Hi all, you have taken that iniative to open this topic,so with a few clicks answer me..They say in the long run you will lose.I play 4 hrs is that long enough..and who really play long run.By the way after 4 hrs im still in profit. SEYKID.
Quote from: seykid29 on December 12, 2009, 12:43:52 PM
Hi all, you have taken that iniative to open this topic,so with a few clicks answer me..They say in the long run you will lose.I play 4 hrs is that long enough..and who really play long run.By the way after 4 hrs im still in profit. SEYKID.
Hello dear Seykid,
My take on the long run is that the
true "long run" is infinity. Think about the largest random deviation possible, even a lifetime of wins, and it is still due to "even out in the long run".
That definitely sounds to me like infinity!
Others may differ. Let's see.
No one plays infinity..like i once said before.Short run makes long run.I win short runs,aint i beating long run a little.
Who has the time playing for the lonh run?
Who's dumb enough to believe that they gamble only in the short run?
dumb
Does this forum need words like this?
The man asked a perfectly good question, and up until this reply, all were perfectly good replies!
I agree with Victor. You won't live long enough to win in the "long run". And, yes, you can win in the short run. You can't swoop in and swoop out like an eagle on a fish, but you can win.
Sam
You right we trying to make a nice thread and dumb aint so nice.I was just looking for some views..because roulette cannot be beaten in the long run,but some of us,beat it short run everytime.
Quote from: Nathan Detroit on December 12, 2009, 01:10:50 PM
Who has the time playing for the long run?
I would say anyone playing regularly enough that their personal betting timeline goes beyond 3 standard deviations or more, a point at which the probability to still remain in profit using a system (or betting randomly) is so low, and keeps getting lower the longer you play (I.e. the more bets you place) until it reaches practically zero.
(σ: Standard Deviation)
(https://www.vlsroulette.com/proxy.php?request=nolinks%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2F8%2F8c%2FStandard_deviation_diagram.svg%2F500px-Standard_deviation_diagram.svg.png&hash=3f3e4764a4b08e67cb09b419f722c4f7a3d47513)
Conversely if it keeps growing bigger, it's party time :dance1: or you could be pinnochio ;D
I'm sorry that I used the word dumb. I didn't mean to offend anyone.
What I should have said is that someone is naive or ignorant of the facts if they believe differently.
It's common for new gambler's to fall prey to the short term way of thinking.
infinity is the long run, thats the math of it. I play to the set. I go to the table, the set starts, I leave the table the set ends. The only probilty that I care about is what happend in my set. What happens over 1,000,000,000,000,000 spins rolls or hands, is meaningless if I am only at a table for 2 hours
Naive
I once was told by a "mathite" that ten millions decisions, at a MINIMUM was necessary to constitute any long run. I play bac, five days per week, 50 weeks per year and I only see about 90000 decisions a year and only make real money bets on about 35000. I win regularly and I doubt I will live long enough to se any "long run".
So most of us will never play long run,just short run..and we win,and are beating roulette daily what does that implies..roulette is not beatable..or not beatable in the long run.Im confuse.
I suppose a load of short runs will eventually equal to a long run and you will see for yourself how robust and profitable your method is. I suppose that's where testing has it's place and you can see the parameters.
I would not get hung up on a lot of the theory. When you have played enough roulette, you will soon know if you are wasting your time or not.
I'm with Dr.Hubert here.
The "long run" in this particular context is neither infinity nor 10 million bets.
Anyone who plays fairly regularly (placed over a few thousand bets in his life) and yet thinks he's always in the "short run" is indeed misguided.
Learn about Standard Deviation calculation to be able to determine where you are in terms of "luck", "short run", "long run", etc.
QuoteThe luck factor in a casino game is quantified using standard deviation (SD). The standard deviation of a simple game like Roulette can be calculated using the binomial distribution. In the binomial distribution, SD = sqrt (npq ), where n = number of rounds played, p = probability of winning, and q = probability of losing. The binomial distribution assumes a result of 1 unit for a win, and 0 units for a loss, rather than -1 units for a loss, which doubles the range of possible outcomes. Furthermore, if we flat bet at 10 units per round instead of 1 unit, the range of possible outcomes increases 10 fold. Therefore,
SD (Roulette, even-money bet) = 2b sqrt(npq ), where b = flat bet per round, n = number of rounds, p = 18/38, and q = 20/38.
For example, after 10 rounds at $1 per round, the standard deviation will be 2 x 1 x sqrt(10 x 18/38 x 20/38) = $3.16. After 10 rounds, the expected loss will be 10 x $1 x 5.26% = $0.53. As you can see, standard deviation is many times the magnitude of the expected loss.
