1. Welcome to the #1 Gambling Community with the best minds across the entire gambling spectrum. REGISTER NOW!
  2. Join our $5,000 Cash Giveaway!

    Win Cash by Posting and Inviting New Members!
  3. Have a gambling question?

    Post it here and our gambling experts will answer it!
    Dismiss Notice
  4. 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 sub-forum.
    Dismiss Notice

Roulette In the random game, all bet selections are equal

Discussion in 'Roulette Forum' started by Jerome, Jan 29, 2019.

  1. Jerome

    Jerome Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2018
    Likes:
    106
    Occupation:
    Self-Employed
    Location:
    England
    There's no such thing as a better or worse bet selection in the random game of roulette. The only thing you can do with systems which makes any difference is to bet more or fewer numbers and use some form of progression. This will affect the variance but won't by itself give you an edge.

    The ONLY thing which makes a difference with regard to bet selection is the NUMBER of numbers you bet on. For any given number of numbers you bet, it makes no difference HOW you pick those numbers. Waiting for "triggers" or virtual bets, skipping spins, trying to complete a pattern - all nonsense and a big waste of time and effort.

    This is obvious if you understand even a little probability. If you want to calculate your probability of winning, do you need to take into account how the bets are selected? NO, you just need to know how many numbers are bet. If you're betting on 3 numbers the actual process of how you select them (which could be very complicated) is irrelevant. The probability is 3/37 every time no matter what fancy selection method you used.

    Free your mind from the illusion of bet selection - it just doesn't apply in the random game.

    If you don't believe me, next time you use your system, when the time comes to place a bet, pick the same location or number of numbers, but randomly (get spins from random.org or use excel to generate them, don't pick numbers which you "think" are random - they should be "genuine" random numbers). Use the same progression or money management, the only thing which is different about this system played in tandem with your usual system is the actual numbers/locations bet on.

    You'll see that over time, there is no difference at all in the results, and this must prove (since the ONLY difference between the two methods is the bet selection) that your favoured bet selection has no merit - it's no better than random bets.
     
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2019
    Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone likes this.
  2. Sharptracker

    Sharptracker Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2018
    Likes:
    168
    Location:
    Belgium
    All they need is to feel they discovered something that other people haven't found... They can lose their pants with their system, they 'll still won't understand and they'll try to improve the system according why they lost on that pattern...

    The only utility they have is to feed the cashier... It is quite important also.
     
    Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone likes this.
  3. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    407
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    "Trying to complete a pattern?" What about the win / loss pattern? Probability can't tell you when a win streak will start. It can't tell you when a losing streak will start. It won't tell you when you are in the middle of each type either. It will never tell you when you are at the end of either too. I out perform random against random all the time. I don't fund the downturns. You say that this is either impossible or worthless. All I have to say to you is that I hope you actually play at casinos with real money. It's got to come from somewhere for those of us that play to win.
     
    Nathan Detroit likes this.
  4. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    691
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    Interesting, but completely wrong.
    I've run both (I see no testing here though) and
    the difference between my bet selection and "random" bets where
    the number of spins are equal and the amount bet is equal - never
    ever produce the same results.
    Picking randomly tends to result in the collection of sessions ending right
    around the house edge. My results on the other hand are never even close
    to that.
    So you're wrong... it "sounds" good.
    I can work up a quick example from my last casino visit - but picking
    the "random" numbers I would play might be difficult.
    I can use random.org though - of course.
    Either way both results will be drastically different.
    The bet selection makes the whole difference.
     
  5. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    691
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    Ok, so here is a recap from my last casino play :
    [​IMG]

    So I have the data I need - below is my testing on random selection
    instead of mine... simple.
    I know the average bet per spin, the amount of numbers played
    and the total number of spins.
    Random.org to pick those "random" selection numbers
    =============================================

    My selection ended +$1,440.00

    Test 1 - random numbers picked : 0,3,7,28 and ends at +$4,600.00 I did worse.
    Test 2 - random numbers picked : 0,11,20,32 and ends at -$2,600.00 I did better.
    Test 3 - random numbers picked : 12,21,23,24 and ends at +$1,000.00 I did better.
    Test 4 - random numbers picked : 6,9,10,14 and ends at -$6,200.00 I did much better.
    Test 5 - random numbers picked : 3,9,15,36 and ends at +$1.000.00 I did better.
    Test 7 - 5,28,23,35 and ends +$100.00 I did much better.
    Test 8 - 2,21,29,31 and ends +$2,800.00 I did worse.
    Test 9 - 1,9,22,28 and ends +$100.00 I did much better.
    Test 10 - 0,3,19,35 and ends +$2,800.00 I did worse.
    Test 11 - 4,8,10,15 and ends -$2,600.00 I did much better.
    Test 12 - 1,14,16,36 and ends +$100.00 I did much better.
    Test 13 - 18,19,32,35 and ends +$1,000.00 I did better.
    Test 14 - 1,4,23,32 and ends -$1,700.00 I did much better.
    Test 15 - 2,3,22,35 and ends -$2,600.00 I did much better.
    Test 16 - 26,29,30,31 and ends -$800.00 I did better.
    Test 17 - 17,18,27,33 and ends -$800.00 I did better.
    Test 18 - 9,13,14,19 and ends +$1,900.00 I did worse.
    Test 19 - 3,14,24,32 and ends -$3,500.00 I did much better.
    Test 20 - 2,3,8,10 and ends -$800.00 I did better.
    =======================================
    I don't know how long is sufficient for you, but there's a ton of data.
    How did I do compared to "random" picks ? You tell me.

