Volume 1 - It can't be that colour again... surely!!
I'm not sure how well or not this will illustrate my point, but here goes. I've read through a few posts regarding chains of red numbers or black numbers being drawn from Roulette wheels (be they in a casino, or a FOBT), and to my dismay I can't get my head around the number of poeple who think that because there have been 8 red numbers drawn in succession, that the 9th number drawn can't possibly be red.
For the purpose of collecting data, I have used the following website:
http://nlvm.usu.edu/en/nav/frames_asid_305_g_3_t_5.html
I have taken this website to be a "true" example of a coin toss (a dangerous assumption perhaps, but i'm not going to argue that).
For the purpose of this experiment, the "Heads" toss of a coin will be taken as Red, and the "Tails" toss of a coin will be taken as Black plus the number 0. As a result, I have set the probability of a coin toss being Heads to 0.486 (or 18/37).
Note: I have provided the data in the file below.
The important data is "Longest Run Of Heads", which equates to the longest run of consecutive red numbers being drawn. From the data shown, there are a couple of things to point out that I hope will help emphasise my point:
- Even only tossing the coin 100 times, it was possible to have a run of 8 consectutive heads.
- As the number of coin tosses increased, so did the average number of consecutive heads.
- The longest run of heads recorded throughout was 19 (!!!)
For me the most important fact was the 2nd one above - the more the coin is tossed, then on average the greater the number of consecutive heads became.
Say for example you can see the last 15 numbers drawn, of which there were 13 red, 2 black, and the last 10 out were all red. What conclusion can be drawn from this? Does the next number or two out have to be black?
Of course it doesn't!!! Because you're only considering the last 15 numbers drawn, you're almost fooled into thinking this way. Look at the 3rd statement above - 19 heads in a row. If you look at my example over a larger number of coin tosses, it's not impossible to believe that indeed the next 3, 4 or even 5 numbers will also be red, maybe more!!!
Hopefully I've done enough to convice you that betting consecutive reds or blacks can be a dangerous strategy. It would be easy for me to turn round and say "You never win in the long run at roulette, the Casino always has the edge". This is true, but sometimes explaining things in a bit more detail, or providing data for people to look at will put off at least a couple of people from trying this.
If feedback is positive, then using the same website and ideas I will throw up another couple of examples exploring different bets on the roulette wheel.
Roulette Myths Vol 1.
-
stuart4010
- Senior Member
- Posts: 325
- Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2005 1:48 pm
Roulette Myths Vol 1.
- Attachments
-
- results_446.zip
- (4.06 KiB) Downloaded 331 times
I agree Stuart thats why my post " Try This" involves backing the previuos colour out and doubling up till you get say 6 or 7 in a row. You give yourself a huge margin of losing bets where if it comes up just once you are in the money. I have posted this theory before on other sites but people seem to get confused by what I am actually saying. All I can say that its better to back with the wheel than against it. Seven in a row equals £128 for a original £1 stake giving you 127 chances to be in profit. 
-
stuart4010
- Senior Member
- Posts: 325
- Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2005 1:48 pm
Kendo - another thread tried to describe your theory as "Martingale", and I replied saying that this was not the case. I understand what you are saying, but I urge you (if you have not already done so) to have a look at the results.
You propose that the player has 127 chances to be in profit (i see no reason why the player doesn't have 128 chances, but lets not split hairs) if they make a £1 bet on a colour (red say), then double up until they reach £128 i.e. 7 consecutive red numbers.
When the coin was tossed 100 times, the average "Longest Run of Consecutive Red Numbers" = 5.15. In fact, on only 2 occasions did the run of consecutive red numbers equal 7 or more.
It is only when the number of coin tosses equals 500 that the average "Longest Run of Consecutive Numbers" becomes greater than 7.
If you're looking for a different betting strategy to try next time you're at the casino/fobt/online, then by all means try what kendo23 proposes. Just realise though that it is by no means a guaranteed winner, do not apply the "It must happen once within 128 goes surely" logic - this is simply not true.
You propose that the player has 127 chances to be in profit (i see no reason why the player doesn't have 128 chances, but lets not split hairs) if they make a £1 bet on a colour (red say), then double up until they reach £128 i.e. 7 consecutive red numbers.
When the coin was tossed 100 times, the average "Longest Run of Consecutive Red Numbers" = 5.15. In fact, on only 2 occasions did the run of consecutive red numbers equal 7 or more.
It is only when the number of coin tosses equals 500 that the average "Longest Run of Consecutive Numbers" becomes greater than 7.
If you're looking for a different betting strategy to try next time you're at the casino/fobt/online, then by all means try what kendo23 proposes. Just realise though that it is by no means a guaranteed winner, do not apply the "It must happen once within 128 goes surely" logic - this is simply not true.
I know what he is saying, I honestly give in, Im happy making my money I was just trying to help other people hopefully regain some losses on roulette with a system that works for me. Im at casino next Friday I will let you know how I get on. £920 up over last 2 months with 4 visits and that is only going with £100 each time no bank cards or credit cards.
Sorry stuart that post wasnt for you but the one above. Yeah I get what you mean just because say 17 neighbours hasnt been out for say 100 spins this doesn't mean it's going to start going there. Like you have said to people there is no guarantee that this will happen off 128 spins but really you have more than 128 spins for all the times you have won and gone onto lose off say 3 or 4 in a row.
What do you propose or do you just play with the chance you may hit lucky like I did last week when things weren't working out. Or have you seen to much and avoid the game at all costs?
What do you propose or do you just play with the chance you may hit lucky like I did last week when things weren't working out. Or have you seen to much and avoid the game at all costs?
I will keep you informed via this thread over coming weeks.-
Cardinal Sin
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4166
- Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 3:33 pm
The advantage of Kendo's plan is that even if he is unlucky, it will take a long time to lose £100. With the Martingale effort, it could be all over within 5 minutes.
If you set yourself a target of 128 quid with each quid and have a hundred shots (i.e. your original stake), then you have a realistic chance of making at least 28 quid profit as long as at least 1 run of 8 colours (which you've chosen) comes up.
On the other hand, you're still more likely than not to lose and the casino ALWAYS has the edge, no matter what system you use. Still, as far as systems go, I've definitely heard worse...
If you set yourself a target of 128 quid with each quid and have a hundred shots (i.e. your original stake), then you have a realistic chance of making at least 28 quid profit as long as at least 1 run of 8 colours (which you've chosen) comes up.
On the other hand, you're still more likely than not to lose and the casino ALWAYS has the edge, no matter what system you use. Still, as far as systems go, I've definitely heard worse...
The casino I go to have machines that are linked to the tables, which I am sure most have. Now some of these machines are £2.50 min for outside bets so to get round this I will put say £2.50 on black and £3.50 on red, red wins then I will put £4.50 on red and £2.50 on black red wins again then you can just put £4 on red. If 0 comes out you will still get half your stake back so if its not on the first 2 spins you will still be slightly in profit.
-
onlythebrave
- Junior Member
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 10:03 pm
Very intresting...
I too favour backing the wheel & not against it.
Like kendo, this is usually what i do at the casino`s, even to the point of manipulating the min outside bet to £1.
I have won far more than ive lost doing this, as long runs are more common than you think. Even collecting at £32 can soon mount up.
The downfall of this apart from the zero is bordom.
I too favour backing the wheel & not against it.
Like kendo, this is usually what i do at the casino`s, even to the point of manipulating the min outside bet to £1.
I have won far more than ive lost doing this, as long runs are more common than you think. Even collecting at £32 can soon mount up.
The downfall of this apart from the zero is bordom.
-
stuart4010
- Senior Member
- Posts: 325
- Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2005 1:48 pm
mjd - I take it you're referring strictly to an FOBT - I don't want to start that debate again, in fact the thread i initially started on it is still going!! Here's a question for you: It's pretty much accepted that pressing the start button on 2 machines at exactly the same time will bring in the same number. What do you think would happen if you cover 35 out of 37 numbers with £1, and on the machines next to it cover the other 2 numbers with the maximum stake? I wonder if the machine would be as reluctant to give you one of the 35 £1 stake numbers back then!!
washer of pots - agreed 100%, I posted to this effect on another thread, "Martingale" will inevitably chew you up and spit you out at some point, at least with the "Kendo23" (as i'll now refer to it) if you do lose, you'll have spent a fair bit of time playing.
I've got a book somewhere that has around 3500 spins recorded from 1 roulette table (not consecutively, and definitely not recorded by myself), if I can be arsed I'll put them into a file and let everyone have a look.
If anything i'm trying to stress to people that are new to the forum, or just new to roulette the perils of any sort of "betting system". I don't want the new player who reads up on "Kendo23" and says "that sounds good, i'll try it but with bigger initial stakes", then proceeds to lose £000's on one night getting caught out.
All the best Kendo, it seems you're doing well so far, just bear in mind what i've said above, if it doesn't go your way a couple of times, don't be tempted to up the ante, the averages are not in your favour in the long run.
washer of pots - agreed 100%, I posted to this effect on another thread, "Martingale" will inevitably chew you up and spit you out at some point, at least with the "Kendo23" (as i'll now refer to it) if you do lose, you'll have spent a fair bit of time playing.
I've got a book somewhere that has around 3500 spins recorded from 1 roulette table (not consecutively, and definitely not recorded by myself), if I can be arsed I'll put them into a file and let everyone have a look.
If anything i'm trying to stress to people that are new to the forum, or just new to roulette the perils of any sort of "betting system". I don't want the new player who reads up on "Kendo23" and says "that sounds good, i'll try it but with bigger initial stakes", then proceeds to lose £000's on one night getting caught out.
All the best Kendo, it seems you're doing well so far, just bear in mind what i've said above, if it doesn't go your way a couple of times, don't be tempted to up the ante, the averages are not in your favour in the long run.