I have corresponded with a Professor of Mathematics at a University near me who was kind enough to answer some probability questions I had which related to a system I was working on. Below is part of his email to me....
"Before I get to the problem discussed below, let me note again: since the expected value is negative *each time* one puts a dollar on the table, it does not matter when, where, or according to what method the bets are placed, it does not matter what results have just occurred, and so on – the total expected value is the sum of the individual expected values and will therefore be negative. Period. This is a long-ago proven theorem of applied mathematics."
If this is true, if you agree with this, then there can be no system, can there...
Yes, there is no system that can beat roulette. I'm sure I've said at least ten times throughout the forum.
then why do you spend time here?
Of course it's true. If it wasn't true then why would casinos put roulette tables and invite you to play?
You can't attack roulette with maths and expect to win in the long haul. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a fool.
Regards,
Marven
I come here to educate, and speak to friends mostly. Surely you must know there are much (MUCH) better ways to approach the game other than playing systems.
Quote from: simon on July 09, 2009, 12:23:02 AM
then why do you spend time here?
First for the fun, it's a hobby.
Second, to meet people who are experienced in the proper ways of attacking the game and learn from them.
Third, to maintain the voice of commonsense and help those who are new and less informed.
the only other way I can think of is visual prediction (very difficult to impossible, for me anyway.) I am curious to see if anyone can agree with the professor's statement, but still see a way to get an advantage play over the game.
What is stated above is absolutely true when applying the thought process of "there is no way to consistently predict the next outcome or group of outcomes".
What I mean is, if there really is no way of consistently winning more bets than losing ones, than yes, it's true.
But, if the system isn't based on trying to "trick" math (using money management, applying negative or positive progressions, etc. all in hopes to beat the math) but is rather based on consistently winning more bets placed than losing bets placed then I think a system would work.
What I mean is, if out of 100 spins, the wheel held true to what it should do mathematically speaking, and (roughly) black came out 49 times and red came out 49 times and zero came out twice and you had your one unit bet placed on black for all 100 spins, you'd be down 2 units...right where math says you should be.
But, if your system had a way of consistently predicting either the next outcome or (what I think is more likely) predicting the next group of outcomes, then the system would be a success.
To be honest, I've almost stopped trying...here is what's kept me looking...
In regards to a no-zero roulette wheel, those mathematicians will say "in the long run, you'll break even...perfectly even" just like they say "on a single zero roulette wheel you'll lose exactly 2.70 % in the long run"
But, we all know that casinos still somehow make a profit from those no-zero roulette wheels despite the (mathematical) fact that they shouldn't.
The reason for this (amongst many) is randoms "dispersion" of numbers and how strange it can be...strange because it doesn't always stick to what "math" says it should.
Things happen in streaks...or don't happen...but also in streaks.
So, if the house can consistently win even when there is no mathematical edge based on the fact that "random" produces favorable results for them...then why can't I find a favorable result for me in the dispersion "random" is producing?
Now, if I can find that "favorable" area (whatever it is) if it is favorable enough to place more winning bets than losing bets at a rate of 3.00%, then I could use that same system on a single zero roulette wheel and enjoy a .30% edge over the house...
The so called maths relating to roulette is incorrect. The results which I am producing using the Signum system, EC, R & B, show that it
is possible to make consistent long term profits. This system has been thoroughly tested over a number of years and not just on paper
but in a number of casino's.
You should not be fooled into believing that mathematicians have all the answers, they don't, as far as roulette systems are concerned.
Do you think for one moment I would have spent years developing systems, if there was the slightest chance that they would eventually
fail.
In order for the Signum system to fail there would have to be a great number of -3 to -4 losses, as the there is incorporated into the system
a minimum loss strategy. I have never experienced such a number of losses on the scale necessary to lose long term. There is also the
interesting aspect of the Signum system, which is not present in any other type of system is the use of symbols. If the symbols are showing
a consistent failure, then I would use that knowledge, so as a positive expectation would be negative and a negative expectation would now
be positive, thus turning losses into wins!
I know for certain the maths relating to roulette is a nonsense.
Mr Chips
I personally believe that although the math is against you, there are much bigger reasons why a player loses. Math does play it's part to an extent but I think a player's own ego combined with the psychological ploys that the casinos introduce have a much more devistating effect to one's bankroll. Considering a game that only has 2.5-5% house edge, you see the table take in significantly more than what they should. In my opinon, the majority of players should spend less time trying to overcome the mathematics of the game and more time trying to overcome the "nature" of the game.
luck is the only thing .i take a couple of hundred dollars and play single numbers somedays i win and some days i lose. but i have a good time. you can not make a living playing. do not play if you can not afford to lose.
Where can one look at the Signum system?
Quote from: Jakkalsdraai on July 09, 2009, 05:29:22 AM
Where can one look at the Signum system?