    Times I did better - 15 of 20 trials (pretty impressive right ?)
    Times I did worse than random - 5 of 20 trials. (not too bad....)

    Average of the trials run ?
    (-$6,200 in total / 20 tests) = -$310.00 for "randomly picked numbers" average
    My stats............................. +$1,440.00 with bet selection
    See the difference ? No ?

    What's the house "edge" for all these test combined from the "random" groups ?
    Is it close to $310.00 ? lol

    So here we are.
    If I ran a test with EVERY possible 4 number combination and checked the results,
    it would be negative results at the house edge exactly ! (this is just math).
    MY bet selection caused the session to end in profit, even though a few random
    selections did better, fair enough. I'll take a "I won 15 times out of 20" against
    "random" selection any day.

    Thoughts ?
    Not enough tests ? Not enough spins ? Lucky me ? Have at it....
    No need to accept what's being demonstrated.
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2019
    Fossell and trellw24 like this.
  6. Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone

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

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Likes:
    428
    Occupation:
    Shoe Cobbler
    Location:
    Merica
    How many numbers were selected in both? The same amount?

    How many totals spins were tested? 100k? 200k?

    I can run it on my numbers if you want. Just run it flat bet.
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2019
  7. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    691
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    The exact same amount of numbers, the exact same $ amount. I did a fair test.
    Like I said - if you tested every combination of the same amount of numbers
    for every possible outcome, you would get exactly the house edge in results.
    I didn't get that, I never will. I use a bet selection.
    The thread poster (and you have said many times) pick any random numbers and test
    the same amount of spins and the same amounts and you'll do just as good.
    This isn't true. I would hope my testing showed this, but I already know it's not
    good enough because the results you guys believe in didn't happen.
    100k or 200k isn't relevant. You would need to test every possible combination
    and we all already know that means the house edge is the result. Nice.. no
    testing needed. My bet selection didn't do that.
     

  8. Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone

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

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Likes:
    428
    Occupation:
    Shoe Cobbler
    Location:
    Merica
    [​IMG]

    Turbo,

    Yet your little graphs of 30 or 40 spins are?
     
  9. Sharptracker

    Sharptracker Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2018
    Likes:
    168
    Location:
    Belgium
    That guy even don't understand a simple fact...

    Take 37 players and give them randomly a unique number...

    Run 37 spins/370/3700/37000, there will be some upper the average, there will be some in the average, there will be some down the average.

    And now it is like player placed at the 5th rank says he's a genious.... Yawning...
     
  10. Jerome

    Jerome Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2018
    Likes:
    106
    Occupation:
    Self-Employed
    Location:
    England
    Turbo, in your testing of the random number selection there were 4 numbers selected every time, which of course must result in the average numbers bet being 4, but in testing using your selection the average was less :
    So it wasn't a fair comparison.
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2019
  11. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    691
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    It was close enough.
    I had a impossible task to bet 37/100 of a number for the test.... and
    over such a short session it would make no difference.
    I figured if I used 3 numbers in the test you would have said the same thing, so I rounded up
    to 4 numbers.
    I countered this by flat betting $25 per spin since my actual play averaged $25.71
    The 37/100th of 1 number per spin would NOT have changed
    the results enough to matter, or to prove that I'm not right.
    -$310 average for your "randoms" and +$1,440.00 for my results wouldn't
    have changed but perhaps $5.00.
    So yes, it was a fair enough test for sure.

    I made a better profit 15 out of 20 times than "random" selection did, which says enough to
    prove the point of this thread is opinion and not fact.
    You on the hand are just trolling for some reason, please get attention elsewhere.
     
    trellw24 likes this.
  12. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    691
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    I played enough spins to win and leave with the profit amount that I wanted.
    This is what "winning" is.
    Because I didn't play enough spins for you to be happy with, I say "Oh well".
    Until such time that the casino forces someone to play "X" amount of spins
    before leaving - I'll continue to play as many or little spins as I want - and
    when my session is done or goal is met, I'll go see the cashier.
    I don't need X amount of spins to prove that I have an advantage - like the
    thousands unicorn hunters need to even begin risking a play.
    It's nice isn't it ? You're approval isn't/wasn't required.
     
    trellw24 likes this.
  13. Sharptracker

    Sharptracker Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2018
    Likes:
    168
    Location:
    Belgium
    So according to you, there are some people that would rather get attention then making big money by participating and make some efforts to understand/improove etc etc?

