Posted:
#1
best way to play and win roulette?
Roulette
Posted:
#4
Can't say this is is "how to play roulette" but I will say that a buddy of mine, and myself, have had success the last three times in a casino with this method of gambling. WE first "scouted" the roulette tables and we were in search for tables where the marble had fallen on 2/3 of the table...in other words, the table is divided into 1-12, 13-24, 25-36...and of course the 0 and 00. We were searching to identify when a table landed on any 2/3 of the table with any numbers (including the zeroes) other than those 24 numbers...we would place a generous sum on an outside bet on the two that were landing at a consistent number (8+ spins in succession). Since it pays 3-1 odds we would only look for one more hit inside those 24 numbers and as streaks seem to go...it has a high percentage chance of hitting those numbers again. Sounds ridiculous I know, but it has worked for us. "8" was the streak number we looked for on the board and worked for us.
Posted:
#5
Play a table with ONE zero. Do hit and runs. A few months ago went to a indian casino played roulette they had one zero tables. walked up threw $10 on zero, boom zero hits up $350. Left the $10 added $20 more so now i have $30 on the zero, zero again up $1050 and the first $350. lost the next try, fastest $1300 something i've ever won.
Posted:
#6
Nice hit Judgelee..tough to find a Euro single 0 wheel,but I love playing the 0/00...Probably selective memory but it seems when a full seated table has the board absolutly covered in chips,and out comes the 0's...I am ALWAYS on them and play a couple other numbers and splits,corners,just to stay alive for the next spin..
Just want repeaters and press numbers..and/or GTFO asap.
Posted:
#9
Quote Originally Posted by 2dawgnation2:
Can't say this is is "how to play roulette" but I will say that a buddy of mine, and myself, have had success the last three times in a casino with this method of gambling. WE first "scouted" the roulette tables and we were in search for tables where the marble had fallen on 2/3 of the table...in other words, the table is divided into 1-12, 13-24, 25-36...and of course the 0 and 00. We were searching to identify when a table landed on any 2/3 of the table with any numbers (including the zeroes) other than those 24 numbers...we would place a generous sum on an outside bet on the two that were landing at a consistent number (8+ spins in succession). Since it pays 3-1 odds we would only look for one more hit inside those 24 numbers and as streaks seem to go...it has a high percentage chance of hitting those numbers again. Sounds ridiculous I know, but it has worked for us. "8" was the streak number we looked for on the board and worked for us.
Can't say this is is "how to play roulette" but I will say that a buddy of mine, and myself, have had success the last three times in a casino with this method of gambling. WE first "scouted" the roulette tables and we were in search for tables where the marble had fallen on 2/3 of the table...in other words, the table is divided into 1-12, 13-24, 25-36...and of course the 0 and 00. We were searching to identify when a table landed on any 2/3 of the table with any numbers (including the zeroes) other than those 24 numbers...we would place a generous sum on an outside bet on the two that were landing at a consistent number (8+ spins in succession). Since it pays 3-1 odds we would only look for one more hit inside those 24 numbers and as streaks seem to go...it has a high percentage chance of hitting those numbers again. Sounds ridiculous I know, but it has worked for us. "8" was the streak number we looked for on the board and worked for us.
Stuff like this amazes me...this is a sports wagering forum, and like most sports bettors, we generally gamble on other things, such as table games in a vegas casino. At 23, I don't have near the knowledge some others have on this site. I've been at this game only since I started college 4 years ago, so in relation to the big picture, you'll never hear me deny my 'novice' status. But it amazes me that people will put their hard earned, or not so hard earned cash, on events without a certain level of knowledge about them. We still have guys who cap games based on trends like team x is 12-5 ATS over the last 20 years on the last game of the season when said game falls on a Wednesday against a team below .500. The next time the Cowboys get to the SB (if ever), mark this thread down, because SOMEONE is gonna post their ATS and overall SB record in some thread as though games with Emmit and Troy, and games from the 70s are relevant at all. PROMISE.
