Odds on your roulette number hitting.
Thread Rating:
October 21st, 2011 at 1:56:00 PM
permalink
I'm sure this is very easy but I just don't know how to do the math. If you bet one single number and you bet it for 20 spins what are the odds that you will hit? How about with 30 spins? Final question, what is the longest you could go without hitting a number and it not being suspicious?
October 21st, 2011 at 2:13:19 PM
permalink
Forget the suspicious part. Wheels are too well made to be biased and too well monitored now to be discovered by the players rather than the casino.
October 21st, 2011 at 2:17:37 PM
permalink
Quote: FleaStiffForget the suspicious part. Wheels are too well made to be biased and too well monitored now to be discovered by the players rather than the casino.
Maybe suspicious was the wrong word, I guess I'm more wondering how long could a single number go without hitting? Obviously on a single 0 wheel it should hit 1 out of every 37 times. In reality I know it can go a cycle or two without coming up. What's the longest it could go theoretically?
October 21st, 2011 at 2:28:54 PM
permalink
edit: Eh, I messed up.
edit2: Okay, so for N probability of a number coming up only once in X+1 spins the formula would be: [(37/38)^x](1/38) = N, right?
edit3: If so, just decide what N needs to be to call it 'suspicious' and solve.
Math really is a use it or lose it skill it seems. I've totally lost it.
edit2: Okay, so for N probability of a number coming up only once in X+1 spins the formula would be: [(37/38)^x](1/38) = N, right?
edit3: If so, just decide what N needs to be to call it 'suspicious' and solve.
Math really is a use it or lose it skill it seems. I've totally lost it.
Solo venimos, solo nos vamos. Y aqui nos juntamos, juntos que estamos.
October 21st, 2011 at 2:32:14 PM
permalink
Theoretically... it could never come up. Your chances are about 1 in a million of your number not coming up in 518 spins on a fair 00 wheel. 259 spins is about 1 in 1000.
I heart Crystal Math.
October 21st, 2011 at 2:41:32 PM
permalink
Asking how long it could go without hitting is like asking how long does it takes to reach zero by repeatedly dividing any number by two.
You can get close, but you'll really never quite get there.
You can get close, but you'll really never quite get there.
October 21st, 2011 at 3:05:21 PM
permalink
The odds that a single number doesn't hit is really the same as the odds of any other number hitting: 36 / 37 on a single zero wheel.
The odds that it doesn't hit in X spins is simple: ( 36 / 37 ) ^ X
There's a 50% chance of hitting within 25 spins. There's only a 36% chance of it hitting within the expected 37 spins.
Your number might not hit for several hundred spins. The odds are long, but nothing is impossible.
For shits & giggles, here's the odds of playing 5 numbers on a single zero wheel, and having none of them hit:
The odds that it doesn't hit in X spins is simple: ( 36 / 37 ) ^ X
There's a 50% chance of hitting within 25 spins. There's only a 36% chance of it hitting within the expected 37 spins.
Your number might not hit for several hundred spins. The odds are long, but nothing is impossible.
Spins | Odds | Spins | Odds | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 97.30% | 100 | 6.45770% | |
2 | 94.67% | 125 | 3.25535% | |
3 | 92.11% | 150 | 1.64103% | |
4 | 89.62% | 175 | 0.82725% | |
5 | 87.20% | 200 | 0.41702% | |
10 | 76.03% | 225 | 0.21022% | |
15 | 66.30% | 250 | 0.10597% | |
20 | 57.81% | 275 | 0.05342% | |
25 | 50.41% | 300 | 0.02693% | |
30 | 43.96% | 325 | 0.01358% | |
35 | 38.33% | 350 | 0.00684% | |
36 | 37.29% | 375 | 0.00345% | |
37 | 36.29% | 400 | 0.00174% | |
38 | 35.30% | 425 | 0.00088% | |
39 | 34.35% | 450 | 0.00044% | |
40 | 33.42% | 475 | 0.00022% | |
50 | 25.41% | 500 | 0.00011% | |
60 | 19.32% | 525 | 0.00006% | |
70 | 14.69% | 550 | 0.00003% | |
80 | 11.17% | 575 | 0.00001% | |
90 | 8.49% | 600 | 0.00001% |
For shits & giggles, here's the odds of playing 5 numbers on a single zero wheel, and having none of them hit:
Spins | Odds | Spins | Odds | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 86.49% | 15 | 11.3298% | |
2 | 74.80% | 20 | 5.4823% | |
3 | 64.69% | 25 | 2.6528% | |
4 | 55.95% | 30 | 1.2837% | |
5 | 48.39% | 35 | 0.6211% | |
6 | 41.85% | 40 | 0.3006% | |
7 | 36.19% | 45 | 0.1454% | |
8 | 31.30% | 50 | 0.0704% | |
9 | 27.07% | 55 | 0.0341% | |
10 | 23.41% | 60 | 0.0165% | |
11 | 20.25% | 65 | 0.0080% | |
12 | 17.51% | 70 | 0.0039% | |
13 | 15.15% | 75 | 0.0019% | |
14 | 13.10% | 80 | 0.0009% |
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
October 21st, 2011 at 3:11:30 PM
permalink
Quote: fatjake44I'm sure this is very easy but I just don't know how to do the math. If you bet one single number and you bet it for 20 spins what are the odds that you will hit? How about with 30 spins? Final question, what is the longest you could go without hitting a number and it not being suspicious?
