I Believe I Have a Roulette System That Works

I don't care who knows about it and I'm not trying to sell it. I know some of the members on this site have coding expeariance as does the site owner and I just want someone to proove me wrong, if I am!

in a nutshell. On a normal roulette table there are several ways to bet, some of the odds are seemingly good (17-1 53-1) but I prefer the 2-1 bets, these are streets and the 12s. On a street (I believe im using this term right, I mean the pay lines at the back of the table as in the line 1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34) on each line you have a little less than 1/3 chance of winning. I believe I saw on one site a stat of 31.8%. The few times I have been to casinos with real roulette, I play two of them usually the outside two. If the ball lands on any one number on those two lines you win 2-1 which means you loose one bet and tripple the other giving you a gain of 1 betting unit per bet. If the stat I saw was right 31.8% this should mean that the odds if you pick two of them is 63.16%

You may loose several bets in a row to a ball landing on the one line you diddnt play or on 0 or 00 but overall this system statistically should win. Unless Im wrong.

If I am wrong please explain to me how using math, or a code test, I would appreciate the help in the event I am wrong but according to the math I dont think I am

Assuming your numbers are correct, let's take $2,000 to the casino and bet it $20 ($10 on two groups of 12) at a time for 100 bets...

We'll do them right in a row...63 wins followed by 37 losses...

Win 1 unit 63 of the time @ $20 a bet =Bet $1260 and return of $1890 with $740 remaining to bet from the original amount...now you have $2630

Lose 2 units 37 of the time @ $20 a bet = Lose $740...now you have $1890.

Even simplified like this, the house advantage is almost correct (within $5, based on the rounding)

This is a loser...can it win sometimes? Sure. It is still a loser...

This is how James Bond played Roulette in the book (not movie) "Casino Royale", so you're not the first to think of it. I've tried it a few times and it seemed boring and didn't make me any significant money.

I don't have anything that runs long-term projections for Roulette or I'd do those for you. I am guessing that it ends up being very close to the HE, though. If this system worked consistently, Roulette would have been modified to reduce its effectiveness by now.

Quote: heather

This is how James Bond played Roulette in the book (not movie) "Casino Royale", so you're not the first to think of it. I've tried it a few times and it seemed boring and didn't make me any significant money.

I don't have anything that runs long-term projections for Roulette or I'd do those for you. I am guessing that it ends up being very close to the HE, though. If this system worked consistently, Roulette would have been modified to reduce its effectiveness by now.

I played this way for several days in Las Vegas on one of our earlier trips. I would bet $25-$100 on two of the groups of 12. I lost a lot of money and had a host want to meet me. Unless you are a really high-level player at a low house edge game, meeting a host is not a good sign!!!

Ignore the layout of the felt. Go by sections of the 0/00 wheel and then target those sections of 12 contiguous numbers on each side of the wheel.

Sometimes you will be betting the first and second dozen , the second and the third dozen , or the third and the first dozen.

Once you have mastered this you can go further and eliminate 2 numbers from the 24 pockets and operate on a reduced scale. It`s nly one number on each half of the wheel.

Just keep following the action of the wheel.

WASHOO2

Come on guys. the dozen bet pays 2:1, while the probability of a hit is 12/37 = 32.4%. This should not be too complicated, the dozen bet is negative EV (3*12/37 - 1 = -2.7%).

Playing two dozen bets does not change this very EV. If you play two dozen bets, the odds are 1:2, the probability of a hit is 24/37.
The EV of the combined bet is . Surprised ?

The two-dozen bet is as good (or as bad) as any other bet you make. The only thing it chances is variance. But if you want low variance, why don't you play the triple dozen bet ?

I have an online casino that I offer to all my players.

I would be thrilled if they would use the system.

First time I was in Vegas, I'd play two 12-sets at a time for $25 each and leave when I made $50. It went very well.

Last night, I bought in for $20 and put $3 down on 6 numbers and $2 elsewhere. It hit 00. Fuck roulette.

I wonder which is more:

A. Number of players to believe they have a long-term winning betting system.
B. Number of players to believe they could invent a casino game equal or better to what is out there now.
C. Number of players to believe both A and B.
D. Number of times somebody has remarked "The hard part is keeping the weight off" in the HB challenge thread.

My wife (Who hates gambling) has played Roulette 7 total times and won 5 times with the same number in 3 different countries: The #17

What are the odds of that???

Last victory was last Saturday. Next time, I'm in a Casino with her; I'm putting $100 straight-up on the #17.

