Online Roulette and Baccarat Systems that work ?

[nafanny29]

If a game has a mathematical edge of 5.26% then you will win 94.74% of all money bet on it over the long run. Period. Unless you either cheat, exploit a fault in software or otherwise manipulate it in your favour. Any "system" that relies on a random event will lose exactly the HA over enough time.

[Slotster!]

Originally Posted by nafanny29

If a game has a mathematical edge of 5.26% then you will win 94.74% of all money bet on it over the long run. Period. Unless you either cheat, exploit a fault in software or otherwise manipulate it in your favour. Any "system" that relies on a random event will lose exactly the HA over enough time.

You mean I should stop clicking my heels together three times, reciting Pink Floyd's "Dark Side of the Moon" backwards, keeping one eye closed and wearing a dress next time I'm playing Roulette?

Bugger.

The bloke who I paid $99 for that information said it did something special and magic to the algorithm - which meant I won more. I feel violated.

[Vesuvio]

Originally Posted by bokske

It's probably ill mannered to refer to a "better" forum in my very first post.
Let's just say that those who want to really delve into the mathematical details, should google for "Deep mathematical thoughts on systems".

If you're going to try and spam something can't you at least check it works first? One hopeful google later... nothing, nada, zip.

I did find somewhere you might aspire to, though :
http://www.private-eye.co.uk/content...section.pseuds

[bokske]

Originally Posted by Vesuvio

If you're going to try and spam something can't you at least check it works first? One hopeful google later... nothing, nada, zip.

My sincere apologies, Vesuvio.
I blindly assumed that the title of the thread I launched elsewhere would automatically show up on Google. My bad - I should have checked.
http://gambling.projectsydney.com/viewtopic.php?t=1318

Now that you've brought it up, another important advice to OP Deej. I strongly dissuade you to buy any "winning" system from online scammers. These are worthless repetitions and recombinations of systems that have been known publicly for ages, and that have often been proven unprofitable. Science should be discussed in public and for free - that also applies here, to the subchapter of mathematics called Game Theory. Over at the forum I just mentioned, there is a huge collection of system descriptions for your free browsing.The folks over there are big on a commercial simulation program (not a commercial system) called Roulette Extreme, and you'll find snippets of algorithm code for this package all over the place.

I'm using my own C simulation program with a standard set of 100,000 roulette spins that I believe to be fair. Many beginning system builders "discover" the Martingale progression for themselves (it has actually been described as early as the 18th century). I'm terminally stuck in that phase, and the current best result of my incessant simulations occurs with an appalling required bankroll of $20,000 for a $1 min and $500 max limit table. It uses Martingale progression on 9 pairs to be selected at will - ending criteria are 2 wins for each pair. This setup is totally out of the question for practical purposes, but at least it adds some weight to the theoretical debate. I have less favorable but still positive results for the same setup, only with a $5000 bankroll. It's a step in the good direction, but I'm still finetuning my search to have a profitable system that requires a bankroll of no more than, say $2000. From that moment on, I want to focus my efforts on an automatic computer player following this algorithm - a bot. After the astonishing adventures of PirateC21 described only here on CasinoMeister, I'd better make damn sure about the regulations for the online casino that I'll pick.

So far, I have the curious impression that the roulette at InterCasino is treating me fairer than it should. My simulations show a catastrophic loss from time to time, to be outweighed by the steady trickle of positive sessions. Yet this has not yet occurred in actual play. I've been very close to bankruptcy when a pair I was chasing did not come out for 86 times, but that is really not
the unbelievable streak one might estimate it to be (should occur 0.8% percent of the time).

[nafanny29]

Originally Posted by Slotster!

You mean I should stop clicking my heels together three times, reciting Pink Floyd's "Dark Side of the Moon" backwards, keeping one eye closed and wearing a dress next time I'm playing Roulette?

Bugger.

That will actually defy all the laws of proberbility, especially if you have Pink Floyd pumping out the speakers at 90db+. Class act

[Mugwump]

Originally Posted by bokske

A last line of thought to win over the diehard pessimists. Do you think it's possible to construct a system with a worse expected overall result than the House edge ? As an extreme case, could you construct a system that always loses the entire initial deposit (expected overall result = -100%).

Ummm....Yeah.

