BetSelection.cc

I thought I would start a poll on this after reading one of XXXV's posts.

The poll lasts for 10 days and you can only see the results after you have voted.

Don't be shy and post up your vote and thoughts if you wish.

cheers


p.s. This poll does not take into account any form of Visual Ballistics or using any kind of Device.

I voted no.

It is possible to have a consistent winning Roulette system.

I will list some of my thoughts.

•   You can't win betting every spin. (You need to be able to identify when the permanence is going against everything you bet)
•   You can't win just betting the E/C bets. (A winning system needs to be varied in the approach)
•   You can't increase your stake after a losing bet. (It makes no logical sense to increase your stakes when your predictions are wrong)

The great thing about Roulette in my opinion is the odds on offer for the streets, splits and single numbers. Unlike Baccarat where you can only win at 1/1 or BJ where you may get lucky hitting a few splits, roulette offers the opportunity to win big in just a few spins if you are correct with your predictions.



cheers

Here is a good analogy,

Many years ago, I was at Catterick racecourse and a friend of mine introduced me to Mary Reveley who was one of the better trainers at that particular time.  We had a 5 minute chat and I will always remember her telling me that I wouldn't find many of her winners in the formbook.

It was a good lesson to learn early on my gambling life. You need to apply filters to sort out the wheat from the chaff and roulette is not that much different in my opinion.

I agree with XXXV about looking under the surface to see what you can find. In fact, there are quite often more 'elegant patterns' than you can shake a stick at going on. But you won't be aware of them if you limit your approach to just one particular type of bet.

There are many games going on within games depending on how you look at things. Some of those games will be throwing up an unequal level of distribution which can be taken advantage of in short bursts.

We can't change the odds, but we can decide when to bet, where to bet and how much to bet. It's important to think positive and look for different angles that can deliver a quick knockout punch and not get bogged down in the 'long run'.

cheers

Quote from: Bally6354 on June 19, 2014, 01:46:15 PM

There are many games going on within games depending on how you look at things. Some of those games will be throwing up an unequal level of distribution which can be taken advantage of in short bursts.

We can't change the odds, but we can decide when to bet, where to bet and how much to bet. It's important to think positive and look for different angles that can deliver a quick knockout punch and not get bogged down in the 'long run'.

cheers

Absolutely quintessential advice. Essence of roulette. Short Cycles. Cluster small groups, strands, streams of spin outcomes rather than see as individual separated spins. Then look for the connections one level down, like the myriad network of roots below the surface. That is where the power is.

The fact that there are people who do not have a winning system does not mean that all people of the world do not have it, it means that the single person has not yet obtained the winning system.

Moreover, one does not need a winning system at 10 trillion spins with downturns lasting millions of hands. One needs a playable winning system in manageable sessions winning more than it loses while one is playing in life.

I voted 'no' -- it's not impossible, based on my experience.

In fact, discerning and thoughtful readers of posts on this forum should have already discovered that for themselves! Several keys to the bank exist on this forum alone.

Consider this:

You can't beat roulette but you can make consistent profits with a winning system.  I've done it. Others have done it.

Thinking laterally, a winning system can involve several systems in combination -- a form of diversification.

For those needing one, here's a winning system on a spoon:

On the forum there are several methods capable of delivering quite a consistent profit in just a few spins.

Identify say, 3 or 4, and then play them consecutively, stopping each on a profit.

There's more, but those pointers should suffice for the surprising number who voted 'yes' a winning roulette system is impossible.

[As an aside, although the poll is about roulette there are winning systems for other 'disciplines' as well.

For example, many have learned how to consistently and profitably lay horse race favourites. Jon Burgess is a well known expert.

Others make regular profits with their horse race and sports trading systems on Betfair.

A winning system exists involving free bets offered by online bookmakers. Mike Cruikshank has nailed it.]

.A system  no, a method yes.

I voted YES, a winning system is impossible. I'm not sure what the difference is between "making consistent profits" and "a winning system". If you have achieved one then you have also achieved the other, have you not?


The tough questions are never answered. How can it be possible, in a game of independent trials, to know when a number or group of numbers is going to hit higher than expectation? No one is denying that any system will have short bursts of wins, the question is, how do you know when they are going to occur?


You cannot compare roulette played this way to horse racing or sports betting, because the latter are potentially beatable, but roulette systems as such are not, because the odds are fixed and the expectation is negative. No amount of skipping spins, manipulating stakes or following patterns will change that. So why is it always claimed that there is some kind of "loophole"?

Quote from: Gizmotron on June 20, 2014, 12:04:46 AM
.A system  no, a method yes.

System or method, same thing.
Guessing or feeling and mechanical system/method, same thing.
If you can not out guess 50/50 then is no better then mechanical methods/systems.

Quote from: Mike on June 20, 2014, 07:56:17 AM
I voted YES, a winning system is impossible. I'm not sure what the difference is between "making consistent profits" and "a winning system". If you have achieved one then you have also achieved the other, have you not?


The tough questions are never answered. How can it be possible, in a game of independent trials, to know when a number or group of numbers is going to hit higher than expectation? No one is denying that any system will have short bursts of wins, the question is, how do you know when they are going to occur?


You cannot compare roulette played this way to horse racing or sports betting, because the latter are potentially beatable, but roulette systems as such are not, because the odds are fixed and the expectation is negative. No amount of skipping spins, manipulating stakes or following patterns will change that. So why is it always claimed that there is some kind of "loophole"?

But i would like to know for how long you can win?
I mean if i can pass 800.000 trails using a test with 12 step fibo and win.
Then in real life i would never have time playing 800.000 trails but i assume i would win.
Who know if the bad strike of 6 STD will hit me during my life time, is no way to tell.
So at the end of my life i quit playing and won, then i can say i had luck to win overall.

roulette beatable.
Everyone knows that worst EC =69RED in 200 spins.
Try to bet that with divisor 1/69, and u will get a profit at the 69th hit..or just try with HP set at 69th win, that's '1follow by137 zeroes' .

Quote from: Sputnik on June 20, 2014, 01:44:19 PM

I mean if i can pass 800.000 trails using a test with 12 step fibo and win.

Is this a one-off test or can you do it every time?


@ BEAT-THE-WHEEL,


What do you mean by divisor, and what is "HP"?


So are you saying that if there at least 69 wins in 200 spins then you will always end in profit?


I don't believe it but I'm willing to test it.

To  the well prepared nothing is  impossible .

Definitions of System

(We all need to be singing from the same sheet!)

   
• A group of independent but interrelated elements comprising a unified whole
• A complex of methods or rules governing behaviour
• A procedure or process for obtaining an objective

Quote from: esoito on June 20, 2014, 11:38:03 PM
Definitions of System

(We all need to be singing from the same sheet!)

   
• A group of independent but interrelated elements comprising a unified whole
• A complex of methods or rules governing behaviour
• A procedure or process for obtaining an objective

Sounds good to me!   :thumbsup:

When it all boils down to it, the only way to keep the naysayers quiet (for a little while at least) is to prove you can win.

The only way to do that is in a fashion that they can understand and can't really dispute.

The answer lies in statistics. There is a concept in statistics called ''Chance of Randomness'' (COR). This is an exact statistical measurement of how 'lucky' a series of events are.

The COR figure is derived by computing the Standard Deviation of an event. The Standard Deviation measures how much better the results are compared to random.

A +4.0 Standard Deviation represents a COR of 31,574. There is almost no question that skill was involved if someone performs at that level. Especially on their first attempt.

Myself and a few others it seems were quite happy to take the test on the in-house game on the other forum before it vanished. So I will challenge myself against the live wheel at Dublinbet and post up the results.

My play will comprise of an even money bet. However that's not playing the outside E/C bets. I said above that I don't believe you can win consistently playing those.

My idea of an E/C bet is a combination of Streets, Splits and Single numbers which will comprise of no more than an E/C bet. (sometimes less)

I will start on Monday and dedicate a few hours each day to playing. My play is in short bursts because of the taxing nature of tracking and analysing the permanence looking for bets to place. I will achieve the minimum COR requirement of +4.0 standard deviations as mentioned above.

Naturally, I don't mind someone checking my account when I have finished to make sure everything was above board.

cheers

That will be really interesting Bally - I'll look forward to your results. And thanks for taking the time to do it. I had not heard of this COR measure before so I have learned something new - love it when that happens!

Outstanding idea Bally, and full marks for your initiative.


Should I add, Good Luck! (lol)


I will speak with colleagues to see if we can establish a COR sample also, and strike paydirt ( to really mix metaphors).


XXVV

Quote from: Mike on June 20, 2014, 04:43:47 PM

Is this a one-off test or can you do it every time?


@ BEAT-THE-WHEEL,


What do you mean by divisor, and what is "HP"?


So are you saying that if there at least 69 wins in 200 spins then you will always end in profit?


I don't believe it but I'm willing to test it.

Hi Mike,
Divisor=Lanky's Divisor.
HP=HP Johnson .

Since worst ever world record=69/200
Divisor, make it 1/69, trigger included.
HP, make it [137zero + 1], since 69x38, thus the 138string will closed when 69th win hit.
Not playable at BM casino thou...

Please test, as I am Computer-illiterate

COR blimey...   Here's a useful link:

http://betselection.cc/wheelwatcher/cor-chance-of-randomness/ (http://betselection.cc/wheelwatcher/cor-chance-of-randomness/)

To me, it's just plain impossible. These things are designed for players to lose. Maybe gain some but definitely a big time lose. (https://imagicon.info/cat/10-3/1.gif)

Previous post..... I don't agree. I think roulette was designed for the idiots (such as) in order to play lucky numbers, birthdays etc.

As long as 99.5% of roulette players toss their chips on ANY stupid numbers for ANY stupid reason, the casino will laugh and laugh and laugh and laugh!!!!

Ken

Ken,
        Even if someone picks  one or two numbers to bet by the best logic, it may still have the same fate as of selecting one/two fixed numbers, in any session. No betselection will give you win in continuous and flat betting. It is mainly about "how much", "when" and "why" than "what" to bet.

Quote from: Mr J on June 21, 2014, 07:04:07 PM
Previous post..... I don't agree. I think roulette was designed for the idiots (such as) in order to play lucky numbers, birthdays etc.

As long as 99.5% of roulette players toss their chips on ANY stupid numbers for ANY stupid reason, the casino will laugh and laugh and laugh and laugh!!!!

Ken

I was in the casino once, playing something clever and IMO...a edgy betselection...getting nowhere. As I played, my birthday (22) hit like this 22,22,22,13,22


My lucky number is 13....lol I didn't have 22 or 13


True story.

Bally,


I appreciate the gesture, and looking forward to your results.

Quote from: Bally6354 on June 21, 2014, 12:50:05 AM
Naturally, I don't mind someone checking my account when I have finished to make sure everything was above board.

I'd like to volunteer to be that someone.  O:-)

Quote from: Sputnik on June 20, 2014, 01:41:06 PM
System or method, same thing.
Guessing or feeling and mechanical system/method, same thing.
If you can not out guess 50/50 then is no better then mechanical methods/systems.

I have no trouble guessing at 100% , until the first loss. What's truly funny to me is that you don't  know why. Perhaps someone will feel sorry for you and clue you in.

Quote from: Gizmotron on June 22, 2014, 01:41:01 PM
I have no trouble guessing at 100% , until the first loss. What's truly funny to me is that you don't  know why. Perhaps someone will feel sorry for you and clue you in.

Yes you can guess but you can not out guess 50/50 - if you claim you can do - then you lie and no need to feel sorry for me :-)

Quote from: Sputnik on June 22, 2014, 02:01:15 PM
Yes you can guess but you can not out guess 50/50 - if you claim you can do - then you lie and no need to feel sorry for me :-)

I guess you have told me. So what exactly do you expect to get from these gambling forums? ... please don't let it be that you are here to help poor us. Someone will need to open up a spandex shop.

