Roulette strategy, Spin limit system.
My bankroll will be $5000, I will be betting $5 on 6 of the numbers in the middle column, and $50 on the left and right 2to1's. The probability of it being a winning spin is 81% of the time. The ball landing on a winning number in the middle column wins a profit of $50. The profit on a L or R column win is $20. I have a max spin limit of 10 and a session goal of $50. I'm no math wiz but that sounds like a winning session almost 100% of the time if not 100% of the time. I would appreciate sim results if anyone can muster it. I plan on using it either way but want to know the exact math either way. Thanks! If someone is going tosim would you mind a 10, 20, 30 or 40 spin max to check thrate that it will win $50.
Quote: bjgodSo here is my system...
My bankroll will be $5000, I will be betting $5 on 6 of the numbers in the middle column, and $50 on the left and right 2to1's. The probability of it being a winning spin is 81% of the time. The ball landing on a winning number in the middle column wins a profit of $50. The profit on a L or R column win is $20. I have a max spin limit of 10 and a session goal of $100. I'm no math wiz but that sounds like a winning session almost 100% of the time if not 100% of the time.
Here we go again...
Quote: TheNightflyHere we go again...
Yeah - freakin' blast isn't it?
Quote: bjgodIf someone is going tosim would you mind a 10, 20, 30 or 40 spin max to check thrate that it will win $100.
For a better sim, need to know exactly how to program the computer when you say bet 6 numbers in middle column. Need an exact betting method.
Here is the results on 4 sims, 10 spins $100 session goal..
50% session loss rate.
Was worse at higher spins!
I say you need to go back to the drawing board!
Edit: I see you have already changed your session win goal!
| Spin | Number | Type | Bet Unit | Win | Loss | Net | Unit Bal. | Bet Layout | Net |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 4000 | -170 | |||||||
| 1 | 21 | Bet | 130 | 150 | -130 | 20 | 4020 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | |
| 2 | 2 | Bet | 130 | 0 | -130 | -130 | 3890 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | |
| 3 | 0 | Bet | 130 | 0 | -130 | -130 | 3760 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | |
| 4 | 36 | Bet | 130 | 150 | -130 | 20 | 3780 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | |
| 5 | 9 | Bet | 130 | 150 | -130 | 20 | 3800 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | |
| 6 | 7 | Bet | 130 | 150 | -130 | 20 | 3820 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | |
| 7 | 22 | Bet | 130 | 150 | -130 | 20 | 3840 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | |
| 8 | 26 | Bet | 130 | 0 | -130 | -130 | 3710 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | |
| 9 | 2 | Bet | 130 | 0 | -130 | -130 | 3580 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | session net |
| 10 | 23 | Bet | 130 | 180 | -130 | 50 | 3630 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | -370 |
| Spin | Number | Type | Bet Unit | Win | Loss | Net | Unit Bal. | Bet Layout | |
| 0 | 4000 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | Bet | 130 | 150 | -130 | 20 | 4020 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | |
| 2 | 5 | Bet | 130 | 180 | -130 | 50 | 4070 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | |
| 3 | 15 | Bet | 130 | 150 | -130 | 20 | 4090 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | session net |
| 4 | 23 | Bet | 130 | 180 | -130 | 50 | 4140 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | 140 |
| Spin | Number | Type | Bet Unit | Win | Loss | Net | Unit Bal. | Bet Layout | |
| 0 | 4000 | ||||||||
| 1 | 2 | Bet | 130 | 0 | -130 | -130 | 3870 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | |
| 2 | 6 | Bet | 130 | 150 | -130 | 20 | 3890 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | |
| 3 | 12 | Bet | 130 | 150 | -130 | 20 | 3910 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | |
| 4 | 5 | Bet | 130 | 180 | -130 | 50 | 3960 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | |
| 5 | 18 | Bet | 130 | 150 | -130 | 20 | 3980 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | |
| 6 | 35 | Bet | 130 | 180 | -130 | 50 | 4030 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | |
| 7 | 12 | Bet | 130 | 150 | -130 | 20 | 4050 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | |
| 8 | 31 | Bet | 130 | 150 | -130 | 20 | 4070 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | |
| 9 | 0 | Bet | 130 | 0 | -130 | -130 | 3940 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | session net |
| 10 | 33 | Bet | 130 | 150 | -130 | 20 | 3960 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | -40 |
| Spin | Number | Type | Bet Unit | Win | Loss | Net | Unit Bal. | Bet Layout | |
| 0 | 4000 | ||||||||
| 1 | 6 | Bet | 130 | 150 | -130 | 20 | 4020 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | |
| 2 | 22 | Bet | 130 | 150 | -130 | 20 | 4040 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | |
| 3 | 15 | Bet | 130 | 150 | -130 | 20 | 4060 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | |
| 4 | 9 | Bet | 130 | 150 | -130 | 20 | 4080 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | session net |
| 5 | 31 | Bet | 130 | 150 | -130 | 20 | 4100 | 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C | 100 |
OK. 24 times you'll get a $20 profit. 6 times you get a $50 profit. And the other 6 numbers, plus zero, is seven times you lose $130.Quote: bjgodI will be betting $5 on 6 of the numbers in the middle column, and $50 on the left and right 2to1's. The probability of it being a winning spin is 81% of the time. The ball landing on a winning number in the middle column wins a profit of $50. The profit on a L or R column win is $20. I have a max spin limit of 10 and a session goal of $100. I'm no math wiz but that sounds like a winning session almost 100% of the time if not 100% of the time. I would appreciate sim results if anyone can muster it. I plan on using it either way but want to know the exact math either way. Thanks!
