Hi Herb,
I was going to post this under your latest reply (about seeking actual biases instead of numerical ones) in this forum but (not to my surprise) another locked thread for the "board of directors here to justify their keep".
My question to you, have you been able to first determine that roulette is beatable, regardless of the possible approaches one way or the other then?
The random game of roulette is not beatable.
However, you can beat the combination of the dealer and the gaming device. Meaning: You can play at the live tables and possibly win in the long run.
Herb, prove it.
The general principles apply to almost all gambling games, and when they apply, they guarantee that systems cannot give the player an advantage.
To help you filter and reject systems, here are conditions which guarantee that a system is worthless.
1. Each individual bet in the game has a negative expectation. This makes any series of bets have a negative expectation.
2. There is a maximum limit to the size of any possible game. (This rules out systems like the Martingale and up as you lose.)
3. The results of any one play of the game do not "influence" the results of any other play of the game.
(Note that we are talking about the "game of roulette", not the "gaming device."
4. There is a minimum allowed size for any bet. (This is necessary for the technical steps in the mathematical proof.)
Under these conditions, it is a mathematical fact that every possible gambling system is worthless in the following ways:
1. Any series of bets has a negative expectation
2. This expectation is the (negative) sum of the expectations of the individual bets.
3. If the player continues to bet, his total loss divided by his total action will tend to get closer and closer to his expected loss divided by his total action.
4. If the player continues to bet it is almost certain that he will:
a. be a loser
b. eventually stay a loser forever, and so never again break even;
c. eventually lose his entire bankroll, no matter how large it was.
-Please note the source "The Mathematics of Gambling", by Dr. Edward O. Thorp.
----------------------------------
Prove that you can win using VB or bias
1. The gaming device is subject to wear.
2. This causes an uneven distribution of the numbers to occur in the long run.
3. Bets are allowed after the ball is spun, consequently the player can observe the position of the decaying ball in relation to the rotor in order to accurately predict where the ball is most likely to strike the spinning rotor. These predictions are enough to overcome the house edge.
4. Since the house edge can be overcome and the player can gain the edge, it remains possible for the player to win over the long run.
5. There are several documented cases of such plays and players that have won using AP methods.
a. Joseph Jaggars
b. Dr. Jareki
c. Billy Walters
d. Garcia Pelayo
e. Christian Kaisan
f. several others not mentioned.
-Herb
This is not prove, only unproven theory.
3. Bets are allowed after the ball is spun, consequently the player can observe the position of the decaying ball in relation to the rotor in order to accurately predict where the ball is most likely to strike the spinning rotor. These predictions are enough to overcome the house edge.
The documented cases are enough to validate my statements.
I suppose I should cite one more source: rouletteresearch.com "Evolution of the Roulette Wheel".
George Melas is the cheif design engineer for T.C.S. Huxley and specifically mentions the reasons for improvements on certain wheels designs. Number one reason was that the wheels were at risk from visual ballistic and other AP players.
-Herb
I am not saying that this method is not working.
But what you are saying is statemants, not prove.
There is to much variable to human mind can analyze and comprehend, so this method is beyond sciense
- in middle.
Searching for wear or unbiased wheel can be called cheating, like counting cards.
Gogo
On the contrary, searching for biased wheels and playing some form of visual ballistics is not considered cheating.
Furthermore the casinos will provide you with pen and paper on which to record the numbers.
Contrary to some people's believe around here, using your brain is not considered cheating.
You use your brain when count cards.
Same thing.
Gogo
Are you saying that you don't use your brain when you play a system at roulette?
Also, it's not illegal to count cards. It is also not considered cheating. BJ is considered a game of skill.
-Herb
Maybe in your casino is allowed but in mine is not, so we have diffrence in opinion on that.
Statemant are statemants, prove is prove. Very simple.
Gogo
Quote from: GogoCro on December 07, 2009, 04:58:18 PM
You use your brain when count cards.
Same thing.
Gogo
ok so you accept it does work then????
BTW MATE HAVE A LOOKAT THIS nolinks://vlsroulette.com/the-dark-side/under-cover-for-the-darkside/msg72755/#msg72755 (nolinks://vlsroulette.com/the-dark-side/under-cover-for-the-darkside/msg72755/#msg72755)
IVE ALSO TOOK SOME SHORT VIDEO FOOTAGE OF THE WHEEL ,it only turned bias on about 1800 spin thats acording to the casino industry,,try to run them through RX and put a few chips on number 19 hey 34 6 aint to bad too
btw i know a lad here where i live and some of the casino staff no what hees doing as long as he dont go over board there fine with him,,in the glossay flyer the give away at the casino sates this,,,(loosly translated),, the idea of the game of roulette is as follows The player tries to predict where the ball will land ...
the rotor must always no slower than 12 pockets per second this is governed by the state
so in reflection,, cheating in the oxford dictionary states something like this,,,,,,cheating,,,by to break the rules in for eg,a game of chance to gain an unfair advantage,,,,,,so i guess you could be right
if you like to call it cheating well fine thats your opinion and your entilted to it so by that admission are you agreing that by useing the art of VB actually works and gives in the long term an positive advatage to the player??