Quote from: Gizmotron on June 22, 2014, 03:35:42 PM
So what exactly do you expect to get from these gambling forums? ...

Well i don't read and expect i will learn from you and others like you, i just want to make that clear.
From 2007 to 2014 so have you only post empty claims with empty words, nonsense, this because you are a "hint guy".
This means you never give explanation with example with clear writing about methods, you just come with worthless hint's that helps no body.

Sometimes i find some interesting ideas, but that is rare.
I don't hang around for a holy grail or any kind of super method.
So i hang around to spend time with others who share same interest as me.

Moderator's Comment

@Sputnik and Gizmotron

Both of you count to 10,  and then simply agree to disagree and leave it at that, and not wind each other up any further.

Thank you.

ok...I am ready to go now and show how it's done.  :))

I was reading an interesting thread over on Rouletteforum.cc where Skakus came out ahead +150 units over 8,000 placed bets and finished with a z-score of near 5. That's impressive stuff considering he should have been down around 200 units without the en prison rule.

Don't get me wrong. I have read posts where people have been ahead after 1/2 a million spins. But how many attempts did it take and was it repeatable. So it will be interesting to see how long it takes me to get to +150. I don't think it will take me as long as Skakus. Playing 6 streets as an e/c opposed to either red/black etc offers a lot more room for manoeuvre IMO.

Nothing is going to happen quick. I will probably be able to fit in around 40/50 placed bets a night. Dublinbet spin too quick during the day unless there are a few players are at the table.

Quote from: Mike on June 22, 2014, 12:18:35 PM
Bally,


I appreciate the gesture, and looking forward to your results.


I'd like to volunteer to be that someone.  O:-)

Cheers and no problem. I would trust you to report the facts.  :thumbsup:

Here is an issue however....

I am just going to bet the streets in this challenge and nothing else.

However I don't always bet 6 streets which equals an e/c.

Here are the first few results....


[attachimg=1]


The bets were as follows....

1) 2 streets. LOSS.
2) 5 streets. WON.
3) 5 streets. LOSS.
4) 1 street. LOSS.
5) 2 streets. LOSS.
6) 3 streets. WON.
7) 2 streets. WON.
8} 5 streets. WON.
9) 2 streets. LOSS.

So I suppose the answer is to add up all the streets and divide them by 6. This will represent how many e/c bets I have placed.

I bet a total of 27 streets above which equals four and a half e/c bets and I had 4 wins. (That's actually quite confusing, lol)

Session 2.

10) 2 streets. LOSS.
11) 6 streets. LOSS.
12) 4 streets. LOSS.
13) 1 street. LOSS.
14) 2 streets. WON.
15) 1 street. WON.
16) 2 streets. WON.

[attachimg=1]

So that's 45 streets bet which equals to 7 and a half e/c bets. I have had 7 wins.

The average streets I am betting so far (45/16=roughly 3) is low. My game is based on a spin by spin analysis and so it can come in any shape or form. The trick is to be able to react accordingly. It should average out to just over 5 streets bet eventually. It will show the robustness of my strategy however. I only allowed myself the capital for 40 e/c bets.

cheers

Then why not bet EC to begin with ?

Quote from: NathanDetroit on June 25, 2014, 08:47:38 PM
Then why not bet EC to begin with ?

I am not too keen on betting anything above a street like a line, dozen or e/c.

The streets, splits or single numbers are the most workable from all of my studies. Now betting any or all of these three to create an e/c can work great as well.

cheers

Bally.


Thanks.

Session 3.

17) 3 streets. LOSS.
18) 3 streets. LOSS.
19) 2 streets. LOSS.
20) 4 streets. LOSS.
21) 5 streets. WON.
22) 6 streets. WON. (I put an extra chip on the winning street here by accident)
23) 5 streets. WON.
24) 4 streets. LOSS.

