1. Originally Posted by lorenzolama
doubling up till u win is a pretty good strategy for any gambling game but needs a lot of bank roll i've already witnessed red show up 15 times in a row so that's a lot of double ups. my best tip for u is to find conssistancy and change strategy once in a while. 1 strategy can work for a certain amount of time untill u have to change. also check on other players u are having hot streaks. watch how they play...try to c what kind of math they use or strategy. There is a lot of math involved and a lot of sequencing...if u can calculate 15 numbers inside your head and also using sequencing and organization of numbers then u'll be an awesome player....this is just a tip. try not to get too greedy and also get addicted. $20-$30 a day is good enough. remember attitude is important. it's suppose to be fun..."there's a saying making money doesn't have to be boring" and u can't be a millionaire over night. we should chat sometime
Roulette is set up so that in the long run you will lose whatever strategy you
use with probability 1.

Casino owners are like bookies, they don't like to play games that you have a
winning strategy for. If they have such games they don't allow players to
use the winning strategy (they habitually ask card counters to leave).

Remember a casino is a business, it is set up to make money for the owners
not to gamble.

RonL

2. I'm pretty sure that this strategy not only is risky, it also is not very profitable. The most money you can ever win is the amount of your original bet.

Bet 1: You bet 20, most you can win is 20.

Bet 2: You bet 40, and if you win 40 you have already lost 20 so your net gain is 20.

Bet 3: You bet 80, if you win 80 you have already lost 60 so your net gain is 20.

Bet 4: You bet 160, if you win 160 you have already lost 140 so your net gain is 20.

This pattern will continue forever. And since there is usually a max bet at a table, you would be hard pressed to actually make any kind of profit from this strategy.

3. Originally Posted by topher0805
I'm pretty sure that this strategy not only is risky, it also is not very profitable. The most money you can ever win is the amount of your original bet.

Bet 1: You bet 20, most you can win is 20.

Bet 2: You bet 40, and if you win 40 you have already lost 20 so your net gain is 20.

Bet 3: You bet 80, if you win 80 you have already lost 60 so your net gain is 20.

Bet 4: You bet 160, if you win 160 you have already lost 140 so your net gain is 20.

This pattern will continue forever. And since there is usually a max bet at a table, you would be hard pressed to actually make any kind of profit from this strategy.

This strategy has been proposed a number of times already at least once in
this thread (I can't be bothered to check).

It is known to lose, so why play it (In fact why play roulette at all other
than for entertainment for which you are paying) at all?

RonL

4. This is called the martingale strategy:

Martingale (betting system) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and it is ultimately not effective because of house limits and because it is a fallacy to assume you have an infinite bankroll

5. ## I earned money with this

I earned 300$in half an hour by betting max on 0 everytime and 5 on all the first 18 small or so same everytime total 100 times and hits 0 3 times and kept my money home on the small diggets and win on the 0 6. Originally Posted by theshark I earned 300$ in half an hour by betting max on 0 everytime and 5 on all the first 18 small or so same everytime total 100 times and hits 0 3 times and kept my money home on the small diggets and win on the 0
Okay now do this strategy again at least 20 more times.
If you keep on winning then you migh have a strategy.

7. Originally Posted by theshark
I earned 300\$ in half an hour by betting max on 0 everytime and 5 on all the first 18 small or so same everytime total 100 times and hits 0 3 times and kept my money home on the small diggets and win on the 0
Now go back and try this again and let us know how you did.

RonL

8. A doubling strategy doesn't work. hpe's post had a pretty good graph illustrating the long term flaw of it.

But it is possible to win on roulette. But you need to be much smarter than you or me :P.

On a 0-36 numbered wheel the house has about a 5% winning margin on the condition that the numbers are completely random. But how random are the numbers?

The wheel, ball, casino worker are all the same. While those things stay the same there will be some sort of correlation about how the numbers change. It doesn't need to be a strong correlation since the house only has about a 5% advantage to beat.

For example, betting on numbers you statistically hit every 37 spins (on a European wheel). You'd only need to increase it to every 35 spins to draw even.

After a quick search I found cases where people claim to have taken advantage of this to win. But I am suspicious, unless you have an ultra consistent person working at the table it seems like a task too high.

Online casinos would be interesting for this, if there was some flaw in their random number generating algorithm so that certain numbers came up slightly more than others people could probably make money from it. Since unlike real casinos the conditions of play never change. (dont change, alter equipment or have workers changing shifts)

9. ^ Sorry my friend but I'm going to have to disagree with you here.

I see how it's possible to think of "human contact" with the roulette game somehow decreases the randomness of the numbers, but it just isn't so.

The wheel and ball spin for a long enough time after the dealer starts the spin that there's just no way to control it. Even if the dealer tried to spin the wheel and toss the ball in at the exact same second every time, the wheel is spinning the opposite direction that the ball is tossed and is subject to so many tiny changes.

I bet if you did a study of roulette numbers over a significant sample size you would find that they fall just about even.

As for online casinos, RNG technology is amazing these days and I've seen studies done in online poker rooms along with my own statistics I keep on my computer that there's absolutely no reason to believe the RNG will favor certain numbers.

