There are no roulette systems that involve a mechanical bet selection with a flat bet or a progression that you can sit down at a roulette table every day for a few hours and beat the game on a consistent basis!!!!!
I'm not saying that some lucky person with a good working knowledge of the game can't use a mechanical system and by making 'in the moment' adjustments in how he plays, using good money management and observing all the fundamental rules of gambling be able to win more than he loses in the long run. But, are you one of those people?
For everyone who is exploring roulette with the idea of finding the magic system where you can sit down at a table or on the internet, buy in for a few hundred chips, start betting based on a pre-determined bet selection method and a pre-determined betting progression (or a flatbet) and expect to win almost every time, "Forget about it!"
If you intend to win money over the long run at roulette, you are going to have to know the game thoroughly, learn a particular system or two inside and out, have plenty of money that you can lose without a care in the world, then play as if every chip is the most important thing in the world, and live the most disciplined life in and out of the casino that you can imagine and have an umbrella of luck over everything and then you may be have a chance to come out ahead in the long run. It's not a guarantee, but a possibility.
In other words, if you can win at this game, it will be a very hard "JOB". Maybe harder than most of us want to work. It will take a master degree in roulette which means at least 5 years of intense study. Only a small percentage graduate.
I know that this is a pessimistic point of view but in my heart of hearts, it's what I believe. Of the hundreds of members and guests of this and other forums, only 1 in a hundred have the inner drive necessary to beat the game. For the rest, it takes too much work. The game is too boring at small units to keep our interest and we don't have the confidence to bet big enough stakes to make the game really interesting. And if we do bet large enough stakes to make it interesting, it's probably money we can't afford to lose which is breaking one of the most fundamental rules of gambling.
It's been around for hundreds of years and some of the finest minds in the world have tried to conquer it and it's still in the casinos. We only read or hear about a small hand full of people over the years who have won enough from roulette to be worth talking about.
I am asking everyone who posts on this forum to state their honest opinion regarding this topic. No BS please. Give it to us straight.
LOL, you'll need it!
GLC
It was also believed that man couldn't fly or ever make it to the moon. In theory bumblebees aren't supposed to travel either, yet all three are or have become possible. Why can't there be a Grail for Roulette?
Well,
In my humble opinion, there can be some mechanical systems which can keep winning except a few losses and hence can win in overall sessions. Recently, I was chatting with an ex-member of this forum and he showed me that if we reverse engineer this game, i.e. play as casino is virtually playing against its players then only we can always keep ahead of the casino. Normally, with or without progressions, it is impossible to beat this game and it can always take away more than what it has given to you so far. He further said that regular progressions and methods are illusionary and we need to think differently, if we want to Win more and lose less.
"learn a particular system or two inside and out" >>> BINGO.
Ken
Quote from: kingsroulette on Oct 19, 11:50 PM 2011
[...]to Win more and lose less.
Ah!
Say hello to Al :)
Yes, talking about albalaha. He told me how to reverse engineer the thinking of a gambler to a casino. Regular progressions and methods are bound to lose sooner or later.
If you intend to win money over the long run at roulette, you are going to have to know the game thoroughly, learn a particular system or two inside and out, have plenty of money that you can lose without a care in the world, then play as if every chip is the most important thing in the world, and live the most disciplined life in and out of the casino that you can imagine and have an umbrella of luck over everything and then you may be have a chance to come out ahead in the long run. It's not a guarantee, but a possibility.
In other words, if you can win at this game, it will be a very hard "JOB". Maybe harder than most of us want to work. It will take a master degree in roulette which means at least 5 years of intense study. Only a small percentage graduate.
GLC
---Right on the nail my friend,George.And to add;Don't play unless it is only job you are doing.
Quote from: kingsroulette on Oct 20, 02:20 AM 2011
Yes, talking about albalaha. He told me how to reverse engineer the thinking of a gambler to a casino. Regular progressions and methods are bound to lose sooner or later.
And how do you do that?
Quote from: warrior on Oct 20, 07:06 AM 2011
And how do you do that?
Hello
Its not a rocket science guys please. You need of course a lot of research before you start
to invest your money. There are some systems out there that produce good winning ratio. If you win approximately 4 times out of 5 and your win target is about the same as your stop-loss you are ahead and you make money steadily. You dont need huge bankroll too contrary to popular beliefs. Keep it simple then and be disciplined and you will be successful :D
And of course little bit of patience wont hurt.
Regards
IN THEORY ITS EASY.
I wouldn't say that. Actually, in THEORY, it's impossible. In practice, it's not easy, but I believe, quite possible (based on actual experience).
"learn a particular system or two inside out" - agreed.
Quote from: warrior on Oct 20, 11:04 AM 2011
IN THEORY ITS EASY.
Hello
I am empirical approach guy and i never play (at least for normal stakes) anything that have not been tested thoroughly before. I mean live spins only by that.
There are few system out there including LINE 10 hehe that work at least for me if you are disciplined in applying win and stop-loss targets.
Exact figures have to be determined by testing and adjustments after you start playing.
Lots of people make mistake by not sticking to the systems after experiencing few losses. You will always loose from time to time but what's crucial is win to loss ratio - such a cliche i know but its so important.
It makes hell of difference if you lose 60u and win 4 times 20u or i you lose 30u and win 4 times 20u on average. It will allow you to increase your bankroll if you choose to and pull faster ahead.
Just stick to the basics when you have a sound system and you have a good chance.
Regards
Please understand that I am in no way suggesting that you give up learning roulette and just go to the casino and randomly toss chips onto the table and hope that you get lucky.
No. I think you should go armed with the best system you know. One that you've thorougly tested and are familiar with what to expect. Set a realistic win target and stop loss and play. This should give you an excellent chance to come out a winner. I think much better than just betting your birthdate on each spin or some other such gimmick.
"There are no roulette systems that involve a mechanical bet selection with a flat bet or a progression that you can sit down at a roulette table every day for a few hours and beat the game on a consistent basis!!!!! "
I disagree, altough I have yet to found a complete system that does exactly that...
There are many systems I have seen here that are good, the problem is they are all incomplete. The key thing missing are entry and exit points, REAL and MEASURABLE entry/exit points. Nailling this correct, many systems present here would be profitable withouth progressions and would allow to beat the game in a consistent basis. Unfortunatly, I have yet to see one decent pair of entry/exit points for a single system, allowing you to skip the games you would have a higher probability of loosing and telling you wich games you would have a higher probability of winning...
(and not based on hit-and-run tactics, like win X ammount of units and call it a day, or loose X ammoung of units and call it a day...)
Cheers
I like your point Vladir. How to determine the entry and exit point is the rub.
I used this technique using MrJ's even chance bet and did pretty well with it for quite a while but then I started losing and lost confidence in my ability to determine enter/exit points.
It's not such an easy thing to do.
Do you have some ideas?
GLC
"There are no roulette systems that involve a mechanical bet selection with a flat bet or a progression that you can sit down at a roulette table every day for a few hours and beat the game on a consistent basis!!!!!"
agree
Quote from: GLC on Oct 20, 08:11 PM 2011
I like your point Vladir. How to determine the entry and exit point is the rub.
I used this technique using MrJ's even chance bet and did pretty well with it for quite a while but then I started losing and lost confidence in my ability to determine enter/exit points.
It's not such an easy thing to do.
Do you have some ideas?
GLC
Probably your entry/exit point was incomplete too (not wrong, but incomplete)
I have some ideas, but nothing that by itself can really work ... First of all, it will always depend on the system you are playing.
Then what can tell us about entry/exit points are, I think, statistical indicators of the event we are playing and statistics of correlated events. Not one , but severall good statistical indicators of when it mygth be more probable to win then loose - no guarantees of winning of course, just probability. To find this statistical indicators, we would need to find correlated events, so that if something is happening, the probability of our event to happen is greater then usual (this is not easy to find, they may even not exist... but I believe they do, even random has some order in itself). By the way, is anyone here able to use neural networks? Neural networks allow for the examination of huge ammounts of data to find patterns...
Ideally, with this knowledge, you wouldn't even need a progression. Flat betting would make you win in the long run.
Cheers
Quote from: GLC on Oct 19, 03:33 PM 2011
There are no roulette systems that involve a mechanical bet selection with a flat bet or a progression that you can sit down at a roulette table every day for a few hours and beat the game on a consistent basis!!!!!
GLC
Sounds like somebody got a little too excited too many times and was then sorely disappointed :P
Here's a few observations drawn from my limited study of Wiesbaden spins. Maybe they will bring hope to the disheartened:
Every EC so far in samples of 300+ spins is distributed at no less than 43/57. I am sure there is a 40/60 out there somewhere, but I haven't seen one yet. Within the session though, the deviations may be greater than that.
With a 19 spin tracker, a dozen that hits 10 times has a limited shell life. In the medium run, the dozens go up and down in wave like fashion. Tracking the number of hits in 19 spins does not look quite like tracking the spins themselves, mind. It is a lot smoother. A dominant dozen ( 10+ spins ) rarely becomes dominant next. They take turns.
Following the last dozen gives the occasional fright, but is generally consistent. A 1x7 2x7, etc slow progression, with plenty funds, has done well so far. Make a few units and go.
The bet selection ( on RB) chop after two chops, otherwise streak, is remarcably consistent. Getting 4 units is easy 1/4 of the time, slow 1/2 of the times and impossible 1/4 of the time. -10 seems to be the lower limit, the exit point. Rather than a progression, changing the unit value from from session to session may have something to it.
And here's an interesting one: on 300 spins, rarely does a number hit less than 2, very rarely 0 times.
I believe roulette wheels throw too many surreal outliers to contemplate an agressive progression, unless it is backled up by very generous table limits, plenty funds, well reserched multi million spin random limits and slow triggers. But I also believe, based on my observations, that in-session inbalances, noticeable though not necessarily extreme, tend to correct within the session and are amenable to gentle progressions.
These are just some observations, to of my head. I could think of more, but at the end of the day, people have to do their own testing. There is something to be said for manual testing, BTW. By going over individual spins, one by one, rather than have a machine do it for you ( though I wish I could code RX, not enough testing and sharing going on ) you notice things and get ideas.
Hope you all enjoy my six course meal of food for thought ;)
Jeromin
Quote from: Jeromin on Oct 21, 07:38 AM 2011
Sounds like somebody got a little too excited too many times and was then sorely disappointed :P
Here's a few observations drawn from my limited study of Wiesbaden spins. Maybe they will bring hope to the disheartened:
Every EC so far in samples of 300+ spins is distributed at no less than 43/57. I am sure there is a 40/60 out there somewhere, but I haven't seen one yet. Within the session though, the deviations may be greater than that.
With a 19 spin tracker, a dozen that hits 10 times has a limited shell life. In the medium run, the dozens go up and down in wave like fashion. Tracking the number of hits in 19 spins does not look quite like tracking the spins themselves, mind. It is a lot smoother. A dominant dozen ( 10+ spins ) rarely becomes dominant next. They take turns.
Following the last dozen gives the occasional fright, but is generally consistent. A 1x7 2x7, etc slow progression, with plenty funds, has done well so far. Make a few units and go.
The bet selection ( on RB) chop after two chops, otherwise streak, is remarcably consistent. Getting 4 units is easy 1/4 of the time, slow 1/2 of the times and impossible 1/4 of the time. -10 seems to be the lower limit, the exit point. Rather than a progression, changing the unit value from from session to session may have something to it.
And here's an interesting one: on 300 spins, rarely does a number hit less than 2, very rarely 0 times.
I believe roulette wheels throw too many surreal outliers to contemplate an agressive progression, unless it is backled up by very generous table limits, plenty funds, well reserched multi million spin random limits and slow triggers. But I also believe, based on my observations, that in-session inbalances, noticeable though not necessarily extreme, tend to correct within the session and are amenable to gentle progressions.
These are just some observations, to of my head. I could think of more, but at the end of the day, people have to do their own testing. There is something to be said for manual testing, by the way. By going over individual spins, one by one, rather than have a machine do it for you ( though I wish I could code RX, not enough testing and sharing going on ) you notice things and get ideas.
Hope you all enjoy my six course meal of food for thought ;)
Jeromin
One number can sleep for 460 spins (stats from 1 million live spins)
Dont look for a system that never loses but for one that wins 3 out of 4 times when your win target and stop loss are about the same.
These systems work but require patience. The rest? difficult for me to say. Ask the experts.
Regards
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Oct 21, 08:25 AM 2011
One number can sleep for 460 spins (stats from 1 million live spins)
Regards
I've heard other results of 1 number sleeping for 600+ spins. You can test against 1m spins but that doesn't give a definitive law regarding any outcome. The next 1m results may produce completely different deviations. Any set of exact parameters can only be applicable to that particular set of numbers, sure it can give you a guide but it can never be an absolute.
Woods
Quote from: GLC on Dec 02, 04:17 PM 2011
What you have described is what I would call a Holy Grail.
I've tested hundreds of systems and found none that win 3 out of 4 times with almost equal win target and stop-loss.
I have plenty that win 3 out of 4 times, but the win target is not large enough to stay ahead of the stop-loss.
If anyone has a system that consistently wins 3 out of 4 times with an equal win target and stop-loss, would you mind posting them for us. They are exactly what we're looking for.
Thank you very much,
GLC
The following post was made by Turnerfeck. There was some confusion because I was posting on my brother's computer and forgot that I was logged on under his account. Vunderosa spotted the issue and pointed it out to me. All's well that ends well.
Quote from: turnerfeck on Dec 02, 06:19 PM 2011
GLC!
I do like reading your posts. I think there is an integrity in your words. This latest post is probably your best.
I do OK with roulette. I am sometimes up by £200 in a month, sometimes my initial £100 stake is gone in a weeks or so. i wait until next month. I wait financially that is. I still run tests and read etc, but at the end of the day the success of all of this is down to your expectation.
My expectation is three fold.
1. The idea that we can find a winning idea in roulette that provides a steady income is an illusion.
The whole point is to prove that you can study a subject and become quite good at it, even make a few quid!
2. have a plan and stick to it like a robot. No one plans sober to go to the cash machine and get more money out when the idea crashed and burned. (notice I said sober like compulsive gambling is similar to alchoholism....that cos it is)
3. You can feel just as big a buzz from losing as from winning if you stuck to your losing plan and executed it perfectly, coming out of the idea from a loss just as you planned when you were sober.
The plan to lose is equal in importance to the plan to win.
My 2 peneth for your digestion
Turner
I like your philosophy Turnerfeck.
I originally started this quest with roulette seeking the phantom Holy Grail.
It doesn't exist. At least not in the sense I was looking for.
I do think this game can be beaten, but I don't know if it's worth the time and effort.
In the final analysis, you can always go into a really bad losing streak and wipe out a lot if not all wins. There's just no way to guard against it.
Even if you are flat betting, you can have such a bad downturn that you may never get back to even.
I know that there are members who profess to win on a regular basis and I'm not saying that they don't. The ones who do have demonstrated a solid grasp of the game, exercise herculean self control, unfathomable patience, a solid understanding of the systems they play, unbelievable love for the game and etc...
The idea of starting with a small bankroll and building it in size so that you can eventually afford to bet large enough units to justify your time is almost a myth. The game progresses too slowly in a brick and mortar casino to hold my attention long enough to chink away with $1 bets trying to win enough money to play for $10 bets which is about where I think I need to be to keep my interest.
I don't have enough confidence in the systems I know to think I can win enough to risk $10 base bet. I don't mind playing for peanuts, testing different systems for about and hour or maybe two at the most. But when you're winning at best 4 or 5 units ($) an hour a couple of times a week, how many months or years will it take to build your bankroll so you can play for real stakes?
Can anyone give an encouraging word?
GLC
(link:://:.jimmyv.org/wp-content/themes/V/images/quote.png)
Remember those words from Jim Valvano, the former North Carolina basketball coach?
All the roads to roulette success have not been explored as yet. Why it's only in the last 5-10 years that we have trackers and bots to assist in testing of new and old theories and systems. Thinking inside and outside of the box will lead to new roulette avenues to follow.
Currently I am working on a system called Randomatic, which utilizes independent random events to generate bet selections. I think this field of randomness has much more to offer.
There is always something on the horizon to peak our interest. Look for it, find it and enjoy it.
Don't give up . . . Don't ever give up. . . . Cheers
Nick
don,t give up glc...to encourage you i,ll post you a flat bet system which may fit your needs should have done it the other week but was waiting for vls for something.
Perhaps a small break from the game would renew your perspective GLC.
well well said, never ever give up GLC i always read your post... :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Quote from: Proofreaders2000 on Dec 03, 08:52 AM 2011
Perhaps a small break from the game would renew your perspective GLC.
Absolutly.....
I am a chess player and get into bad rutts. You think roulette study is infinate? Chess is far worse.
I take a break now and again of 1 month and come back with renewed vigor.
Actual, this interest in roulette was a product of a chess break
Turner
Quote from: GLC on Dec 02, 10:23 PM 2011
Can anyone give an encouraging word?
GLC
Yes..............
When I do badly in something, lets use roulette as an example, I try to see where It went wrong.
So, lets say, I am betting on repeating this or that, over a period of something or other spins and lost £60. I personally would feel a bit sick.
On reflection, I would look for reasons.
1. I said I would cut and run if I lost more than I could replenish my bankroll with a win, so lets say I was betting 1U and a win is 36U, so I must stop at -40U
2. I said I would only do this twice a night and come away with anything I won or lost.
3. I would stick to the bet rigidly, not thinking on my feet if I saw something from another idea that was materialising.
So.....
no.1 was broken, I went past -35U.
no. 2 was broken because this was my 3rd session after being "-2U" and "even" on 2 sessions
No.3 wasnt broken. I performed this system perfectly as planned.
It wasnt roulette. It was me.
regroup!! return replenished!
Turner
Quote from: Jeromin on Oct 21, 07:38 AM 2011
There is something to be said for manual testing, by the way. By going over individual spins, one by one, rather than have a machine do it for you ( though I wish I could code RX, not enough testing and sharing going on ) you notice things and get ideas.
Hello dear Jeromin, there are also
manual TRACKERS which automate the generation of notes, you can just hit "Step" and let the software track for you, one spin at a time, and get to see the same patterns as when manual tracking, without the paperwork.
I agree that when using your own brain over some results you will notice things and get ideas... but the manually printing and using sheets of paper can be automated too :)
Thanks for your insights, you made quite an interesting read :thumbsup:
Vic
I have read this topic and with all due respect to all I have to say that most of this is pure nonsense associated with gambling fallacy. If anyone thinks otherwise please let me correct in the following conclusions and give me proof that I'm wrong;
-in long run there is no difference in play every day 50 spins or 1000 spins (because we can't know when we get bad series and before that leave the table (this does not apply to people who can see the future :D)
-in long run on losing system stop-loss and win can't help ( if u don't agree try to test some losing system with stop-loss and without, u will see, both are losing)
-in long run there are no better losing and worse losing systems, all is same, if u bet same unit, all get loss approximately of 2.7% ( if some think that some system is beter then his system need to neutralize the advantage of house least for a 0.5 percent on 3 milion or more spins)
-in long run, you can know and combine 100 outside and 100 inside bet systems but there no difference u got same house advantage of 2,7% and 1.5% on outside bet for french roulette because u don't know when to change system and play another (this does not apply to people who can see the future :D)
I know some of you think I have experience playing roulette 40 years and I can predict when to stop and leave the casino.. This is one of the largest gambling misconceptions, because roulette
is random in 95% cases!
For example why sports betting has the advantage of house7-15 percent and roulette 2.7? This is because on sport betting players with knowledge and experience can affect and reduce the house advantage, while at the roulette it is hard to happen because we can not affect on the ball and the roulette wheel. I hope some understand this facts.
speed
Quote from: speed on Dec 03, 12:35 PM 2011
I have read this topic and with all due respect to all I have to say that most of this is pure nonsense associated with gambling fallacy. If anyone thinks otherwise please let me correct in the following conclusions and give me proof that I'm wrong;
-in long run there is no difference in play every day 50 spins or 1000 spins (because we can't know when we get bad series and before that leave the table (this does not apply to people who can see the future :D )
-in long run on losing system stop-loss and win can't help ( if u don't agree try to test some losing system with stop-loss and without, u will see, both are losing)
-in long run there are no better losing and worse losing systems, all is same, if u bet same unit, all get loss approximately of 2.7% ( if some think that some system is beter then his system need to neutralize the advantage of house least for a 0.5 percent on 3 milion or more spins)
-in long run, you can know and combine 100 outside and 100 inside bet systems but there no difference u got same house advantage of 2,7% and 1.5% on outside bet for french roulette because u don't know when to change system and play another (this does not apply to people who can see the future :D )
I know some of you think I have experience playing roulette 40 years and I can predict when to stop and leave the casino.. This is one of the largest gambling misconceptions, because roulette
is random in 95% cases!
For example why sports betting has the advantage of house7-15 percent and roulette 2.7? This is because on sport betting players with knowledge and experience can affect and reduce the house advantage, while at the roulette it is hard to happen because we can not affect on the ball and the roulette wheel. I hope some understand this facts.
speed
I can just glance at the wheel and reduce the house edge - not so difficult.
Quote from: ego on Dec 03, 02:49 PM 2011
I can just glance at the wheel and reduce the house edge - not so difficult.
And I also.. But not here talking about VB, DS and BIAS, this up only applies to roulette mathematical systems.