Hi guys.I need some help from you.I just need find kind of bets where is payout 1 to 1.It can be bets on 18 straight up numbers,6 streets,3 lines and so on.I need just this thing.I give you example for RED/BLACK.
20 spins
RED- 10 hits
BACK-10 hits
This is important for me.How many times this happen in your stats or just give me your ide which kind of bets i should use.If it happen 2 or 3 times in 1000 spins its good results for me.But no more.In 100 000 spins it can be 200-300 times.Please help me.I need just your opinions and kind of bets.Thank you.
Regards Thomas.
from what i recall bene we need to make a bet that will win every 20 spins, but lose if there is 10 red and 10 black because this occurs not very often at all, any ideas anybody?
Yes we need bets where is payout 1 to 1.So we have to bets like RED/BLACK.We can make it from numbers,streets etc.SO i will call it GROUP A and GROUP B.One of this group must hit minimum 11 times every 20 SPINS where is no zero.I zero came we count new 20 spins.So when one of this group came minimum 11 times the other group came only 9 times or less.This kind of bets i need.It can happen that etiher groups came 10 times in 20 spins but only 2 times in 1000 spins in average.It can be some system too, where we have payout 1 to 1.In this system can be group A winning hit and group B lossing hit.I hope taht you understand what i am looking for.If you find something or have some idea please give me it.Its important for me and i think for you too because if i find these bets i will make a great system and can post it here.
regards
Thomas.
bene im not sure where you got your data, i had a play with this and i got 10 red and 10 black twice in 30 shots
Yes.I know and this is reason why i am looking for any other bets and no RED/BLACK.It was just example.I know RED/BLACK not working.
Bene, bene... Try that: write down 21 spins and count B and R. Eg. 13 Blacks and 8 Reds came in 21 spins. Next 21 spins bet 1 unit on Blacks only. If you are ahead bet the same next 21 spins if you are losing bet 2 units on that one which came more often in the last 21 spins. Eg. Red 14 and Black 7. If you are still losing bet next 21 spins on the better one with 4 units. That's the whole progression 1-2-4. Doesn't happens often that you are on 2 or 4 unit bets in minus! Just bet the better one for every new 21 spins and if total behind use progression 1-2-4. Difficult to lose with this strategy. You can use that strategy on all ECs or play even all 3 ECs simultaneously.
Try and give me a feedback.
Cheers
Hermes
There is no difference between R/B and a pair of even chances made up from lines, streets, pleins. All are the same and all will produce the same composition of singles and series.
Quote from: Danger Man on March 18, 2010, 09:30:19 PM
There is no difference between R/B and a pair of even chances made up from lines, streets, pleins. All are the same and all will produce the same composition of singles and series.
sorry, THEY ARE NOT THE SAME! red/black are evenly (except 0 or 00) spread on the wheel, the other EC are NOT!
notice the difference! That's why table layout was created like this, to make u think it is all the same when it is not.
And there is a great difference in stakes. A lot of people play colors (18 numbers), so in some cases, more money is on one color than on the other. Silly streaks can happen due to input/output calculations. But when you play 18 random numbers, there are less silly streaks.
I recommend choosing 18 numbers, 2 in a dozen's row. Pick 2 out of 3 6 9 12. 2 out of 2 5 8 11, 2 out of 25 28 31 34.... you'll get 18 numbers that are more dispersed accross the wheel & board and less recognisable for strange wheel behaviour.
There was a study done by Jack Wise Kennedy some time ago on even chances that you will find interesting.
Quote from: iggiv
sorry, THEY ARE NOT THE SAME! red/black are evenly (except 0 or 00) spread on the wheel, the other EC are NOT!
notice the difference! That's why table layout was created like this, to make u think it is all the same when it is not.
They are physically different that is all. How can two pairs of bets that have the same probability of hitting be different from any other? It's nonsense.
Here is an excel tool that proves you are wrong LOL
nolinks://rapidshare.com/files/365850723/Analysis.xlsx.html (nolinks://rapidshare.com/files/365850723/Analysis.xlsx.html)
Quote from: Danger Man on March 20, 2010, 10:54:29 AM
They are physically different that is all. How can two pairs of bets that have the same probability of hitting be different from any other? It's nonsense.
