Roulette- why you can't ever constantly win.

[bpb]

Is black more favorable to come at least once after 25 reds in a row? The answer is yes

After 20 reds the probability for each colour to come is still 48,65% but this isn't what am talking about here.

You're not making any sense at all.

Repeat after me .... "wheels have no memory"

 

[Slotster!]

Anyone seen Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead?

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

 

[Jarome]

All of you..... You're just so.... WRONG!

I have the best system and it always works for me. I watch the ball bounce and spins and then it's like - "Damn i told ya it's goin to be black" I'm telling my friend and I leave without making a single bet!

I don't really like the roulette - but it's fun to watch my friends gamble.

I should really head to Vegas next month - haven't been there for a while.

 

[gfkostas]

You're not making any sense at all.

Repeat after me .... "wheels have no memory"

wheels have no memory but mathematics dictate certain things regardless of your opinion about it. After 20 reds it is impossible to have another 20 of the same. That would make it 40 in a row. No chance!

 

[anadolu]

ımportant friends


Hi everyone;

I want to mention to you about my roulette system which i have been working on for a long time and just finished...

I began to play roulette approximately two years ago. At first; i was only betting on sports, then i knew roulette.
Roulette, which seems so easy to play, actually was the game of the devil and to understand this made my pocket empty.

Then i began to play with martingale, although i won very much, it wasn't too long to understand it was a suicide.

Then side bets, later others, result: lost,lost,lost...
The ones who started with me lost all of their money but i did not forgive and went on...

I thought... i cant win on colour bets, i cant win on side bets, i cant win with martingale, and what was necessary to win??? it was going to be nonsense to think about numbers... 1/37, huh... But this opinion became the main road to turn from... I understood that i had to bet on numbers if i wanted to win... i couldnt use martingale because the machine protects itself, if you use martingale... then i found a way... i was going to choose a number and bet on it 37 times...

This tactic seemed well first times, i was earning money... but it did not continue too long, i finished it as the number which i chose did not come in spite of 325 bets!!!

But i did not forgive again... i had to guess a number to come in a short time...

Anyway, lets turn to the topic... I had to guess the true number only after a few bets... But how could i do it? ( and i was writing datas of the hands i played.)

I needed a signal, and these datas showed me the signals. And i began to know the numbers... In first times, i couldnt believe to myself, i was saying that this number will come and it was coming, i thought that it was the time i became rich, if i start in morning, i would be a millionaire that evening... And i became, but it was only half an hour, i had won 2000 with a starting budget 250... but i lost all of the money half an hour... But what was the mistake? The numbers which i bet on was caming but what became and i lost all??? Then i understood, i didnt know to say stop to myself, for example i bet 1 stake on a number, as it didnt come i bet 5 or 10 than the machine became angry...

And finally, i noticed the patience factor which all the gamblers has to have... After i noticed the patience factor i win 30 - 50 stake once a day and i leave the game and the other day, i get 30 - 50 and leave again...

At this point, i decided to write this to the forum, because i wasnt able to win more than 30 - 50 stake... Dear friends, please do not want me to make an explanation about signals... At least, i dont want them to make changes on the algoritma... As you're reading, dont forget that there are others who are reading...

Someone who interests this topic, pls send me a pm and i will give my msn address and we would be in contact, i suppose, to write the address here is forbidden, and i hope these article which i wrote to share my experiments would not be cleaned...

Sincerely

 

[Swede]

This is getting better and better....please don't lock this thread guys, I really enjoy reading it

 

[bpb]

wheels have no memory but mathematics dictate certain things regardless of your opinion about it.

I didn't give an opinion about anything

After 20 reds it is impossible to have another 20 of the same. That would make it 40 in a row. No chance!

The chance of the 2nd series of 20 reds is identical to the chance of the 1st series of 20 reds. You can't say that you accept the fact that wheels have no memory unless you also accept that the probabilities are equal.

Chance of 20 reds in a row from an arbitrary starting point = (18/38)^20
Chance of 20 reds in a row after 20 reds = (18/38)^20
chance of 20 reds in a row after 20 blacks = (18/38)^20
Chance of 20 reds in a row after 100 reds = (18/38)^20
Chance of 20 reds in a row after 100 blacks = (18/38)^20

Notice a pattern?

It doesn't matter how improbable the previous series of events was, the fact is, THEY'VE ALREADY HAPPENED!

 

[winbig]

I didn't give an opinion about anything



The chance of the 2nd series of 20 reds is identical to the chance of the 1st series of 20 reds. You can't say that you accept the fact that wheels have no memory unless you also accept that the probabilities are equal.

Chance of 20 reds in a row from an arbitrary starting point = (18/38)^20
Chance of 20 reds in a row after 20 reds = (18/38)^20
chance of 20 reds in a row after 20 blacks = (18/38)^20
Chance of 20 reds in a row after 100 reds = (18/38)^20
Chance of 20 reds in a row after 100 blacks = (18/38)^20

Notice a pattern?

It doesn't matter how improbable the previous series of events was, the fact is, THEY'VE ALREADY HAPPENED!

