Deposit Bonus 200% up to $1000

Author Topic: Beating roulette with math...  (Read 51690 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Belgian

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 25
  • Thanked: 6 times
Beating roulette with math...
« on: June 19, 2010, 03:33:31 AM »
Hi all,

I guess I will get a lot of negative comments on this post, but nevertheless I am probably one of few people believing in a mathematical solution for the game.

I don't want to give away all my gunpower in the first writing, but first want people get thinking in the right direction with some hints:

Most people creating systems based on math, so mechanical, get idea's and afterwards starting to analyse the risks of the bust, which will always come,
lets try the other way around:

Take as the starting points events that you are sure off that they will come:

For instance: in 36 spins, there are always more then 18 different numbers,
after 200 spins, there are never less then 65 Blacks or Reds and so on.

the only thing we have to do is find a progression that survives the most long period of spins till you know for sure that one of these events will happen, and off course this progression has to be handled within table limits.

Question: any idea's which event we can take as a basis to built our progression on? Second, any idea what kind of progression can be suitable?

We will talk about this later, but I found someone who managed all of this and gave me many clues to devellope it for myself.

Our goal will be 1 unit everyday, beating all the years of hamburg,what kind of bankroll do you think you will need? you are allowed to play no more then 200 spins everyday, less is possible off course, you have to play some kind of progression,

Any idea's?

belgian


 

kav

  • www.Roulette30.com
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1935
  • Thanked: 924 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: Beating roulette with math...
« Reply #1 on: June 19, 2010, 10:18:27 AM »
Hello Belgian and many thanks for joining our forum.

Your post is extremely interesting. And our way of thinking is very near to mine.


For instance: in 36 spins, there are always more then 18 different numbers, after 200 spins, there are never less then 65 Blacks or Reds and so on.
the only thing we have to do is find a progression that survives the most long period of spins till you know for sure that one of these events will happen, and off course this progression has to be handled within table limits.
Question: any idea's which event we can take as a basis to built our progression on? Second, any idea what kind of progression can be suitable?

Yes, these are very important facts. They show that NOT EVERYTHING IS POSSIBLE, SOME THINGS ARE PREDICTABLE.
More than that you pose your question in a "mathematical problem" style which I like very much.

We will talk about this later, but I found someone who managed all of this and gave me many clues to develop it for myself.
It seems we all had a teacher... or not?

 

lazarous

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 12
Re: Beating roulette with math...
« Reply #2 on: June 19, 2010, 11:39:03 AM »
Your message is very interesting and,in my opinion,you are on the good way.But to be a bit critical,your statement,that I partially share,refers to statistics,not to math.If you could beat matematically roulette,a progression would be useless,even bet with a positive player edge would be enough for winning.The goal of winning 1 chip a day and run,it's a dream.You can maybe win,on average,one chip a day,but on an yearly basis.200 spins a day is perfect ,but for 150 day per year at least.As far as progression is concerned a recent German book states that "Bread Winner" and "Groupe of Seven" are the most effective.I only partially agree with that,but I like a lot these two progressions.For the event you ask for,I have some ideas,on even chance.The key principle is playing "against equilibrium" in short term.Anyone can interpretate that as he likes....Don't forget that in a short term roulette generetes unpredictebles numbers(random),in the very long term is not at all random.But this last point is interesting to know,but uselee for playng strategies.This is my opinion....Comments
 

ttt

  • Guest
Re: Beating roulette with math...
« Reply #3 on: June 19, 2010, 05:03:42 PM »
One unit a day is almost no-brainer, especially with 200 spins to work with.

A Marty or an Oscar's Grind or any standard progression bet would give you that.

The REAL problem with folks winning and keeping the win(s) is pure averice/greed.

Hey, the bet won once, it will do it again....is the thinking. Can't say I disagree
with those thoughts as I have them myself.

The longer you park your butt in the chair at the table, the better advantage
the House has in getting back your profit PLUS nibble at your bankroll.

If I lived near a casino then every morning I'd walk in, have breakfast, make
a bet or two at craps or roulette and go home. My single unit size would be $100.

$700 a week tax-free works for me.

Could I do that? I don't know. I'd have to develop a strong will to walk once
I had reached my goal. Just like everyone else, I like to play.
 

Belgian

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 25
  • Thanked: 6 times
Re: Beating roulette with math...
« Reply #4 on: June 20, 2010, 10:36:36 AM »
OK,

We have so far already 2 different opinions, according to Lazarous it is a dream that you can make 1 unit FOR SURE EVERYDAY, according to ttt it is rather easy.

The arguments posted by ttt are not correct as everybody will know: there is no way to make 1 unit profit 100% sure everyday, every year with the Hamburg permanence (or any other permanence) with Oscar grind or whatever known system to me. It is always possible to get the permanence of horror right from the start.

Ok some more clue's:

Lazarous is correct, we will take the even chances as our betting target. In Europe this is the most logical one because if you lose to zero, you get back half of your bet, so the odds are only 1.35%.
Although I think there are a lot of other targets to choose, but they will probably involve a more complicated progression.