By reading Mr Chips' mind, or convincing him to let other people test it (preferably code it) other than himself. :D
Excuse the sarcasm Mr Chips, but your continues praise of this Signum system had us righteously skeptical.
QuoteI have corresponded with a Professor of Mathematics at a University near me who was kind enough to answer some probability questions I had which related to a system I was working on. Below is part of his email to me....
"Before I get to the problem discussed below, let me note again: since the expected value is negative *each time* one puts a dollar on the table, it does not matter when, where, or according to what method the bets are placed, it does not matter what results have just occurred, and so on – the total expected value is the sum of the individual expected values and will therefore be negative. Period. This is a long-ago proven theorem of applied mathematics."
If this is true, if you agree with this, then there can be no system, can there...
Simon that is the truth no roulette system will make you buy a new car or house.
Simon it is not hard to gain an real edge with andvantage play.
You can learn how to gain 5 to 10% if you use some basic advance play but you still need a large BR because even if you have an edge there will be fluctation.
Come to the chat when I am around I will help you out and give you the direction to go with some things or you can send me a PM.
Cheers
Simon,
If you take to heart the professor's words then you might be better off attacking the gaming device, and not the game (as per Herb's advice). The assumption underlying the "long-ago proven theorem of applied mathematics" is that outcomes are random (whatever that means) and independent. The theorem does not incorporate or interpret the outcomes of the wheel as a time series, but only as sets of equally likely outcomes, so when you add them all up and take into account the house edge of course the result is negative. In other words, the maths does not take any account the order of the outcomes, because they are assumed to be independent of each other and any perceived patterns are deemed meaningless.
The apparent paradox is that the outcomes are predictable in the sense that we can calculate their occurrence by using probability (the binomial distribution, standard deviations, etc) but the maths dogmatists are always quick to point out that these are useless because they can not tell you when any outcome or series of outcomes will occur, only that they will occur at some point. The interpretation of a stream of outcomes as a time series (which the dogmatists insist is nothing more than the gambler's fallacy), is the key - in my opinion. ;D
This is an example of what I mentioned in my post earlier. I've made a system (fully mechanical...but variable at the same time...so it's more of a programmed "method" than a "system"...oh, just so you guys know, any "method" or "system" or "whatever" that bases it's betting on anything other than guessing can be programmed)
Anyway, back to my point...what I've programmed plays on a no-zero wheel only. It is flat betting, and has done so for over 15,000 spins for a profit of just over 200 units. You'll see flucuations, but the obvious direction of the BR is up. I'm going to continue to let it run and see if the trend stays that way.
The thing is, it wouldn't work on a single zero wheel because the win to loss ratio is only at 1.30%. That means on a single zero wheel, I'd (mathematically speaking) be at -1.40%.
Anyway, it's things like what I'm showing you below that keep me going....(oh, and for anybody that wants this RXtreme coding PM me and you can have it...I'm trying to make it better and it would be nice to have some help. But, I know most will think it a waste of time as only a 200 unit profit flat betting over 15,000 spins could be luck....)
[attachimg=#]
Quote from: Lucky StrikeSimon that is the truth no roulette system will make you buy a new car or house.
LS,
If you really believe this then why do you continue to post systems such as the "cut point methodology"? why do you still concern yourself with systems if "advantage play" is the one true way? :-\
QuoteLS,
If you really believe this then why do you continue to post systems such as the "cut point methodology"? why do you still concern yourself with systems if "advantage play" is the one true way?
Because I enjoy it and I am having fun and thats all.
I will not let any one stop me from create roulette systems it is an hobby for me and I do not search for a HG.
I hope you don't hate me for that like Marven does :)
Cheers
@Tangram: I like what you said. :thumbsup:
Quote from: Lucky Strike on July 09, 2009, 06:27:18 AM
Because I enjoy it and I am having fun and thats all.
I will not let any one stop me from create roulette systems it is an hobby for me and I do not search for a HG.
I hope you don't hate me for that like Marven does :)
Mate, I'm not hating you for anything. :D
We just had a clashing of opinions.
You have more experience than me and I respect you.
Same hobby (roulette), same enemy (casinos).
Cheers,
Marven
QuoteWhere can one look at the Signum system
I am explaining the system to someone at the present time and hopefully he will get a handle on it soon. It is very complex and
I am hoping in time there will be a simpler way to explain the system. I have spent a great deal of time explaining 4Selecta both
here and emails and most probably I would get treble the amount of enquires about Signum.
QuoteBy reading Mr Chips' mind, or convincing him to let other people test it (preferably code it) other than himself.
Excuse the sarcasm Mr Chips, but your continues praise of this Signum system had us righteously skeptical
I indulge in a bit of sarcasm myself so you are excused ;)
I have no intention of keeping Signum a dark secret, my original intention to bring it to light was to try and get a proof
re the 'Advanced Roulette debate' in the Chips section.