The range is six times the standard deviation: three above the mean, and three below. Therefore, after 10 rounds betting $1 per round, your result will be somewhere between -$0.53 - 3 x $3.16 and -$0.53 + 3 x $3.16, I.e., between -$10.00 and $8.95. (There is still a 0.1% chance that your result will exceed a $8.95 profit) This demonstrates how luck can be quantified; we know that if we walk into a casino and bet $5 per round for a whole night, we are not going to walk out with $500.
The standard deviation for the even-money Roulette bet is the lowest out of all casinos games. Most games, particularly slots, have extremely high standard deviations. As the size of the potential payouts increase, so does the standard deviation.
As the number of rounds increases, eventually, the expected loss will exceed the standard deviation, many times over. From the formula, we can see the standard deviation is proportional to the square root of the number of rounds played, while the expected loss is proportional to the number of rounds played. As the number of rounds increases, the expected loss increases at a much faster rate. This is why it is impossible for a gambler to win in the long term. It is the high ratio of short-term standard deviation to expected loss that fools gamblers into thinking that they can win.
The volatility index (VI) is defined as the standard deviation for one round, betting one unit. Therefore, the VI for the even-money American Roulette bet is sqrt(18/38 x 20/38) = 0.499. The variance (v) is defined as the square of the VI. Therefore, the variance of the even-money American Roulette bet is 0.249, which is extremely low for a casino game. The variance for Blackjack is 1.2, which is still low compared to the variances of electronic gaming machines (EGMs).
It is important for a casino to know both the house edge and volatility index for all of their games. The house edge tells them what kind of profit they will make as percentage of turnover, and the volatility index tells them how much they need in the way of cash reserves. The mathematicians and computer programmers that do this kind of work are called gaming mathematicians and gaming analysts. Casinos do not have in-house expertise in this field, so outsource their requirements to experts in the gaming analysis field, such as Mike Shackleford, the "Wizard of Odds".
Source: nolinks://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaming_mathematics#Standard_deviation (nolinks://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaming_mathematics#Standard_deviation)A useful post by Laurence Scott:
QuoteLet's go through the methology in detail for both an even money (18 number bet) and a 5 number bet. In my earlier post, I did the math in terms of wins (which is an approximation when even money bets are involved), but in reality it needs to done in terms of Action vs. Return. And, after redoing my calculations the 400 figure was originally based on a 00 wheel. So, to be conservative, let's assume we are dealing with a 00 wheel.
For an even money bet, we need to find the number of spins where the house expectation = one standard deviation. In other words, by breaking even you are at one standard deviation (SD). I'm sure there must be a formula for this somewhere (contributors?), but I always do it by estimation and trial and error.
Even money:
Let's assume you bet $1 per number and cover 18 numbers. This would be the same as betting $18 on red/black/etc. Your total action over 400 spins would be 400 X 18 = $7,200.
The house edge is 5.26%. So, over 400 spins the house would expect to make $378.72 (7200 X .0526).
How many extra wins does it take to make this amount? Each win returns $36, so 379/36 = 10.5 wins.
The standard deviation over 400 even money bets is 10. SQRT(400 X .5 X .5).
If you were to just over come the house edge (I.e. break even) you would be 1 standard deviation over expectation.
You would then need to find some bet that is over 3 standard deviations. In other words, you would need to find an even money bet that had 30 net wins, for a profit of about $750. Quite an accomplishment, and a fairly rare event.
This bet then becomes your hypothesis. You then need to take an additional 400 spins to confirm the hypothesis.
Let's say that after 800 spins red does not perform as expected, but "odd" is now at 3 SD. Can you start betting odd? No. You would need another 800 spins to confirm the odd hypothesis.
Now, let's look at a 5 number sector:
2000 spins would be my initial threshold:
Action = 2000 X 5 = 10000
House expectation = 10000 X .0526 = $526 = 14.6 wins
N = 2000
P = 5/38
Q = 33/38
SQRT(N x P x Q) = 16.22
14.6 vs. 16.22. Close enough. 2000 is a nice round number for illustration purposes.
If I am looking for a 5 number event it would take at least 2000 spins to form my hypothesis. I would then need another 2000 spins to confirm my hypothesis.
The bottom line is that you need 4000 spins to confirm a 5 number bet.
*********************
How significant your orignial hypotheis should be is a matter of personal risk tolerance. 3 SD for an initial hypothesis is a pretty high bar. 2 SD will obviously qualify more wheels.