Here is an excel tool that proves you are wrong LOL
nolinks://rapidshare.com/files/365850723/Analysis.xlsx.html (nolinks://rapidshare.com/files/365850723/Analysis.xlsx.html)
OK. Does it mean that if u bet let's say one dozen on a table or one sector of 12 on a wheel, it is gonna be the same probability of hitting?
Danger Man:
i don't mean that in a long run low/high numbers will appear more or less than red/black numbers or something like that. I mean that betting let's say b/r and low/high (with the same approach) may have different results in a long run.
And betting low/high is gonna be harder.
maybe i am wrong.
A simple example is to consider even chances. The composition of the results is the law of series: there will be
x amount of single hits such as RR
BRR, there will then be half as many doubles (series of two) than singles, then half as many series of three than series of two, half as many series of four than series of three and so on. It doesn't matter how you form even chances, whether they are table or wheel based, all will produce almost identical composition of singles and series. If you downloaded the spreadsheet, it compares R/B with a a pair of even chances made up from the wheel layout, you will see that the count of hits is the same and the amount of observed singles and series is usually within 1 or 2%, or statistically insignificant, meaning for all intents and purposes the "behaviour" of any and all ECs is the same. The results of any betting procedure will also be identical over time. Roulette is not about bets, it's about timing.
Quote from: iggiv on March 20, 2010, 11:48:28 AM
OK. Does it mean that if u bet let's say one dozen on a table or one sector of 12 on a wheel, it is gonna be the same probability of hitting?
Yes, of course that is so.
Yes, of course that is so.
[/quote]
which means wheel based strategies don't make sense, do they? if we can bet dozens, columns, low/high and so on, why bet any single numbers patterns based on wheel layout. Do i understand u right? If i bet any 12 numbers -- the result is the same as betting a dozen or a column? Is it right?
Quotewhich means wheel based strategies don't make sense, do they?
Not really, no, unless you use a visual prediction technique. All bets are the same across the board. If you bet a "custom dozen" made up from numbers on the wheel it is indeed exactly the same as betting the first 12, second 12 or third 12 on the table - streaks, chops, fluctuation/deviation will all be identical. If that wasn't the case roulette would be easily beatable and, in fact, to an extent perfectly predictable.
well, i got your point. I respect your point of view, but totally disagree with it. As a matter of fact, i consider it to be a perfect example of gambler's fallacy.
I can't base my point of view on any theory though. I hope maybe someone from more experienced roulette players will help me with that :)
Danger man, i got a question to u. If there are the same odds for the same quantity of bets (whatever the location is), then why the roulette wheel creators bothered at all with mixing all the numbers on the wheel? why they just did not make it in the order like in a table? if the odds are all the same? They were not smart enough? or their goal was just to trick people like me to believe that u can get better odds by betting on the roulette layout?
Iggiv, I'm interested to know why you think it is gambler's fallacy when I already proved with a simple statistical analysis that it isn't...that is, actually, verifiable fact. Am I correct in thinking that you believe bets made up of wheel sectors will behave differently to bets based on the table layout and that one set of bets is more likely to consistently hit above and below it's expected value? This is absolutely impossible, if it were true roulette would have a "flaw" and everyone would be crushing casinos day after day. It would be the easiest game in the world to beat since there would be a very real and permanent state of bias in favour of the player. You are entitled to your own opinions about this subject but I know that you're suffering from a misconception.
Quote from: Danger Man on March 20, 2010, 09:05:00 PM
Iggiv, I'm interested to know why you think it is gambler's fallacy when I already proved with a simple statistical analysis that it isn't...that is, actually, verifiable fact. Am I correct in thinking that you believe bets made up of wheel sectors will behave differently to bets based on the table layout and that one set of bets is more likely to consistently hit above it's expected value? This is absolutely impossible, if it were true roulette would have a "flaw" and everyone would be crushing casinos day after day. It would be the easiest game in the world to beat since there would be a very real and permanent state of bias. I suggest you try to read up on distribution models and probability theory.
yes, i believe that certain bets are more likely to win than the others. From practical point of view. I am not in a position to back it up with the theory though. And it doesn't make roulette "the easiest game" to play. There are not only bets involved, but also timing for them (watching certain events happen), also there is a money management involved.
