- This topic has 82 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 20 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hi guys, ok, where to start…. mmmm….. you are wasting your time by betting short prices on a continual basis, the strike rate will never be good enough to keep you in front. I’m not talking about 4/5 or 8/11, you can couple those together and return a modicum of value, but betting these 1/3’s and 4/11’s is just throwing it away, that is not the way for consistent profits, you will lose in the long term. The RD’s are OK for the shorter prices but even that method wont help with prices that short, two 1/3 in a double would only return you 75% of your outlay, I’d want at least that with one winner, never mind the difficulties of getting two on the trot, no, betting odds on shots like that is a bad move and you need to move on guys……. I’ve been following Daz’s system for a long time and I’m actually making a fair amount of money from it, I just modified it for my own benefit. I just make a note of his selections but I only bet ONE, which one ???…. thats easy, the longest price that is quoted in the RP. I’m getting prices of 5/1 and 6/1, even a couple of 7’s at Betfair, its betting in that range that will get you a sustainable profit….. A bet is not worth the risk to me if I can’t turn it into at least  2/1, and to make it pay at that price I have to have better than a 33% SR, anything less than that and I am bound to lose. There are very few people who bet at around the 2/1 that can manage a 33% SR, it’ll always be a lot lower, so it goes without saying that you must look at better value. I will never bet at anything less than 8/11 because two winners at that price will return me that 2/1 I’m on about. You have to stay on the right side of the fence on this because your SR will not carry betting at shorter prices than that. There are far better opportunities outside of the odds on shots that will reap dividends, picking the longest price of Daz’s selections is only one of them. On this particular one I made 28pts in October, 19pts in November and I could only bet the first two weeks of December cos I was too busy on personal things but for those two weeks I won 11points. I cannot tell you whats happened since then because I haven’t been around and haven’t even had chance to work at Daz’s system, but I’ll pick it up again soon…… don’t get wrapped up too tight in short prices, you’ll need far better value than that if you wanna get some wonga in, there are ways to bet short for profit but the methods that are being used at present are not the way….. if your continually going to bet short, be more selective……<br>:biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:
MrE
Well fellas, I was busy writing this lot when Daz put his results up, it looks as if he came out swinging yet again. He has had a 9/1 winner, I dont know if it would’ve been the one I bet though, cos its too late now to check their forecasts, but you would have to assume that at that price, it would have been a bet, can’t record it though cos I dont know, but it does follow on from my last posting….. what I am trying to say about the bad odds on shots is that your on a hiding to nothing and I think that the best way to explain it is to look at a 4 horse accy, all horses at 1/2. If you bet the 4 GG’s in x trebles it would cost you 4 points, if you got a treble up it would only pay you 3.375 and you lose money even with three winners. The only bet in this instance is 1pt E/W accy because the 4 timer would return you 6.5pts and if you had NO winners at all, you could still get 75% of your stake back on the place accy…… thats a real insurance policy cos if your picking horses at 1/2, you oughta be good enough to get ’em in the frame at least, and if you aint good enough because your total crap, then you’ve only lost 2 points, no big deal……. if your determined to bet short because you wanna keep your losing runs to a minimum, try Roulette, and don’t let any idiot tell you that thats a mugs game, cos I’ll shut ’em up no matter how big they are, thats one thing that I’m bloody good at…….. best of luck guys, I’m not rubbishing anybody, I am really trying to help, I’ve been on here a fair time and hope I tell it as it is…… at least its honest and its as I do……<br>:biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:
MrE
Hi Mr E,
I always enjoy your posts and I don’t want to be the idiot that says roulette is a mug’s game in case I incur your wrath. What I would like to say is that I have spent far too many hours over far too many years looking for a roulette system that shows CONSISTENT profits – I have yet find one!
I am not saying that you can’t win at roulette, what I am saying is that I don’t think you can change the reality that in the long term, you will lose.
Back in the 70’s I bought a book called ‘Roulette for the Millions’, this gave the story of a team of players that tried out all sorts of systems over a period of 31 days at<br>the Casino de Macao. The book gave the results and the record of 20,000 spins. The author’s conclusion was that they couldn’t come up with a system that would show a regular profit.