77 streets / 24 spins = 3.2 streets per spin. (10 wins)

This is exactly how I like to play in B+M casinos. Very short bursts looking for a couple of consecutive wins which give a profit.

[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]

That's me done for tonight. 43 units is roughly +7 betting the equivalent of 13 e/c bets. (That's not counting the lucky extra 11 units)

cheers

Session 4.

25) 3 streets. WON.
26) 3 streets. LOSS.
27) 2 streets. LOSS.
28) 5 streets. WON.
29) 6 streets. WON.
30) 5 streets. WON.
31) 6 streets. WON.
32) 5 streets. LOSS.

[attachimg=1]

112 streets / 32 spins = 3.5 streets per spin. (15 wins)

cheers

Today was a real grind and ended up as a marathon session.

In total, I played 290 games taking the games played up to 322.



[attachimg=1]

There are times when it feels like you are getting nowhere fast with a flat betting approach. However variance works both ways and it's sometimes just a case of riding out the storm.

cheers

Played another 56 games and this time the variance was back on my side in full force!

[attachimg=1]


I estimate that I have played around 1700 splits which is not far away from 300 e/c bets. So a 300 unit profit for +50 is not bad going so far.

Going well  :thumbsup:

Where are you playing? (Not DB I think you said)

Hello esoito,

It's called View Casino. They have the same feed as dublinbet. (In fact it would not surprise me if they are the same company.) I like the fact that View Casino don't convert my pounds into euros and then back into pounds when I withdraw.

I remember reading somewhere that it's a probably a good idea to avoid these conversions because the player always seems to lose out by a bit.

So far, so good. It's certainly a challenge because the dealers don't hang around. Playing the streets doesn't offer me the same flexibility as the splits or single numbers. However, at least I can get my bets down on time.  :thumbsup:

In fact, I just checked and they both have the same company registration number and address.

They are still my favourite. They have a choice of two live casinos to play at. Either the Fitzwilliam Club or the Palace Casino.

cheers.

Thanks for that info.

From a similar stable is LuckyLiveCasino.com that you might find of interest.

It too uses VueTec linked to the above two venues.

Played another 53 games today and the variance was kind again.

[attachimg=1]


I will keep plodding away until 1000 games and then tally everything up.

cheers

Here is a useful little tool for calculating your z-score even if you are betting different combinations of bets from spin to spin.

Bayes created this and it's very good. I don't think he will mind me uploading up here.

cheers

Another 37 games to finish the day on.

[attachimg=1]

I have managed to fit in more games than I anticipated because of the rain here and also watching some of the football. At this rate, I will probably complete 1000 games within the next 3/4 days.

cheers

Another 52 games.

[attachimg=1]


This has been a good experience. The speed of the dealers compared to the B+M casinos I visit has sharpened me up a bit.

After I complete 1000 games with the streets, I may then try again with the splits and see how that goes.

cheers

Thanks to all the people who voted.  :thumbsup:

Another 39 games.

[attachimg=1]

That balance is steadily rising.  :thumbsup:

Softly, softly, catchee monkey...

Quote from: esoito on June 29, 2014, 11:42:24 PM
That balance is steadily rising.  :thumbsup:

Curious to know if the balance is still rising?

Bally, have you reached 1000 games yet?

I have started a simple flat betting experiment myself as well....  Bally is the inspiration. Reached 150 games now in view casino. Will let all know how this goes.

Crossed 250 Games today. Next update at the end of 350 games. Base chip is 0.5.
[attachimg=1]

Winning system is possible. You just have to take to account quite a few factors, not only one. If you bet a consistent pattern you are doomed. Each of your bets must be a little bit different than previous one. But all of them must have some things in common. It is a pretty much complicated task.

You'll win some but eventually, you will lose. These systems are designed for players to lose. (https://imagicon.info/cat/10-3/1.gif)

@ Peleus

"These systems are designed for..."

Which systems are those you have in mind? 

Correct me if I'm wrong (my wife will tell you it often happens!) but I ask because neither of the testers have told us their precise selection method.