The proof is in the confiming indepent set. If you start out with a 2 SD event, and then it turns into a 3 SD event after the confirming set, you most likely have something real.
The bottom line is this: A 2000 spin initial set followed by another set of 2000 to confirm is NOT THE SAME as taking 8000 spins and then finding your event. This is a classic MISTAKE people make:
* I've taken 4000 spins
* I've found a 5 number sector that is @ 3 SD
* The sector performs in both the first 1/2 of the set and the second half of the set
* I've found my significant event! (WRONG)
The proper methodolgy is this:
* I've taken 2000 spins
* I've found a 5 number sector that is @ 3 SD
* I've taken another 2000 spins
* The 5 number sector is positive in my confirming set and is now over 3 SD.
* I've found my significant event! (RIGHT)
Source: nolinks:// nolinks. advantageplayer .com/roulette/forums/roulette-main/webbbs.cgi?noframes;read=1500
Technically, surely you're always in the long run. The long run would be the entire population of decisions you've ever observed while playing for real cash-money, the gap in between sessions is irrelevant. When you stop, you're in the long run, when you start again you're in the long run. The characteristics of randomness will apply themselves to any sample or population, regardless of time, wheel, location. Someone mentioned "personal permeance"; everyone's long run is different, depending on how much you play, it can't be defined as 10 million decisions or 100 million. I'm not saying things don't happen in the short term, but everything is part of the long haul.
So Maths has come into play to shed light.But in the end long run,short run what really matters is a good money management,good play strategies,discipline and walking out in profit everytime.
Money management, gaming discipline won't make you a winner. Strategy is everything. Without the edge, you're not going to win in the long run.
People should focus more attention on getting the edge before they worry about money management.
Indeed.
Dr.Hubert you knew on Forum,but by the way you answer it feels you been playing for long.Concernin Strategy you right,and money management fits in,but i think discipline is key.Maybe you have read,or will read about some good players on Forum with good strategy who let them stray,as lack of discipline.
"People should focus more attention on getting the edge before they worry about money management"
I don't agree. Money management is critical.
Strategy is all-important if you want consistent wins. If your just playing for entertainment, money menagement is more important.
Good questions and responses are interessant.
Before when i read the term "long run", i was always thinking that it's playing everyday short sessions during some years and still winning until the dead. . . ^^'
To me a long run means;
From the day I first start playing full time until now.
And only I know the results of that long run....W or L
It is like any company....if succ.you still running,if not you are out of buss......Iboba 8) 8)
Money management: another gambling misconception to thrown on the pile. If you play for fun, you play with $50 you don't care about losing. If you play for fun, it's pretty much guaranteed that you're going home with nothing. People who play for "fun" don't know when to stop.
The phrase "money management" should be banned from forums. If you don't have an edge, money management simply means you're just looking for a way to lose as slowly as possible. If you're obsessed with money management, stop playing because the red is going to get deeper. The bet selection alone is everything.
Bet selection only makes a small difference. Your bet selection only has to be average if you have good money management.
QuoteBet selection only makes a small difference. Your bet selection only has to be average if you have good money management.
That's absurd. That's like saying you don't have to worry about how to make money. You just need to worry about how to spend it.
Get the edge first, then worry about money management/discipline.
Using data I collect to determine the SD with enough values to gain confidence, to validate that what I am doing is effect is naive? Probability based on the physical properties of an object or objects is not dependant on those objects being in a "neutral state". Having a person touch those objects does not effect the "neutral state". A 3 + SD for a method based on 4000 bet decision will not change through out the course of 400K bet decisions.
So the answer to the question that started this thread is 4000 bet decision= long run and the long run is not just a set totaling all the bet decisions with REAL MONEY that you make. Cool
Get the edge before you have the discipline to use money management must come from someone who lost money by having neither.
Just a thought
Quote from: hoper35 on December 13, 2009, 04:59:34 PM
"People should focus more attention on getting the edge before they worry about money management"
I don't agree. Money management is critical.
Bet selection only makes a small difference. Your bet selection only has to be average if you have good money management.
(https://www.vlsroulette.com/proxy.php?request=nolinks%3A%2F%2Fnolinks.funnyforumpics.com%2Fforums%2FDemotivational%2F1%2Fdemotivational-posters-defeat.jpeg&hash=935fdb765daac07113dc276c6c69197d62f9b67a) (nolinks://"nolinks://nolinks.funnyforumpics.com")
Concerning money management debate,i was saying money management,good strategy,discipline will get you through.But in what order,that is for you to decide.
Sorry, but no it won't.
