This should be interesting. The Roulette issue aside, he does make some valid points.
I would at least want to do single zero at higher limits, but these guys do double zero tables.
My understanding is that Archie Karas plays roulette every day as well.
I assume he would be up for some sort of challenge like the Wizard provides or the magician James Randi does. I almost feel like quitting my job and just providing challenges to all the "AP" players that can beat Casino games. I'm pretty sure I could make a pretty good living.
ZCore13
But sectioning out the wheel and betting every number equally and grabbing three to fifteen numbers based on a portion of the wheel you expect NOT to hit would be a viable way to play the game if you could take those bets down starting with the three, and grabbing numbers off the felt as you felt more confident they would not hit.
I never heard of anyone AP'ing this way though.
It seems that this felt would allow you to bet this way, no, if those are bets on specific number physically around the wheel:
Quote: AhighI would at least want to do single zero at higher limits, but these guys do double zero tables.
Wow, I can't imagine people that are regularly beating double zero tables in Las Vegas without cheating. Single zero I could see but even that would be difficult to find enough opportunities to make any real money at it.
Quote: Zcore13More AP rubbish. "Joe" can predict the speed of the ball going one way, the speed of the wheel going the other and the bounce of the ball as it bounces around before finding a resting place in a number.
Not just one number, several numbers. There are players who have
been doing this for decades, especially in Europe where roulette is
the most popular casino game. Its called VB, Visual Ballistics. Munchkin
had Laurance Scott on the radio show a couple weeks ago talking about
this subject. Its a very valid AP method.
http://www.richardmunchkin.com/2013/03/professional-roulette-prediction-by.html
Quote: EvenBobNot just one number, several numbers. There are players who have
been doing this for decades, especially in Europe where roulette is
the most popular casino game. Its called VB, Visual Ballistics. Munchkin
had Laurance Scott on the radio show a couple weeks ago talking about
this subject. Its a very valid AP method. http://www.richardmunchkin.com/2013/03/professional-roulette-prediction-by.html
What? EvenBob is being sarcastic. Right? I played Roulette in Cincy yesterday. The pockets are so shallow that the ball could take several trips around the wheel after the drop. Unless Munchkin and Scott included Kreskin in their AP I'm not buying it.....
Quote: EvenBobNot just one number, several numbers. There are players who have
been doing this for decades, especially in Europe where roulette is
the most popular casino game. Its called VB, Visual Ballistics. Munchkin
had Laurance Scott on the radio show a couple weeks ago talking about
this subject. Its a very valid AP method. http://www.richardmunchkin.com/2013/03/professional-roulette-prediction-by.html
You had better being sarcastic. My faith in anything you say is gone if you believe it because it was on the radio...
By the way, the article you are linking to has been removed.
ZCore13
Quote: Zcore13You had better being sarcastic. My faith in anything you say is gone if you believe it because it was on the radio...
By the way, the article you are linking to has been removed.
ZCore13
Thats odd, its there, I just looked at it again.
I've known VB players for years, its for sure a
real thing. There are forums where all they
talk about is visual ballistics, books have been
written about it.
Lets see if this works: http://www.richardmunchkin.com/2013/03/professional-roulette-prediction-by.html
Whereupon one character says "Suppose we spend bilions on a mission there and learn that a probability is only a probability." I think that's one of the funniest lines in the Good Doctor's work.
Later on Susan Calvin saves the day.
Just sayin' ...
Quote: MrVIIRC, Bob is pals with a guy who is a VB player, so his "eye" might be a bit "jaundiced."
Just sayin' ...
And he is a VB player and he does make money at it
and you know he does. Right?
Quote: sodawaterhaha, "visual ballistics" roulette advantage play? some people will do anything to avoid getting a job.
There's a few guys in EU that make a very good
living at it. Lot of work, though. And lots and lots
of practice.
Quote: EvenBobThere's a few guys in EU that make a very good
living at it. Lot of work, though. And lots and lots
of practice.
You know my stance on Roulette AP, so no need to rehash it. But you know what kind of shook me up? At the WGPC this year, I was talking with the head honcho of GamePro for one of the huge casinos down there, and he said flat out that he knew guys that could sector shoot at will. He'd call out a number and they could whack a slot within that slice of the pie.
Wouldn't sector shooting be a combination of physical skill combined with VB?
Quote: Face
Wouldn't sector shooting be a combination of physical skill combined with VB?
Its mostly VB. He's doing the same thing a VB player
is doing, except he's doing it on the release of the
ball and not predicting where it will land, like the
player does.
Nothing else we talk about would give the player who can do this, an advantage of this level.
Quote: BozIs 25 percent accuracy in an 8 number range too much to ask?
.
Nope, in fact thats right in the ballpark.
Quote: EvenBobNope, in fact thats right in the ballpark.
I am not questioning if it has happened,, but you and I both know an advantage like that beats everything we discuss daily. Still I would like to see it, just like you and I want to see any proof of DI.
ZCore13
Quote: WizardThis is not a topic I know much about, but I am much less skeptical about wheel clocking than dice influence. As I understand it, this is a very difficult skill to master. I think it is also combined with careful wheel selection and making very late bets. I don't necessarily believe in it either, I'm just going off of third- and fourth-hand chatter in the AP world. This may disagree with other posts of mine, but information has come my way recently changing my opinion somewhat.
There was a "Breaking Vegas", episode about some MIT guys who built a real primitive computer to help them wheel clock. As I recall it actually worked, up to a point, they actually made some money; but eventually decided it just wasn't worth the time.
Quote: BozIf you could predict the sector, plenty of money to be made betting the 6-8 numbers in the area. If this worked even 25 percent of the time, you could break a casino in days. Is 25 percent accuracy in an 8 number range too much to ask?
Nothing else we talk about would give the player who can do this, an advantage of this level.
http://edwardothorp.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/inforthecounteot-i.pdf
page 28, Thorp's roulette computer.
There is no dispute that a computer can clock a wheel. The only question is whether a human can with sufficient accuracy to overcome the edge.
Quote: vendman1There was a "Breaking Vegas", episode about some MIT guys who built a real primitive computer to help them wheel clock.
Yes, I saw that one. I don't think it is in dispute that with the aid of a camera and computer clocking roulette could be done.
Quote: WizardYes, I saw that one. I don't think it is in dispute that with the aid of a camera and computer clocking roulette could be done.
Do doubt. Computer aid at anything can probably overcome the house advantage. You might even be able to get a robot to throw the dice perfectly every time, barely hit the back and rest nicely. That can't be a factor in what we are talking about. It should be a given that no casino is going to allow computer aid.
ZCore13
Quote: Zcore13It should be a given that no casino is going to allow computer aid.
You're undoubtedly right. But these days it could be done, perhaps.
the Eudomonics team used a cumbersome system which required inputs by a player, and used relays to indicate the result (I think it gave an octant number). That was the state of the art back then. These days it might be possible to conceal a camera and a display in a pair of glasses, and to relay inputs and results with bluetooth. Not to mention today's gear is a lot more reliable.
There was a Mission: Impossible! episode, in the show's first run in the 60s, using such a strategem. The gear was impossibly compact for the time (it fit in Cinnamon's everning clutch) and displyed the exact number (on a calendar watch, no less!). Dramatization and exaggeration aside, it was perfectly feasible as science fiction. (great show, BTW).
In fact I'd be surprised is no one else has attempted something similar since the late 60s or early 70s until now. Even with manual inputs, it could be done with relative ease if you posses the know-how.
Quote: WizardYes, I saw that one. I don't think it is in dispute that with the aid of a camera and computer clocking roulette could be done.
What are the number of spins or time needed clocking a dealer to make it feasable?
Quote: NareedYou're undoubtedly right. But these days it could be done, perhaps.
the Eudomonics team used a cumbersome system which required inputs by a player, and used relays to indicate the result (I think it gave an octant number). That was the state of the art back then. These days it might be possible to conceal a camera and a display in a pair of glasses, and to relay inputs and results with bluetooth. Not to mention today's gear is a lot more reliable.
There was a Mission: Impossible! episode, in the show's first run in the 60s, using such a strategem. The gear was impossibly compact for the time (it fit in Cinnamon's everning clutch) and displyed the exact number (on a calendar watch, no less!). Dramatization and exaggeration aside, it was perfectly feasible as science fiction. (great show, BTW).
In fact I'd be surprised is no one else has attempted something similar since the late 60s or early 70s until now. Even with manual inputs, it could be done with relative ease if you posses the know-how.
You are exactly right on probably being able to incorporate it. That's why casinos are already talking about banning things like Google Glasses before they even come out. I'm sure someone could incorporate the computers and radars needed into cell phones, but it wouldn't take long to figure out what was happening.
One thing that people that study the human mind and science fiction type stuff all agree on... if the human mind can imagine it, it can be done at some point when technology catches up. The mind is always ahead of technology. If it can be thought of, it's possible. If it's not possible, it can't be imagined.
ZCore13
Quote: Zcore13If it's not possible, it can't be imagined.
A nice lead in for arguments about paradoxes like backward time travel: "Is it possible for someone to invent a time machine capable of backward travel and have someone from the future travel to the past and murder the inventor before he discovers the invention? Would that make the device disappear?"