Yes, but he said a series of 20 reds after a series of 20 reds already occurred. That would bring it to (18/30)^40. Not impossible, but nearly.

 

[winbig]

Sorry, typo. That should be (18/38)^40, not 18/30

 

[hitobito2005]

i lost all of the money half an hour... But what was the mistake? The numbers which i bet on was caming but what became and i lost all??? Then i understood, i didnt know to say stop to myself, for example i bet 1 stake on a number, as it didnt come i bet 5 or 10 than the machine became angry...

Your mistake was continuing to play a -EV roulette "system". If you keep the stakes small, you may win at first - but in reality it will just take you longer to lose.

 

[hitobito2005]

Sorry, typo. That should be (18/38)^40, not 18/30

The probability of 40 reds in a row is indeed (18/38)^40


But if 20 reds have already been spun (in the past, so can be disregared) the probability of a further 20 reds is (18/38)^20.

 

[anadolu]

dear sir

Your mistake was continuing to play a -EV roulette "system". If you keep the stakes small, you may win at first - but in reality it will just take you longer to lose.

dear sir,

ı am every time winn.. never losss..

seen again , please contact

 

[winbig]

The probability of 40 reds in a row is indeed (18/38)^40


But if 20 reds have already been spun (in the past, so can be disregared) the probability of a further 20 reds is (18/38)^20.

Correctumundo

dear sir,

ı am every time winn.. never losss..

seen again , please contact

Uhm, sure. If you win every single roulette session, then you're just plain lucky. There's nothing in this world that you could do to win every gambling session, no matter what game you play. Unless of course...well, you get the idea.

 

[brutaldeluxe]

Why do people still think there is some system or magic formula that allows you to make money at roulette ?!?!

There is no bet, no series of bets and no combination of bets that can ever yield a positive expecatation, end of story !

You are not being paid the correct odds for the probability of the outcome of the event, you can't ever beat that. If you bet on a coin flip at -110 ( 1.909 or 10/11) all day long are you going to win money ? Of course not. Sure you might have a few winning sessions but the more you play the more your money will dwindle. Doesn't matter how you stake your cash, how you bet, how much you track the past 20 flips, the more you play the more likely you are to lose.

However bet on a coinflip at +110 ( 2.100 or 11/10) all day and you will make money. You are now being paid odds which are in excess of the probability of the outcome of the event (assuming coin is completely unbiased and flip is fair). You have a 50% chance of winning yet you are being paid as if you only had a 47.62% Again it doesn't matter how you stake this, the more you bet on this the more likely you are to win.


It's the exact same thing happening with roulette it's just there are a few more outcomes and this somehow seems to confuse people into believing you can fool it.

Imagine a roulette wheel has just spun 50 blacks in a row. At this point some guy just walks into the casino and has no knowledge of this and bets on red.
Is this a bad bet ? No worse than any other bet on roulette.
As people keep saying the wheel has no memory ! It is a game of independent trials, previous results do not affect future ones !



20 reds in a row is unlikely yes, but possible. Now after 20 reds in a row have happened the chance of another 20 reds in a row is exactly the same as it was in the first place. If we forget the zeros for a second to make it simpler the chances of four reds in row is 1 in 16 yeah ? Now say we notice a time when four reds in a row have come up. Now the chances of another four reds in a row coming up is again 1 in 16. Nothing has changed. It's not more or less likely for four reds in a row to happen just because the previous four spins were red. However the chances of 8 reds in a row is 1 in 256. But you can't suddenly jump in during a sequence and say...ooh it's been 7 reds in a row, if it comes in again that would be a 1 in 256 shot so surely it'll be black !
The chances were 1 in 256 at the start before you had started to track it !
Red Red Red Red Red Red Black is also a 1 in 256 chance to come in, as is any particular sequence of 8 colours you wish to quote. We just like to look for patterns like all red or all black and attach some sort of significance to it like it is a streak. There's many other times when there is no apparent or obvious streak but you don't look to ride the "no streak" part do you ?


If people want to put their effort into a casino game they are better off studying blackjack because you can actually give yourself an edge at that.
It is a game of dependent trials. Previous results DO affect future ones(used cards are not shuffled back), that's the key difference. Obviously in online casinos it is different cos deck is shuffled every hand but in single deck games the cards dealt can alter the composition of the deck enough to warrant some basic strategy changes. For instance 7,7 v 10 is actually a stand !
These days trying to play blackjack in a casino for any advantage is hard going and not something you would wanna take lightly !


I sympathise with the people trying to explain probability. You really feel like banging your head off a wall cos no matter what you say some people will just not accept or believe the facts. Perhaps they don't want to I'm not sure why.

 

[winbig]

Another useful tidbit:

Betting on a single number all of the time has the exact same EV as betting on red or black all of the time.

