Betting System Challenge

Threads: 12
Posts: 548

Joined: Jan 25, 2010

June 16th, 2012 at 2:17:09 PM permalink

It's a progression that beats the HE. It hasn't been tested, but it wins outright. I just don't know what kind of bankroll it needs. I can't do the math for that.

EvenBob

EvenBob

Threads: 442
Posts: 29634

Joined: Jul 18, 2010

June 16th, 2012 at 2:27:20 PM permalink

Quote: JyBrd0403
It's a progression that beats the HE. It hasn't been tested, but it wins outright. .

No it doesn't, and its been tested, just not by you.

Don't waste your time.

"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."

buzzpaff

Threads: 112
Posts: 5328

Joined: Mar 8, 2011

June 16th, 2012 at 2:33:51 PM permalink

I calculate your bankroll need to be $34,653.44 approximately

JyBrd0403

Threads: 12
Posts: 548

Joined: Jan 25, 2010

June 16th, 2012 at 4:54:14 PM permalink

Buzzpaff, could you run a simulation of this system for me. It's for single zero roulette. Only problem is that it has to be a roulette simulator. The system requires that you rebet the last bet whenever a zero comes up. That way the progression itself is 50/50 18 blacks vs. 18 reds. What you do is basically D'Alembert the Martingale, but instead of dropping back down to 1 unit after a win, you just bet half the last bet. So you double the bet every time you lose, and you bet half of the last bet when you win. Like this 1-2-4-8-16-32-64-32-16-8-4-2-1. And, if a zero comes up you bet the same amount again. So, if you bet 32 and a zero come up, you don't double the bet, you just bet 32 again.

If you, or anybody else, can run that simulation you'll see the game wins outright. Feel free to post the results here. I think the bankroll would be too high to play in real life. If it's playable in real life, I'd be happy to take a Vegas kick back on the winnings :) But, I think the bankroll would be to high, and the casinos won't have a High Roller table that would handle the biggest bets on that progression.

I've got another game that wins outright, and also is playable in real life casino play.

Gabes22

Gabes22

Threads: 15
Posts: 1427

Joined: Jul 19, 2011

June 16th, 2012 at 5:40:42 PM permalink

There are many flaws with that system first off, the Martingale is designed you by winning you 1 betting unit
If you lose betting 1, you bet 2 for a net of 1 as you won 2 but lost 1
If you lose betting 1 and 2, you win at 4 for a net of 1 as you won 4 but lost 3
If you lose betting 1, 2 and 4 and win at 8 for a net of one as you won 8 and lost 7
and so on and so forth, by cutting the bet in half when you win rather than going back down to 1 unit would increase you risk of ruin.

A flute with no holes is not a flute, a donut with no holes is a danish

JyBrd0403

Threads: 12
Posts: 548

Joined: Jan 25, 2010

June 16th, 2012 at 6:13:33 PM permalink

Quote: Gabes22
There are many flaws with that system first off, the Martingale is designed you by winning you 1 betting unit
If you lose betting 1, you bet 2 for a net of 1 as you won 2 but lost 1
If you lose betting 1 and 2, you win at 4 for a net of 1 as you won 4 but lost 3
If you lose betting 1, 2 and 4 and win at 8 for a net of one as you won 8 and lost 7
and so on and so forth, by cutting the bet in half when you win rather than going back down to 1 unit would increase you risk of ruin.

No, there are no flaws with the system. First of all you have to understand the martingale does not win on a 50/50 game, it breaks even, like all other systems besides the D'Alembert. The problem is you don't understand the D'Alembert and how it works. I've spent years studying the D'Alembert, I know how it works, and I know why it doesn't work on an HE game. By D'Alemberting the Martingale you produce an outright win even on an HE game. You'll have to do the math yourself to figure out why it works. Good luck. It took me years to figure out how it works. But, hey, if someone has a roulette simulator, we won't have to wait long to find out who's right and who's wrong.

EvenBob

EvenBob

Threads: 442
Posts: 29634

Joined: Jul 18, 2010

June 16th, 2012 at 6:31:31 PM permalink

This isn't a roulette forum. Go to
VLSroulette.com and somebody there will gladly
test it for you.

"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."

WongBo

WongBo

Threads: 62
Posts: 2126

Joined: Feb 3, 2012

June 16th, 2012 at 6:39:47 PM permalink

Quote: EvenBob
This isn't a roulette forum, nobody here cares. Go to
VLSroulette.com and somebody there will gladly
test it for you.

mr. charm strikes again

In a bet, there is a fool and a thief. - Proverb.

Mission146

Threads: 142
Posts: 16832

Joined: May 15, 2012

June 16th, 2012 at 6:44:48 PM permalink

Quote: JyBrd0403
I'm curious as to why these betting system challenges have regulations on bankroll amount and maximum units bet for these challenges. Everyone here is 100% certain that no game could win, even with an infinite bankroll, right. So, why the regulations? MichaelBlueJay's challenge requires a real life casino game with a table limit of $5000. In real life, if you're betting a system and you reach the table limit, wouldn't you just move to a higher limit table and place the next bet at that table?

Another thing I'm curious about, the Wizard's challenge says if your system wins, he will post the system on his website and say he was completely wrong about system betting. MichaelBlueJay promises in writing not to use your system himself in a casino. Personally, if I give you a winning betting system, I definitely wouldn't want you to post it on your website, logical reasons apply, however, I would love for you to play the system in a casino for yourself and put in writing that you'll cut me 15% of the winnings. 20 people cutting you 15% of the profits means you make 300% instead of 100%.

Just curious, how interested you are in a betting system that can beat an HA game.

The goal of the challenge is to develop a system which can be used by an actual player in improving the Edge into the player's favor. The regulations are designed in support of that purpose.

1.) Bankroll

-There must be a limited bankroll because, technically, every single person to ever walk into the casino would have a finite bankroll. If an individual were the richest person on the face of the planet, with a net value (liquidated) that exceeds the value of the entire casino, then the casino's, "Bankroll," could not cover the player's bankroll and the casino could not risk more money than it actually has.

-It is with this that, regardless of how much theoretical money you want to give to the player, some bankroll will always come into play because the player's cash cannot exceed the casino's cash or the casino cannot necessarily make the bet.

-The other reason is that I don't need your system to know a system that would work with infinite bankroll. I already know one: The Martingale. Given infinite money and infinite time, the Martingale MUST win.

2.) Table Limit

-There will always be table limits, but it's not the Table Limit itself that is important to the casino, at least not when it comes to systems, it is the spread. For example, if you have a Table Minimum of $5.00, Max $200.00, a Martingale line fails at six consecutive losses (5, 10, 20, 40 80, 160-can't bet 320)

If you increase the Maximum to $500, then it is seven consecutive losses (5, 10, 20, 40, 80, 160, 320-can't bet $640)

If you make it $1,000, then it is eight consecutive losses (5, 10, 20, 40, 80, 160, 320, 640-can't bet 1280)

-I understand your point about moving to higher limit tables, but eventually you will reach the point where a real casino would actually say, "I'm sorry, Mr. so-and-so, but we can't cover a bet of $5,000,000/hand. Casuarina may be able to cover that kind of action, give them a call."

(The last part was a joke)

3.) Further, and to stay with Martingale, even if you were to reach a point where the next bet would be $1,310,720 (assuming $5.00 base bet) then he has lost eighteen hands in a row and $1,310,715. Most players cannot afford to lose $1,310,715, so the system would be patently useless to them, even in the event of a win on that nineteenth hand.

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219

Mission146

Threads: 142
Posts: 16832

Joined: May 15, 2012

June 16th, 2012 at 7:28:26 PM permalink

Quote: JyBrd0403
Buzzpaff, could you run a simulation of this system for me. It's for single zero roulette. Only problem is that it has to be a roulette simulator. The system requires that you rebet the last bet whenever a zero comes up. That way the progression itself is 50/50 18 blacks vs. 18 reds. What you do is basically D'Alembert the Martingale, but instead of dropping back down to 1 unit after a win, you just bet half the last bet. So you double the bet every time you lose, and you bet half of the last bet when you win. Like this 1-2-4-8-16-32-64-32-16-8-4-2-1. And, if a zero comes up you bet the same amount again. So, if you bet 32 and a zero come up, you don't double the bet, you just bet 32 again.

If you, or anybody else, can run that simulation you'll see the game wins outright. Feel free to post the results here. I think the bankroll would be too high to play in real life. If it's playable in real life, I'd be happy to take a Vegas kick back on the winnings :) But, I think the bankroll would be to high, and the casinos won't have a High Roller table that would handle the biggest bets on that progression.

I've got another game that wins outright, and also is playable in real life casino play.

This system would fail, and quickly, for a variety of reasons.

1.) You are basically playing the Martingale, just changing the base bet.

-The purpose of the Martingale System is that you double the bet after each loss and restart the system with the base bet after a win. By doing so, you will ensure that a completed Martingale line wins back all of the previous losses plus one unit.

-Your system does absolutely nothing, except continuously plays the Martingale, but changes the base bet in the event of a win. I will illustrate:

If you lose five bets in a row starting with 5 and win one:

-5 -10 -20 -40 -80 +160 = 5

You have profitted $5.00, which we are calling one unit.

If you accomplish this, but instead of returning to the normal Martingale, you cut the winning bet in half and lose five then win one (Table Max. $500-for example)

-80, -160, -320...You Can't Make The Bet!!!

The advantage, to the extent that it can be said the Martingale offers one (it doesn't) is that it takes a substantial number of losses in a row to wipe you out. Your system will wipe you out faster because, instead of returning to the base bet and starting a new Martingale line, you are simply dictating a higher initial minimum bet for yourself, in this case, $75 higher.

For example, let's just say you have a pattern where you lose three spins in a row followed by one win:

-5 -10 -20 +40 (+5 total) -20, -40, -80, +160 (+25 total) -80, -160, -320 (The next bet cannot be made)

In comparison, if you were guaranteed to have a pattern whereby you would lose three spins consecutively followed by winning one, the Martingale could never fail. That is the purpose of the Martingale. In the sequence above, you have lost a total of $535.00 due to the table limit.

In short, the Martingale system relies upon ONE WIN to break a losing streak and still result in a player profit. Your system not only counts on a win to break the losing streak, it also relies upon winning streaks to keep you away from the betting limit. Furthermore, where a losing streak that brings you to the Max Bet will demoralize your bankroll, you are not taking advantage of your winning streaks because you are decreasing your bets everytime you win.

2.) Rebet on Zero

-This is probably the single worst part of your betting system because it deliberately ignores a loss.

Let's say you lose two in a row, then lose on a zero, lose one more, then win:

-5, -10, -20, -20 +40 (-$15 total)

3.) I understand where you think the advantage in your system lies. With the Martingale System, you come ahead the +5 units and then re-start. Your system does, to a certain extent, take advantage of winning streaks. For instance, if you lose five in a row then win three:

-5, -10, -20, -40, -80, +160 (+5 total) +80 (+85 total) +40 (+125 total)

Then you have taken advantage of three consecutive wins in a fashion that the Martingale fails to do.

I have also taken note of the fact that if you went, win-loss-win-loss, you would also come out ahead.

-5, +10 (+5 total) -5 (Even) +10 (+10 total) -5 (+5 total) +10 (+15 total)---This is the same thing Martingale would do.

So, don't think I don't understand the purpose of your system.

CONCLUSION:

The main difference between your system and the Martingale is that you system chooses to conveniently ignore a specific type of loss (on zero) and the Martingale would never ignore any loss. If the Martingale did ever ignore a loss, then it could not succeed, even theoretically.

The other problem with your system is the Martingale seeks nothing more haughty than breaking a losing streak. In other words, the Martingale can ultimately succeed while only winning a fraction of the time. With a $5-$500 Bet Spread, for example, the Martingale can theoretically lose:

5, 10, 20, 40, 80, 160 (Win on 320)

Six times for every win, 1/6 or 16.66666667% win rate, to ultimately be successful.

Unfortunately, your system must win AS MUCH as it loses in order to succeed, which is why, I believe, you were conveniently ignoring the loss on zero.

However, not only must your system win as much, your system can also not be confronted by losing streaks (however small) that are not offset by winning streaks, or you will eventually reach a point where two losses in a row after a win would put the next bet over the table limit.

Your system has its good points, though, I'll admit. I do like how your system will capitalize on a winning streak (in terms of profit) better than will the Martingale, however that does come at increased risk of running into the table limit. I cannot reiterate enough that the goal of the Martingale is to take advantage of the spread between the minimum/maximum bets so as to ensure as many consecutive losses as possible before reaching the Table Limit.

It is for this reason, for example, that you will not see a table with a Minimum of $5 and Maximum of $500000. The percentages for this sort of thing have been fully analyzed by the casinos and the spread between Minimum/Maximum is partially based upon that.

In short, your system has a short-term rate of profit that may be higher than the Martingale's rate, but your system is also more susceptible to failure because you reach points between where there is less of a spread (in terms of doubling) between the amount bet after a win and the Table Limit.

If you would be so kind, please explain the intended purpose of ignoring the zero. I can't figure out why you would be compelled to do that.

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219

buzzpaff

Threads: 112
Posts: 5328

Joined: Mar 8, 2011

June 16th, 2012 at 7:34:01 PM permalink

" If you would be so kind, please explain the intended purpose of ignoring the zero. I can't figure out why you would be compelled to do that. "

If you can not see such an obvious thing, I doubt your ability to properly evaluate this system !!

weaselman

weaselman

Threads: 20
Posts: 2349

Joined: Jul 11, 2010

June 16th, 2012 at 7:34:42 PM permalink

Quote: JyBrd0403
You'll have to do the math yourself to figure out why it works.

Quote: JyBrd0403
I can't do the math for that.

Quote: JyBrd0403
I know how it works

Case closed.

"When two people always agree one of them is unnecessary"

buzzpaff

Threads: 112
Posts: 5328

Joined: Mar 8, 2011

June 16th, 2012 at 7:37:29 PM permalink

" Case closed. " Then you are in agreement it works ?

Mission146

Threads: 142
Posts: 16832

Joined: May 15, 2012

June 16th, 2012 at 7:40:03 PM permalink

Quote: buzzpaff
" If you would be so kind, please explain the intended purpose of ignoring the zero. I can't figure out why you would be compelled to do that. "

If you can not see such an obvious thing, I doubt your ability to properly evaluate this system !!

I analyzed it in the context of the Martingale, which I understand inside and out, chiefly because there isn't a whole lot to understand. I believe that the purpose of ignoring the zero is because, ignoring the zero, red and black come up evenly resulting in a 50% chance of winning.

The problem, as I have explained, is that you cannot essentially, "Ignore a loss," when playing a betting system. The reaosn why you cannot ignore a loss is because you will never bet in a fashion that makes up for the loss.

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219

buzzpaff

Threads: 112
Posts: 5328

Joined: Mar 8, 2011

June 16th, 2012 at 7:45:15 PM permalink

The system obviously must include a reverse Martingale on 0O to counter any losses, thereby guaranteeing a winning result.

Mission146

Threads: 142
Posts: 16832

Joined: May 15, 2012

June 16th, 2012 at 8:05:25 PM permalink

Quote: buzzpaff
The system obviously must include a reverse Martingale on 0O to counter any losses, thereby guaranteeing a winning result.

No, you eventually have to win two in a row to offset any zero. If you ignore any zero, the first win afterwards still results in an overall loss.

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219

SOOPOO

SOOPOO

Threads: 123
Posts: 11520

Joined: Aug 8, 2010

June 16th, 2012 at 8:14:57 PM permalink

This is the best way to answer your question..... In the history of mankind, adding all the casino games with built in permanent house edges, no great mind has ever been able to devise a system to beat the house edge in a negative expectation game......... until JyBird came along....... So, seriously, putting aside the double up, but after a zero rebet, then add two units, then switch from odd to even, then bet red...... YOU REALLY think that YOU are the one to finally beat these games??? And then I ask..... why ask us about it...... why not JUST GO DO IT!!!!!!! Use REAL money, win REAL money. Keep records, then brag to us about it. I will be the first to congratulate you. I promise I won't let the casino's know your secret.

buzzpaff

Threads: 112
Posts: 5328

Joined: Mar 8, 2011

June 16th, 2012 at 9:10:43 PM permalink

" I promise I won't let the casino's know your secret. " No worried about that as my patent will protect me from any actions
the casino's might take.

JyBrd0403

Threads: 12
Posts: 548

Joined: Jan 25, 2010

June 16th, 2012 at 9:24:37 PM permalink

Quote: buzzpaff
" I promise I won't let the casino's know your secret. " No worried about that as my patent will protect me from any actions
the casino's might take.

You're going to steal my game and pass it off as your own buzzpaff. :) That's mean. Why wouldn't you just kick me down some money from the winnings?

JyBrd0403

Threads: 12
Posts: 548

Joined: Jan 25, 2010

June 16th, 2012 at 9:38:42 PM permalink

Quote: Mission146
-The other reason is that I don't need your system to know a system that would work with infinite bankroll. I already know one: The Martingale. Given infinite money and infinite time, the Martingale MUST win.

The martingale breaks even with and infinite bankroll on a 50/50 game of chance. Here's the math for let's say losing 2 in a row.

Lose 1-2 = -3 You lose 2 in a row and you're at -3. On average you'll lose 2 in a row every 6 trials, so you'll have 3 wins in 6 trials, and you'll lose 2 in a row in 6 trials. You'll win 3 units ( the 3 wins) and you'll lose 3 units ( the 2 losses in a row). The system breaks even on a 50/50 game. Now, you can bet 4 units after the 2 losses in a row, but it won't help you, the game will still break even.

By the way, on a HE game the martingale loses outright.

Mission146

Threads: 142
Posts: 16832

Joined: May 15, 2012

June 16th, 2012 at 10:01:17 PM permalink

Quote: JyBrd0403
The martingale breaks even with and infinite bankroll on a 50/50 game of chance. Here's the math for let's say losing 2 in a row.

Lose 1-2 = -3 You lose 2 in a row and you're at -3. On average you'll lose 2 in a row every 6 trials, so you'll have 3 wins in 6 trials, and you'll lose 2 in a row in 6 trials. You'll win 3 units ( the 3 wins) and you'll lose 3 units ( the 2 losses in a row). The system breaks even on a 50/50 game. Now, you can bet 4 units after the 2 losses in a row, but it won't help you, the game will still break even.

By the way, on a HE game the martingale loses outright.

How would the Martingale ever break even? You profit the amount of the base bet every time the Martingale completes, (i.e. everytime you win a bet) so with infinite money, the Martingale theoretically couldn't lose because you must win a hand eventually. When you do win that hand, then you will be ahead the amount of the base unit bet plus any previous winnings.

(lose two in a row)

-1, -2 = -3

We agree so far.

Next bet

4-Win = +4 Profit = 1

Two losses in a row:

-1, -2

Next bet

4-Win = +4 Profit =1 Total Profit = 2

Where do you get breaks even?

By the way, on an HE game, the anything except for counting cards loses outright, but then you're technically not playing an HE game...at least at the time the count is in your favor.

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219

JyBrd0403

Threads: 12
Posts: 548

Joined: Jan 25, 2010

June 16th, 2012 at 10:02:45 PM permalink

Quote: Mission146
I believe that the purpose of ignoring the zero is because, ignoring the zero, red and black come up evenly resulting in a 50% chance of winning.

By ignoring the zero you DO NOT get a 50% chance of WINNING. Ignoring the zero, makes the betting progression 50/50. If you're betting Red, and the next five rolls come out. Black-Black-Zero-Red-Red. You're D'Alembert progression would be 1-2-3-4-3. My system is 50/50. The progression would be 1-2-3-3-2-1. You give 3 units to the casino when the zero lands in this situation, but the progression stays 50/50. This is why the D'Alembert loses on an HE game.

Mission146

Threads: 142
Posts: 16832

Joined: May 15, 2012

June 16th, 2012 at 10:17:32 PM permalink

Quote: JyBrd0403
By ignoring the zero you DO NOT get a 50% chance of WINNING. Ignoring the zero, makes the betting progression 50/50. If you're betting Red, and the next five rolls come out. Black-Black-Zero-Red-Red. You're D'Alembert progression would be 1-2-3-4-3. My system is 50/50. The progression would be 1-2-3-3-2-1. You give 3 units to the casino when the zero lands in this situation, but the progression stays 50/50. This is why the D'Alembert loses on an HE game.

If there were no zero, you would be 50%/50% to win, that's my point. Your system is based off of a 50/50 chance of winning, even though such is not the case.

I understand the way your system works, and it never does anything to compensate for losses on zeroes, by design, your system fails to do this. The advantages that your system sees compared to the Martingale in being better at taking advantage of winning streaks are partially negated by the fact that you have to compensate for losses on zeroes and you are not making such compensations within the system.

I suppose not factoring the loss on zero into the Progression will help you combat the Table Limit slightly, but flat-betting would help you combat it 100% of the time.

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219

JyBrd0403

Threads: 12
Posts: 548

Joined: Jan 25, 2010

June 16th, 2012 at 10:23:49 PM permalink

Quote: Mission146
the Martingale theoretically couldn't lose because you must win a hand eventually.

It theoretically couldn't win either, because the losses in a row break even with the total amount of wins. I'll try to explain the martingale to you. You lose 18 in a row in approx. 500,000 trials. That's $250,000 in winnings. So, you can clearly see that the martingale wins and wins and wins and eventually it will lose 18 in a row and you'll break even. It does the same thing after 6 trials. You win 3 and lose 2 in a row and you break even, it's your choice to bet 4 units or not on the next roll, but no matter what you do the martingale just breaks even. Period. The D'Alembert wins outright.

JyBrd0403

Threads: 12
Posts: 548

Joined: Jan 25, 2010

June 16th, 2012 at 10:25:31 PM permalink

Quote:
Mission146 and it never does anything to compensate for losses on zeroes

Yes,it does.

JyBrd0403

Threads: 12
Posts: 548

Joined: Jan 25, 2010

June 16th, 2012 at 10:26:45 PM permalink

Quote: Mission146
I understand the way your system works

No, you don't.

Mission146

Threads: 142
Posts: 16832

Joined: May 15, 2012

June 16th, 2012 at 10:27:28 PM permalink

Quote: JyBrd0403
It theoretically couldn't win either, because the losses in a row break even with the total amount of wins. I'll try to explain the martingale to you. You lose 18 in a row in approx. 500,000 trials. That's $250,000 in winnings. So, you can clearly see that the martingale wins and wins and wins and eventually it will lose 18 in a row and you'll break even. It does the same thing after 6 trials. You win 3 and lose 2 in a row and you break even, it's your choice to bet 4 units or not on the next roll, but no matter what you do the martingale just breaks even. Period. The D'Alembert wins outright.

What?

With an infinite bankroll and no table Maximum the Martingale would always eventually profit one unit.

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219

JyBrd0403

Threads: 12
Posts: 548

Joined: Jan 25, 2010

June 16th, 2012 at 10:35:15 PM permalink

Quote: Mission146
What?

With an infinite bankroll and no table Maximum the Martingale would always eventually profit one unit.

Right, if you stop when you're ahead, the martingale will produce a win at some point. Problem is, once you get ahead you have to quit, and you can never, ever, play again. Otherwise, you'll just break even.

Mission146

Threads: 142
Posts: 16832

Joined: May 15, 2012

June 16th, 2012 at 10:37:10 PM permalink

Quote: JyBrd0403
Right, if you stop when you're ahead, the martingale will produce a win at some point, who knows when, but you will be ahead at some point. Problem is, once you get ahead you have to quit, and you can never, ever, play again. Otherwise, you'll just break even.

That's not even remotely the case with an infinite bankroll and no table Maximum. You would always add one unit to your profits for every completion of the Martingale line, and every Martinglae line would eventually complete.

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219

JyBrd0403

Threads: 12
Posts: 548

Joined: Jan 25, 2010

June 16th, 2012 at 10:44:45 PM permalink

Quote: Mission146
That's not even remotely the case with an infinite bankroll and no table Maximum. You would always add one unit to your profits for every completion of the Martingale line, and every Martinglae line would eventually complete.

Yes, and then, you would eventually lose 18,000 in a row, and break even.

Mission146

Threads: 142
Posts: 16832

Joined: May 15, 2012

June 17th, 2012 at 3:50:59 AM permalink

Quote: JyBrd0403
Yes, and then, you would eventually lose 18,000 in a row, and break even.

You would have to stop to break even, why would you stop with infinite money? You'd just play until you finally win a hand.

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219

mrjjj

mrjjj

Threads: 75
Posts: 1579

Joined: Sep 4, 2010

June 17th, 2012 at 7:09:37 AM permalink

Why do you guys argue regarding a PRETEND situation? There are max payouts at tables so.......end of story.

Ken

Gabes22

Gabes22

Threads: 15
Posts: 1427

Joined: Jul 19, 2011

June 17th, 2012 at 7:17:38 AM permalink

Quote: mrjjj
Why do you guys argue regarding a PRETEND situation? There are max payouts at tables so.......end of story.

Ken

Very true. Unless you can find me a casino that doesn't have a table max or a person with an unlimited bankroll, then it is pointless arguing it. It is very probable that table max's were a casinos initial defense against a Martingale system, although I don't know that to be true.

A flute with no holes is not a flute, a donut with no holes is a danish

cardshark

cardshark

Threads: 9
Posts: 239

Joined: Nov 30, 2009

June 17th, 2012 at 7:33:35 AM permalink

I can run a simulation, but I won't do it for free. The best deal I can make is $295/hr (upfront, but I can provide a fixed hour quote), but I will give you a complete refund if your system shows a profit.

JyBrd0403

Threads: 12
Posts: 548

Joined: Jan 25, 2010

June 17th, 2012 at 9:13:46 AM permalink

That's alright cardshark, that's just 1 way to beat an HE game that is suppose to be impossible to do, I have 10 other ways. If you don't want to do it for free and post the results, don't bother. I do the impossible all by myself :)

I'm sure someone else has a simulator, and enough curiosity to test the system.

cardshark

cardshark

Threads: 9
Posts: 239

Joined: Nov 30, 2009

June 17th, 2012 at 10:24:51 AM permalink

Quote: JyBrd0403
That's alright cardshark, that's just 1 way to beat an HE game that is suppose to be impossible to do, I have 10 other ways. If you don't want to do it for free and post the results, don't bother. I do the impossible all by myself :)

I'm sure someone else has a simulator, and enough curiosity to test the system.

No worries, if you change your mind, just let me know.

s2dbaker

s2dbaker

Threads: 51
Posts: 3259

Joined: Jun 10, 2010

June 17th, 2012 at 10:31:47 AM permalink

Quote: buzzpaff
I calculate your bankroll need to be $34,653.44 approximately

Approximately :)

Someday, joor goin' to see the name of Googie Gomez in lights and joor goin' to say to joorself, "Was that her?" and then joor goin' to answer to joorself, "That was her!" But you know somethin' mister? I was always her yuss nobody knows it! - Googie Gomez

teliot

Threads: 43
Posts: 2871

Joined: Oct 19, 2009

June 17th, 2012 at 12:43:43 PM permalink

Though the theoretical behavior of these types of systems is never in doubt, there are practical challenges to simulating progression systems. The size of the wagers can quickly overwhelm data types. In the case of this simulation, the practical limitation of multiplying or dividing by 2 quickly forces the wagers to become quite large. There is no upper bound on the wagers, but with a lower bound of 1 unit, the drift of the wagers is quickly upward.

The following Java program uses an arbitrary precision integer class. It prints out whenever "totalWon" goes further negative than its previous most negative amount. This shows that the progression does not win in the "long run" and in fact loses arbitrarily much. The BigInteger class does not contain a "divide" method that outputs a double, so the house edge is not included in the output. It's enough to show that the player will have an increasingly negative bankroll infinitely often.

