My stepdad literally just bought a book from someone he saw on youtube on how to increase the odds of winning the...

Casinos have at least one more slot - 0 (green) that skews the probability distribution so that these sorts of long term strategies end up with a losing expected value.

If the board were half red and half black then your strategy would work.

This strategy ONLY works if you have infinite money, and the casino accept ridiculously high bets. You CANNOT beat roulette in the real world.

You meam only genetucally related to him can fuck his mom?
... should we tell him?

Sell your car to make up for the rest of the losses

LET IT RIDE sip your drink and grab the nearest broad and have her sit on your lap while you play

It’s not the green. Martingale will work with fucking anything, it’s just a matter of bankroll.

Lol, unironically it's possible. There's some mathematician that has won the lottery 3 or 4 times. Can't be bothered to Google it but I remember reading about him a couple years back.

this is here biz is called "gamblers fallacy"
but in the real world let's assume that yes it will hit.

if you are any normal person and go to the casino with 1000 bucks to blow and only play roulette
you have
10,20,40,80,160,320---640---
mind you, you wont get to bet 640 because all of your previous losses and the 320 bet amount to 630. in bets/losses

this means that your last bet is 320. and to get to it you have to lose 5 times in a row which is very easy. as your chances of landing on color is less than 50% regardless of previous results.

to make matters worse lets look at this from a purely profit perspective if you follow this gamblers fallacy and decide to bankroll a roulette run.

if you win on your first try you get 10 bucks
if you lose then win on your second one, you profit 10 bucks, and no mattery how many losses in a row. you will only ever be up 10 dollars a win.

if youve ever been to a casino youll know that the roulette landing on a single color 4,5,6 or even 7 times in a row is not uncommon.

gambling is gambling biz, you either got it or you dont.

if you really want an edge, sperg out learn to count cards and find a small casino that uses the entire shoe for blackjack.

There actually was a guy who beat roulette, it was actually the same man who invented counting cards in blackjack to get an edge. But basically it involves wearing a computer to calculate a general range the ball is likely to land. Gave them a slight edge, but he was in it for the maths not the money

Their was that guy on this casino cheats show, he didn't really cheat in my opinion but he logged everI roll and found all the wheel bias and got his whole family betting. He made millions because every wheel had a section it showed up in more often due to the mechanics of the wheel.

user, pls. Learn some maths. The ONLY strategy for winning the lottery that makes any sense is to wait for the jackpot to build up high enough that they pay out more in winnings than they receive though selling tickets. Is DOES happen, but very rarly, and you have to be very rich or have a large group of people aiding you. You basically have to buy all the tickets. nytimes.com/1992/02/25/us/group-invests-5-million-to-hedge-bets-in-lottery.html?pagewanted=all

Ok sure, if there roulette table is poorly made you can make money. But do we really discuss how to win at roulette when playing at a shady casino with a scuffed roulette table?

The probability of getting black is slightly less than 50% because of the house's single bias slot. But for simplicity let's just say it's 50%.
To not get black 5 times in a row is like flipping a coin 5 times and not getting tails 5 times in a row. The probability of that is 0.5^5, or 0.03 = 3%. In other words it's extremely unlikely to not get black within 5 rolls.

It has everything to do with the house's bias slot. In the short run maybe you'll get lucky with this guy's strategy and cash out a slightly positive net win: notice that in his strategy he only ends up winning $10 before resetting the strategy (independence of probability events). But because of the house's bias, there is an extra slot where you also lose, so that pushes this slightly winning strategy into the negative.

a better strategy for roulette would be corner betting which gives you a x8 payout or "line" betting which gives you x5 pay out

there are 38 numbers in american and 37 in regular roulette.

if you corner bet 7 times gives you a 7x4 = 28/38 or 28/37 chance of winning. better than half and better than betting colors.

if you line bet 4 times giving you a 4x6=24/38 or 24/37 chances of winning

either way its better than just solid color bet in terms of "odds" but honestly if you are gambling its best to do it right and just try to get lucky instead of trying to beat the casino