So what is your view?
DR. Hubert,It seems you are quite a pro or semi-pro by your way of writing.
Quote from: Raider
4000 bet decision= long run and the long run is not just a set totaling all the bet decisions with REAL MONEY
What happens if I play more than 4000 decisions? Am I in the very long term, the extremely long term, the exceedingly long term, the massive long term, the huge long term, the epic long term, the gargantuan long term? Every outcome you ever observe is part of a player's individual long term, thinking it can be defined in any way is preposterous. Everyone is always in the long term.
definition of long run in infinity (or lifetime in a man point of view) seem very accurate to me, but disturbing. Because even if someone have a HG, he just can't claim that he can beat the roulette in long run.
So two question: virtually, for how much spin do you need to stay positif for saying that, at least, roulette don't have beat you long run.
And pratically, how much spin before you go from test play to real money play ?
Think in do-able sessions.
I tested a method for a million or more spins before I started betting real Euro on it.
Sam
I don't know when will people stop stating numbers of "tested spins" and use number of
placed bets.
Quote from: aegil on December 14, 2009, 11:33:37 AM
And pratically, how much spin before you go from test play to real money play ?
Personally I would require a minimum 10,000 placed flat bets with a +3 SD. I would break the 10k sample into 2 or 3 samples and make sure such advantage is present in all of them.
Marven
The way I'm playing, three bets are placed each spin. I should have said I tested over a million spins. Or did I test a million spins three times? Anyway..........
Nothing matters except volatility anyway. The long and short runs simply don't matter. The only reason I test anything anymore is to determine the volatility. This is what a million spins with three bets each has taught me.
Sam
Sam,
I get the impression you're betting the three EC's simultaneously, each bet/spin. If that is the case then you have 3 million placed bets. So when/if you calculate your edge or SD (actually z-score) you should multiply your number of bets per 3 in the formula.
E.g.
[tex]SD=P/sqrt(B*3)[/tex]
Where:
P: Total profits (flat betting)
B: Number of placed bets
2.5 SD is good, 3 is very good, over 3 is excellent.
As for the edge, here's the simple formula:
[tex](P/(B*3))*100[/tex]
This will give you your edge in %
Notice that I'm multiplying B by 3 since you're presumably betting 3 EC's simultaneously.
-----------------------
Example:
Suppose one has these test results:
10,000 placed flat bets
Betting 3 EC's simultaneously each bet
+562 Profit
Therefore:
SD: 3.2
Edge: +1.8%
The results are statistically significant. Other tests (such as chi square tests) can also be used for confirmation.
The edge is rather small so a proper bankroll must be used. I would suggest proportional betting, with 2% of BR invested on each bet.
@Victor,
Why is the name of the thread automatically quoted under each image or formula posted? ???
The catch is that's he's probably running an up as you lose progression that starts at one penny.
I think you need to specify that it also needs to show that it can profit flat betting.
Marven
Thank you for that, but it is all over my head. I posted a thread under testing which should--well, let's just say the excrement may hit the ventilation device!!
I do know that all that matters to me at this time is volatility or dispersion or concentration--whatever one wishes to call it. For almost five months I've noticed a trend that never wavered. I've studied it extensively for the months of November and thus far into December using two computers running 24/7 except for the time I'm on here and other places.
I watched the movie on the electron behaving differently when being watched vs not being watched. That assumes an electron is some type of sentient being! Shy, perhaps! Can we believe these physicists? Where they from? MIT? If we can believe in a bashful electron, well, I can believe the electrons in a roulette wheel have a memory.
Geez, I can believe anything!!
Sam
QuoteGet the edge first,
And how exactly would You describe what it is that gives You that edge Dr.Hubert .
Lanky.
Why not ask him for his pin code while you are at it Lanky? :lol:
Quantum entanglement has been observed up to the size of an atom, but I don't think I'd make the leap to roulette just yet.
Quote from: Davey-Jones on December 14, 2009, 06:40:00 PM
Why not ask him for his pin code while you are at it Lanky? :lol:
Davey.
Some people could be forgiven for assuming that I knew the answer to the Question Before I asked it.
Lanky.
Lanky,
I'm into ballistics.
Quote from: Marven on December 14, 2009, 04:21:44 PM
@Victor,
Why is the name of the thread automatically quoted under each image or formula posted? ???
Frigging forum bug that comes over and over.
More likely it gets fixed on next version/revision.
This branch has loads of bugs and I can't do every one of them.
We'll live with it for some months until next STABLE version is released.
