Roulette Math can beat a math game - and everyone can agree :)

Exactly - and not only that - a person can win "long term" just by sheer luck. It sounds insane to people who don't believe you can beat the casino in short or long term - but they just haven't studied the math or the game long enough I suppose.

 

I know somebody that did it. He was ahead every year for over 20 years and then it just stopped cold. He's still ahead because he quit playing. People have no idea how long the long term is, and that they would have to live 10 lifetimes for it to apply to them.

It doesn't even apply to single casinos sometimes. There are successful casinos that have losing quarters and losing years. You want to know what the long term refers to? Every single casino game in the world, all looked at as one operation just for the sake of the long term. If you go that big, then yes, the casino business is thriving.

It you try and apply it to a single player, you flat out do not understand the math. Or the house edge.

 

I do believe that roulette can be beaten, I'm just not sure how many have really achieved that.
Practically.

Nobody can argue this, can they?

 

The math which proves the game can't be beaten is pretty simple. Sure, you can calculate all kinds of probabilities for events of one kind or another, but they are all taken account of and included in the bottom line negative expectation. No matter how you select your bets, skip spins, or use triggers and progressions, the math remains the same: your return is less than you put in.

And the "long term" is not an unknown quantity; it can be calculated rather precisely. No-one can win long term by sheer luck. Luck is short term and is just another name for variance. Variance takes secondary importance to the house edge the more spins you play.

The only way to win long term is to step outside of the math box and use physics.

 

That's correct, unless you change part of the game. If you develop a bet selection that lets you win more often than lose, the math is now in your favor and not the casinos. The casinos edge disappears and becomes meaningless.

 

That isn't true, as I posted in the other thread (38 people go into a casino).
This person using nothing really but luck is up a very large amount over a large number of spins
(long term) - perhaps even a lifetime of spins.

 

You'll never see it in 10 lifetimes. We play in the extreme short term, where anything can happen. The long term doesn't even apply to the casino, it applies to the GAME. Take every roulette wheel in the world spinning for the last 200 years and you have the long term. As soon as you make a bet, you're in the games long term. But you're personal game will never be in it. Ever. Anything the math says applies to the long term will never apply to you.

This is important to understand, but for most it will go in one ear and out the other.

 

Turbo, your example in the "38 people go into a casino" isn't representative. 1000 spins isn't really very much for a betting a single number. The variance changes according to how many numbers you bet. Try the same experiment betting EC's or 30 numbers over 1000 spins and ALL the players will be down.

Of course, IF you can find a bet selection which wins more than it loses, then you have a winner. Well d'uh; you might as well say "if you can find a way to win, then you'll win", or "if you can predict the future, then you'll win". It's purely hypothetical.

To say that you can "make your own edge" is confused. Edges aren't made, they're discovered. Confining your attention to statistics, probabilities, progressions etc can't yield an edge. The symmetry of all outcomes and patterns ensures that there is no advantage to be had in the GAME. On the other hand, the wheel, ball, dealer, environmental conditions and so on are not generic attributes of the game, but can and do change depending on the specific wheel/dealer. A physical system can never be perfect, but an abstract system is.

You cannot "beat" an abstract system which is designed to give the casino an edge, so all the complex bet selections, triggers etc are tantamount to attempting to build a perpetual motion machine, and no matter how "clever" your system is the symmetry will ensure that however many holes you plug, another one will appear somewhere else. It's not a matter of "practice" or studying the behavior of randomness, such a study will only reveal that there can be no advantage. Previous spins do not indicate future spins, and the patterns and apparently regularity in random outcomes cannot be exploited because you never know know when they are going to manifest.

There's also a lot of confusion about the "long term". Apparently, according to some, the long term does not consist of a series of short-terms! You could play 1000,000 spins in 20 years but you are never in the "long term" if you only play 100 spins per session. And if in the short term "anything can happen", how can you then claim that a winning bet selection is possible? another contradiction.

You guys really ought to take a course on logic.

 

Out of all the misguided garbage in your last post, I chose this to respond to. What you meant to say was, studying random has revealed no advantage for YOU. Frankly, I doubt you have spent even 5 seconds doing it, though. Previous spins do not indicate future spins for YOU, is what you're saying. So you assume that's true for everybody.

You sharpened your pencil, sat and did the math, and now you've found the path for YOU. Please don't lump the rest of us into your religion..

 

All casino games is about the odds of an single event occurring, and your wagering on that occurrence of that event. Casinos make the money (house edge) on offering you less than true odds for the payouts of the occurrence. However, what is often ignored is events occurring in succession and this is where the smart player can win and where math is fun!

Lets look at the 64% bet with roulette, this is betting on two of the three douzaines where with the American Roulette wheel you have 64% of a win and 65% with the European wheel. (this is a real wheel, not a video wheel or online where spins are not true).

It is possible to lose, but improbably to lose more than 4 times in a row (roughly 1.6% chance of this event happening) with a fair wheel and truly random results with a dealer who is not aiming the ball. If you use a negative progression Martingale betting method the odds are greatly in your favor that you will win 1 in 4 of your bets and recover your losses and/or make money too, depending on your betting style.