Your mom is a whore

Russian Roulette is the same. The bullet usually ends up at the bottom of the gun in the third or fourth chamber because of the weight of the bullet. Try it, you can't lose.

i understand what you are saying.
however probability for some reason is not reality

every single time you flip that coin or roll that wheel, the odds of getting a result is always the blank odds.

take flipping a coin for example.
its 50/50
however if i flipped the coin 5 times and it has been heads every time. what are the odds of on my 6th flip it being tails?

while it being "extremely unlikely" doesn't change the fact that it really is possible.

don't let math trick you into thinking that just because it has been falling on red for 10 numbers in a row, its going to fall on black for the 11th.

Surely the odds of it being a tails on your 6th flip have remained completely unchanged, it is a singular event - 50% for the sake of argument. You are not less likely to flip a coin with the outcome of 5 H's or T's in sequence than you are random results, as the probability of the events are unrelated.

Winning the lottery isn’t hard. Doing it without spending twice as much as you win is. The mathematicians who won typically find games where some manner of trickle down on the prizes gives them enough of an edge to win 10% or something.

not true. i had a roulette system that worked. i would spend hours to do it though and would only take one spin. I would wait for a table to do one color 5 times in a row and then would bet on the opposite color on the 6th time. it worked 6 out of 10 times, so i always left up. it was a native casino and im 8/14 native so they were all chill with me there.

Not sure if bait but statistically what you are saying is just not true. Regardless of whether the outcomes came in for you, the odds of the opposite colour on the 6th time are just as likely as the same colour to appear as had the previous 5 times. The spin of a roulette wheel is an independent event, the outcome of the previous spin has no relation to the outcome of the next in terms of probability.

thank you.

every single time. the wheel spins.
it is a singular event.
plz anons dont be dumb.

do not attempt gambling strategies with money you cant afford to lose.
only idiots think this method could work as only 2 things that other gents have already states here could happen.

1.you run out of money.
your bets will cost you around 2000 dollars after 6 losses
that is a lot of money to be gambling.

2. you somehow have a large pot where you can keep going.

Why are you gambling?

Lol was it that book written by some woman? Talks about their "smart luck" system or whatever? I packed that book the other day at work.

Each event has a 50/50 probability, but a sequence of events has a different probability. As a simple example lets say you get two coin flips. What is the probability of getting two heads in a row? The answer is 25%, or 0.5^2. To illustrate that, just think of all the possible events from two coin flips. You can get HH, HT, TH, or TT. So that is 4 events with each equal probability of 25%. This is a simple example where heads and tails are equal probability but I hope you get the idea. Each event is independent and has a 50/50 chance, but a sequence of results has its own probability of happening.

I like to call that the Deal or No Deal dilemma. Basically, you’ve got a million suitcases, and all those suit cases contain 1 dollar, except 1, which contains a million. You select a case, which you can’t open until the end of the game. You then open the remaining cases until there is only one left or the million dollars is revealed.

Assuming you find yourself in a world where there are just two cases left, do you switch cases or not? People familiar with the Monty Hall problem will tell you to switch, because the rules of that game say a goat door HAS to be opened. Deal or No Deal is different because at any point you could have opened that million dollar case. It just happens that this time you didn’t. So which reality are you in? The one where you picked the one in a million case, (logically meaning you couldn’t open it until the end), or the one where you picked a bum case but performed the 1 in a million feat of not revealing the million dollars?

This was in a big time casino, it was just that the bearings get worn or something after all that spinning and had a slight bias, they even swapped all the tables around to try and trick the cheats but they quickly identified which tables were which.
"Gonzalo García-Pelayo organizes members of his family, mainly his son Iván and Vanessa, and they dedicate themselves to playing at the Casino Gran Madrid . After organizing a team of people who took data from the roulette tables in the casino, they start playing at the end of 1991, being the summer of 1992 when they manage to win about 70 million pesetas in that casino. After being discovered, the casino in Madrid prohibits them from entering. It is at that time when they begin to travel to different casinos around the world: Las Vegas , Australia , Austria , Denmark , Holland . In total, the García-Pelayo family earned more than 250 million pesetas, a very high figure for the time."

