Thank you horus for reminding us about RD Ellison, and for publishing the communications with Leibon. He was surprised when I contacted him wondering how I had achieved this but the answer was in his book. His reputation may have been impacted by some legal issues which you can research. What I enjoyed most with his book, setting aside his naive techniques, beliefs and attempts at humour, were the practical insights into psychological play.

I cannot see why there should be any advantage in applying Ellison's efforts to the American wheel as opposed to the French wheel. In the long term it would always balance even despite the evident column three clusterings on the American wheel. It comes down to when you start and stop, and that alone may not be good enough, let alone using small samples and toy roulette wheels.

An answer to beat roulette is to look deeper, below the surface, and find short cycle patterns that are regular predictable phenomena but invisible to the untrained eye. No doubt there are other ways also. Those are problems easily solved given sufficient time ( 10,000 hours - Tipping Point).

LG Holloway shows some remarkable and practical insights, and most importantly goes into the psychology of the player which to my mind is the most difficult and engaging task for the serious professional. Credit must be given to his outstanding, inconsistent and controversial Publisher Lyle Stuart whose passion was high stakes gambling, particularly Baccarrat in which he won major tournaments. Read the obituary in the Guardian. That in itself is some piece of work.

Quote from: horus on March 22, 2015, 05:01:59 PM

But I like the idea of a cold stream with high running counts starting to warm up a bit. Things definately come in waves/cycles. I think the trick behind all this will be to figure out what the 'sweet spot' for the running counts are. Playing single numbers, I think playing up till it reaches 10 could still be a bit costly. Maybe 7-8 would be better and something like 3-4 for the splits. But that's just an early guesstimate. Keeping a relatively low running count would allow for ramping up the stakes on a winning run without things getting out of hand. It's important to make the most of it when things are going your way.

Thanks horus

As 'the one far above' and with a keen eye you post some very interesting material on roulette in particular. It is my personal view that roulette has vastly more opportunity for leveraged profit ( relative to risk bank size) than any other casino game. It is a game not understood, which is just as well, for this enables serious players to take notes, record data, and even take along workbook schedules allowing recommended bets. This may be more comfortable on live internet but I have sat in the casino and seen players adjacent with miniature wheels and arrows, bundles of paper, books and note pads with multi coloured pens.

I often play with black and red pens and use the provided casino roulette card to write out my matrix codes spin by spin for four streams or sets of codes.  As I have been doing this for at least ten years at the same casino they just think I am another nutter and do not even blink, unless I bring out a mobile phone and then it is keep clear. Of course their cameras will have seen my detail and I never attempt to hide my notes and sometimes will even talk to the pit boss about what I am about to target. They have seen it 'fail' enough over the years to have no fear -lol. One sweet Chinese dealer suggested I must be a multi-millionaire with such a 'system'.

As always, it is how you handle the 'tools' that makes all the difference, and that is why the hours of practice and refinement have been put in.

As always, the hardest part of winning at roulette, although I can say this having invested the time, is self management. Knowing when is sufficient, and when to stop. It does take years and I have a close friend, brilliant, yet still has doubts over 'compulsive behaviour' patterns when he has walked away with a loss after achieving 'sufficient' earlier gains.

The casino cameras have seen me win and lose, so there is comfortable accord. I do not seek to take excess profit from my regular local or matters would become uncomfortable. I try to keep a positive edge nevertheless on the macro scale while experimenting and improving efficiencies on the micro scale.

I hope you enjoy the LGH book. Note he does not give away his hard won specific details ( very smart) but he does talk in principle and with sufficient examples to guide your own very valuable research and development.

As a visual analyst I prefer to graph data and the optimum areas and timing then become very clear.

My bet utilises two phases and the second phase, being a 'recovery' phase, does utilise some RTM principles and treads warily to beat 'gamblers fallacy', although in rare, very rare situations, the extreme skew behaviour is best left well alone. I can play through it eventually but the drawdown and time consumption is just not very efficient, so I try to read the signs and exit stage left when advised.

