Can the game of Roulette be beat by attacking it with a system?

[Mike]

Sure, the very definition of "Win" and "Loss" can re redefined; I've found one MM system that does just that.

re-defining Win and Loss is not a reason why MM methods can work. 

Like I said in another post, using progressions is equivalent to flat-betting, given enough spins. And you can't win flat-betting without an edge. 

[schoenpoetser]

Yes that is OK but a sample of 250 may be to small.It is important to program a stop after a hit.My suggestion of this HR is special for a long run test.Formerly I did it in basic.I shall try to program the HG in excel also for a small sample.In my SSB program I have also a stop programmed before the end of the sample.In which language do you program?

[MauiSunset]

re-defining Win and Loss is not a reason why MM methods can work.  

Like I said in another post, using progressions is equivalent to flat-betting, given enough spins. And you can't win flat-betting without an edge.  

And who elected you Mr Know-it-all?  You don't know Jack about what I'm doing but that doesn't hold you back from sounding like a fool.

If I find something I will demo it here - if not I won't.

You're welcome to do the same thing since you know so much.....show us.

I thought not....

[Mike]

Yes that is OK but a sample of 250 may be to small.It is important to program a stop after a hit.My suggestion of this HR is special for a long run test.Formerly I did it in basic.I shall try to program the HG in excel also for a small sample.In my SSB program I have also a stop programmed before the end of the sample.In which language do you program?

Ok but as a programmer you should know that definite rules are needed.

"a sample of 250 may be too small".

So how big a sample is necessary then? there must be a cut-off point or it can't be programmed.

I use Python.

[Mike]

And who elected you Mr Know-it-all?  You don't know Jack about what I'm doing but that doesn't hold you back from sounding like a fool.

I don't know it all but it's pretty obvious I know more than you. The fact is, you can't create a winning system using pure money management. Instead of resorting to personal attacks you should try to educate yourself. Why do you guys assume you know better than the mathematicians?

If I find something I will demo it here - if not I won't.

You won't find anything.

You're welcome to do the same thing since you know so much.....show us.

I've already told you it can't be done, so I can't show you anything. You're not paying attention.

I thought not....

Yes, you're correct. I have nothing.  

[Mike]

Read part 4 of Ed Thorp's "The Mathematics of Gambling":

nolinks://nolinks.bjmath.com/bjmath/thorp/tog.htm

"There are hundreds of schemes designed to overcome the house edge in roulette and craps based solely on manipulating the size of one's bets. As will be seen, all such attempts are futile".

Just trying to help... 

[schoenpoetser]

MIKE:The hit and no hit sessions can be very large.This is the reason a sample of 250 spins can give no profit.Your program language I don`t no.I only will prove that it is possible to beat the roulette on long run with a strategy.
The program conditions as follow.
1 the length of the sample 1.5M spins
2  High + 1 :Low -1 and zero 0
3 program High- Low
4 print High -Low
5 If High -Low is +15  bet 1 on Low, till H-L=0
6 if High- Low is -15 bet  1 on High, till H-L=0
7 summon bets
8 summon payouts
9 if number of spins>1M and H-L=0 end

By the statement 9 the proof will ended always with a hit between 1M and 1.5 M .
The en prison rule gives more profit but is more complicated to program.Do not program the double zero.

[MauiSunset]

Read part 4 of Ed Thorp's "The Mathematics of Gambling":

nolinks://nolinks.bjmath.com/bjmath/thorp/tog.htm

"There are hundreds of schemes designed to overcome the house edge in roulette and craps based solely on manipulating the size of one's bets. As will be seen, all such attempts are futile".

Just trying to help...  

Of course Ed is correct, basing a MM technique solely by changing the size of one's bet is futile; it won't help make a flat bet system work any better.

That's why I changed the definition of "win" and "loss".

The net net final size of the bank roll is all that matters.

I would look at what I'm doing as algebra - you can add in something to both sides of the equation and the equation is exactly the same:  X=Y to X^2 +5 = Y^2 +5 and if that now allows you to do something in those 5 extra units you now have something different that might work.

I don't know if what I'm doing will pan out since I don't have enough statistics background and must use brute force to see if there is something there.

But more important, even if what I did find something, can I can gamble with it over a long haul?  I found many stock market systems that kind of worked but I could not put up with the punishment they dealt out in order to use the system.  (number of losses and draw down)

We will see, I'm guessing I will experiment with this for 1 year and if I actually use it to make some money I will demo it here.  It will not be for sale, but smart minds can reverse engineer systems and that would be my contribution to those here who want to spend the time.

I have yet to see anyone play 2 hours of Roulette and it was 100% obvious that they had mastered Roulette - that will be easy to spot....

[Twocando]

Yes yes and Yes


Flat betting.


And with >>>>>>>>

Something stupid like card counting to roulette. +/0/- Lets see who knows this?

[Carpanta]

Yes yes and Yes


Flat betting.


And with >>>>>>>>

Something stupid like card counting to roulette. +/0/- Lets see who knows this?

Hi Twocando,

I guess it has to do with pocket counting from last number spun. + stands for clockwise movement (+1/18), - stands for anticlock movement (-1/18) while 0 stands for same pocket(number) repetition back to back. After some recording and tracking you can try an strategy seeking those most favoured distances in both directions on the wheel. Kind of a hit and run system.
Just my 2 cents as it is said.

Cheers,
Carlos.

[Mike]

MIKE:The hit and no hit sessions can be very large.This is the reason a sample of 250 spins can give no profit.Your program language I don`t no.I only will prove that it is possible to beat the roulette on long run with a strategy.
The program conditions as follow.
1 the length of the sample 1.5M spins
2  High + 1 :Low -1 and zero 0
3 program High- Low
4 print High -Low
5 If High -Low is +15  bet 1 on Low, till H-L=0
6 if High- Low is -15 bet  1 on High, till H-L=0
7 summon bets
8 summon payouts
9 if number of spins>1M and H-L=0 end

By the statement 9 the proof will ended always with a hit between 1M and 1.5 M .
The en prison rule gives more profit but is more complicated to program.Do not program the double zero.

I haven't forgotten about this, just a matter of finding the time. Been pretty busy lately.

[birdhands]

@ Mike,  I'm looking forward to seeing your results.

[RouletteSlayer]

Roulette can be consistently beaten.  No two ways about it.  Einstein was wrong!

Clues to consider:

- Use inside betting only
- Think of smart ways to kill the zero
- Create your own virtual wheel so that the dealer misses your numbers
- Take advantage of double-hits and possible triple hits
- The magic is in how many numbers you bet on and the number pattern arrangement you use

Get a picture of a roulette wheel and study what the dealer cannot avoid

[gizmotron]

Roulette can be consistently beaten.  No two ways about it.  Einstein was wrong!

Clues to consider:

- Use inside betting only
- Think of smart ways to kill the zero
- Create your own virtual wheel so that the dealer misses your numbers
- Take advantage of double-hits and possible triple hits
- The magic is in how many numbers you bet on and the number pattern arrangement you use

Get a picture of a roulette wheel and study what the dealer cannot avoid

Wow, that was riddled with many magical beliefs. It's also an incomplete statement. Missing is the reason for selecting "how many numbers you bet on and the number pattern arrangement you use."

[RouletteSlayer]

If I revealed how many numbers as well as the pattern, you would end up in Roulette heaven and the casinos would be shocked and change the game entirely.

[RouletteSlayer]

-