MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
• Posts: 6526
March 1st, 2012 at 12:13:50 AM permalink
Quote: EvenBob

Nothing changes. But its a playing strategy you can use
last longer.

This is a contradiction. If it does indeed slow your losses (as opposed to betting on the "sleeping dozen"), then the odds actually would be changing. As your friend is fond of saying, "you can't have it both ways."

If you really want to slow your losses, come to grips with the fact that each spin of a roulette wheel is independent -- and then come to grips with the ramifications of that independence. The first of which is that "sleeping dozens" don't exist except in hindsight where you can't bet on them.

Unless you know of a roulette game that lets you bet on the last spin instead of the next one...
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
EvenBob
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
• Posts: 19751
March 1st, 2012 at 12:28:13 AM permalink
Quote: MathExtremist

This is a contradiction. If it does indeed slow your losses (as opposed to betting on the "sleeping dozen"), then the odds actually would be changing. ..

How do you figure that? You're betting twice as
much as you'll win, thats the factor that levels
the bet. Do you actually think that you lose money
at exactly the same rate in roulette no matter
where you place your bets? You can't be serious.
Have you ever investigated the game at all, or
do you just blindly believe everything you're told.
"It's not enough to succeed, your friends must fail." Gore Vidal
PopCan
Joined: Feb 15, 2012
• Posts: 178
March 1st, 2012 at 12:29:57 AM permalink
Sleeping dozen?!?

Here's a picture of a roulette wheel with each dozen's location highlighted:

What on earth would cause a particular dozen to "sleep"? Does the ball magically avoid landing in a particular pocket only to land in the pocket a maximum of 2 pockets away? If (and this is a giant if) the wheel was horribly biased AND the dealer trained for years for precise spins AND the dealer initiated the spin at the same point every time AND he only initiated a spin when the rotor was at the same point and speed each time, I could possibly acknowledge a sector/section hitting more or less often. How can you possibly justify hitting a given dozen more or less than the other?
thecesspit
Joined: Apr 19, 2010
• Posts: 5936
March 1st, 2012 at 12:42:08 AM permalink
Quote: EvenBob

How do you figure that? You're betting twice as
much as you'll win, thats the factor that levels
the bet. Do you actually think that you lose money
at exactly the same rate in roulette no matter
where you place your bets? You can't be serious.
Have you ever investigated the game at all, or
do you just blindly believe everything you're told.

You are taking a low variance bet. Betting sleepers, or hot columns, or whatever is nothing to do with it. Selecting 24 numbers to win has plenty to do with it.

BUT the rate of loss is exactly the same on average. The rate of decline is 5.26% of your bet. The bet by bet change in your bankroll ISNT 5.26%, naturally. With a two column bet youll tend to get closer to that expected rate quicker than making a single number straight up.

And thats why every bet on the roulette wheel isnt the same.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
PopCan
Joined: Feb 15, 2012
• Posts: 178
March 1st, 2012 at 1:41:57 AM permalink
Quote: EvenBob

You're wrong. For instance, if you're tracking
dozens, its a fact that one of the dozens will
often sleep for varied lengths of time. It happens
constantly. Its not unusual for a dozen to
sleep for 25 out of 30 spins. Its not an illusion,
its not fantasy, it actually happens. Betting the
other two dozens while that dozen is sleeping
is an optimum playing decision.

An optimum playing decision effects the house edge. Playing basic strategy on BJ versus making the standard mistakes lowers the house edge by 1-2%. Playing with basic strategy on Three Card Poker has a house edge of around 3.5% depending on the paytable while playing blind has a house edge of around 7.8%.

Playing the dozens on roulette is a BETTING decision and not a playing decision. Once the bets are placed there are no further decisions to make. The average loss per session given the same average bet is also the same. Like thecesspit said, you're only changing your variance: How far from the house edge you'll tend to be.

For example I wrote a few quick sims of a player playing a million 3 hour (120 total spins) sessions (source code here). One where he bets two different dozens at one unit each, one where he bets one dozen at 2 units, and one where he bets the 19-36 at 2 units. Each has the same average bet. Here are the results:

2Dozens - Average Bet: 2
2Dozens - Win per Session: -6.489081
2Dozens - Loss Per Unit Bet: -0.0270378375
2Dozens - Win Count: 307820 (30.782%)
2Dozens - Average Win: 11.4004970437269
2Dozens - Loss Count: 692180 (69.218%)
2Dozens - Average Loss: -14.4447715912046