And by the post above, clearly some people wager their money with possibly the most incorrect theory you could find. What he described is the DEFINITION of the gambler's fallacy man, you can't be that ill-informed. Your theory works if the tables show bias, which any major casino is going to avoid because they already have the house edge, a detectible bias is only going to help the players. In your explanation you said you looked for streaks of 8 and no longer, which indicates that you weren't searching for bias, just what was running hot. Since your system clearly indicates you have no idea what it means, the gambler's fallacy is that when some result happens it dictates the result that follow it. What you’re basically saying is that if I flip a coin 9 times in a row and it lands on heads, its more likely to land on heads if flipped a 10th time, which could be no more incorrect. A wheel which results in turning up a certain sector 7 times in a row has ZERO bearing on the spin of the wheel the 8th time. NONE. Please commit to understanding real statistics before you attempt to help someone out next time man, seriously. The last thing this board needs is someone giving advice like you gave above.
Posted:
#10
T-Rav while you are 100% correct in everything you posted above, You forgot the one thing that can not be handicaped, the one thing that goes aganst all logic, the one thing that is spell binding, that thing my friend is called Luck.
When I was dealing cards at a casino in San Diego CA
A young dude walked into the high limit room
He pulled out two black chips out of his pocket and said, Green Please.
I said this is highlimit
200 dollar minimim, we have 25 dollar tables and as I proceeded to tell him he said okay just let me bet it and go.
He gets a Blackjack
he bets the 500
Wins
Bets the 1000
Wins
Bets 2000
Another Blackjack
Bets the table limit 5000
Wins
Bets another 5000
Wins
He won every hand that I dealt for 19 minutes
I leave to go on break
Come back do my other two tables
Come back to his table and is up 135,000 dollars
This guy for that night couldnt lose
He ended up by the time my shift was over, He was up 540,000
What he did was not only what I thought was impossible or improbable but it was flat out incredible.
He tipped out over 30k total
said he was moving back to Illinios to buy up as many houses as he can and rent them out as rental properties.
I never saw him again, Now Back to topic
You are still correct but you have to understand the power of luck
Posted:
#11
Quote Originally Posted by T_Rav1088:
Stuff like this amazes me...this is a sports wagering forum, and like most sports bettors, we generally gamble on other things, such as table games in a vegas casino. At 23, I don't have near the knowledge some others have on this site. I've been at this game only since I started college 4 years ago, so in relation to the big picture, you'll never hear me deny my 'novice' status. But it amazes me that people will put their hard earned, or not so hard earned cash, on events without a certain level of knowledge about them. We still have guys who cap games based on trends like team x is 12-5 ATS over the last 20 years on the last game of the season when said game falls on a Wednesday against a team below .500. The next time the Cowboys get to the SB (if ever), mark this thread down, because SOMEONE is gonna post their ATS and overall SB record in some thread as though games with Emmit and Troy, and games from the 70s are relevant at all. PROMISE.
And by the post above, clearly some people wager their money with possibly the most incorrect theory you could find. What he described is the DEFINITION of the gambler's fallacy man, you can't be that ill-informed. Your theory works if the tables show bias, which any major casino is going to avoid because they already have the house edge, a detectible bias is only going to help the players. In your explanation you said you looked for streaks of 8 and no longer, which indicates that you weren't searching for bias, just what was running hot. Since your system clearly indicates you have no idea what it means, the gambler's fallacy is that when some result happens it dictates the result that follow it. What you’re basically saying is that if I flip a coin 9 times in a row and it lands on heads, its more likely to land on heads if flipped a 10th time, which could be no more incorrect. A wheel which results in turning up a certain sector 7 times in a row has ZERO bearing on the spin of the wheel the 8th time. NONE. Please commit to understanding real statistics before you attempt to help someone out next time man, seriously. The last thing this board needs is someone giving advice like you gave above.