I disbelieved this for years but now think they were right.
Graham<br>
Hi Graham…. no mate, they were wrong. In all fairness to ’em, I would think that they were talking in successive series of spins and that definitely aint the way to play, that will just coax and cajole you and eventually suck you in….. just take a deep breath and re look at the game afresh, the house has only a 2.7% "take", your bookie has ten times that in a normal horse or dog race, they are normally over round to the tune of 112% to 115% and I’ve seen ’em go to 130%. Now I don’t see how you can compare a 30% mark up to a paltry 2.7% pinched by the casinos. Take an even closer look at horse racing (and I really love it like Snowy), withdrawn horses and you lose a place bet, dodgy trainers/ jockeys or inferior rides, going, draw, those bloody fences and thoroughly crap racing and on top of that they make their 20%+ take, Jeeeez, and you think Roulettes not safe, Graham my friend, take a peek over your shoulder, its a frigging minefield…… I wouldn’t wanna coax anybody into Roulette, each to their own, but I can’t be having it slated because I’ve made money out of it for the last two years. There are no going changes, jockey changes or cancellations cos it gets a bit foggy, its constant, it never changes, you don’t have to hunt around for value, its already there, you just have to learn how to play and learn the run of the table. The house take is only 2.7%, all you have to do is to nullify that take and you have a level playing field where evens is really evens and 5/1 is exactly that, 5/1. No over rounds, no decrease in price because Frankie’s on a 4 timer…… no problems, no sweat…… so how to eliminate the 2.7% house take and put it in your favour, well, I would be stupid to shout my face off wouldn’t I but I’ll give you a hint in case you dont know already. Reds and Blacks are even money bets and are spread evenly round the table, wrong, there is an anomaly that you can use in your favour because where the colours are evenly spread by number count they are very uneven in their respective columns. 1 column contains 8 Reds and only 4 Blacks and likewise another column is the reverse with 8 whites and 4 reds. Now I’m sure that if you were betting colours, you could use this to your advantage…… I personally don’t bet colours though, I’ve got bigger fish to fry……… if you wanna take this any further, it would probably be better by PM, that way we dont upset the rest of the members on what is primarily an horseracing MB……<br>:biggrin: :biggrin:
MrE
So am I MrE.
If you don’t want post in public, then pm me and Andy.
Regards – Matron<br>:cool:
Sorry to disappoint you guys but the slight edge to the house in roulette can NEVER be eliminated, you can put up ANY bet on here & I’ll prove to you that the house has an edge each & EVERY time.
In fact the ‘take’ for the house in the UK is even smaller than MrE suggests as far as ‘even’ money shots are concerned anyway ( Red/Black, High/Low, Odd/Even ). There are Nos 1-36 and zero so if you back an even money chance every time, you will ‘in theory’ win 18 times, lose 18 times and (when zero comes up ) lose half a stake. That’s a full stake lost every 74 spins and a very small vig. of 1.35% to the house.
Of course there are ways to improve your chances but you cannot get away from the FACT that each and every time you place a bet on roulette the house has an edge against you.
An interesting quirk to finish with:
A casino only makes it’s money when you win!
If anyone wants me to explain the above just let me know, it’s only a bit of fun but true nevertheless.
