Author Topic: Roulette Riddle about the house edge  (Read 2861 times)

Mike

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 557
  • Thanked: 23 times
Re: Roulette Riddle about the house edge
« Reply #15 on: April 09, 2016, 04:28:42 PM »
p.s. Anything for the Grand National ?

Yeah, put your shirt on Rule The World.  ;D

So if you admit that winning depends on variance, and variance = luck, what's the point of using a system?
 

scepticus

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1913
  • Thanked: 386 times
Re: Roulette Riddle about the house edge
« Reply #16 on: April 09, 2016, 04:50:08 PM »
p.s. Anything for the Grand National ?

Yeah, put your shirt on Rule The World.  ;D

So if you admit that winning depends on variance, and variance = luck, what's the point of using a system?

Because I am a" GAMBLER" and  you  still don't understand that gambling is gambling . Look up it's meaning in Wiki or whatever .
p.s.
I did bet Rule The World - along with three others - one of which was 4th. I bet each Each-Way at SP and  got 33/1 for the winner. I subscribe on a Saturday for the tips at " wwwMathematicians Betting "
Cost £3 for  tips. He has done well so far. Check it out . Looking costs nothing.
33/1  ? Well- every little helps  !
 

kav

  • www.Roulette30.com
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1710
  • Thanked: 723 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: Roulette Riddle about the house edge
« Reply #17 on: April 09, 2016, 04:59:53 PM »

So   we   bet
1 number = 2.7%
2 numbers = 5.4%
3 numbers = 8.1%
4 numbers =10.8%
5 numbers = 13.5%
etc,
17 numbers=45.9%
18numbers =48.6%
19numbers=51.35
35 numbers =94.5%
36 numbers =97.2%
37 numbers =100 %
 So  it is inadvisable to bet more than 18 numbers.
and ,preferably , no more than 17.
And we didn't already know this ?
No it doesn't work like this.
Who said it is inadvisable to bet more than 18 numbers?
You try to jump into conclusion while you haven't fully understood what we are talking about yet.

I understand that math and equations make the minds of many people hurt. However I urge you to try to understand the quite simple equations I posted here.
First try to understand the logic of the game (profit, payouts, what's fair, what's actual etc.)
Then and only then you should try to find ways to capitalize on this knowledge.
There are no easy answers. Roulette is a greatly balanced game. It is not this easy to find loopholes and "best bets".
 

scepticus

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1913
  • Thanked: 386 times
Re: Roulette Riddle about the house edge
« Reply #18 on: April 09, 2016, 07:01:28 PM »

So   we   bet
1 number = 2.7%
2 numbers = 5.4%
3 numbers = 8.1%
4 numbers =10.8%
5 numbers = 13.5%
etc,
17 numbers=45.9%
18numbers =48.6%
19numbers=51.35
35 numbers =94.5%
36 numbers =97.2%
37 numbers =100 %
 So  it is inadvisable to bet more than 18 numbers.
and ,preferably , no more than 17.
And we didn't already know this ?
No it doesn't work like this.
Who said it is inadvisable to bet more than 18 numbers?
You try to jump into conclusion while you haven't fully understood what we are talking about yet.

I understand that math and equations make the minds of many people hurt. However I urge you to try to understand the quite simple equations I posted here.
First try to understand the logic of the game (profit, payouts, what's fair, what's actual etc.)
Then and only then you should try to find ways to capitalize on this knowledge.
There are no easy answers. Roulette is a greatly balanced game. It is not this easy to find loopholes and "best bets".

kav
I think you are being patronising telling me to understand profit-payouts etc I have been betting roulette for many years and DO understand the odds on offer,.They always have been and always will be unfair to the bettor so telling us that they are unfair is " noise ".
Who says it is inadvisable to bet more than 18 numbers . Well, your illustration does. The more numbers you bet the higher the odds against you . Bet more than 18 numbers and you are into Odds- On territory and THAT is inadvisable is it not ?
You think progressions are needed. I don't and I offered to go to Mike's place and show that I do usually profit. Yes I may have lost but that is UNLIKELY !
Just how helpful is telling us that if we bet 37 numbers means a 100% loss ?
 

kav

  • www.Roulette30.com
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1710
  • Thanked: 723 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: Roulette Riddle about the house edge
« Reply #19 on: April 09, 2016, 09:12:36 PM »

kav
I think you are being patronising telling me to understand profit-payouts etc I have been betting roulette for many years and DO understand the odds on offer,.They always have been and always will be unfair to the bettor so telling us that they are unfair is " noise ".
Who says it is inadvisable to bet more than 18 numbers . Well, your illustration does. The more numbers you bet the higher the odds against you . Bet more than 18 numbers and you are into Odds- On territory and THAT is inadvisable is it not ?
You think progressions are needed. I don't and I offered to go to Mike's place and show that I do usually profit. Yes I may have lost but that is UNLIKELY !
Just how helpful is telling us that if we bet 37 numbers means a 100% loss ?


Sorry if I sounded patronizing. I do not underestimate your experience and knowledge.

But my illustrations do not show that one should not bet many numbers - they merely describe a "paradox" (for the shake of it if you like).
To find the "best bet" is much more complicated than this, because underneath roulette is an extremely well balanced game.
It would be wrong to say that someone who bets one number per spin plays better than someone who bets 20 numbers per spin. This is not true - the house edge is 2,7% for both.
Also there are other parameters to consider too, like Capital in risk, probability of win etc.

 

scepticus

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1913
  • Thanked: 386 times
Re: Roulette Riddle about the house edge
« Reply #20 on: April 09, 2016, 11:09:39 PM »
No, kav. you didn't SOUND patronising you WERE patronising and should practice what you preach.
Anyway, I didn't claim that betting ONE number was better than betting 20 numbers.What I said . and stand by , is that betting  more than 19 numbers is not as good as betting less than 18 numbers because we must allow for the zero. Betting less than 18 numbers allows me to bet level stakes with more confidence than someone betting 18 numbers .
I don't look for the "best bet"- only one that will yield me a profit.
And my main point was - and is- that Romn's " Riddle" gives no aid to bet selection and therefore of little use to newbies. Musing is fine but it should address the problems of playing roulette.
 

Geoffrey

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 122
  • Thanked: 77 times
Re: Roulette Riddle about the house edge
« Reply #21 on: April 09, 2016, 11:41:09 PM »
As far as what is the better choice to bet, in my opinion there is no straight answer to give. It all depends on the players individual.
 

Reyth

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3338
  • Thanked: 991 times
Re: Roulette Riddle about the house edge
« Reply #22 on: April 09, 2016, 11:52:34 PM »
Bet selection definitely makes a difference in the results.
 

Geoffrey

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 122
  • Thanked: 77 times
Re: Roulette Riddle about the house edge
« Reply #23 on: April 09, 2016, 11:59:53 PM »
sure it does , but what i mean is what betting selection we define as the best , is impossible to give a straight answer, because we all have different expectations. this surely affects your betting selection choice
 

scepticus

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1913
  • Thanked: 386 times
Re: Roulette Riddle about the house edge
« Reply #24 on: April 10, 2016, 12:11:03 AM »
Bet selection definitely makes a difference in the results.

I fully agree ,Reyth. which is why I concentrate on it .
And Geoff's point is well made. I think there is no  " best bet ". If we found " it" would we share it and kill the Golden Goose ?
Ideas-Hints etc. are for sharing but not what gives us actual profits otherwise casinos would " shift the goalposts"  and they have enough of an advantage as it is.