1. Welcome to the #1 Gambling Community with the best minds across the entire gambling spectrum. REGISTER NOW!
  2. Have a gambling question?

    Post it here and our gambling experts will answer it!
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Discussions in this section are assumed to be EV- as they are outside of the Advantage Play section. For EV+ discussions, please visit the Advantage Play section.
    Dismiss Notice

Roulette Betting Against Patterns

Discussion in 'Roulette Forum' started by Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone, May 5, 2017.

  1. Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone

    Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone Well-Known Member Lineage to Founders

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Likes:
    931
    Occupation:
    Shoe Cobbler
    Location:
    Merica
    Turbo,

    Be specific. Provide a pattern, not just a link. Explain why it's different and less likely to repeat than another pattern that you just make up at random.
     
  2. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,794
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    In the thread I posted how all 3 dozens won't produce the same "pattern".
    You can certainly bet against them all being the same by playing the numbers as explained in the thread.
    And no need to stop there - you can further bet that the same dozen won't produce the same pattern for the next cycle (and always be right). Grins.
    So many ways with just that one idea - it isn't complicated.
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2017
    RouletteGhost likes this.
  3. BlueAngel

    BlueAngel Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2016
    Likes:
    83
    Location:
    nowhere
    How about betting against a sequence?
    What if we bet 17 splits and we gain 1 unit per correct bet,for example we have the following sequence:

    1) 35
    2) 14
    3) 10
    4) 16
    5) 30
    6) 36
    7) 14
    8) 2
    9) 18
    10) 15
    11) 1
    12) 17
    13) 29
    14) 8
    15) 21
    16) 27
    17) 29
    18) 3
    19) 24
    20) 10
    21) 7
    22) 21
    23) 31
    24) 12
    25) 16
    26) 0
    27) 33
    28) 17
    29) 18
    30) 11
    31) 16
    32) 31
    33) 19
    34) 34
    35) 29
    36) 9
    37) 19
    ------------------------------
    1) lay split 32/35 1 win +1
    2) lay split 14/17 11 win +2
    3) lay split 7/10 16 win +3
    4) lay split 13/16 21 win +4
    5) lay split 27/30 34 win +5
    6) lay split 33/36 5 win +6
    7) lay split 14/17 4 win +7
    8) lay split 2/5 35 win +8
    9) lay split 15/18 32 win +9
    10) lay split 15/18 8 win +10
    11) lay split 1/4 10 win +11
    12) lay split 14/17 8 win +12
    13) lay split 26/29 22 win +13
    14) lay split 8/11 15 win +14
    15) lay split 21/24 32 win +15
    16) lay split 27/30 15 win +16
    17) lay split 26/29 31 win +17
    18) lay split 3/6 28 win +18
    19) lay split 21/24 30 win +19
    20) lay split 7/10 36 win +20
    21) lay split 7/10 7 loss +3 now bet that split 7/10 will repeat within 18 spins.
    22) bet split 7/10 9 loss +2
    23) bet split 7/10 32 loss +1
    24) bet split 7/10 0 loss 0
    25) bet split 7/10 7 win +17 now return to laying phase.
    26) lay split 0/3 4 win +18
    27) lay split 33/36 7 win +19
    28) lay split 14/17 7 win +20
    29) lay split 15/18 9 win +21
    30) lay split 8/11 18 win +22
    31) lay split 13/16 13 loss +5 now bet that split 13/16 will repeat within 18 spins.
    32) bet split 13/16 6 loss +4
    33) bet split 13/16 5 loss +3
    34) bet split 13/16 18 loss +2
    35) bet split 13/16 29 loss +1
    36) bet split 13/16 25 loss 0
    37) bet split 13/16 14 loss -1
    38) bet split 13/16 19 loss -2
    39) bet split 13/16 19 loss -3
    40) bet split 13/16 3 loss -4
    41) bet split 13/16 26 loss -5
    42) bet split 13/16 36 loss -6
    43) bet split 13/16 18 loss -7
    44) bet split 13/16 9 loss -8
    45) bet split 13/16 13 win +9

    The reason why it works is because a split not only has to come again but also in a certain spin, for the second part works because if a split found its way to a specific spin then why not to come again within 18 spins.
     
  4. Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone

    Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone Well-Known Member Lineage to Founders

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Likes:
    931
    Occupation:
    Shoe Cobbler
    Location:
    Merica
    Why do you believe that YOUR sequence is less likely to occur than a sequence that is just made up at random?
     
  5. BlueAngel

    BlueAngel Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2016
    Likes:
    83
    Location:
    nowhere
    To whom are you talking to?
     
