### Author Topic: 65/135 Red and Black  (Read 1171 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

#### Scarface

• Mature Member
• Posts: 233
• Thanked: 176 times
##### 65/135 Red and Black
« on: June 15, 2017, 11:24:04 PM »
Supposedly the 65/135 ratio is the worse to appear for an even bet like red/black.  Knowing this, I find it hard to believe there isn't a progression formula we can use to beat this.  Of course not a double up on loss.  But, it seems like it would take a math genius to figure it out

This is really a paradox, but a negative edge game can be positive if information is known.  For example, if we knew red would appear somewhere once in every 3 spins, this could be beat very easy....even though our hit rate would be 33% instead of 50.  A simple progression would do.  Same could be said for 6 spins...if we know we'll get 2 hits we could devise a progression that wins everytime.

So we know we'll get at least 65 hits in 200, worse case...which is roughly 1/3.   As the numbers get large like this, the progression ideas are harder, and the hit ratio changes, but 1/3 in 200 will be the worse case.   There is a solution to this.

Solve this, and there's your Holy Grail
« Last Edit: June 15, 2017, 11:47:15 PM by Scarface »

The following users thanked this post: SugTips

#### Scarface

• Mature Member
• Posts: 233
• Thanked: 176 times
##### Re: 65/135 Red and Black
« Reply #1 on: June 16, 2017, 03:00:22 AM »
If the worse case for an even bet in 200 spins is 33%, and payout is 50%....that's a difference of 17% (50-33=17).

What if we raised the bet 17% every spin till break even or profit?  Would that work?  Just a thought

#### Sheridan44

• Mature Member
• Posts: 279
• Thanked: 251 times
• Gender:
##### Re: 65/135 Red and Black
« Reply #2 on: June 16, 2017, 05:16:24 AM »
Scar.....

Here's a method that I've been tinkering with... it is a "stepped" progression. It's neither a positive or negative progression. I guess it's a "win or lose - just keep going until a new high" progression, lol...

Step 1:  1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1
Step 2:  2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2
Step 3:  3-3-3-3-3-3-3-3-3-3
Step 4:  4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4
Step 5:  5-5-5-5-5-5-5-5-5-5
Step 6:  6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6
Step 7:  7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7
Step 8:  8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8-8
Step 9:  9-9-9-9-9-9-9-9-9-9
Step 10: 10-10-10-10-10-10-10-10-10-10

And so on, you get the idea, 10 flat bets per step (or plateau) ...progressing between each step only.

You keep a close watch on your bankroll balance, and upon each new bankroll high (even if by 1 unit)...you terminate - or start over on Step 1, if you wish. The progression is mild, and as you can see - very "thick". You will hit many new highs even in the earliest steps. Of course it wont go on forever, but by keeping an eye on your balance, you should have plenty of opportunities to bail with profit.

This "progression" is raw, and I just threw it together from a concept - there may be other ways to structure it - to make it more efficient. 10 steps may be too long, but at even at 4 or 5 steps it's lengthy enough to capture many even chance clusters (aka variances).  How you choose your EC is up to you. You can wait and watch for a trend....or jump right in and pick any EC and let it fly. I used just red bets all the way. The bet selection seems to take a back seat to the progression itself - which along with bankroll management - may be one key to this riddle.

Talos has mentioned that any "grail" is all in the progression. The bet selection is almost incidental he claims. I'm going to focus on this "advice" for awhile and see if there's anything to it. He does say he doesn't play the EC's though.

I do believe that any grail need not have to win forever until the end of time to be one. If the wagering/progression scheme is set up to where one could be in profit almost every time - especially early in the progression, have numerous opportunities to quit while well ahead, and be able to recognize such exit points (and have the discipline to act on them), that would be very close to my definition of a grail.

Sher
« Last Edit: June 16, 2017, 10:24:42 AM by Sheridan44 »

The following users thanked this post: SugTips

#### Scarface

• Mature Member
• Posts: 233
• Thanked: 176 times
##### Re: 65/135 Red and Black
« Reply #3 on: June 16, 2017, 11:25:13 AM »
Thanks Sheridan.  This is something to think about.  Reminds me of the Falicious Holy Grail thread from Blueangel.  Variance is never one sided indefinitely.  Makes sense to bet a higher wager when variance swings back in favor

#### MrPerfect.

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1806
• Thanked: 996 times
##### Re: 65/135 Red and Black
« Reply #4 on: June 16, 2017, 10:13:42 PM »
If the worse case for an even bet in 200 spins is 33%, and payout is 50%....that's a difference of 17% (50-33=17).

What if we raised the bet 17% every spin till break even or profit?  Would that work?  Just a thought
unfortunately not, but it would greatly extend your play with available bankroll.
Variance can be both sides..  it's just egeinst you it will be slightly more often due to unfair payout.