# Roulette: odds, chances, myths and fact



## explod (12 July 2009)

As promised brom the Baccarat thread I have found that a thread dedicated to the possibilities/impossiblities of Roulette should be of considerable interest.  

So as the last poster on the other one Royboy and to appease my abrupt insult, much out of order, to Naked shorts lets see where we can go on our enquiry.

First, as a player of the game for many years I have concluded that Roulette is controlled totaly by the house, as we would expect, some forms of that control in my view are foul and some by the skill of the croupiers.

From my tracking/charting of the wheels over time it is far from random.  Yes the wheels today are very well ballanced but clear trends over 20 or 30 spins can be played with some success.   Again I have found distinct differences between croupiers (the dealers)

But in among this short opening we have a lot to go through and at the moment write this in the midddle of family chores.   Just thought I would get the thread going and provide some opportunity for input from others to start the direction to suit the majority.   And its the weekend, so time for some fun maybe.

cheers explod


----------



## 2020hindsight (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*

Explod - howdy ... 
I copy this from the "Vegas" thread.
(PS was thinking of you blokes in Vic during the January fires - unprecedented fire risk - almost unimaginable until that day  - how dare they say that the climate isn't changing.) 

Let's take Vegas as the "middle quality casino" between Aus and Reno - in terms of permissible odds bets behind the pass line

[ you go to Reno, I know you can get 10 times odds bet, possibly more - Aus you only get about 2 times I think ] 

Say Vegas is 3 times , 

and you have choice of either .......

a) craps table, betting one $10 chip per roll, and $30 odds bet behind it - and hence you are betting, each hour, about 
102 rolls x $10 and in addition about 34 odds bets at $30 = say $2000 per hour, (casino advantage approx 0.47% based on post #11) 

b) or roulette wheel, betting at the same rate, eg very approx $70 per roll x 30 rolls of the "little wheel" per hour = $2000 per hour (with "0" and "00", as they do in US, casino advantage is (2 / 38) = 5.26%!! ridiculous)

THEN 
a) the craps would cost you $14.40 per hour, 

b) and the roulette would cost $105.20 per hour !! (7.3 times more expensive.) 

SUMMARY - you can bet for a week playing craps in Vegas, for the same probable loss as betting at the same rate at the roulette wheel - but for 1 day!!. (obviously the chances of winning are much worse at the roulette as well. )

test your roulette theories lol - (what a joke!)
http://www.lonniebest.com/Roulette/


----------



## waza1960 (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*

I believe the best chance with Roulette probably lies with gaining an edge over the croupier although its true in the past some have exploited inconsistantancies with the wheel I think that this is probably hard now with more accurate manufacturing.By an edge over the croupier I'm talking about things such as studying the ability of the croupier to spin the wheel with similar force in other words stopping in a similar quadrant also does this change as the croupier gets tired towards the end of the shift.Of course most punters just follow the numbers or odds similar to the Baccaract thread doubling up chasing red or black or similar.Please Note I once observed a run of 11 red in a row.The amount of money lost in that period was incredible as punters tried the chase the odds of a black.I have being known to have a punt if there are 5 or 6 odds or evens or black or red in a row however just my


----------



## treeman (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*



> Yes the wheels today are very well ballanced but clear trends over 20 or 30 spins can be played with some success. Again I have found distinct differences between croupiers (the dealers)




Yes I agree with you. As simple as roulette seems at first glance it is a ball spinning and hitting random numbers all based on random events.
I have been a player of roulette on and off for about 8 years now and it takes time but differences can be noticed. Of course there is no such thing the dealers being able to hit exact numbers, colors or number ranges, it is possible however for those very well trained to focus on particular segments of the wheel.
Roulette has come a very long was in the last 30 or so years, just as card counting has became a hit with blackjack roulette prediction devices have also emerged to aid players.
Casino's are aware of this, it is standard operating procedure for dealers to change direction of wheel spin along with speed of the ball. So between each spin it might be fast-slow-fast clockwise-counterclockwise-clockwise etc. This being said there is strong awareness of prediction, both by the casinos and some punters. 
I am not saying there is a conspiracy or anything along those lines, but different dealers
(croupiers) can produce interesting trends. 

Not to be fooled roulette is still a game that is totally controlled by the house with the odds always in their favour. But playing for a while interesting trends can be picked up on some tables more then others.


----------



## explod (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*



> treeman
> 
> Yes I agree with you. As simple as roulette seems at first glance it is a ball spinning and hitting random numbers all based on random events.
> I have been a player of roulette on and off for about 8 years now and it takes time but differences can be noticed. Of course there is no such thing the dealers being able to hit exact numbers, colors or number ranges, it is possible however for those very well trained to focus on particular segments of the wheel.
> ...




To deal with, or reduce this I actually chart left and right hand spins seperately.   Often the strong bias will be off the right hand spin where the dealer has greater control.


----------



## cuttlefish (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*

I happened to be down at the Sydney casino the other night and noticed that the roulette wheels actually have stats on display which as well as showing the recent numbers that have come up also show stats for how often each invidual number has come up on that table (as a total and a percentage).  So the casino's are actually giving out the info for anyone trying to track bias towards certain numbers/colours.


----------



## explod (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*



cuttlefish said:


> I happened to be down at the Sydney casino the other night and noticed that the roulette wheels actually have stats on display which as well as showing the recent numbers that have come up also show stats for how often each invidual number has come up on that table (as a total and a percentage).  So the casino's are actually giving out the info for anyone trying to track bias towards certain numbers/colours.




Yes they do the same at Crown.  I think the averages are taken from more than the last 20 or 30 spins, had not occurred to ask them.  But the hot numbers put up on the board are usually cold against the current/recent few spins by the time they are up.   

Some sucess can be had by playing the last 3hits with the two on the wheel each side of them, but again distinguish between either left or right hand spin.  There can often be a tendancy to return to sectors so this can be expanded.   One I have not tried is to ignore the last two and play 3, 4, and 5, sort of trailing.   This can be charted over a dozen or so spins to determine the dealers tendancy.


----------



## explod (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*

A couple of years ago Crown brought in new reulette wheels, tables and equipment.  I inadvertantly saw behind a screen the bottom side of one of the new roulette tables being prepared.    It had hundreds of wires going into the bottom of the table, could have been 10 or 12 into what would be each number on the table.   It struck me, so many.   After they went into service the games changed and many older regular players made the comment, "they've done something"   

One glaring aspect I have observed is that when a player gets onto a roll and others follow and the bets get large for certain areas, the ball drops in a pocket not covered at all.   Conspiracy theory?    seen it so many times that I wonder.   The ball also behaves in ways indicating some directional control.

My take is that the chips and thier values can be assessed backroom.  It would be a no brainer in this age of computer/eloctronic knowhow.   Have not gone big on it yet but have tried to contact the regulators who are supposed to audit these things but like hitting a brick wall.   But of course like pockies the Guvmint get a huge slice.   Fair?  whos fair anymore.


----------



## Mr J (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*

2020, you're missing the point. If a croupier has a constistent action, then the result will be predictable. The question is whether they will be consistent.



> I happened to be down at the Sydney casino the other night and noticed that the roulette wheels actually have stats on display which as well as showing the recent numbers that have come up also show stats for how often each invidual number has come up on that table (as a total and a percentage). So the casino's are actually giving out the info for anyone trying to track bias towards certain numbers/colours.