For simplicity, I assumed "red" corresponded to 1..18 and "black" to 19..36 and that the player wagered on red.


import java.math.BigInteger;
import java.util.Random;

public class roulettesim {
  public static void main(String[] args) {

    BigInteger wager        = new BigInteger("1");
    BigInteger totalWagered = new BigInteger("0");
    BigInteger totalWon     = new BigInteger("0");
    BigInteger ZERO         = new BigInteger("0");
    BigInteger ONE          = new BigInteger("1");
    BigInteger TWO          = new BigInteger("2");
    BigInteger MIN          = new BigInteger("0");
    
    Random generator        = new Random();
    int roll;
    int ctr = 0;

    while(true) {
      ctr++;
      roll = generator.nextInt(37);
      totalWagered = totalWagered.add(wager);
      if (roll >= 1 && roll <= 18) {
        totalWon = totalWon.add(wager);
        if (wager.compareTo(ONE) == 1) 
          wager = wager.divide(TWO);
      }
      else
      if (roll >= 19 && roll <= 36) {
        totalWon = totalWon.subtract(wager);
        wager = wager.multiply(TWO);
      }
      else
      if (roll == 0)
        totalWon = totalWon.subtract(wager);
      else
        System.exit(1);

      if (totalWon.compareTo(MIN) == -1) {
        MIN = totalWon;
        System.out.println(ctr + ", " + totalWon);
      }
    }// while
  }// main
}// class

Here is some output:



1, -1
2, -3
3, -7
53, -28
54, -92
58, -220
61, -348
96, -1244
442, -220663
499, -3210743
515, -10550775
516, -44105207
517, -111214071
518, -245431799
5185, -4694268046
5203, -49791424654
5221, -127100835982
5222, -676856649870
5223, -1776368277646
5224, -3975391533198
5225, -8373438044302
5226, -17169531066510
9110, -21926770405267
9113, -57111142494099
9114, -197848630849427
9115, -479323607560083
9131, -901536072626067
9143, -2590385932890003
9144, -11597585187630995
9349, -169170795587465107
9350, -745631547890888595
9855, -15802971599794892691
9856, -52696459747213995923
9859, -89589947894633099155
9860, -237163900484309512083
9861, -532311805663662337939
9862, -1122607616022367989651
11834, -9981264520366725558163
11835, -1218907084134995900264339
11836, -3636758723364254249676691
11837, -8472462001822770948501395
13202, -28368874921337306746744723
13219, -67054501149005440337342355
13225, -1304994540434385715236466579
13226, -3780874619005146265034715027
13227, -8732634776146667364631211923
13228, -18636155090429709563824205715
13229, -38443195718995793962210193299
13232, -58250236347561878360596180883
13259, -355355845776053144336385994643
13262, -672268495833110494710561795987
13268, -3207569696289569297703968206739
13269, -8278172097202486903690781028243
13270, -18419376899028322115664406671251
56624, -40821759546190969066977412375767
56625, -203081036375404332458555422663895
56626, -527599590033831059241711443240151
56627, -1176636697350684512808023484392663
56641, -1338895974179897876199601494680791
56642, -6531192832714725504730097823900887
56645, -11723489691249553133260594153120983
56646, -32492677125388863647382579470001367
56651, -42877270842458518904443572128441559
56663, -94800239427806795189748535420642519
56664, -427107238374035763415700300490728663
56665, -1091721236266493699867603830630900951
56666, -2420949232051409572771410890911245527
56667, -5079405223621241318579025011471934679
56670, -7737861215191073064386639132032623831
56671, -18371685181470400047617095614275380439
56681, -39639333114029054014078008578760893655
70385, -54020887742580753132897945067188362861
70386, -394303254663519216596272552498956574317
70387, -1074867988505396143523021767362492997229
70388, -2435997456189149997376520197089565843053
70389, -5158256391556657705083517056543711534701
70730, -8634353754033685827211085495059347644013
70731, -95746639685793932473834984997592009776749
70736, -139302782651674055797146934748858340843117
70737, -487751926378715042383642532758988989374061
70740, -836201070105756028970138130769119637905005
70741, -2229997645013919975316120522809642232028781
70742, -5017590794830247868008085306890687420276333
70752, -16167963394095559438775944443214868173266541
70764, -46831488042075166258387557068106365243989613
70765, -136034468836197658824530430158699811267911277
70766, -314440430424442643956816176339886703315754605
70767, -671252353600932614221387668702260487411441261
70768, -1384876199953912554750530653427008055602814573
70769, -2812123892659872435808816622876503191985561197
71309, -56358178925565600860139504110612352492802121325
71310, -239045883591928465635600108200147729949793689197
71311, -604421292924654195186521316379218484863776824941
71326, -1746219447089422100033150091938814593969974124141
71330, -4669222721751227936440519757371380633281839210093
71333, -7592225996413033772847889422803946672593704296045
71334, -19284239095060257118477368084534210829841164639853
71335, -42668265292354703809736325407994739144336085327469
71336, -89436317686943597192254240054915795773325926702701
71339, -136204370081532490574772154701836852402315768077933
71340, -323276579659888064104843813289521078918275133578861
71341, -697420998816599211164987130464889531950193864580717
71351, -2100462570654266012640524569872521230819889105837677
71561, -7204757039032444454466893848134139676968233512181357
71583, -31149999865061957866316066147357720671011032296300141
71588, -55095242691091471278165238446581301665053831080418925
72136, -160983025932450137607892334539820996444318803626794605
72137, -927230796365394566787065848114975588253688364718595693
72138, -2459726337231283425145412875265284771872427486902197869
72141, -3992221878097172283503759902415593955491166609085800045
72142, -10122204041560727716937148011016830689966123097820208749
72143, -22382168368487838583803924228219304158916036075289026157
72144, -46902097022342060317537476662624251096815862030226660973
72233, -393246089258032942306523904798594126594650903643720752749
72236, -785564947719700490046260743749073277601048118922722909805
72239, -1570202664643035585525734421650031579613842549480727223917
72240, -4708753532336375967443629133253864787665020271712744480365
72241, -10985855267723056731279418556461531203767375716176778993261
72242, -23540058738496418258950997402876864035972086605104848019053
72243, -48648465680043141314294155095707529700381508382960986070637
72244, -98865279563136587424980470481368861029200351938673262173805
72245, -199298907329323479646353101252691523686838039050097814380141
72253, -349949348978603817978412047409675517673294569717234642689645
108354, -641404674650675144273122567112725185089186695818885081298072
108355, -2248342718909665419815084659453887787611389689601677916599448
108356, -3855280763168655695357046751795050390133592683384470751900824
108465, -43501455323870931399743892748774671474236069670619312735351960
108572, -731270938266718769331703668270792265353738951009654646244340888
108573, -2376775495587924811486672850828142770336474816643234509592949912
108576, -4022280052909130853641642033385493275319210682276814372941558936
108577, -10604298282193955022261518763614895295250154144811133826335995032
108578, -23768334740763603359501272224073699335112041069879772733124867224
108579, -50096407657902900033980779144991307414835814920017050546702611608
108580, -102752553492181493382939792986826523574283362620291606173858100376
108581, -208064845160738680080857820670496955893178458020840717428169077912
108582, -418689428497853053476693876037837820530968648821938939936791032984
108978, -962734372762176801164180562020861831240885694397041282256424891544
108979, -27922681039912816595831195649040492504878030116937613763360035140760
108980, -81842574374214096185165225823079753852152318962018758725567255639192
109048, -224224792710103412600750399251402178347298487943561157141395697267864
110068, -2668561780743074160707899534632387645035523764025320627991538394166424
110071, -9570308127533637948142655396909413097486632736195707183154062617965720
110072, -37177293514695893097881678846017514907291068624877253403804159513162904
110073, -92391264289020403397359725744233718526899940402240345845104353303557272
110079, -313247147386318444595271913337098533005335427511692715610305128465134744
110084, -423675088934967465194228007133530940244553171066418900492905516045923480
110085, -1307098621324159629985876757504990198158295119504228379553708616692233368
110086, -3073945686102543959569174258247908713985779016379847337675314817984853144
110087, -6607639815659312618735769259733745745640746810131085253918527220570092696
110193, -38500609684178507880471776099315880361417321370530441525324551658746639512
110196, -95039715757086806427137296123089272867896806070550248185215950100110472344
110199, -208117927902903403520468336170636057880855775470589861504998746982838138008
110200, -660430776486169791893792496360823197932691653070748314784129934513748800664
110203, -1112743625069436180267116656551010337984527530670906768063261122044659463320
110204, -2921995019402501733760413297311758898191871041071540581179785872168302113944
110210, -10159000596734763947733599860354753139021245082674075833645884872662872716440
110211, -24633011751399288375679972986440741620679993165879146338578082873652013921432
110212, -53581034060728337231572719238612718583997489332289287348442478875630296331416
110213, -111477078679386434943358211742956672510632481665109569368171270879586861151384
110639, -294858660065457300593656504386509718322301421606111945980990970863588876448920
115452, -527926146430055547320119614553446012564383836984468864997458879019441219138712
115458, -7938619857618292054428662655109472115173662855585464963522744255525881516094616
115468, -33876047846777119829308563297055563474306139420688951308361243073298422555440280
115469, -93161597536283011886176907621503772295180371569496920096563526085349944931087512
115470, -211732696915294795999913596270400189936928835867112857672968092109452989682381976
115478, -626731544741836040397992006541537651683048460908768639190384073193813646311912600
115479, -1575300339773930313307885515732708992817036175289696139801620601386638004322268312
115480, -3472437929838118859127672534115051675085011604051551141024093657772286720342979736
115595, -11362974058825793680071493736547080467838241439106961736928891262407519026526778520
115596, -41717175499852810413188086030664563384125848299296641756488460164577898482858161304
115599, -72071376940879827146304678324782046300413455159486321776048029066748277939189544088
115745, -415067924669516165641316484413877158433581325256414825200192337432972360643496604824
115746, -1386402370782380701101047437825636611754784744782484585826098542302424503246100853912
115747, -3329071263008109772020509344649155518397191583834624107077910952041328788451309352088
115833, -3587081975256839414252000379149154123185636242146236387244167287709777013830126105752
115834, -34669784250868504548963390888325456629464145666980468727273165843532245577113462076568
115837, -65752486526480169683674781397501759135742655091814701067302164399354714140396798047384
115838, -190083295628926830222520343434206969160856692791151630427418158622644588393530141930648
115850, -438744913833820151300211467507617389211084768189825489147650147069224336899796829697176
115875, -7898593459980619783630945189709929990717927030150041250754609800466616792087797462693016
115878, -15855765242537206058117061160059063432325225442907604729802033430757168744288331471221912
115879, -47684452372763551156061525041455597198754419093937858645991727951919376553090467505337496
115880, -111341826633216241351950452804248664731612806395998366478371116994243792170694739573568664
115887, -127256170198329413900922684744946931614827403221513493436465964254824896075095807590626456
115899, -350056980109913829586533931914722667979831758778725270849793825902960350736710759829435544
115949, -1390457190679187484975593595037871865469986026246776695735244465563450018486930581444588696
116873, -4567775334426315794490222283110622919186833039559347802465837254910219923779759428200264856
116876, -69752926577129870555080484312210724072833821636869307822822331634250421516206534026068980888
116877, -200123229062536980076261008370410926380127798831489227863535320392930824701060083221806412952
116878, -460863834033351199118622056486811330994715753220729067944961297910291631070767181613281277080

Run at your own risk.

