
winnings, without disputes on the part of other players. Unless one's
French accent is above reproach, it is advisable to talk English to the
croupiers. The writer, wishing to stake on Nos. 3, 12, and 15 on one
occasion, handed the _chef-de-partie_ three 5-franc pieces, saying, "_Sur
le 3, 12, 15, s'il vous plait._" After a short conversation on the subject
the _chef_ said in perfect English, "If monsieur will please speak English,
I will see that his money is correctly staked."
* * * * *
{464}