This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Roulette: odds, chances, myths and fact

Jump to new
Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact


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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact


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.
 
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.
 

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
 
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.
Click to expand...

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..
 
Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact

So_Cynical said:
but the maths is always with u.
Click to expand...

Mr J said:
No it is not.
Click to expand...

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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Re: Roulettedds,chances,myths and fact

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 said:
test your roulette theories
http://www.lonniebest.com/Roulette/
Click to expand...
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
 
wayneL said:
Can someone explain to me the *physics* of roulette wheel bias.
Click to expand...

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
 
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..
Click to expand...

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???
Click to expand...

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.
Click to expand...

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.
Click to expand...

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.
Click to expand...

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.
 

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

Attachments

  • Wayne.jpg
    6.5 KB · Views: 356


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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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.
Click to expand...

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 !!
 

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
 
Trembling Hand said:
Explod can you please address this before we go any further. Or shall I just let it rest at this,
Click to expand...

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.
 
Why do I keep thinking of Nassim Taleb in this thread?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...