Ok i hope i cleared a few things up for you
oh ps.im not the sharpest toll in the shed herby boy will tell you that,but,,,,,,,,with a pen and writing down every number that comes up has turned the house edge (for that period ) to over 20 % in my favour,you see im not cheating its a hot number system that herb gave me :haha: :haha: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
ok cya
what ever it is VB+any other...skils can be great just took some money from wheels thats all if it s work even if is hard to learn kommon thinks you can gain pretty good money from the wheel im a hell sure....person need to have some talent and like it game thats all it is not cost just pure thinks it cost hard vork before come back.. you know when you start see thinks from diferent angles you will ask your self like me why i didnt see this before??? how is that possible??? wht hell :girl_wacko:
@Grogo,
When you play, do you use your brain?
Quote from: BerlinerBruce on December 07, 2009, 05:20:05 PM
ok so you accept it does work then????
if you like to call it cheating well fine thats your opinion and your entilted to it so by that admission are you agreing that by useing the art of VB actually works and gives in the long term an positive advatage to the player??
I have said in earlier post, (btw you must read it all): I am not saying that this method is not working.
Also no human mind can analyze so many variables, wothout help of some special meassure device with are not allowed. I have also ask Herb only to prove it, nor I either deabted this method is or not working.
No one can accurate predict where will ball land. There is no formula to calculate that with so many variables.
Gogo
@edit
@Herb Do you use your brain, can you prove it?
The article, "Evolution of the Roulette Wheel" will provide you with all of the prove that you need.
Grogo,
According to you, the brain is a cheating device. You know, this conversation if all to familiar. I recall a very similar one with Mr. Chips about a year or so ago.
-Herb
Herb,
you have mentioned brain first. That useing your brain when playing isnot cheating.
As refer to counting cards is not cheating and braking the rules searching unbiased wheel.
Dont understund your logic, and when you lose argument, go insolting others.
I want do that, you could say that you cant prove but that you have valid statemants and my question would be answered, but you did not.
Gogo
Grogo,
Where did I insult you???
Relax, I haven't insulted you. :)
Okey, take care.
Gogo
Its dificult to me express myself in english, and search correct words.
I will repeat.
I have nothing agains AP!
Maybe is even interesting to me. But I have issue with "easy" statemants.
Tenis player can also predict where will ball land in field, but there only few variables and wither field.
Gogo (not Grogo)
I understand :)
There are quite a few mechanical systems which could prove to be positive after 100K spins.
This can be tested in few minutes by programming it.
AP player might not even play those many spins in 10 years.
This can not be programmed hence this can not be tested quickly. (I will not believe tests in your garage)
All those 10 years both AP player and mechanical system player are in positive.
Now according to you mechanical system player is lucky.
Could AP player also be plain lucky?
The mechanics behind AP play can easily be examined by slow motion video and proven effective.
Herb,
Thanks for your replies.
I have only the Steve H. system, but the more I study it, the more questions (than answers provided) that arise. Admittedly, I try to get to the "heart" of all things scientific... which is why I also try to get off on the "right foot" by first looking for some eloquently-logical reasons, and/or extreme-physical limitations (through "thought experiments").
Usually these sorts of processes "mimic" only by analogy the (random) quantum-physical realm (of the atomic, and sub-atomic, "particles"). Ie, the more which can be known about one aspect, the less about an other. Eg, a heavier roulette-ball will "scatter" less, but will do so more often because of its greater momentum. Furthermore, any conceivable error in the "tracking" method(s) will grow logarithmically (very-quickly) beyond its "initial" benefits... I did a few physics labs in my undergrad-days at Waterloo, and vaguely remember there are formulas also for adding deviations along a time-line... and that even in a controlled lab-setting, it's difficult to "beat" the deviations to get a valid result. Furthermore, there may be localized site effects, or even global ones (such as uncontrollable variations of gravity, coriolis effect, and etc), which could deem the "whole thing" a non-starter. (Don't balk until you've actually ruled "idiotic" stuff like that out.)
How many players win is is somewhat secondary to the above, as well as to the practicallity of any further-qualified approach. Some good players lose with valid systems, while others sometimes win with bad systems; and there will always be a few big winners, even over a span of years, from any casino-game. That's a statistically-poor way to assess near-guess (winning or losing) systems, given eg, the generational data required to begin to properly assess some environmental effects on our health, planet, etc, or even the weather... by which much more less-anecdotal attention, equipment, and understanding, has been employed from the outset.
Anyway, always looking to improve my "baccarat game", and also I through actual biases. (I think yours is the tougher "battle" to just win, while mine tougher to "convince" others of the fact.)
If you're looking to improve your baccarat game then consider reading the edge printed pattern of the card.
This printed pattern will sometimes shift left and right at the edge of the card.
By tracking this pattern and the shuffle, you may be able to follow certain cards through the deck. Some casinos don't have the little brushes that hide the next cards to be dealt.
I do not attempt to play this way. However it would likely be possible in the minbac games.
Quote from: Herb on December 07, 2009, 09:53:00 PM
If you're looking to improve your baccarat game then consider reading the edge printed pattern of the card.
This printed pattern will sometimes shift left and right at the edge of the card.
By tracking this pattern and the shuffle, you may be able to follow certain cards through the deck. Some casinos don't have the little brushes that hide the next cards to be dealt.
I do not attempt to play this way. However it would likely be possible in the minbac games.
I didn't think of that, at least not to try to apply that irregularity there. (I now recall hearing it's also possible to detect very slight differences in the ink-shading of the backs of some cards.)
Owe you one. Thanks man.