Playing cold numbers on roulette

I'm a poker player (English not being my native language, so apologies up front for spelling and grammar mistakes) and have no real love for gambling since I'm aware of the fact that the house always has and edge, so I rarely play a slot machine or any other table game. That is, until while on holiday a buddy of mine introduced me to a small casino where they have an Interblock Roulette machine (single zero) at which you can play numbers from €0,10 minimum up to €28 maximum. Slightly puzzled by the seemingly huge gap between min and max I eventually decided to start playing the cold numbers.

I only started playing a cold number when it already hadn't hit for 200 spins (which is the maximum stats for this particular machine apparently). Trust me, it's a boring strategy.
Starting with €0,10 and adding €0,10 every time my number(s) didn't hit, I racked up a little profit. You need to have patience though... it took me about 4 hours to get a profit of €100, which is nice obviously. Just out of curiosity I did this for three days and every time I made a profit, but a holiday is a holiday and I wanted to do other fun shit as well.

Now I've done some math on this, but I am a gambler nor a genius, so I have the following assumptions and calculations:

1. If you don't hit your number within 69 spins (after already not showing up after 200 spins) you get a negative expectation. 69 spins is break even.
2. For those 69 spins you need a capital of €241,50
3. The odds of not hitting your number within:
3A. 69 spins = (36/37)^69 = 15,1%
3B. 269 spins = (36/37)^269 = 0,063%

If these assumptions or calculations are incorrect, by all means, correct me.

There is no certainty that your number will come up within 69, 269 or even 500 (or more) spins as I've already found out from the forum, but I was curious whether you can play this particular machine profitably with these settings or did I just get lucky? And this is where my math stops and I would like to know the answer to whether the average profits you rack up are enough to cover the loss(es) for when you don't hit your number or whether a different approach is needed.

If you have any questions, please let me know.

TIA for your answer and corrections.

Quote: TheRealKameleon

I
Now I've done some math on this, but I am a gambler nor a genius, so I have the following assumptions and calculations:

1. If you don't hit your number within 69 spins (after already not showing up after 200 spins) you get a negative expectation. 69 spins is break even.
2. For those 69 spins you need a capital of €241,50
3. The odds of not hitting your number within:
3A. 69 spins = (36/37)^71 = 15,1%
3B. 269 spins = (36/37)^271 = 0,063%

If these assumptions or calculations are incorrect, by all means, correct me.

TIA for your answer and corrections.

Hi and welcome to the forum.

I see you refer to single zero roulette.
The ball has no memory.
The table and chips have no memory.
If a number has, or has not showed in the last xxx spins, the probability of it landing on the next spin is 1/37 and the return for a win is 36:1. So the house edge is 1/37 against you. EVERY TIME. There's nothing break even about it. There is no winning strategy except to own the casino.
Just research Gamblers fallacy. There's a mountain of analysis out that that I cannot be bothered to repeat.

You CAN improve your odds of winning ever so slightly by betting on the number(s) that have hit the most. The reason is that there's a small chance that the wheel could be biased.

I have a gambling app on my phone where you choose numbers to hit. They gave me a list of hot numbers(Most likely to hit) and cold numbers(Least likely to hit) I decided to throw caution to the wind and choose all of the "Cold numbers" Cold numbers gave me the second best hit of the gambling app, 7 hit numbers out of 10). ;) So you never know. ;) As a disclaimer, this was just a practice app and choosing cold numbers would most likely cause you to lose, but like I said maybe most of your cold numbers will hit at least once for a good payout in the real world. ;)

I know I'm going to regret this, but what exactly might be the difference between...

Quote: Nathan

hot numbers(Most likely to hit)

...and...

Quote: Nathan

cold numbers(Least likely not to hit)

I can't quite grok the distinction. Between least likely to fail at hitting, as opposed to others which are most likely to succeed at the task of doing so, instead.

Quote: DrawingDead

I know I'm going to regret this, but what exactly might be the difference between...

...and...

I can't quite grok the distinction. Between least likely to fail at hitting, as opposed to others which are most likely to succeed at the task of doing so, instead.

I edited my post to make more sense. :)

Quote: Nathan

I edited my post to make more sense. :)

And you failed.
Anyone advising a member that 'hot numbers' or 'cold numbers' actually have any significance is doing a grave disservice, not helping.
The OP seems thoroughly seduced by the gambler's fallacy.
We should be helping him see the error of his ways not telling him crap like 'hot numbers are more likely to hit or 'cold numbers' are less likely to hit.

cold numbers probability to hit = 0.027
extremely cold numbers probability to hit = 0.027
hot numbers probability to hit = 0.027
extremely hot numbers probability to hit = 0.027


Probability of a biased wheel changing those statement: Negligible

Quote: Keyser

You CAN improve your odds of winning ever so slightly by betting on the number(s) that have hit the most. The reason is that there's a small chance that the wheel could be biased.

Any such bias is unlikely and it would have to have just recently developed because the casino's computers and the casino staff would otherwise be detecting it.

so as clint eastwood said: Do you think this is your lucky day? the day you just walk into a casino and as you approach the wheel it gets wobbly therefore gives an edge to hot numbers such edge having more zeroes in it than the national debt?

Come on. Get real.!!

The casino is in business to make a profit; they are not in business to buy and operate real cheap roulette wheels that somehow have magical powers to ascertain your presence and do things for your benefit.

Quote: Keyser

You CAN improve your odds of winning ever so slightly by betting on the number(s) that have hit the most. The reason is that there's a small chance that the wheel could be biased.

I have always thought this was really clever, in that it doesn't hurt you on unbiased wheels, but it helps you on biased wheels, even if you don't know whether or how they are biased.

It doesn't really help in any practical sense, since essentially all wheels are either unbiased or very negligibly biased, but it's a cool idea.

Throwing salt with your right hand over your left shoulder can be a really cool idea too. It doesn't to anything for you and annoy the heck out of that cocktail waitress walking behind you, but what a cool idea.

Quote: FleaStiff

Throwing salt with your right hand over your left shoulder can be a really cool idea too. It doesn't to anything for you and annoy the heck out of that cocktail waitress walking behind you, but what a cool idea.

I took this whole thread with a grain of salt because the person starting this thread has not returned (as of right now).

I have already read every reply and read up on Gamblers Fallacy as well. That was the only interesting reply.

Quote: FleaStiff

Throwing salt with your right hand over your left shoulder can be a really cool idea too. It doesn't to anything for you and annoy the heck out of that cocktail waitress walking behind you, but what a cool idea.

No, because throwing salt over your shoulder cannot theoretically help you take advantage of a biased wheel. Based on your posts in this thread, I think you have missed the point Keyser was making.

Again, this doesn't mean much in practice, but it's a fun puzzle (at least to me) to think about "When picking roulette numbers, is there any possible theoretical gain over picking randomly?"

The idea is that if you bet only "hot" numbers instead of random or "cold" numbers, you are no worse (or better) off for unbiased wheels, but you would be doing slightly better for a biased wheel. So if you are going to play anyway, you might as well bet the "hot" numbers.

Quote: TheRealKameleon

I have already read every reply and read up on Gamblers Fallacy as well. That was the only interesting reply.

yayyy. ]I win the internet :o)

No, seriously RealK, If waiting for a streak of no-shows floats your boat, then do so. It may slow down the rate at which you throw chips down on the table. Other that that, it will do nothing for your profit potential

Quote: MrGoldenSun

No, because throwing salt over your shoulder cannot theoretically help you take advantage of a biased wheel. Based on your posts in this thread, I think you have missed the point Keyser was making.

Again, this doesn't mean much in practice, but it's a fun puzzle (at least to me) to think about "When picking roulette numbers, is there any possible theoretical gain over picking randomly?"

The idea is that if you bet only "hot" numbers instead of random or "cold" numbers, you are no worse (or better) off for unbiased wheels, but you would be doing slightly better for a biased wheel. So if you are going to play anyway, you might as well bet the "hot" numbers.

that might work if you are playing at home with a wheel that you bought from Toys'R'Us

Quote: vegas

I took this whole thread with a grain of salt because the person starting this thread has not returned (as of right now).

LOL at your salt related pun! :D I love puns! :D But seriously, the OP might be busy working or something. He only posted this thread yesterday. :)

Quote: Fleastiff

Any such bias is unlikely and it would have to have just recently developed because the casino's computers and the casino staff would otherwise be detecting it.

so as clint eastwood said: Do you think this is your lucky day? the day you just walk into a casino and as you approach the wheel it gets wobbly therefore gives an edge to hot numbers such edge having more zeroes in it than the national debt?

Come on. Get real.!!

The casino is in business to make a profit; they are not in business to buy and operate real cheap roulette wheels that somehow have magical powers to ascertain your presence and do things for your benefit.

What some people think they know about live wheels and bias always amuses me.
Virtually 90% of wheels are indeed biased, producing very high chi squares after a significant number of spins. Sometimes with chi over several hundred. A very high percentage of the time the wheels are NOT exploitable because the bias is just too weak.

The differences between live wheels and RNGs really begin to show once you get above 20k to 50k spins. After 50k spins, you can, a very high percentage of the time, immediately tell the difference between a live wheel and an RNG. (The larger the spin sample grows the greater the chi grows on a live wheel. Even on brand new wheels.)

Yes casinos have readers that track for bias, but NO they don't replace a wheel just because it fails a short term chi square. The reason is the wheels are still making money, just like the rest of the wheels in the casino. Replacing them would be a waste of money. Instead casinos often just rotate wheels around the casino floors. Most of the time, the history of the rotations and the data does not follow the wheel to it's new table.

Quote: Fleastiff

Any such bias is unlikely and it would have to have just recently developed because the casino's computers and the casino staff would otherwise be detecting it.

Yes, an interesting situation did take place at C-----'s on the LV strip. They knew several of their wheels were biased. A team hit them for a classical amount of money and they disputed the win because they said the wheel was biased. They couldn't figure out how the team knew it was biased. They thought that the team had somehow gained access to inside info regarding the spin history of their wheels. The truth was that it took me less than two minutes to spot the biased wheel and only 7500 spins to determine the best numbers to play on the wheel. Arrogance and incompetence from the casino.

I was kind of surprised to see a dealer spin the wheel with nobody sitting or betting at the table. I didn't think casinos did this, but apparently so. The result did go on the board.

I think they consider it more attractive to passersby that way. The annunciator should work irrespective of wagers.