The winning strategy for roulette???

The Law & the Profits wrote:

The house always wins.

Unless it is owned by Trump.

Yeah France wrote:

The process is memoryless. Your expected value for each bet is $0.96 per dollar bet. So when you look at the long term value for this strategy, it will be negative. You are trying to win $10 at a time and this will work most of the time. But for the few times that you are chasing back your $10, you will lose much more than you previously won.

Casinos love it when people think of strategies such as this. Especially card counters.

No, card counting works and it's legal. A guy I worked with explained how to do it and it wasn't complicated at all. The problem is that tables are watched by camaras and the casino can tell by the pattern of bets when someone is counting cards. Since the casino is private property they can, and will, ask you to leave

Ed Thorpe wrote:

most vegas roulette tables have minimums. $10. Think about that. suppose you lose. Double. $20. Lose again? $40. Again? $80. Etc. If you lose 10x (not unheard of) will have a total of $30k riding on the next spin, to make $10. Not a great return on your money.

anybody who plays a game w/ a 48% chance of winning is a moron.

You don't have a 48% chance of winning. It is much, much higher than that. How? By doubling your bet. (You can accomplish nearly the same thing by betting the Field in craps. I have done this multiple times back in my louder days, but I always waited until a 2-in-a-row "bad" outcome before I start betting.)

To make this simpler, I will use 50% - or 1/2 - instead of 48%. We will be betting Black every time here.

The chance of losing on one throw: 1/2

The chance of losing twice in a row: 1/(2^2), or 1/4

The chance of losing five times in a row: 1/(2^5), or 1/32

The chance of losing ten times in a row: 1/(2^10), or 1/1056

If all you did was increase your initial $10 bet by $10 each time, you are betting on a single roll...BUT... By doubling your bet each time, you are effectively betting against super long losing streaks, not any single roll.

Is it fool proof? Of course not... and you obviously need to have a reasonably large bankroll and a lot of patience, as you will only be winning $10 per series... but the odds are WAY in your favor using this technique.

Let's take the scenarios above and assume we win on the next throw after the stated series:

The chance of losing on one throw: 1/2

Total bet: $30 ($10 + $20).

Gross winnings on next throw: $40.

Net winnings: $10

The chance of losing twice in a row: 1/(2^2), or 1/4

Total bet: $70 ($10 + $20 + $40).

Gross winnings on next throw: $80.

Net winnings: $10

The chance of losing five times in a row: 1/(2^5), or 1/32

Total bet: $310 ($10 + ... + $160).

Gross winnings on next throw: $320.

Net winnings: $10

The chance of losing ten times in a row: 1/(2^10), or 1/1056

Total bet: $10,230 ($10 + ... + $5120).

Gross winnings on next throw: $10,240.

Net winnings: $10

The true winning strategy is to not play. You will lose nothing with this strategy, I guarantee it.

This is typical "gambler's fallacy".

With this strategy, what happens is that if you have infinite amount of money, then you can make modest income with that capital. If you only have finite capital, then you will likely quicker loose that capital then doubling it.

The question is, if you have infinite amount of money, why should you bother with making modest income?

Gamblers fallacy wrote:

With this strategy, what happens is that if you have infinite amount of money, then you can make modest income with that capital.

Money will be lost on average on every single bet, thus even on an infinite capital, money will slowly decrease.

czxcz wrote:

Gamblers fallacy wrote:

With this strategy, what happens is that if you have infinite amount of money, then you can make modest income with that capital.

Money will be lost on average on every single bet, thus even on an infinite capital, money will slowly decrease.

ooo... is that true? If infinity - 20 is infinity, is infinity less than infinity?

I think I need a nap.

Roulette is not a good choice. If you want to win, learn how to play blackjack (21).

The most important thing (long term) is not to win, but to have the casino think you're not winning. No matter how good you are and how much you win, if they become aware you're winning they will end your playing. So you need to lend money to friends in there and collect it at another time (away from the casino), so it looks like you're operating at a loss. The winning part itself is not the hardest part.

slowdown90s wrote:

The winning strategy for roulette is to always pick black, and double your bet each time. You have a 48% chance of winning, and while doubling your bet each time, you will net $1 per win.

Don't quadruple, because you still only net $1 per win, but you'll go broke quickly on a streak.

This strategy works so well that most casinos will kick you out after the third bet if they notice you're using it. Even online casinos will now ban people for using this trick..

That`s called the Martingale system and is probably the only way to be a winner in the long process as I have experienced in my gambling life.The most known prerson using it was Nick the Greek, a multi billionaire. The disadvantage is that if the colour you bet on wont come up for a long streak you will lose alot .

Therefore it`s much better to use this system on sport gambling where you chose your own matches and just go for doubling your bet until you win. Good luck! It doesn`t function on online casinos because they are programmed so you can`t win in the long row.

There's a book about building a wearable computer to predict how the casino ball will fall: "The Eudaemonic Pie" ("The Newtonian Casino" in the UK). It worked, whilst also frying the users. You can't use wearable computers in casinos any more...

great advice, thx