It's not useful unless we are also given the information of when the croupier released the ball. Even that may not be useful, depending on greatly croupiers vary their actions.



> Some sucess can be had by playing the last 3hits with the two on the wheel each side of them




I highly doubt there is an edge there.



> One glaring aspect I have observed is that when a player gets onto a roll and others follow and the bets get large for certain areas, the ball drops in a pocket not covered at all. Conspiracy theory? seen it so many times that I wonder. The ball also behaves in ways indicating some directional control.




While it may be true, I doubt your sample is significant. The human brain is not perfect, so it could easily be a memory bias or coincidence.



> Have not gone big on it yet but have tried to contact the regulators who are supposed to audit these things but like hitting a brick wall.




Are you sure about the legality of this? Some would consider it rigging, but it is also no different from counting cards.

I think sharpshooting craps would be a more entertaining discussion. It's not illegal, the punter is in control, and I imagine a significant edge could be gained by it.


----------



## explod (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*



> 2020, you're missing the point. If a croupier has a constistent action, then the result will be predictable. The question is whether they will be consistent.
> 
> It's not useful unless we are also given the information of when the croupier released the ball. Even that may not be useful, depending on greatly croupiers vary their actions.




Croupiers when the trun the wheel release the ball over the last hit pocket, some of them mix this up, but the basic tradition and training is to release the ball in this way and it is rare for this not to occur.   It then becomes like water over a waterfall, the flow can often be consistent and detectable for profitable play.



> While it may be true, I doubt your sample is significant. The human brain is not perfect, so it could easily be a memory bias or coincidence.




The observations I have made in conjuction with discussions with other long term players is pretty compelling to me.




> Are you sure about the legality of this? Some would consider it rigging, but it is also no different from counting cards.




In what sense "legality" that the casino could not be cheating?   Or that I should not speak of it?


----------



## So_Cynical (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*

This is the way i like to play Roulette...(Blue) column bets are typically $20 (2 to 1) & (Orange) 
corner bet $5 (8 to 1) and ill alternate the outer column while always betting the middle.

The big advantage of this system is the fact that u have the majority of numbers covered 
(about 70% of them) and if u can get a run of success u can do quite well without doing 
anything spectacular...A run of 100% losses will hurt, but the maths is always with u.


----------



## Mr J (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*



> The observations I have made in conjuction with discussions with other long term players is pretty compelling to me.




Are these advantage players of life-long roulette losers?



> In what sense "legality" that the casino could not be cheating? Or that I should not speak of it?




It may not be able to be defined as cheating.



			
				So_cynical said:
			
		

> The big advantage of this system is the fact that u have the majority of numbers covered
> (about 70% of them) and if u can get a run of success u can do quite well without doing
> anything spectacular...A run of 100% losses will hurt,* but the maths is always with u*.




No it is not.


----------



## explod (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*



Mr J said:


> Are these advantage players of life-long roulette losers?
> 
> 
> 
> It may not be able to be defined as cheating.




Nothing to do with losing, just clear observations of outcomes when watching.  I never play when the stacks are big and keep a low profile.

No the authorities probably allow it as they screw down the chances of pokie players


----------



## Wagyu (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*

Just came across this thread from the Baccarat thread, and I could not help myself.

HINDSIGHT, you are on the right track but there is a lot of fluff in your theories. Never bet on even chances on "double 00" roulette, you are doubling your chances of losing. For that matter just stick with the French Wheel it is easier to work with than the American Wheel.

WAZA, you need to understand a basic element of the roulette ball. It always slows down to the exact same speed before dropping, hitting the hazzards and then falling between the frets to a winning number. 

Your perspective of dealers is idealist at best. Dealers who are fresh out the training room will try to observe the procedures as close as possible as awkward dealers as they are. Some experinced dealers know their job so well they just don't give a ****.

There are 2 rules dealers should/must abide by when spinning up; 1) vary the speed of the wheel, 2)the ball must be released from the dealers fingers above the previously winning number. Some experienced dealers will control their game with a fine art and will not be bullied by expectant patrons. (that was advice). Regular players to roullete will appreciate a consistant dealer, as the players understand that a ball that falls in the same spot (a bias) is still determined by the hazzards and the final resting place of the ball. 

Finally, if you find a run of 10 red or 12 even or 14 highs, GET ON IT. Don't play the hero and get a winner by picking the break in the run.

TREEMAN, players will see ONLY what they want to see and are often blinded by their own theories.

EXPLOD, you are correct in that if there is a different bias in a wheel for a clockwise spin to a anticlockwise spin. The wires that you saw were related to the wheel recognising where the ball has landed and then is displayed on the screen, nothing more, no calculations, no fancy algorithms, nothing. A 2.7% house edge is quite sufficient.


CUTTLEFISH, information is only good for 300 spins and not all tables are open at Star City 24/7. You may need to consider that a table may only open for 6hrs in an 8 hr shift twice a week which puts these stats at 2 weeks old, useless at best.

MR J, there is a practice where you, anyone can find bias in a wheel. Watch a wheel for 30 to 40 spins. (dealers have no impact on this study). Lets say you are standing right in front of the wheel and the ball consistently DROPS from a particular point in the wheel lets say the point is 2 o'clock. This is the bias. On each particular spin once you have found your biased wheel, watch the number that intersects with the ball at that bias point (2 oclock) as both the wheel and ball are spinning. You then need to do a mental calculation of the time it takes between intersects to gather the speed of the wheel. Dont laugh this can be done in your head in 2 seconds. This is called "wheel clocking". You can buy a device over the net which contains a press button (push it at every intersect) which goes in your pocket and an ear peice which tells you in SAT NAV voice what number to place your bets on. This process takes between 2 and 5 seconds and is best done working in pairs, 1 at the wheel and 1 at the table.

This particular behaviour is legal, however all Australian casinos have a rule that states no electronic devices are allowed at the tables. You can still lose using this method, just like you can lose counting cards on Blackjack. All that you are doing is reducing the house edge via clocking the wheel and counting cards and no one has been asked to leave a casino for using their heads.

Thankyou for the indulgence hour, hope I answered some of your queries from my experience.


----------



## Wagyu (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*



So_Cynical said:


> This is the way i like to play Roulette...(Blue) column bets are typically $20 (2 to 1) & (Orange)
> corner bet $5 (8 to 1) and ill alternate the outer column while always betting the middle.
> 
> The big advantage of this system is the fact that u have the majority of numbers covered
> ...




SO CYNICAL, Your column betting is flawed, you are now betting 2-1 against. If you lose 1 spin it will take you 2 winning spins to get back to square 1.


----------



## explod (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*



Wagyu said:


> Just came across this thread from the Baccarat thread, and I could not help myself.
> 
> Thankyou for the indulgence hour, hope I answered some of your queries from my experience.




And thank you for a comprehensive and helpful post                                                                                                                               cheers explod


----------



## Mr J (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*



explod said:


> Nothing to do with losing, just clear observations of outcomes when watching.




It makes a difference to me, as an advantage player is likely to be far more credible than a long-term casino punter.