It may be of some use to you but as I bet an optimum spread of nine single target numbers, my recovery will involve close repeat appearance three times, more often than not, of these targets within multiple up to 7 spin attacks, after not appearing a prior 11-21 ( average spread) spins. Sometimes these outcomes will be hit, hit, hit, all within one or two spins spreads and the earlier loss is quickly recovered and in fact often results in profit. Sometimes it is slower. This is more easily managed as it is all flat staked. I do not chase loss to extremes. However the spread and distribution of outcomes for this second phase has been based on empirical evidence, and not probability theory. There is indeed a sweet spot for phase one and phase two (when required) for my bet. The sweetest spot though is to exit with perfect timing.

One key to success/ efficiency is to step outside the live game for a while during a correction ebbing phase and go virtual. There are triggers and signs that enable this. Correction phases are full of false signals that the unwary would chase and thus result in catastrophic loss. Empirical research has shown where the stops and starts occur using groups of numbers as I have outlined. Yes to reduce risk exposure you can play splits or streets I prefer - but note if you have a winning strategy why dilute your power and that is why I play straight up always and if streets are targets I play the individual numbers within.

However while being defensive toward loss, increasingly I attack wins so will step parlay say 2-3-5 'when things are going (my) your way'.

Roulette is a game of short cycles within cycles, and the payouts at 35-1 enable quick recovery from loss, and thus more efficient betting ( and drawing far less attention) than blackjack say, with much smaller risk bank, and risk of loss.

Lastly I would note in this context ( and thank you horus for your excellent ideas and effort) the practical advantage* of having a playing partner ( or part time mentor/ observer) at the table with you or nearby who can also understand the ebb and flow of this fluid game.

* thanks to recent post by The Crow.

Peter

All the very best for the successful operation.

You have produced a very helpful methodology that when applied with your suggested caution can consistently and practically  achieve some successful gains. Thank you for your honest efforts to challenge prior roulette expectations.
xxvv

Thanks for raising this question Sputnik.

I address this from time to time and my answers now will differ from what I thought 3 months ago, 12 months ago, and those were different to several years prior. In other words our views develop, and eventually mature. Also new information comes to hand. A life principle is that we access appropriate ( next step) material automatically when we are ready for it/ are searching for it.

This is how I view the situation today and this is my personal view - others may well well disagree.

Roulette is my favourite live casino game. I like the atmosphere of a well managed and respected casino. Live B+M play has a special quality. Adverse attitudes from staff, dealers or other patrons would immediately cancel a session and choice of locale. In my personal experience within the boutique casino where I play 3-5 times per week, staff and management are mostly friendly and helpful. The MD has a unique and very engaging hands-on attitude with his staff, and frequently is accessible and seen chatting with any staff member from cleaner to bar staff to senior management within the public space. As always the principle within an organisation the values from the top carry through the management chain.

No mistaking however, they are there to promote their business and to win, but evidently to do so with style and a smile. It helps to be known as a valued customer, but of course you still have to overcome the house edge, and hospitality can play into the house's hand.

Latest research in creativity psychology and brain plasticity demonstrates we are fundamentally intrigued and attracted to pattern seeking and analysis, and further by the attraction of random sequences of outcomes and rotating wheels. They can mesmerise.
And we endeavour to try to make sense of all the outcomes.It is a challenge.

All the above indicates a very personal, somewhat subjective view of roulette and it's charms.

Many come and most fail. They always return sooner or later, and the roulette tables are occupied by usually regular players. Yes, by being there every day of the week sometimes I can recognize  the others, and must acknowledge I am a regular player too. I have several friends, acquaintances, familiar faces, both sides of the tables.

Question is, can this familiarity  be turned to advantage as an investment for my time and particularly my money.

My current view is yes with qualifications, and also a massive reminder at just how slippery this game can be, and particularly in the context of all the live distractions scheduled above.

Observation of my own behaviour patterns in the past 12 months, even in the context of having some specialised knowledge of the game, reveals weaknesses in the theoretical ideal of the hard nosed sharp professional.

This attitude can be honed with practice and with success, but as I have frequently written, even with a bet that has a proven edge over substantial testing, the player needs to be prepared to sometimes leave the casino after a loss.

Now I play usually flat staking but do aggressively step parlays when in a winning cycle in order to accentuate  the positives. There is a fine edge to that and I have succeeded at times to draw disaster out of the jaws of success by pressing too hard too soon. I see it as a journey and my frequent visits are often with very low RB, in order to test a theory of 'traction'/ 'engagement'.