Quote: CrapsForever

My wife (Who hates gambling) has played Roulette 7 total times and won 5 times with the same number in 3 different countries: The #17

I can top that. Here is the Wizard's Prime Number System, for use on double-zero roulette.

If you are north of the equator:

1. Bet $1 on any prime number. If you win, walk, if you lose, repeat up to 35 times or until you win.
2. If you haven't won after 35 spins, bet $2 on any prime number. If you win, walk, if you lose repeat until the 53rd spin or first win.
3. If you haven't won after 53 spins, bet $3 on any prime number. If you win, walk, if you lose repeat until the 65th spin or first win.
4. If you haven't won after 65 spins, bet $4 on any prime number. If you win, walk, if you lose repeat until the 74th spin or first win.
5. If you haven't won after 74 spins, bet $5 on any prime number. If you win, walk, if you lose repeat until the 81st spin or first win.
6. If you haven't won after 81 spins, bet $6 on any prime number. If you win, walk, if you lose repeat until the 87th spin or first win.
7. If you haven't won after 87 spins, bet $7 on any prime number. If you win, walk, if you lose repeat until the 92nd spin or first win.
8. If you haven't won after 92 spins, bet $8 on any prime number. If you win, walk, if you lose repeat until the 96th spin or first win.
9. If you haven't won after 96 spins, bet $9 on any prime number. If you win, walk, if you lose repeat until the 100th spin or first win.
10. If you haven't won after 100 spins, bet $10 on any prime number. If you win, walk, if you lose repeat until the 104th spin or first win.

If playing south of the equator, bet on composite numbers only.

This system will win 93.8% of the time. However, the other 6.2% you will lose $357. Results even better in single-zero roulette.

Now before I get misquoted, this system is just as worthless as every other one, but at least it is free.

Quote: CrapsForever

My wife (Who hates gambling) has played Roulette 7 total times and won 5 times with the same number in 3 different countries: The #17

What are the odds of that???

Last victory was last Saturday. Next time, I'm in a Casino with her; I'm putting $100 straight-up on the #17.

For only a total of 7 spins ever?? Not 7 sessions of spins? There is a big difference...

For only 7 lifetime spins, hitting 5 or more of a particular number in 7 spins is:

1 in 3.94 million for an American wheel (double zero)
1 in 3.46 million for an European wheel (single zero)

7 lifetime spins in Venice (Italy), Lucerne (Switzerland), Nassau (Bahamas) and on a Norwegian Cruise to the Western Caribbean; total of 7 spins over a 3 year period.

She'll only play Roulette when I force her to follow me to a Casino while on vacation...

Tringlomane, Thanks for the Stats!

The Wizard's system is pretty good, but Mosca's is even better.

I recall him once saying in a thread that the best strategy is simply to immediately pick the number that is going to hit.

What if I am north of the equator, but the online casino I am playing at is south of the equator? This game is too hard...

Why does roulette of all games attract so many people who think it is beatable.

The maths with roulette are simple, and it should be obvious to everyone that it cannot be beat.

I just dont get it. (Other than scammers trying to scam people by selling systems etc)

Quote: dealerwins

Why does roulette of all games attract so many people who think it is beatable.

Because it has so many places on the layout to
place a bet. People are convinced there is some
heretofore un-thought-of combo of bets that just
has to overcome the edge.

Quote: dealerwins

Why does roulette of all games attract so many people who think it is beatable.

The maths with roulette are simple, and it should be obvious to everyone that it cannot be beat.

I just dont get it. (Other than scammers trying to scam people by selling systems etc)

The answer to that question, in my opinion, is simply because there are so mnay potential systems due to the various bets.

I believe that Roulette probably has more betting options than most, if not all, other Table Games commonly found in a casino.

Let's say I wanted to make only $1 Bets, but I wanted to make every possible profitable bet in one go, I could make a bet such as:

Black
Odd
19-36
13-24 & 25-36
Five Sixlines
Eight Corners
11 Streets
17 Splits
35 Individual Numbers

Black-29, for example, could be at least a part of every one of these bets, and I would win $1.00 on each bet (set of bets).

When you get into combinations of Streets, Splits, Individual Numbers, Corners, Sixlines, Martingales, Reverse Martingales, Presses, Laboucheres, Reverse Labougheres, Kelly, etc. ad nauseum, you can essentially just make a ridiculous number of bets at the Roulette Table. I don't know off of the top of my head how many combinations of bets there are, but I'm sure the answer is a huge number.