Climate Casino: https://climatecasino.net/climate-casino/

tupp

tupp

Threads: 3
Posts: 519

Joined: Feb 9, 2012

June 17th, 2012 at 3:01:06 PM permalink

Quote: teliot
The following Java program uses an arbitrary precision integer class. It prints out whenever "totalWon" goes further negative than its previous most negative amount. This shows that the progression does not win in the "long run" and in fact loses arbitrarily much. The BigInteger class does not contain a "divide" method that outputs a double, so the house edge is not included in the output. It's enough to show that the player will have an increasingly negative bankroll infinitely often.

Great work!

This forum is really amazing sometimes.

Thanks!

JyBrd0403

Threads: 12
Posts: 548

Joined: Jan 25, 2010

June 17th, 2012 at 3:01:49 PM permalink

Quote: teliot
The following Java program uses an arbitrary precision integer class. It prints out whenever "totalWon" goes further negative than its previous most negative amount. This shows that the progression does not win in the "long run" and in fact loses arbitrarily much. The BigInteger class does not contain a "divide" method that outputs a double, so the house edge is not included in the output. It's enough to show that the player will have an increasingly negative bankroll infinitely often.

Here is some output:
1, -1
2, -3
3, -7

I don't understand any of that. lol I think there may be a problem in the programming, though.

I think it should be.

1, -1
2, -2
3, -4

teliot

Threads: 43
Posts: 2871

Joined: Oct 19, 2009

June 17th, 2012 at 3:11:17 PM permalink

You lose 1 unit on first wager, so your total loss is -1.
Then you double and lose 2 on second wager so your total loss is -3.
Then you double and lose 4 on your third wager, so your total loss is -7.
I assume you won your fourth wager, then being ahead +1 after 4 rolls.

Your bankroll doesn't exceed being down 7 units until round 53, at which point you are down 28 units.

If you don't understand any of it, at least try and understand some of it.

Climate Casino: https://climatecasino.net/climate-casino/

JyBrd0403

Threads: 12
Posts: 548

Joined: Jan 25, 2010

June 17th, 2012 at 3:17:17 PM permalink

Quote: teliot
You lose 1 unit on first wager, so your total loss is -1.
Then you double and lose 2 on second wager so your total loss is -3.
Then you double and lose 4 on your third wager, so your total loss is -7.
I assume you won your fourth wager, then being ahead +1 after 4 rolls.

Your bankroll doesn't exceed being down 7 units until round 53, at which point you are down 28 units.

If you don't understand any of it, at least try and understand some of it.

Okay, I get it now. So, did the game win outright or lose?

teliot

Threads: 43
Posts: 2871

Joined: Oct 19, 2009

June 17th, 2012 at 3:21:37 PM permalink

Quote: JyBrd0403
Okay, I get it now. So, did the game win outright or lose?

That question doesn't make sense. Sometimes you are ahead, sometimes you are behind. If you create a finite game, limited by a specific number of rolls, then it will lose at exactly the house edge. I can show you that, if you care to fix that number of rolls.

If you call it "infinite" then you can only discuss the "limsup" and "liminf". The limsup is bounded by a linear function. The liminf is bounded by an exponential function. That is, about as often as you are up 100, you will be down 2^100 (or thereabouts).

Climate Casino: https://climatecasino.net/climate-casino/

JyBrd0403

Threads: 12
Posts: 548

Joined: Jan 25, 2010

June 17th, 2012 at 3:30:32 PM permalink

No, if it's a losing game you're losing after let's say 100,000 trials. The game is losing and will never go ahead. If it's a winning game at some point, let's say 100,000 trials, you will be winning and never go into the negative again. My guess is there's a bug in your programming. The results don't make sense. But, I do appreciate the effort.

teliot

Threads: 43
Posts: 2871

Joined: Oct 19, 2009

June 17th, 2012 at 4:35:00 PM permalink

Quote: JyBrd0403
My guess is there's a bug in your programming.

Thanks, I'll go back to college and try and learn more.

Climate Casino: https://climatecasino.net/climate-casino/

teliot

Threads: 43
Posts: 2871

Joined: Oct 19, 2009

June 17th, 2012 at 4:42:24 PM permalink

Quote: JyBrd0403
If it's a losing game you're losing after let's say 100,000 trials. The game is losing and will never go ahead. If it's a winning game at some point, let's say 100,000 trials, you will be winning and never go into the negative again. My guess is there's a bug in your programming.

Yes, that's why it's neither winning nor losing if you are considering an "infinite" model. It crosses the line in both directions infinitely many times. Because there is no bound on the wager size, there is no reason to expect the total win/loss to stabilize on one side or the other. Limit the wager size, or limit the number of rounds, it will settle to the H/A. Otherwise, this is the paradox the infinite model gives.

Quote:
The results don't make sense.

You don't understand the results. That's not my problem.

Climate Casino: https://climatecasino.net/climate-casino/

JyBrd0403

Threads: 12
Posts: 548

Joined: Jan 25, 2010

June 17th, 2012 at 4:54:35 PM permalink

Try it flat betting single 0 roullete. You could also do a martingale, or D'Alembert. The systems will lose outright after let's say 100,000 trials. It will NOT cross the line in both directions infinitely many times. It WILL go down and have no chance of ever winning. Why, because those are losing betting systems vs. an HE game.

So, you're not really making sense.

teliot