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 Why are people so reluctant to accept that roulette can't be beaten?

Discussion in 'Roulette Forum' started by Warren Arnold, May 28, 2020.

  1. Warren Arnold

    Warren Arnold New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2020
    Likes:
    4
    Location:
    UK
    Hi Guys,

    I've been gambling profitably for over two decades now. Recently, I published a book detailing some of the techniques I use to achieve that. Don't worry, I'm not selling any systems, I don't believe in such things. Nor am I about to start spamming the boards here either, especially not the roulette board. I stick mainly to poker and sports betting. I have had a reasonable degree of success with roulette over the years due mainly to a few substantial wins here and there. I put my wins down to luck more than anything else, though I do use a couple of methods to try and help predict where the ball might land, which I believe is the only way to consistently beat roulette: i.e., to increase your strike rate, the accuracy of your predictions, to better than the odds on offer.

    Anyway, I'm currently doing some research for my next book and I'd like to just ask you all an open question: I don't believe roulette can be consistently beaten. The house's edge can't be overcome. The math, as far as I'm concerned, is indisputable.

    Not everyone shares this opinion.

    My question is this: Why not? Why are people willing to invest so much time and money in a game that clearly can't be beaten?

    People who read and post on forums about roulette are obviously taking the game quite serious. It's about more than just the adrenaline rush for them. They are more than just casual gamblers. They are looking for a way to win. Just like the pot of gold at the end of a rainbow, though, it doesn't exist. I'm not trying to mock or belittle anyone's beliefs but profitable gambling is not about belief in theories. It's about securing a mathematically-qualified edge and then exploiting that edge as profitably as you can.

    I look forward to your answers!
     
  2. mr j

    mr j Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2015
    Likes:
    518
    Occupation:
    self employed
    Location:
    Milwaukee, WIS
    Its a QUEST in which I enjoy. Besides easy money, I play/test *BECAUSE OF* posts/threads like yours.

    2+2 will not equal 5. So?? I have said it 500 times......the people that BASH roulette are the SAME people that are unable to think outside the box. There are hundreds and hundreds of things I cant do.
    So that means, others cannot achieve those same challenges? (lol)

    That kind of thinking is flawed. People play roulette...they fail...they vent...and no other person is ALLOWED to excel at it?

    Ken
     
  3. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,027
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    I'm not sure why you're interested in why people struggle to find ways to win when you are already convinced that it's impossible.
    It might be that all throughout time, everything that people have been told was impossible is now possible. Every day there are
    things to move from the "impossible" column to the "possible" one.
    It is simply a game based on math, and it can be exploited.
    But regardless - I have your email and will be in touch if you want to discuss it more - the forum replies will quickly turn into
    a joke by the people who ridicule those trying to win and the ones who believe the only way to win is through cheating or
    defective gambling devices (a bias wheel, etc). Those of us who have spent decades working on solutions to win aren't going
    to openly post much info that you could use (in my opinion) as it is only met with ignorant replies from the people who refuse
    to put any effort into it.
    Cheers.
     
    WaterFox, gizmotron and mr j like this.
  4. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    1,045
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    It's a fallacy to expect anything to be due. You can look it up for your next book, "Gambler's Fallacy." I'm the one that says that a mathematical expectations is also a fallacy. It needs a name though. Perhaps Mathematician's Fallacy would fit for coining a new phrase? Here is why. You admit to making money by luck alone with Roulette. So why don't you consider learning a skill for hunting for stretches of good luck? Math or any "House's Advantage" can't prevent you from hunting win streaks. Math or odds will never tell you when a win streak starts. It won't tell how good it is. It can't tell you how long it will last. It never tells you when it will end. So using math or statistical averages won't help you find more win streaks. You must use something else. There are people trying to perfect that skill to find win streaks and to exploit them. You might want to look into that for your next book too.
     