24 * 20 = 480
6 * 50 = 300
7 * 130 = -910
480 + 300 - 910 = -130
So if you were to place the bet 37 times, getting each result once, you'd be down $130.
Hmmm.... Total risk vs total loss:
37 * 130 = 4,810
-130 / 4,810 = -0.027027
Hmmm.... Remind me.... What's the house edge on Single Zero roulette again?
Quote: DJTeddyBearOK. 24 times you'll get a $20 profit. 6 times you get a $50 profit. And the other 6 numbers, plus zero, is seven times you lose $130.
24 * 20 = 480
6 * 50 = 300
7 * 130 = -910
480 + 300 - 910 = -130
So if you were to place the bet 37 times, getting each result once, you'd be down $130.
Hmmm.... Total risk vs total loss:
37 * 130 = 4,810
-130 / 4,810 = -0.027027
Hmmm.... Remind me.... What's the house edge on Single Zero roulette again?
Your numbers contradict the math of the game. Those numbers are based on that each number will hit in a thirty seven spin cycle. Which believe it or not wont happen. HMMMMMMMMM. Remind me again what the chances are that that will happen...... Each and every spin I have have a 81% chance of winning. House edge believe it or not is actually based on the theory that each number will hit once in 37 spins. So based on that I think I will follow the math that say my system will win 81% of the time and work night and day till can win 100% of the time with a session goal.....
Quote: nope27For a better sim, need to know exactly how to program the computer when you say bet 6 numbers in middle column. Need an exact betting method.
Here is the results on 4 sims, 10 spins $100 session goal..
50% session loss rate.
Was worse at higher spins!
I say you need to go back to the drawing board!
Edit: I see you have already changed your session win goal!
Spin Number Type Bet Unit Win Loss Net Unit Bal. Bet Layout Net 0 4000 -170 1 21 Bet 130 150 -130 20 4020 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C 2 2 Bet 130 0 -130 -130 3890 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C 3 0 Bet 130 0 -130 -130 3760 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C 4 36 Bet 130 150 -130 20 3780 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C 5 9 Bet 130 150 -130 20 3800 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C 6 7 Bet 130 150 -130 20 3820 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C 7 22 Bet 130 150 -130 20 3840 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C 8 26 Bet 130 0 -130 -130 3710 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C 9 2 Bet 130 0 -130 -130 3580 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C session net 10 23 Bet 130 180 -130 50 3630 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C -370 Spin Number Type Bet Unit Win Loss Net Unit Bal. Bet Layout 0 4000 1 1 Bet 130 150 -130 20 4020 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C 2 5 Bet 130 180 -130 50 4070 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C 3 15 Bet 130 150 -130 20 4090 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C session net 4 23 Bet 130 180 -130 50 4140 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C 140 Spin Number Type Bet Unit Win Loss Net Unit Bal. Bet Layout 0 4000 1 2 Bet 130 0 -130 -130 3870 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C 2 6 Bet 130 150 -130 20 3890 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C 3 12 Bet 130 150 -130 20 3910 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C 4 5 Bet 130 180 -130 50 3960 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C 5 18 Bet 130 150 -130 20 3980 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C 6 35 Bet 130 180 -130 50 4030 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C 7 12 Bet 130 150 -130 20 4050 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C 8 31 Bet 130 150 -130 20 4070 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C 9 0 Bet 130 0 -130 -130 3940 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C session net 10 33 Bet 130 150 -130 20 3960 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C -40 Spin Number Type Bet Unit Win Loss Net Unit Bal. Bet Layout 0 4000 1 6 Bet 130 150 -130 20 4020 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C 2 22 Bet 130 150 -130 20 4040 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C 3 15 Bet 130 150 -130 20 4060 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C 4 9 Bet 130 150 -130 20 4080 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C session net 5 31 Bet 130 150 -130 20 4100 5 : 5,11,17,23,29,35 ; 50 : Column A,Column C 100
Keep the bets the same! And your number generator seems biased on the numbers that are not bet!
