August 25th, 2012 at 6:30:22 AM
permalink

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

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

August 25th, 2012 at 6:52:33 AM
permalink

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...

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...

August 25th, 2012 at 7:03:53 AM
permalink

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 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.

August 25th, 2012 at 7:15:20 AM
permalink

Quote:heatherThis 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!!!

August 25th, 2012 at 7:58:37 AM
permalink

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

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

August 25th, 2012 at 9:43:05 AM
permalink

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 ?

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

-2.7 %

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 ?

August 25th, 2012 at 9:46:35 AM
permalink

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

I would be thrilled if they would use the system.

I would be thrilled if they would use the system.

"I am a man devoured by the passion for gambling." --Dostoevsky, 1871

August 25th, 2012 at 10:04:17 AM
permalink

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.

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

Its - Possessive; It's - "It is" / "It has"; There - Location; Their - Possessive; They're - "They are"

August 25th, 2012 at 10:09:29 AM
permalink

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. 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.

It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.

August 25th, 2012 at 10:23:36 AM
permalink

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.

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.

Craps is the most "Jekyll and Hyde" casino game ever invented!