I am in agreement with you Kav. The game of roulette is devilishly well balanced. I am from the school of thought that believes that betting 1 number 35 times is a better choice of the two. I am a firm believer that the less money on the table, the better. Kav, you are correct if we bet 35 numbers we will win 95% of the time, but what is the down side? IF this bet loses, you have 35 units on the table, not 1 unit. What is the risk vs. reward ratio? We expect this bet of 35 numbers to win 95% of the time, but what if there is a hit back to back on one of the two numbers we didn't pick? It is possible that this event can happen and lose 70 units in 2 spins as apposed to 2 units. For me personally the risk reward ratio is too high to bet 35 numbers. Most of us would agree that the Bank has one chance better than us in every 37 spins. This holds true if we play on one number straight up, but if we play on an even chance, the Bank has only half this advantage over us, or one chance better than us in every 74 spins, the reason being that when our stake is on an even chance, and zero appears, we do not lose our whole stake, only half of it, just like Mr. Real pointed out. The player always has the right to take off half his stake.
We would think that if we put a unit on the first eighteen numbers straight up instead of putting eighteen units on "manqué" or low numbers 1-18, we are doing a very foolish thing; for when zero comes out, as it should do once in every 37 spins, we would lose the whole of our 18 units, whereas if had put them on 1-18, we would only lose 9 of them; in other words, the person who plays on the numbers is quite sure to lose, on average, 9 units an hour more than the player who plays 1-18.
Let me break this down a little further. Real, you make a very interesting observation. I understand your philosophy about the house edge being the same. I will say that I respectfully disagree about the columns and dozens bets in that they are the same. Here is my opinion on the this matter.
It seems to me, and I maybe wrong, but if we back any given dozen, the Bank has a 4% advantage over us and if we back 2 dozen for the same spin, the Bank has a 8% advantage over us. If we back only one dozen the Bank only bets us 2 to 1 that 25 numbers will beat 12, whereas the proper odds are 2.08 to 1. In the same way if we back 2 dozens, the Bank makes the player lay 2 to 1 that 24 numbers will beat 13, whereas the proper odds are only 1.84 to 1, and we have a disadvantage of 8% in the odds.
I do enjoy the philosophy and discussions that roulette can provide us with. It makes the game that much more interesting and fun to play.