    Last edited: May 28, 2020
    Punkcity likes this.
  5. Punkcity

    Punkcity Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2020
    Likes:
    117
    Location:
    Sydney Australia
    Mathematic fallacies. Love it
    So short fat ugly people don’t get happiness from relationships because maths say that tall handsome/beautiful people are most likely to have success in love and procreation. Don’t catch a bus as maths says you are more likely to die that way than flying. Etc etc etc. Why are there so many failures at poker if the math is so good? Why do AP have to sell fake Rolex if the math is so good? Why do AP have to do low life criminal activity to survive if the math is so good,etc, etc , etc blar blar blar. Guess you fly everywhere warren?
    Cheers
     
  6. Warren Arnold

    Warren Arnold New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2020
    Likes:
    4
    Location:
    UK
    Hi Guys,

    Thanks for the replies so far.

    Mr J: Roulette looks and feels like a game that should be beatable; It's easy to see how it becomes a quest, an intellectual puzzle of sorts. I suppose it just depends on what your goals are. If you're goal is to solve the riddle that is roulette, go for it!

    TurboGenius: Firstly, by all means please feel free to email me. Secondly, it's quite true that possible is often a matter of perspective. As long as there is a chance of something happening, given enough time the probability is that it will happen. One thing I like about mathematics, though, is that it is unequivocal. Unless the rules of the game or the payouts change, there is no mathematical-based system that will ever overcome the house's edge, you can bet your retirement on it! That said, I agree the odds can be exploited if the wheel is biased or someone is using some sort of mini-computer perhaps, neither of which I think is very likely in this day and age. Most casinos monitor their wheels 24/7 and anyone smart enough to build a small computer capable of predicting where the ball will land is probably also smart enough to keep it to themselves. I don't see how the math could possibly be exploited, as you seem to suggest, but just because I don't see it, that doesn't mean it's not possible of course! I look forward to your email!

    Gizmotron: I'm well aware of Gambler's Fallacy. There are a whole host of other cognitive errors that clobber gamblers too. However, I definitely do not agree that mathematical expectation is a fallacy. 'Hunting stretches of good luck' doesn't work because it doesn't change the long-term expected value of any given spin.

    Once again, thanks for all your replies.
     
  7. Punkcity

    Punkcity Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2020
    Likes:
    117
    Location:
    Sydney Australia
    The thread is a fallacy in its self. you don’t beat anything , you can’t beat the market, the packers cannot beat the bears. The packers can win A game or a number of games but in the last 50 years they haven’t won every game against the bears so technically they can’t beat the bears. So why do they play ? Why do people watch them play? They play or are watched for the potential short term gain, the math say they cannot win every game why play ,using your logic not much is ever going to happen on this planet. The math says the odds of a life form coming into existence on some random planet is dam near impossible yet here you are creating a thread. The bus odds are in your favour by the way yet here you are posting a thread. Just a math fallacy?
    Cheers
    Welcome to forum , value your opinion thanks for the thread.
     

  8. Warren Arnold

    Warren Arnold New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2020
    Likes:
    4
    Location:
    UK
    Punkcity,

    Thanks for the reply. Firstly, I definitely don't fly everywhere!

    The only reason I've actually started writing about gambling recently is because of the lack of poker and sports betting due to the lock-down here in the UK. I am a profitable gambler but it's a side hustle, nothing more. I certainly don't profess to be an expert.

    I think what you are referring to here is a concept called regression to mean: the sporting performances of given teams will eventually regress to the mean average of their performances and the divergence of that average between clubs or teams in a given league, for example, is usually not that wide. In the last fifty years, say, the packers may well have won about the same number of games as the bears.

    A profitable sports bettor isn't looking to see which team win the most games over 50 years, though. That statistic won't necessarily help determine who will win the next game. Instead, the profit in sports betting comes from identifying value in a given price. Say the bookmaker is offering 6/4 but, by your analysis, the team is closer to even money, there's a lot of value there - assuming your analysis is correct. That would be what we call a positive expected value.