The Signum system cannot be coded, as it requires a high degree of human intervention to increase profits and minimise
losses and on a certain number of occasions break even.
As I am producing on going results you must also be sceptical of them. You think perhaps I am going to all the trouble of
making them up for some ego gratification. They are taken from Spielbank spins and eventually when a number of people
will fully understand the system and will be able to check my results, I will easily be found out!
I have produced endless verifiable results for 4Selecta and I am not in the business and wouldn't waste my time in making up
any results. I always produce verifiable results to avoid any suggestion that they are in any way fiction.
QuoteSimon that is the truth no roulette system will make you buy a new car or house
That is the truth as you perceive it, not necessarily the absolute truth for everyone.
Mr Chips
Quote from: Lucky StrikeI hope you don't hate me for that like Marven does
Not at all, in fact I like your CPM system, I use a similar bet selection myself. :)
But you never use systems in real play right?
From your CPM post on VIP:
QuoteThe law for correction for underrepresented figures and events happens if the value for the imbalance rise above an statistical ecart of 2,5.
Observation and masse égale - takes time - but the reward is good.
So the reward is good, but not good enough to buy a car or house. What about a TV or a bicycle? ;D
It's one thing to post systems for fun but you are making claims here which imply that the system is a long-term winner. That's ok, maybe it has been for you and it's up to others to find out whether it is for them.
Please understand that I'm not attacking or criticizing you, I just think you're sitting on the fence with regard to systems vs advantage play methods. Maybe you believe that some systems do work, in which case you can't at the same time believe the maths that says they don't. >:D
Perhaps you just
hope they work, which is pretty much what everyone who uses a system thinks. ::)
You are ok in my book Tangram.
But Mr Chips is a dangerous member to this forum -lol- I qoute:
QuoteThat is the truth as you perceive it, not necessarily the absolute truth for everyone.
About
Simon that is the truth no roulette system will make you buy a new car or houseWell I only know Kaisan who else has made it?
I know two more but I want mention there names!
None of them use a roulette systems.
Cheers
I have said 100 times that there is no system that can beat roulette too....
Hi all nice debate.
200 players,
100 players from the casino who have little experience as joined the casino in the last thew weeks and never visited a forum or read a page of a book
+
100 players from this forum the most experienced who believe they can make consistant profit over time playing and learning what roulette can produce.
all players have a full day 12 hours to visist the casino take breaks, bet just once or every single spin whatever they like but all players have a $500 bankroll each and after the 12 hours can walk alway with any + profit they made (if any)
Now from my point of view id say that 80% of the amature players with little experience would have lost there bankroll within the first 3 hours.(they ''give up'')
and 80% of the experienced players would of made it to the end with a nice profit.(and probably knew roughlt how much profit they would make).
HOWEVER THE PROFIT GAINED BY ALL THE PLAYERS COMBINED WILL MOST LIKELY BE FAR LESS THEN THE AMOUNT THE LOSING PLAYERS LOST ($500 EACH)
thats my view anyway, and I can see why people presume no system can win longterm with the house adge. but to be honest im here on the forum to find a winning bet where you yourself can produce more winners than losers in the log run and still have FUN :drinks:
mattjono
as nobody knows what the next spin is going to be. all players have chance to pick it. i do not believe anybody makes a profit out of roulette. in the long run everybody loses. you will have winning days mebe weeks. but in the long run you will lose. as sure as the sun will rise to morrow
"This is an example of what I mentioned in my post earlier. I've made a system (fully mechanical...but variable at the same time...so it's more of a programmed "method" than a "system"...oh, just so you guys know, any "method" or "system" or "whatever" that bases it's betting on anything other than guessing can be programmed)"
What about a method where you are jumping from one table to another? I am sometimes playing three or four tables.
It makes no difference if you are playing one table or ten tables. Each outcome is equally as likely as every other outcome.
"It makes no difference if you are playing one table or ten tables. Each outcome is equally as likely as every other outcome."
Big deal.
Doesn't stop me.
Surely you people that produce nothing but negative posts, a 100 quoted above should find themselves some other activity.
What is the point of belonging to a forum where the main discussion is about roulette systems, if you don't participate in a
positive way. Few of you ever bother to test any systems or make any contribution with some ideas.
Even when positive results are shown you dismiss them, without even bothering to examine them and make trite comments
instead.
As has been pointed out before, over 3000 people have joined this forum and how many have actually posted anything?
The majority who joined must have an interest in roulette and could well have made a positive contribution here, but won't
for fear of adverse comments, by a handful of negative posters, who have nothing better to do than post repetitive negative
comments.
What do you or anyone else get out of 100 repetitive negative posts, absolutely nothing.
Mr Chips
Quote from: hoper35 on July 10, 2009, 12:52:20 AM
"It makes no difference if you are playing one table or ten tables. Each outcome is equally as likely as every other outcome."
Big deal.
Doesn't stop me.
I shouldn't think it would stop you. Whatever works for you - stick to it.
Quote from: Mr Chips link=topic=10877. msg70489#msg70489 date=1247207656
Surely you people that produce nothing but negative posts, a 100 quoted above should find themselves some other activity.
What is the point of belonging to a forum where the main discussion is about roulette systems, if you don't participate in a
positive way. Few of you ever bother to test any systems or make any contribution with some ideas.
Even when positive results are shown you dismiss them, without even bothering to examine them and make trite comments
instead.
As has been pointed out before, over 3000 people have joined this forum and how many have actually posted anything?
The majority who joined must have an interest in roulette and could well have made a positive contribution here, but won't
for fear of adverse comments, by a handful of negative posters, who have nothing better to do than post repetitive negative
comments.
What do you or anyone else get out of 100 repetitive negative posts, absolutely nothing.
Mr Chips
Someone posted something about LS books on getting the advantage. Now, that is GOOD posting.
I also read that someone slammed a math system. Although in a negative way, that is also GOOD posting.
Giving positive feedback on mathbased systems can never be GOOD posting. It is contraproductive and delusional.
If you're ready to accept Advantage Play is just a question of
- how stubborn you are.
- how open minded you are.
- how proud you are.
- how much you are willing to learn.
Ok, I'm done. Flame on.
Ps. Agree that systems can be fun if playing when drunk. That's about it. It adds to the headache in the morning after.
Drunk systems playing is fun. :)
Quote from: Lucky Strike on July 09, 2009, 05:41:00 AM
Simon that is the truth no roulette system will make you buy a new car or house.
Simon it is not hard to gain an real edge with andvantage play.
You can learn how to gain 5 to 10% if you use some basic advance play but you still need a large BR because even if you have an edge there will be fluctation.
Come to the chat when I am around I will help you out and give you the direction to go with some things or you can send me a PM.
Cheers
Hello Patrick,
I have no doubts that advantage play like VB is one of the workable ways but no you need a wheel,no everyone can afford that,you simply cannot learn VB without a wheel.Roulette with a 2.7% house edge is simply too hard to beat unless you can find a ridiculously biased wheels,they exists but they are rare.I reckon advantage play in baccarat and blackjack is easier to pick up and master simply because there are only a certain number of cards in a shoe with a proper professional method,it is far easier to gain an advantage,no forgetting house edge for these 2 babies is peanuts compare to roulette.I am sure thre are more people making a living out of baccarat/blackjack compare to roulette
Well I have a roulette method that is sure to make money 100% its call bonus abuse,I didn't do it as it too much of a trouble.Opening accounts with other people's ID,it works.You can make a hundred Euros in a day but that is not my idea of playing roulette.LOL
Well there is a holy grail coming to me,to that kind soul thank you very much.the faster the better,I am broke ha ha ha
Looks like you've gone with the title. . .
:good:
Why should it be more difficult? Only 37/38 numbers, but 52 cards. . . :smile:
Quote from: simon on July 09, 2009, 12:16:48 AM
I have corresponded with a Professor of Mathematics at a University near me who was kind enough to answer some probability questions I had which related to a system I was working on. Below is part of his email to me....
"Before I get to the problem discussed below, let me note again: since the expected value is negative *each time* one puts a dollar on the table, it does not matter when, where, or according to what method the bets are placed, it does not matter what results have just occurred, and so on – the total expected value is the sum of the individual expected values and will therefore be negative. Period. This is a long-ago proven theorem of applied mathematics."
If this is true, if you agree with this, then there can be no system, can there...
This Prof. is wrong.
The simple Martingale worked if you were allowed to place unlimited bets. You would win every single attack.
The problem is that all casinos have limited the bet-amount. they say to save the player from losses. but it is only limited to save the casino from losses.
br
winkel
hmmm, that could be true but at the casino I play at it is not the house limits that would stop me or most people from progressing, as I would be way over my head and no where near the house limits to have the nerve or money to place another bet to make such a tiny profit.
Quote from: simon on July 11, 2009, 12:03:56 PM
hmmm, that could be true but at the casino I play at it is not the house limits that would stop me or most people from progressing, as I would be way over my head and no where near the house limits to have the nerve or money to place another bet to make such a tiny profit.
simple mathematical fact: Don´t bet if you don´t have enough money
It is a fact of sense not of math that you can´t win millions starting with some hundreds
hmm, but what is the point spending millions to win hundreds?
Quote from: simon on July 11, 2009, 03:58:47 PM
hmm, but what is the point spending millions to win hundreds?
to win
if you can not win with hundreds you will not win with millions. if i play at the one dollar roulette and lose how would i win with millions. if you have a good system your bankroll does not matter.