			
				Wagyu said:
			
		

> You then need to do a mental calculation of the time it takes between intersects to gather the speed of the wheel. Dont laugh this can be done in your head in 2 seconds. This is called "wheel clocking". You can buy a device over the net which contains a press button (push it at every intersect) which goes in your pocket and an ear peice which tells you in SAT NAV voice what number to place your bets on. This process takes between 2 and 5 seconds and is best done working in pairs, 1 at the wheel and 1 at the table.
> 
> This particular behaviour is legal, however all Australian casinos have a rule that states no electronic devices are allowed at the tables. You can still lose using this method, just like you can lose counting cards on Blackjack. All that you are doing is reducing the house edge via clocking the wheel and counting cards and no one has been asked to leave a casino for using their heads.




I know what it is, I was questiong the pracitcal application, as it requires croupiers to be consistent. I'm very aware of roulette prediction computers, as I looked into it myself. As for people being kicked out for using their heads, yes it has certainly happened numerous times. I've only head of card counters being banned, but I have no doubt that any advantage play would see a personal ban.



> Finally, if you find a run of 10 red or 12 even or 14 highs, GET ON IT




You're suggesting that one can profit by riding a trend. I am very skeptical, as I highly doubt a casino would allow trend riding to be profitable. After all, it is typical of casino punters to get on the "hot" numbers and colours.


----------



## Wagyu (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*

MR J, roulette croupiers are often egocentrical wankers who think they are heros by talking up their dealing abilities when the ball lands as they predict. No different to walking up to a table and placing 1 bet of $5 on "17" and winning. They've got nothing. What effects do you think the STAR VIGRO, STAR CAPRICORN or any other cruise ship has on a roulette ball as it sways in the high seas?

Further, your scepticism is so valid in a casino. But, when you have 20-30 players all on Banker, (baccarat) and you place your bet on Player, look out the death stares will cut you in half from the other players on Banker. Just get on board, have some fun at the casino. After all it is a rich man's recreation perfected by the poor.


----------



## explod (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*



> It makes a difference to me, as an advantage player is likely to be far more credible than a long-term casino punter.




As an obvious skeptic I believe it would make little difference what I said.



> You're suggesting that one can profit by riding a trend. I am very skeptical, as I highly doubt a casino would allow trend riding to be profitable. After all, it is typical of casino punters to get on the "hot" numbers and colours.




That is one of the ways experieced players do win.   On a run of blacks for example I have often backed it for a win when a number of other players have had stacks on the red.   I pick my time and mark though as you get scowls as if you have pointed the bone so to speak.

Many years ago I when I started out I used to play a progression against the dozen furthest back as I had observed that a run against of more than 10 was unusual.   Scammers have sold books on just this method.

Anyway I would wait till a dozen had not hit for 10 spins.   I went very well about 6 months, won 5 grand at Juptiters whilsat on holidays.   Back at Crown one day the progession had me at my limit of $9oo and lost it, all to try and recover my original $10.    Gave that up quick but good learning.  Have observed streaks where a dozen section has been passed 32 times.   So yes there are streaks and trends.


----------



## Wagyu (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*



explod said:


> And thank you for a comprehensive and helpful post                                                                                                                               cheers explod




EXPLOD,

what is the number you get when all the numbers are added together on a Roulette wheel?

Also, starting at 3 red and moving clockwise, what do you get when you multiply all the numbers on a roulette wheel?

You have 30 seconds to answer both questions.


----------



## Trembling Hand (12 July 2009)

OMG!!


----------



## explod (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*



Wagyu said:


> EXPLOD,
> 
> what is the number you get when all the numbers are added together on a Roulette wheel?
> 
> ...




Tooo late, leave that you to tell.

But of value

If you look at the wheel and he is hitting one side it is handy to know that all the high reds and low black are to the right and on the left you have the low reds and the high blacks.


----------



## Wagyu (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*



explod said:


> Tooo late, leave that you to tell.
> 
> But of value
> 
> If you look at the wheel and he is hitting one side it is handy to know that all the high reds and low black are to the right and on the left you have the low reds and the high blacks.




Interesting observation EXPLOD. Have not noticed that in all my years...

However back to lesson #1, if you add all the numbers you get 666. Here endith the lesson. You have been warned.

Lesson #2, starting at 3 moving clockwise. 3*26*0*....mutiplied by 0 = 0. Gotcha.! Now the lesson is ended.


----------



## explod (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*



Wagyu said:


> Interesting observation EXPLOD. Have not noticed that in all my years...
> 
> However back to lesson #1, if you add all the numbers you get 666. Here endith the lesson. You have been warned.
> 
> Lesson #2, starting at 3 moving clockwise. 3*26*0*....mutiplied by 0 = 0. Gotcha.! Now the lesson is ended.




Years ago from a book on roulette by a John Patrick I learned a sequence, that if it was in was easy to identify on the overhead screen.   Played it so much in short bursts (and won) that after awhile the pit bosses would see me coming.  So my days at this were gone.  But for a month or two when I approched I played the opposit of the sequence even though against the trend, you could see the pti bosses breathing the f..ck as I passed on collection.    Lot of fun had learning this game, and it still is.

But if anyone thinks you can easily find a holy grail and win mega, you cant'.  But if you are a dedicated masochist (cant' spell) and put in huge time you may usually stay in front.    

As a sport I find it great for me.


----------



## wayneL (12 July 2009)

Can someone explain to me the *physics* of roulette wheel bias.

I find it a bit incredible for two reasons.

1/ There would have to be a noticeable mechanical flaw in the wheel

2/ I do a lot random number spreadsheets in relation to distribution of random returns with Excel. Often there appears to be a bias for a certain group of numbers, but with enough iterations, the bias always disappears.

Don't be fooled by randomness, there must be a physical explanation *if* there is a wheel bias.

Play with excel to see what I mean.


----------



## explod (12 July 2009)

wayneL said:


> Can someone explain to me the *physics* of roulette wheel bias.
> 
> I find it a bit incredible for two reasons.
> 
> ...




The wheels are very well done these days but bias can be detected at times, there is a lot to tell but time now does not permit, my wife is getting a bit cross at the time on here today.   But in the days and weeks ahead we can go into it in more detail.

Posters who have had some experience may help in the meantime and more explanations of the game need to be told for those interested to learn.

For tonight

cheers explod


----------



## skyQuake (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*



Mr J said:


> You're suggesting that one can profit by riding a trend. I am very skeptical, as I highly doubt a casino would allow trend riding to be profitable. After all, it is typical of casino punters to get on the "hot" numbers and colours.




Imo its _stockmarket_ punters that get on the hot stuff, and the casino punters that try to fight the trend.

Probability 'clumps' so trend riding is worth researching into..


----------



## So_Cynical (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*



So_Cynical said:


> but the maths is always with u.






Mr J said:


> No it is not.




 ok so not all the maths....jezz its like ya have to walk everyone through the simplest things  

I have over 69% of all the possible outcomes covered...so how is the maths against me here???



Wagyu said:


> SO CYNICAL, Your column betting is flawed, you are now betting 2-1 against. If you lose 1 spin it will take you 2 winning spins to get back to square 1.




But im almost twice as likely to win due to having over 66% of numbers covered...i do realize 
i still need to get lucky to win betting like this...after all it is casino gambling....i just don't need 
as much luck as most of the punters due to my lower expectations.