No, it is not an easy game to play. But probability theory is much more complicated than gathering statistics and claiming they prove that all bets are just the same. Of course in a long run low/high, red/black, etc will hit roughly the same quantity of times, but it doesn't mean all respective bets are the same. There are lots of things involved in predicting. Way too complicated to explain for me. Honestly.
And i am sure i am not the only one here thinking this way.
And also from historical point of view if the table and wheel based bets meant all the same odds then nobody would bother with creating "mixed up numbers" wheel. The wheel would be all the same as the table. The dozens would be exactly the sectors of 12.
U know why they mixed up the numbers? because if u could put 1 unit on a sector of 12, casinos probably would go out of business.
If certain bets are more likely to win than others, hence, for some inexplicable reason, they hit more than their expected value (more than probability dictates), then you have the game beaten hands down and everything beyond discovering such a bet, like money management and timing, is pointless. If what you are saying is true, you would have a reliable and permanent positive edge over the house and the more you play the more you win. When I talk about all bets being the same I'm not comparing outside even money against each other. The test I did compares a pair of wheel-based ECs with the colours and DOES prove that there is no difference, either over 100 outcomes or 10,000. They are more or less identical. It can be, and has been, backed up. It can be applied to any and all variables. In such a test you can run as many trails as you want with numbers that have an acceptable chi score and the results will always be insignificant. That is how the random process works. I look forward to the day when someone can explain to me, and support, why bet
x is more likely to hit than bet
y when both
x and
y share the same probability.
Quote from: iggiv
And also from historical point of view if the table and wheel based bets meant all the same odds then nobody would bother with creating "mixed up numbers" wheel. The wheel would be all the same as the table. The dozens would be exactly the sectors of 12.
U know why they mixed up the numbers? because if u could put 1 unit on a sector of 12, casinos probably would go out of business.
The odds versus the actual payout is exactly the same. There is no difference whatsoever. Sorry, but these are the very basics that you're failing to grasp. I hope that in time you'll understand what I'm talking about.
OK then, how do u explain mixed up numbers on a wheel. If the bets of the same value have always the same chance to hit, why would anyone bother with arranging the roulette wheel the way it is. Why u can put 1 unit on a dozen with
12 separated numbers with different distances between them(we are lookin at the wheel layout now), why would not they allow to make a dozen like a sector to bet on?
there should be some reason for this. I say that's because if u had this possibility u would have high chances of winning with low drawdown. Or u think it was just out of the blue -- to confuse the players?
iggiv, think of it this way. Imagine the wheel with no numbers at all, just 37 blank pockets. No way to identify them. The wheel is balanced and fair. In your opinion, is the ball more likely to go in one pocket over another pocket? If so, why woud it do that?
Please condider this, its a very important question.
Cheese:
it is possible for a few times, but unlikely that it will happen frequently.
if all the bets with the same value had the same odds, we would easily see one number hit 20, 30 or 100 times in a row. It doesn't happen, does it? it means that after hitting lets say 3-4 times in a row in one pocket, it is very unlikely to appear again in a row (though it may happen once in a blue moon). Which means that there are some probability laws, which can be used for betting certain numbers.
according to a Danger Man if a ball hits #10 5 times in a row, betting number 10 still has the same probability as betting all other numbers. I say if u bet after this all other numbers but number 10, it is very likely that u win 1 chip.
Of course u can not build any serious strategy on this small example, but u can use it to compare the odds of hitting certain numbers after certain events.
if a ball hits #10 5 times in a row, betting number 10 still has the same probability as betting all other numbers. >>
This is true. How would the ball know not to fall into the #10 pocket again? If you can't understand this, you have no hope of ever beating the game.
Quote from: cheese on March 21, 2010, 05:52:03 AM
if a ball hits #10 5 times in a row, betting number 10 still has the same probability as betting all other numbers. >>
This is true. How would the ball know not to fall into the #10 pocket again? If you can't understand this, you have no hope of ever beating the game.
The ball does know anything, there are some probability laws. According to them the ball will unlikely fall there again right after it hit it 5 times in a row. That's how i understand it.
Do u have some other explanation? Would love to read it.
the ball will unlikely fall there again right after it hit it 5 times in a row.>>
What would stop the ball from falling there again? How would the ball know not to fall there again? That pocket still looks like all the other pockets, nothing has changed.