There's just more room to come up with goofy things that look really good, and have a high win rate, until the Math gets slapped down on them. I know a guy who starts with a buck and Martingales Red/Even/1-19/2 Rows/, every time one of his selections wins, he goes back down to $1 on it. Obviously, if one of the rows wins, the Martingale continues on the non-winning row. He stops his Martingale at $16 (5 Consecutive Losses) except each row stops at $32. When one of his bets is stopped, it's done for the night. If he profits the stop point of $16 on one of the Even Money Bets, or $16 on either row, then that bet is done for the night. When all bets have either made $16 or lose $16/$32, he's done playing Roulette.

I'd go there just to watch, except he is one of my old friends from Missouri.

Anyway, sometimes he wins, sometimes he loses, but that's his, "System," as it were. He calls it the, "Multi-Marty."

What bets can you make in BJ for a system? You can put your chips in the betting circle, only so many ways to spin that...

Quote: Wizard

I wonder which is more:

A. Number of players to believe they have a long-term winning betting system.
B. Number of players to believe they could invent a casino game equal or better to what is out there now.
C. Number of players to believe both A and B.
D. Number of times somebody has remarked "The hard part is keeping the weight off" in the HB challenge thread.

A 0 B ? D 0 is my vote!
Interesting question as I imagine there are a few, a very few, here who can make money from Blackjack - sadly I'm not one of them! Also there are certainly a few here who have invented a casino game - now I admit I'm hoping to find that holy grail (or else take a photograph that makes megabucks) but am realistic enough to sense it is unlikely.

Quote: EvenBob

Because it has so many places on the layout to place a bet. People are convinced there is some heretofore un-thought-of combo of bets that just has to overcome the edge.

That's probably the correct answer. But I really can't get into that thinking why people come in and out asking those questions.

It's as simple as that: If all you can do is add up negative numbers, it will never turn up positive because there is a "yet unthought combination". It's right, you didn't check *all* combinations - you don't have to be sure about this simple fact.

Personally I like roulette, although it's house edge is large - you have perfect control about a fairly large range of variance. This variance control can be used to make +EV play under special conditions.

The OP has made one post--the original one that created this thread. I'm not sure how much he even believes in his system!!

OP is busy at his local brick and mortar building his bankroll. lol

OT..... Witnessed a player bet $2k on black the other day. He was expecting half back when 00 came out. Dealer said this isn't Atlantic City, no European imprisonment rule here. Player was not happy.

Quote: dealerwins

Why does roulette of all games attract so many people who think it is beatable.

The maths with roulette are simple, and it should be obvious to everyone that it cannot be beat.

I just dont get it. (Other than scammers trying to scam people by selling systems etc)

Unlike the other responders, the reason I think roulette attracts many people wanting to beat it is because of three things: 1) the high payout (35-1), 2) human interaction with the selection of the winning number, and 3) the people attracted to roulette are less likely to be mathematically inclined. However, #3 applies to a lot of people gambling in a casino, so I'm going to ignore that for now.

I think the high payout of a single number hit is the most attractive to a lot of people with gambling mentality. Plus, the concept of letting it ride. (The episode of Futurama where Zoidberg bets $8 million in Mars Vegas, wins, then lets it ride, and wins again, comes to mind.) In very few other casino games could a person plunk down a $100 bet on one number, one spin of the wheel, and come away with $3,500.

But it's not just this high payout. It's the spread of payouts available to the "shrewd" gambler. From a high of 35-1 all the way down to a seemingly meaningless 1-1 payout. But therein lies the secret to winning at the game. Obviously, the 35-1 bets are for the suckers, and the casino takes them for all they can get. But surely the 1-1 bets are beatable. You only win slowly, but you will win! [sarcasm off] I can easily see how some people would think that the high payout bets are sucker bets, while the low payout bets must allow for some sort of system which will beat the house.

The second concept is human interaction. I think a lot of times when there is a human being involved in the selection of winning a gamble, then people will want to say that a system should be possible. For roulette, it's the man spinning the wheel and placing the ball into motion. Surely it must be possible to watch how he operates, and a pattern will develop. For craps, it's the person throwing the dice. Dice setting works, right?!? Crazy dice throwers always seven out, right?!? Women who have never played before are lucky throwers, right?!? Even in blackjack, people think that how, where, who cuts the cards will make a distinction in what happens for that particular shoe. Over at the slot machines, people "know" that how they pull the handle, how hard they pull the handle, and when they pull the handle will all make a difference in whether or not they win, provided they have found the "lucky" machine, of course.