  6. Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone

    Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone Well-Known Member Lineage to Founders

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Likes:
    931
    Occupation:
    Shoe Cobbler
    Location:
    Merica
  7. Michaela

    Michaela Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2016
    Likes:
    21
    Location:
    3rd Rock from the Sun
    It's bizarre how TG apparently recognizes that each spin is independent of previous spins (so he tells us) and yet, with a seemingly straight face, goes on to describe systems like this:

    Where we are supposed to believe that somehow the 8 is less likely to occur because it will complete a pattern which has occurred earlier in the sequence. If it were true that patterns don't repeat then it might actually mean something, but because spins are independent, each possible pattern always has the same chance, including repeating patterns.

    You wlll do just as well or badly choosing any number at random to complete the sequence.
     

  8. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,794
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    Ok then, lets do some simple math.
    5 7 9 8 was recorded earlier (a pattern using 4 number sections of the table or wheel).
    5 7 9 has shown up again and I am going to bet against it being 8 this time.
    What are my odds of being right ?
    I'll lose if the pattern repeats. The odds of that on a Euro table is 4 in 37
    That means that I can expect to lose this bet once every 9.25 times I try.
    ONE time out of 9 1/4 tries I'll lose, I'll win every other time.
    And this doesn't make sense to you ?
    What about the patterns in the dozen sections ? (which is why I posted the link)
    Will all 3 dozens show the same pattern after a cycle of spins ?
    If I bet you that every time they didn't match I would pay you a prize - you wouldn't take that bet ????
    Ha.
     
  9. RS

    RS Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2016
    Likes:
    173
    Location:
    USA
    Win $3 8.25 times, and lose $33 1 time.

    $3*8.25 - $33*1 = -$8.25

    -8.25 / 37 = 0.22297297297

    0.22297297297 / 8.25 = 0.027027027

    HE on roulette: 1/37 = 0.027027027



    NEXT
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2017
  10. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,794
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    So flat betting doesn't work when it comes to roulette -
    everyone knows that already (I would hope)
     
  11. Michaela

    Michaela Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2016
    Likes:
    21
    Location:
    3rd Rock from the Sun
    The math is correct, but you're missing Dr. Sir's point. Your calculation could apply equally to ANY of the groups 1-9. The only thing which determines your selection of 8, as opposed to any other number, is the prior sequence of 5 7 9 8. In other words, it's based on believing that past spins indicate future spins, which by your own admission is a fallacy. :rolleyes:

    What's missing from all systems based on the game (as opposed to the physical conditions) is the concept of "value". It's usually understood in the context of sports betting and bookmakers, where the odds on offer can vary. To obtain a value bet basically means finding a bet where the odds (payouts) are high in relation to the actual probability of a win. To give a simple example, if I offered you $1.10 every time I flip a coin and it comes up heads, but you only pay me $1 if tails comes up, you have a value bet (and I'm playing a negative expectation game). Because heads and tails are equally likely your "edge" is 10%. On average, heads and tails will come up 50 times each in 100 flips, but you've won 50 x $1.10 = $55, minus your 50 $1 payouts to me, which leaves you with $5. I, however, have received 50 x $1 from you but have paid out 50 x $1.10, leaving me with a deficit of $5.

    That's a silly example of course, and if you understand why then you've understood the concept of value. In roulette, the odds are fixed by the house so there's no chance to get better odds, as you can by comparing what various bookmakers are offering, so the only way to get value is by increasing the accuracy of your predictions.
    What system players don't understand is that you can't increase the accuracy of your predictions merely by using statistics which don't relate to anything outside the game itself. If you stay inside the game then there are all kinds of interesting stats to be found, but none of them will increase the accuracy with which you can predict the next spin or series of spins. This is because they are already accounted for in the game, and you cannot side-step probability. The only way to increase accuracy is to think outside the "game" box, ie at the physical conditions: the wheel, ball, dealer, etc. Collect data and look for correlations among these variables, or look for signs of bias and compare with your data.

    The data of the "game" will only reveal what the math already tells you: that you cannot get an edge.
     
  12. eugene

    eugene Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2016
    Likes:
    415
    Location:
    united kingdom
    Thanks! I knew they had to be a logical explanation. LoL.
     

    Attached Files:

  13. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,794
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    So if we sat down at a table and I agreed to pay you every time a dozen went through a cycle and the pattern didn't repeat - you wouldn't take that bet ? lol.
    You'd have to be kidding to say that you wouldn't.
     
  14. Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone

    Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone Well-Known Member Lineage to Founders

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Likes:
    931
    Occupation:
    Shoe Cobbler
    Location:
    Merica
    "Your calculation could apply equally to ANY of the groups 1-9. The only thing which determines your selection of 8, as opposed to any other number, is the prior sequence of 5 7 9 8. In other words, it's based on believing that past spins indicate future spins, which by your own admission is a fallacy."-Michaela :rolleyes:

    Exactly!
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2017

  15. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,794
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    I know you'll get over the fact that spins played within a session are a session of spins, a cycle of spins.
    A group of spins that make up a "whole"...... I know you can do it !
    If you do, you'll see the way - if not you won't.
    (Which explains why you don't see a pattern - each spin is a pattern of 1 and that's all you see....wow)
     
  16. Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone

    Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone Well-Known Member Lineage to Founders

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Likes:
    931
    Occupation:
    Shoe Cobbler
    Location:
    Merica
    Turbo,

    You can only play one spin at a time.

