There's a mathematical curiosity for having a 36-number layout coverage and yet win +1 unit on a hit:

How can it be?

Targetting #19 as the only number to leave open, the bet goes like this:

3 chips go to number 0
72 chips to low (Covers 1 to 18 )
48 chips to 3rd dozen (Covers 25 to 36)
16 chips to corner 20/24 (Covers 20-21-23-24)
4 chips to straight-up number 22

If any number other than 19 is spun, you win +1.

You need a table with "Le Partage" rule for this bet to work.

---

---

Testing the validity of this bet with Roulette Xtreme.

First you need to enable Le Partage:

[attachimg=1[size=78%]][/size]

Then proceed to test the winning bets:

At a straight-up win, we win 4 x 36 = 144 chips, minus 143 chips layed = +1

[attachimg=2]

At the corner, we win 16 x 9 = 144 chips, we lost 143 chips layed = +1

[attachimg=3]

At the dozen, we win 48 x 3 = 144 chips, taking in to account 143 chips layed = +1

[attachimg=5]

At the even chance, we win 72 x 2 = 144 chips, subtracting 143 chips layed = +1

[attachimg=4]

If Zero shows up, dealer returns us 108 chips as payout for it, then takes away losing chips: while from the 72 chips layed at low by "Le Partage" rule enabled at the even chances dealer takes 36 and we get 36 chips back. As we won 108 by zero + 36 chips back from low = 144 chips - 143 layed = +1 unit profit even when zero hits! Positively letting only 1 out of the 37 numbers as a loss, and winning +1 unit at 36 numbers.

[attachimg=6]

---

It is important to notice at regular Roulette without Le partage, you have a net loss of 35 chips when zero hits so we really need this Le Partage splitting rule:

[attachimg=7]

---

Of course, the downside is losing spin costs 143 chips. But for doing that bet your REALLY have to do next spin and want the very least numbers against, this "tricky bet" can do.

Also you can mathematically split all the bets in half to win +0.5 instead of +1... but the problem is the Zero. The dealer won't be too fond of you splitting a chip in two to bet 1 and a half on zero    

---

A liked trigger is to bet after 2 instances of the same number are spun. But we've all seen 3 in a row. Thanks to Namor for the tip.

Cheers!,
Vic

Remember:

This is a mathematical curiosity only. You just can't play this and expect to make a long-term profit. For the very reason that a number is expected to show up once in every 37 spin and you are laying 149 units.

---

The only imaginable way to use this if you really, really, REALLY have to bet 1 single "hit and run" spin.

This is the only way I know for having the numerical coverage at 36 numbers for you, and only 1 number for the bank.

As a single-spin strategy, the best way being playing it only 1 time in your lifetime and then leave it alone if you win, so that unit is yours forever.

Yes, you can leave other numbers out apart from #19 open by moving the chips while respecting the proportionality.

For instance, using HIGH for the even chance and the 1ST DOZEN for the outside and moving the corner and straight-up bet to the 13/18 double-street inside.

You can target the numbers in the splits: 13/16 15/18 19/22 21/24. Perhaps if one of them shows "enough times" (x4, x5... to your personal criterion) while you are betting and you want to try your once-in-a-lifetime shot!

How about on a no zero wheel.

Awesome VLS!


Didn't think it was possible.

Can we target any number or only number 19?

If we can target all numbers (maybe not the zero) then I would play it this way.


For LIVE wheel.

I would go to random.org. Program it to show one number out of 37 on a click of a button. Now I try and guess which number will appear. If I am correct then I would randomly chose a number on the LIVE wheel (table) to bet against.

This I feel is not random versus random as I am not a perfect random number generator.


Can I be right twice in a row often?

A similar setup with less units;


1u    Zero
36u  Low
8u    Corner 20/24
2u    Number 22
24u  Doz 3

This method has no merit in real play. It is still better than playing martingale.

Very nice topic ...
I just love it when you explain in details and add screen-shots to describe a complete idea.

Nice work.

Quote from: Sputnik on June 09, 2013, 05:59:13 AM
Very nice topic ...
I just love it when you explain in details and add screen-shots to describe a complete idea.

Nice work.

Thank you Ego.

Guys, remember the first line at the post's heading, this is a mathematical curiosity only (hence the post at the Math&Statistics section).

Do feel like exploring it, but remember this is not an actual method.

Cheers!

wierd why i bet:


$1 on zero
$36 on Low
$24 on 3rd Dozen
$8 on 20 - 24 Corner
$2 on 22


I betted $71 but got back $54.

Oh ignatus formula is wrong.

Quote from: weddings on June 09, 2013, 05:13:58 PM
wierd why i bet:


$1 on zero
$36 on Low
$24 on 3rd Dozen
$8 on 20 - 24 Corner
$2 on 22


I betted $71 but got back $54.


[size=78%]Oh ignatus formula is wrong.[/size]

It was not my idea, just knew the same bet with less units on the table.

QuoteI betted $71 but got back $54.

That is due to erroneous bet on #0. The bet suggested by Victor can be multiplied but not divided/downsized.
                      Millions of virtual monkeys may type a Shakespeare novel but even billions of actual ones can't.
No offence meant.

BUMP for a friend! 

Thanks Victor ...