Roulette Shank's Thread

Today I was testing a strategy on a provably-fair online Roulette table. I was playing on the low section (EC, DS, ST,...). I kept playing for ~4000 spins and the wheel avoided giving me hits like crazy! After summing up, I had a hit rate of ~2.50% per number played. This is too low, compared to the expected hit rate of 2.70% (1/37)! The house had an extra edge of ~7.4% against me in this insane game. It might be either:

1) A huge variance, that will balance out in like another 4000 spins! What kind of strategy can sustain until then?

2) A weird state in PRNG. Maybe I could get normal results by just refreshing the page. Do things like this (e.g. one street underperforming for 4000 spins) happen in B&M or live casinos (on real physical tables)?

PS: The casino can not be cheating in this particular case. The game is provably fair. The outcome is selected by PRNG before the gambler places his bets, and it's provable, technically speaking.

What do you think?

 

When you play the table layout, outside bets, the zero is excluded from your bets, either side, being red or black etc... If the cold number happens to be zero and it sleeps for your entire 10 hour session at a B & M casino then you are playing a 50 / 50 game under the conditions that you have taken advantage of situational awareness.

As the Dr. AA would say, there are still 37 slots on the wheel. And by physics alone they are all still in play. Now if you are really smart, and not lazy, you can identify the two coldest numbers, whatever they are. You can exclude them from your red grouping or from your odd grouping by placing each number in a group on the inside. An example, for the sake of clarity, would be like #3 and #12 are the two coldest numbers. You can leave them out of the Red and Low 18 groupings. You must do that by making the bets on the inside layout with individual chips.

Now if you think this will protect your progression from the natural occurrence of a sequence of death then you would be mistaken. That is my opinion. I have long since forgotten about the odds as being the reason for a perfect storm of lost bets together in a swarm. That is just a natural phase of randomness. There is no magical math that will make your progression be safe and always profitable. People will still go along, hit a swarm of losses, and deplete their playing bankrolls. The casino will win that session because the player ran out of headroom in their bankrolls.

 

I'm going to defend Reading Randomness. I don't care much what other people think of me personally. Anyone can act like they are "Woke" and are entitled with a responsibility to "cancel" anyone or any idea that they don't like. Course that makes them a Nazi type personality and in most cases a person selling suckers on racism when considering the context of the original original form.. Take the tech giants for an example. They practice Nazi style censorship and are glad that they do it while attempting to bring back racism so that they can process the suckers of a race victimhood that is willing to be suckers again. This is slowly starting to backfire on these "race bating poverty pimps." Just look at the results of last night's election.

So how does this apply to answering a false news claim that there are no mathNazis or mathZombies? Let's use context as a baseline value. In the beginning there were the mathBoyz. They were the obnoxious math oriented absolutist types that used statistical absolutism to brow beat anyone that stood in their way. But then our fine Dr. Anyone Anyone here, known by the handle 'Snowman' took over the power of moderating the online gambling forum known as Gambler's Glen. He proceeded to destroy that forum with cancel and censorship tactics. It killed the forum forever. It's dead and only the remnants of its archives remains. That tactic was pure Nazism. So we had the nicer more respectful mathBoyz and then we added the mathNazis to the label so that a person could tell the difference between the two. But it became obvious that applying Nazism to the mathBoyz was an overreaction. And the blind magical belief in math did not turn a mathBoyz into a mathNazi. So with so much attention to zombies there became the mathZombies because they walk around like brain dead , mindless. automatons, spewing their magical math dogma. We tolerate them here, knowing that they almost all tend to be paper players with no skin in the game and not much actual playing experience.

Us, "old guys" is a new tactic. It's the first push by people that are like to see themselves as entitled to cancel anything that disagrees with their point of view. It's a new happy kind of Nazism. The entitled élite will safely guide you if you just suck the brains out of any logic that is contradictory to anyone else's knowledge or opinion. You see the neo-elitism that is now in fashion does not believe in a real truth. They are brainwashed into thinking all ideas representing an opinion are subjective and that objective critical thinking is something you can manipulate at any time to bolster you own beliefs.

So in effect zombie-ism is the new "cult of personality" affectation. It's OK to label some of us "Old Guys" but watch out if you label anyone zombie.

 

Hi Shank

I have been checking out Provably fair. I think that they have found a way to turn roulette into a game of slots. It's fair in that they payout 95%, as in slots.
I think that they can discard numbers that are generated until they get one that suits them. They keep generating numbers using the SAME seed from your computer over and over (for the same spin). Next spin, they use the next seed from your PC.

I once played on a faulty airball roulette machine, and I could see it generating and discarding numbers before launching the ball. Legally it's not cheating, as the payout is fair. But it becomes a game of slots where skill won't help you.

 

Thanks, Badger. I've been suspecting them recently. The point is each round they generate a few numbers, but only one is winning. Why even bother generating a handful of numbers when one is enough? It's weird. However, the hit rate is 2.7% most of the time... Seems like I should begin to test my systems against live roulettes. Takes way more time.

 

DrTalos was able to win with his progression on airball (auto roulette) roulette machines. That's because he had a very long progression that would keep him in the game. When he started playing at B&M casino's, he said that the sessions were much shorter.
The fact that you have a hit rate of 2.7% would seem that you are playing a form of slots. With natural roulette, there should be wider swings in variance.

 

What do you mean by "wider" swings?

I have witnessed crazy swings in PF-RNG roulettes. I don't know if I should expect better or worse games on live roulettes or B&M tables.

 

I'm no maths expert but let's assume that provably fair is the same as playing slots.

The variance would be controlled by the payout algorithm. "They" don't want you to get too far ahead and they also don't want you to become discouraged.
With normal roulette, Casino or RNG, the variance would be the result of the random nature of the spins generated.

This is just speculation on my part. As I said, I am no expert.

 

Shank, as you've probably noticed;
I've been working on DrTalos lore for just more than a year as a first thing since starting with roulette seriously, & lately began implementing the statistical advantage as per Turbo (unhits or late numbers) into the system itself -- which you have mentioned in the thread & exploring from this angle.

I see you have coding knowledge & interest in this type of system .. which is quite rare & which would be in my benefit; & me, I have a lot of experience & work done with DrTalos lore & principles which will bring you quickly up to speed.

Would it be in your interest of joining the forces for this purpose?

 

Thank you, @thereddiamanthe . I prefer to discuss ideas publicly, that's the way I enjoy it. That's why I initiated this thread. I'm not familiar with this guy's concepts enough though.

 

Well, not all from the body of work can go public, although in the essence in my posts has been revealed.
In case you wanna have a look deeper into it I can be contacted on rouletteforum. cc as TRD.

 

I think I'm going to post more about my systems. It's the only way to make them better.



~1000 spins
Max drawdown: -400u (from ATH)
Max bet size: 12
P&L: +0.2u / spin

What do you think about the graph?

 

The hit rate was around ~1/37 at the end of the game for the numbers I played, so no luck or positive variance.

 

I like the black background.

 

I like the leftover artifacts from the Photoshop filters.

 

That's just bs.

 

That is correct. Give yourself a kewpie doll.

 

Making up graphs? Really? I have much better things to do.

Anyways, the graph descended on spin #2500 and couldn't recover anymore, so this one is definitely not a winner. Will keep posting...

 

What's correct? Correct is that your comment is bs.
Gizmo, you really think that I would be looking for gratification.

 

Armitage; Turbo talk.


1st 16 no repeat. Just +1 shank