HAHAHA….. Snowy you git, are you trying to steal my thunder, I said I could nullify the "take", I didn’t say I could remove it altogether, it would be great to be able to wave that magic wand. What I was saying was that I could weaken it so that it becomes irrelevant. It will always be there cos its that bloody zero but you can erase it from your memory because you learn to play through it. On your figures you have already started to do just that by trimming that "take" down to 1.35%, thats a start, thats better than the 2.7% proper because in reality you have 1 chance in 37 against you which is 2.7%, but you Snowy have already trimmed that by half so we’re heading in the right direction aint we. You sound as if you know your way around the table yet your still talking as one of the brainwashed majority. At present we’re talking a comparison between odds on betting on the GG’s and betting on Roulette and the odds of winning are far BETTER on roulette than on the horses when your considering like for like. Roulette is betting on PROBABILITY, we would all agree that we know we have a  POSSIBILITY of losing but but I can render it so that on my bet, although it is possible that I will lose, it is PROBABLE that I won’t…… interesting aint it……. just a childish example here, the ball lands on the zero (or any other number) 3 times in succession, it is possible that the ball can land on the zero again, its possible, but it aint gonna happen, and if it does happen, the likelyhood is that your not playing at that time anyway. By your own calculations you have reduced the "take" to 1.35%, by my calculations I would have swung that even more in my favour cos I know it aint gonna land on the zero again on this next spin, there’s your level playing field. Yes, I aint a mug and I know that it can land on the zero again, but I also know that it aint gonna, I’ve been playing 3 times a day for two years (on and off), and I have NEVER seen the ball land on the same number for that many consecutive spins, even with the "Dealers Signature" they can’t get that right. Its all a game of chance, but what I am saying is that Roulette is possibly one of the easiest ways to make money from betting short prices and the casino "mark up" is far, far less than the bookies and therefore the chances of winning are better…… people may try to kid themselves or kid others that its just a numbers thing, a toss of a coin, well it aint, there is an element of form to read into the play of the table, everything changes when the dealer changes. The casino know that they can be hurt, and it aint the high rollers that hurt ’em, its the regular little system players that slowly chip away at their castles. Landbased casinos change dealers on a regular basis so that a player can’t get used to his "signature", likewise the online casinos have their own methods of exercising some control which I aint prepared to go into on here, but although you may have Random Number Generators, they are not as random as you may be led to believe…… here’s food for thought, Bill Hill (and others) give you a free £25 for every £25 you put in your account, put £50 in and your balance becomes £100, thats generous of ’em aint it…… but they won’t let you use it on Roulette or Baccarat, they only let you use it on Blackjack, Keno or the Slots….. now doesn’t that tell you something…….<br>Anyway, nice try Snowball, I think your just trying to milk a couple of my methods out of me…… hahahaha…… you’ll have to grab a better insight into the game before I impart the proper stuff……<br>;) ;) :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:  MrE is now clapping his hands and looking forward to the fight………<br>:biggrin: :biggrin:
MrE you’re a one aren’t you? I promise I’m not trying to ‘snaffle’ any of your roulette systems. !st let’s get out of the way what we agree on:
1) It’s easier to win a short priced bet on roulette than on horses.
Yes I’d agree with you there MrE.
2) The house ‘edge’ on roulette is smaller than bookies overround on a horse race (generally speaking anyway).
Also probably true MrE – we’re doing well aint we!
3) The house edge is quantifiable before you bet.  You expressed it the other way MrE about the variables in GGs – draw, going, jockey etc.
I’d go further – not only is it quantifiable but I think at 1.35% re even money shots it’s fair.
However. The wheel has no memory. It doesn’t matter if zero has come up 3 times in a row or not, It doesn’t matter if zero hasn’t shown for 300 spins, the chances of it appearing NEXT spin are identical – 1 chance in 37, 36/1, for which the casino will pay you 35/1.
Where there IS sometimes confusion is that people say " But I’ve looked it up in a book! The chance of zero ( or any other number ) showing 4 times on the trot is 1 chance in 1,874,161 "  This however, is only true at the start of a run ie if you say "The chances of zero coming up 4 times on the trot is 1.8 million +/1 against FROM NOW!" However on each and every spin the chance of ANY individual No showing is & always will be 1 in 37 no matter what has happened previously. Remember the wheel has no memory.
Dealers’ signature. Just a word on this I accept that experienced croups tend to get into a rhythm, but in the uk dealers are changed so frequently, that by the time you have picked up on any pattern that may be there, you have relatively little time in which to take advantage. Even if this were not the case, it would be foolish in the extreme to rely on dealer signature as your ‘edge’ against the house and you would be guilty of praising the game on one hand for it’s quantifiable risk, and yet introducing a far from quantifiable variable – dealer signature.
Finally re the house ‘edge’ – you didn’t actually say ‘nullify’ MrE you said "eliminate" which is much stronger wouldn’t you agree?
(Edited by snowman at 4:44 pm on Jan. 6, 2004)
hehehe…… I’m really loving this ‘un Snowy but lets put the record straight, 9.44 pm posting on January 5th says "nullify" the take, ok, later on in the same posting I did say "eliminate", but the former takes precedence…. "nullify" rules, OK…… hahahaha…… and I can’t see anywhere that I condone the use of the "signature", I was just pointing out that nothing is as random or mechanical as they would lead you to believe…… now the nitty gritty stuff…. we have agreed most things now and when compared to betting odds on on the horses, roulette has it by the short hairs, so lets forget what we agree with, lets look at what we disagree with. You sound an intelligent enough person, so why can’t you grasp what I’m trying to say, I agree with all of what you say about the balls landing on zero for the fourth time in succession, being just the same chance as the first time and yes, of course its possible….. but it aint PROBABLE….. there’s a casino in Hamburg that has 7 tables that play every night, they have records of every spin on every table for the last 10 years, now YOU go and find any time when the zero has taken 4 hits in a row on the same table. Forget the odds of possibilities, start looking at the probabilities. If the ball lands on the LOW DOZEN for 5 or 6 consecutive spins, the odds are exactly the same for the ball to land there again, it is possible that it will land there again, but after 6 consecutive landings, you must expect, in all probability, that it will land in one of the other positions. If this is the case, you only have to choose right or even bet ’em both and at 2/1 that would be a reasonable bet in all PROBABILITY (ignoring that bloody zero for the time being). I’m not disputing that the house has an edge, I’m saying that it is possible to play through it and the reasonable odds that are offered make it still a fair form of gambling……. I’d go so far as to say that I’d pick more odds on winners on the table than you will on the horses……. phewww!!!!!….. getting hard this aint it, I’m starting to give myself a bollocking here for not choosing my words correctly….. hehehe……<br>:biggrin: :biggrin:
MrE
Hi MrE dont let it become hard work this is a fun forum!
I concede you did use the word nullify as well as eliminate.
I understand where you are coming from as you do me. I understand your point that low dozen has appeared 5 times on the trot, whereas in theory it should appear only once every three spins (forgetting as you point out the damn zero). But you MUST concede that when the croupier picks up that ball and spins the wheel the odds of middle or high dozen coming is no better than they HAVE ever been or WILL ever be. The wheel, nor the ball KNOW that low dozen has come 5 times in a row. Indeed the chances of low dozen coming again remain exactly the same 12/37. It is no good saying it probably will not come again. Probably doesn’t come into it. There are 12/37 chances it will come again and it is not more nor less likely to appear because of previous spins.
I am not saying it is not possible to win at roulette – it is. But any winner must accept that they have won despite the house’s edge & not by mysteriously negating it in some way.
I have watched people wait until 7 or 8 reds have appeared and then start backing black doubling up until they win, or of course until they lose the courage to continue and lose. They would undoubtedly subscribe to your theory that "Sure red COULD come another 5 times but it PROBABLY wont". What they all forget is that it’s not ANOTHER 5 times, it’s just 5 times. The previous 7 or 8 have gone and the wheel doesn’t remember.
If you want some very informed reading on roulette you could do no better in my humble opinion than John Scarne (to rhyme with Carney). His books are a little dated now but the maths are the same although written for the American market where a table has not only zero but double zero also.
