BetVoyager Portal

Author Topic: Counting Methods For Roulette?  (Read 7449 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Reyth

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4393
  • Thanked: 1611 times
Re: Counting Methods For Roulette?
« Reply #45 on: June 27, 2016, 03:26:00 AM »
By now, surely you have to be asking yourself why none of your systems seem to really work.



You see this is how banal and immature this argumentation is.  None of us deny that variance is VERY DIFFICULT but instead of working hard and creating a method to help you come along and criticize those that try -- ITS SICKENING.

I have many systems that work but the goal is to structure it so the bankroll is within reach.  Its SO easy to sit on the sidelines and say "ITS IMPOSSIBLE MATHS AND MOAR MATHS NYA NYA!" and requires little effort but somehow you still think that it gives you a sense of accomplishment.

« Last Edit: June 27, 2016, 03:28:03 AM by Reyth »
 

Real

  • Fighting the war on absurdity one foolish idea at a time.
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1693
  • Thanked: 282 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: Counting Methods For Roulette?
« Reply #46 on: June 27, 2016, 04:07:34 AM »
Quote
I have many systems that work -Reyth



If you say so.   ::)   
« Last Edit: June 27, 2016, 04:11:10 AM by Real »
 

Reyth

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4393
  • Thanked: 1611 times
Re: Counting Methods For Roulette?
« Reply #47 on: June 27, 2016, 04:29:02 AM »
They say 90% of systems fail due to inadequate bankroll. :shrug:
 

UK-21

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 115
  • Thanked: 39 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: Counting Methods For Roulette?
« Reply #48 on: June 27, 2016, 08:22:24 AM »
They say 90% of systems fail due to inadequate bankroll.

What about the other 10%? Does that mean if you can afford to adequately capitalise the application of a system (to ride out any negative variance) then it will be successful and produce a longer term profit? I doubt it, very much. The other 10% (if it is 10%) will also be losses, attributable to the effect of the house edge.

Quote from: Reyth
Sputnik is correct in my opinion.   Equal distribution is an objective force that limits random results.  This force can be used to our advantage and Sputnik has come up with a way to identify specific triggers that are associated with these limits.  I think he deserves alot of credit.

He's not. Really. His assertion that "Regression is the real thing" is misconceived, and there is simply no logical merit in believing that recent past variance in results will correct itself within any given timescale to the same degree. As I've pointed out, even where the variance (measured in StdDevs) reduces what this represents grows as the number of trials increase - so the negative variance window for losing tends to get bigger, not smaller, as one plays even where the number of StdDevs variance reduces. That is it. Sorry if that contradicts something someone wrote in an internet forum ten years ago. Believe different? That's fine.

Sputnik has said that he's not going to be convinced that his approach isn't a winning one, and will be funding some extended travel across Europe on the profits. He is, of course, entitled to take this view and as I've said I wish him good luck with applying his method, and hope very much that he isn't too disappointed when he discovers it doesn't work.  Also I think he'd better take a credit card with him when he travels.

Let's draw a line under this now, as we've all moved off of the question posed by the original poster.

 

BlueAngel

  • I always express my opinion
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1574
  • Thanked: 246 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
Re: Counting Methods For Roulette?
« Reply #49 on: June 29, 2016, 07:19:06 PM »
His idea is great because instead of counting all the results in your card every time you want to know where you stand, you always know what the current count is.

Hmmm . . . . OK, let's say that over a hundred spins the count is Black +34. Ignoring the impact of the green slot, and notwithstanding the decimals in the calculation, this is three standard deviations south of the EV (EV=~49, Red=33, Black=67). So what?

Why would this knowledge affect any decision making over where to drop the next handful of chips?

In your example "RED" numbers represent the 33% of the total and as we know their average expectation is 48.65 % so we deduct from that their current percentage which is 33 and we arrive to 15.65 %, this is the difference which means a equivalent raise of 15.65% in the bet.

If for example the initial bet is 10 units, then the raise should be of 1.565 or 2 units by rounding it up in the nearest non decimal digit.
By starting with 10 units bet is better from 1 because you may move up or down and set your comfort limits such as from 1 unit up to 20 units bet.

As the balance on results changes, so does your bet, it adjusts suitably to every situation...
 
The following users thanked this post: kav, Reyth

dobbelsteen

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1578
  • Thanked: 559 times
Re: Counting Methods For Roulette?
« Reply #50 on: June 29, 2016, 10:10:50 PM »
The Multi roulette calculates the stats of the last 50 numbers. Start flat betting after a difference of at least 12 figures or 24 %.Example: 32 R;17 B; 1 zero or 64% R;34% B;2% zero
 
The following users thanked this post: december, Reyth