Well, well....I am not going to attempt a rebuttal to your long-winded explanation as to why this is a "gamblers fallacy" etc, etc, it simply will never end and in your eyes you will always be the wiser, more intelligent, strategic, and any other 4-5 syllable words you choose to use...BUT, I do know there is a 100% guarantee that there is no such thing as a guarantee in sports gambling, or any type of gambling for that matter. Spin a wheel, flip cards, watch games, etc....no such thing. I think anyone with any gambling experience will tell you that streaks (both hits and misses) are gonna occur whether its betting games, rolling the die, spinning a roulette wheel, and so on......but they are and will always occur in gambling. We are all novices that inhabit this website/forum. None of us have the necessary capital, or resources, to put us over that status. My simple explanation--that to you seems like drawn out BS--is I find a damn streak on a board. Then I wager a generous sum for a (24/38= .6315....) 63% chance of it maintaining the streak from 8-9.....times. That is all. I apologize I do not have an elaborate quantifiable system with numerous theorems and such to appease anyone, but yet a simple method used that has given me more coin than I walked in with and the instrument in use was a damn wheel and a marble--and of course as Mafiaso has added a "lucky streak".
You're right though.....trends, stats, records, etc, just a bunch of useless numbers that eases our conscience and makes us feel good about who we GUESSED would win. If luck happens to be on your side, it makes you feel intelligent and acts as a method of reinforcement for your next GUESS. If you think you're looking for anything to rely upon other than gambler's fallacies, you are probably entertaining the wrong hobby. Try a Roth IRA.
Posted:
#12
Idk why gambler's fallacy is in quotes, look it up. What you described is the definition of...
As for me thinking I'm wiser. I don't pretend to have a strategy that works at "winning roulette" because one doesn't exist. If someone found a legal way to shift the odds away from the house to the player, the game would be pulled or said strategy would be banned. I'm not questioning your intelligence, I'm pointing out that a streak of whatever you want it to be does not determine the odds of the next spin, its fact, statistics, there's no debating it. Its NOT an opinion.
Your end paragraph is half right, I can make the numbers say whatever I want for any given matchup, but if you're equating picking winners in sports and numbers on a roulette wheel, you're nuts. Its not an exact science, and the importance of certain variables can't be measured, but previous games do have a determining factor on the following result. A team gets housed, next week, you don't know if they'll come out pissed and win, or come out demoralized and lose, but the previous result DOES often factor into it. The wheel isn't a thinking object, it doesn't get in a rhythm like a jumpshot and start spitting out sectors because it's in a groove...
I'm nowhere close to some pro, I win some, I lose some, but if you're seriously equating your roulette strategy as no different than randomly taking a shot in the dark in handicapping games, you're probably entertaining the wrong hobby.
I'm glad you didn't rebuttal with this two paragraph response though. I'd just point out in your close, idk what you're defining as "gambler's fallacies" when capping games, or if in your use of the phrase you even understand its meaning at all. Unless you can statistically prove to me what elements matter and what don't, they're all relevant. The way I use said statistics might be wrong and ultimately result in a loss, but it can all give indications about the upcoming game. What can't be an indication about an upcoming result? What the roulette wheel showed on its last roll
Posted:
#13
Your reply is inevitably, because you've already referenced an end result in your initial paragraph and reply to me, going to point to your end results that made you money, which if you've played only a handful of times are meaningless. Like buffalo said, the only correct answer is there is way to win at roulette long term. You won this way over a short period, thats awesome. I could win one night by closing my eyes, spinning around 3 times and picking the first number that I saw once I opened my eyes. That doesn't mean this is a strategy that will work more than once. Over an extended period, this strategy will bleed you no more slowly than any other because the odds are always the same
Posted:
#19
Quote Originally Posted by T_Rav1088:
Stuff like this amazes me...this is a sports wagering forum, and like most sports bettors, we generally gamble on other things, such as table games in a vegas casino. At 23, I don't have near the knowledge some others have on this site. I've been at this game only since I started college 4 years ago, so in relation to the big picture, you'll never hear me deny my 'novice' status. But it amazes me that people will put their hard earned, or not so hard earned cash, on events without a certain level of knowledge about them. We still have guys who cap games based on trends like team x is 12-5 ATS over the last 20 years on the last game of the season when said game falls on a Wednesday against a team below .500. The next time the Cowboys get to the SB (if ever), mark this thread down, because SOMEONE is gonna post their ATS and overall SB record in some thread as though games with Emmit and Troy, and games from the 70s are relevant at all. PROMISE.