Hi again Snow, not in a good mood tonight cos I’ve got a bleeding toothache….. owwww!!!!……. I’m gonna draw a line under this cos we just aint gonna agree although I think we’ve met in the middle. Its unfair to confuse members who are reading this and want to give the wheel a chance, both of us are putting forward statements and the other is shooting it down, we’re going round and round and getting nowhere, so if I give you one method that I use, you will see how it works for me. I will, in this instance, agree that the house has any advantage that you wanna say, you tell it as you see it….. jeeeez, you can see my tooth actually throbbing….. ooohhh….. the "Famous Grouse" helps a bit but not a lot….. I’m going to bed in a minute….. Forgetting any series of numbers that may be your preferred "trigger", just say that you fancied the HIGH DOZEN @ 2/1. You place your chip on high 12 and a safety bet on Low Half. You have the whole table covered except for a block of 6 numbers plus the zero so thats seven numbers in all…. so the house has 7 numbers in its favour, so it has a little less than a 20% chance of winning, or conversley, its a 5/1 chance AGAINST you losing….. try it from another angle, you have better than an 80% chance that you won’t lose. Don’t misunderstand me, I aint saying that you have an 80% chance of winning, its an 80% chance of NOT LOSING…. that surely is a reasonable bet for one spin to return you odds of 1/2, minimum risk with every opportunity to increase your stake by 50% or break even……. Lordy me Snowy, my tooth is giving me gyp, I’ve gotta call it a day, a visit to the dentist I think…… but your response appreciated and then time to draw to a close I think…… I’ve enjoyed the debate and find your a disagreeable old bugger…… hehehe….. joking, joking……. g’night Snowy, I’m sure this toothache woulda killed a lesser man…….<br>:biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:
MrE ÂÂÂ
So sorry to hear of your pain MrE, but you are treating it correctly, a generous slosh of FG around the affected tooth as required.:biggrin:
Okey dokey I agree to draw a line under this one and I’m going to agree that if you want a high chance of winning (or not losing) and are prepared to accept modest profits there is nothing wrong with the bet you advise as long as people still realise the odds are against you.
2 chips outlayed. 1 on 25-36 @ 2/1 & 1 on 1-18 @ evs.
In 37 spins your return should look like this:
18 times (1-18) 2 chips returned – Break even<br>12 times (25-36) 3 chips returned – 1 chip profit x 12 = +12<br>6 times (19-24) total loss – 2 chip loss x 6 = – 12.<br>Once (0) 1.5 chips lost = -1.5
So 1.5 chips lost per 37 spins but you could do a lot worse on the nags for sure. I’m going to pm you a favourite roulette ploy of mine, see what you think.:cool: And good luck with that tooth:(
Very interesting thread!
Both of you must be rocket scientist or something…:biggrin:
I doff my cap in homage at your superior grey matter!!!
Regards
Brico
And I’ve still got a toothache….. b*****d
s say I gotta wait cos they can’t fit me in…… aaaarrrrrgggghhhhh…..<br>thanks Snowy, but I wouldn’t have 37 spins….. hahahahaha……. no, no, enoughs enough, I think we’ve done well, the discussion went down a treat….. cheers mate….. look forward to your PM…..Brico….. it aint nothing special mate, sounds complex but it aint. To put it in a nutshell, you’ve probably got a better chance of winning at short odds on Roulette than you have on the horses……. BUT it is still a gamble and you risk your stake whatever…… OK Snow…..<br>:biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:
MrE
hi mrE,<br>intresting reading the posts on roulette<br>would like to hear more<br>cheers<br>carl
(Edited by carl at 10:14 pm on Jan. 8, 2004)
I think we’ve covered most things Carl, is there anything specific that you wanna know…… I find that I can make more money on roulette betting short prices than I can on the horses but it’s boring, clinical, methodical…… two things make it for me, a slow steady profit which takes the form of 4 steps back and 5 steps forward (usually in that order), and a fascination with numbers and their progression….. As Snowy says, once you accept that your gonna lose, winning gets easier. Is there a secret to Roulette????….. yes, I think maybe there is, its to only place your chips down when your confident that your not gonna lose them. Now your gonna be wrong sometimes, but as long as your correct one more time than your wrong, you won’t lose……. download the practice table and get some spins under your belt, get familiar with the fall of the numbers, get the feel of the wheel, when you feel comfortable with it, your halfway there…… people like me or Snowman can give you methods to win, thats no problem, but you have to learn not to lose, we can’t teach that……mmmmm…… it’s hard to explain on here, but look on it as you would the horse racing systems, its much the same, the system can point you toward a multitude of winners but you need your own skills to avoid the losers. Roulette is very much the same, you need methods to play (more than one) and you must definitely have yourself a staking plan and a bank that you would be prepared to lose……. if you aint already done so, have a go on the practice table, its rubbish but it’ll hone your concentration, if you still wanna know more, I’ll be only to pleased to help…….<br>:biggrin: :biggrin:
MrE
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.