+ Register

[Albalaha]

Although it is true that every single spin is totally independent of the last ones but sequential probability is also as much true. It is true that due to the lack of interdependence of spins, even 10 or 20 reds could hit in a stretch but it is also true that 30 or more reds(or any other EC) have never been seen in an unbroken succession. This is due to degree of certainty of the counterpart EC hitting and breaking the unbroken chain of continuing hits of one particular EC till eternity.
                              Remember, I am cautiously using the term, "Virtual Limits" or assumed limits as I do not want to deny the maths that tells there can not be any actual limit. The smaller coverage a bet has, the higher is the risk to go across the virtual limits that I am going to suggest here.
In my researches, analysis, studies, plays, simulations, I can suggest the virtual limit to be 15x of the break even point of a bet.

So, the virtual limits for an Even Chances bet like Red in roulette or banker in baccarat is 30 spins/hands. It means, one EC(like red) may not hit till 29 consecutive spins.

The virtual limit of a double dozens/double columns/24 numbers is 23 spins

The virtual limit of a dozen/column is 45 spins.

The virtual limit of a linebet/double street/6 numbers is 90 spins

The virtual limit of a street/ 3 nbrs is 180 spins

The virtual limit of 2 nbrs played together for one hit is 270 spins

The virtual limit of a single number is 555 spins.


Again, I insist that there is no actual limits of any bet but these limits have never been crossed in any real data, to the best of my knowledge, belief and information. Please correct me with citing as to where this limit was ever broken in a real casino, if possible, with proof.

[TheMagician]

It is a beautiful sentiment, and desire, to understand and set a limit (of a childish hope). to what is permanently governed by the LLN (Law of Large Numbers) that through its Strong and Weak law invalidates your entire premise. We are NOT dealing with a Lebesque Integral essentially limiting the mathematical theory of probability, which you so desperately seem to desire in order to make your theory fit the illusory frame of calculable order.

I will not waste my energy teaching you how to handle the above theorems, or even basic game theory, mean deviation for grouped data, implementation of a variance curve for each set bet selection, and so on, that easily invalidates each and every statement you just made in your post.

I leave it to you, finding out the errors of your flawed reasoning at the high-priced expense of your own ignorance.

[Albalaha]

@TheMagician,
                It is my first and last warning to you to keep your tone under check while replying my topics. Instead of reading what I wrote and coming up with any reasoned contradiction you started to bark upon me here. Even Bayes, a renowned member here and moderator of maths section approved the idea of having virtual limits in his posts and to replies to my PMs. If you can not discuss sensibly, stay away from my topics.

[Albalaha]

Your logic doesn't seem to work in real world and you failed to show any evidence of what you stated to be true. Come up with proofs and till then give your hollow mind a bit of rest. Mathematically, casino gambling is unbeatable so why the hell you are into a gambling forum? Go and try to teach math to primary kids. Are you an agent of Steve the scammer, trying to prove only his device works to win?

[Albalaha]

The virtual limit of successive hits of a bet:

1 straight up bet: 7 times
2 nbrs/a split bet: 10 times
3 numbers/street: 12 times
4 nbrs/quarter bet: 15 times
6 nbrs/doublestreet: 18 times
12 nbrs/a dozen: 22 times
18 nbrs/EC bet:       30 times
24 nbrs/double dozens
or double columns:  45 times

Since these are the virtual/historically recorded limits, you might not see any of them ever in your plays or tests or casino stories but they may happen anyday.