I've done extensive simulation on the topic and studied the maths, it's seriously not a viable business. There's no way you can stay in business taking unbounded risk for 0 expected profit. There's a lot of psuedo-science around thinking that "greedy" strategies are good for the house, but it's simply not true. (It's just equivalent to playing at a high payout)
With substantial bankroll, a house can run comfortably and make decent profit with 0% house edge, if they dont allow automated betting by bots. If u exclude bets made by bots, u'll find bustabit.com makes more profit in the long run than house edge % of total wagered amount. Hence, though it is theoretically impossible to run a 0% house edge game, games like https://www.chain-bet.com still do exist in practical world.However, if you do it pvp way, then it's totally possible. Then you could take no risk, and match gamblers with gamblers. That could totally work.
U r confusing commission with house edge. In PvP games, house does NOT take any risk. Hence, the very concept of House Edge does NOT exist in PvP games. If house does not take any cut from the winner, it is merely running on 0% commission.But another way to look at it, even with a house edge running a casino is an extremely risky business. In the calendar month of October, I lost around ~402 BTC bankrolling bustabit, where the weighted average house edge during that month was around ~0.7%.
Exactly this is what I am saying. House Edge does NOT guarantee the same % of profit on wagered amount. It still varies on many other factors.No sane person is going to take those sort of risks for no expected profit 
If u were correct, then chain-bet.com would have gone bankrupt by six month, whereas they are running close to one year now... 