 

[brutaldeluxe]

Not strictly true actually winbig. It depends on the rules. In european casinos with a single zero the house edge on the "even chances" is 1.35% whilst betting on single numbers the house edge is 2.70% This is assuming that if you bet on an "even chance" and the ball lands in 0 you get half your money back. This is the case in alot of UK casinos. There is also the french "en prison" rule where if you bet on an even chance and it comes up 0 they spin the wheel again and if you get your colour/number up you get your stake back and if you lose you lose your stake. This equates to just paying half your bet back anyway.

US type wheels with 0 and 00 the house edge is 5.26% on every bet bar the 0,00,1,2,3 combo bet where the house edge is 7.89% It only pays 6/1
Large house edge on that bet ! What you said is right for US roulette wheels except for that one bet though aye.

 

[winbig]

Thanks, I forgot to mention that it only applied to games with 0 & 00, and not betting on those.

 

[gfkostas]

When I play blackjack and I have won 15 hands in a row I KNOW that at least one lose is near because I simply cannot keep winning all the time(impossible). That's why we have no winning streaks of lets say 50+ hands. Same with roulette. If I bet that 40reds in a row will never happen i will win every time regardless if at some point 20 reds show up. I will still be confident that it won't go up to 40. Looking at the history of the game we never had such long streaks so If I were to bet after 20 reds in a row at each casino that would have these 20reds streaks I would have been a winner

 

[brutaldeluxe]

This is what I mean about banging your head off the wall ! You know a loss is near ? Wow you must be able to predict the future !

That's why we have no winning streaks of lets say 50+ hands. If we make a bet that 1 black will show up in the next 50 spins and you say that it won't I will win every single time not because I can predict the spins but because of the mathematics behind it. You cannot win all the time. I bet on that.

First of all I'd like to look up the most impressive "streaks" there have been.
A win streak of 50+ hands you say ? Well depends if you mean dealer hands or player hands. I'll show you a win streak of 1000000000 for the dealers hand in blackjack if you want, I'll just draw till I am bust every single hand.

If we made the bet you describe you will not win every single time. You will win the overwhelming majority of the time. In fact we could probably spin wheels for the rest of our lives and you'd never lose. But you can't say with 100% certainty you'd never have a loss although you could be as close to 100% as you are likely to get. What are the chances of 50 blacks in a row ? It's an absolutely ridiculous figure. But ridiculous things do happen...

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

All you are basically saying is the probability of not spinning at least 1 black in 50 spins is very very very small. We already knew that. We could demonstrate with exact numbers if you want. You aren't actually disproving what I or anyone else who understands probability has said.


After 20 reds in a row another 20 reds is exactly the same probability as it was in the first place ! It doesn't become less likely because the previous 20 were red, the probability is exactly the same ! The wheel doesn't think "Oh man I've just spun 20 reds I better make sure I don't spin another 20 cos that would be ridiculous" The roulette wheel is not some intelligent organism that decides what colour it is going to spin !

 

[brutaldeluxe]

How about if it went to 39 reds in a row ? Would you still be 100% confident that the next spin wasn't going to be red ? Would you be your entire wealth on that the next spin would be black ? Or perhaps......just perhaps........the chances of it being red or black are exactly the same as they were for the previous 19 spins ! It just so happened that it came up 19 reds !

 

[EasyRhino]

I finally figured out a way to explain it to myself:

1) If I'm experience a winning (or losing) streak, I am not "due" a loss (or win) any time sooner. It's the same chance as it always is.

2) When you're playing, streaks, both positive and negative, are inevitable, you just don't know when they're going to start or end.

The awesome part is these two statements are not contradictory.

 

[bpb]

When I play blackjack and I have won 15 hands in a row I KNOW that at least one lose is near because I simply cannot keep winning all the time(impossible). That's why we have no winning streaks of lets say 50+ hands. Same with roulette. If I bet that 40reds in a row will never happen i will win every time regardless if at some point 20 reds show up. I will still be confident that it won't go up to 40. Looking at the history of the game we never had such long streaks so If I were to bet after 20 reds in a row at each casino that would have these 20reds streaks I would have been a winner

Any casino manager who monitors this forum (assuming they have half an ounce of brains) should start sending you roulette bonus offers up the wazoo right now.

Everything you said in the above paragraph is wrong. This isn't my opinion. This is fact. It can be clearly proven with mathematics. I could make the effort to explain it to you, but I won't. I don't think you would be able to understand.

 

[Reef]

it seems that no matter how good your system you begin to lose

lol @ systems. There is no "system" that can overcome a house edge. If ANY system truly worked, why would these people be selling it? (hint: to make back the money they lost using their system).

 

[gfkostas]

Everything you said in the above paragraph is wrong. This isn't my opinion. This is fact. It can be clearly proven with mathematics. I could make the effort to explain it to you, but I won't. I don't think you would be able to understand.

I don't think you have understood what am trying to convey here. Winning streaks have to end at some point and they usually end sooner than later.

 

[Swede]

Since my first suggestion for a true winning roulette system was shunned, it's probably time to try a different approach. More scientific this time.

I'm gonna try this in conjunction with a Martingale 2B and reverse Betty for 10,000 spins and let you know how it went. Wish me luck.