Thanks for all the replies. Would just like to make these points -
1) Maths tells us that roulette cannot be beaten, because of the negative
expectancy / house edge. BUT maths would also tell us that 50 reds, for example,
is possible. If we assume that this kind of scenario will not happen, and if we
keep to the 65 / 135 principle, then maybe the game can be beaten.
2) On a more pessimistic note, I understand from this forum that a labby,
mathematically, will not work. (I have asked a maths graduate about this, who
could not formulate the proof.) Anyway, assuming this is the case, look at it
like this -
Suppose we bet red, starting with 1, 1, 1, 1, 1.
After a bad run, we have 15, 15, 10, 5, 5.
We have a target of 50. We are told we can extend the list. So we could have
a list of 50 1s. We could also have 10 sets of 5 1s. Which is exactly what we
started with. So does this not prove that the idea will not work?
3) Regarding the "pairs" idea. If we bet red, starting with 1, 1, 1, 1, 1.
Suppose we have BB (two blacks.) What then? Is it 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 4?
After another BB, is it 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 4, 5, 10?
Seems like the values could rise very quickly.
Or am I misinterpretating? I know it has been explained before, but I am still not
clear. A pity that Belgian has not posted for some time.
Could anyone help me on these points?