ZCore13
Quote: Zcore13You are exactly right on probably being able to incorporate it. That's why casinos are already talking about banning things like Google Glasses before they even come out. I'm sure someone could incorporate the computers and radars needed into cell phones, but it wouldn't take long to figure out what was happening.
I think it would be a good technology experiment to try to clock a roulette wheel using just an iPhone's camera and an app (no typing or data entry). Is it possible to capture and analyze video fast enough to run the necessary orbital decay computations? It would obviously be illegal (in NV, a felony) to actually use it, but it would be a great demonstration if it worked. There must be someone out there who's already tried it...
Quote: DocA nice lead in for arguments about paradoxes like backward time travel: "Is it possible for someone to invent a time machine capable of backward travel and have someone from the future travel to the past and murder the inventor before he discovers the invention? Would that make the device disappear?"
Yes, this is a twist on the "Grandfather paradox" going back 70 years to a book by Rene Barjavel. Very interesting exercise for the mind :)
Quote: Zcore13That's why casinos are already talking about banning things like Google Glasses before they even come out.
That's a bit too obvious. if I were planning such a thing, I'd use regular prescription glasses to begin with, or sunglasses.
Quote:I'm sure someone could incorporate the computers and radars needed into cell phones, but it wouldn't take long to figure out what was happening.
Or rather things that look like cell phones? A dedicated computer wouldn't be too expensive, after all. The thing is, you could also make it look like any number of things. Say a cigarette pack, or a compact, or a tablet, or a tin of breath mints, etc.
I think that there is a thread that the Wizard started about this topic though.
I'm just hung up on any advantage player of any game trying to overcome any edge over 1.00% much less 5.26% on double zero.
Roulette would be a lot more fun to me if the edge were not so high. That's why I don't play it at all.
Quote: WizardYes, I saw that one. I don't think it is in dispute that with the aid of a camera and computer clocking roulette could be done.
So just to sum up...I think we could both agree that roulette AP would be possible with computer/mechanical aids. Which I'm sure are illegal everywhere. But that gaining an advantage in the real world is impractical/very difficult with the naked eye, and/or a lot of practice.
Quote: AhighI'm just hung up on any advantage player of any game trying to overcome any edge over 1.00% much less 5.26% on double zero.
It's not a question of the absolute edge, it's a question of how far the edge moves with a little bit of effort. Lucky Ladies is a side bet for blackjack with one of the stiffest edges around -- over 24%. But it's also *very* countable because a little knowledge goes a long way. Eliot Jacobson and Stephen How have spent lots of time publishing how to beat proprietary side bets by counting, many of which are in the 5-10% range, but because the EORs are so large it doesn't take much. Roulette is similar: the "EOR" of a single number is enormous. If you can rule out half of the wheel even once every 10 spins (about every 12-15 minutes), you still have an edge. Quick quiz: what is that edge if you bet on half the wheel (double-zero) and one out of ten times a number in your half is guaranteed?
Quote: MangoJTo beat double zero roulette, you would only need to exclude 2 numbers per spin on a consistent basis. If you can exclude 18 numbers in 10 spins, you are still on the losing side.
I'm not excluding 18 numbers in 10 spins, I'm excluding 19 (half the wheel) for one spin. Betting 19 units, one each on 19 numbers, one of which is guaranteed to hit, gives me a return of +17, more than enough to cover the expected loss for the other 9 normal spins if I bet the same way. *I* can't do this, but if someone else could they'd have the edge.
Quote: MathExtremistI'm not excluding 18 numbers in 10 spins, I'm excluding 19 (half the wheel) for one spin. Betting 19 units, one each on 19 numbers, one of which is guaranteed to hit, gives me a return of +17, more than enough to cover the expected loss for the other 9 normal spins if I bet the same way. *I* can't do this, but if someone else could they'd have the edge.
Sorry yes, my mistakes. You are perfectly right, you win 17 units on your 10th spin, and lose 9 units on the other spins.
My estimation was somehow naive, that for 10 spins you would effectively bet on 380 numbers, and you would need to make sure only 360 could hit for the 35:1 payoff to be overall zero EV.
The wheel layout is different from the table layout as we all know, and to lay say 19 chips in the time available is near impossible.
I play Rapid Roulette with a real wheel as the bets can be placed by touch screen. It has a racetrack layout available which makes placing bets on adjoining numbers very easy.
However, the casino are aware of the potential of AP, and so they shut the betting long before the ball has started its decay, which is from my understanding, when the AP players need to assess their bets.
There is much more time to place a bet at a conventional table, but not enough time to cover 19 numbers.