Where are Forum's most experienced members?

[RouletteGhost]

Basically that's just wrong. You don't speak of variance
You are talking about betting with expectation.
Once it happens it will conform like a good pattern and pop up in 300 spins
Variance is against expectation....so you wait for 123123 and it happens again....then again 5 spins later
It can.
It's just up against all the other combinations that arnt 123123.
That's why you refer to it as rare.
Over millions of spins...yes it averages out to a once in x spins...but it's not a bus. It doesn't have a timetable..
The gap between 123123 happening could be 5 10 4 38 120 1
It all evens out long term but you have absolutely no idea how it will distribute its self
It's rare in another world. The world of 20million spins but not in your world of 300

not only do i agree with you, but i have said that myself

if you chose to bet against 213213, you may not see it happen at all, or you may see that sequence right away, or it may take 300 spins

im just talking expectation and average

123123 happens very seldom. HOWEVER it can happen 123123 then 20 minutes later see 123123 again, chances are very slim though....in roulette anything can happen

ive never seen 123123 myself in live play, id assume i could wait hundreds of spins before seeing it

but the way i see it is if i wait for a 123123 to happen and then i bet against 123, chances are im gonna win, because the wheel wont keep spitting out fixed patterns

[RouletteGhost]

RG, how does one go about betting against 123123? I assume that means if you get 123122 or 123121 you'll have succeeded and be in profit?

if using a marty yes you would win that sequence

your example of 123122

lets assume 123 shows, so we say to ourselves hey, 123 just occured, chances are it wont occur again, so you bet against 123, then 122 happens. we win on step 3, 3rd step of progression

to risky though, as we KNOW 123 can repeat. so marty is not a good idea

but if you have the bankroll and its money to spare then have at it, who am i or anyone to judge how you bet or your progression, gambling is gambling

the only time i would use marty (in a non hit and run style) would be to wait for a unique pattern to repeat, and then bet against it with a 139. if i was at a table and i saw 123123 i would then bet against 123 using a 1 3 9 progression. call me stupid, but 1 in a million chance to lose

[MrJ]

Even if you bet 30 numbers, you wont have changed variance or odds. All youd be doing is making 30 separate bets, each with their own variance.

1000000% correct.

Ken

[MrJ]

I know a bit, and I often try to help. But most people just want the easy 2-second system that wins millions.

So we have Turner, myself, Steve, Buffster & Turbo all chiming in and TRYING to explain things
to the "I have a holy grail" crew. What do you notice regarding this group of 5? Anything?

Ken

[denzie]

Veterans?

[Steve]

Top blokes?

[MrJ]

Top blokes?

I wonder between us 5, the combined number of years with roulette? (lol) I would guess, its more than your newest 30 members put together.

Ken

[MrJ]

Veterans?

War veterans? (lol) No.

Ken

[Steve]

I started at 17 when my local casino opened. Back then I had a fake ID to get in. I'm 39 now. So that's over 20 years, and literally I've been working on it almost every day. I love the game but there are still other more important things.

[MrJ]

We'll just say 20 years. I think you would agree, over the 20 years, you have ELIMINATED (for the most part) what does NOT work? Why would a person with 3 years experience (roulette) not listen to a 20 year veteran of the game? That question simply kills me. Its like a 15 year old thinking he/she knows it all (lol). Oh well, like I said, I lose nothing.

Ken

[Steve]

Ken that's true with anything in life, not just roulette of course. The problem is UNDERSTANDING. You know 20 years ago, I wouldnt have listened to some guy preach to me about what could and couldnt be done. I wanted to do it all for myself. If I actually understood it all back then, I wouldnt bother betting with a system I know would eventually lose.

Everyone's different. Some people will listen and at least try to understand what more experienced people are harping on about. It is frustrating when people just ignore facts, but i need to remember I was much the same.

But then again people have different goals. If you want to make money, you know roulette is not the easiest way to go. It is remarkably easy if you have good conditions, but very different in difficult conditions. If you just want to have fun, then dabble with systems. But FFS at least try something that is not PROVEN to fail. There are plenty of things that havent been tried. And probably more things that HAVE been tried.

[MrJ]

Yeah, I didn't listen either, I understand. Take any example though....you want to start a hobby of collecting stamps. Are you gonna listen to the guy doing it for 5 years or the guy with 30 years experience? Not saying the 5 year guy is a dummy, I'm not saying that at all.

Ken

[Tacwell]

It doesn't take years of experience to understand value and apply simple logic to see why any bet selection won't work. Any bet in roulette has a negative expected value, you get paid out less than what your bet is worth, it has been explained in many different ways, some are unable to comprehend that, others maybe choose to ignore it, I don't know.
Would you choose to back a horse at odds on which you know in reality only stands a 2/1 chance of winning? If you did back this horse and repetitively placed bets like this would you be surprised that your bank roll keeps diminishing? It's the same thing with roulette, or any negative expectation game. You won't win in the long run.

[Tacwell]

And to add to the above, the variance debate, variance doesn't correct itself, if in the first 10 spins after you sit down you, you see 8 red and 2 black, that's 80% Red, if the next 90 spins show 45 red and 45 black, i.e. perfectly even, then over the last 100 spins red is now only 8% ahead, continue up to 1000 spins and red is now 0.8% ahead, without black ever exceeding red to "even out" the variance. Nothing is ever due.

[Steve]

You're right. Actually it takes minutes to understand the principles with at least basic understanding.  But it takes much longer to get over the ignorance that made me blind.