I don't mean to come off as rude bjgod but your system doesn't, won't and cannot work. If you believe otherwise then that's your choice.
Quote: bjgod
Keep the bets the same! And your number generator seems biased on the numbers that are not bet!
All bets are the same.
Cant you read a table?
Spins are actual single zero roulette wheel spins I tracked personally.
No RNG there.
Good Luck!
Quote: nope27All bets are the same.
Cant you read a table?
Spins are actual single zero roulette wheel spins I tracked personally.
No RNG there.
Good Luck!
Sorry for sounding like a conceded asshole Alright thanks for info. I just need to make a system that will make a profit all the time. And make a bet that will be worth it after 1 win above the bankroll!!!!!!!! Could you tell me is that possible!
Quote: bjgodAnd with nopes runs if I stop at a profit I win each time!
I only showed you a snap shot of the first 4 sessions.
I ran 500 of them.
You claimed to win close to or 100% of you sessions.
You did not in any of my sessions come even close to winning 90% of the sessions.
14% of the sessions NEVER even showed a net profit at any point for 10, 20,40 spins
Again I used actual spins I tracked from a real single zero roulette wheel in a real casino with a real live dealer.
Believe what you wish.
I still say, you need to go back to the drawing board!
Quote: bjgodI just need to make a system that will make a profit all the time.
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Quote: bjgodSorry for sounding like a conceded asshole Alright thanks for info. I just need to make a system that will make a profit all the time. And make a bet that will be worth it after 1 win above the bankroll!!!!!!!! Could you tell me is that possible!
Don't be sorry.
Be smarter.
again 12.3% of my sessions, I have now run 5,000 of them still show at no point were you ahead before 10, 20 or 40 spins
Quote: nope27I only showed you a snap shot of the first 4 sessions.
I ran 500 of them.
You claimed to win close to or 100% of you sessions.
You did not in any of my sessions come even close to winning 90% of the sessions.
14% of the sessions NEVER even showed a net profit at any point for 10, 20,40 spins
Again I used actual spins I tracked from a real single zero roulette wheel in a real casino with a real live dealer.
Believe what you wish.
I still say, you need to go back to the drawing board!
I said I look to win I will not apply it until I find a betting amount that will and a bankroll that will allow it!
Quote: RPToroSorry, couldn't resist.
I can understand how you can win at blackjack as you have claimed.
At roulette. I doubt it could be done consistently.
At least I have yet to see any system come close.
Quote: nope27I can understand how you can win at blackjack as you have claimed.
At roulette. I doubt it could be done consistently.
At least I have yet to see any system come close.
Thank you.
Quote: bjgodI said I look to win I will not apply it until I find a betting amount that will and a bankroll that will allow it!
It may end up taking a very large bankroll, with a low session win goal and very low average bets.
Good Luck
I suggest that you go out and follow your strategy religiously and heavily. When you achieve bankruptcy, come back here and let someone explain to you where you went wrong. At that point, you might be more willing to listen. In your spare time along the way, you might consider studying statistics just a little bit.Quote: bjgodYour numbers contradict the math of the game. Those numbers are based on that each number will hit in a thirty seven spin cycle. Which believe it or not wont happen. HMMMMMMMMM. Remind me again what the chances are that that will happen...... Each and every spin I have have a 81% chance of winning. House edge believe it or not is actually based on the theory that each number will hit once in 37 spins. So based on that I think I will follow the math that say my system will win 81% of the time and work night and day till can win 100% of the time with a session goal.....
Quote: bjgodRead the rest of the posts
http://www.uxsoftware.com/pages/index.html
Roulette Xtreme has an excellent simulator for a free 30 day trial and only $30 to register.
You can set up any type on programming, takes a little reading to learn the programming code and includes examples of others code, but if you are serious to try Roulette, get the software.
It will save you time and take out all the guess work.
You also can download actual roulette spins from a Euro Casino right thru the software.
Quote: bjgodKeep the bets the same! And your number generator seems biased on the numbers that are not bet!
I am sure, this is the problem! :)
Quote:Each and every spin I have have a 81% chance of winning.
Yes. 81% chance to win either $50 or $20, and 19% to lose $130. On average, you will lose $130/37 = $3.51 on each spin on a single zero wheel or about seven bucks with double zeroes.
Is there any chance that we can get an IP check here on aisle 12?
Quote: bjgodOver the years I have amassed a rather large fortune from blackjack. .
Translation: I won a few thousand.
Quote: DocI suggest that you go out and follow your strategy religiously and heavily.
Exactly. Take this infallible system to the casino and make the biggest bets you can for as long as you can. Thats always my advice to roulette system players. Don't try and convince us you're right, we're not going to pay you anything. The casino, on the other hand, pays winners very well.
Quote: bjgodSorry for sounding like a conceded asshole Alright thanks for info. I just need to make a system that will make a profit all the time. ... Could you tell me is that possible!
Sorry, but it's not possible -- not that people haven't been trying for nearly 500 years. Read "The Gambler" by Dostoyevsky.
If your system wins 81% of the time, it loses 19% of the time. Any system where you can lose at all can't be guaranteed to "make a profit all the time".
Quote: MathExtremist
If your system wins 81% of the time, it loses 19% of the time. Any system where you can lose at all can't be guaranteed to "make a profit all the time".
I played around with this for fun on RX for a few minutes. It seems to do very well or very badly. One session stayed in profit for over 400 spins. Another session was never in profit. In the casino, playing for real money, this would break you just as fast as throwing your chips randomly on the layout. Have fun...
Quote: EvenBobI played around with this for fun on RX for a few minutes. It seems to do very well or very badly. One session stayed in profit for over 400 spins. Another session was never in profit. In the casino, playing for real money, this would break you just as fast as throwing your chips randomly on the layout. Have fun...
You can do similarly by just taking 5 chips and putting 3 on 1-18 and 2 on 25-36 (or, alternately, 3 on 19-36 and 2 on 1-12). High probability of winning 1 chip. Low probability of losing 5 chips.
Try a few...... Do the math and you might get an estimate of what I have taken. How many times I have been barred backed off hands told to bet the minimum, how many times they have shuffled after every hand. When I started I toke a bankroll of $500 played dd games, any rules with a max of 5 rounds, and a session goal of $50. Hit it every single time using the Hi-lo count, I18 and fab4 with a bet spread of 1-5. Put the parameters in blackjack sim 100% win rate with session goal and pennies an hour win rate without a session goal. So after I doubled up I doubled my bets session goal of $100 bankroll of $1000. Now I play single deck games and pretty much am only allowed to play the worst conditions possible. I did this again and again until I reached my current bankroll which is five bankrolls of $30,000 with a minimum bet of $500... short of a double yes but those numbers are rounded down. I am never in a casino for more than 20 minutes. If I was my average action an hour would be about $70,000 to about $85,000 an hour. The numbers speak for themselves. The math isn't wrong. I have nothing to prove to you so I don't care if you believe it or not. It would benefit you if you did and also incorporated this strategy into your casino arsenal but hey I cant sway everybody can I!Quote: EvenBobTranslation: I won a few thousand.
Quote: bjgodTry a few...... Do the math and you might get an estimate of what I have taken. How many times I have been barred backed off hands told to bet the minimum, how many times they have shuffled after every hand. When I started I toke a bankroll of $500 played dd games, any rules with a max of 5 rounds, and a session goal of $50. Hit it every single time using the Hi-lo count, I18 and fab4 with a bet spread of 1-5. Put the parameters in blackjack sim 100% win rate with session goal and pennies an hour win rate without a session goal. So after I doubled up I doubled my bets session goal of $100 bankroll of $1000. Now I play single deck games and pretty much am only allowed to play the worst conditions possible. I did this again and again until I reached my current bankroll which is five bankrolls of $30,000 with a minimum bet of $500... short of a double yes but those numbers are rounded down. I am never in a casino for more than 20 minutes. If I was my average action an hour would be about $70,000 to about $85,000 an hour. The numbers speak for themselves. The math isn't wrong. I have nothing to prove to you so I don't care if you believe it or not. It would benefit you if you did and also incorporated this strategy into your casino arsenal but hey I cant sway everybody can I!
Please remember that this board has some of the brightest mathematicians and analysts that can be found anywhere.
I'm sure you can find a captivating audience somewhere out there but this is not the forum for tall tales.
Quote: benbakdoffPlease remember that this board has some of the brightest mathematicians and analysts that can be found anywhere.
I'm sure you can find a captivating audience somewhere out there but this is not the forum for tall tales.
And I am also sure you could find a retractive statement for any negative comments about the strategy if you just used it in a casino...For the strategy not to work you would have to lose your whole bank before being 3 hands ahead. Thats the math. You would have to say that AP Blackjack is bullshit because you would have to say that it is impossible for An AP player to be three wins ahead before he loses his bankroll. You would have to say that blackjack is a 100% losing game even more so than Roulette. Also for the strategy not to work you would have to say that the MATHEMATICIANS that wrote the CASINO VERITE Data Simulator software were wrong in their analysis and that probably the best Blackjack game and simulation software available is worthless and anyone who invest's their money in it is getting scammed. Are you telling me that men like Stanford Wong shouldn't back up the program and in the process saying that one of blackjacks greatest minds is a Floppy Quack... I sure hope not because then you would be a contradiction wouldn't you. I would like you to come up with a intelligent contraction to prove me wrong.
Quote: bjgodWow I thought that someone of the 20 people that have looked at the new post since it was up would have posted something. But I guess they finally understood that it is either sound proof if played perfectly or they dont want to anger the blackjack gods by denying mathematical fact and AP TRUTH!
Don't flatter yourself, it's much simpler than that - they just realized there is no arguing with you, so it's better to let it go.
Quote: weaselmanDon't flatter yourself, it's much simpler than that - they just realized there is no arguing with you, so it's better to let it go.
So you are saying that the casino Verite writters are wrong and that ap play does not exist and that it is impossible for an ap player to be three hands ahead each and every time and that it is more possible that you will lose your bankroll before you are three hands ahead... I dont think so and if you are then you are insulting hundreds of mathematians, ap players, and blackjack professionals.
Quote: bjgodSo you are saying that the casino Verite writters are wrong and that ap play does not exist and that it is impossible
No. I offer no opinion on this "casino Verite" thingy, as I don't know what it has to do with anything. It is most certainly impossible to "be three hands ahead" (or to have anything at all happen for that matter) "each and every time" for anyone, in any game of chance, unless it is rigged with deterministic results. But I don't know what that has to do with anything either.
More importantly, nobody is going to take you seriously now, that you started pitching for your *roulette* system. If you want it so badly that everyone believes you you made any decent money on ap play, you are better off changing your nick (to something less presumptuous, perhaps), and starting over. Also, when you do, don't mention "sessions" (it's a completely meaningless notion), and just go on bragging about how rich you are from all those millions you made on blackjack.
But even then ... you see, nobody really cares how much money you say you have, or even how much money you really have. It doesn't matter, so, chances are, you are not going to attract very much attention with it either.
Quote: bjgodSo you are saying that the casino Verite writters are wrong and that ap play does not exist and that it is impossible for an ap player to be three hands ahead each and every time and that it is more possible that you will lose your bankroll before you are three hands ahead... I dont think so and if you are then you are insulting hundreds of mathematians, ap players, and blackjack professionals.
I'm one of those mathematicians, and I am confirming that it is impossible for a player (any player) to be three hands ahead *each and every time* in any casino game where you and the casino have a finite bankroll and lifespan. If that doesn't seem intuitively correct, here's how to think about it:
1) You need to win N+3 out of 2N+3 bets in order to be +3.
2) You're starting at 0. It is possible to lose your first bet, putting you at -1. From there, you need to win N+4 out of 2N+4 bets in order to be +3.
3) From -1, it is possible to lose your next bet, putting you at -2. From there, you need to win N+5 out of 2N+5 bets in order to be +3.
Therefore, it is possible for you to get to -100 (I assume $5 bets, $500 bankroll) and bust out. Call the probability of busting out PB, where 1 > PB > 0. If you always keep playing until -100 or +3, then the probability of getting to +3 is 1-PB. Obviously 1-PB >> PB, but also 1 > 1-PB > PB > 0. Since 1 > 1-PB, the probability of getting to +3 is less than 100%. In other words, you are not guaranteed to get to +3. Q.E.D.
Obviously this ignores split/double/BJ considerations, but those don't change the result much.
The only way you can guarantee a +3 result is in a theoretical infinite random walk scenario, but it turns out that all results are equally likely if you go forever. Blackjack isn't such a scenario - you have neither infinite money nor infinite time, and neither does the casino.