Over 1 year, playing everyday for getting 1 unit of profit, we will get around 37% ROI (return of investment) of our bankroll.

What in your opinion has to be the bankroll to earn this 1 unit everyday 100% sure?

What do we have to achieve in terms of % of winning bets to get this 1 unit? In other words, if we encounter the permanence of hell, lets say we play on red (off course it doesn't matter at all which bet selection you want to choose, as they don't make any difference in terms of odds) what is the most negative expectation we can encounter in 200 spins? We have to deal with this because off course we will get that sequence one day in our year of playing.

What kind of progression we have to use to be possible to face this permanence of hell? If you have the answer you solved beating the game.

Will be continued
 

ttt

  • Guest
Re: Beating roulette with math...
« Reply #5 on: June 20, 2010, 11:04:10 PM »
Well,
I beg to differ. No doubt in my mind I can do a unit a day, every day, for the
rest of my life and I'd stake all I own and ever will own on that statement (except
for the dog and the firearms).

Since you say it can't be done....I'll run every file on their Website and prove
it. I prefer craps, but I'll do it just as easy in roulette.

But, since that will take a huge chunk of my time, make it worth my while.
I'll take $5 per file....or match my winnings with real dollars. That way if I make
a bet and win 20 units instead of my target single unit I come out a bit ahead.

I'll make it easy on you...I'll only play with a 100 unit bank to start.
And I'll only use a single bet method, of my choice, throughout all the files.
 

Hann

  • Guest
Re: Beating roulette with math...
« Reply #6 on: June 21, 2010, 05:27:06 PM »
Lets me get this straight, whenever someone asks if there is a surefire method for winning at roulette, everyone answers an unanimous "NO", "No such thing". Nothing wins all the time.
Then here comes ttt saying he does have one that will win at least one unit everyday. Isn't that the holy grail everyone has been seeking?
 

Belgian

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 25
  • Thanked: 6 times
Re: Beating roulette with math...
« Reply #7 on: June 22, 2010, 02:01:33 AM »
Ttt,
I'm sorry to contradict you, but you are really making a mistake. To win one unit a day, every day, is impossible! There is a famous story(but it's not invented,is real) that occurred at Monte Carlo Casino at beginning of last century. The boss was the very well known Francois Blanc, that accepted the bet of a rich player. The player asked to be allowed to go away at + 1 every day,without that the casino complained,but he promised to bet 365 day a year,with high bet unit. He also asked to multiply by five,only for him, the max bet table limit. Of course he could bet one time a day(if +) or he 'd have continued every day, until the win goal were reached.Francois Blanc accepted and the player at the end was ruined.... I have on a French book the detail of the results every day. If you are interested i can write them here in a next message!
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth

winner

  • Guest
Re: Beating roulette with math...
« Reply #8 on: June 22, 2010, 05:07:57 PM »
I'll throw in my 2p as well.

Your originally question was if you could beat roulette with math. I would say 'no'. All systems seem to be tested with mathematical odds. The problem is the odds are calculated against perfection: The wheel must e mathematically perfect, the ball must be mathematically perfect etc. As these are obviously not perfect, the 'mathematical created odds' are not the quite the same as reality.

Does that make sense?
 

UK

  • Guest
Re: Beating roulette with math...
« Reply #9 on: June 22, 2010, 05:50:40 PM »
Belgian,

This is an interesting thread and you've raised some good points.
I've been working on a program which attempts to answer some of the questions you've raised - its based on the ideas in Philip Koetsch's book "Conquer the Casinos". I agree with you in that I too believe that a solution (if one exists) will be based on mathematical analysis.

Quote:
what is the most negative expectation we can encounter in 200 spins?

Quote:
It is always possible to get the permanence of horror right from the start.

The program so far will answer the first question and also address the 2nd point in that it will tell you what % of sessions will start of with a loss and never get to a +ve balance throughout the session. The program simulates even money roulette (betting on red) and the le partage rule (1.35% edge) with 100,000 sessions of length 200 spins.
For flat betting:

number of sessions always in a net loss = 6553 (6.55%)
average peak gain within a round = 9.44
average peak loss within a round = -12.11
actual peak gain in 100,000 rounds = 58.00
actual peak loss in 100,000 rounds = -62.50

So 93.45% of the time you can expect to quit at some point within the session with a profit - even if it's only 1 unit.
The second figure (average peak gain within a round) would suggest that if you get a profit of 9 or 10 units in the session and continue to play on you are making a bad bet, statistically speaking.
The final figure (actual peak loss within a round) suggests that a bankroll of 60 - 70 units is sufficient.
The program is work in progress and I intend to add more analysis including the number of "reversals" within a session, a reversal being a swing from +ve to -ve balance or vice versa within a session. In theory by knowing the average number of reversal for a system you can then keep track of them and quit on a +ve balance if you have "used up" your reversals in a session.
I've experimented with various systems and the best so far in terms of being able to make a profit at some point (ie; the lowest % of sessions without making any profit at all throughout the session) is the Maxim principle. Note that according to the author this is only meant to be used for craps and also I haven't simulated any of the exit points.

