Ok, so the last ten days or so I have played and I was suscesfull, for the first time! :clapping:
I feel myself getting all hyped up and getting ahead of myself, so i think i need a reality check... or something.
I played "Victor's 5 lines method" and used "Mattjono's smart way" to recover from a loss.
All of this was FLAT betting. I did about 20 sessions and only once did I not hit my target of 5 units. I took the one loss of -4 units,
because I was tired of playing (so 96 units won in 20 sessions).
I just keep wondering, is it gonna last? What can I expect ? I know there will be sessions from hell, but can it be overcome if use proper money management?
What I was using now was:
5% Goal
1% Unit size
25% Stop loss
(percent of BR)
Maybe some of you can tell me if there is a big disappointment waiting ahead of me, or if I am finally on the right track? I hope the last :)
Any help is much appreciated.
Vix
Maybe some of you can tell me if there is a big disappointment waiting ahead of me>>>
Do the math, it never lies. Never...
A cryptic response!
"Do the math" wouldn't mean much to some of the forum, especially newcomers to roulette.
For them, could you elucidate, please?
If you're ever going to beat any casino gambling game, you must know the math that rules it inside and out. All pro BJ players know the math of card counting in detail, every pro poker player knows the math of whats going on in the game for every hand that comes up. You must know how the math in roulette works if you're ever going to get anywhere. So yeah, do the math and it will tell you if your system has a chance. Don't know how? Learn...
Quote from: Spike on July 18, 2009, 09:41:34 PM
If you're ever going to beat any casino gambling game, you must know the math that rules it inside and out. All pro BJ players know the math of card counting in detail, every pro poker player knows the math of whats going on in the game for every hand that comes up. You must know how the math in roulette works if you're ever going to get anywhere. So yeah, do the math and it will tell you if your system has a chance. Don't know how? Learn...
Don't think anyone has said so much that has helped so little in so many words...
Engineer by any chance?
As for flatbetting on streets. Have you reduced the house edge and turned it in your favour? If you have, grats, you'll win. If you haven't, sorry, you'll lose. And the answer is no, you haven't.
(Pretty simple to know if you have or haven't in this case, though.)
Don't think anyone has said so much that has helped so little in so many words...>>
Typical attitude. I would come to your house and show you how to do it, but you should have learned the math by 6th grade. Damn public schools..
what they are saying is that roulette can not be beaten. if you keep playing you will lose. this applies to all players. i speak from experience.
Quote from: Spike on July 19, 2009, 12:29:00 AM
Typical attitude. I would come to your house and show you how to do it, but you should have learned the math by 6th grade. Damn public schools..
You gapped a lot and your advice was: Learn.
That wasn't very helpful to the one who started this topic...
The math for calculating this isn't tricky, though.
Jeez...
Quote from: Gotrek on July 19, 2009, 05:59:53 AM
You gapped a lot and your advice was: Learn.
That wasn't very helpful to the one who started this topic...
The math for calculating this isn't tricky, though.
Jeez...
Do the math... 0x0=0... spike is never helpful, period.
Vix I think it sounds good.
Use more of Victors and Lankys methods.
If you want to know if you are on to some-thing good.
Then place 1000 bets and gain at least 100 flat betting.
Cheers
Hi vix,
Im glad to hear you recoverd from the losses with 'the smart way' :yes:
'''What I was using now was:
5% Goal
1% Unit size
25% Stop loss
(percent of BR)'''
so if you stick to these rules above you could afford to lose 1 in 6 sessions and still be in profit (but we dont want that we want 19 out of 20 sessions won)
Regards,
MATTJONO
Quote from: Spike on July 18, 2009, 07:29:43 PM
Maybe some of you can tell me if there is a big disappointment waiting ahead of me>>>
Do the math, it never lies. Never...
Spike, you're giving me the impression that you are consistantly winning at roulette. Do you use math to win? I have read many times on this forum that it is impossible to win this game with math, do you disagree? Because of what I've read I haven't focussed on the math part...
