Roulette Betting System Challenge to System Sellers - risk $3K to win $30K

.
basically to win you must be profitable over 200,000 computer generated hands of either roulette or craps

the details are linked

this was first offered in 2008 and there were no takers - now he has one taker

to contact him go to bottom of page click on his name and then fill in info on how to contact him

I've also linked discussion of the challenge from another forum


https://easy.vegas/gambling/betting-system-challenge

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gam...gent-for-betting-system-challenge/#post956344

.

 

Hi, I run Easy Vegas and I'm the one offering the challenge. Thank you for posting about this here.

The supposed challenger backed out. This is one reason I stopped taking challenges from the general public and limited it to system sellers, non-sellers always back out. I made an exception in this case because he annoyed me (I asked why he wouldn't simply hire a programmer for $50 on Fiverr to see whether his system works and he replied, "I know that my system works, why would I pay someone to tell me what I already know)," and because he taunted/goaded me, so I finally relented. But of course he backed out anyway, they always do. I could see this coming when he initially wrote from an AOL email address.

I'm toying with making the rules more palatable to system-believers: only 20,000 rounds for each test instead of 200,000, and must win 51/100 tests. What critics miss is that I'm offering a whopping 10:1 odds with me $30k vs. the challenger's mere $3k, a lousy system with only a 9.1% chance of winning in the casino could still be profitable against my challenge. That's why the challenger must win 11/20 tests (probably soon to be 51/100). But I'll have to find the time to stress-test the new rules with computer simulations before implementing them, to make sure that challengers can't exploit my generous 10:1 odds.

I'm also toying with opening it up to the general public again. Critics complain that anyone with a winning system would simply use it rather than reveal it to a stranger via the challenge, but they could submit a crippled version which won only $1 an hour without revealing their magic beans. Also, I used to make $100/hr counting cards at blackjack, but it takes nearly two months to win $30,000 that way, it's more convenient to make $30,000 in one fell swoop.

 

Michael, not too many people are going to have a winning strategy in the first place and then they would need to know about this particular challenge to consider if they want to partake in it or not and so what are the odds of all that coming together.

But the thing that gets me is whilst (yes) it sure is nice having free money and 30k is nothing to sniff at, once you (Michael) know about the winning strategy, what are you going to do with it. Play it? Do you have connections within the Casino industry? Would you even reveal that you had someone who beat your challenge or would you say nothing / say the challenger failed, because if word got out, are you then not opening up a whole new can of worms. Not to sound too cynical, but do you already work within the Casino industry and your challenge is just a way to beat most system players over the head?

I look at it like this. Assuming someone has a winning strategy and nobody else knows about it, then they are pretty much in control of what happens with it. Like something you mentioned yourself above, if a system was a real dynamite system, even allowing for the eye in the sky, there are probably ways to try and hide it for as long as possible to gain the most out of it.

I just don't see why would someone would want to lose control of something so valuable for a cash reward. Especially if someone had devoted half their life and a ton of money and research in finally coming up with something that genuinely worked.

My question to you would be let's say that you had discovered for yourself a winning strategy, would you take up the challenge for 30k if somebody offered that to you?

cheers

 

Michael Bluejay is on the forum! Welcome back sir!

I took a look at your rules. I think your money is safe!

At first glance I thought that surely a bettor could earn $0.01 per 200,000 decisions bet in Baccarat. But then I noticed all the restrictions.

A) The bettor can only sit out 2000 decisions per test (2000 per 202,000 decisions). So you are required to bet over 99% of all decisions per test! This rule alone would make the challenge impossible to win.

If each decision is independent of all previous decisions, why does it matter if the bettor wants to wager only once every five shoes? He still loses, right? It would take the test longer to run but the GPU's won't care!

B) $5 minimum, $5000 maximum. So only a 1 to 1000 spread. That is not much to work with. It is not that difficult online to find a 1 to 10,000 spread for Baccarat in the year of 2025.

C) $5000 bankroll. Only 1000 units. Again that is not much to work with. The bettor would be greatly handicapped.

As many of you know I have run countless betting simulations over the years. If you are considering accepting Mr. Bluejay's challenge I would advise against it. With these rules you will most certainly lose!