Obviously they had losses you mongoloid brainlet, but they had an edge enough to beat the odds.

Ya you proabably do TA with crypto too. You think you are smart but you are wrong and you have no experience. I DID it on a regular basis. It would take hours to happen. Thats what you are not getting. It would do every possible combination up to 5 times one colour. The higer you go the more combinations. It statiscally more likely to not do 6 in a row than 5 in a row (especially considering that would be like doing 5 in a row twice again being more possible). So regardless what your MATH says STATISTICS and EXPERIENCE say I am right. Youre just like those people that say poker is luck. How do you think there are pro gamblers?

Shouldn't the odds of tails being the 6th flip after 5 strait heads be 98.4375% ?

>inevitably

this system would literally work 5/10 times mongoloid, you just got lucky, hence gambling

>regardless what your MATH says STATISTICS and EXPERIENCE say I am right

That would be correct on the assumption that one event had an influence of the outcome of the other - but they do not in the example of a coin. You are no less likely to flip a coin landing on hands after doing it 3 times consecutively, the coin has no memory of past events or results and they have no influence on future events.

Independant vs Dependant probability

isnt this a variation of the monty hall problem
1-you open all remaining cases and a million dollars show up.
2-you open all remaining cases but a million dollars hasnt shown up.
-----
at this point you should logically switch because your initial odds are a million to one as opposed to 1/2
-----
good example ill be sure to use it at some point in the future,

mathematically, yeah sure.
but that is not how it plays out, every coin flip is independent of previous flips,
think of it this way.
what are the odds of flipping 6 tails in a row VS what are the odds of flipping a coin 6 times and getting tails 6 times.

they sound like the same question but they really aren't. what you are solving the math for is the answer for the first question, the reality is the second question. every time you flip a coin it's 50/50 it could in theory land on tails a million time.

Not sure what Ta with crypto is user. I don't think I'm smart, I'm just pointing out that regardless of whether this has worked for you a few times - statistically you will eventually loose all your money. It's the Martingale fallacy as another user posted earlier, the longer you play the closer you will get to the time when you will loose all your money.

The reason why this also fails is due to table limits, not necessarily the way you're suggesting playing. But the classic "double or switch" Martingale method means you need to be in a ficticious casino where there are no maximum bets or table limits, and you'd need unlimited capital.

That’s not entirely true. You assume it’s an independent event, but how often do you have to see one color come up in a row before you decide the thing is broken?

sometimes biz you guys give me hope for humanity

and other times you guys make me realize why there are so many scams out in the world.

there phrase " a sucker born every minute" is an understatement.

i feel like starting a scam, if even a small portion of the population really thinks like some of you bright minds here do.

Well I only did it like 3 times back when I was living in Edmonton, so Ill take your word for it.

Nice to see this board isn't filled with brainlets.

It's wouldn't mean it was broken - I'm not sure what you mean by this. If a roulette ball landed on a certain colour consecutively 20 times it doesn't matter, the outcome of previous events have no way to influence the future events therefore they are by definition independant.

No worries user, please do not risk your money ever doing this strategy - I have seen people lose money they couldn't afford too with delusions of grandeur that they were going to become a millionaire overnight.

The old adage is always right - if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

but the probability of this event happening is really really low

kek

Perhaps I've not been clear enough with my explanation.

The probably of getting 20R vs mixed results vs 20B is exactly the same, the events are not related. The result of one spin has no statistical influence on the result of the next, therefore all outcomes are still just as likely.

So you are just as likely to have these sequences of results as you are any other for example;

BBBRR
RRRRR
BBBBB
RBRBR

When gambling in roulette you are only betting on the current random event. So the probability of a sequence of random events doesn't really matter. Sure you could have seen that it's landed on black 5 times and the probability of it landing on it a 6th time is very low. But you aren't betting on a sequence of random events, you are only betting on that 6th roll, which is a 50/50 event.