Quote from: Gotrek on July 18, 2009, 09:47:38 PM
As for flatbetting on streets. Have you reduced the house edge and turned it in your favour? If you have, grats, you'll win. If you haven't, sorry, you'll lose. And the answer is no, you haven't.
(Pretty simple to know if you have or haven't in this case, though.)
Gotrek, how do you know that I haven't? And why is it simple?
Quote from: pins on July 19, 2009, 04:07:00 AM
what they are saying is that roulette can not be beaten. if you keep playing you will lose. this applies to all players. I speak from experience.
Pins, why do you think your experience resembles everyones elses?
@ "I have cookies" ... Thanx, good to hear from you :)
Quote from: MATTJONO on July 19, 2009, 08:53:56 AM
so if you stick to these rules above you could afford to lose 1 in 6 sessions and still be in profit (but we dont want that we want 19 out of 20 sessions won)
Mattjono, meaning what? That it's good?
Thanx for your time guys :good:
Vix
yes vix, ''a good thing'' i would suggest carrying on the way you was playing if you made 96 units in 20 sessions with only 1 losing session. but if you do lose 4 sessions in a row next then you would be in a loss to your bankroll.
im no expert on all this i have to admit but i presume its down to how well you system :pleasantry: stratagie performs.
cheers,
mattjono
Quote from: MATTJONO on July 19, 2009, 10:18:44 AM
yes vix, ''a good thing'' I would suggest carrying on the way you was playing if you made 96 units in 20 sessions with only 1 losing session. but if you do lose 4 sessions in a row next then you would be in a loss to your bankroll.
im no expert on all this I have to admit but I presume its down to how well you system :pleasantry: stratagie performs.
cheers,
mattjono
I might have done the math wrong but the way I calculated it after 4 losing sessions (of 25 units) i would still be in profit with 45 units.
This was due to the 1% unit, i think :scratch_ones_head:
I'll carry on and see what happens.
Vix
Vix I told you that if you stay with what Victor and Lanky does you will be ok.
Just want to mention that if you have 1K = 1000 Eur as bankroll you should play minimum like 1 Eur.
In my contry 10 Eur is minimum for even money bets but if you play high/low using line bets you can play with 2 Eur - that is the minimum for straigt up - then 3 chips on the lines become 6 Eur and high/low is the same as O/E or R/B.
Cheers
Do you use math to win?>>>
Does the casino use math to get money from a bank to build a new casino? Thats all they have is the math, it never lies. If you think you have a winning system, the math will tell you if it is or it isn't, just like it tells the bank.
This isn't brain surgeon material, people. The math involved is stuff you learned in high school. People who say the math is unimportant are either ignorant, in denial, or system sellers. Everybody who has a winning system that beats a casino game can show you the math that makes it a winner.
Quote from: Spike on July 19, 2009, 04:57:44 PM
Everybody who has a winning system that beats a casino game can show you the math that makes it a winner.
What spike is saying is that nobody has ever had a winning system and nobody ever will have a winning system as you can't change math and no matter how you bet the math is always in favor of the casino.
Quote from: rjeaton1 on July 19, 2009, 05:30:28 PM
What spike is saying is that nobody has ever had a winning system and nobody ever will have a winning system as you can't change math and no matter how you bet the math is always in favor of the casino.
Is that what you are saying spike?
I'd prefer yes or no anwers, that would make things clearer... but maybe that is not what you are trying to do.
Lets talk even money bets and how to apply math and probability with the law of series.
Any takers?
Just curios how many knows and how many who pretend they know...
Cheers
This just seems to keep going around in circles. It is a fact that in the game of roulette a 2. 7% edge in favour of the casino is constant. On the 00 wheels it is 5. 4%. So what is really to debate. A minority of players win despite this fact and the majority lose because of it. I don't see how it is productive to harp on about something that is never going to change.
Quote from: vix on July 19, 2009, 05:39:18 PM
Is that what you are saying spike?