For 20 spins on a 00 wheel, the odds that your number will not hit is (37/38)^20 = 58.7%. So the odds that your number will hit at least once is 100% - 58.7% = 41.3%
For 30 spins, the odds of not hitting are (37/38)^30 = 44.9%, so your odds of hitting are 55.1%
There is a 90% likelihood that you would hit within 86 spins. There is a 99% likelihood that you will hit within 170 spins.
October 21st, 2011 at 4:00:57 PM
permalink
Quote: FleaStiffForget the suspicious part. Wheels are too well made to be biased and too well monitored now to be discovered by the players rather than the casino.
100% accurate, not to mention all the driving.
Ken
October 21st, 2011 at 5:45:55 PM
permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBearThe odds that a single number doesn't hit is really the same as the odds of any other number hitting: 36 / 37 on a single zero wheel.
The odds that it doesn't hit in X spins is simple: ( 36 / 37 ) ^ X
There's a 50% chance of hitting within 25 spins. There's only a 36% chance of it hitting within the expected 37 spins.
Your number might not hit for several hundred spins. The odds are long, but nothing is impossible.
For shits & giggles, here's the odds of playing 5 numbers on a single zero wheel, and having none of them hit:
That chart is exactly what I was looking for! Thank you!
April 17th, 2016 at 6:24:13 PM
permalink
Sorry for reviving a 4 year dead thread, but I think this would be a good place to ask my question.
I've got a deal through an affiliate, for a 10% monthly cash back on all my loses from every casino.
I am thinking would be a wise idea to sign up with say 400 casinos and bet $25 at each on the same number at roulette.
When I win I cashout $900 (on average 1 out of 37 casinos) and for where I lose get my $2.5 next month from the affiliate.
My question is, what bankroll I would need to make this work and "be sure" I won't go broke?
Obviously, I would need $10000 to place 400 bets of $25, but would that be enough to support a few months very ugly streaks?
I'm thinking the casinos will not notice what I am doing, and I will only play at known software: Microgaming, Playtech, Netent, RTG.
It's a 3 day work/month, I plan to do this for as long as possible, hopefully for many years from now on if the deal will still stand up.
I've got a deal through an affiliate, for a 10% monthly cash back on all my loses from every casino.
I am thinking would be a wise idea to sign up with say 400 casinos and bet $25 at each on the same number at roulette.
When I win I cashout $900 (on average 1 out of 37 casinos) and for where I lose get my $2.5 next month from the affiliate.
My question is, what bankroll I would need to make this work and "be sure" I won't go broke?
Obviously, I would need $10000 to place 400 bets of $25, but would that be enough to support a few months very ugly streaks?
I'm thinking the casinos will not notice what I am doing, and I will only play at known software: Microgaming, Playtech, Netent, RTG.
It's a 3 day work/month, I plan to do this for as long as possible, hopefully for many years from now on if the deal will still stand up.
April 17th, 2016 at 6:36:59 PM
permalink
Mocrogaming has screwed me in the past. Damn Kool cat casino.
Expect the worst and you will never be disappointed.
I AM NOT PART OF GWAE RADIO SHOW
April 17th, 2016 at 7:05:22 PM
permalink
CASH back? Sounds too good to be true. Wouldn't those terms turn a "0" wheel from -2.6% expected value to +7.1% expected value? Good luck!Quote: PlayHunter... 10% monthly cash back on all my loses ...
Last edited by: BleedingChipsSlowly on Apr 17, 2016
“You don’t bring a bone saw to a negotiation.” - Robert Jordan, former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia
April 18th, 2016 at 5:03:45 AM
permalink
@GWAE, yes this is real fear that I have, to come over bad payer casinos, since I'll be playing at so many. But a $25 straight bet win will bring me a $900 cashout which I think is a small amount for any casino, unless that casino is the last disgrace that never pays out anyone and in this case I would be able to read quite many complaints on forums, and if so, and surely I will skip playing at it.
@BCS, I am a bit worried too about casinos offering rigged games, but I don't really think that BIG companies such as Microgaming, Playtech, Netent and RTG would allow for this. - I'm guessing the forums would be full of complaints with enough data to prove it?
The 10% monthly cash back deal is not to good to be true, in some cases it goes as high as 15% (even 20% in very rare cases). I was benefiting from this deal for at least two years already and I always get it from the affiliate (and not from the casino directly). But the truth is that I've been playing only at about 40 casinos which I trust. So far I've been playing blackjack, baccarat and video poker mostly. Sometimes slots if a good extra promotion was given by the casino. And I've did well so far. But invested LOTS of time.
Now I figured that by playing roulette on a single number will maximize my profits from the cash back deal. And all it takes is about 4 minutes per casino: deposit, place bet, spin (then make a cashout if won or a cash back claim next month). If I'm gonna do this at 400 casinos, I'm looking at about 27 hours of work per month which is WAY less than what I'm currently doing and the idea appeals me.
My only question is: assuming the game is not weighted (the single zero roulette keeps its 2.7% house edge) and that I will not come over bad payer casinos, what kind of bankroll do I need to make this work and be sure I will never go broke?
@BCS, I am a bit worried too about casinos offering rigged games, but I don't really think that BIG companies such as Microgaming, Playtech, Netent and RTG would allow for this. - I'm guessing the forums would be full of complaints with enough data to prove it?
The 10% monthly cash back deal is not to good to be true, in some cases it goes as high as 15% (even 20% in very rare cases). I was benefiting from this deal for at least two years already and I always get it from the affiliate (and not from the casino directly). But the truth is that I've been playing only at about 40 casinos which I trust. So far I've been playing blackjack, baccarat and video poker mostly. Sometimes slots if a good extra promotion was given by the casino. And I've did well so far. But invested LOTS of time.
Now I figured that by playing roulette on a single number will maximize my profits from the cash back deal. And all it takes is about 4 minutes per casino: deposit, place bet, spin (then make a cashout if won or a cash back claim next month). If I'm gonna do this at 400 casinos, I'm looking at about 27 hours of work per month which is WAY less than what I'm currently doing and the idea appeals me.
My only question is: assuming the game is not weighted (the single zero roulette keeps its 2.7% house edge) and that I will not come over bad payer casinos, what kind of bankroll do I need to make this work and be sure I will never go broke?
April 21st, 2016 at 3:18:07 PM
permalink
So we have the following details:
1) Roulette house edge 2.7%
2) Hitting the winning number frequency 2.7% (since I'll play a single number on a single spin at each of the 400 casinos)
3) Monthly Cashback 10% on losses for each casino in part
So if I'm doing the match correct I will be playing with an effective 7.03% player edge?
This means that actually I will pocket 7% from the total amount wagered and replenish my bankroll with the cashback I receive.
I am thinking at approaching this exploit the following way, considering I have a $10000 starting bankroll (which I intend to maintain in the long run):
Use the $10000 bankroll to bet $25 at each of the 400 casinos AND IF*/**:
*I have a lucky month and win more than expected (say my returns after the first month are $11700 from casinos, plus $217.5 from cashback), then I'll pocket my theoretical profit ($700) and leave the remainder $11217.5 for wagering next month. (Eventually if possible, I will play at 48 more casinos next month.)
**I have a (very) bad month and lose more than expected (say my returns after the first month are just $6300 from casinos, plus $232.5 from cashback), then I will STILL pocket my theoretical profit ($700 for wagering $10000 on roulette) and leave the remainder $5832.5 for wagering next month. But for this case it will mean that next month I will only play (same $25 bet size) at 233 casinos and pocket only $408 (which represents my theoretical profit for wagering $5832.5). And so on... you get the idea.
What kind of bankroll I would need to have in order to make it work with a chance of ruin lower than 0.2%?
And which would be the chance of me losing my $10000 bankroll before pocketing at least $10000 the way I described above?
Please, can anyone tell me how solve the math on this problem? And, is my described approach flawed somewhere?
1) Roulette house edge 2.7%
2) Hitting the winning number frequency 2.7% (since I'll play a single number on a single spin at each of the 400 casinos)
3) Monthly Cashback 10% on losses for each casino in part
So if I'm doing the match correct I will be playing with an effective 7.03% player edge?
This means that actually I will pocket 7% from the total amount wagered and replenish my bankroll with the cashback I receive.
I am thinking at approaching this exploit the following way, considering I have a $10000 starting bankroll (which I intend to maintain in the long run):
Use the $10000 bankroll to bet $25 at each of the 400 casinos AND IF*/**:
*I have a lucky month and win more than expected (say my returns after the first month are $11700 from casinos, plus $217.5 from cashback), then I'll pocket my theoretical profit ($700) and leave the remainder $11217.5 for wagering next month. (Eventually if possible, I will play at 48 more casinos next month.)
**I have a (very) bad month and lose more than expected (say my returns after the first month are just $6300 from casinos, plus $232.5 from cashback), then I will STILL pocket my theoretical profit ($700 for wagering $10000 on roulette) and leave the remainder $5832.5 for wagering next month. But for this case it will mean that next month I will only play (same $25 bet size) at 233 casinos and pocket only $408 (which represents my theoretical profit for wagering $5832.5). And so on... you get the idea.
What kind of bankroll I would need to have in order to make it work with a chance of ruin lower than 0.2%?
And which would be the chance of me losing my $10000 bankroll before pocketing at least $10000 the way I described above?
Please, can anyone tell me how solve the math on this problem? And, is my described approach flawed somewhere?
April 21st, 2016 at 5:53:43 PM
permalink
I think about Roulette a lot, probably too much.
I get that the wheel has no memory and all previous spins mean nothing when calculating the odds of the next spin BUT --- a part of my mind also tells me that recent historical data is REAL and any abnormalities in that data can be reasonably be expected to correct themselves with what could be reasonably considered a certain number of upcoming spins?
Is that reasonable assumption or still completely flawed?
I get that the wheel has no memory and all previous spins mean nothing when calculating the odds of the next spin BUT --- a part of my mind also tells me that recent historical data is REAL and any abnormalities in that data can be reasonably be expected to correct themselves with what could be reasonably considered a certain number of upcoming spins?
Is that reasonable assumption or still completely flawed?
April 22nd, 2016 at 8:01:44 AM
permalink
@GibsonSteps, you know that hitting any number is 1/37 and that previous results have absolutely no effect on the next or future spins, right? - Then you know that if it happens for you to see five zero's in a row, the chances to land again on zero next spin are still 1/37 ! If for some reason your mind refuses to accept this as a fact, then is much better to stay away from gambling in general because is likely to expose you longer to the game than you would initially planned (thinking the game "is due balance things soon"). And this directly translates to you wagering more money on a game with negative edge, so you will be losing more than you have initially planned.
And even if you find a way to make profit from a casino game (like I exemplified in my earlier posts in this thread), you still have to figure out exactly how much money you need to allocate for that to work for you and not let a few bad streaks to put you down. Betting more than you should in relation to your bankroll is a very likely way to end up disappointed, depressed and eventually concluding that the game(s) are rigged against you. Very ugly situation instead to milk the opportunity and make some cash.
In this thread I'm just hoping someone with enough knowledge will be nice enough to help me figure out the answers to my questions in order to avoid falling into the category I just described above.
And even if you find a way to make profit from a casino game (like I exemplified in my earlier posts in this thread), you still have to figure out exactly how much money you need to allocate for that to work for you and not let a few bad streaks to put you down. Betting more than you should in relation to your bankroll is a very likely way to end up disappointed, depressed and eventually concluding that the game(s) are rigged against you. Very ugly situation instead to milk the opportunity and make some cash.
In this thread I'm just hoping someone with enough knowledge will be nice enough to help me figure out the answers to my questions in order to avoid falling into the category I just described above.
April 22nd, 2016 at 8:07:03 AM
permalink
You need to know the variance/standard deviations for roulette and the types of bets you want to make. Then you can take your disadvantage, the number of trails, the variance, and get your standard deviations... which should tell you how well and how poorly you could possibly do. This would be a good bankroll estimation, in my opinion.
Edit: First google search result: http://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/102769/how-do-you-calculate-the-standard-deviation-for-roulette
Edit: First google search result: http://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/102769/how-do-you-calculate-the-standard-deviation-for-roulette
Playing it correctly means you've already won.
April 22nd, 2016 at 9:56:06 AM
permalink
this thread might help out with a formula for Risk of RuinQuote: PlayHunterPlease, can anyone tell me how solve the math on this problem? And, is my described approach flawed somewhere?
when having an advantage
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/questions-and-answers/math/14785-suppose-you-could-beat-the-casinos-how-many-buyins-would-you-need-for-95-confidence/
using it I get
ruin prob / bankroll
0.002: 30,517
0.01: 22,614
0.02: 19,210
0.03: 17,219
0.04: 15,806
0.05: 14,711
0.1: 11,307
it may not be that close
but I think a simulation would be better as you really do not get that 10% back very quickly.
also
have you thought of maybe making like 10 spins at each casino
instead of just 1
you have a better chance (almost 1 in 4)
of getting at least 1 win and the casino may not think anything of your play
1 bet and no more may raise a red flag
does sound fun
Sally
I Heart Vi Hart
April 23rd, 2016 at 7:09:18 AM
permalink
@MustangSally, thank you VERY much !
So, the RoR formula is "RoR = e^[-2*WR*BR/(SD^2)]" - That's pretty much what I was looking for.
And looking at the numbers, does seem almost impossible to lose $10000 before wagering $143000 with $25 bets (one per casino). (By the time I wagered a total of $143000 it will mean that I have already fully recovered my initial $10000 initial investment.)
Playing more spins at a casino will lower my advantage. I think that by playing only one spin per casino I'm having a 7.03% advantage. If I'll be playing two spins per casino I'll be having a 6.76% advantage, so if I am correct, the more spins I do per casino the lower my advantage gets (not something that I want).
Also probably no casinos care when you lose your deposit. When they may notice something is when the win occurs and is immediately followed by a cashout. Even then they have to and will pay my win because I did nothing wrong. But they may watch me closely and if they observe I continue to make the same deposit and play just one roulette spin with it, they may decide to no longer allow me to play. That wouldn't be a big hassle for me as I'll probably be able to sign up at a new casino and do the same thing.
But I take your point, and if I'll notice that too many casinos will start to kick me out for my style of play, then after hitting my winning spin on roulette, I'll switch to blackjack and play a few dozen games there before requesting a payout. - I think that should do it.
So, the RoR formula is "RoR = e^[-2*WR*BR/(SD^2)]" - That's pretty much what I was looking for.
And looking at the numbers, does seem almost impossible to lose $10000 before wagering $143000 with $25 bets (one per casino). (By the time I wagered a total of $143000 it will mean that I have already fully recovered my initial $10000 initial investment.)
Playing more spins at a casino will lower my advantage. I think that by playing only one spin per casino I'm having a 7.03% advantage. If I'll be playing two spins per casino I'll be having a 6.76% advantage, so if I am correct, the more spins I do per casino the lower my advantage gets (not something that I want).
Also probably no casinos care when you lose your deposit. When they may notice something is when the win occurs and is immediately followed by a cashout. Even then they have to and will pay my win because I did nothing wrong. But they may watch me closely and if they observe I continue to make the same deposit and play just one roulette spin with it, they may decide to no longer allow me to play. That wouldn't be a big hassle for me as I'll probably be able to sign up at a new casino and do the same thing.
But I take your point, and if I'll notice that too many casinos will start to kick me out for my style of play, then after hitting my winning spin on roulette, I'll switch to blackjack and play a few dozen games there before requesting a payout. - I think that should do it.
Last edited by: PlayHunter on Apr 23, 2016
April 26th, 2016 at 3:42:15 PM
permalink
I did actually run a sim using "beating bonuses roulette simulator" to find out my chance of busting a $10000 bankroll before wagering a total of $143000 while betting $25 per spin picking a single number, and the result was 48.35%
I think this is pretty contradictory with your results of 0.1% risk of ruin for a $11307 bankroll? Is that formula wrong or are we missing pieces?
I think this is pretty contradictory with your results of 0.1% risk of ruin for a $11307 bankroll? Is that formula wrong or are we missing pieces?
April 27th, 2016 at 8:16:18 AM
permalink
I have not used that sim programQuote: PlayHunterI did actually run a sim using "beating bonuses roulette simulator" to find out my chance of busting a $10000 bankroll before wagering a total of $143000 while betting $25 per spin picking a single number, and the result was 48.35%
in some time after Google said no to Java
but I used Firefox with it and was ok
that 48.6% is just playing Roulette and no loss rebate it looks to me
I got the same result too
and that is easily calculated using D Schlinger trip risk of ruin formula too
I had to look at that againQuote: PlayHunterI think this is pretty contradictory with your results of 0.1% risk of ruin for a $11307 bankroll?
and that 11307 = 10% ror (0.1)
and that is for playing forever at that ror
for your 143,000 in a sim shows 8.34% ror
(a loss of -0.9 instead of -1 is what I did as seen in the photo)
and with 10000 bankroll about 11.7% ror
hope this helps out some
I Heart Vi Hart
April 27th, 2016 at 2:59:15 PM
permalink
@MustangSally, I see it very clearly now thank you very much ! (Actually I was misreading a simple notion and from there my confusion.)
