Azaleas wrote:
Because people who count poorly lose a ton of money, and most people aren't actually very good at counting.
If that's what was meant, I agree.
Azaleas wrote:
Because people who count poorly lose a ton of money, and most people aren't actually very good at counting.
If that's what was meant, I agree.
adeaf wrote:
I've had luck betting on two rows. You get money back slightly less than 2/3 of the time, which makes it fun. Also, you burn through your money a little slower, meaning a longer period with free drinks. With this strategy, I maximize my fun (amount of "wins", free drinks, time at table) while minimizes my negatives (potential loses, rate of money lost). Of course, when I gamble, I'm just looking to have fun - I'm not looking to get rich.
I do this too and it has worked about 50% of the time but I always have fun. I usually get out at $500 or what I perceive to be the cost of my weekend, ie "Free Vegas Weekend." It was based on a more complicated strategy but I have forgotten what it was. The downside is that progress can be very, very slow and a few times I took riskier bets to liven things up. Still had fun but lost.
It is ultimately a loser's game but people get too serious and desparate for me on other games.
I find craps to be more fun than roulette and with better odds. Pass line + odds is a nice combo of decent odds and fun.
You can't actually win money from the casino playing roulette over the long term, but there is another way you can win.
Get on a junket with a friend and promise the casino $25,000 of action over the course of a few days. Get them to cover airfare, hotel, meals, golf, hookers, alcohol, everything.
Play several hours of roulette with your friend taking the opposite side. If you bet red, he bets black. If you bet high numbers, he takes low numbers, and so forth. You will lose 2/38 of the time, when the green spaces hit, but you will break even the rest of the time. Assuming you do give the casino $25,000 of action, you will lose on average $1,316.
BUT, if you have lived it up while you are there (remember, free airfare, free hotel, free meals, free drinks, free hookers, free golf), it would be hard to argue that you didn't come out ahead.
Vote for Change 2012 wrote:
18 black, 18 red, 2 green
20 ways to lose, only 18 ways to win.
Not very good odds at all.
Roulette is just luck. There is no skill or winning strategy.
Think of it as entertainment. Enjoy yourself!
Someone on letsrun with common sense?? I've seen everything
Look up Gonzalo Garcia-Pelayo. He's the only guy I know for sure has beaten roulette enough that he got 86'd in the 90s. He would log an insane amount of time getting observational data about a specific wheel. After accruing a statistically significant sample size he would run the number on a computer and find the numbers that hit the most. being able to exploit a wheel bias is the only way to "beat" roulette. Obviously, casinos are aware of this and have changed their equipment dramatically in the last 20 years. It's probably true that every wheel has to have a bias but it's much smaller than it was 20 years ago. Side-note, can you imagine taking all that time to do this and finding that the number that hit the most is 00?
I've also been told a story about a guy in AC who did this by paying old ladies to record numbers for him. I've heard it enough times from different people that it's maybe legit. The story goes that he took the trop for a big 7 figure sum over the course of 2 weeks in the late 90s. He obviously ran really well for that to happen, even with his knowledge of the wheel. Honestly, if youre looking for a casino game thats easy to beat with a super small edge, take up video poker. With a proper roll it is doable to beat video poker for a really meager hourly rate. Then kill yourself from boredom.
I'm guessin this is the guy I saw on an episode of the show Breaking Vegas a few years ago. It was pretty interesting the amount of time and preparation they put into making their strategy work.
Some dealers can hit specific regions of the wheel with alarming accuracy.
It sometimes happens when they get so consistent with how they spin the ball. They're told to mix it up a little.
In_ithaca wrote:
Look up Gonzalo Garcia-Pelayo. He's the only guy I know for sure has beaten roulette enough that he got 86'd in the 90s. He would log an insane amount of time getting observational data about a specific wheel. After accruing a statistically significant sample size he would run the number on a computer and find the numbers that hit the most. being able to exploit a wheel bias is the only way to "beat" roulette. Obviously, casinos are aware of this and have changed their equipment dramatically in the last 20 years. It's probably true that every wheel has to have a bias but it's much smaller than it was 20 years ago. Side-note, can you imagine taking all that time to do this and finding that the number that hit the most is 00?
I've also been told a story about a guy in AC who did this by paying old ladies to record numbers for him. I've heard it enough times from different people that it's maybe legit. The story goes that he took the trop for a big 7 figure sum over the course of 2 weeks in the late 90s. He obviously ran really well for that to happen, even with his knowledge of the wheel. Honestly, if youre looking for a casino game thats easy to beat with a super small edge, take up video poker. With a proper roll it is doable to beat video poker for a really meager hourly rate. Then kill yourself from boredom.
They actually switch out the wheels now so you can't track the same one for too long. Even if you managed to find the same wheel on a different part of the floor (unique markings, etc), I imagine by moving the wheel, much of the bias is changed as the specific set-up has a lot of influence on the bias.
This post was removed.
This post was removed.
Vladimir678 wrote:
We went to casino last weekend, and I'm just curious if you can win some money using one of many strategies, you can find on internet. We've tried martingale strategy.
Just in case you don't know what is this system about:
The player bets $1 and wins $2. The net winnings are $1.
The player bets $1 and loses. Then he bets $2 and wins $4. The player bet $3 in total and won $4. The net winnings are $1.
The player bets $1 and loses. Subsequently he bets $2, $4, $8, $16, $32, $64, $128, $256 and loses all of these bets. Then the player bets $512 and wins. The total bets were $1023 and the player won $1024. The net winnings are $1.
https://casino.guru/roulette-scam-strategiesSo let's say I start with 1000 units. Win is 18/37 and lose is 19/37.
With this system I can't lost more than 9 times in row:
(19/37)^9 = 0.0025 = 0.25%
This probability means that statistically, 1 of roughly 402 Martingale cycles will result in losing 9 bets in a row, causing the player to be unable to place another bet.
So my question is: do you think that you can actually win some money this way?
So my answer is: No!
This post was removed.
This post was removed.
This post was removed.
The best advice that I can give is to select the correct number and bet it all. You must, however, make sure that you pick the correct number.
You're welcome!!
This post was removed.
This post was removed.
The house always wins.
House wins ))