    When it comes to roulette, you can't find this sort of value because the probability of hitting a given number on the wheel remains static. On a single zero roulette wheel, for example, the probability of any given number coming in will always be one in thirty-seven but you will only ever get a return of thirty-five to one. Unless you knew where the ball was heading in advance, which is obviously impossible, you cannot change these odds.

    Does this make sense? I hope so.

    Kind regards,

    Warren Arnold
     
    Punkcity and Nathan Detroit like this.
  9. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,027
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    In your section "Common Biases" you mention regression to mean.

    So in your opinion a person who is ahead and in profit is basically doomed to lose because their bankroll is always
    working towards the expected negative value where it "should" be. (Used my own words there, didn't want to copy/paste lol).

    But you don't seem to think that this happens with the spins at the wheel because (?).
    Random doesn't mean that long term all numbers won't appear around 1 in 37. And they are always working
    towards that value because of the math. There are 37 possible outcomes, so long term each number will wander towards
    appearing 1 in 37.
    Meaning hot numbers will slow and drop in appearance rate heading towards the mean.
    Meaning cold numbers will become hot and appear more heading towards the mean.
    This is how it looks when it's charted....
    So then why would it appear foolish to bet on a cold number that is now appearing better than average ?
    "Random has limits". Any number at the lower limit is simply going to become hot eventually, and hot numbers
    well above average are going to slow down. You win on hot numbers that appear better than the payout of 35 to 1.

    I'm confused how you expect a bankroll to show regression to mean and the player is expected to end it all in a loss -
    but don't believe regression to mean with the numbers themselves - when we know that they are all heading to a 1 in 37 result.
     
    Last edited: May 28, 2020
    chewtoy and Punkcity like this.
  10. Warren Arnold

    Warren Arnold New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2020
    Likes:
    4
    Location:
    UK
    Hi Turbo,

    I agree, numbers will regress to the mean.

    Over a hundred thousand spins, say, most numbers will be close to the expected mean. I'm speaking in broad terms here. Now, that said, even after that amount of spins you may well still find numbers that are either above or below the expected mean, hot or cold as you put it. In fact, I'd be surprised if you didn't. It's just statistical variance. Perhaps there is some way to capitalise on it. I'm not saying there isn't. If there is, though, I don't know how it is possible. If a number has been cold for a hundred spins, it may well appear once or twice then go cold again for five hundred more spins. Again, I'm just offering broad examples.

    As I have said, I don't think roulette can be beaten, at least not consistently, with any kind of system approach.

    I could be wrong.

    I usually am :(

    One thing I have noticed is that certain clusters of numbers seem to very often appear together within a relatively small amount of spins. I don't know why this should be or if there is any statistical significance to it but I have occasionally won quite big by seeing one of these clusters emerge and then hammering the rest of the of the numbers in the cluster for the next few spins. This has worked for me on different wheels in different casinos. At first, I really thought I had discovered something but I've come to conclude that it was probably just good luck coinciding with a flawed theory, the entrance to many a bottomless rabbit hole!

    Thanks again for the reply.
     
  11. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,027
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    So a question for you - what do you think the odds/chances are of any person going into the casino and walking out a winner.

    Leave out the lack of discipline most gambler's have and other factors - just the "math" of the game.
    Is it the house edge ?
    If so - a person going into the casino playing a single zero wheel for example will walk out a winner (100%-2.7% edge) 97.3% of the time ?
    That seems pretty good chances of walking out in profit.
    When the "house edge" is brought up, most people think this is the killer math that means no one can win, or they can expect to
    lose it all over time. But why ? It's not what the math says really. The longer you play means you have less and less of a chance of losing it all ?
    The psychology behind what people who gamble think is probably one of the most important things that help the casino to move money
    from the player's pocket to theirs.
     