----------



## 2020hindsight (12 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*



Wagyu said:


> HINDSIGHT, you are on the right track but there is a lot of fluff in your theories. Never bet on even chances on "double 00" roulette, you are doubling your chances of losing. For that matter just stick with the French Wheel it is easier to work with than the American Wheel.



thanks wagyu lol
not sure you are quoting me correctly.
Like - anyone who bets on the Roulette wheel in Australia or France ( with a single "0") is gonna lose (nine times out of ten or whatever) - suppose you cover all possible bets - you will get back 36 in every 37 rolls !! (end of story)

And anyone who bets on the American  double "0"  is gonna lose bigtime !! (5.26 % casino advantage - idiots). - you get back 36 in every 38 rolls.  

My point was that Craps is a much better bet that roulette.  - but still a bet. and still with a casino advantage against you (around 0.5%, if you put on the place bets). - A big difference between 0.5% and 3% btw. 

Then again, Blackjack is better still if you can memorise the picture cards - in fact you can even get to a negative casino advantage - i.e. chances are you will win long term.   But it's still trivial. 

Always imagine you were at a gambling party (as we used to do in the islands) - and you had the choice of being bookie or punter - believe me, you make a lot more money as bookie. 
Over to you man.


----------



## 2020hindsight (13 July 2009)

2020hindsight said:


> test your roulette theories
> http://www.lonniebest.com/Roulette/



Worth looking at those numbers ..
a) amazing scatter / chaos in the short term
b) amazing consistency in the long term

(so chaos becomes ordered).

I mean they show (sample of 100,000 rolls) that every number comes up at least once for consecutive wins - and they even had 4 consecutive #8's.   

So if you happened to be watching then , you'd think that it was biased to #8, yes?.  But you'd be wrong.   In a large sample, every number came up around 2631 times ( 100,000/38 whatever).  

#8 also came up for 350 consecutive losses !

In the end, #8 came up 2636 times = spot on average.  Looks like the lowest number was 2542, (for #35), and the highest was 2742 (#17).  Not much scatter over the long run.

I believe you need 2778 wins (100,000/36) to break even, 2779 to come out ahead , etc - so even if you'd bet on #17 (= the most fruitful number even in hindsight), you'd still have lost. 

Assuming, after you saw #8 have 4 consecutive wins, that you'd bet on 8's for 100,000 rolls,  you'd lose 5.26% of your money.  No way round it.  (In Aus that would be 2.7%). 

I think I'll be taking Wag's advice -  that the total is 666, lol.  Stick to the stock market 

PS I love the way that site says " learn betting probabilities, simulate millions of spins and analyse the results".  (builds up the pseudo-science image) - And in all their copius columns of numbers, lol, they fail to point out that every number lost in the longterm .

PS I've noticed the same effect i.e. short term apparent bias, when throwing dice in backgammon.  Nothing (or rather not unknown) to get a stack of consecutive double 6's.... then you don't get another for a week.  etc


----------



## Cartman (13 July 2009)

wayneL said:


> Can someone explain to me the *physics* of roulette wheel bias.




wheel bias is basically a myth - u have to have a very high % lean on the table to get the ball dropping out in a similar position with any regularity --- and even then its only a slight advantage

the physics of a R/table is actually very precise, and can be predicted with mathematical accuracy *if u use a computer* 

the ball thrown by the croupier decelerates at a constant speed therefore the drop off point is constant relative to its speed and starting position

where the ball enters the wheel is also predictable relative to the speed the wheel is spinning -- simple 

the problem u boyz are gona have is plotting the points of reference with any accuracy in the time permitted and still getting your bets on in time

of course, even if u smuggle your computer in and dont get caught u still have the real problem of the *bumpers, speed bumps and number channels* which sit raised all over the board to send the ball off in a random tangent even when u get your calculation within a 5% deviation

if u r determined to play roulette, play a slow wheel


----------



## Mr J (13 July 2009)

*Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact*



skyQuake said:


> Imo its _stockmarket_ punters that get on the hot stuff, and the casino punters that try to fight the trend.
> 
> Probability 'clumps' so trend riding is worth researching into..




Trend riding is valid in the stock market because it is all part of one, large movement. More people jumping in pushes up the price. Self-fulfilling prophecy. Not the case in casino, as no amount of punters can force a trend to continue.



			
				so_cynical said:
			
		

> ok so not all the maths....jezz its like ya have to walk everyone through the simplest things
> 
> I have over 69% of all the possible outcomes covered...so how is the maths against me here???




The maths is against you because it is a losing system. You haven't altered the probabilities of the game, just the distribution of results. Your mathematical expectency has not changed at all. To be profitable, this is the value that would need to change, not your winrate.



> i do realize
> i still need to get lucky to win betting like this...after all it is casino gambling....i just don't need
> as much luck as most of the punters due to my lower expectations.




So you admit you need luck to win, but not so much since you expect less. Sounds like you know your 'system' is not profitable.



			
				2020 said:
			
		

> My point was that Craps is a much better bet that roulette. - but still a bet. and still with a casino advantage against you (around 0.5%, if you put on the place bets). - A big difference between 0.5% and 3% btw.




The majority of discussion has been about possible advantage play, so your argument is only relevant as far as calculating that craps is an easier game to get an edge at, but that means little if the edge one has is at roulette.



> Then again, Blackjack is better still if you can memorise the picture cards - in fact you can even get to a negative casino advantage - i.e. chances are you will win long term. But it's still trivial.




You assign numerical values to the cards, not memorise them. Unless you're rainman.


There are far easier ways than roulette to gamble profitably, such as sportsbetting or trading.


----------



## Trembling Hand (13 July 2009)

Cartman said:


> of course, even if u smuggle your computer in and dont get caught u still have the real problem of the *bumpers, speed bumps and number channels* which sit raised all over the board to send the ball off in a random tangent even when u get your calculation within a 5% deviation




Explod can you please address this before we go any further. Or shall I just let it rest at this,


----------



## explod (13 July 2009)

Cartman said:


> wheel bias is basically a myth - u have to have a very high % lean on the table to get the ball dropping out in a similar position with any regularity --- and even then its only a slight advantage
> 
> the physics of a R/table is actually very precise, and can be predicted with mathematical accuracy *if u use a computer*
> 
> ...





Granted but there are times when it seems to occurr

However what we are looking for is dealer effect/bias and that is real.

Some years back I read a book by a fellow Schoblet (spin roulette gold)  tucked away in just one paragraph he talked about pocket counts.  Basically you measure by counting clockwise the distance between each spin result.  eg.  on Euro wheel, we hit 0, next 34 and the next one 13, the first is a pocket count of 9 the second is a pocket count of 3.   After 20 odd spins we can look at an average pocket count adn if they are sufficiently together we bet that area.

To find such likely possibilities we look for a dealer who is spinning the wheel not too fast, in a steady rythm, releasing the ball consistently from the last pocket.  Often he is jovial, talking to some of the players and not too interested, probabably near the end of a hard shift.   Good pit bosses will often interevene and have him/her vary ball/wheel speed which you need to look out for but generally this type of play has served me well.


----------



## son of baglimit (13 July 2009)

ah yes roulette - one of many games you are sometimes forced to play cos theres no spare seats at the card tables.

my stupid theory - i have 2 numbers i follow - 6 spaces apart on the wheel - i walk around looking for a table that has consistently won with that area of the wheel - i put one chip on each for 10 spins - it seems to win every time, but i hate the game. 

thats the respect i have for the game. im not knocking the pros, i just havent got the time or resources to explore other theories.


