Online Roulette and Baccarat Systems that work ?

[Deej]

Hello,

I was wondering if there are any online Roulette and/or Baccarat Systems that work well ? I have tried a few different Roulette Systems online that worked for a while, but then I lost all of my winnings in the long run. If there are any, please let me know the names and where I can find them.

Thank You,
Deej

 

[Vesuvio]

Deej, there aren't any. You'll always lose in the long term unless you're incredibly lucky.

Just thought I'd jump in before any scam artists get the chance to reply.

If you want to make money from on-line casinos without needing luck then playing with bonuses which give the player an edge is the only proven 'system'.

 

[Deej]

Vesuvio,

Thank you for your honesty and the heads-up. I greatly appreciate it.

Deej

 

[Casinomeister]

And let me jump into this thread while it's still fresh.

There are no "systems" that work. There have been a load of arguments pro and con concerning this topic in this forum. Believe me, you'd be better off playing the stock market.

 

[dominique]

The only system is a good knowledge of basic strategy for the game you are playing. Learn the rules, learn the basic strategies.

Bonuses can help or hurt depending on the wagering requirements.

I had access to a backend for a short time a couple of years ago, and I watched people play Blackjack, and I was horrified. They had no idea and were playing by hunches and losing and losing....

So, learn the odds of your available moves and play according to them. It's the only thing that will definitely help.

 

[GrandMaster]

The truth about betting systems:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[chandra8000]

I am a long time Baccarat player and I have seen almost every system imaginable.
If you are lured by what a system claims, do not look at how it wins but figure out what it loses to (they all lose to something). Once you have that then calculate how often that loss will occur and how much that loss will cost you. Then see if you still have a profit (and this does not take into account human mistakes, panic and general loss of control).

 

[XANATOS]

i am new to this forum
and i hate to be disagreeable
but there are working roulette systems
at least there is one its mine
and it is not for sell
i started working on it when i was 13
when i recievd a roulette game as a gift
it took me five years to develope my system playing
for fun
when i turned 22 i played it for money
and have every since
i have yet to try it online but that is soon to change
in fact its going to change tonight


XANATOS

 

[bokske]

Eradicating the myth of the House edge

I am convinced that all the naysayers really mean what they say, and that their answer is a well-intended advice not to rely on systems. People with this opinion have probably come to this conclusion after a long time of gambling and likely some experiments with systems of their own. Too bad that the truth is still one step beyond.

This discussion is all about two mathematical properties of whatever gambling proposition :
1. The average House edge on each single play
2. The expected average result for a specific playing algorithm on this game
Many people intuitively equate one to the other in the blink of an eye. WizardOfOdds is only one of so many websites to perpetuate this falsehood.
I contend that these two figures are quite different. Therefore, a game with a built-in disadvantage can still be played with a positive statistical expectation about the average result in the long run. I posit that a system (a.k.a. playing algorithm) can slant the House edge in either direction. But it's harder to find a specific system to sway this House edge several percents in the positive direction, than just half a percent. Therefore it's still useful to look out for games with a very small negative expectation value.

It's actually difficult to construct a system that yields exactly the same expected overall result as the House edge. I think the best way to go would be a strategy of always playing exactly 1 betting unit on some chance. Any deviations from this scheme probably cause a difference between the two said mathematical properties.

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%). I would think along the lines of "keep playing forever, no matter how much you win, until all your money is gone". But this is mathematically not watertight I guess, as there could be this one lucky streak that keeps piling money into your account and never reaches those end criteria. Still, many people must feel that it's easy to define a playing algorithm that loses twice as much money as it wins (expected overall result = -50%). Admitting that, is admitting that the two mathematical properties are NOT the same.

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".

 

[GrandMaster]

Therefore, a game with a built-in disadvantage can still be played with a positive statistical expectation about the average result in the long run. I posit that a system (a.k.a. playing algorithm) can slant the House edge in either direction.

Wow! This is quite a statement! Please read an introductory book on probability. It will be a very good investment as it will stop you from losing a lot more money in the casinos.

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%). I would think along the lines of "keep playing forever, no matter how much you win, until all your money is gone". But this is mathematically not watertight I guess, as there could be this one lucky streak that keeps piling money into your account and never reaches those end criteria. Still, many people must feel that it's easy to define a playing algorithm that loses twice as much money as it wins (expected overall result = -50%). Admitting that, is admitting that the two mathematical properties are NOT the same.

If you play a negative expectation game long enough, you WILL LOSE your whole bankroll, lucky streaks nothwithstanding, it is just a matter of time. (For details again see a book on probability.)

 

[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!]

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]

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 :
Old / Expired Link

 

[bokske]

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.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

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]

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]

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]

I blindly assumed that the title of the thread I launched elsewhere would automatically show up on Google. My bad - I should have checked.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

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!]