  12. mr j

    mr j Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2015
    Likes:
    518
    Occupation:
    self employed
    Location:
    Milwaukee, WIS
    There is also the HOLD (I think it does not get talked about enough imo) >>

    What does hold percentage mean in gambling?

    Hold percentage is the percentage of buy-in money (also chip-in money) that a table game keeps. for example, if various players bought in at a table for $1,000 during a 24 hour period, and that table kept $250 of it (the players color up and out a total of $750), then the table hold is 25%. It made $250 on the $1,000 it saw in action.
     
    TurboGenius likes this.
  13. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    1,045
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    Ha ha, another true believer. That explains the same dozen sleeping for more than 30 spins in a row. It protects you from another same dozen hitting in a perfectly osculating pattern. Yep, math certainly creates a safe place. No chance of any of that being in any chapters other than your impressions of magical thinking.
     
  14. Warren Arnold

    Warren Arnold New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2020
    Likes:
    4
    Location:
    UK
    Hi Turbo,

    I think you make two very good points in your last post.

    First, the house's edge on most games is relatively small. That means you will very often be ahead at some point. The reality is, most people could dramatically improve their results by simply walking out when they get a given percentage of their bankroll ahead. I actually used this sort of strategy to very good effect myself years ago, albeit with blackjack.

    Secondly, you're right, psychology is definitely paramount. I think that the reason most people don't walk away when they are ahead is because they either don't understand how probability actually works or they simply don't have the self-discipline to walk away. Either way, I agree, this causes more problems for them than the house's edge itself.

    Anyway, it's late here and I'm off to bed!
     
    gizmotron and TurboGenius like this.

  15. Punkcity

    Punkcity Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2020
    Likes:
    117
    Location:
    Sydney Australia
    Very good thread thanks.

    I think you are creating a dialogue that’s needed. Early thought is you seem open minded for a math bent person. True math says the house edge should prohibit any wins against it. I really understand that and can agree if that would stop some problem people from gambling as I’m sure it has. But true math .That is an extremely black and white viewpoint which really is the cause of the huge divide between what is thought and what can actually happen. My point I have been trying to make, reconcile? for a long time to myself and a few other is if the math is so correct why am I constantly making money.
    This is not bragging but a dialogue.

    I have been playing for many years 5 days per week min etc yet I cannot in any way say it’s due to luck. I can and do play upto and beyond 20 thousand hands per year min. That’s a long run of luck ok not the gazillion hand simulation but really isn’t that gazillion a fallacy also. Yes I have seen and know those that have crashed and burned, I have also seen and personally know those that really succeed.

    A concept that I think could be happening is that a quasi math concept is in play. It’s a combination of the mathematical house edge AND the combination of concepts that turbo, giztronic (and others) discuss and post about. From reading what people post but don’t say you can infer from between the lines that there is something other than mathematics in play also. Full disclosure I am aware of the mathematics and yes it does influence my actions to a degree but I seem like some others able to profit from an ev- situation.
    I do enjoy a dialogue with people as yourself that don’t just say the mathematics says it cannot be done and anyone that thinks otherwise is a fuckwit end of story. There a number of posters all forums with that black and white attitude. When I ask the above questions they cannot answer other than I’m an idiot etc. I would think a mathematical mind should be beyond such a rigid approach. Etc.
    Really enjoy your post.
    Cheers
     
  16. Nathan Detroit

    Nathan Detroit Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2014
    Likes:
    672
    This Warren Arnold cat knows what he is talking about .It appears to indicate that he knows how to play and how to win

    Yes , Virginia , some people know how to play but do not know how to win .



    ND
     
  17. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    1,045
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    It's as if I had already said it in the Reading Randomness thread. It reinforces the suspicions that the casinos make way more than the edge percentage off of all their table games as reported in their yearly corporation earnings reports to their stockholders. And my 3 net wins to 7 net losses stop points are reflected in all this too. I tried to tell people that they could get really rich with just 3 net wins. So I worked out the numbers to show how.