----------



## skc (13 July 2009)

This is a fascinating thread.

To all who are trying to argue about probability, house edge etc. You are talking pass the real issue. No one questioned the probability (except may be So_Cynical). The question is whether someone can gain an edge from the casino.

My gut feel is that you can if you are really good. As pointed out, the edge to the house is 2.73% (or something like that). Instead of thinking you can determine where the ball is going to land with any probability, you only need to work out where the ball isn't likely to land with a decent probability.

If you can be 100% sure that there is 1 segment of the wheel that the ball isn't going to land on for that particular spin, you have gained the edge. Alternatively, you need to be 50% sure that the ball isn't going to land on 2 or 3 segments... and so on.

How might one do that? No idea. But wheel clocking and ball speed estimation seem like possibilities. Given that you can place bets after the ball is tossed and wheel is spun...

1. Look at the time it takes the ball to move a full circle. Then note how long does it take the ball to hit the wheel. Do this with a stop watch. Over enough cycles you have a list that roughly says: If the ball just took "B0" seconds to move the circle, it will stop in "B1" seconds.

2. Look at the wheel, and essentially do the same thing. Look at the time it takes the wheel to do a full circle, then clock it to see how long it takes to do the next circle. Over enough spins, you have a table that says, when a wheel takes "W0" seconds to do a full circle, it will take "W1" seconds to move another 360, "W2" for 720 etc.

3. Fully memorise these data. Now, say you estimate the ball is due to stop in 25secs, and based on wheel speed the wheel will move another 720 degrees (noting where the ball and wheel intersect was at the time of measurement), you have a rough idea where the ball is likely to hit the wheel. 

4. Cross out the 2 or 3 numbers that are directly opposite to where you predict the ball is likely to hit. And bet on a combination of numbers accordingly (haven't really thought this part through). By taking out 2 segments, you have removed the house's edge.


This method doesn't really worry about dealer or wheel bias. It only rely on the wheel and ball having consistent physical properties (like friction), which they do. You will probably need 2 ppl to have this working. 

I have no idea whether it will work, but seems to make sense to me after spending 5 minutes coming up with it. Feel free to comment.


----------



## Cartman (13 July 2009)

skc said:


> This is a fascinating thread.
> 
> The question is whether someone can gain an edge from the casino.
> 
> you only need to work out where the ball isn't likely to land with a decent probability.




that is exactly correct skc -- in  world of pure physics it would be totally feasible to do it




skc said:


> I have no idea whether it will work, but seems to make sense to me after spending 5 minutes coming up with it. Feel free to comment.




it works within certain degrees of randomness

both the speed of the ball and the speed of the wheel need to be calculated precisely -- humans cannot do this/ a computer is necessary (problem 1--  especially if u get caught )

to have enuff time to place bets after the calculations have been done requires more than a couple of people --- reason being a R/table is not partitioned into equal sections based on *360 degrees* (if it were, the casino would lower their edge exponentially) -- 

it is partitioned based on equivalent randomness -- ie each column of 33% is made up of numbers scattered/mixed around the board --- the *time available* to punt on a particular area of the board based on degrees requires more than one pair of hands to get the chips on the necessary numbers --- (problem 2)

even if u get the physical calculations correct, the randomness of the board layout will still beat u in the end --- they dont put all those speed bumps on there for nothing !!


----------



## explod (13 July 2009)

son of baglimit said:


> ah yes roulette - one of many games you are sometimes forced to play cos theres no spare seats at the card tables.
> 
> my stupid theory - i have 2 numbers i follow - 6 spaces apart on the wheel - i walk around looking for a table that has consistently won with that area of the wheel - i put one chip on each for 10 spins - it seems to win every time, but i hate the game.
> 
> thats the respect i have for the game. im not knocking the pros, i just havent got the time or resources to explore other theories.




Yep as good as any.

Another casual play which succeeds most of the time is a focus on the zero when large outside bets are being played.   Time and agin you see the dealer aim for the top end.   With four chips cover the splits 0-3   12-15  26-25 and 32-35

And what are we saying here?     determined by croupier/dealer influence


----------



## explod (13 July 2009)

Trembling Hand said:


> Explod can you please address this before we go any further. Or shall I just let it rest at this,




I think T/H you are referring to the frets outside the wheel.   They do distort but are fixed objects that do average out under the right dealer/wheel speed combination over a number spins for the pocket count system. I liken it to the waterfall scenario outlined in an earlier post. 

For the pocket count system, a lot of table/dealer searching, then, tracking is required.   Full time pros. do it as they have the time.   I have found that in two visits I may only find this situation once, so whilst looking I employ other forms of play.


----------



## wayneL (13 July 2009)

Why do I keep thinking of Nassim Taleb in this thread?


----------



## brty (14 July 2009)

Coming out of left field here, but imagine the following...

The roulette wheel is partitioned EXACTLY, the ball is PERFECTLY spherical. The croupier spins the wheel EXACTLY the same speed every time. The ball is released at EXACTLY the same speed and place relative to the numbers every time. The air pressure, temperature and movement are EXACTLY the same every roll. The......

I hope you get the picture, everything the same every spin, should theoretically produce the same number coming up, every time.

Because things are not the same, and we have no way of calculating all the possible variations, we mistakenly call it random, when it is most likely not.

brty


----------



## wayneL (14 July 2009)

brty said:


> Coming out of left field here, but imagine the following...
> 
> The roulette wheel is partitioned EXACTLY, the ball is PERFECTLY spherical. The croupier spins the wheel EXACTLY the same speed every time. The ball is released at EXACTLY the same speed and place relative to the numbers every time. The air pressure, temperature and movement are EXACTLY the same every roll. The......
> 
> ...





Could you expand on your thoughts?


----------



## brty (14 July 2009)

Wayne,



> Could you expand on your thoughts?




Which bit??

The first part... A mathematician may think that a million spins with everything the same will result in a perfect spread of numbers, ie a 2.7027027% for each of 37 possibilities. I put forward the argument that if everything was the same, as in exactly, then the same number should come up a million times in a row.

The second part... Because the same number does not always come up, there are biases that prevent it from happening. Just because we cannot calculate all the variances does not make something random.

Because something is not random, then it should be possible to work out a methodology to win at the game. However as each croupier is a variable as well as their spins, and each table, wheel and ball have variances, then the constant changing around a casino will make a methodology harder to profit from. (you need the same croupier at the same table as observed previously to have a hope)

If you could get enough data about how each croupier went at each different  table, there could be something there to narrow the odds. You would then know what types of bets work best in each situation and could probably rank performances at different tables etc. 

Whether it overcomes the house odds is a different question.

Good luck in trying to get the data.

brty


----------



## wayneL (14 July 2009)

I get what your saying, but I don't see how that overcomes the randomness of *outcomes*.

Would could make the same argument about any game where inputs (i.e. the variables of human input and other physical factors) are not identical and are infinitely... variable.

E.g, coin tossing/two up, craps, the big wheel etc.

Theoretical and actual expectancy can be very different in practice, until the number of iterations eventually cause the law of averages to apply.

Essentially we have a chaotic system. All inputs cannot be known/measured.


