• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

silly roulette system spam

CanadaGlass said:
I assume you mean financially, and not morally.

On a side note, it is illegal to have an honest slot machine, since they must have a prescribed percentage payout. Furthermore, the way they work the math is different from how most players work theirs. The players count how much money they put in, not how many times they hit the spin button. Having eaten up their "payout" with extra spins, they think a payout should be "due" when it isn't.
Click to expand...

I think it depends on your definition of "honest". The casinos even advertise their payoff rates on the slot machines. (And they're all less than 1.0! That is, the one with the "loosest slots" pays out something like 98 cents for every dollar put in.)

You can't blame the fact that some people think there's a system whereby they can somehow magically defeat the house advantage on the casinos.

The games are all honest in the sense we talk about an "honest die"--just that the house has an advantage. If they didn't, they wouldn't exist (or they'd have to charge a LOT for drinks!)

By your definition of honest, the casinos would lose money. If they had to pay out as much or more than they took in, there would be no money to pay for the games, the lights, the rent, etc. Anyone who thinks that's the state of affairs is a fool.
 
ddt said:
You're right about American roulette, yes. French roulette (which is also the usual style in my country - note the "at least around here") has other rules. I checked with "Holland Casino" what their rules are. When you bet on 'red' and the outcome is 0, your bet is placed "en prison". When it's 'red' again, you get your bet back. Or you can ask the croupier to give back half your bet on the 0, which statistically amounts to the same.

So, the house has indeed a slight advantage on the 0, though a lot less than with American roulette. And they earn on the drinks and on the tips to the croupier. :)
Click to expand...

And a slight advantage, in some games, is all it takes. The slot machines here are an example of that. Their advantage is very slight, but with high volume, the house is guaranteed to come out ahead.
_____

Dunstan, thanks for the link!
 
I always thought you were better off just taking your whole bankroll and just placing one bet with the whole amount on one color. You either double your money or walk away with nothing and you waste a lot less time.
 
Starthinker said:
I always thought you were better off just taking your whole bankroll and just placing one bet with the whole amount on one color. You either double your money or walk away with nothing and you waste a lot less time.
Click to expand...

I occasionally follow the inverse of the "strategy" proposed in the OP: double every time you win, with a cutoff where you take your winnings and reset the bet. That way you gradually lose money - which means you stay a while and (hopefully) have fun - punctuated with rare moments where you win a lot.
 
sol invictus said:
I occasionally follow the inverse of the "strategy" proposed in the OP: double every time you win, with a cutoff where you take your winnings and reset the bet. That way you gradually lose money - which means you stay a while and (hopefully) have fun - punctuated with rare moments where you win a lot.
Click to expand...

I think the strategy I follow is even better for my wallet. From a previous post:

ddt said:
Disclaimer: I have an MSc in math. There's a casino in my town. I've promised myself not to enter it until I have a winning strategy. I haven't been inside yet. :)
Click to expand...
 
I suspect that casinos do better than the mere odds of the game would suggest: that is, while it is true that, say, roulette is set up to ensure that--all things being equal--the house comes out marginally ahead in any sufficiently long series of bets; in actual practice I suspect that the house does much better than that slight margin on the odds would suggest. I think the real advantage for the house is that when people win money they are likely to stay until they lose it again.

I wonder if anyone's done any studies on what percentage of the money that walks in to a casino walks out with the customers again? I'll bet its far more than the 2 or 3% that the odds would suggest.
 
ddt said:
I think the 0 doesn't play a role in the "even odds" cases, such as red/black and even/odd; you can leave your bet there for the next round. At least around here.
...
Disclaimer: I have an MSc in math. There's a casino in my town. I've promised myself not to enter it until I have a winning strategy. I haven't been inside yet. :)
Click to expand...

i don't believe that is correct. If your bet was left on the red or black when a 0 came up and the next spin was treated de novo then there would be neither a player nor house advantage.
 
JoeTheJuggler said:
Yes, the 0 and 00 matter. They're possible results of a spin, meaning the chances of getting a red or a black is just less than 1:2, but the house is paying out even money.

Leaving your bet out there doesn't matter. Your odds of winning are less than 1:2, but the house pays as if it's exactly 1:2.

For example on an American wheel (with 0 and 00), the payout is 1:1, but the odds against winning one of these "even" bets (like red or black or even or odd or 1-18 versus 19-36) is 1.111 to 1.

That's how casinos stay in business.
Click to expand...

Not true. If a player's bet was left on red (or black) whenever 0 (or 00) came up the house percentage take would be zero. What you did not consider was that while the odds of winning are less than 1:2, so are the odds of losing as both are reduced equally.
 
marting said:
i don't believe that is correct. If your bet was left on the red or black when a 0 came up and the next spin was treated de novo then there would be neither a player nor house advantage.
Click to expand...

You're right. I didn't state it clearly, but I gave the actual rules for French roulette in post #20, and they differ from my recollection. They are better for the player than in American roulette, but which still give a house advantage.
 
ddt said:
... I gave the actual rules for French roulette in post #20, and they differ from my recollection. They are better for the player than in American roulette, but which still give a house advantage.
Click to expand...