    Well that would be even more strange than having the HG and play demo, right?
     
  14. Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone

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

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Likes:
    428
    Occupation:
    Shoe Cobbler
    Location:
    Merica
    [​IMG]

    Wow! Another holy grail! And it's a completely original idea. Something that nobody else has thought of until now, betting on hot numbers and increasing bets until you hit. Thanks for the genius of Turbo for coming up with such a completely original idea and dreaming the dream!

    Oh, and before you think that it's too good to be true, know this...he has graphs of 30 and 40 spins that PROVES that it works! :D
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2019
    Nathan Detroit likes this.

  15. Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone

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

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Likes:
    428
    Occupation:
    Shoe Cobbler
    Location:
    Merica
    Remember the key to making the magic happen...

    1. In order for a number to hit twice, it first has to hit once.
    2. In order for a number to hit three times, it first has to hit twice.
    3. He relies on random to win.
    4. He doesn't use past spins.
    5. He doesn't bet on a number until it hits.

    [​IMG]
     
  16. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    691
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    You sound like a jealous child.
    I guess in time you'll either figure it out or not.
    Your posts of "I know you are, but what am I" makes you look foolish,
    but not to worry - your band of misfits will agree with you.
     
    trellw24 likes this.
  17. Sharptracker

    Sharptracker Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2018
    Likes:
    168
    Location:
    Belgium
    That's why i told you to look for someone expert/independant with a high/serious level in mathematics and report it here... but of course you won't dare to ask...
     
  18. Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone

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

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Likes:
    428
    Occupation:
    Shoe Cobbler
    Location:
    Merica
    Turbo,

    The following is from Mike Shackleford on the wizardofodds.com.
    He's an actuary. Do you know what an actuary actually is and how incredibly hard it is to pass the actuary test. In short, Mike's a bonafied mathematician. Are you?


    From the Wizardofodds.com..
    "The Truth about Betting Systems



    Not only do betting systems fail to beat casino games with a house advantage, they can’t even dent it. Roulette balls and dice simply have no memory. Every spin in roulette and every toss in craps is independent of all past events. In the short run you can fool yourself into thinking a betting system works, by risking a lot to win a little. However, in the long run no betting system can withstand the test of time. The longer you play, the ratio of money lost to money bet will get closer to the expectation for that game.

    In the many years that run this site I have received thousands of e-mails from believers in betting systems. Their faith surpasses religious levels. However, in all things, the more ridiculous a belief is the more tenaciously it tends to be held. Gamblers have been looking for a betting system that works for hundreds of years, and yet the casinos are still standing.

    Gambler's Fallacy
    The biggest gambling myth is that an event that has not happened recently becomes overdue and more likely to occur. This is known as the “gambler’s fallacy.” Thousands of gamblers have devised betting systems that attempt to exploit the gambler’s fallacy by betting the opposite way of recent outcomes. For example, waiting for three reds in roulette and then betting on black. Hucksters sell “guaranteed” get-rich-quick betting systems that are ultimately based on the gambler’s fallacy. None of them work. If you don’t believe me here is what some other sources say on the topic:

    A common gamblers’ fallacy called “the doctrine of the maturity of the chances” (or “Monte Carlo fallacy”) falsely assumes that each play in a game of chance is not independent of the others and that a series of outcomes of one sort should be balanced in the short run by other possibilities. A number of “systems” have been invented by gamblers based largely on this fallacy; casino operators are happy to encourage the use of such systems and to exploit any gambler’s neglect of the strict rules of probability and independent plays. — Encyclopedia Britannica (look under “gambling”)

    No betting system can convert a subfair game into a profitable enterprise... — Probability and Measure (second edition, page 94) by Patrick Billingsley

    The number of ‘guaranteed’ betting systems, the proliferation of myths and fallacies concerning such systems, and the countless people believing, propagating, venerating, protecting, and swearing by such systems are legion. Betting systems constitute one of the oldest delusions of gambling history. Betting systems votaries are spiritually akin to the proponents of perpetual motion machines, butting their heads against the second law of thermodynamics. — The Theory of Gambling and Statistical Logic (page 53) by Richard A. Epstein

    Vegas Click also has a good expose of the gambler’s fallacy." -Source is The Wizardoffodds.com
     
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2019
  19. jbs

    jbs Active Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2015
    Likes:
    44
  20. Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone

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

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Likes:
    428
    Occupation:
    Shoe Cobbler
    Location:
    Merica
    JBS,

    The tinfoil hats are terrified that someone will steal their latest inside bet Martingale if they do!
     

Share This Page