----------



## doogie_goes_off (14 July 2009)

Started my own system once, set it up with cards and 5c pieces - I called it blind martingale after I found out what martingale is, doesn't really work but I wish it did. Had several goes thinking I would take the casino to the cleaners but eventually figured the odds can not be beaten by a betting pattern alone.


----------



## 2020hindsight (14 July 2009)

Trembling Hand said:


> OMG!!



:topic
TH, that meter of yours reads "Creditability"..
I was staring at it - thinking that's surely a typo, but turns out that it makes sense  ...

Amongst it's meanings ... 
"Deserving of praise: creditable effort on the essay.
Worthy of belief: a creditable story. "

Live and learn 

PS Either way - there's no way I'm gonna try to get rich at the roulette wheel. 

Explod, we should give you a roulette wheel for Xmas, and when you can prove that you can land the ball where you predict - to the point of being reliably profitable (over two sets of 100,000 rolls whatever) - then I for one might start to be convinced.  After that you have to show us your betting records when a hostile croupier is rolling - and is intentionally "mixing it up" 



> Biased wheels: Section betting In 1982, several casinos in England began to lose large sums of money at their roulette tables to teams of gamblers from the USA. Upon investigation by the police, it was discovered they were using a legal system of biased wheel-section betting. As a result of this, the English roulette wheel manufacturer John Huxley manufactured a roulette wheel to counter-act the problem.
> 
> The new wheel, designed by George Melas, was called "low profile" because the pockets had been drastically reduced in depth, and various other design modifications caused the ball to descend in a gradual approach to the pocket area. In 1986, when a professional gambling team headed by Billy Walters won $3.8 million using the system on an old wheel at the Golden Nugget in Atlantic City, every casino in the world took notice, and within one year had switched to the new "low profile" wheel.






> ...
> Casinos are aware of players who try and mechanically exploit roulette wheels and take protective measures by rotating wheels, changing dealers, and switching roulette ball sizes, making mechanical strategies virtually impossible.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roulette


----------



## brty (14 July 2009)

Law of averages and things like coin toss are often used in the same sentences.

On the net you get this type of info about coin tosses.....



> Another example is the flip of a coin. Given repeated flips of a fair coin, the frequency of heads (or tails) will increasingly approach 50% over a large number of trials. Almost surely the absolute (nominal) difference in the number of heads and tails will become large as the number of flips becomes large. That is, the probability that the absolute difference is a small number approaches zero as number of flips becomes large. Also, almost surely the ratio of the absolute difference to number of flips will approach zero. Intuitively, expected absolute difference grows, but at a slower rate than the number of flips, as the number of flips grows.




This type of stuff is mathematical theory and utter garbage. If there was an equal weighting to an infinite number of variables, then the theory might be true. However the variables are not equally distributed with some overcoming any force implied by others.

Hmmm, perhaps an example is needed. 

I can "toss" a coin (an Aussie 20c) so that it comes up heads every time. I can do it because I can control some elements of the result. I can also "toss" the same coin, starting the same way as before (ie tails facing up) and get tails nearly every time, by changing one variable. 

Anyone can try this by taking a coin and placing it on their bent index finger tails up. Very gently use your thumb to "toss" the coin so that it does a 180 degree "spin" and land it in your other hand at about 1 inch below. With a few seconds practise you get heads every time. By dropping your other hand to about 4 inches below the coin, you allow the coin to do a full 360 degree rotation and the result is tails nearly all the time. 
There is nothing random here.

With enough practise, anybody could get a coin to spin 5 or 6 times and come up with the same result. Like wise with 10 to 15 spins, etc. Of course the greater the number of spins, the higher into the air the "toss" goes, the harder the result is to control, so more and more 'errors' are likely. The results though are still not random, just harder to predict.

Bringing this back to the topic of roulette, then the variables that we have no control over tend to make the results appear random, whereas some of the variables may be making certain outcomes happen disproportionately.

Because most of the players believe in the law of averages, and a return to the mean (ie random probability theory) if a run of lows occur they bet high, if a run of reds occur, they bet black.

Personally , I think the best game at the casino is to enjoy the subsidised drinks and watch others drop hundreds of dollars, without putting my hand in my pocket.

brty


----------



## explod (17 July 2009)

Ah, the weekend, time to see the ball roll.



> Bringing this back to the topic of roulette, then the variables that we have no control over tend to make the results appear random, whereas some of the variables may be making certain outcomes happen disproportionately.
> 
> Because most of the players believe in the law of averages, and a return to the mean (ie random probability theory) if a run of lows occur they bet high, if a run of reds occur, they bet black.




Yes bty agree.   I have found roulette not to be random and the following simple game is worth trying:

A croupier at Crown, would you believe, said to me a few years ago,  "When I retire I know that I can always win at this game,  you just have to look at where the dealer is hitting, have a look, I tend to play tennis, hit across the wheel..."    and he was, roughly between the 22 and 26 (top left) and 10 to the six (bottom right)  I have followed this and won well with it when it appears.  As I have said in previous posts, you have to chart a few dealers to find it but well worth the effort.   

I plot 30 spins out on thier card with the wheel on it ( fold the card under so that you have the underside give you a white area right round) and for each hit draw a dot.  I usually put a dot for left spin and small cross for right spins and if one or the other is stronger play that.   On the rapid (with live wheel and dealer) you can set the prime pockets and keep hitting reset.  I allways stop if there a two losses in a row.

Cheers explod


----------



## andione1983 (18 July 2009)

i follow this advice, and yes you will always win if you keep 2.5x your money each time you miss your color.

*you know in roulette you can bet on blacks or reds. If you bet $1 on black and it goes black you win $1 but if it goes red you loose your $1.

So I found a way you can win everytime:



bet $1 on black if it goes black you win $1



now again bet $1 on black, if it goes red bet $3 on black, if it goes red again bet $8 on black, if red again bet $20 on black, red again bet $52 on black (always multiple you previous lost bet around 2.5), if now is black you win $52 so you have $104 and you bet:



$1 + $3 + $8 + $20 + $52 = $84 So you just won $20 



now when you won you start with $1 on blacks again etc etc.  its always bound to go black eventually (it`s 50/50) so that way you eventually always win. But there`s a catch. If you start winning too much (like $1000 a day) casino will finally notice something and can ban you. I was banned once on royal casino. So don`t be too greedy and don`t win more then $200 a day and you can do it for years. I think bigger casinos know that trick so I play for real money on smaller ones, right now I play on lucky june casino: rabbit-jackpot.net for more then 3 months, I win $50-$200 a day and my account still works. You`ll find roulette there when you log in go to "specialty games" - "american roulette".*

(this is not my advice, something a mate sent to me so don't take it as gospel but i went and had a play using this theory, and found it to work, and if i was patient enough i coulp make $50.00AU an hour)


----------



## 2020hindsight (18 July 2009)

jeez, I hope noone writing or reading this stuff seriously thinks they will win in the end. 
c'mon fellas - you will go broke with these theories.
and the casino will still be there.

THe classic was the Crown Casino (Melb) - lady discovered her husband had a betting problem the hard way - like - he shot himself on their front lawn rather than fess up to her that he'd lost all their money and the house etc. 

All she had were some vouchers from the casino for various shopping chains .  They declined saying " sorry those are in your husband's name and are non-transferable".  

They wouldn't even help her with the cost of the funeral.