    So it makes me wonder about the title of this thread. There's this: "I don't believe roulette can be consistently beaten. The house's edge can't be overcome. The math, as far as I'm concerned, is indisputable."

    It has been my effort so far to try to illustrate the fact that any bet selection process will result in waves that are up or down in a graph if they were charted. By always stopping on whatever up point you are at, be it in the positive, or at the highest point in a difficult session where it is slightly less than breaking even, then you as a savvy player can aggregate a method of actually beating this negative expectation game. That takes will power and situational awareness. I know the game can be beaten. You just must have the will to beat it. You will never have it handed to you by some mathematical approach. So I can't consider that roulette can't be beaten. I'm reluctant because I always go to the casino to win. All it takes is patience and waiting for the win to come to me.
     
    Nathan Detroit likes this.
  18. Nathan Detroit

    Nathan Detroit Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2014
    Likes:
    672
    People are getting whacked at other table games too and the includes Baccarat and a variety of other table games .


    Knowledge of any game is important but then one must learn how to win .
     
    mr j likes this.
  19. chewtoy

    chewtoy New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2020
    Likes:
    8
    Location:
    Paris
    Nice project! I'm thinking to write a novel too, about casinos, gambling, I have to think more about the plot. I play poker sometimes, I think it is really interesting, I learned some way to play with the winamax school videos but poker is so long sometimes, and so much competition, really good player, you have to give all your time into it, an dit is funny because that is what you criticize about people interested in roulette. I guess it is a question of taste. I found the randomness of roulette so interesting, its kind of magical how random happens and I like luck and odds too. You can be a consitant winner at roulette but it involves having a bet selection carefully chosen based on what is more likely to happen next because you know certain thing are going to happen for sure, so you need to know how to read that and then time the moment of your betting.
     
  20. Warren Arnold

    Warren Arnold New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2020
    Likes:
    4
    Location:
    UK
    Hi Guys,

    Firstly, thanks for the mainly positive posts.

    Just to clear a couple of things up: Gizmotron, the title was mainly to get eyes and, hopefully, provoke some well-thought out responses, which seems to have worked.

    When I told a couple of my friends that I was going to post a few questions on an online roulette forum they laughed at me. Bear in mind for a moment that they are also profitable poker players and sports bettors. I told them that I wanted to understand why people found it so difficult to accept that the house's edge on roulette could not be overcome. One of my friends almost instantly said words to the effect, 'You know why. They don't understand probability, they have no self-discipline and they are mainly action junkies.'

    This is NOT an opinion I share.

    It's clear from some of the posts in this forum that not everyone understands probability or how the house's edge actually erodes your bankroll over time. However, some people do, they understand it very well. Are they just carrying on regardless, hoping against hope? My friends would say they were. I don't think they are. I think they are looking for a way not to reverse the house's edge but to profit in spite of the house's edge. Now that is a subtle distinction but it's an important one that my friends seem to overlook or discount.

    What some profitable sports bettors, who turn their noses up at roulette enthusiasts, seem to forget is that a certain amount of their profit comes from situations where they had incorrectly identified a positive EV scenario that was actually negative. They won regardless, perhaps, thanks to a gentle push from lady luck perhaps.

    I don't criticise anyone interested in beating roulette.

    Earlier, Gizmotron said this:

    I don't disagree.

    In fact, I knew this old guy who used to frequent the same local casinos as me. He always brought in the same amount of money. He always used the same strategy and he walked out in profit most days I saw him. I'm talking about over a five or six year span here by the way. He has since passed away and I don't know if he ever kept records but he played roulette like robot and, my friends will be rolling their eyes reading this, I think he was probably profitable, I really do!

    As I say, his system definitely shouldn't work on paper but in practise it certainly seemed to and he claimed it did.

    I'll share his exact strategy with you in just a moment.

    Let me just grab a coffee . . . .
     

Share This Page