How to Win at roulette Z - Q

[Gordon Gekko]

Originally posted by Runningbear
I use a system where I place an equal sized bet on the 1st and second 12. I have a 65% chance of winning 33.3% of my money back. If I lose I triple the bet. I then have an 87.75% of winning the second bet. If I lose both bets I cut my losses.

This gives a smoother equity curve than black / red.

I bet on the same 1st and second 2nd 12 for about 10 bets then change. Short runs often result in statistical anomolies where the ball lands in the same two thirds of the table for long periods.

I have only used this system 4 times and always finished up.

Runningbear

runningbear,

you're becoming one of my favorites here. i enjoy your posts. you had a great post in my chaos theory thread, and now you've done this.

i've never been to vegas, but when i go, i will be implementing something of this nature.. thanks!

 

[aphexcoil]

<quote>
i've never been to vegas, but when i go, i will be implementing something of this nature.. thanks!
</quote>

Just make sure you put enough aside for a couple of cheap hookers.

 

[profitseer]

That's a tough one. I think it might be the best, if not it's definately in the top ten (I'm talkin all time).

 

[Quah]

Originally posted by Runningbear
I use a system where I place an equal sized bet on the 1st and second 12. I have a 65% chance of winning 33.3% of my money back. If I lose I triple the bet. I then have an 87.75% of winning the second bet. If I lose both bets I cut my losses.

Runningbear

Runningbear - Exactly how does increasing your bet change the chances of winning? If it did, it wouldn't make any sense to do anything other than start with the bet that "increased" your chances of winning in the first place.

 

[Andy62279]

Originally posted by Runningbear
I use a system where I place an equal sized bet on the 1st and second 12. I have a 65% chance of winning 33.3% of my money back. If I lose I triple the bet. I then have an 87.75% of winning the second bet. If I lose both bets I cut my losses.

This gives a smoother equity curve than black / red.

I bet on the same 1st and second 2nd 12 for about 10 bets then change. Short runs often result in statistical anomolies where the ball lands in the same two thirds of the table for long periods.

I have only used this system 4 times and always finished up.

Runningbear

runningbear,
I am not too familiar with roulette. You said you bet on the 1st and second 12. What does that mean? I thought in roulette you either bet black or red.

I play craps, but the rules in casinos differ from the one I play here at the dorms. I just place lay bets, and payoff is 1:1. I'm trying to get some guys to go to the casinos in Slovenia. I'm open to learn how to make money in different games.

Andy

 

[rs7]

Originally posted by Andy62279


You said you bet on the 1st and second 12. What does that mean?

There are 3 columns of the 36 numbers on the layout that you can bet.

 

[aphexcoil]

Quah,

Runningbear is basically using statistics. You have a 66% (well, slightly under with the 0) of winning a 33% return when you put the same size bet on 2/3'rds the numbers on the table.

If, however, you lose the first bet, you can triple your bet and still win -- but now statistics says that you have a 33%x33% chance of losing -- or 10.9% chance of losing -- an 89.1% chance of winning.

The error in this is that the sample size is so small, the law of large numbers has little meaning.

 

[Tradesman]

It all sounds great but the house gets you.
there are 36 numbers and 0 & 00 that equals 38
the house pays even money for your bet and 35 to one straight up but....
The house has about a 3% advantage every roll because of the 0 & 00. Kinda like commissions in daytrading.

 

[Quah]

Originally posted by aphexcoil
Quah,

Runningbear is basically using statistics. You have a 66% (well, slightly under with the 0) of winning a 33% return when you put the same size bet on 2/3'rds the numbers on the table.

If, however, you lose the first bet, you can triple your bet and still win -- but now statistics says that you have a 33%x33% chance of losing -- or 10.9% chance of losing -- an 89.1% chance of winning.

The error in this is that the sample size is so small, the law of large numbers has little meaning.

That's such BS.

Every time the wheel spins, you have exactly the same chance of winning or losing.

You bet size doesn't matter one bit.

 

[rs7]

Originally posted by Quah


That's such BS.

Every time the wheel spins, you have exactly the same chance of winning or losing.

You bet size doesn't matter one bit.

I think Aphie needs a break. I KNOW he knows better than this. He must be typing faster than he is thinking.

Also, in the US, there is a double zero in addition to the zero. So that significantly lowers your probabilities with the mentioned method. Bottom line though, is the odds are the odds. When you get paid 35 to one on a 37 to one wager, you lose. Period.