And by the post above, clearly some people wager their money with possibly the most incorrect theory you could find. What he described is the DEFINITION of the gambler's fallacy man, you can't be that ill-informed. Your theory works if the tables show bias, which any major casino is going to avoid because they already have the house edge, a detectible bias is only going to help the players. In your explanation you said you looked for streaks of 8 and no longer, which indicates that you weren't searching for bias, just what was running hot. Since your system clearly indicates you have no idea what it means, the gambler's fallacy is that when some result happens it dictates the result that follow it. What you’re basically saying is that if I flip a coin 9 times in a row and it lands on heads, its more likely to land on heads if flipped a 10th time, which could be no more incorrect. A wheel which results in turning up a certain sector 7 times in a row has ZERO bearing on the spin of the wheel the 8th time. NONE. Please commit to understanding real statistics before you attempt to help someone out next time man, seriously. The last thing this board needs is someone giving advice like you gave above.
Thank god you posted here mate i was seriously starting to question the average IQ of this place
Posted:
#25
Quote Originally Posted by Uncle_Gimp:
what if the roulette wheel has landed on black for 999,999,999 times in a row. Does it still not alter the chance of landing on a red?
Great question, uncle, one I've often wondered about myself. I know what the laws of probability would say and that is that it would still be the same chance as it was when the first spin was made, when it was 0-0. I know Stanford Wong studied a similar question in blackjack, related to streakiness, i.e. if you have won 3 hands in a row for example, does that mean you have a greater chance of winning the fourth hand? Can streaks be predicted? His findings after simulating millions of hands was that there is no correlation, that you have the same chance of winning whether you have won the previous hand or not. Now this is scientific, empirical evidence, and pretty difficult to argue with.
But I have always wondered; what if there was an intangible thing which influences events (luck) which we have not been able to quantify? If you have gambled for a substantial length of time as I have, then you have experienced amazing streaks, both good and bad. When you are on a winning streak, you can almost intuitively predict that you will win the next hand or spin or football bet. A lot of you know the feeling I'm talking about. I know in my head that the roulette ball has no memory of the last spin nor does it "care" where it will land on the next spin. Cards don't have a memory or feelings either. But when you can't seem to win a hand no matter what you do....the losses mounting up, maybe the thing to do is cash in and come back another day, even though the math says it doesn't matter.
just trolling along
what if the roulette wheel has landed on black for 999,999,999 times in a row. Does it still not alter the chance of landing on a red?
Great question, uncle, one I've often wondered about myself. I know what the laws of probability would say and that is that it would still be the same chance as it was when the first spin was made, when it was 0-0. I know Stanford Wong studied a similar question in blackjack, related to streakiness, i.e. if you have won 3 hands in a row for example, does that mean you have a greater chance of winning the fourth hand? Can streaks be predicted? His findings after simulating millions of hands was that there is no correlation, that you have the same chance of winning whether you have won the previous hand or not. Now this is scientific, empirical evidence, and pretty difficult to argue with.
But I have always wondered; what if there was an intangible thing which influences events (luck) which we have not been able to quantify? If you have gambled for a substantial length of time as I have, then you have experienced amazing streaks, both good and bad. When you are on a winning streak, you can almost intuitively predict that you will win the next hand or spin or football bet. A lot of you know the feeling I'm talking about. I know in my head that the roulette ball has no memory of the last spin nor does it "care" where it will land on the next spin. Cards don't have a memory or feelings either. But when you can't seem to win a hand no matter what you do....the losses mounting up, maybe the thing to do is cash in and come back another day, even though the math says it doesn't matter.
just trolling along
Hot Forum Topics