I'd prefer yes or no anwers, that would make things clearer... but maybe that is not what you are trying to do.
Spike has mentioned before many times that any casino can walk into a bank and show them the math and they'll get the loan.
As far as single-zero roulette goes, this is the math they show them (and I'll just use Red/Black as an example)
18 Reds
18 Blacks
1 Zero
Percentage chance of ANY red bet winning is calculated as follows:
Number of outcomes that will produce a win divided by ALL possible outcomes multiplied by 100
18/37 = .4864864864864 (repeating) X 100 = 48.648648648 (repeating)
Percentage chance of ANY black bet winning is calculated the same as above
So, using math, there is NO POSSIBLE WAY to prove you have a winning system. It's literally impossible....can't be done.
I'm not saying there isn't a winning system. I'm just saying that you can't prove it using math.
Spike has mentioned before many times that any casino can walk into a bank and show them the math>>
Steve Wynn has said in articles that if you tell him how many customers will come into his casino in a month, he can tell you how much profit he'll make almost to the dollar. Its the math, its the science. Its all set in place, he says his only job is to bring as many people thru the doors as possibe, the rest is a given..
Why do you think its any different for you? A pro BJ player can tell you what his projected profit will be for a month if he plays X amount of hours a day. Its the math, it never lies.
I forgot to mention that the other part of why you can't prove it using math is because it is assumed that the wheel is truly random.
If it is a truly random wheel, no individual bet is ever considered to be more advantageous (mathematically speaking) than any other.
So, those percentages NEVER change regardless of how long you wait, what you're waiting for, certain events to happen, etc.
Quote from: Spike on July 19, 2009, 06:50:12 PM
Spike has mentioned before many times that any casino can walk into a bank and show them the math>>
Steve Wynn has said in articles that if you tell him how many customers will come into his casino in a month, he can tell you how much profit he'll make almost to the dollar. Its the math, its the science. Its all set in place, he says his only job is to bring as many people thru the doors as possibe, the rest is a given..
Why do you think its any different for you? A pro BJ player can tell you what his projected profit will be for a month if he plays X amount of hours a day. Its the math, it never lies.
So, would you please answer Vix with a yes or no answer already? That's really all she is asking of you.
I'm not saying there isn't a winning system. I'm just saying that you can't prove it using math.
Excactly right RJ Eaton. So I ask myself why do people get so worked up about it. If it has been like that for the last 150 years and will no doubt continue as such in the future, why argue about it asking for mathematical proof when it would be impossible to do so.
That will get you no where if you are going to apply math and probability and the law of series.
There is two ways to caculate the law of series.
There is an common distribution where there is more of singles and less of sereis of two and so on.
This is just values and it is an different story how to use the values.
1)))
Singles has the value of 1
Series of two has the value of 0
Series of three has the value of 1
Series of four has the value of 2
Series of five has the value of 3
Keep going like that...
2)))
Singels has the value of 1 and series no matter size has the value of 1
Here is an exampel where we use alternativ 2)))
RRBBRRBBRRBB R BBRRBBRRBBRRBB R BB = SD 3.0
How to calculate and get the value.
The Statistical Ecart or SD
Above there is 14 series and 2 singles.
Now the first thing is to get the difference between this events, the absolute ecart:
14 - 2 = 12
Now we whant to get the statistical ecart so we add
14 + 2 = 16
Now we take the sqr of 16 = 4
And finally we divide the absolute ecart whit the sqr
12 sqr 4 = 3,00
Here is one exampel using alternativ 1)))
RBRB RR BRB RRR BRB RR BBB RBRBR = SD 3.0
Quote from: Lucky Strike on July 19, 2009, 07:01:54 PM
That will get you no where if you are going to apply math and probability and the law of series.
There is two ways to caculate the law of series.
There is an common distribution where there is more of singles and less of sereis of two and so on.
This is just values and it is an different story how to use the values.
1)))
Singles has the value of 1
Series of two has the value of 0
Series of three has the value of 1
Series of four has the value of 2
Series of five has the value of 3
Keep going like that...
2)))
Singels has the value of 1 and series no matter size has the value of 1
Here is an exampel where we use alternativ 2)))
RRBBRRBBRRBB R BBRRBBRRBBRRBB R BB = SD 3.0
How to calculate and get the value.
The Statistical Ecart or SD
Above there is 14 series and 2 singles.
Now the first thing is to get the difference between this events, the absolute ecart:
14 - 2 = 12
Now we whant to get the statistical ecart so we add
14 + 2 = 16
Now we take the sqr of 16 = 4
And finally we divide the absolute ecart whit the sqr
12 sqr 4 = 3,00
Here is one exampel using alternativ 1)))
RBRB RR BRB RRR BRB RR BBB RBRBR = SD 3.0
And that might very well be a winning system. However, again, the math never considers any one bet any more advantageous than another. The wheel has no memory and deviations from the norm might very well continue to deviate for much longer than you might think...or they might not...it's random (again, mathematically speaking)
So, using math, the system you just described will still be considered a loser...even if in practice it is actually a winner.
QuoteAnd that might very well be a winning system. However, again, the math never considers any one bet any more advantageous than another. The wheel has no memory and deviations from the norm might very well continue to deviate for much longer than you might think...or they might not...it's random (again, mathematically speaking)
So, using math, the system you just described will still be considered a loser...even if in practice it is actually a winner.
Above is not a system its how you messure the random flow and the law of series.
Does any one know how to apply the law of series and the math and probability?
Cheers
Vix, I know you haven't reduced the house edge if you bet on streets.
Even if you cover 8 streets of 12 streets and win, you'll lose in the long run. Sure, you'll win 8 out of 12 times, but the 2 times you lose, you'll lose more than you've won.
Look at the numbers. They are scattered across the wheel. 1, 2 and 3 are not even close. Where is the logic that they should hit more often and you've overcome the house edge?
Instead of this wild goose chase for the Holy Grail and winning systems with math, focus on predicting where the ball will land. There are several ways to do this.
You only have to increase you're accuracy very little (2,7% or 5,4%). That way you overcome the house edge, and that way you win in the long run.
I hope that cleared it up. Yes, VB and DS and so on, is more difficult than betting on streets, but remember that the table is only an illusion.
:thumbsup:
Quote from: Lucky Strike on July 19, 2009, 07:10:09 PM
Above is not a system its how you messure the random flow and the law of series.
Does any one know how to apply the law of series and the math and probability?
Cheers
I know it isn't a system...but I'm assuming that you use it in some way to select your bet. When you finally place that bet based on what you posted, the math won't ever consider that bet of having a chance of winning any higher or lower than 48.648%.
Now, I'm not saying that it isn't a good way to select your bet. I'm just saying that when speaking mathematically, it's a waste of time to ever wait for anything to happen before placing a bet.
Where was the 48.648% and the house edge when I won 800 000 trails?
Any one in this forum can develop a strategy that pass a life time and play and have some fun...
The only thing that will not happen is that you wont get rich because you need a slow fibo to do so and it can fail the very first day or after a life time...
Cheers
Quote from: Spike on July 19, 2009, 04:57:44 PM
Everybody who has a winning system that beats a casino game can show you the math that makes it a winner.
The only reason I even got involved in this thread posting the stuff that I have isn't because I don't believe you can consistently win. The only reason I started posting is because of the comment made by Spike that I quoted above.
It's frustrating when you see comments like that, because in that sentence he is implying that there is a winning system. Then, he says that those that have a winning system can show you the math that proves it is a winning system. However, the math will ALWAYS say ANY system or method of bet selection is a loser.
So, my postings were only here to negate what Spike said. Not to negate any hope of a winning system (or winning bet selection) and not to negate the fact that there are those that are winning with systems (or winning with certain bet selection methods).
Even a professional Blackjack player who can say that his method is mathematically sound can still lose his entire bankroll. It has happened to many players. So showing something to be a winner and actually doing it are two seperate things. The same goes for saying that a game with negative expectation can have no long term winners. The reality is different because there have been winners and always will be as long as the game is played.
the reason i keep playing is i am trying to win a large amount in one sitting. i know i will have winning days. so i bet big hoping today is the day
Well I don't claim to have a winning system but I can say that I enjoy the game and spend more money on roulette material then I spend in an casino.
My last buy was 800 Eur for some books and software and some other stuff.
Still trying to find Nylon balls to my wheel...
Cheers
Even a professional Blackjack player who can say that his method is mathematically sound can still lose his entire bankroll.>>>
Absolutely not true. A pro with a proper BR and betting the amounts proscribed by the math for the amount of the BR, will NEVER lose the entire BR. He will have ups and downs like a roller coaster ride, but the entire BR is never in danger. Only a fool with a small BR and bets too big for it, will lose the BR.
I'm not saying there isn't a winning system. I'm just saying that you can't prove it using math.>>>>Excactly right>>
Exactly WRONG! Of course if you have a winning system you can prove it with math. Do you think winning systems are freaks of nature and outside the boundries of simple math?
Go back to BJ. You can prove how you win, how much you'll win, how long it will take, on and on. ALL winning systems can be proven with math, thats why they are winning systems! You can also prove a system a loser with math.
I can't believe I'm having this conversation..
because in that sentence he is implying that there is a winning system.>>>
Before card counting, BJ couldn't be beaten. What makes you think roulette is immune just because you haven't done it?
Hi, interesting discussion.
In fact, i´m pretty sure, having studied a lot of maths for many years, that there may be a system that wins at roullette and still you can´t use today´s mathmatics or physics to prove it.
I´ll explain. If roulette was a true random number generator, or even a pseudo random number generator, as are rng electronic (or online) roulettes you could use math to prove that you had a winning system. In fact Math has been use to prove beyond all doubt that those roulettes cant be beaten. There is no way to gain an edge against a rng roulette..period.
Now, physical roulette is another story...and that´s because of something called chaos. The matmathics of Chaos as been develop only in the last 2 decades or so. Among other things it has been discovered that chaothic systems tend to form patterns known as attractors. (If we think a little we can consider that the appearing of live in the universe was a prove of an attractor that formed some order out of chaos).
If a physical roulette is a chaotic system complex enough to form attractors in the form of some order in its results is something modern maths and physics would have a very hard time to discover or prove.
So, what i´m saying is that there is hope for a Holy Grail for roulette, even if today´s mathmatics and physics can´t prove...or deny it.
Mane
Quote from: Spike on July 19, 2009, 09:11:06 PM
because in that sentence he is implying that there is a winning system.>>>
Before card counting, BJ couldn't be beaten. What makes you think roulette is immune just because you haven't done it?
I never said there wasn't a winning roulette system...I just said that if there is a winning roulette system there is no way it could be proven with math as you said in the following quote
QuoteEverybody who has a winning system that beats a casino game can show you the math that makes it a winner.
Quote from: Spike on July 19, 2009, 09:06:12 PM
Go back to BJ. You can prove how you win, how much you'll win, how long it will take, on and on. ALL winning systems can be proven with math, thats why they are winning systems! You can also prove a system a loser with math.
I don't know why you're talking about a winning blackjack system on a roulette forum, but if you must, I'll explain why math CAN say you'll win with blackjack.
It's because blackjacks events are dependent...meaning the odds of what cards will come out in the future changes with each and every card that is turned over. This, provided you're skilled at card counting, can be used to your advantage in calculating the optimum time to place a bet, because the calcuations to figure out what you're ROI (return on investment) will be is constantly changing because the odds of what cards will come out are constantly changing.