 

Bbbwwwaaahhh, so basically another disingenuous attempt by the mathite to debunk the claim, hey hey.

 

Your reading comprehension needs a lot of work.

I stopped reading after the part I quoted.

 

You're right, mathematically it wouldn't matter. I wrote that limit years ago and can't remember my reasoning, probably thinking that someone would try to screw with me by making sitting out 500 quadrillion rounds for every bet they made, which would make a simulation take eons. But of course there's a middle ground, and I'm open to upping the limit. What would be a reasonable limit to you?

Well, it's certainly difficult in Vegas. The challenge rules mirror typical casino conditions. I never hear betting system proponents say that they need an exceptional ruleset to beat a casino game, but as soon as my challenge is the topic, then all of a sudden they need exceptional rules. Also, as I've said ad nauseam, I'm offering a whopping 10:1 odds, which means that a lousy system with only a 9.1% chance of winning in the casino would be a good bet against my challenge, and once you start talking exceptional rules, then it's trivial to create a lousy system with a 9.1% chance of winning in the casino. Such a system would be the farthest thing from a "winning betting system", but it could be a winner against my challenge, with its 10:1 odds. You want a 10,000x spread? Then for a fair challenge you'd have to either put up more money or sim for more rounds. (Not that I'm offering to change the challenge rules that way.)

Whatever. Again, system sellers NEVER say you need a lot of capital in order to use their supposedly profitable systems, but when my challenge is the topic, then suddenly even $5000 is not enough for them to prove that they have a winning system.

 

Michael, I don't sell systems and am not after your money. Ha.

As far as sitting out hands goes, in Baccarat 202,000 decisions is only about 2800 shoes if you ignore ties. Sitting out a max of 2000 decisions per test would be less than one hand per shoe. I have seen many systems that bet only a handful of decisions per shoe. So to accommodate those sellers maybe either drop that rule altogether or as an alternative require that they bet at least 10% of the total decisions dealt.

The spread and bankroll ... to be fair to the brick and mortar players I guess just leave it as it is. You are right, since covid even a 1 to 1000 game is hard to find. The casinos have raised their minimums but often kept the max bet the same.

I cannot imagine a system seller winning your challenge with only 1000 units, so your money is definitely safe. I doubt if they want their system tested anyway. Those guys often don't even bet (or perhaps cover some of their losses with system sales).

 

The jimske and the spike never lose a session so am sure both will come over the tops to capture the Bluejay 30ks$ challenge, easy, hey hey.

 

I've glanced at what you've written (or at least at what you've attempted to write) and I'm wondering if you'd be willing to bend the rules a bit.

1. Can the player choose to play a certain roulette machine instead? (Players choice) (It is possible to get several hundred spins per day.)
2. If the player agrees to flat bet..(not run a progression) can the number of spins be reduced to just 8,000 spins?
3. Rather than a 30k wager, would you instead agree to match the amount won? 30K only amounts to roughly $200 per hour. While that may be good for a card counter, it's just dirt for a roulette ap.

I'm guessing that you won't agree to such terms, but I thought it might be fun to ask.

 

You should bother to read the terms.

 

You mean the rambling nonsense that you’ve written above?

 

I’ve made my living as a writer for decades, and I got the highest possible score on the SAT Test of Standard Written English, so while you may feel that my writing is rambling nonsense, you’d be in the minority in that regard.

 

I’m sure that you’re a legend in your own mind. Would you like me to correct your posts for you?

Hubris! We take short cuts on posts and make spelling errors sometimes, but you’re just being a d I c k.

 

Why the hell would anyone with a winning system sell it for 30k to you, when the profit potential is enormous.

I don't get the logic of your premise.

 

No one is going to give you a winning system for 30k!
I've found my own grail, and I'd be remiss if I could prove to you with results that I can win. Just by making you understand what I've discovered, you'd take your 30k out of your pocket and apologize for your stupid proposal!
Now you want a winning system? Give me time. I'm making dyksexlic's software my way, and I'll show you that with that method, I can win consistently. You'll have to give me the 30k if you're a man of my word, but I'll never reveal what the software does!