The Superior Bet Selection

[Scarface]

Back in the day, I was very naive when it come to roulette.  I would bet cold numbers, thinking they were due to hit, and using a negative progression.  Lost alot of money.  One thing I noticed is there were always a few numbers that seemed to repeat over and over.  Playing repeaters seems counterintuitive, but from what I always witness I would have had a much better hit rate playing them.

So, I decided to switch it up.  Now, I play around 4 numbers that are the most recent repeaters.  I've had so much more success with this strategy than playing cold numbers!

Random is a weird thing.  We all know over a great many spins, all numbers will balance out.  But in in a session of a couple hundred spins, there is a huge imbalance.  It seems like playing hot numbers, or repeaters, is the way to go.  The marquee at my casino shows the results of the last 200 spins...the hottest number is almost always around 12, while the coldest number is usually 1 or 2.

Here's my theory.  I think there are some bet selections superior to others.  Of course, I know they will all lose in the end because of the house edge, but I believe some will lose much faster.  All I'm  trying to figure out is which bet selection is better.  If we can find the best bet selection, than we can reduce variance.  If we can reduce variance enough, and use good money management, then we can be closer to beating this game.

Suppose 2 players are playing the same game.  Both players play only 4 numbers.  Player 1 always plays the 4 most recent repeaters.  Player 2 tracks numbers and always plays the 4 numbers that hasn't hit in the longest time.  In this scenario, who will lose their money the quickest?  If we repeat this scenario 100 times, will there be a large number of spins difference between Player 1 and 2.  Of course, with the house edge, both players are destined to lose...but does one bet selection keep you in the game longer than the other?

[precogmiles]

 
There is a lot of talk about random lately on this forum. I think people are starting to finally see the light. Roulette is a game based on luck not maths. So focus on the luck aspect (random)

You are right in your observation regarding random and repeaters and you are on the right track.

It is only when you study random from a esoteric perspective that you begin to understand the true nature of random. Not a scientific, mathematical view.

My advice is to sit with random and learn from it. Do not judge it or force the pseudo reality called probability upon it. That is the only way.

There are a few more rules to random then simply repeaters. And an important aspect is when to switch your bet selection.

I will say it again. Roulette is a game of chance(random) NOT MATHS.

The system players and science obsessed sceptics can ridicule all they want but precognition is the best way to beat roulette.

[Firefox]

Playing repeaters is marginally better than sleepers as you may piggy back unwittingly on a short term physical bias.

For example if the wheel is slightly out of level that evening, and for certain rotor speeds and dealers, a rotor defect or warped numbers ring may mean that certain numbers are favoured slightly.

Wheels and procedures are very good nowadays, so tomorrow that wheel will be levelled, or they swap the rotors between wheels and that bias will be gone.

That's why you should play repeaters over sleepers.

Note that it's not possible to analyse bias with any statistical certainty until about 800 spins or more, which you will not manage in an evening, but if there is a bias there will be some abnormal repeating, so hop on it while you can.

[Scarface]

I think most roulette players have this same belief.  Playing sleepers will bring loses faster than repeaters or recents. 

[Scarface]

My advice for playing hot numbers:  play numbers that have recently repeated.  Do not put much value in the hot numbers listed on the marquee!  The other day I played a B&M casino, and the 2nd hottest number on the board was #17, with 11 hits.  The marquee is based on data from the last 200 spins.  Well, I played awhile for at least 100 spins and #17 still remained in the #2 spot for the hottest number even though it didn't hit at all while I was playing!  This tells me something...this means that #17 was not actually hot for 200 spins.  It was probably very hot in the first 50-100 spins, then didn't hit again for the next 100 spins.

Play recent repeaters!  Play a small amount of numbers.  If your selection don't hit after x amount of spins, change your bet selection!  The nature of random is extremes.  It is very common for a number to stand out and hit many times in a short period of time.  This always happens!

[Still]

I think most roulette players have this same belief.  Playing sleepers will bring loses faster than repeaters or recents.

A recent test of mine did not support this. 

I just finished another test of 33,000 spins over 105 sessions of 314 each. 

In this test it was similar to my two previous, going 8 steps high, but this time i bet on the latest spin value plus the number numerically higher.   

In this test the average loss was 47.35 units per 314 spins, remarkably close to my estimate of exactly how much each session should lose, when the total betting volume is subject to house edge.  Again, this is with RandBetween(0,36) in Excel.   

Since a previous test indicated that it should not matter what the next sleeper is chosen, this test should also be valid for choosing a sleeper numerically lower than the latest spin.   

Anyway, this test showed me that trying to catch repeats early in the cycle, sacrificing bets on sleepers, appears to follow house edge, whereas just betting on sleepers alone, up to 8 steps, has so far appeared to offset the house 2.7% by it's own 2.7% for breakeven. 

This is not the same as what you are suggesting exactly, the difference being the other two bets on sleepers in the columns.

[Firefox]

A recent test of mine did not support this.

A test of one sample proves nothing though. If there were no slight bias in your sample then either sleepers or repeaters could come out on top.

Only where there is a bias (and that's not many samples)  would it be worth playing repeaters. So there is some small factor which argues for repeaters whereas there is no factor which argues for sleepers.

It's a very slim chance, but in an otherwise random choice, it's better to go with something rather than nothing.

[Scarface]

There is no such thing as a perfect wheel, or a perfect dealer.  So, in theory, there will always be bias somewhere.  Maybe, not enough to get an edge, but enough to reduce variance. 

As players, we may not know what the cause of the bias is, but doesn't really matter.  Play what's hitting

[Firefox]

Agreed, there will always be a bias, but sometimes it's so small as to be indiscernable. If it reduces the house edge to 2.5%, it will be very difficult to detect or exploit by noticing repeaters. Most modern wheels are in this territory and it's probably within the limits where the house doesn't care and doesn't act.

[Scarface]

Lets assume there are no zeros on the wheel, and all payouts were fair.  I believe playing the most recent repeaters will have an edge over sleepers. 

[precogmiles]

A group of blind men heard that a strange animal, called an elephant, had been brought to the town, but none of them were aware of its shape and form. Out of curiosity, they said: "We must inspect and know it by touch, of which we are capable". So, they sought it out, and when they found it they groped about it. In the case of the first person, whose hand landed on the trunk, said "This being is like a thick snake". For another one whose hand reached its ear, it seemed like a kind of fan. As for another person, whose hand was upon its leg, said, the elephant is a pillar like a tree-trunk. The blind man who placed his hand upon its side said, "elephant is a wall". Another who felt its tail, described it as a rope. The last felt its tusk, stating the elephant is that which is hard, smooth and like a spear.

If you want to understand random need to combine and spend time with random. Spend days observing and reflecting on what the nature of random truly is. Throw everything you think about random out of the window, start fresh.

[Firefox]

Lets assume there are no zeros on the wheel, and all payouts were fair.  I believe playing the most recent repeaters will have an edge over sleepers.

My personal view is in that case you would have a level game.

But take the case of a wheel without zero where, for example, there is a pocket defect. 26 and 32 are 1/34 numbers. 15 and 3 are 1/40 numbers.

Now if we take case of the most recent numbers, 15 and 3 may well have repeated. But if we continue to stay on them we will have  a negative game.

They will fade and 26 and 32 will become more prominent. Only by recording all the numbers as the game progresses can we identify what is going on. And, when they rotate the numbers ring, we need to pick up the defect afresh.

However, without doing any of that, it is statistically more likely that 26 and 32 will have repeated not 15 or 3 giving your scenario.

But it is not guaranteed, only the best strategy at that moment, given the available information.

[Scarface]

Playing the most recent repeats, will catch the numbers repeating more often.  So, if there is bias, it will be played

[Firefox]

It's more likely to, but one can't say for certain in the short term. In the example above a 1/40  number may have recently come up 3 times but the 1/34 number which you really want to be on may have slept for 40 spins.

Only after 800 to 1000 spins can one start to form some level of confidence.

Still, if you want to start playing immediately then back recent repeats but keep recording and be prepared to switch to the most frequent numbers.

[Scarface]

Yes, I agree.  But as long as it works in the long run thats all that matters.  Even AP players can lose single sessions, with an advantage, over a couple hundred spins