Roulette will never have this advantage as the odds NEVER CHANGE. There is and always will be a 48.648% chance for a red or black on each and every spin. Therefore, math will NEVER allow for a roulette system to be proven effective (mathematically speaking).
Therefore, math will NEVER allow for a roulette system to be proven effective>>
You have to beat the edge, just like card counting beats it in BJ. With your negative atttude I wouldn't worry about ever finding out how to do it, though..
Quote from: Spike on July 19, 2009, 09:53:28 PM
Therefore, math will NEVER allow for a roulette system to be proven effective>>
You have to beat the edge, just like card counting beats it in BJ. With your negative atttude I wouldn't worry about ever finding out how to do it, though..
And here we are back to where we started. I never said that a winning roulette system didn't exist. I said that if it did, it wouldn't be able to be proven using math as you said in the following quote:
QuoteEverybody who has a winning system that beats a casino game can show you the math that makes it a winner.
you can show me any system. and i will show you a run of numbers that will beat it.
I said that if it did, it wouldn't be able to be proven using math>>>
You're not sure there is a winning system, yet you're sure it couldn't be proven with math if there was one.
Thats so incedibly wacky I don't even want to know any details.
Quoteyou can show me any system and I will show you a run of numbers that will beat it
What does one run of numbers prove? Produce 10 and say where they came from and you will be proved wrong.
Mr Chips
Maths is about certainty, and 2+2 = 4 for eternity whatever universe you're in. But obviously we're not dealing with certainty or "pure" maths in the context of gambling. Probability theory is
applied maths, and there are assumptions and simplifications in the interpretation of gambling situations which makes the theory easier to use (just as there is in any mathematical model of the real world). If it were just about the maths, then casinos would make 2.7% of all bets on roulette tables, but they don't.
Quote from: SpikeOf course if you have a winning system you can prove it with math. Do you think winning systems are freaks of nature and outside the boundries of simple math?
Not if you use the assumptions that are in the "standard" model.
All possible bets will result in a negative expectation. It doesn't matter how many spins you skip, how many "rare" patterns you use, etc. Trying to prove that a winning system exists really
is like trying to prove that 2+2 is not 4. ::)
It's very easy to prove this with a computer simulation. Suppose you are playing the ECs and base your next bet or series of bets on what has happened in the last 10 spins. There are 2
10 = 1024 possible permutations (patterns) that are possible. You have a theory that when you see some pattern or another and bet a certain way that this gives you an advantage (based on your results so far). If you cycle through each of the possible last 10 spin outcomes you will find that there is no such advantage in the long run, because each pattern has exactly the same chance of showing up. If you deny this and insist that there are favourable opportunities (depending on past results), then why does the computer simulation not reveal them?
Well i have to agree with you again Tangram...
Cheers
Tangram,
The Signum system often shows repetitive patterns, which will determine whether to place a bet on Red or Black.
In the example I gave in the chips section 'Advanced Roulette- a constructive debate', it's not necessary to understand the system
to see a repetitive pattern OOO, which will lead to an excellent win. This occurrence happens quite often and when I see the first OOO,
I have a high expectation of this continuing during a session.
Mr Chips
Quote from: Mr Chips on July 20, 2009, 10:06:00 AM
Tangram,
The Signum system often shows repetitive patterns, which will determine whether to place a bet on Red or Black.
In the example I gave in the chips section 'Advanced Roulette- a constructive debate', it's not necessary to understand the system
to see a repetitive pattern OOO, which will lead to an excellent win. This occurrence happens quite often and when I see the first OOO,
I have a high expectation of this continuing during a session.
Mr Chips
And yet, it is as likely as anything else...
But yes, I once also played systems based on repeaters and patterns. So please continue (is that better, LS? ;)).
All possible bets will result in a negative expectation.>>>
If you don't have the edge, this is true. But if you have the edge, very very quickly a string of bets produces a positive result and it just keeps climbing up. Actually, it resembles hills and valleys, but the next hill is always higher than the previous hill and the end of the session always increases the BR.