    Regardless, you can't use past spins or statistics to improve the accuracy of your prediction for the next series of spins either!
    (In the random game of roulette)
     
  17. Michaela

    Michaela Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2016
    Likes:
    21
    Location:
    3rd Rock from the Sun
    I can agree with you regarding the patterns not being the same in all dozens, but it's not the same as agreeing with you that the system you described is a long term winner.
    This shouldn't be too hard to code in RX. Can anyone else see why it won't win consistently? What is the apparently sound theory not taking into account?

    And I'm not talking about general statements like "because of the house edge" (although ultimately that is the reason).
     
  18. mr j

    mr j Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2015
    Likes:
    1,809
    Occupation:
    self employed
    Location:
    Milwaukee, WIS

    I do agree, for the most part.

    The item that does get a bit tricky though......5 guys playing, one guy starts his tally/session. Every 5th spin, one of the other four guys now jumps in, all are playing the same method. They are "kind of" playing with MOST of the same numbers but will receive different results at the end of THEIR session. Who knows? Maybe 4/5 guys end in profit, I really dont know?

    Where I really GET STUCK.....I play here a lot. Played last night as a matter of fact. I start my tracking of 38.

    A >> *MANY* times I have a ton of two peaters, more than I should get.

    B >> I get no 4th hit within the 38 and BEYOND. As in, it takes around 55 spins to get ONE !! (lol)

    C >> Too many numbers with 3 hits drains your BR.

    All of this (and more) RUIN what is "suppose to happen". In other words, what I should be counting on.

    (sorry if I'm getting off topic)..... I said it many times before. REPEATERS are the way to go but "too many qualifiers" (prior to betting) and "not enough qualifiers" (also prior to betting) will ALWAYS be the greatest issue.

    (take Irish War Cry for todays K.D., book it !!!)

    Ken
     
  19. BlueAngel

    BlueAngel Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2016
    Likes:
    83
    Location:
    nowhere
    Let's assume that 38 players buying in with 1 spin difference each, would their data be different?
    Of course, especially from the 1st to 38th would has the greatest difference and as a result they would have different targets even if they are using same amounts and selection criteria.
    When they bet different numbers they will accumulate different totals and all these thanks to timing effect.
    What you determine as ''hot'' might or might not continue to hit above average probability, LOT brandishes 2/3 from everything (hot,cold,average), 1/3 of the hot numbers will become average, 1/3 will become cold and 1/3 of the hot numbers will remain hot.
    Meanwhile guess what is happening with the average and cold numbers, exactly the same thing!
    This way the complicated system LOT recycles the numbers perpetually while we are ending up like dogs which are chasing their tails!
    Numbers can change their state gradually but tendencies are remaining the same.
    Check also if you could find a group of hot numbers which belong only to 1 wheel's sectors or to only 1 table section, don't bother because you won't find any, you see, what we call ''hot'' numbers is well spreaded around the wheel's and table's layouts which makes the situation even more complicated.
    So if I'm not mistaken we could discard selecting by the number of hits observed and also to discard selecting regarding their proximity on the wheel's and table's layouts.
    As a matter of fact why the number of hits to be more related during 38 spins and not during 380 or 3800 or even 38000 spins?
    Results don't start and stop during our sessions, thus according the perceived data we could arrive o different conclusions about the same thing, for example I see no 34 during the last 38 spins and I consider it cold, Ken who was seating at the table before me charted 380 spins that far and informs me that 34 is average number, while Caleb who's biased physics player informs me that 34 is way above average regarding his 38000 spins record.
    What can make the same number hit or not hit again during the same amount of upcoming spins?
    Mark my words, physics is not the only solution...
     
  20. Fossell

    Fossell Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2016
    Likes:
    152
    Location:
    UK
    Not sure what kerfuffle is going on in here, but lets not quote me out of context please. Something didn't add up in my understanding is all. I was doing well with what I know. My understanding has edged up a few % notches since then and I'm doing better still. And thats thanks to reading TG's wise words, playing, analysing and realising important but simple things along the way. And then playing some more.

    Not sure what all the fuss is about RNG and 'play' modes. If you understood more you'd realise its not important. In fact Parx having nothing to gain from a play mode that is rigged in any way. They want you to lose just as much as real play or BM. They want you to pay for more credits. Its exactly the same. BM and live online is just peace of mind for the skeptical. Which is fair enough.
     
    celescliff and TurboGenius like this.

Share This Page