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]

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

No wonder I feel right at home there.

Bokske, you actually seem sincere, if slightly delusional.

My friends would describe me that way, yes.

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.

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.

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

Now where's the mathematical challenge in that ??

(...) 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 ?

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]

a bit off the topic

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.

 

[Vesuvio]

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

Fair enough. I agree bonus hunting isn't interesting and won't advance the boundaries of intellectual knowledge, but at least it's an easy way to make some money. Demonstrating a fair game of roulette or baccarat can be beaten would be much more stimulating - it's just a shame it's impossible, whatever complicated reasoning you come up with to try and convince yourself of the opposite. Still, good luck!

 

[KasinoKing]

For what its worth, I believe there are ways to beat Roulette. I have had little dabbles with some good successes, but all the time there is easy money to be had from bonuses, I can not be bothered to try to develop my theory further. This might sound crazy, but with any Roulette system there is the risk of losing $100s before you start winning and I cant stomach that. (Too chicken!).
All the pessimists say that if you keep going with any system, you will lose in the end. This is undeniably true. But in any given session, you will nearly always be ahead at some point the trick is to quit at this point, before the maths takes your winnings away!
The basis of my (and many others!) theory: There is no way to win if you bet on every spin, but some casinos (e.g. Cryptologic) allow you to spin the wheel with no bets on it. After say 20 spins, at least 17 of the numbers will not have come up at all. If you start betting on these numbers, the chance of any one hitting on any given spin is still always 1/37, but the longer it doesnt hit the greater the probability that it will come in sooner than those that have already hit. In this respect, the maths says you MUST win!
This is very roughly the basis of my theory, and presumably, those of others.
When I finally get down to fine tuning my system to a foolproof winning method I will immediately tell no-one and not try to sell it. What - are you kidding???

 

[pstnpstn]

For what its worth, I believe there are ways to beat Roulette. I have had little dabbles with some good successes, but all the time there is easy money to be had from bonuses, I can not be bothered to try to develop my theory further. This might sound crazy, but with any Roulette system there is the risk of losing $100s before you start winning and I cant stomach that. (Too chicken!).
All the pessimists say that if you keep going with any system, you will lose in the end. This is undeniably true. But in any given session, you will nearly always be ahead at some point the trick is to quit at this point, before the maths takes your winnings away!
The basis of my (and many others!) theory: There is no way to win if you bet on every spin, but some casinos (e.g. Cryptologic) allow you to spin the wheel with no bets on it. After say 20 spins, at least 17 of the numbers will not have come up at all. If you start betting on these numbers, the chance of any one hitting on any given spin is still always 1/37, but the longer it doesnt hit the greater the probability that it will soon come. In this respect, the maths says you MUST win!
This is very roughly the basis of my theory, and presumably, those of others.
When I finally get down to fine tuning my system to a foolproof winning method I will immediately tell no-one and not try to sell it. What - are you kidding???

I use system for roulette.
I do not use complicated system.
I am playing two simple system.


one is martingale (1,2,4,8) - black/red , odd/even
example :
wait black come out successively four or more.
after all red will come out.
after then red come out, now bet black 1, if lose again bet 2 on black ,again lose again bet 4 on black, again lose last bet 8 on black.
If I lose bet 8 on black, then it's game over.
total lost unit is 15 (1,2,4,8)


another is dozen or column bet
example :
wait one dozen or column come out 4 times successively.
and then bet other dozens or other colums each one unit.
If i lose then bet 3 each, again lose again bet 9 each.
If i lose bet 9 each , then it's game over.
total lost unit is 26 (1-1,3-3,9-9)

sorry for my english.
anyway many roulette player are playing with their own systems.

 

[nafanny29]

Until roulette balls acquire a memory I will stick to crossing my fingers.

If you record all your bets over 5000 spins you will find your return will equal about what the mathematics say it should be im afraid.

 

[KasinoKing]

I use system for roulette.
I do not use complicated system.
I am playing two simple system.

one is martingale (1,2,4,8) - black/red , odd/even
example :
wait black come out successively four or more.
after all red will come out.
after then red come out, now bet black 1, if lose again bet 2 on black ,again lose again bet 4 on black, again lose last bet 8 on black.
If I lose bet 8 on black, then it's game over.
total lost unit is 15 (1,2,4,8)


another is dozen or column bet
example :
wait one dozen or column come out 4 times successively.
and then bet other dozens or other colums each one unit.
If i lose then bet 3 each, again lose again bet 9 each.
If i lose bet 9 each , then it's game over.
total lost unit is 26 (1-1,3-3,9-9)

sorry for my english.
anyway many roulette player are playing with their own systems.

Those systems can only have one outcome.

Please let me know when you are completely broke, so I can say 'I told you so!'

I urge you to give up this crazy notion now - before it is too late!