Try this 'system'.
-------
Put a bet on every single number of the roulette wheel, including 0 and 00.

Its cool because you are guaranteed to win on every single spin!

Repeat until broke.
-------

This 'system' actually has a -5.25% expectation each time its played, and has the added benefit of removing the volatility of the roulette wheel from the equation.

In american roulette, every bet I place has a -5.25% expectation. This means that if I bet $10, I lose on average .52 cents each time I make a bet. In the short run, I can win with a bet and increase my bankroll. However, my chances of coming out ahead over the long term decrease with the number of bets that I make.

In actuality, I think the best system you have of beating the house edge in an even money game is to take your entire bankroll and place it down once and walk away, win or lose. By doing so, you give the casino less of a chance to grind out its inevitable long term win.

You don't get to play very long when you do this though, thus we have devised systems to help us manage our money and extend our time at the tables. They don't work over the long haul, but its fun when they work, and unless we're using that Martingale mess, don't cost us much when we lose.

The only people that make money with systems are those that author books on them and the casinos that welcome those that read them.

[Vesuvio]

Originally Posted by bokske

I blindly assumed that the title of the thread I launched elsewhere would automatically show up on Google. My bad - I should have checked.
http://gambling.projectsydney.com/viewtopic.php?t=1318

It's like an asylum for 21st-Century alchemists! Bokse, you actually seem sincere, if slightly delusional. I couldn't quite work out how others use that forum, maybe a split between those who see it as:

1) An intellectual challenge - either to create an 'interesting' system, or to be the quickest to find the inevitable 'flaw' in each cunning new plan

2) A source of lots of moderately plausible systems to rip off gulllible and/or desperate gamblers (nice to see our old friend Andruchi making an appearance there!)

3) A genuine quest, akin to finding a perpetual motion machine or turning base metals into gold. Unfortunately I suspect there comes a point in the 'career' of genuine 'questers' when they realise the only way to actually make money is to sell systems they've proved to themselves don't work...

How about just playing with casino bonuses and making money without defying the laws of physics or mathematics!? Or else - just accept you can't beat a fair negative expectation game and concentrate on on-line casinos which may well not be fair, and should therefore be exploitable. At least it might work - and everyone on here would be interested in your results. The same doesn't go for any brainstorms you may have related to unrigged games...

[Slotster!]

Originally Posted by nafanny29

That will actually defy all the laws of proberbility, especially if you have Pink Floyd pumping out the speakers at 90db+. Class act

I still get to wear the dress too, right?... Only because it's a very important part of the system you understand, no other reason. Ahem.

[bokske]

Originally Posted by Vesuvio

It's like an asylum for 21st-Century alchemists!

No wonder I feel right at home there.

Originally Posted by Vesuvio

Bokske, you actually seem sincere, if slightly delusional.

My friends would describe me that way, yes.

Originally Posted by Vesuvio

1) An intellectual challenge (...)
2) A source of lots of moderately plausible systems to rip off gullible and/or desperate gamblers

I want to stress that the whole Systems Library over there is free to browse, albeit in the somewhat clumsy shape of a forum discussion.

Originally Posted by Vesuvio

3) A genuine quest, akin to finding a perpetual motion machine or turning base metals into gold.

Put me down for that third category. I'm not terribly keen on ruining an online casino, and I definitely don't want to peddle any systems to hapless readers. I just have the humble intention of changing the way the world thinks about roulette forever.

Originally Posted by Vesuvio

How about just playing with casino bonuses (...)

Now where's the mathematical challenge in that ??

Originally Posted by Vesuvio

(...) concentrate on on-line casinos which may well not be fair, and should therefore be exploitable.

Yawn. Your interests are just very different from mine. Isn't it infinitely more stimulating to demonstrate that a fair casino can be beaten ?

Originally Posted by Vesuvio

At least it might work - and everyone on here would be interested in your results. The same doesn't go for any brainstorms you may have related to unrigged games...

I get your point, and I'll withdraw to the "asylum".

[aye-nay]

I know most of you guys don't like it, but at luckycance casino the baccarat appeared quite recently and I win more ften than loose - making small bets, I always make small bets. maybe it's just due to the fact that they've just started the game and try to "advertise" it. and "ties" happan unusually often.