hi guys,
just don't get too excitet about the headline of this topic. :)
the attached pdf (which will be attached by Victor a bit later because it's too large to be uploaded) does not really give a solution. still it shows that a solution might be found in the well known red/black/odd/even differences. it also explains why, because of these differences, roulette is not totally random.
I think it is an interesting read anyway and might even "challenge" the math guys among us.
cheers
hans :)
EDIT: http://betselection.cc/uploads/hanshuckebein/a_solution_to_roulette.pdf
No pdf...
Mail it to me at twocatsam@cox.net, please.
Sam
@Sam & Hans:
http://betselection.cc/uploads/hanshuckebein/a_solution_to_roulette.pdf
Hope it helps :)
Cheers!
thanks Victor :thumbsup:
... very intresting article.... 10 red/odd versus 8 red/even, for black the same....and if one looks at the numbers 7,8 and 9 over 36 spins on average they appear less then the 1,2,3,4,5,6,0 numbers.
1,2,3,4,5,6,0 seem to appear 24 times on average in an cicly of 36 spins and the numbers 7,8 and 9 only 12. Off course sometimes more or less.
7 groups of numbers with each 4 numbers= 28 numbers versus 3 groups of numbers with each 3 numbers which= 9 numbers.
The difference can be seen. Can the difference also been seen with the 10/RO against 8/RE?
If so probaly over 48 outcomes ( spins ) ??
What can we learn from this??
Not to bet on Black Oneven and Red Even?? Only Red Oneven and Black Even.
If the Red Oneven and Black Even are in the small majority then they should somehow appear more in 36 or 48 spins.
Carlitos 8)
Line 13-18 and Line 31-36 are the only 2 lines that don't contain any RED ODD or BLACK EVEN numbers at all.
So a bet on the other 4 lines (in effect a double dozen bet) covers them all.
Bet those 4 each spin with mild up/down progression, maybe?
A.
Nah - doesn't help. The ROBE situation has been discussed to death and, by itself, gives no advantage. The reason is that although the probabilities for the 3 possible outcomes (Win, Lose Break even) are different between betting RO versus RE, or BO versus BE, the important one is the difference between losing and winning and, on a Euro wheel, is 0.027 in both cases.
Unfortunately the author doesn't go far enough in his explanation to give any useful guidance for developing a successful method, although he hints that it may be possible. But the point of his article was, I think, to demonstrate that the layout may be such that the traditional way of viewing the game, as random and hence may be analysed using the random walk or Markov chain models, is not valid. And the point of that, is that it invalidates Gambler's Ruin. If that is true then it is good news indeed.
...yes the author wanted to proof that using roulette as an demonstration model for randomness does not stand because its inperfection..... i have read many articles were roulette is being presented to demonstrate its randomness, probaly a lot of people here too.
Now, roulette has more inperfections.....
The BIG question is, are these inperfections to be used in the gamblers advantage??
According to the article the writer seems to think so.
One thing that also stroke my mind is that it did remind me of CEH and his win3million website..... did he not mention a few things that are similar to the article??
Sorry for going there.....but i rememberd he pionting out to the 10's and 8's inperfection.....
Did he realy had something or did it just happen that he read the same article and made the best of it......??
The article writes about sequence and partial sequence, were sometimes it better to play red odd then red even....
Were does an partial sequence begins, when we have 2 even changes of the same, like 2 reds, or 2 odds come inn.....??
Carlitos 8)
Quote from: Carlitos on April 21, 2015, 06:06:19 PM
...yes the author wanted to proof that using roulette as an demonstration model for randomness does not stand because its inperfection..... i have read many articles were roulette is being presented to demonstrate its randomness, probaly a lot of people here too.
Now, roulette has more inperfections.....
The BIG question is, are these inperfections to be used in the gamblers advantage??
According to the article the writer seems to think so.
I totally agree with you here. Still I also agree with sqzbox that this imbalance has been looked at for ages. The document itself is more than 20 years old and casinos still exist.
one can easily create a few even money bets in which are more blacks than reds and vice versa. but I guess that doesn't seem to do the trick at all. [smiley]aes/confused.png[/smiley]
cheers
hans :)
is funny how author only saw imbalance between even chances...perhaps he could have looked at imbalance between 1 digit numbers like 0-9 and 2 digit numbers 10-36...just curious
The thing is, does all these imbalances or inperfections automaticaly mean that it can lead to an advantage for the gambler??
We all know that the action in roulette happens on the wheel, we also all know that every number on the wheel has as much change to appear as any other number.
So their they go the imbalances or inperfections.......
One thing that i notice is that some weak inperfections are made up by strong inperfections.
Like i mentioned about the 7,8 and 9 numbers, the seem to appear far less then the other numbers 1,2,3,4,5,6 and 0. However, if one looks at their even changes then the 7 and 9 are made up of four red and odd, 7,9 and 19, 27.
The reds and odds which are appearantly in the majority.
Carlitos 8)
Quote from: maestro on April 22, 2015, 11:22:12 AM
is funny how author only saw imbalance between even chances...perhaps he could have looked at imbalance between 1 digit numbers like 0-9 and 2 digit numbers 10-36...just curious
if we take away red/black, even/odd, high/low ... what's left? numbers!
maestro, are you suggesting that numbers are the things to look at? ???
cheers
hans :)
.... for that matter, one got 10 1digit numbers, 10 2digit numbers starting with an 1, 10 2 digit numbers starting with an 2 and only 7 2 digit numbers starting with an 3.
Carlitos 8)
Hello Carlitos,
I just started a thread which you might be interested in where I am using the RED ODD, RED EVEN, BLACK ODD and BLACK EVEN numbers as groups.
It's here.....
http://betselection.cc/bally's-blog/bally's-final-solution-(hopefully!)/msg37109/#new
One of these 4 groups can go missing frequently for 20+ spins.
cheers
Hello Horus,
Thanks for pointing out your thread.
The thing is, is there an advantage to be gained from roulette inperfection.
As we also know that every number on the wheel has as much change of showing.
Good point, some EC can sleep for an while however that's also the case for colums, numbers etc....
Carlitos 8)