Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
11
Gambling Philosophy / Re: Some FUN Facts
« Last post by Reyth on Yesterday at 08:47:53 PM »
Its a "joke" about how we lose at roulette.  All of his examples are meant to be funny. :)

We all have our serious side that is very focused on beating roulette and I know that it is your intense focus that is at work here.

Sometimes it helps us to lighten up and unload some of our frustration?  I mean grinding can become quite difficult and a bit of humour can give us much needed strength?

The best discoveries I have ever had with roulette came after a period of complete absence from the game. :)

Or like Kav says, "My best advice?  Go out and lose some money!". :D
12
Gambling Philosophy / Re: Some FUN Facts
« Last post by MickyP on Yesterday at 06:42:29 PM »
Reyth, thank you for trying to explain or answer the question. I must be as thick as early morning pig s**t  because I was unable to relate your answer to the roulette question. Biblical verse has nothing to do with roulette.

Will you please try and explain it again in layman's terms and also in the context of the roulette game.
13
Gambling Philosophy / Re: Some FUN Facts
« Last post by Reyth on Yesterday at 06:16:36 PM »
666 is an abundant number. It is the sum of the squares of the first seven prime numbers.

Since 36 is both square and triangular, 666 is the sixth number of the form n2(n2 + 1) / 2 (triangular squares) and the eighth number of the form n(n + 1)(n2 + n + 2) / 8 (doubly triangular numbers.)

There is no number whose value of Euler's totient function รถ is 666, making it a nontotient.

The harmonic mean of the digits of 666 is an integer: 3/(1/6 + 1/6 + 1/6) = 6. 666 is the 54th number with this property.

In base 10, 666 is a palindromic number, a repdigit and a Smith number.

A prime reciprocal magic square based on 1/149 in base 10 has a magic total of 666.

The Roman numeral representation of the number 666 (DCLXVI) uses once each the Roman numeral symbols with values under 1,000, and they occur in exact reverse order of their respective values (D = 500, C = 100, L = 50, X = 10, V = 5, I = 1).
Quote by internet user Cortan

And of course:

[16] And he shall make all, both little and great, rich and poor, freemen and bondmen, to have a character in their right hand, or on their foreheads. [17] And that no man might buy or sell, but he that hath the character, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. [18] Here is wisdom. He that hath understanding, let him count the number of the beast. For it is the number of a man: and the number of him is six hundred sixty-six.

[18] "Six hundred sixty-six": The numeral letters of his name shall make up this number.
14
Gambling Philosophy / Re: Some FUN Facts
« Last post by MickyP on Yesterday at 06:07:19 PM »
Hahaha, a good sense of humour you have. I enjoyed the read.

What you are actually saying is that casinos are dishonest and I disagree, especially where live wheels are concerned. Casinos get audited on a regular basis and all equipment/programmes are checked to make sure they comply with regulations. The fact that a few are dishonest and get caught out from time to time should not be held against the whole industry.

What you are also assuming is that losses or should I say big losses are never the players fault.I've seen a player calling and betting heavily on a number and the more he calls for it the bigger the bets become and the more other players begin betting on the same number/numbers. Let's face it, distractions come in many different forms and human nature is so susceptible to distractions. No matter what sort of player you are you will encounter losses. All people generally speaking have bad days. When you walk up to a table your mindset must be right. Keep your mind on your own game and manage it well. If you can't,  walk away and come back another day when you are more focused.

Please explain your statement: "The real percentage against an average table of players is 66.6%."
15
Casino Lounge / Re: Dobbelsteen`Blog
« Last post by Reyth on Yesterday at 04:42:39 PM »
I was wishing that you would record the video and post that so we all can watch when we are available.  :'(
16
Roulette Strategy Discussion / Re: Are Some Bets Worse Than Others?
« Last post by Reyth on Yesterday at 04:35:36 PM »
I would think the repeat strategy would have less variance.  Doesn't necessarily have to have an edge...just less variance.

Rinad points out that if we can identify the hottest selections, we know that we aren't betting the coldest.

Quote
I'm more interested in the idea of is there really better bet selections than others.  Can some selections be shown to be worse in the long run.

I truly believe, risking 100's of dollars, that roulette functions in this way; hot selections persist for a longer term than the short-term fluctuations that every selection goes through.

The important thing to realize though, is that these hot selections do not always remain the hottest; roulette will EVENTUALLY correct the disparity.  But how does it do it?  With ANOTHER hottest selection!
17
Questions and Answers / Re: Structured posts
« Last post by heatmap on Yesterday at 04:25:54 PM »
@Mrperfect the laws plain and simple I'm looking at laws
18
Roulette Strategy Discussion / Re: Are Some Bets Worse Than Others?
« Last post by MrPerfect. on Yesterday at 04:21:58 PM »
 It's brings up a simple qwestion : " how in this world do select your bets? "
    If it's not obvious,  then probably you do something wrong....
19
Gambling Philosophy / Re: Reduce the house edge!
« Last post by Reyth on Yesterday at 03:39:12 PM »
I've never been in a math class where the "number" 00 apeared on any number line...

I must say, it does look pretty though...  ;D

20
Roulette Strategy Discussion / Re: Are Some Bets Worse Than Others?
« Last post by Scarface on Yesterday at 03:33:34 PM »
How many times would 4 numbers have to wink out to ruin you?

Depends on bankroll and progression.  Just more curious on which strategy is more stable.  Hard to believe that both strategies are equally bad.  I would think the repeat strategy would have less variance.  Doesn't necessarily have to have an edge...just less variance.

I'm more interested in the idea of is there really better bet selections than others.  Can some selections be shown to be worse in the long run.  If not, then there seems to be no point in having a strategy at all
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10