PS - andione, as for the doubling up system mentioned there,  run 100,000 rolls in that simulator (post #2) - and see just how big your bank has to be - eg to cover a string of losses !


----------



## 2020hindsight (18 July 2009)

eg from post #30 :-
#8 on one occasion had 4 consecutive wins, but also came up for 350 consecutive losses ! etc etc 

whether you bet on single numbers or columns or colours - it's the same rule - the bank ends up (averaged) with 1 in every 37 dollars you bet


----------



## nathanblack (18 July 2009)

2020hindsight said:


> eg from post #30 :-
> #8 on one occasion had 4 consecutive wins, but also came up for 350 consecutive losses ! etc etc
> 
> whether you bet on single numbers or columns or colours - it's the same rule - the bank ends up (averaged) with 1 in every 37 dollars you bet




its the "0" that gives the house an advantage, its not black/red, odd/even,high/low. all the outside bets lose (columns, etc).

my mate worked at crown for years. he was taught to accuractely land the ball in any quaddrant he wanted, more specifically he could get the ball to land on his chosen number or 2 numbers eitherside, with 90% success.

dealers are told to look for large bets on single numbers and avoid that result. obviously the croupier needs to quickly sum up the bets and decide the worst outcome for the house and even then some bets are placed after the spin has started.

betting on the best outcome for the house isnt a good option because the croupier doesnt have time to calculate that, he has just enough time to see an obvious bad result to avoid.

the safest bet is outside bets because, he can only guarantee a particular quadrant which will have equal representation of red/black/odd/even. that is why the wheel isnt sequential numbers 1-36, to break up each quadrant.

its impossible to exploit the croupier unless you know which quadrant he is striving for. there was a case at crown a few years ago where a croupier helped his gay lover win by spinning like this.


----------



## Wagyu (19 July 2009)

andione1983 said:


> i follow this advice, and yes you will always win if you keep 2.5x your money each time you miss your color.
> 
> *you know in roulette you can bet on blacks or reds. If you bet $1 on black and it goes black you win $1 but if it goes red you loose your $1.
> 
> ...







6 consecutve losses with a table limit of $250 (even chance betting) you are down $200+ with no opportunity to get your money back, 7 consecutive losses with a table limit of $500 (even chance betting) puts you at $500+ down with no opportunity to get your money back.

Find a new friend?


----------



## Wagyu (19 July 2009)

nathanblack said:


> its the "0" that gives the house an advantage, its not black/red, odd/even,high/low. all the outside bets lose (columns, etc).
> 
> my mate worked at crown for years. he was taught to accuractely land the ball in any quaddrant he wanted, more specifically he could get the ball to land on his chosen number or 2 numbers eitherside, with 90% success.
> 
> ...






Are you serious? "look for large bets and avoid that result"? be practical champ!

"the croupier needs to sum up the bets and decisde the worst outcome for the house"? oh please!

And "quadrants"?. the zero section comprises of 17 numbers out of a total of 37 (not 36 as you have quoted). Any knucklehead dealer can say " I'll land the ball in the zero section", it's half the wheel the odds are on his side to start. It takes a pelican like yourself to believe him.

And "guarantee"?, the dealer can't guarantee jack-****. If you want a guarantee, go and buy a toaster.

What happens when your mate works on the "Rapid Roulette" game? (terminal betting on screen with a live dealer). there is no bets for the dealer to look at, nothing! he's just waiting for the ball to drop and then to confirm the winning number in the system.

A lot of roulette dealers are self fulfilling wankers, and your mate is not exempt. 

Wise up sunshine.


----------



## Wagyu (19 July 2009)

brty said:


> Law of averages and things like coin toss are often used in the same sentences.
> 
> 
> Personally , I think the best game at the casino is to enjoy the subsidised drinks and watch others drop hundreds of dollars, without putting my hand in my pocket.
> ...




brty, have a drink for me.


----------



## 2020hindsight (19 July 2009)

I believe you and I are thinking the same way Wagyu.  
Just for fun I studied a roulette table for 5 minutes yesterday , and put on one bet!.
and the ball came down 180 degrees exactly from where it was supposed to lol.

:topic  btw, every time I see your avatar it reminds me of this one we bred on the farm - United Nations grainfed - cheers.


----------



## 2020hindsight (19 July 2009)

ps - btw, when I say we're thinking the same way - I don't really see the need to insult the other posters  (nb, or andione) or their friends.   

Actually there was a young Chinese croupier rolling last night, and I asked her could she land it on a number - she replied that she could sometimes get it in a quadrant if she was lucky - so maybe there's a smidgeon of truth in this theory  - then again - she's gotta get it in some quadrant somewhere lol.   - and statistically, she'll get it right occasinally 

Personally, watching that ball hit those miriad deflectors etc - I'd be betting that she gets it in the right quadrant one time in four


----------



## explod (19 July 2009)

> 2020hindsight      ...   Personally, watching that ball hit those miriad deflectors etc - I'd be betting that she gets it in the right quadrant one time in four





I have done a lot of watching and measuring.   If your interest is sufficient and put in the time you will find that experienced shooters/dealers/croupiers can put into any quadrant.


----------



## 2020hindsight (19 July 2009)

explod said:


> I have done a lot of watching and measuring.   If your interest is sufficient and put in the time you will find that experienced shooters/dealers/croupiers can put into any quadrant.



fair enuf m8 - but I won;t be joining you 
(I only put that one bet on because the bludy craps table was closed - temporarily / permanently who knows - the casinos prefer to make their money fast at the roulette wheels ). 

PS 25%  of those polled resemble a quarter of the population. (if you get my drift / ghist)


----------



## explod (19 July 2009)

nathanblack said:


> my mate worked at crown for years. he was taught to accuractely land the ball in any quaddrant he wanted, more specifically he could get the ball to land on his chosen number or 2 numbers eitherside, with 90% success.
> 
> dealers are told to look for large bets on single numbers and avoid that result. obviously the croupier needs to quickly sum up the bets and decide the worst outcome for the house and even then some bets are placed after the spin has started.
> 
> ...




What you say above is correct IMV    On busy tables I often cover areas where there a few chips with splits and corners (one chip covers four numbers)   70% strike rate covering about 1/3rd of the wheel


----------



## explod (19 July 2009)

2020hindsight said:


> fair enuf m8 - but I won;t be joining you
> (I only put that one bet on because the bludy craps table was closed - temporarily / permanently who knows - the casinos prefer to make their money fast at the roulette wheels ).
> 
> PS 25%  of those polled resemble a quarter of the population. (if you get my drift / ghist)




Have you observed the poker machine crowds on a Saturday night, must be huge money down the hole and I reckon they'd be at it as the planet goes down the gurgler.   Then maybe it is so lets throw it away.

cheers explod


----------



## explod (19 July 2009)

brty said:


> Because things are not the same, and we have no way of calculating all the possible variations, we mistakenly call it random, when it is most likely not.
> 
> brty




Correct, but with some thought and you are into some maths and charting the variations can be worked out sufficiently to beat the house edge as long as you stick to a set of good criteria and rules.  To hold the gains you also need to be aware of when a trend/tendancy has changed.  On average, having picked the right croupier particular trends last about 40 spins.

cheers brty


----------



## explod (19 July 2009)

doogie_goes_off said:


> Started my own system once, set it up with cards and 5c pieces - I called it blind martingale after I found out what martingale is, doesn't really work but I wish it did. Had several goes thinking I would take the casino to the cleaners but eventually figured the odds can not be beaten by a betting pattern alone.