They sure are. What's worse, most Casinos here use both 0 and 00.
 
I think the 0 doesn't play a role in the "even odds" cases, such as red/black and even/odd; you can leave your bet there for the next round. At least around here.
...
Disclaimer: I have an MSc in math. There's a casino in my town. I've promised myself not to enter it until I have a winning strategy. I haven't been inside yet.
Click to expand...
marting said:
i don't believe that is correct. If your bet was left on the red or black when a 0 came up and the next spin was treated de novo then there would be neither a player nor house advantage.
Click to expand...

Problem is....if a 0 or 00 comes up, and you bet on red or black, you lose the bet (in American casinos, that is). That's the built in advantage they have.
Same with ODD or EVEN bets. You lose on 0 or 00

Same with betting on the numbers. There are 36 numbers, and they pay out 36-1 odds on hitting any of them. But there are 2 extra spaces on the wheel..the green 0 and 00, making for 38 total spots.
 
drzeus99 said:
Problem is....if a 0 or 00 comes up, and you bet on red or black, you lose the bet (in American casinos, that is). That's the built in advantage they have.
Same with ODD or EVEN bets. You lose on 0 or 00

Same with betting on the numbers. There are 36 numbers, and they pay out 36-1 odds on hitting any of them. But there are 2 extra spaces on the wheel..the green 0 and 00, making for 38 total spots.
Click to expand...

You mean 35 to 1. A straight up win on a number pays $35 for each 1$ bet.
 
marting said:
Not true. If a player's bet was left on red (or black) whenever 0 (or 00) came up the house percentage take would be zero.
Click to expand...
I don't follow this. In an American casino, if you put $100 on red, and red doesn't come up (either black or 0 or 00), you lose your $100, right?

What you did not consider was that while the odds of winning are less than 1:2, so are the odds of losing as both are reduced equally.
Click to expand...
What? The odds of winning are slightly less than 1:2 (actually 18:38), which means that the odds of losing are slightly more than 1:2 (actually 20:38).
_______

drzeus99 said:
Problem is....if a 0 or 00 comes up, and you bet on red or black, you lose the bet (in American casinos, that is). That's the built in advantage they have.
Same with ODD or EVEN bets. You lose on 0 or 00
Click to expand...
That's what I thought.

If you bet on any of these "even money" bets, there are 18 outcomes (of the possible 38) that are wins and 20 that are losses.
 
marting said:
You mean 35 to 1. A straight up win on a number pays $35 for each 1$ bet.
Click to expand...
That's right. The house pays out 35 to 1, but the odds against winning are 37 to 1. (1:38 probability of winning and 37:38 probability of losing.)
 
JoeTheJuggler said:
I don't follow this.
Click to expand...

Please review your response #13 to ddt's suggestion that bets were left on the red/black in the event 0 came up. You then stated:

Leaving your bet out there doesn't matter.
Click to expand...

Did you really mean to agree with ddt?

EDTA:
It appears you interpretted and ddt meant that bets "left there" were played according to French rules. I didn't pick up on this because of the comment 0 didn't matter.
 
Last edited:
In all the European casinos I've played in if you bet red or black and zero comes up, you lose half your stake. Not sure about American wheels with a double zero.

My strategy for roulette; pick a number (usually 0 for me) and just bet on it every spin. make sure you have enough for 37 bets and hope it appears more than once. Continue until broke :)
 
marting said:
It appears you interpretted and ddt meant that bets "left there" were played according to French rules. I didn't pick up on this because of the comment 0 didn't matter.
Click to expand...
In either system, though, if you bet red or black and it comes up 0, the house's take is not zero. It's either the entire bet or half the bet. Making the same bet again doesn't remove the house's advantage. Your chance of winning is still slightly less than 1:2 (and your chance of losing is slightly more than 1:2).

Again, from the odds table (American roulette), while the house pays 1 to 1 on these "even money" bets, your odds against winning is actually 1.111 to 1.

I'm still not sure if you lose all or just half of your bet if you hit 0 or 00 (in the American game), but you still lose.
 
while there might well be some system out there in math land to beat a roulette table, lets say we define "beat" to mean have a positive bankroll after some large number of spins e.g. a million, noones found it yet, if it does exist at all it will be *very* complex, and is unlikely to win all that much in the long run.

Human beings just don't understand random. Our brains are wired to find patterns in things and there are no patterns in random. IIRC casinos vastly increased the roulette takings by adding the board that shows the previous few results.

In a casino the only game offered where you can make a profit is poker. Playing vs other human players and not against the house. Though depending on how high the rake is it might not be possible to make a profit there either.

The house *always* wins in the end. They setup the odds in the games offered so that the house has a positive expectation. Even a very small edge in the houses favour will break any size of bankroll given enough time (aside from an infinite one of couirse)

Roulette is second only to slots in games that give the casinos the highest return, the edge the house has at even a European Roulette table is *huge*.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom