Roulette Lies MathBoyz, Therapists, and Casinos Want You to Believe

of course, my answer above is referring to the average of all the many players at the roulette table

it does not mean that one person's experience will follow this example -

this is gambling, so, of course the experience of one individual in a short amount of time could result in a great many different outcomes

 

Sophistry is not an argument. This is an earnings report. The casino takes in 20% of all buy ins for table chips. Do you need me to find examples of people telling you that the casino takes in 3% to 5% ? Do you really think that people get back 95% when they gamble on table games, on average ? The casino does not keep track of bets placed. They get a general idea for purposes of setting comps per player. The IRS don't give a damn how many bets a player makes. They only care about wins and losses. These numbers are all about what a casino earns off of the table games.

 

Gizmo, let me ask a question: suppose you find a biased wheel which you play 10 numbers, your edge over the house is 5%, means that these 10 numbers yield 50 units every 100 trials played.
You decide to play 500 spins a day for a month. You have played 15k and won 7500 units.
Can you win more than 5% on 15k? very very hard to win less than 2,5% or more than 7,5% on this test.
My winning were due to an advantage, no way to win 20%. Casinos edge by 5% playing against 1000 players a day yields what its edge says.
Casinos have edges from 2% to 20% on a variety of games, for them, the long run comes early for them.
You could explain to me how the hold works.

regards

 

in roulette, the players lose on average a little more than 5% of all the money wagered

but they lose on average about 20% of the amount of their buy in - this is the "hold"

the amount of money wagered is much greater than the buy in because the player's wins are re-bet

that is why the "hold" is so much larger than the house edge

 

Half smoke, in my example, how vould I win 20% in long periods while my edge is 5%
Same scenario with casino's edge.
Your buy in is 1000, you decide to play 1 unit each spin. In case you decided to play 2, 3 or 100 units each spin you must separate it. In the end you sum the times you wagged 1, and the times you bet the other bets.

 

OK, I guess I will have to demonstrate how people believe the lie, and tell the lie.

 

Now let me explain why the casino takes more from players than just 5%.

I will show you a graph of 300 spins all bet on red at the same value of $90 per bet or $5 per chip for all 18 numbers. In this example the bet selection and amount is set to a consistent value and without reason or cause and effect.

People lose because of self control. They want more so that even when they win they feed it all back to the casino because they want more. This always happens because the casino's bankroll is far bigger than the player's bankroll. So all that has to happen is that the player keeps betting right through a downturn. So they eventually run out of bankroll. In the example below you will see the graph go into a slow grind upward followed by a slow grind downward.



It doesn't take a mathematician, a sorcerer, a prophet, or a skilled physicist to figure out that things sometimes come in wave forms. All you have to do is look for the up and down trends in the wave forms.

Instead of looking for the wave forms, "moving averages," in one set of numbers, like in the reds only bet in the graph, I look at 12 sets of numbers in order to find the best one in a state of winning. The odds could be in a losing streak but the high numbers can be in a win streak all at the same time. I chose to bet on the win streak. It's that simple. I also chose to not be greedy like the suckers that want more and play and pay right through losing streaks. But that is beside the point here. The point is that the casinos and others lie to you about what must happen.

I'm telling you that you can lose hundreds of unfunded or minimally funded bets and still beat the casino by betting your big bets during an upswing in the effectiveness condition. The video teaches this principle and uses it to beat the stock market. Only the guy teaching it believes the lie. He uses the lie as his main point.

Once you see the lie as nothing more than an excuse to lose then you can start to see how not important it is to winning. If you can stop betting when your selections go into a downturn then you have the situational awareness to control your outcome. It's that simple. It is far more difficult to control your emotions and your desires. Human nature will sabotage you. It will even get you to hang onto plausible excuses for losing. The casino does not want you to figure out that it was your method that made you lose and not the 5%.

I'm glad that people that disagree with my conclusions here are stuck on believing and telling the lie. They are stuck and can't get past this. All the disparaging pejoratives in the world can't make this knowledge disappear. It's like watching someone grasp onto another when they are drowning. They would rather take both of you down then to face reality.

 

That is only partially true. The first statement is not true. They tend to lose their entire bankroll when they lose. Very few quit while they are ahead. You do see people get up as winners all the time. But they sit right down at another game and feed it right back. It's the downturns and the size of the bankroll that sets the stage. Mathematics will never tell when a streak will start, how long it will last, and when it will end. And it won't tell you if it is a win streak or a losing streak either. That's why it is so funny when trend players are accused of predicting the future based on past spins. They can't predict the future from that information. But that is the argument some people want to have because it's an easy argument to win. So they are cheaply entertained by it. Prediction is not possible based on past spins. If you attempt to use that and believe it then you are not looking at the current conditions. If you look at mirages and expect them to guide you then you will get what you deserve. You will bet big right through a losing streak. You will run out of bankroll before the casino does.

 

Try real hard to figure out the math. If I only bet on 10 numbers then the odds are 26.3% that I will win on the double zero wheel. But let's round that number to 25% for argument sake. That means that I will win one out of four bets. I will bet $40 per bets at $1 chips on 4 bets and I will get back $36 on each fourth placed bets win. But when you add a 5% edge to me because of a biased wheel I will get 5 extra wins out of each 100 spins. So instead of winning 25 spins I win 30. Those 5 extra wins get me an additional $180. I also lose $50 less on the loss side of the equation. So you add that $50 to the win side. So with a house expectation that I should lose 52.5 bets and win only 47.5 bets based on the house's advantage your extra 5% edge will never be enough to get to a 20% hold.

 

I hope you get a comission to try sending people in the wall with this bs...

 

Any more calculations on the back burner ?

 

I hope you get to go to the big barbecue.

I have provided software to practice on and with in order to perfect the skill at no cost or risk to anyone. That's far more than you have ever done for sheep.

 

Hopefully it doesn't worth anything, and they'll lose their stack... Do you get a comission on that stack? Where is your affiliation link?

 

Gizmo,



Your lack of knowledge and conspiracy theories are absurdly funny!!!

FYI The house hold is higher than the house edge because players aren't content winning just a puny amount or losing small. Instead players will continue recycling any wins that they have and or chasing losses until they either win very big, or reach their loss limit. (Run out of money). It has nothing to do with rigged games or other conspiracies.

I'd love to hear your 911 or lunar landing conspiracies sometime too!

 

It so wonderful for you to sight the obvious. Of course the player's ignorance is the cause for the difference. If they were smart they would just lose the expected mathematical amount, right? You have just confirmed that it's a lie that the casinos make the expected amount. That's the same lie you have been spewing for more than 20 years. I'm just pointing out that the books and the claims are hogwash. You have not changed that. A smart player can beat the casinos at will.

As far as a conspiracy theory goes you are that person. When are you going to figure out that a person can know when they are in a win streak? You never got back to me on that question. People should wonder about you.

 

Gizmo, the video about "trade like a casino" does not explain the way a casino wins more than its edge.
It says many trues mixed with some lies, I do not know trading but we know that you cannot have 60% or 55% chance of winning buying when trends are going up.
I don't know why he said stock market pays 2 to 1 whereas casino pays 1 to 1.

 

.... by using precog

 

I guess, Dr Sir anyone hasn't seen it yet.

 

Deleted . ND

 

Gizmo is closer to reality than the mathboyZ