In Craps the odds of the sit and eight being hit is 1 in 4 (provided that the dice are fair) However the payouts here is 6:5 not 2:1 as in roulette, making this bet far more lucrative with roulette than craps. Though betting across the number line in craps gives you a 65% odds of winning two bets and betting insides gives you 61% odds of winning two bets. Lets say you bet $32 across and win two times for a total of $14 to $19, you then take all your bets down and wait for the seven to show before you remake the bets and repeat. If you lose your across bet you just use a negative progressing martingale to recover:

Betting on 1:1 games where you have a 47.8 to 49.2% chance of winning such as red/black or Odd/Even in roulette or baccarat, blackjack the chance of losing 8 in a row is near zero. Using the negative progression martingale can work, though beware that table limits may make this bet unworkable. In my own play losing more than 6 hands in a row was rare and I due to table limits I often just cut my loses at that point.

Now, pressing in your wins back in to your bets can significantly speed up a recovery of a loss, however can also astronomically launch your bankroll as well. I have watched plays buy in for $100 and walk out with several grand in a short time with the pressing in the wins to the next bet and read an account of a guy who turned 6K in to 280K this way. Experiment with this and find your own comfort level about pressing in your wins, go with what feels right for you.

There is a lot to the above methods I have left out intentionally, though any smart person can figure out what I left out and figure it out for themselves.

Casinos know well about these methods and don't care. They figure eventually if you play long enough that you will lose, get careless, get bored and make mistakes. And, they may be right if you where to play at the same table long enough you could lose it all back to the casino, so that is why when playing this method you don't stay long to let the odds of the table settle against you. I tend to view that there is an odds Matrix that flows though the games and that the longer you play the more you move though it. A hot moment can lead to a cold ending, and a cold start can become hot. That is why you want to have some win goal that is easily achievable, such as one win or 3% of bankroll.

I also look for hot tables as well, might as well go where the odds are favorable. Sure, this may mean some foot work as you walk from casino to casino..but then again it is good exercise too.

This method can be used for Video Poker as well, though it would be a bit of work. The odds of winning a hand in Video Poker is the same as blackjack
You have to go like this on each loss: .01,.05,.10,.25,.50,$1.$2.$5.$10,$25

 

100 spins played every day for 100 days is no different than playing 10,000 spins in a row...
The math doesn't change at all.

In my 38 people post - I showed not 1 person, but 13 people who ALL left as winners after 1,000 spins.
How you break those spins up (50 spins per visit, or 200, or all 1,000 at once doesn't matter at all)
I can also give another example of those 13 people doing the same thing for as many sets of 1,000 - 2,000 or 3,000 or more spins and they will always leave in profit.
Now if "LUCK" can produce this result, don't tell me that a betting selection/system/method doesn't have the exact same chance of working and winning at the same rate (long term) for as many spins as you'd like to throw at it.

Of course you do - if a pattern shows every time, and you see the pattern forming - you can surely use this to your advantage... please think about this before dismissing it from not understanding it

 

People don't realize how close the line is to saying ahead of the casino. They often don't realize it until they are so far behind for so many years that they'll never get caught up. You gladly spend weeks and months learning how to drive a car, or years to learn a musical instrument, but to beat a casino they you want it right now, right away.

 

Agreed. My point above was in response to EKAPs, who is denying this (although he doesn't seem to realize it). Since he clearly has no arguments, but is only interested in personal attacks, I'm not going to bother responding to him.

But this is assuming the very thing that you're attempting to show, namely that "a pattern shows every time". Where is the evidence that this ever happens in roulette? Again, it's purely hypothetical. Of course IF a pattern shows every time then you should bet on it, but a pattern can break at any point, so where is the advantage? You only have an advantage if the pattern shows at a higher rate than probability dictates, or at least that it shows reliably after some "trigger".

You talk about beating roulette with math, but where is the math that says past spins indicate future spins? there is none and in fact no logical justification for believing it, and yet your systems seem to depend on the possibility that past spins DO indicate future spins.

 

Where did I deny it? I agree 100% with what Turbo said. I agreed when he said it 10 years ago.

There is none and never will be. Past spins don't actually point to anything, they cannot, they are random. So you pretend they do. It's just like a belief in god. There is no god, he's a myth. There is not a shred of evidence god exists. But millions take it on faith that there is a god. Show me the math that proves god is real.

 

Actually, there are a lot of arguments for the existence of God, whether you find them convincing or not is another matter.

Are you serious? if past spins don't point to anything, how can pretending they do give you a real edge?

Like I said, no logic whatsoever.

 

You have to invent your own game that you play with the past spins.

 

That doesn't answer the question. If past spins don't actually point to anything (and I agree), then inventing your own game won't help. How can it? It would only help if past spins DO indicate future spins. If spins are entirely disconnected then any "game" you invent must also be disconnected from the actual game, in which case your results will be no better than random.

 

When I was a kid, we invented a game where we looked for faces of people and cartoon characters and recognizable things in the clouds. The first one to spot 10 of them wins. Clouds are random events, the faces aren't really there.

 

Hi T.G...Its been a long time.lol.....hope your well.......post the holy grail...

 

You don't need to reach the "long term" for a system to fail. Systems fail because of the house edge, much sooner than most people realize.
In the short term, variance is a bigger killer. However, after about 5k or so spins (where bets are actually placed) on the double zero wheel, even chance betting systems (if flat betting) reach the point of no return and are net losers due to the house edge, not variance.

Variance simplified = (+ or -) 3 x (the square root of the number of trials).
House edge = number of spins x 5.26%

You can input whatever number of spins you choose into the crude formulas above to see which has a bigger effect on your bankroll.

By the way, there's no difference between playing 5k spins off and on over several weeks verses playing them all in one setting.

-Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone