Betchain usa friendly 728x90

Author Topic: Dobbelsteen`Blog  (Read 64470 times)

Bayes

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 650
  • Thanked: 525 times
  • roulettician.com
Re: Dobbelsteen`Blog
« Reply #525 on: November 04, 2016, 09:47:46 AM »
I think he should have   declared his interest when advocating Betvoyager. You may not.

Scep, yes I have affiliate links to BV, so what? Does this invalidate its merits or mean that I only advocate it because I'm an affiliate? obviously not.

I don't see that you have any legitimate complaints. The T & C clearly state that you are required to produce ID when withdrawing (to thwart money-laundering), that's  a common requirement at online casinos. Similarly, when you login a large notice is displayed telling about the terms regarding the 10% deduction, you'd have to be blind to miss it.

Quote
Actually,Bayes, the reason I chose Betvoyager was your view that it was a "Fair" site.So much so that I did not even read the Terms and Conditions.

That's unfortunate, and somewhat unwise if you don't mind me saying so. But you can hardly blame me (or BV) if you're having trouble withdrawing funds when you're not willing to meet the requirements as stated in the T & C. Personally I've never had a problem withdrawing funds, and to my knowledge no-one else has either.

BV isn't perfect, and maybe you would prefer to play at a live OC because you like looking  at the dealers or watching the wheel spin around, or maybe you would prefer prettier graphics or nicer background music.

But if you want the best roulette odds on the net, together with the peace of mind that the game isn't rigged against you (and what's the use of the best odds if you don't trust them?) then BV is the obvious choice.

Quote
Your example  ignores the fact that we in this forum - including  yourself - EXPECT to win more than we lose .If we do that , and bet on a 37 number table ,we do not suffer a 10% deduction , we get paid the full odds . In this case the 2.7% is irrelevant .

Come off it scep, if you think the house edge is irrelevant then you're the one indulging in Alice in wonderland fantasies. The house edge is never irrelevant; even the AP with a demonstrable edge has to overcome the house edge, so it doesn't really matter whether you expect to win or not. As Mr P has pointed out, many wheels may be biased, but not all are sufficiently biased to overcome the HA, so it depends on what precisely your edge is whether the 10% deduction works out to be an overall disadvantage.

The problem is, many don't understand how the HA works. Many people looking at the 10% deduction argue that this is greater than the standard 2.7% HA and so you must be worse off than playing a supposedly "fair" wheel. Or they don't understand how the deduction is applied, and conclude that you're better off playing the regular game. Steve H made this mistake -

[admin. note: please no links to that site, thanks]

They also don't understand how the randomness control works and think it's just a gimmick (Steve's criticism of it in that article may apply to the "Fairness control" feature, but not to "Randomness Control" which can't be cheated in the way he describes).

It's for these reasons that I added a lengthy article on my site about BV - I even included an algorithm for the SHA so you can check the outcomes yourself and don't have to rely on BV's. If I'm going to all that trouble, why not include some affiliate links so that I potentially pay for the site running costs? In any case, I've been promoting BV for years without being an official affiliate, so Reyth is correct; I'm not in it for the money (and FWIW, my affiliate earnings amount to zero so far).
« Last Edit: November 04, 2016, 03:04:06 PM by kav »
 
The following users thanked this post: kav, Reyth

Bayes

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 650
  • Thanked: 525 times
  • roulettician.com
Re: Dobbelsteen`Blog
« Reply #526 on: November 04, 2016, 09:56:17 AM »
The most important aspect of an online casino is the ease and
speed of withdrawal.

Maybe, but if the odds are against you winning or the game is rigged you're unlikely to have anything to withdraw in the first place.
 

Bayes

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 650
  • Thanked: 525 times
  • roulettician.com
Re: Dobbelsteen`Blog
« Reply #527 on: November 04, 2016, 10:02:24 AM »
Its not that.  Its just that I really don't think:

1) Bayes would skew his view of BV for any reason


I would change my mind about BV and cease to recommend it only if I had legitimate grounds for complaint on a regular basis, such as having trouble withdrawing. BV isn't perfect. If a player wins a roulette tournament they're required to spam gambling forums before being paid. This isn't exactly ethical behaviour.
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth

scepticus

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1707
  • Thanked: 338 times
Re: Dobbelsteen`Blog
« Reply #528 on: November 05, 2016, 05:41:58 AM »
Bayes
I did not say you were motivated by your affiliated link to Betvoyager but, yes, I did think that it might have influenced your view .I have no objection to anyone having a link to  somewhere else- paid or unpaid. I was , mainly I suppose, surprised to see the link.
Yes, I must be blind not to have seen the daily 10% deduction notice. Perhaps you could post a copy of it here so others can have a good laugh at my sightless eyes  ? !   

Yes, I may have been unwise not to have read the T and Cs but it would not have made any difference anyway as I would have the same (  self created ?) problem anyway.
Somehow I cannot see my 53Euros being remotely considered as Money Laundering.  ( It was 56E but they deducted 3E from the amount they  haven’t paid me.! )
Where is Betvoyager based anyway ? Is it an offshore company ?

As for being in Alice in Wonderland country . I don’t think so . It’s just that I gamble in the real world and not in your theoretical world.
Consider this scenario .
I am going to the horse racing today. Before I go I study the
Form  . I choose two horses which I think have a very good chance of winning. 
At the races .I see a  Bookie offering 2/1 on my first pick. I bet £10 on it. It is first  past the post of the 4 horses  in the race and I win £20 .
In the next race my other horse is offered at 2/1  so I bet £10 on it. It wins in a field of 10 so I win £20.
I won £ 20  on each horse at odds of 2/1 even though the odds against them winning their race was different. A 1 in 4 chance and a 1 in 10  chance.
With my winnings from the Bookie I go to a B&M casino.
The casino offers me 2/1 that none of the 12 numbers I pick
Will win. I accept the bet and  put £1 on each of the 12 numbers . One of them wins. I win £24. Being a Hit and Run merchant I go to another table where the casino again offers me 2/1 that none of my 12 numbers wil win . Again one of my numbers wins and I win £24.
In all 4 cases I have struck a bet .It doesn’t matter what the “real “ odds against are.  If you strike a deal  it is the deal that is relevant not the theoretical odds. If you win you win and if you lose you lose.
The moral of the story is that you must concentrate on choosing the winner because choosing the winner is what counts and not fixating on the odds on offer because in the REAL world  of gamblingthe odds are irrelevant .
 At home I log into Betvoyager to have a bet on their NoZero table. I bet 12 numbers one of which wins . Being a Hit and Run Merchant I leave the table and “casino “ .I  have won £24 but Betvoyager deducts 10 % from that .
Some deal. Some bloody deal !
And if THAT is the best  deal going ?
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth

Bayes

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 650
  • Thanked: 525 times
  • roulettician.com
Re: Dobbelsteen`Blog
« Reply #529 on: November 05, 2016, 08:30:51 AM »

The moral of the story is that you must concentrate on choosing the winner because choosing the winner is what counts and not fixating on the odds on offer because in the REAL world  of gamblingthe odds are irrelevant .


The odds are never irrelevant in any gambling scenario, and no, picking the winner is not always what counts. In your horse racing examples (and any sports betting) the way to win is not to try to pick winners but to find "value" odds. That is, finding bets that offer the best odds. You can pick favourites all day long and still lose because the odds are adjusted to take account of the weight of money on the selections.

With roulette you can't get better odds because the payouts are fixed, so yes you have to concentrate on picking more winners than losers, but that doesn't mean the odds are irrelevant. How can the HA be irrelevant when there is a zero which is certain to hit? Unless you think you can always avoid it (good luck with that).

The crucial point about the 10% deduction is that it doesn't affect the number of winning bets; it's applied after you've played your session and only to the net profit. On the other hand, the standard HA is always present and acts to reduce your net wins: it erodes your bankroll. That's not theory but fact. With the HA present you have to pick more winners than losers (relative to the odds) in order to even break even. Remove the HA and you keep more of your wins, it's as simple as that. Your bankroll isn't eroded and the only thing you have to battle against is variance.  In exchange for keeping more wins you only get 90% of your net profit instead of 100%, which is a good deal in the vast majority of cases.

scep, I sometimes think you like arguing just for the sake of it. You dismiss probability, statistics, simulations, the long run and any kind of "theory", and yet you use systems. For any system there are assumptions, in other words, a theoretical framework. Otherwise, it's just gambling and you're relying on mindless luck, in which case, why exchange ideas or have any discussion at all? You say you like to discuss ideas, but at the same time seem to deny that there is any way of discriminating between them or testing them because it's just a matter of gambling and if you win you win and if you lose you lose! It comes across as quite a negative attitude, actually.
 
The following users thanked this post: MrPerfect.

Bayes

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 650
  • Thanked: 525 times
  • roulettician.com
Re: Dobbelsteen`Blog
« Reply #530 on: November 05, 2016, 08:41:25 AM »
Where is Betvoyager based anyway ? Is it an offshore company ?

BetCruise is a Dutch company but their operation is in the Netherland Antilles (the Caribbean). And it's silly to say (as Steve H does) that there must be something dodgy about OC's which are based "in the middle of nowhere". Many OC's are located in these countries for tax reasons.
 

scepticus

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1707
  • Thanked: 338 times
Re: Dobbelsteen`Blog
« Reply #531 on: November 05, 2016, 04:27:15 PM »
Where have I dismissed probability ?
I don’t dismiss statistics but your use of them and so do  mathematicians because they claim that past spins because they are irrelevant . So they  are wrong too ?

Yes. I suppose I do argue too much but  I think you will find that is because I find some points of view misleading .

I think that posts should be about solving the problems presented by roulette and PRACTICAL ways of dealing with them rather than “ just for fun” . They should be aimed at making a profit  and should also consider Risk and Reward .
I don’t consider that attitude negative,

I should have made it clearer that the odds I was referring  to was the " unfair " odds which we are told cannot be beat.
« Last Edit: November 05, 2016, 08:04:11 PM by scepticus »
 
The following users thanked this post: MrPerfect.

joeyyyy

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 1
Re: Dobbelsteen`Blog
« Reply #532 on: December 07, 2016, 03:38:01 PM »
Dobbelsteen, why we cant play just on one variation. how much variations is enough to know and use in session? thanks
 

dobbelsteen

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1218
  • Thanked: 286 times
Re: Dobbelsteen`Blog
« Reply #533 on: December 07, 2016, 05:08:21 PM »
My manner of playing roulette is all based on statistic and strategies. The most often odds I use are the streets and doublestreets and accidently the dozens, columns and ECs. More odds,less risk !!

I do not understand what you means withmany variations. There are infinite systems but a few suited for the roulette game.
 

Jesper

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1141
  • Thanked: 545 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: Dobbelsteen`Blog
« Reply #534 on: December 07, 2016, 05:18:23 PM »
Test using free money or my simulators, there we can do the same on NOZ EU or AM, every time we try, we will learn that the house advantages have a lot impact of the result. The reason BV have time limit is because in the long run they will not win.  They use theire large bank and time limit besides the commissions to make their money. A skilled player (no skill to play that is a game of chance) which know the odds come out better.

On most casinos you get a share of the loss that the people have , if you link them. BV gives only commission on the winning which is very smart. 
« Last Edit: December 07, 2016, 05:28:33 PM by Jesper »
 

Jesper

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1141
  • Thanked: 545 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: Dobbelsteen`Blog
« Reply #535 on: December 07, 2016, 05:33:26 PM »
Its not that.  Its just that I really don't think:

1) Bayes would skew his view of BV for any reason


I would change my mind about BV and cease to recommend it only if I had legitimate grounds for complaint on a regular basis, such as having trouble withdrawing. BV isn't perfect. If a player wins a roulette tournament they're required to spam gambling forums before being paid. This isn't exactly ethical behaviour.

The major reason is not PR, it is that, they want to exclude the thinking of fake winners.
 

dobbelsteen

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1218
  • Thanked: 286 times
Re: Dobbelsteen`Blog
« Reply #536 on: December 17, 2016, 11:47:37 AM »
With very much pleasure I have shared my knowledge and experience this year with all my felleow followers.
I hope to do this  a longtime,
All the best  an success in 2017.
« Last Edit: December 17, 2016, 03:06:48 PM by dobbelsteen »
 
The following users thanked this post: kav, Reyth

dobbelsteen

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1218
  • Thanked: 286 times
Re: Dobbelsteen`Blog
« Reply #537 on: March 10, 2017, 02:52:49 PM »
The irregular distribution of the ECs is a very interesting question. The answer is difficult to give.
Terminator for you I have programmed in Excel the Red Even system. It is not a true 28 number bet.
Most 200 spins examples give a loss. My analises learn me that the DTOP is about 100 spins .The outcomes osculate ver heavy.

Here the graphics of a 200 spins event and an example of the program.

For members ,who are familar with Excel the program is free available
 
The following users thanked this post: kav, Reyth, TERMINATOR

kav

  • www.Roulette30.com
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1600
  • Thanked: 651 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: Dobbelsteen`Blog
« Reply #538 on: March 10, 2017, 03:22:08 PM »
Thanks for all your contribution dobbel!
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth

dobbelsteen

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1218
  • Thanked: 286 times
Re: Dobbelsteen`Blog
« Reply #539 on: March 27, 2017, 03:00:58 PM »
I have converted my SSB demo in a video. Now every body can watch the demo at any time.
The demo is not 100% perfect because it is very difficult to dra the images from the screen and do all the other handlings..
The demo is done for RED and BLACK. An experience player can play all the three Even Changes.

The link is:

https://youtu.be/oNrSVWopvok
« Last Edit: March 27, 2017, 05:02:42 PM by Reyth »
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth, Sheridan44