For example I recently achieved a 50 unit to 413 unit completion in 27 spins ( 30 minutes). That day the session unfolded as an A type, and my behaviour was impeccable. At other times though I have made poor choices in aggressive parlay timing and psychologically have not been in the zone for success. This research and learning continues and as I see with colleagues the slippery pole can be there much of the time, despite 'knowledge'.

I am just being candid. Progress continues but it is fair to sum it as 5 steps forward 4 steps back often. The retracements are still being studied and the 'correct' rules are still being drafted.

Yes the RB size is critical and resources used must be 'free money'. Again and again we seek to accentuate the opportunities for success with short cycle play and 'dampen'/ mitigate the negative corrective cycles. This is fundamental.

My current view is that an optimum session RB of 500 units should be sufficient for the way I play, with a maximum of say 2000 units in reserve, and a 2500 units in 24 hour delay reserve.

I accept the advice of one of my mentors that it is pointless to go into a casino with insufficient resources. But he was a progression man and played with  5000 to 10,000 unit RB ($25,000- $50,000) or USD/ GBP. He always wanted a flat stake method and would have played with $100 units if it was proven correct. At that time my knowledge was still forming.

Today I would be confident to play in Auckland or Sydney/ Melbourne with $25 units given clear resources at the time and with as I mentioned above,  2500 or 5000 units.  I would not do that in my local casino because here we come to the nub. At that level of play the profit take outs would attract adverse attention.

Yesterday I played in my local casino at the little RNG machine even ( two other players) and turned 40 units to 90 units within 10 spins. it really need not be any more complex than that. One of my earlier traits to unlearn is to leave a pleasant game ( obviously while ahead) instead of enjoying the company and the  atmosphere, so as to not risk experiencing the inevitable corrective cycles.
When the unit values are much higher the choice to leave becomes easier because the real money value (not the chip number) over rides the poorer choice to stay on. The freedom to up and go at will is the premium value of roulette, as I watch the poker players in the tournament at the other end of the great hall locked into their games.

So, in summary, in short bursts, and with successfully applied specialised knowledge, roulette can be a profitable travelling game, but there are huge exposures to various risks at all levels, and the player will have to train and train and train to become adept.

I have stated elsewhere it should be possible to achieve average compounding +5% return on RB per day of play but house limits and human frailties will erode that efficiency, still enabling a lot of fun and a pleasant lifestyle given a real bank of say 5000 x $5 being $25,000 free money.

I hope to test exactly that formula within the next couple of years once my other responsibilities and contracts can be delegated or completed. But it is limited to a certain practical level and self assessment and self management, or better still, a playing partner and trusted companion needs constant vigilance.

So what is the alternative or parallel investment.

I am not interested in other casino activities unless a small proportion of roulette profit goes into a jackpot slot. I have won many jackpots this way and consider myself 'lucky'. That helps also. But that is still speculative.

Specialised knowledge in the financial markets accessing smart use of leveraged funds is really the very best approach but is not usually known or understood by casino players. In that field a 3-5 year plan really sorts your priorities.

It makes the stressing on the casino floor rather pointless, but nevertheless can open the door to access of a small portion of income to be used for casino activity. That to me is the best investment option. You pay proven top professionals to deal with the variables and stand aside, in order to plan ahead. However you manage risk ( variance) in all its forms.

So to return to Sputnik's great question - if you had the money ( well in excess of $25,000) - then roulette makes a great mobile cash machine for world cities, for fun, travel and gifts - but not for bigger, more powerful and better goals that can really assist society where multiple millions of dollars are needed to make a difference for the common good.

This is a subjective note and others may well disagree, or not understand. This is not the context for me to go into details on the hidden financial models and opportunities that exist in our present society.

However I have chosen to prioritise other investments ahead of roulette for the reasons stated above.

As always, it takes money to make money, but specialised knowledge has massive value whether in roulette, baccarat, poker or the financial markets. It is knowing how to access this, and when and where to apply this and to make good strategic choices in accordance with a carefully researched plan, that will bring success and happiness.

Good questions deserve full answers.

Nice to see you back GG and thanks for the dark but ironic filmic reference. You are most welcome to apply but I already have partners in Perth (central) and Sydney (east) . Of course my notes are intended to push several limits and boundaries, but I am sure you appreciate the value and intention of what lies within, which is why I spell out so much detail for those who are serious roulette players. if you have any questions I will be very pleased to assist.