Using a maximum stake of 50u:

number of sessions always in a net loss = 261 (0.26%)
average peak gain within a round = 63.98
average peak loss within a round = -156.53
actual peak gain in 100,000 rounds = 122.00
actual peak loss in 100,000 rounds = -1692.50

A 99.74% chance of quitting with a profit, but of course this is offset by the hugely increased bankroll necessary and attendant risk involved.
For a maximum stake of 10u (ie; the progression is 1,2,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) and start over when you get to the end.

the results are:

number of sessions always in a net loss = 1131 (1.13%)
average peak gain within a round = 43.46
average peak loss within a round = -64.63
actual peak gain in 100,000 rounds = 121.50
actual peak loss in 100,000 rounds = -412.00

From my testing so far it seems that most volatile systems (those that offer more "reversals") are those that incorporate both -ve and +ve progressions (like the Maxim principle).

 

ttt

  • Guest
Re: Beating roulette with math...
« Reply #10 on: June 23, 2010, 06:05:47 AM »
Belgian,

Just because some French guy couldn't do it doesn't mean it can't be done.

And I ask not nor seek any special deals. I'd even play a 00 wheel if we had
actual data such as Hamburg as I am that dead sure.
 

lazarous

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 12
Re: Beating roulette with math...
« Reply #11 on: June 24, 2010, 11:04:27 PM »
Ok,Ttt, I respect your point of view. It's sure that for a guy entering a casino twenty times a year, with the objective of plus 1 per day, a Marty of only 7 terms could be sufficient. The probability are on his side. But ALL THE DAYS, plus 1, for 365 days a year..... It really means to throw away all my 35 years knowledges of gambler. Why not?I live close to a Casino in Italy and I Know a lot of people (mainly retired) that are all the day at the Casino with + 1/per day as wingoal. A disaster.... Every now and then they tell me that they don't understand... a so modest objective, impossible to reach...! But once again I trust on you....
 

ucdrummer00

  • Guest
Re: Beating roulette with math...
« Reply #12 on: June 26, 2010, 05:40:26 AM »
Belgian & all,

Hi, I have been using a similar approach to you when designing methods. For example, there is a very high probability of 20 wins in 80 trials of an even chance. Figuring out how to stay within the table limits and resources of our bankroll when going for those 20 wins is the problem.

It would be desirable to test a method on every possible sequence of events (and programs exist that can create these for you), but in the case above, there are 2^80 such sequences (including those without at least 20 wins). As you can imagine, for 200 trials, the number of possible outcomes is 2^200.

I am curious as to how you went about being able to ensure that your method will be able to ride out the worst of the sequences when going for those 65 wins in 200 trials.

I really like where this thread and the other one related seem to be going.
 

Belgian

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 25
  • Thanked: 6 times
Re: Beating roulette with math...
« Reply #13 on: June 26, 2010, 12:26:11 PM »
Hi all,

Thanks for all the replies. I especially want to thank UK for his analysis of 20 million spins or 100.000 sessions of 200 spins. It confirms the theory that you will always find at least 65/135 in 200 spins.

The solution to all the questions I asked here can be found in the other thread newbielink:http://rouletteforum.roulette30.com/index.php/topic,9.0.html [nonactive] by Lazarous, as the discussion is heading into the same direction.

According to the needed bankroll in my experience 1500 units must be enough to survive the most bad ecarts in losing streaks. But opposite to losing strikes of 7 (the most bad one I encountered in all the years starting from 1999 T1 in The Hamburger Permanence, and only 1 time) there are winning streaks of 30 as the 75:25 will pay off very fast and easy.

In some posts here people have the respected opinion that it is rather easy to win 1 unit everyday with the average systems. One must always kept in mind that the permanence of hell can be encountered right from the start and that one loss can consume all previous wins, as you can never see in front, when it is the right moment to stop before you find yourselves in the hole of no return.

The 1 unit is only mentioned to try to find a way to protect ourselves against any possible way of a loss, from that point then you can aim more units, always in the knowledge that a new aim can in most bad expectation takes no less then 200 spins, averaging 5h of play.

If what is proposed here and in the Johnson progression thread is without miscalculations we can draw conclusions that are supposed not to exist:
  • 1. There is a mechanical solution to beat the odds (not by changing the odds, but by overcoming the most bad ecards by a rigid progression.)
  • 2.  Bet Selection is not of any influence of the final plusresult, f.i it doesn't matter which even chance you are playing, IN THE LONG RUN (is here max 200 spins) you always win.
  • 3.There is no way to coming even close to table limits with this progression.

This is to good to be true, but as I see it at the moment , it fits,

regards,
Belgian
 

soccer

  • Guest
Re: Beating roulette with math...
« Reply #14 on: June 27, 2010, 09:01:02 PM »
Hi All,

I must agree with Ttt, One Unit per day is something that is easily done. The big problem is being satisfied with that ONE unit!