10. Originally Posted by IRSISRSRI
A doubling strategy doesn't work. hpe's post had a pretty good graph illustrating the long term flaw of it.

But it is possible to win on roulette. But you need to be much smarter than you or me :P.

On a 0-36 numbered wheel the house has about a 5% winning margin on the condition that the numbers are completely random. But how random are the numbers?

The wheel, ball, casino worker are all the same. While those things stay the same there will be some sort of correlation about how the numbers change. It doesn't need to be a strong correlation since the house only has about a 5% advantage to beat.

For example, betting on numbers you statistically hit every 37 spins (on a European wheel). You'd only need to increase it to every 35 spins to draw even.

After a quick search I found cases where people claim to have taken advantage of this to win. But I am suspicious, unless you have an ultra consistent person working at the table it seems like a task too high.

Online casinos would be interesting for this, if there was some flaw in their random number generating algorithm so that certain numbers came up slightly more than others people could probably make money from it. Since unlike real casinos the conditions of play never change. (dont change, alter equipment or have workers changing shifts)
Ask yourself this question: "How large a sample of spins do I have to observe to determine with any confidence that the distribution of results differs usably from uniform".

Now the "Newtonian Casino" claims it is possible to track the ball/wheel in real time sufficiently accurately to increase you chance of winning, but when I read the book it seemed to me that the only real money they made out of this was from sales of the book (and I believe that the equipment they used means that what they did is construed as cheating and is seriously frowned upon by casino operators).

RonL

11. Originally Posted by Jameson
^ Sorry my friend but I'm going to have to disagree with you here.

I see how it's possible to think of "human contact" with the roulette game somehow decreases the randomness of the numbers, but it just isn't so.

The wheel and ball spin for a long enough time after the dealer starts the spin that there's just no way to control it. Even if the dealer tried to spin the wheel and toss the ball in at the exact same second every time, the wheel is spinning the opposite direction that the ball is tossed and is subject to so many tiny changes.

I bet if you did a study of roulette numbers over a significant sample size you would find that they fall just about even.

As for online casinos, RNG technology is amazing these days and I've seen studies done in online poker rooms along with my own statistics I keep on my computer that there's absolutely no reason to believe the RNG will favor certain numbers.
Originally Posted by CaptainBlack
Ask yourself this question: "How large a sample of spins do I have to observe to determine with any confidence that the distribution of results differs usably from uniform".

Now the "Newtonian Casino" claims it is possible to track the ball/wheel in real time sufficiently accurately to increase you chance of winning, but when I read the book it seemed to me that the only real money they made out of this was from sales of the book (and I believe that the equipment they used means that what they did is construed as cheating and is seriously frowned upon by casino operators).

RonL

I'll pitch a simpler example. But I think you both understood what I meant. I just probably should have put it in my initial post.

Say you bet on the flip of a coin, but I only pay you 90% of your risk per win. Statistically you win 90% of your investment.

But what if 60% of the time I flip the coin it lands the same side up as when I tossed it because of the action I use, and you know what side I am flipping it from. You should statistically win 108% your investment.

I agree with you both. That firstly any correlation will be weak, and it will take a large sample to produce predictions. I said myself I was suspicious of claims that people can get it working.

It's simply approaching the problem from a different perspective. It is unlikely to use it successfully, and if so for so little profit margin maybe you should have spent that time getting a job, you'd make much more >_>

About online Casinos. I agree they RNG are far too sophisticated to be cracked, maybe if we went back in time to the beginnings of online casinos it would be a better argument. But anyone who has programed before should know random numbers are never truly random.

But it's still mathematically interesting (well not really because there's no sample of results to analyze <_<)

12. I'll just speak for myself when I saw I "get" the idea of using small details to gain a slight edge, but what I was saying is that you have no real reason to believe that a roulette wheel has skewed output at ALL, even if you are trying to only gain 5%. How do you justify that it's not a random sample over a significant sample size?

As for online RNG's, the good ones now use unpredictable physical processes to generate numbers, not line of code. You are correct that the latter way isn't truly random.

13. Originally Posted by Jameson
I'll just speak for myself when I saw I "get" the idea of using small details to gain a slight edge, but what I was saying is that you have no real reason to believe that a roulette wheel has skewed output at ALL, even if you are trying to only gain 5%. How do you justify that it's not a random sample over a significant sample size?
I beleive this is the gist of what I was trying to say

(also, if this had any chance of working the Casino can eliminate it by changing croupiers, balls, or whatever at regular or irregular intervals)

RonL

14. Originally Posted by Jameson
but what I was saying is that you have no real reason to believe that a roulette wheel has skewed output at ALL
Well it's impossible for a system to ever be truly random, especially a system with user input. Using the coin example, mathematically random, but not random in the real world.

15. Ok, point taken. Still, there are too many variables that decide the output of the roulette wheel. Even if you were able to list them all and somehow come up with a PERFECT set of equations that govern the whole system from start to finish, there's no way to calculate them in your head while in a casino and take notice of an extremely small difference the wheel was outputting versus a perfectly random output.

Card counting has so many less variables and is still incredibly hard.

Page 2 of 2 First 12