Roulette Beating Random by Betting Random

Yes David ,


That`s why it is to this date still the Monte Carlo Casino and not the Rothschild Casino of Monte Carlo .

 

By his own published admission this New York wise guy in the early 1970 went to Las Vegas with $ 3000 to let them know


how to play and he would own the SANDS Casino.


Within a week he was flat busted and was lucky to have paid his room in advance for the week.


He returned from Las Vegas completely changed and being a good player he also learned how win .


ND

 

Just out of curiosity, what Black/Red betting strategy are you using that's helping you to become a millionaire? I am not being sarcastic or inferring that your claim is untrue. I take it you are a believer in the Martingale progression as I am. So, exactly how does your strategy apply it? It has to be an approach other than staying with one color and doubling your bets every loss because that cannot work.

Thanks

 

Your win count does not add up. You claimed that you played 321 sessions with a win goal of 50 units.
Even if all the sessions were won without fail it would be close to 15k units of profit. The size of the base unit is irrevalant.

What is your ratio of won 50 units to lost 128 units?

If a session on avarage takes 100 spins to play it is roughly 30k spins. That's well within a limit of being lucky with a losing approach, especially if we consider that there is a marti progression being deployed.

What makes a difference with setting a win goal of 50 units in testing rather than let it run in a continues style?

Why this progression method should work in contrast to flat betting that does not work?

If we dissect the 7 step progression levels to just 7 separate players placing flat bets at 7 different stakes. It should be the same.
From the house point it is the same taking, eg same wagers placed with a negative expectation.

 

Also consider this; the short term results of player 7 and 6 have a larger impact on the overall results then the combined stats of the other players.
The casino just patiently has to wait till player 6 and 7 overall results will reach a critical count of spins where they cannot recover any longer.

 

The truth is I’m not a millionaire and don’t claim to be playing roulette .what I did say outside bets have maximum bet rule therefore you can only make 1 unit at time unless you can make big money it’s not worth the time .but playing for pleasure not a big deal but forget about making a living at it .its not going to happen gambling is stressful!! But I make few to buy my night

 

Okay, thanks, that was a reasonable reply.

 

I was just going to comment on this, too.

 

Sorry, I missed your above reply. First of all, I have played 321 sessions with a goal of winning 50 units per session. However, I did not win every session. If I would have won every session, I would have won a total of 16,050 units. At this point I am ahead 8,716 after recouping my losses of 7,334 units. Secondly, you have to understand that when I lose the 7 step Martingale, I rarely lose 128 units. Most of the time I am up maybe 30 or 40 units (sometimes more, sometimes less) before I bust.. My win ratio to loss averages 5 to 6 wins for every loss. There are a few reasons why I set a 50 unit win per session. 1st, playing to a win of 50 units takes a lot of time as it is. 2nd, the longer you play your odds decrease. It is a good balance I have found. There is no other reasoning I have other than that.

 

So basically the system is this :

1. Bet on odd or even using a 7 step martingale.
2. If the last bet wins, bet the same as the last outcome.
Otherwise, if the last outcome was red, bet on odd, and if it was black, bet on even.
3. Keep playing until 50 units up or a progression bust.

 

Yes, that is it basically. In addition, if you lose 3 bets in a row, reverse strategy by betting Red is Even and Black is odd.

 

Normy2000 created a baccarat simulator of rf.cc

Unfortunately I do not know how to code, but it should be easy to test a 7 step martingale with random bets.

https://www.rouletteforum .cc/index.php?topic=26447

 

Let me give you a little insight about my thinking on this type of a random betting strategy. First of all and most importantly, It all comes down to the odds. Baccarat offers the best odds over roulette and craps. Admittedly, Baccarat is a brain dead game that requires no skill what so ever. Whereas, Craps and roulette are much more fun and exciting with hundreds of decisions that can be made. So what, if you're into gambling to win, isn't it better to chose the game that gives you the best odds right from the start? Baccarat has random results and therefore what happens in the past is just as random as what happens in the future. The only thing that can be predicted for sure is that every outcome will be a random result with no rhyme or reason. So why not play the game as it plays its self-randomly. Here's why: Using a Martingale progression offers the best odds of any betting progression. If you are using a 7 step progression, your odds are 128 to 1 in your favor. Odds do not get any better than that unless you use a higher step progression. The problem as proven in the past with the Martingale progression is using it to bet the same selection every time and doubling every loss. We all have witnessed time after time when betting Black only, Red will come up 10 times in a row or more, and vise versa. This happens quite frequently during a session as we all have witnessed. When betting randomly, you are not stuck on the same selection in a row witch virtually eliminates that problem. A random bet is actually creating a future pattern that begs to be defeated. Let's just say for example that you are dealt 7 hands and the results are P P B P B B P after the fact. Now, if you were betting randomly not knowing those future results before hand, what are the odds that the random bets you placed would be B B P B P P B, the exact opposite? The odds of that happening are 128 to 1 in your favor. That's really good odds wouldn't you say, much better than betting the same selection every time hoping that the opposite doesn't occur 8 times in a row. I have proven this strategy to myself to be the best of all I have tried. I am not claiming it is the holy grail by any means. I do lose sessions, but so far I have been able to make up the losses and stay ahead. If you try this strategy, I look forward to hearing your results and I am open to any comments or suggestions that are positive in nature. After all, I believe we are here on this forum to try and find something that offers at least a little bit of hope?

 

Have you experimented to try to wait for a trigger? Let's say you track 3 or 4 virtual losses before starting the progression?

 

Actually the odds are identical.

 

No I have not, but I realize that would add more steps to the 7 step Martingale making it a 10 or 11 step and of course offering even better odds yet. I believe you would have to have 3 or 4 virtual bets lost in a row before you started your actual money bets. Give it a try, it may make a substantial difference.

 

For one day at the casino playing the martingale method what size if a bankroll is mandatory a a $ 10 table minimum currently common at some B& M casinos ?

 

David,

A random bet doesn't change the odds because each sequence of the same length has the same probability. BBBBBBB has the same odds as PBPPBPB, even though the latter looks more "random". All 128 sequences of length 7 have the same chance of showing up, so it doesn't matter how often you switch or how "random" the selection is.

 

David, if you choose to play a 5 step martingale and wait for a trigger of 3 lost bets, you will only need to target a lower win goal of 15 units.

It should take about the same amount of time, yet you risk far less. Also there is no worry about the table limits.

 

I agree that the risk is less, but that's only because you're using a shorter marty. The use of virtual losses doesn't change anything.