Random Thoughts on Roulette

[KasinoKing]

Originally Posted by fergus lee

Choosing, say, Red, Even ;High, we would seek Fair Odds of 7/1 because this is only one of the eight variations.For the treble to win we need any one of the numbers ,30-32- 34- or 36 to win.
If we bet only those four numbers on the layout and one of them win we get odds of 8/1 which is -allowing for zero- an advantage of about 11% .Which I agree, seems nonsense but is dictated by Probability maths.( I think )

First off I have not had time to read & fully digest your 'system', though I do have a keen interest in Roulette systems in general.

Obviously though Croup is totally correct and it does not matter where, how or when you place your bets on the table - the house WILL take 2.7027% in the long run. (Unless you play online roulette with no zeros - in which case it will be 0%! )

Your 11% is obviously way off the scale, and my inkling as to how this came about is that somehow you are not including 4 or 5 of the numbers on the wheel in your calculations.
Hopefully I'll have a chance to look at this in more detail next week, but in the meantime why don't you try it (small stakes (1c or 10c Roulette) or 'fun mode' - not your mortgage!) and see what results you get?

KK

[fergus lee]

Actually,Kasino King I wasn't posting a system but an idea.The 11% is my calculation of the bonus of getting 8/1 for a 7/1 shot.A one point bonus on a 7/1 shot is one seventh which equates to 14% Deduct the 2.7 for zero and you get 11%.Not being a mathematician, however, I could be wrong.Fun mode is best for checking.
My question "but when do we bet ?" was really rhetorica question as I have thought of a way to answer this, but that's for my next post because I want to answer some of the
points I mentioned before.
First.- Two guys get different odds when betting the same numbers. This happens when one bets two adjacent dozens with two chips on each.If one of his numbers win he wins two chips but loses his four chips if the number is in the other dozen or zero occurs.
If we assume his bet is on !st and 2nd , his mate would put 3 chips on LOW and one chip on the six line 19/24.Thus , he salvages one and a half chips if zero wins.
SECOND - An awkward question. - Why does the Gaming Commission insist that casinos within their jurisdiction give bettors of the even-money shots half their wager back if zero wins.We are told that ALL bets have the same disadvantage of 2.7% o why should even - money bettors get a bonus?
Third - Are even money bets such a good bet as is thought? It relates to the previous answer.Why the preference ?. I think it can be explained if we take a different perspective on calculations.
Look at it this way.Without the zero Red and Back are even-money bets. Putting the zero against either of them puts a "1" of a disadvantage."1" is an eighteenth of what was already there .An eighteenth equates to 5.5% and twice 2.7% which is why even-money bettors get half their stake back when zero wins. Not good maths perhaps, but it does answer the question while mathematicians are in a quandary.
Incidentally, there is no point in asking the Gaming Commission because when I asked them they couldn't answer the question "Why". And they are the people who set the rules!

[Dice Man]

Good debate going on here. Better than most roulette threads we have. I'm not entirely sure I understand Fergus Lee's position at the moment, so will stay out of it and just observe how this debate unfolds.

[Saeco]

I also think that math has nothing to do with the Roulette. It's just luck what you can count on when playing.

[Dice Man]

Originally Posted by Utireatte

do you get my meaning?

No.

[WarrenBuffett]

Thanks for the excellent discussion. I think we fail to realise, you just can't beat the game of roulette no matter how much our heart desires. I think the best system is a combination of:

Losing the least amount of units per spin
Moneymanagement, have a fail safe. Once you reached this point stop, leave or start over. This is why martingale fails in the long run.

Cheers.

[fergus lee]

Where I am going ,Dice Man, is that I am trying to show that the received wisdom that roulette is unbeatable depends on your perception.There are 37 numbers which is Fair Odds of 36/1 and you only get paid 35/1 so,being unfair odds merans that you will eventually lose.But that is on ly if your perception is a one dimensional flat earth one.There are other views you can take that can give you an Edge( a mathematical advantage.The one I illustrated is only one'
DISCLAIMER
I do not claim that it is a wining system.It is the mathematicians, not me, that claim that if you have an edge ten yo have a winning system2in the long run".I emrely claim that a bet that has an edge is a bet you can make withn a reasonable chance that tou will win but that it is not certain ! My "short run "is this month this year and my "Long Run " is the rest of my betting life.SomehowI don't think I will be worrying whether or not I lose after I am dead!

Those who take Probability Theory to extremes and declare that it proves that roulette cannot be beaten are wrong.It depends on your perception.
They should bear in mind that Probability throws up some strange results and not only the Birthday Paradox.One of its "paths" will show that it is PROBABLE ,however unlikely,that a R ed could occur from now to infinity.Should we in the ral world worry about that?
When you see ,say,twenty numbers on the numbes board then you have witnessed what matematicians say is "impossible" and yet it happens repeatedly on roulettes every day and in evry casino in the world ..DSo you really believe that ?

[KasinoKing]

Originally Posted by fergus lee

First.- Two guys get different odds when betting the same numbers. This happens when one bets two adjacent dozens with two chips on each.If one of his numbers win he wins two chips but loses his four chips if the number is in the other dozen or zero occurs.
If we assume his bet is on !st and 2nd , his mate would put 3 chips on LOW and one chip on the six line 19/24.Thus , he salvages one and a half chips if zero wins.

Sorry for the delay in getting back to this thread!

Opps!
I thought I had a quick answer for this, but I got myself in a muddle!
Will come back later when I've got time to think about it properly...

KK

[KasinoKing]

Originally Posted by KasinoKing

Will come back later when I've got time to think about it properly...

OK, I've thought about it. (Can't edit my original post after 15 minutes...! )

It's simple, you are correct of course, because player 2 is including even money bets.
It was the complexity of your example which threw me, a similar but simpler example would be:-
Player 1 places 1 chip on all 18 red numbers on the table
Player 2 places 18 chips on red.
When zero hits Player 1 loses 18 chips, but player 2 loses only 9 chips.

By playing the 'table' Player 1 is getting a 2.7027% HA game, but by playing the 'evens' Player 2 is getting a 1.3514% HA game.

So they are getting different odds while betting on the same numbers, which means Player 1 will lose all his money twice as fast as Player 2, but in the long run they will both still lose, so what's the point?

KK

[DannyC]

Again, an invalid argument and the reason being is you either a) haven't been to a real casino in your life, or b) you've never played roulette in a real casino, and want to know how I know?

Because all of UK Casino's offer a 1/2 bet back on zero coming in on some if not all of the even money bets...