Yep started out similar, thought I would never have to work again, the feeling of having/(thought) th holy grail was wonderful and I did have some good wins for awhile.

cheers doogie-goes-off


----------



## nathanblack (19 July 2009)

Wagyu said:


> Are you serious? "look for large bets and avoid that result"? be practical champ!
> *if a dealer sees $1000 on number 34, you think house instructions aren't to spin as far away from that as possible? don't mention table limits.*
> 
> "the croupier needs to sum up the bets and decisde the worst outcome for the house"? oh please!
> ...




*out of curiosity which school did you attend for math? and have you lived a sheltered life?*


----------



## nathanblack (19 July 2009)

* Roulette deal for sex, cash: witness *
A Crown Casino croupier agreed to rig spins on a roulette wheel for a patron in return for money and sex, a court was told yesterday. The Melbourne Magistrates Court was told that the croupier, Mr Demetrios Zagaretos, struck a deal over drinks and dinner with Mr Peter Kyprianou to control where t
The Age 19/08/1999     Cost - $2.20     460 words 

If you dont belive it happens, buy the article. I can't be bothered.


----------



## explod (19 July 2009)

nathanblack said:


> * Roulette deal for sex, cash: witness *
> A Crown Casino croupier agreed to rig spins on a roulette wheel for a patron in return for money and sex, a court was told yesterday. The Melbourne Magistrates Court was told that the croupier, Mr Demetrios Zagaretos, struck a deal over drinks and dinner with Mr Peter Kyprianou to control where t
> The Age 19/08/1999     Cost - $2.20     460 words
> 
> If you dont belive it happens, buy the article. I can't be bothered.




I have observed many instances over the years that confirm such behaviour.  It also confirms that the dealers control the game.   Watch/learn/chart the dealer and you can then get somewhere.


Whilst checking to see if I could retrieve this article I noted a system, "You cant lose" he spruikes.   Involves betting red/black but staying fixed to the one number and doubling up.  Says you can go 9 spins before hitting the table limit.   What a goose, I often see the whole overhead with one colour straight.   Overheads show the last 12 to 14 spins.

I wonder if it is the industry who post this rubbish.   Have seen such stuff around often.  Maybe there is a job with Crown sucking suckers in.

cheers nathanblack


----------



## againsthegrain (11 February 2011)

Thought I will revive this thead for a while.

I just finished reading Mick Gatto's book and found something interesting in between the lines. He claims to have had a winning roulette system until the casino got a few trained croupies to turn the odds against him, wondering what you guys make of this:



> In Australia, underworld hard man Mick Gatto
> and his great mate Mario Condello played a
> system at Crown Casino where they left out seven
> numbers – the top three (1, 2, 3), the bottom
> ...




Im thinking the odds are very good for them, but also the loses would be very heavy and chasing such loses for 5 spins would be very hard to recover even if they did have good streaks to follow, also very interesting about the trained croupies, might hit crown tonight as I have not been for very long and do some wheel watching and for croupie signatures hehe


----------



## bellenuit (11 February 2011)

againsthegrain said:


> Im thinking the odds are very good for them, but also the loses would be very heavy and chasing such loses for 5 spins would be very hard to recover even if they did have good streaks to follow, also very interesting about the trained croupies, might hit crown tonight as I have not been for very long and do some wheel watching and for croupie signatures hehe




I don't get it. The odds are against them winning without the croupier having to try and fix the result. 

If the wheel is not tampered with and spinned randomly, then by my calculations this is what their long term outcome should be:

They should win on average 30 out of 37 times and lose 7 out of 37 times over the long run.

This means (for the $50 bet on each of the 30 numbers) on average over the long term their winnings will be $9,000 (30 x $300) every 37 spins of the wheel and their losses will be $10,500 (7 X $1,500) every 37 spins of the wheel.

Increasing the bet only increases their losses.

Even the statement about the croupier "directing" the wheel doesn't make sense. Instead of choosing the 7 numbers NOT to bet on from one section of the wheel, they could have chosen 7 numbers evenly distributed around the wheel. It doesn't change the odds, but the croupier would have to be pretty gifted to be able to "direct" accurately to one of those 7 distributed numbers.

_Looking at it another way, although their odds of winning are much greater than the odds of losing, the amount they win is much less than what they will lose. They have a 30/37 chance of winning $300 which translates to average take of $243.24 and a 7/37 chance of losing $1,500 which translates to an average loss of $283.78.

Since they claimed to win regularly, then they are defying the laws of probability. _


----------



## Tyler Durden (12 February 2011)

Best bet is to bet on the house - ie. buy shares in Tabcorp and/or Crown!


----------



## DB008 (12 February 2011)

Think you know how to place a bet...???

Check out this guy, Billy Walters. He puts on millions just for a Sunday breakfast AND WINS!!!

Very, very interesting 60 minutes doco.


----------



## againsthegrain (13 February 2011)

Yea I tried playing it on a few free online roulette websites and everytime I was making profits 0 or one of the 7 would come up, then trying to climb back just as I would make back the loss I would get wiped out again, so using this system I would slowly lose.... mmm maybye they had ALOT of good luck then when the streak ended they blamed the croupie


----------



## Tyler Durden (13 February 2011)

DB008 said:


> Think you know how to place a bet...???
> 
> Check out this guy, Billy Walters. He puts on millions just for a Sunday breakfast AND WINS!!!
> 
> Very, very interesting 60 minutes doco.





Interesting what he says about stocks. Maybe at the end of the day, we're just dealing with thieves in suits...


----------



## Tyler Durden (14 April 2012)

Just had a random thought...

If you had to bet on half the wheel (18 numbers), would your chances be any different with the two strategies below?

1) betting on each alternate slot of the wheel (ie. all black, or all red); or
2) betting on a quadrant/sector of the wheel that spreads over 18 numbers


----------



## DB008 (14 April 2012)

Tyler Durden said:


> Interesting what he says about stocks. Maybe at the end of the day, we're just dealing with thieves in suits...




Who cares, that 60 minutes reporter is HOT!!!!!!


----------



## bellenuit (14 April 2012)

Tyler Durden said:


> Just had a random thought...
> 
> If you had to bet on half the wheel (18 numbers), would your chances be any different with the two strategies below?
> 
> ...




Unless the wheel is biased (e.g. a rigged wheel), betting on any group of 18 numbers, no matter where they are located, should have the same odds, 18/37.


----------



## So_Cynical (14 April 2012)

Tyler Durden said:


> Just had a random thought...
> 
> If you had to bet on half the wheel (18 numbers), would your chances be any different with the two strategies below?
> 
> ...




The odds are the same.


----------



## cynic (15 April 2012)

bellenuit said:


> Unless the wheel is biased (e.g. a rigged wheel), betting on any group of 18 numbers, no matter where they are located, should have the same odds, 18/37.




+1

Bias via croupier technique may also need consideration.

I met a player once whom recommended a couple of books to me. I never got around to following up on them, but mention them here as they may be of interest to you :

"Beating the Wheel" and "Spin Gold" (if my memory serves me correctly).


----------