Quote from: horus on March 01, 2015, 07:22:14 PM
This is a pretty good book and worth a review/discussion.

The authors views on betting strategies are based on his analysis of more than 12 million games. His findings lead him to believe that you can quit a winner in up to 90% of the rounds of nearly even odds games.

His results show that progressive betting can trump flat betting. I think a lot of us try all kinds of different kamikaze progressions early on in our quest and then mistakingly start to think that we have to find a winning flat betting strategy instead. The key really as the book shows is knowing when to quit and what are reasonable expectations to have.


Thank you horus. Your refreshing contributions are really appreciated. I certainly agree with the two principles emphasised here being 'knowing when to quit' and 'reasonable expectations'.

I would like to add to that 'knowing when to attack',  'bet selection' and 'game selection'.

The term 'reasonable expectations' is a vast library of practical knowledge where the due diligence (+ 10,000 hours) has been applied. It used to be that an unfortunate devotee of a game might spend a lifetime, and go through a fortune never finding any answers. In the communications of our time access to knowledge is literally at the fingertips but still must be applied and consistently achieved. We are all in the business of reducing variance, whether in the financial markets or at the tables. Risk is variance and variance is risk.

Regarding choice of game, my personal preference is roulette.

Roulette offers access to many types of bet, and it is my view that it is possible to play roulette with a suitable but relatively modest bank and with a bet 'family' that has a significant edge over the house sufficient to enable flat staking, and conservatively stepped unit values under special conditions being 10-20% of the time to attack more efficiently and effectively.

Looking forward to the views from the book. My belief is that the player can quit a winner in roulette about two thirds of the time but that losses are mitigated and winnings are accentuated. Handling loss is a major aspect of the game.
Best wishes
xxvv

Nick

Thanks so much for this work. This will provide opportunities for some real accelerated understanding and insight into the mysteries of roulette. This thread may become very active. I really look forward to various views and opinions in coming weeks, and will endeavour to contribute something worthwhile myself.
XXVV

Thanks Mike for bringing this comprehensive site to our attention. A mine of information.\R

Teorulte, you have encouraged some really interesting subject matter, and I share with Bayes a real love for the little book written by the Englishman in New York who was smart enough to make enough profits from US Casinos and Racetracks to be able to support his family and send his son to College in the US.

RK mentions 'recoverability' and if I understand this correctly it is what I might term a 'forgiving' bet, one where the outlay if the attack fails, can be quickly recovered, and if a mistake is made (human error) it can be recovered from swiftly.

I will give you an example that I was describing to a friend this morning. I target 9 numbers and I flat stake for up to 6 attempts. My range of flat stake returns on a single play can be from +27 through to -18.  The decay curve though demonstrates that most hits are on the first attempt.  If this fails I lose 54 units. However when I win, at best I can earn 27 units so the loss can be partly recovered quickly, especially if your research data shows that it is worthwhile to play 3 quick attacks on the earlier  target loss, after it has eventually appeared, so that actually up to 81 units can be 'recovered'.

You have to be wary/ aware of Gamblers Fallacy but if your bet accurately measures and attacks a characteristic that is cyclic, such as repeaters or patterns of clustering or other characteristics as noted by your correspondents, then empirical testing will have shown the optimum start and stops, and you can use short cycles to your advantage. The loss cycles then can be partly or fully neutralised or better, and you can build on those happy cycles that win step by step one after another.

In the case of the 9 target bet mentioned above I do not simply select 9 random numbers. They have to be selected as being a qualifying group that has demonstrated a greater likelihood to appear in the short cycle ( say next 6 -18 spins) more than the 37/9 ratio so as to enable profit to be taken. Why they are more likely to appear is based on pattern observations on huge ( multiple millions of spins)samples. The number of targets needs to be carefully considered also - too many and you lose the efficiency of your focus target and you are odds on - never a good bet - too few and you might be waiting too long for a bite. One of my friends selects 4 targets, and the fewer the number of targets the more 'efficient' the bet as long as you consider the trade offs, one of which is 'recoverability'. Fewer targets easier to recover.

There will be some who insist that spins in roulette are independent. On one level they are correct. On another level there is a connection between outcomes using cluster analysis, so that past clustering can certainly have an impact on the immediate outcomes following.