1Dozen - Average Bet: 2
1Dozen - Win per Session: -6.485976
1Dozen - Loss Per Unit Bet: -0.0270249
1Dozen - Win Count: 375602 (37.5602%)
1Dozen - Average Win: 24.774069360653
1Dozen - Loss Count: 624398 (62.4398%)
1Dozen - Average Loss: -25.2902251448595

19to36 - Average Bet: 2
19to36 - Win per Session: -6.486312
19to36 - Loss Per Unit Bet: -0.0270263
19to36 - Win Count: 348648 (34.8648%)
19to36 - Average Win: 16.8097450723939
19to36 - Loss Count: 651352 (65.1352%)
19to36 - Average Loss: -18.9559500853609

The only things that changed were the win rate and variance. This may or may not be good for the player depending on his goals.

Quote: EvenBob

Do you actually think that you lose money
at exactly the same rate in roulette no matter
where you place your bets? You can't be serious.

Yup, see the above. On average you'll lose the same amount for any session length at a given average bet.

Quote: EvenBob

Roulette has systems that slow
down the losses, which is a good thing for the
average player.

Time to be pedantic. Roulette has ways of betting that will lower the variance, not slow the losses.

Quote: EvenBob

Its the same as seeing a high count in BJ and
not knowing if you'll get the 10's or the dealer
will get them. No accurate predictability.

There's a huge difference here. Yes, you don't know who will get the 10s. However, the 10s are far more valuable to the player due to doubles and blackjacks than to the dealer who will more frequently bust in a 10 heavy deck.
edward
Joined: Jan 18, 2012
• Posts: 76
March 1st, 2012 at 2:50:10 AM permalink
Quote: PopCan

Sleeping dozen?!?

Here's a picture of a roulette wheel with each dozen's location highlighted:

What on earth would cause a particular dozen to "sleep"? Does the ball magically avoid landing in a particular pocket only to land in the pocket a maximum of 2 pockets away? If (and this is a giant if) the wheel was horribly biased AND the dealer trained for years for precise spins AND the dealer initiated the spin at the same point every time AND he only initiated a spin when the rotor was at the same point and speed each time, I could possibly acknowledge a sector/section hitting more or less often. How can you possibly justify hitting a given dozen more or less than the other?

From Your picture above, I've noticed that there are twice occurences on the wheel where dozen 2 does not appear for 6 spots.

Does this in some way inbalance it? Im just asking, i dont know.
EvenBob
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
• Posts: 19751
March 1st, 2012 at 5:43:42 AM permalink
Quote: thecesspit

BUT the rate of loss is exactly the same on average..

And that average takes a long long time to reach.
Every bet you place has an eventual loss rate of
5.26%. For every \$100 you wager, you'll get back
about \$95 eventually. The key word here is eventually.

The average person with no strategy will be all over
the map with it. They'll lose the \$100 almost right
away. Then win back \$150. Etc. If they track their
play for years, they'll be losing at the house edge.

A player with a practiced method, strategy or
whatever, will still lose at the house edge, but
their variance will be very tight. They won't have
the wild swings the average player has. This is
exactly what Ken (MrJJJ) does. Does he win all
the time? Hardly. But right now, he wins more than
he loses. Eventually, the math says he'll lose more
than he wins.

If he lives long enough. He's found a way to play
very close to the HE in every session. This means
he doesn't have the huge high roller coaster peaks
and valleys of the average player. His variance
sine wave is almost flat lining.

Right now he's on the positive part of the sine wave,
above the line. He could stay there theoretically
for decades. Eventually the losses will start to overtake
the wins and he'll lose more than he wins for a very
long time. Why don't more people play this way?
Because its too much work, it takes over your life,
it becomes an obsession.

So you're right, the HE effects every bet. And it takes
its toll. Eventually.
"It's not enough to succeed, your friends must fail." Gore Vidal
WongBo
Joined: Feb 3, 2012
• Posts: 2126
March 1st, 2012 at 5:48:17 AM permalink
Pics or it didn't happen...
In a bet, there is a fool and a thief. - Proverb.
EvenBob
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
• Posts: 19751
March 1st, 2012 at 6:15:03 AM permalink
Whats the HE in bacarrat, about 1%? If you look
at the sine wave of the average player, with his
BR as the baseline, the curve goes way up on a win
and crashes way below the line on a loss. There
are players in bac who have strategies that do just
what Mrjjj does, and their curve is even longer than
his, they stay ahead longer. This is what all the crazy
bac players strive for, but they don't have the patience
or discipline to achieve it.
"It's not enough to succeed, your friends must fail." Gore Vidal
buzzpaff
Joined: Mar 8, 2011