Lanky, you have got to know he will never answer that, or bother to explain why he is right, and others are wrong. I have always thought of the long run as infinity. I was wrong, the context of the question wasn't about the long run, but how many bet decisions to validate or invalidate a betting method, and the source of those decisions that are tested do not come from the wheel we are currently betting on, but hopfull do come from a real wheel and not an RNG(unless your betting on a RNG wheel). I have alwasy thought that nothing works all the time, and everything works some of the time, the trick is knowing when to do what, making it all realtive to the NOW.
Raider
Guess I should have read the next page before I posted, leason learned
Quote from: Dr.Hubert on December 14, 2009, 09:38:34 PM
Lanky,
I'm into ballistics.
Yes I Know You are.
Thanks for the polite reply.
Lanky.
QuoteRaider
Guess I should have read the next page before I posted, leason learned
Hi Raider.
Most have done that before My Friend.........Its cool Mate.....I will probably do it next...Lmao
Lanky.
Perhaps I should describe two types of "long run" for clarification purposes. A local long run, and the global one.
A local long run is an amount of trials upon which statistical significance can be established with regards to one's method.
The global long run is infinity.
Significant success in the local long run should be able to guarantee success in the global one.
I guess eventually long run short run,the aim is to profit out.At times i feel on forum there is more matheticians than players...
Most of us also have a great deal of casino experience as well. This is why we also understand casino math.
If they had taught the math of gambling in school, or had related math to it in any way shape or form, made the connection between math and money, I would have loved it. Since I started studying gambling. esp craps, and now roulette I have learned about physics, probability, random, quantum, chaos theory, the uncertainty principle, and see how it all fits into one. This was a good question, a scum bag says that what ever system , method your using will lose in the long run and it means 10k spins to him, and i play 2 hours a week, 80 spins that's 2. 4 years, if he means 100k, hey that's 24 years and Will be dead, so as long as it wins before I die, what would i care. I have just started studying this game, but it seems that there are two schools of advantage play, one based in physics, VB, tracking what the ball does, and trying make the best guess as to where it will land , and the the method, or system, make the same bet every time and use some sort of progression/ regression, its based on probability. At the end of the day, physics trumps probability since it is based on energy and probability is based on a "neutral state. The dealer is the seed of his RNG, making it a non neutral state and his sequence of numbers is predictable based on it. All I have to do is crack the code of the seed. I don;t know if any of that makes any sense, and I just wrote it, LOL
Quote from: Raider on December 15, 2009, 01:29:58 PM
This was a good question, a scum bag says that what ever system , method your using will lose in the long run and it means 10k spins to him
Take it easy there, this is not GG. You have a good point (later in your post), no need to stain it with needless name-calling. :)
I did not say that "whatever you're using you're doomed to failure", only shared what "long run" means to me. Should my opinion upset you, please step away from the keyboard for a moment, take a deep breath and realize that none of this matters.
Thank you, and good day.
Quote from: Philc on December 15, 2009, 06:47:07 PM
I thought the scum bag was the one who says he has a winning system (usually so he can sell you it). It seems not, the scum bag is the one that points out the truth. :swoon:
All in favour of Scum Bags say "Ay"
AY!!!! :yahoo:
There are many truths. :paint:
I apologize, that word was not directed at anyone in particular, more at a reoccurring attitude that I have encountered of overly helpful people who use their knowledge to give un asked for advice to humiliate others in public. I will use better word choice in the future. I do not know what GG is though.
I will go wash my mouth out with soap now, thankful that I did not chose one of the first five words that came to mind, and that now, thanks to you Marven I have a context to put the 'Long run" in that makes sense.
I can't figure out why you thought I was directing that at you though, unless its the way I am posting, will check into that
Quote from: Raider on December 15, 2009, 11:11:10 PM
I can't figure out why you thought I was directing that at you though
Well, I was the only one here saying that I would determine long-term effectiveness of a method with 10K bets.
No worries though, no offense taken. :thumbsup:
Oh, O. The more I learn a out roulette, the more i realize who little I know. The term long run meaning enough vaules to confirm statstical conddience is clear. Right now I am looking at establsihed methods rather than tring to create my own.
Thanks for putting in context
By the way... I have done extensive research on the subject and it does in fact seem that Marven is a "Scum Bag". :sarcastic:
Oh come on ;D
I'll put it on Wikipedia! Then it becomes true! :lol:
Davey-Jones
Well I guess that would depend on the parmeters, the number of observations, short run or long run, and what your using for the mean. Also, you should throw out any observations that involve alchole and use a different set of parameters for those, esp if you drinking as well :haha: