BetVoyager Portal

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Casino Lounge / Re: Spin history as a tool.
« Last post by MickyP on Today at 10:17:57 AM »
History as in general history is not 100% accurate as it is written by the victors; a bias hand if you will.

Mathematics in roulette is a tool; a good tool but not good enough to be undisputed. To challenge the maths can be for two reasons
1. To understand better.
2. To compare it to other methods observed that produce a similar result.

If any person rejects a roulette approach outright they must have a valid reason for doing so. I have not come across a player who will not accept the value of maths in roulette.
Questions and Answers / Re: a different AP definition....
« Last post by MickyP on Today at 09:58:43 AM »
Very interesting. Sue the casino. Is the video evidence admissible in court seeing as it was illegally obtained? Just asking.
Questions and Answers / Re: Roulette Physics Predictor
« Last post by legend21 on Today at 09:44:02 AM »
Hi Kav

I have done but got no reply.......
Questions and Answers / Re: Roulette Physics Predictor
« Last post by kav on Today at 09:43:05 AM »
Why don't you message the author at
Questions and Answers / Re: a different AP definition....
« Last post by Real on Today at 09:17:57 AM »
I was at the CASINO having a decent conversation with a fellow roulette enthusiast. He made an interesting observation, I'm wondering what ya'll think?

He says, the only real difference between AP and a non-AP player is......if you can still win week after week after week (long term), but your bets are laid out BEFORE the ball is spun, you are a winning non-AP player. As we have heard from other AP guys, you cannot win (long term) unless AP is involved.

As opposed to (I think?), you NEED to see the ball spun (clocking etc.) then place bets, you are or aspire to be a good AP player. I hope that made sense because I find it rather interesting.


Your friend sounds just like another random gambler.

An AP simply means advantage player.  Having the advantage is the dream of EVERY gambler.

In roulette an advantage can be obtained by betting on biased numbers BEFORE the ball is spun.
Or by using visual ballistics AFTER the ball is spun.

Regarding casinos comments that advantage players are cheaters.  This is a sticky subject for them, as well as risk consultants and surveillance reporting.  The reason is that suing casino risk consultants is a new AP game! Players can sue for defamation of character if there's false information in a report that has been made public.  Some APs and their private investigators are even discretely attending casino risk conferences in order to catch slanderous individuals and groups on video.  Currently there are some cases being built by some APs that already have dirt on some groups and individual consultants.  The make money and take town the parasites and the companies for which they work.

Coming up in March is a big meeting in LV .  March 12 to the 15th. 
Casino Lounge / Re: Spin history as a tool.
« Last post by Real on Today at 09:07:49 AM »

RD Ellison was not a mathematician.  He was just a crackpot.  He sucked not only at math, but also at logic, common sense, and gambling. 

No mathematicians ever took him seriously.    He was just a landscaper that merely dreamed of making it big by gambling.   

Why is it the less someone like RD Ellison knows about math, the more certain they are that everyone else that is a mathematician and even history are all wrong???  T

Casino Lounge / Re: Another thing that bugs Ken
« Last post by The Bedsit Botter on Today at 09:04:51 AM »
I'm going to defend Ken here.

Ken's method where you bet a single number to complete a street in 12 spins is one of the best methods ever posted on any forum over many years.  Another one I would like to see coded into Roulette Extreme.

Casino Lounge / Re: Spin history as a tool.
« Last post by palestis on Today at 09:03:39 AM »


That's simply not true.

The red and black only appear to catch up to one another because the spin samples grow larger, and because the percentages appear to converge.  HOWEVER, the numeric difference between the two tend to actually grow much much larger.

Welcome back
The point is I am not going to play a lot of  continuous spins, hoping to profit from the momentary gap.
As you said the moment the percentages appear to converge (due to what has happened in previous spins that we haven't seen), it's the time to bet, but only limited spins. Maybe until I have just one successful bet.
You must've  misunderstood  my plan, namely to  play enough spins of the opposite until total equilibrium is achieved. That's not the way I would play, because things can turn sour again as the current sample can be considered as continuation of a much larger sample.
But for the specific moment,  as things are, I know I can make one or two hits, but that's as far as it will go. At least for my play style.
Then repeat the same procedure later or somewhere else under the same circumstances. 
Having played from the beginning, without consultation to the gap, it could've been  very profitable if I had played black, but catastrophic if I had chosen red.
Casino Lounge / Re: Spin history as a tool.
« Last post by kav on Today at 08:50:52 AM »
Real said:
The red and black only appear to catch up to one another because the spin samples grow larger, and because the percentages appear to converge.  HOWEVER, the numeric difference between the two tend to actually grow much much larger.

This can happen, but it is not the only scenario. If this were always the case, then all we had to do to win, would be to bet on the trending color. Things are much more complicated than this.

Actually Palestis thesis can be supported by serious arguments besides the writings of R. D. Ellison: Gambler's Fallacy or not? and Statistical Propensity. Just to make myself clear, right now I do not express a definitive opinion on the matter. I'm just saying that there are pretty good arguments supporting the "balancing out" view. I'm talking about theories like the Ergodic Hypothesis. Btw, long time ago I have posted this:

            A simple test that would gain you a Nobel prize
According to current probabilities theory, roulette is a game of independent trials and independent probabilities. No mainstream professor on probabilities would accept that past results can influence future results. One of the reasons for this thesis, is that academics care about "single spin" probabilities than groups of spins (more on roulette group probabilities in the future). Anyway, if someone can prove that previous spins can give us information for next spins, he would turn mainstream probability theory upside down, and most probably would win a Nobel prize. Here's a simple test to prove that previous spins offer info for following spins.

1. Take a database of past roulette spins - like these spins
2. Search for series of 50 consecutive spins with less than 12 appearances of one color. (that is around three standard deviations from normal distribution)
3. Record the appearances of that color in the following 50 consecutive spins.

Theoretically in step 3, both colors have the same probabilities of appearing. For example, in 20 tests, 10 times should be in favor of the one color (the prevailing color in the previous 50 spins) and 10 times in favor of the other (the less appearing color in the previous 50 spins).
However, real tests show that the next 50 spins are in favor of the color that did not appear in the previous 50 spins.

Then Bayes has created this little tool, I attach here. He wrote:

I knocked up this little tool for experimenting.

But don't get too excited, for one thing, I coded a win to count as "not a loss" (ie; win or break even).
Also, it's one thing to get > average in the next sequence MOST of the time, but that's not the same as making a profit overall, you have to take into account how much you LOSE in those sessions where you get less than average. Another thing to be aware of are those cases where you get a rush of wins early on and then losses later;  just betting the next X spins mechanically through to the end may not be the best way to test the hypothesis. I tend to agree with Ego in that the best way is to wait for the correction to manifest before you start your attack.

Note that the 2nd sample (the one you would actually be betting in) doesn't have to be the same length as the first sample (but obviously, the trigger has to be less than the first sample!). Play around with different figures and see what you get.

I haven't actually implemented the file option yet, so you're stuck with RNG for now. Also, it can take a long time to do the analysis (250,000 spins are taken at a time), so be patient. It takes 2-3 minutes on my computer.

I'm pretty sure I coded this idea years ago and the end result in terms of profits was... you guessed it - right on the mathematical expectation.

How the program works:

The numbers are adjusted by the sliders. The trigger value is what the program looks for (number of wins) in the first sample. So in the screenshot the number of wins is 12 in the last 50 spins (1st sample). The program then starts from the first spin in the sequence of 250,000 spins and advances by 1 spin at a time checking each 50 spin sequence for 12 wins OR LESS. When it finds such a sequence, it jumps to the next sequence of spins the length of which is given by the number you input for the 2nd sample (again, 50 in the screenshot).

When you've entered these 3 numbers, hit GO! and WAIT.  ;)

After a few minutes, the list will fill with numbers. The numbers on the left are the trigger values (so they will be the trigger value or LESS), and the numbers in the right column are how many WINS you got betting the entire 2nd sample sequence. So if for example this number is 28 (and the 2nd sample value was 50), it means you would have made 3 units profits when betting the spins which followed the sample which contained the underrepresented side.

Now it is up to anyone to use this little tool and test for himself.

Btw, back then F_LAT_INO has replied to my post:
Few years back,on old VLS we tested it on all outside E/C in cycles of 80 spins and it is fact that in almost 85% next 80 spins would be in favour of opposite.

Sputnik was also very active in that topic back then.
Casino Lounge / Re: Spin history as a tool.
« Last post by palestis on Today at 08:26:19 AM »
Palestice,  you just proved my words without even realising it.
   Take 1mln spins sample, choose any trigger for what you say is important and set up rulls how to bet. Then see what happen. Find at least 10% edge like that and the way how to profit from what you see optimally with minimum risk for maximum money in less time posible.
   And if you can, l will look to that picture. But l think you can not.
Take 1 minute spin samples? And look for 10% edge? I don't get it.
And who sets this rule that the only way to play is with minimum risk, getting maximum profit at a very short time. That doesn't sound like a roulette game
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10