An analogy can be found in fluid dynamics and the flow in a stream and response to obstacles through eddies and short cycle aberrations.

It is these situations that can be viewed and studied by the roulette player and after sufficient practice can see familiar scenarios (patterns) that recur quite reliably, some 85-95% of the time given specific triggered circumstances/ windows, thus enabling short term profit.

Performance will vary but not sufficiently to erase profit with good skills, study, timing and money management by the player.

By adjusting bets to take advantage of short term aberrations, then profit can be obtained, as long as timing is efficient.

Purpose of this note is to encourage further research. Some will disagree of course, and others may have much more to contribute.

Thanks in advance for the contributions which will follow.
R.

This is a very good analysis Teorulte. The idea from Tomla is excellent, will grind a successful outcome if you are patient enough or able to seamlessly link sessions.  I believe studying play outcomes in 37 spins cycles is an incredibly fruitful source of further worthwhile ideas. I have a colleague who has built a winning bet using such a window parameter.

Here is a thought to try to laterally extend your ideas. Take a look at your result data and prepare a timeline that illustrates the session overall outcomes one after another, and then look to see how these distribute and cluster or space.

What is the best cluster. What is the worst.

Try to measure the duration of the 'worst' outcome sequence ( session by session) and try to design a bet that might overcome this. That may be unlikely to be achieved but by applying the one unit per session step see how long it might take to dig out of the hole. I will not make any assumptions here so see what unfolds.

Another way you might consider is to define a trigger stop, a warning based on the grand data overview, at what might be a sensible place to pause, and then find a suitable trigger or spacing based on prior experimental observation, when you can resume live again.

In other words on the roadway of session outcomes you receive a warning of a likely pothole/ obstruction ahead, and through the benchmarks of research data you go to virtual play mode and then resume when the signal indicates danger past. The sceptics will say you never know what is ahead but in cluster analysis you do get to understand the families of lengths of clusters of types of patterns, and you may then be able to 'read' the game and the path ahead even if dimly rather than being blind.

This research alone will trigger the inevitable inputs from the sceptics, but persevere and explore the types of cycles you will encounter and see if you can beat this one. I recommend you look at cluster analysis which can give you insights into 'random' outcomes.

I will add a further point for your consideration.

Roulette can be beaten, especially when played in relatively short cycles. The type of bet characteristic though will determine how hard or how easy you make it for yourself. There are cycles within cycles. There can be cycles of individual spin outcomes, but also cycles of whole session ( 37 spin) outcomes. Use these changes of scale to your advantage,

By adopting a technique of always playing for the higher outcomes or second and third dozens, you are merely a passive victim to random distribution and sometimes will be 'lucky', but generally will be fighting the current of Ecart, and will frequently lose.

Consider the idea of trying to build a 'diversion in the stream', or a 'net' that can catch opportunities that are potential winners, ie have a greater skew already that you can take advantage of.

Say a form of repeat, or cluster combination within a group of finales, or streets, or sixaines, where there is short term clumping/ clustering. These regularly occur and by filtering out the other non attracting stuff you can possibly take advantage of these types of outcomes using a 37 spin cycle for the European wheel, or 38 for the US wheel.

These are conceptual  ideas for exploration, still to be fleshed out, and do not allude necessarily to any specific method of mine or others. I hope you do not find these metaphors annoying, but they are visual tools as well and will assist your imagination and creativity. There will be some who disagree of course. Good hunting.

Re HSBC and banksters... excellent example. Compare also the RBS et al. who actually have been shown to have a dirty tricks division to 'assist' problem customers only to have a hidden agenda which sucks defaulting businesses into a black hole for re-packaging and processing. Similar ethical principles to packaged junk bonds. All came to a head in 2008, but of course has now re-continued and reached ever new lows which can guarantee 2015 will be a year of much social unrest in Europe, and a likely replay of 2008/9 only messier.

You might like to draw inferences to HSBC but I couldn't possibly comment...you might find the Moderators/ Admin act quite quickly when it comes to risk of upsetting litigious entities with printing presses producing fiat currency 24/7.  The cracks are starting to show however in that game.

For those who do care about where all this is heading access Keiser Report on RT.com.  That will be bound to upset some people.
Also look into the Economics of Happiness and crypto currencies that leave the banksters stranded. Helena Norberg-Hodge is a beautiful multi-lingual Swedish Economist who is based in my old hometown in Devon. Watch this space.

All the above is one reason that I value casinos.

Back to the Blog.....

It is a little bit like attending one's own funeral to observe some of these posts. To be damned by faint praise is an interesting phenomenon which I understand goes back to Alexander Pope in 1733, but more probably to the origins of human fickle behaviour.
Of course I received the obligatory 4 letter words from Rolex Watch - not very articulate thanks, but at least an amusing response.
And not to put too fine a point on it, it is astonishing and actually very offensive to have Green Hulk mention the CEH context when that entity actually stole it is estimated, over $1.72 million GBP, in a pre-meditated but convoluted con fraud, especially from roulette loving Europeans as well as this kiwi. That HSBC actually hosted the fraudulent account at Brighton was an inspired PR spin coup for them...

Oh well, back to the Blog...

I may be one of the few to say it here, but I have  been writing on roulette forums for no more than four years, and as I have stated before,  I started by default really, and in reaction to being conned by that Swiss Scam. I have no one to blame other than myself because the art of a con artist is always to ( pretend) to give the target what is really desired and to elaborate on the theme so as to extract the maximum.

Through the practice of writing and the passionate desire to try to find genuine ways to know and to beat roulette, I soon came upon Esoito as a Moderator among the Forums.

Through many hundreds of posts, where he was on call, I have always found him impeccably fair, honest and reliable.

Over recent years I have come to know him as a personal friend and through his experience as a retired professional journalist, I have relied upon him as a totally professional editor and colleague who is in search of genuine success in the casino or in any investment field, just like many of us.

I am particularly grateful that he maintained a consistent and impartial quality control in terms of guiding this forum through many tests and trials, and enabled a golden phase of unspoiled calm and good will within this Forum.

He weeded out the troublemakers whose mission in life was to pollute, upset, annoy, insult, slander and cause trouble. You know who they are.

One of the first warning signs of childish emotional upset and imbalance is the use of bad and inappropriate language. The case of Rolex Watch comes to mind. At one phase his posts were so full of anger, spleen and frustration it was clear he was in trouble, and following that he sent abusive PM's to several and one including myself. I explained to him why communication in that vein was unacceptable, and that it actually undermined any worth of what he was trying to say, but he never replied.

There are several entities like that, and some far worse who are internet trolls. That behaviour does border on criminal at times and really has no place amongst adults. It is childish. Some seem to giggle at seeing off colour remarks in print - it is at that level - to see how far you can push the limits - just as a child does with a parent or guardian.

This is a roulette forum and is termed a gambling forum researching bet selection. it is one of the best because it has been really well managed this year. The Moderators and Administration are to be congratulated. Gambling can become Investment.

Esoito, as one of the team, set the bar at the chosen level and I really respect that someone could take a position like that. It might not always be as I would have acted, but nevertheless was necessary. The results speak for themselves with a calm and polite environment, or at least it was until recently.

A forum will not work when self governed and where there is no quality control. Also quality control needs fast action, not decision by committee. Life experience teaches that.

The recent behaviour by one member who has been an irritant to this Forum and many other Forums for years is a case in point where the unceasing need to be in the spotlight and causing dissension and ill will and a series of posts where he was screaming for attention, reached shocking levels.

Now this fellow has appeared at the new Forum and immediately has caused negative reaction before it even opened its doors.

The format of open Forums needs to be rigorously reviewed or there will be continuing losses as serious writers will avoid stormy waters. There is a role for healthy debate and mature, robust criticism and review nevertheless.  It might be better to take a deep breath and simply carefully read what has been offered. No need for glib, smart and cynical reactionary posts. It takes a lot of time and effort to write a published piece. Respect that.

This note is to thank Esoito for his work and my most sincere thanks and goodwill for his future efforts.

Best Wishes to All.

This is a wonderful time to acknowledge and learn from our mistakes, and to realize the benefit of working harmoniously and genuinely helping others.

We all have shortcomings, but let us build on our strengths, and be sympathetic to the weakness, flaws of others.

Make some wishes, develop some goals - how else can we move forward. Make plans.

Fundamentally see the family as a core value to support and love, especially at this time of year, so see that all our  organisations, societies, groups and vehicles in which we participate are extensions of families.

Merry Christmas
xxvv