Guaranteed winning roulette system

[Steve]

Guaranteed winning roulette system

Is there a guaranteed way to win at roulette? What would a guaranteed winning system take?

Source: Guaranteed winning roulette system

[scaldedcat]

  Only new to the forum as far as posts go, but have read extensively about pretty much everything this site has to offer. Literally hundreds of systems and ideas, none from which I can see so far making a consistent profit (but don't shoot me down if there is one or two I have missed). But the reason for my post is that considering all that I've just written, when a post titled "Guaranteed winning roulette system" is started, there has not been one post Just thought it curious, but might be just me. Not saying the system is any good or not, could be a load of bollocks, but not one post? Maybe people have heard this just one too many times to bother, who knows, just thought it was worth noting. Others would disagree I'm sure

[CallMeRed]

There can't be a guaranteed winning system, if one exists, then someone would have found it by now. Isn't that why it's called "gambling" or games of chance?

[Proofreaders2000]

'Guaranteed'-sounds like the beginning of a scam.

Even the best of players have an occasional loss at times.

While there are good systems out there much has
to do with the bankroll and the self-control of the player imo.

Until then, the only truly 'Guaranteed' winning Roulette system is to own the casino.

[Chris555p]

Agreed

[Steve]

Perhaps the context of the article is unclear from the heading alone. You need to read the article.

The casino normally has a 2.7% advantage. Does it mean they are guaranteed to profit? NO. It is still possible they will lose, especially in the short term. But what about the long term? . . . Are they guaranteed to profit? . . . Still NO.

It can be said that when there is a legitimate advantage, profit is never 100% guaranteed. Anyone with a legitimate advantage (the casino or you) can get so damn close to 100% that they are unlikely to lose in a million lifetimes.

IT’S NO DIFFERENT FOR ADVANTAGE PLAY. WHEN THERE IS AN ADVANTAGE, THERE IS AN ADVANTAGE.

If I applied a roulette computer on a wheel that had predictable scatter and reasonable dominant diamonds, and I could make predictions at around 10 seconds before the ball falls, I could safely bet my life I'd beat the wheel over 1,000 spins. Not even that many are needed, but I'm saying to be so sure that you could safely bet your life (not that you ever would though). The edge achieved may be 30%, which is far greater than the casino's 2.7% edge. Nothing is ever 100% assured, not even a casino's profit. Not even that the sun will rise. But in relation to roulette . . .

Which is more guaranteed . . . the casino's small 2.7% edge, or the advantage player's 30% edge on a suitable wheel?

Any advantage player may say “well that’s all true, but what if conditions at the wheel change, like the ball’s deceleration rate?”. It’s a valid question, but a well designed computer deals with the adjustments to maintain the edge. Some of the possible edge is lost while the computer adjusts. Similarly a skilled advantage player using different methods knows how to verify consistent edge and adjust.

So it applies to any advantage play method. The simplest is bias. If there is a bias, and the player continues to verify the bias through visual and audible cues, combined with statistical analysis (to confirm bias still exists) is the player winning 100% guaranteed? No. But the longer the player plays, the closer they’ll get to 100%. For example, after say 10,000 spins, the probability that they’ll have profited may be 98%. Then after another 10,000 spins, it may be 99%. Then 100,000 spins later it may be 99.99%. It will never get to 100%.

The article explains the same thing. But if you judge a book by its cover, in this case the article title, you wont be making an informed judgement.

ps - if you consider my public roulette computer demo with 93% win rate covering 15 numbers, and see the data charts, thats an enormous edge. I could have continued to play for weeks and nothing would have changed. You may notice in the video I say while the results are clearly good, I'll continue to make it even clearer. I knew if the results turned bad, I would have look pretty stupid in front of a group of people. But I knew the results would not change. If I had only a 2.7% edge, I couldnt have continued with confidence because with such a small edge, there is too much variance.

[Proofreaders2000]

What you offer Steve with the money back
guarantee I understand the context of what you offer.

That said, 2.7% is still a big number considering if the average Roulette wheel
makes $10,000/day that's a minimum of $370,000 worth of chips in bets daily.

While an AP player may have his/her advantage in theory that person has to stop playing at some point.  That's where the profit ends for the bettor.  Casinos make money 'round the clock
whether the owner is there or not.

[Steve]

Yes another way of saying it is a casino may have hundreds of players, all with a 2.7% edge in favour of the casino, all day. They'll still earn a lot more than a single advantage player with a 30% edge.

[scaldedcat]

Interesting, if people would like to discuss further please email me