Quote: konceptum

3) the people attracted to roulette are less likely to be mathematically inclined. However, #3 applies to a lot of people gambling in a casino, so I'm going to ignore that for now.

Actually, I think that hit the nail on the head.

Maybe calculating house edge is beyond most people, and many people do not understand that every bet (except for the 00,0,1,2,3 combo) has the same relative payouts.

But it takes little to realize that, assuming it's a fair wheel, every number has an equal chance of hitting. There is no other game where that simple fact is so easy to grasp.

Plus, with all the different bets available, it doesn't take much imagination to devise a, ahem, sure-fire winning strategy.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

But it takes little to realize that, assuming it's a fair wheel, every number has an equal chance of hitting. There is no other game where that simple fact is so easy to grasp.
.

A huge number of roulette players think some
numbers hit more often than others. They also
think if you bet on the zeros and win, you have
somehow defeated the casino because those
are the 'house numbers' and they casino gets
mad if you win on them. Some people bet on
the zeros on every spin, along with their regular
bets. They think it evens things out or it buys
them some kind of insurance.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Maybe calculating house edge is beyond most people, and many people do not understand that every bet (except for the 00,0,1,2,3 combo) has the same relative payouts.

House edge is confusing to most people because of the way is normally described.
I understand it as the less than true odds payout on most simple bets.
The bet should pay 3 to 1 but you are paid just 2 to 1 on any win.

I make a $5 bet on Red and all I ever read or hear is over an infinite number of bets I WILL lose 5.26% or 26cents each bet made.
Come on.

I only make 10 bets and still find it hard to lose exactly $2.60
Then those that just push just the house edge and say NOTHING about variance,
because they really do not understand that concept or how to explain it to one that does not understand it,
say it is only for the "long run" not just 10 bets.

So now it is not exactly $2.60 but about 5.26%?

IS 5.0% close enough?
How about 4.89% in 30 spins?

IS there not any variance to the house edge?


Oops, that variance again.
No one understands it (variance or standard deviation)
and the ones that do can not explain it well enough to the ones that do not.
And that leaves us with just the old house edge to go by.

And dogs chase their tails!?!

Quote: mustangsally

House edge is confusing to most people because of the way is normally described.

Can we amend this statement to "House edge is confusing to most people because it is never described to them."? I mean, the average person in the casino is NEVER presented with the term 'house edge', nor do they understand that there is a house edge. In the middle of the day, when they are teaching people how to play roulette, they say, "You place the amount you want to bet on any number, and *when* it hits, you'll get paid 35-1." First, they say 'when' it hits, as though it's a guarantee. Nor are they ever told they are fighting a house edge of 5.26% or that the payout amount is less than true odds payout.

Not too long ago, you didn't know what was in the food you ate. Then a requirement was made for manufacturers to put ingredient lists on packages of food. Then they started requiring to put the Nutrition Facts on the label. Now there's a movement that people think the caffeine content of items should be listed on the package as well. One has to wonder if casinos were required to actually put 'truth in advertising' labels on their games, if it would have any effect on people. Seeing a sign that said, this game has a house edge of 5.26%. Or a sign that said, For every $100 you bet at this game, you will lose $5.26.

Quote: konceptum

Or a sign that said, For every $100 you bet at this game, you will lose $5.26.

If they did, I am sure some lawyer would sue and win over that sign.
Everyone that bets $100 on Roulette will only by coincidence lose 5.26
That would be from the change falling from their pockets.

The OPs betting idea is a bit hard to follow.
He calls a street bet that pays 2 to 1?

Maybe he needs to clarify his betting system so I can give it a spin, on the computer that is,
so he will know he will just not lose 5.26% of his total money bet.

That is just an average over many bets.
I know what variance is and can easily show how to use it in a gambling sense.

My roulette system is now for sale. Wife and i have booked a cruise around the world off the system's winnings.
First forum member to PM me can have the system for $89, which id $1 less than T Dane's book.

Yes, I do accept Paypal.

The OP should learn how to spell "lose" because it's going to happen to them a lot.

Quote: RonC

Assuming your numbers are correct, let's take $2,000 to the casino and bet it $20 ($10 on two groups of 12) at a time for 100 bets...

We'll do them right in a row...63 wins followed by 37 losses...