Quote from: cheese on March 21, 2010, 06:53:56 AM
the ball will unlikely fall there again right after it hit it 5 times in a row.>>
What would stop the ball from falling there again? How would the ball know not to fall there again? That pocket still looks like all the other pockets, nothing has changed.
What would stop the ball from falling there again? 37-1 against for starters.
How would the ball know not to fall there again?How do sub-atomic particles know how fast they should move, and in what direction?
That pocket still looks like all the other pockets, nothing has changed.Everything has changed, it is a new spin – and the ball cannot
see any pockets as such.
Iggiv, what you believe in is classical gamber's fallacy. If red hits 150 times in a row, then you bet black you still only have 18 chances to win and 19 chances to lose on that spin. The odds are never any better since the odds never change and you're never more likely to win than the probability dictates. Think about it, or at least try to do some research into normal distribution and probability theory. The layout of the wheel means absolutely squat. It might as well be arranged numerically, nothing would change.
If anyone wants to play the following AFTER 4 REDS bet Black that`s the bettors prerogative. It`s his money at stake.
Therefore someone acting like a smart alek and calling it a gamblers fallcay is just like a PARROT repeating an old cliche.
The calculated odds that RED would appear at the 5th bet are 31 :1. Good enough for me to go on BLACK !( With a certain method)
But nothing is ever certain and that is a fact but not a fallacy.
Nathan Detroit
HAPPY WINNINGS.......... YOUR WAY.
Danger Man, i was talking to some experienced gambler with lots of knowledge and he told me that u r absolutely right. No point to argue with "math guys" he told me. When we bet he said "we are not trying to change the odds, but we try to to catch or "tune-up" into the game rythm".
Quote from: iggiv link=topic=15405. msg98417#msg98417 date=1269195458
but we try to to catch or "tune-up" into the game rythm
And what is that exactly? Is it deterministic?
Not it's not.
Sure the random process produces "cycles". It's easy to see. But there is no way, method, or algorithm that can predict a cycle's length (I. e. how long it will last and when it will break).
Quote from: Nathan Detroit link=topic=15405. msg98407#msg98407 date=1269184472
The calculated odds that RED would appear at the 5th bet are 31 :1. Good enough for me to go on BLACK !
The odds that you'd see a series of 5 reds are 1 of 32.
More specifically, 5 Reds in a row is one of 32 equally likely 5 spin combinations.
16 of these possible combinations end with a Red, and the other 16 end with a black.
Therefore the odds that a Red would appear after 4 blacks are always 50% (minus house edge).
The same applies for combinations with different lengths (e. g. 6 spins, 7 spins, 30 spins, etc. ). No matter what happened in x number of past spins, the odds for an even chance bet winning are always 50% - house edge.
Period.
Don't let system sellers and gambling forums posters fool you guys. This whole "bet selection on random events" thing is an illusion motivated by the desire to win money. You are better off focusing on other things. :)
Quote from: iggiv on March 21, 2010, 03:17:38 PM
Danger Man, I was talking to some experienced gambler with lots of knowledge and he told me that u r absolutely right. No point to argue with "math guys" he told me. When we bet he said "we are not trying to change the odds, but we try to to catch or "tune-up" into the game rythm".
''to catch or "tune-up" into the game rythm". easier said that done but i totally agree...
question= doesn't random/maths (roulette) naturally produce patterns....its full of patterns waves to jump on its just having the experience in when to jump in and jump out with more more chips in your pocket...........but like iv said before its easier said than done.
mattjono
Quote from: MATTJONO on March 22, 2010, 07:33:58 AM
''to catch or "tune-up" into the game rythm". easier said that done but I totally agree...
question= doesn't random/maths (roulette) naturally produce patterns....its full of patterns waves to jump on its just having the experience in when to jump in and jump out with more more chips in your pocket...........but like iv said before its easier said than done.
mattjono
yes Matt buddy, it is very hard. otherwise everybody would beat roulette and casinos would not operate. But if
we had a wheel with "straight" numbers, i think it would not be that hard. that's the reason they mixed up the numbers. Imagine u could put one unit on a hot sector of 12 and work out a long progression. Mr J would probably buy not just one reastaurant, but a big net of a restaurants :thumbsup: