@ turbo

[jekhb76]

A buddy of mine went to the casino with me a little while back.  Never played roulette in his life.  His strategy was simple, and effective.  He played the minimum $1 bet on a couple numbers.  I don't think he played anymore than 5 numbers at most.  As long as they were hitting, he kept playing.  If after a little while with no hits, he'd switch 1 or 2 out with most recent hotties.

First time player, keeping it simple.  Just flat betting a the most recent hotties at only $1 a number...no more than 5 numbers at most.  Won over 300 in couple hours.

Don't play a lot of numbers.  Don't get crazy with progressions.  Keep it simple 

A clever friend.

[TurboGenius]

...no more than 5 numbers at most.  Won over 300 in couple hours.

Oh wait, let me throw this in because you "have to" now.

It wasn't enough spins.
He got "lucky"
Eventually he will lose to the house edge (even if he never plays again)
The game was rigged.
If he took a bankroll or someone gave him cash to use, it's rigged.

Whew, there. Now you won't be called "misleading". Thank me later lol

[wiggy]

Eventually he will lose to the house edge (even if he never plays again)

LoL….that was funny!

[The General]

Scarface-Switching will never produce the losses you talked about earlier.  Look at any set of set of samples and you will see.

Why?
Are the new numbers to which you switched more likely to hit over the next series of spins than the old numbers, and if so, then why? 
What do you suppose the hit frequency will be for the new numbers?

I hate to say it but you're inventing new fallacies to make up for the old ones.

[jekhb76]

Can't you Just Make a new Forum for All those naysayers and nom believers???
A Forum full of those wonderful bias methods 

[The General]

JEKH,

When you were in school, did you want to know when or if you made a mistake on your math homework? 

Would you rather remain blissfully ignorant, or would your rather learn something?

[Lucky7Red]

Can't you Just Make a new Forum for All those naysayers and nom believers???
A Forum full of those wonderful bias methods 

What will happened if you play only number 7 all day?

[jekhb76]

What will happened if you play only number 7 all day?

I would have lost â,¬46 euro 

[Andre Chass]

The wheel has no memory.
Hot numbers, cold numbers ... It's all in your head.
The wheel does not give a crap about it.

The only way to win is to bet that a rare event will not happen.

You can bet on hot or cold numbers as long as the strategy rely on a rare event.

Imho

I have my own strategy but is not so simple like that.

[Scarface]

Why?
Are the new numbers to which you switched more likely to hit over the next series of spins than the old numbers, and if so, then why? 
What do you suppose the hit frequency will be for the new numbers?

Test it out and see for yourself 

[Scarface]

General,

My way of play is no more fallacy than yours.  Was it you or Steve that once said even a bias number can take 400 spins to show up.  So, you spend 100s of hours tracking thousands of numbers...who's to say your sample is large enough?  How do you know it's not variance?  Surely, the casino computers would spot this long before you.  This is not the 1970s.  Casinos have technology now. 

But they let you continue playing on what you think is a biased wheel....even when your number may take 400 spins to fall.  Good luck with that

[Steve]

I dont know where to start. It ends up in the same place though.

Its your money guys.

[The General]

- Scarface -General,

My way of play is no more fallacy than yours.  Was it you or Steve that once said even a bias number can take 400 spins to show up.

No, I've said the unit draw down on a small group of numbers could easily be or surpass 400 units on a strong bias.  I didn't say that a single biased number would go 400 spins without hitting.  I have been on a biased number that hasn't hit for over 200 spins before.  Again, note the word biased.  Now if a group of biased numbers can have negative variance in the 400 units plus range, how much variance do you suppose your system can have, (which doesn't have an edge)? 

..who's to say your sample is large enough?  How do you know it's not variance?

I know because of the visible defects, chi square and because of the standard deviation size.  Just curious, have you ever viewed the data from such a wheel?

Surely, the casino computers would spot this long before you.  This is not the 1970s.  Casinos have technology now.

Yes, some casinos have data downloads.  And yes they move the wheels around.  But do you for even one moment think that they really remove biased wheels from play, and why should they?  Biased wheels make money just like the regular wheels.  I could tell 99% of the people on this forum that a wheel was biased, yet almost nobody could beat the wheel because they don't know how to track, play it, or correctly exploit it.

But they let you continue playing on what you think is a biased wheel....even when your number may take 400 spins to fall.  Good luck with that

Again, if I have the edge, and may experience a draw down of 400 units, then just how large do you suppose your draw down could be playing your system where you don't have the edge?  The answer is,  If you don't have an edge, then the max draw down can be bottomless!  .

[The General]

The wheel has no memory.
Hot numbers, cold numbers ... It's all in your head.
The wheel does not give a crap about it.

The only way to win is to bet that a rare event will not happen.

You can bet on hot or cold numbers as long as the strategy rely on a rare event.

Imho

I have my own strategy but is not so simple like that.

Andre,

What makes you think that a "rare event" has a boundary that enables you to step outside of probability in order to exploit the "rare event?"
For example, let's say the number 5 hasn't hit in 300 spins.  Is that a "rare event" that you can exploit?
How about if I've just witnessed 10 blacks in a row.  Is that a "rare event" that you can exploit?
Do you feel that the probability of winning has changed as a result of the "rare event?" 

[Steve]

See link:://:.roulettephysics.com/roulette-strategy/ - it explains all the common mistakes. Best to carefully read it, unless you don't mind not knowing the truth.

There's a lot more:

FICTION: You can build a system around a “rare event” that you’ll never see in your lifetime
Another common mistake is believing you can use progression to win before a “rare event” happens. It’s incorrect because the odds still haven’t changed. Your perception of a “rare” event is actually something that will eventually happen in enough spins.

For example, you may have never seen these winning numbers in a row: 1,2,3,4,5. But chances are you’ve never seen this sequence either: 32,4,18,9,1. If you see enough spins, they will happen exactly the same amount of times. Each sequence is just as rare as the other.

Another example is expecting you’ll never see 37 different numbers appear in 37 spins. Firstly, it will happen just as often as any other sequence of 37 spins. So why would you favor one group of 37 numbers over another 37 numbers? There is no difference at all. Each spin is independent and with the same odds. It’s exactly the same as expecting to never see four reds in a row (RRRR). It may occur less often than a mixed sequence like BRRB or RBRB, but the odds of any specific sequence happening are exactly the same. So thinking one sequence is more rare than another is delusion.

Put another way, imagine waiting many years to see the spin sequence 1,2,3,4,5. It seems really rare, and you bet that #6 wont spin next. But actually the odds of #6 spinning next are the same as any other number.  Run some proper simulations and you’ll see no matter how you play it, you cannot change your odds by betting that rare events wont happen.