Roulette Shank's Thread

Hey, fellow Roulette-heads!

I'm going to introduce myself first. I've been researching the game of roulette very deeply for a long time now. I have several favorite approaches, but I've done deep researches in almost all fields, including statistics, strategic gameplays, physics, non-random concepts, prediction accuracy optimization (bet selection), trends, patterns, cycles, repeats, Pigeonhole principle, ... the list goes on.

I would describe my situation as "close to the answers". I believe there are ways to beat the game, but I do not possess one yet. However, I know like a million strategies that don't work, and this knowledge is the payoff of thousands of hours researching all possible routes to investigate. Thus identifying loser approaches and cherry-picking those that might have merit is my strength now.

In this thread, I'm going to share my progress towards the grail. Any kind of contribution is welcome. I found the members of this forum way more resourceful and knowledgeable than other ones, so I decided to continue my journey here. Salut to everyone!


How Does Roulette Beat Us?

To kickstart, let's talk about why roulette wins against almost all of the gamblers.

I'm pretty sure most of you guys have heard about Parrondo's paradox. The idea of switching between loser strategies, to form a winner strategy. This can not be done versus roulette, because the game is a negative expectation experience. But, why does roulette win then?

Another question: while in a cycle of 37 spins, we can bet for hits to repeat, or bet for unhits to hit. Both win sometimes, but why don't they keep winning? The answer, in terms of Juan Parrondo's theory, is that the casino is playing Parrondo's paradox against you!

Roulette will lose against the gambler if it keeps spitting hit numbers, and it will lose if it keeps spitting unhit numbers, but since the game for the wheel itself is a positive expectation experience, it will win eventually against any gambler by switching between these two strategies. That's another POV to understand why the game is almost impenetrable.




Overdue Events? Let's See...

In this section, I want to investigate the idea of betting for overdue events in the game of Roulette. Any veteran Roulette player knows betting for overdue events (events that are happened way less than expected) is a waste of hard-earned money, and a dead-end route to explore. We all have been there...

Also, we all know that one fellow player (Maybe it's you?) who believes there is no due in random, therefore there is no overdue either. I can't pick sides in this fight, since I have witnessed facts that confirm both.

My latest understanding of the chaotic behavior of the game dictates that there are overdue events in Roulette, but they can not be exploited. The reason lies in the word "chaotic". The expected situation will happen sooner or later, but the path to it is not linear, it's basically chaotic. But...!

We know that a hit is expected every 37 numbers played, no matter what location on the felt we are playing (EC, DZ, ...). It's not related to the overdue events explained above. It's hard-coded into the game, and simply explainable by math. No matter if you keep betting 1 single number on each spin, or a bunch of numbers, you will end up having 1 hit per 37 numbers played. If throughout the game we keep tracking our hit ratio like this 1/63 or 5/195, by doing little calculations, we can find out how short we are in terms of hits. And after a good number of spins, it will end up like 1/37.

To wrap up, I believe that there are no possible ways to exploit overdue numbers or events in Roulette (At least I'm not aware of any), simply because it's a chaotic system. Instead, since we eventually end up with a hit ratio of 1/37, no matter what route we take, I believe there are overdue hits in Roulette, and they might be exploitable. I confidently call the ratio of 1/37 due to happen, and when the ratio is like 0/74, I call the hits I expected to have overdue to happen. Why? Because after a good number of spins, you can not and will not end a game with a hit ratio of 1/50.

This must be taken into account in the process of designing a winner system, no matter if you pick a flat bet or progressive strategy.


Let's Discuss!

Let me know what you think. Feedback is welcome. I will keep posting and replying on this thread. Who knows, maybe we end up with a reference thread like Reading Randomness and other useful threads.

Cheers,
Shank

 

So let's discus this. Let's, just for the sake of argument, say that 337 spins is a single event. You want that event to go your way but not all of them will. But you want enough of them to go your way so that it ends up in the long run being your way in your favor.

So if you do place a 1 unit bet on a single number for each spin then you must lose every bet in the 300 remaining spins that you are supposed to lose, after no bets on the first 37, in order to have an equilibrium of expected value. I'm suggesting to not place a bet on any selected number that has not repeated by the time 35 bets have been placed on it. You consider that number dead until it wakes back up, if it does.

Look at it this way. You will place the same flat bet somewhere on a number for all 300 remaining spins after that first 37. You will need 9 wins in order to brake even. If you can find one other of the hot numbers that hits like 14 times in 300 then you are in profit nicely. If you win less than 9 then you lose a little. So you look at the full 337 spins as a single event. So you need to find other hot numbers so you can switch. You don't need to find or makeup for lost bets. You just need to get at least 9 wins.

Going after just one number is a great way to play. The secret to reading randomness on this is to look for the few active numbers. Just don't feed the cold spots. Many tables have a $5 low limit. Some casinos make that a 5 chip minimum. Irritating policy. But 5 extra wins above 9 wins, 14, makes for a nice payday. That's $900 from a $1,500 bankroll. Nobody would expect you to lose all 300 bets. And sometimes a hottest number reaches 22 to 24 hits in 300 spins.

I don't see how Turbo can lose. I could play that way as my small bet while looking for monster type trend patterns.

 

A very dodgy method . Best to be " deep sixth ".

 

Gizmotron, thanks for your input. Despite the fact that I do not reject the idea of playing hot numbers (I always find it convincing to explore this route), it is actually in contradiction with the idea I proposed in the section "Overdue Events? Let's See...".

If we change our view, we can see a very interesting concept in the game: Overdue Hits. To see it, we should let go of any bet selection method. Forget about numbers, think about played numbers, or in other words: played slots.

On average we get 1 hit per 37 numbers played, no matter what location on the felt we are betting on. The more numbers we play each round or overall, the closer we get to the 1/37 ratio. If we have played a total number of 120 numbers and we had no luck, our hits are overdue and we will receive them sooner or later. So we should construct our bets in a way that the payout is enough to cover our losses after receiving our hits, both in terms of vertical and horizontal progressions.

However, this approach is only viable when playing a meaningful number of numbers (group of numbers). Sitting on a single number doesn't provide assessable results to evaluate this approach. The idea is to dynamically fine-tune the number of numbers to bet on for each spin.

What do you think about it?

 

I think that if you play say 4 or 5 numbers only 1 can win at a time and the other 3 or 4 must lose when that 1 does win.

I presented the notion of 1 number to illustrate independence from other numbers. Now you could run 4 or 5 of these as 3 or 4 other independent simultaneous activities.

If you can't make 1 work for you then why would 4 or 5 work for you? I'm suggesting ten hour sessions and finding the most recent hottest number in activity. It's almost always 1 number being the hottest for a stretch. A good example of that is the zeros. They can act dormant or they can get real active. It's situational awareness.

 

Again I repeat, I'm putting aside bet selection (choosing better slots in terms of likelihood). It's a figurative situation. Forget about smart ways to cherry-pick numbers on the felt. Let me put it in other words, for the sake of the example...

A) Let's say we have no memory and no access to pen and paper. So we are unable to identify hot numbers, sleepers, or any statistical characteristic of the game.

B) Each spin, we are being told what our hit ratio is (like 0/96).

C) Each spin, we can only choose how many numbers we want to play (EC, DZ, ... down to SU), and how much money we are willing to bet. You are not even allowed to choose which dozen or line to play, just the type of bet...

D) We know that we should've had 1 hit per 37 numbers played. With this given, can we come up with a strategy to close the session with the minimum amount of profit (1u)?

PS: To make it clear again, I don't have the answer to the above problem. It's an open discussion.
PS: Apparently someone called Talos on the other forum designed a winner system based on this concept.

 

good luck with that

 

Since I keep forgetting certain facts, here is a side note for the future me, and those who find it useful:

I just did a test on single numbers. The goal of the test was to find out if it makes any difference in the longest streak of losing when selecting the number based on different statistical logics. The following is the result of the test, each for 1,000,000,000 spins:

Random Number (betting on a random number each round)
The longest consecutive losing spins reached 613

Constant Number (betting on the same number each round)
The longest consecutive losing spins reached 600

Hottest Number (betting on the number with the most hits)
The longest consecutive losing spins reached 643

Coldest Number (betting on the number with the least hits)
The longest consecutive losing spins reached 593

Average Number (betting on the number with the expected number of hits)
The longest consecutive losing spins reached 691

Don't mind the minor differences, they keep changing a few percent each time the test is done.


@ Everyone:

- How do you interpret this information?

- The hit rate for each method at the end of each test was 2.70% (1/37). So what happened after that 600-ish spin absence? How did it get back to balance?

PS: The Average Number test took the longest to spit out the results since it needed a sorted 2x37 matrix array. Should I be considering the latest Macbook Pro? lol.

 

DrTalos expected a hit in 60 numbers played. I have always wondered how he calculated that.

 

No idea, I don't know him and the details of his system.

 

We know that we should've had 1 hit per 37 numbers played. With this given, can we come up with a strategy to close the session with the minimum amount of profit (1u)?

I will try to answer your question.
A) A very slow progression.
B) Play more than 1 number to spread the risk of having a sleeper.
C) both the above.

I think that you have clearly identified the problem that roulette players face.

 

If the number has slept for 600 spins, I am sure that it would have to hit at greater than 1/37 to get back to 1/37.
Can a number sleep for 600 spins, hit once, and sleep for another 600 spins?

 

You are totally correct, in my opinion. However, a slow progression is not enough. Strategically managing our bets (numbers played and the amount of bet) must be the key. And yes, always play more than 1 number. I would say 3 is the minimum.

 

Technically, it's possible.

 

Side note #2:

A few posts ago, I shared the result of my latest test about how long a number can sleep, no matter how you choose it (the number is ~600 spins).

Today I tested what's the longest missing streak for a second sleeper. When one number has been sleeping for ~600 spins, the second-worst performing number could be absent for about 350 spins. Given that this number is not necessarily the "Split Pair" of the worst-performing number, it shows that technically a split can not go sleeping for more than 350 spins.

 

That is sort of funny. This confirms that the zero and the double zero can go to sleep for a long stretch. I'm saying "CAN" go to sleep. Well guess what happens to the odds when the zeros go to sleep. The entire argument that a 47% / 53% game becomes a 50% / 50% game while that is true.

This could be thought of as conditional math. I just thought I'd point that out just to tweak the mathZombies a little.

 

Pfff - with all due respect to your age - do you sometimes READ what you write? And if I may: There is no such thing as a "mathZombie" or worse, a "mathNazi". These concepts simply do not exist. Neither do dependencies between independent events nor, consequently, patterns in chains of independent events.
I do not wish to discuss this any further and I ask you politely not to highjack each and every topic here. Every now and then people really have to say something which is worth listening or responding to.
Thank You.

 

Fine. I'll go silent longer than you can.

 

Yes I will respond to this.
Lol rlmao
You
Have
No
Idea
Lol

but please continue, I hope many people believe what you say then , disregard it as they always do ,

as YOU

in fact disregard your own opinion and the opinion of your fellow mathites when you go back into the casinoverse and bet on the very games you post against lol. Typically Hypocritical but you all play for FUN
Lol. Cheers

 

I assess ideas unbiasedly. I did a quick test on it, here are the results:

On average, a specific number (not "any" number) does go sleeping for up to 450 spins. It also stretches to a typical maximum of 600 spins at times, meaning that zero (or any specific number) can be that awful-performing number in these tests. But when it's not, it simply can go missing for 450 spins.

The test has a sample size of 10 million spins on a one-zero wheel.

You are free to interpret the situation with 600 spins and no zero showing up. I'd like to hear your thoughts.

PS @ everyone: Talk, discuss, even fight, but don't get personal. That's the least you can do on a "discussion board".