Win 1 unit 63 of the time @ $20 a bet =Bet $1260 and return of $1890 with $740 remaining to bet from the original amount...now you have $2630

Lose 2 units 37 of the time @ $20 a bet = Lose $740...now you have $1890.

Even simplified like this, the house advantage is almost correct (within $5, based on the rounding)

This is a loser...can it win sometimes? Sure. It is still a loser...

It can win sometimes in 100 spins.
Simple math shows this.
66 win and 34 lose = -2 units. OK I see we are betting $10 each so we are down $20.(100 unit bankroll)
67 win and 33 lose = +1 unit or $10
To win at least $10, this is binomial probability of 24.57991% or about 1 in 4 are winners
Not that horrible.

How about 500 spins
334 win and 166 lose = +2 unit or $20
To win at least $20, this is binomial probability of 4.95233% or about 1 in 20 are winners
Not looking too good
(RoR of busting before the 500 spins with the 100 unit bankroll is about 1 in 237,754.31)

How about 1,000 spins
667 win and 333 lose = +1 unit or $10
To win at least $10, this is binomial probability of 1.06516% or about 1 in 94 are winners
Getting worse but not impossible.
(RoR of busting before the 1,000 spins with the 100 unit bankroll is about 1 in 38)

We seem to have a trend developing here.
The more bets one makes, the less chance one has to show a profit.

You better be able to pick winning bets better than average if you want to play more than 1000 bets.

How about 10,000 spins
6667 win and 3333 lose = +1 unit or $10
To win at least $10, about 1 in 8,457,464,088,958.680 are winners
(Probability of NOT busting before the 10,000 spins with the 100 unit bankroll is about 1 in 1,691,358,778)


Yep, it got worse

Quote: CrapsForever

My wife (Who hates gambling) has played Roulette 7 total times and won 5 times with the same number in 3 different countries: The #17

What are the odds of that???

Last victory was last Saturday. Next time, I'm in a Casino with her; I'm putting $100 straight-up on the #17.

As good a system as any other one. Go for it. Though Seventeen is in the middle of the layout, its not the middle of the wheel.

Quote: guido111

The OPs betting idea is a bit hard to follow.
He calls a street bet that pays 2 to 1?

I believe that the OP's system works like this: Bet the same amount on two of the three columns simultaneously, Martingale until you win, repeat. With the columns paying out 2:1, the OP expects to win one betting unit while having better odds than on the even money bets, because one is betting just under two thirds of the wheel rather than just under half of the wheel (what the even money bets offer). Like I said, that's how James Bond played Roulette in one of the books, and I've tried it before and thought that it was boring and don't remember it being tremendously profitable. But I think that many people here probably realize that I prefer the call bets anyhow.

If I want a better than 50% chance of winning, I'll just stick with the Banker in Baccarat. If I'm playing Roulette, I want the excitement of maybe getting a really good payout. If I wanted to bet two thirds of the wheel, I'd probably do Voisins + Orphelins (can pay out as much as 36:1 if 26 hits), but that's just me. I like variance.

Every bet but one has the exact same house advantage. Roulette is fun to play as entertainment, doesn't need for you to be sharp so it's a good game to be with friends, drinking, having a good time. The only thing you can do is know when to leave a table. You limit your winning sessions to amounts 6% higher than your losing sessions amounts and you can enjoy the game day in and day out without getting killed. But a system? No, never seen one even come close because it's mathematically impossible, and knowing that before you sit down makes it easy to walk when you have to. And for the poster who said it's more for the less mathematically inclined? Probably true, but I love the game and I love math, love the odds, love running the payout totals in my head after each result. Doing the math on the fly for stacks of chips on and around a number is like crack for me.

Quote: FleaStiff

As good a system as any other one. Go for it. Though Seventeen is in the middle of the layout, its not the middle of the wheel.

The #17 is both our lucky # and has been EXTREMELY lucky for my wife when playing Roulette. The most we have ever put straight up on the #17 is €5 for €175 profit on our honeymoon in Casino de Venezia in Venice, Italy last Spring.

Quote: NickyDim

, love running the payout totals in my head after each result. Doing the math on the fly for stacks of chips on and around a number is like crack for me.

You've no idea how lucky you are. I couldn't do the math without taking my shoes off.

Quote: FleaStiff

You've no idea how lucky you are. I couldn't do the math without taking my shoes off.

Hope you never have to count to 21 in public.

One good thing about roulette is that even American roulette offers the best odds I know of for a straight longshot on the order of 35:1.

nvmind