You only take the probability of a sequence of random events into account if that's what you're betting. For example if you were to bet with your friend that you would get a certain number of heads from flipping a coin a certain number of times, then the probabilities you are thinking about are important. But it's not relevant in roulette.

That’s the trick though, you’re picking between two one in a million chances. In the case you selected the correct case, you physically CAN’T open the million dollar case because you have it in your hands, so the outcome you’re seeing isn’t unexpected. In the event you didn’t, you performed the 1 in a million feat of opening 999,998 cases without revealing the million. You’re playing Schroedinger’s lottery at that point. Assuming you switch every time gives you the same odds as assuming you don’t.

The same logic applies to the Monty Hall problem. The ability to switch only matters in the case that the host HAS to reveal goats. If the host just got lucky and didn’t reveal the car, the decision doesn’t matter. That’s the nuance of the Monty Hall problem that people forget to mention, and it’s why I rather use Deal or No Deal, because the rules for that game make it clear you just got lucky by not revealing the winning case. You just don’t know if that luck was on your first choice or the ones following, and it’s why normies fuck up the Monty Hall problem.

yes and its called TA

the best way to get normies to understand the monty hall problem is to make the numbers larger and larger while they stick with their choice.

3 doors 2 goats you pick one host opens a goat and asks if you want to switch.

30 doors 28 goats you pick one host opens 27 goats asks if you want to switch

1 million doors 999,998 goats you pick one host opens 999,997 goats asks if you want to switch.

when it comes to gambling, like in this thread. roulette its all a matter of luck, there are no solid sure win strategies outside of table errors or cheating.

the monty hall issue is clearly a matter of switching for better odds.
---
its why i like your example
you could in theory open the winning case while opening the rest.

but in the off chance you don't open it, what would be the best course of action? it literally is two 1 in a million cases.

personally i would switch. but yes you are right it is Schrodinger lottery lol

stop trying to convince these fools.
open a casino!

The thing is you’re assuming randomness, which isn’t always the best idea. That’s basically the whole point of identifying biased wheels, because they are demonstrably not as evenly random as you would think.

It’s a method that is used in science to determine correlation. You measure the probability of a controlled spread of data, and the see if the observed data where you tweaked some factor could have fallen within that range due to happenstance or blind randomness.

Pure math fags haven't kept up with psychic research. EXPECTANCY skews the probability. You are welcome to think it's bullshit. What do i care.

Anti TA fags are litterally cancer.
Good analysis and research are paramount to looking into investments.
But when you want to time an entry or look for a good condition of exit why wouldn't you use TA.
Do you not believe in support or resistance? Then if I plot those areas on a chart do you not thing that would be pivotal to making an easy low risk entry decision.
Do you not believe in trends? If I draw a line underneath or on top of a trend to visualize an average movement does that sound unreasonable?
The issue with TA is that a lot of people don't even research anything to do with it, they see some meme drawing and go omg a head and shoulders but they don't know what actually constitutes a proper pattern and even if they did they don't have a strategy to capitalize on the pattern.
When you look at TA with a proper risk management strategy you could probably only have to be right 30% of the time and still be highly successful. Although some patterns have higher rates of success then that. The purpose of it is just to use a strategy that says hey when this event happens their is a chance that this will happen and with proper risk management you can capitalize on it.

i think whipping out a notepad at the roulette table is the fastest way to get closely watched by a casino lol

expectancy skews probability?
im genuinely interested can you explain further?

Not really. The casino loves when people do that shit because every amateur who sees 26 come up a few times doesn’t know the math to figure out if that was randomness or bias, and at worse they identify a biased wheel and shut it down.

The real thing keeping roulette from being easy to game are table limits and time. Best place I’ve seen for that type of thing is crypto games, where the table limits are so high you can reliably Martingale for a while if your bankroll is large enough. Thing is you’re also winning just pennies there, so you’ll be there fucking forever making shitty payouts until you fuck up that one in a million roll and go bust.