Thread: Roulette

A while ago my ex boss told me about a way to bet with roulette so you don't lose all your money. You choose a base bet, say $20. What you do then is double up your bet every time you lose so that when you eventually win, you can win back all the money you have lost and then you can start again.

Last night I started thinking a bit about it and came up with an extra step. What you do, is you take enough money with you so that you have to lose 5 or 6 straight times before you run out of money. So it comes down to 20 + 40 + 80 + 160 + 320 + 640 = $1260.

The method then works like this:

You bet 20. If you lose, you bet 40, if you lose again, you bet 80, etc. until you win again and you start over. BUT if you win when you bet the first 20, you take the 20 you've won, put it in your purse and start again. Then after you have made enough money you can double the base bet to $40 and repeat the above procedure.

So, is there something I am missing (most probably)? Because as far as I can see, this system is foolproof, unless you lose 6 times in a row, which is not very likely. This isn't a very complicated system and many people must have thought about it before me. So why aren't everyone doing it? Is it one of those things that are frowned upon, like counting cards, where the casino will ban you once they realise you are doing it?

Give me a reason why I can't go out today and come home a millionaire tomorrow morning.

Here's another idea, given that you don't mind losing $20:

Enter casino with $20 only. Bet $20.

If lose, walk out. If win, bet half your wallet.

Continue betting half your wallet until you lose. Walk out immediately at the first loss.

Never ever enter a casino again.

I have never been in a casino before, even though we have one in town. I know the house always wins and the casino is doing nothing other than sucking the community dry. BUT if I can find a surefire method, I sure as hell will exploit it!

I have read about the doubling-up method on the internet and the fact the house odds always get you, but nowhere have I yet seen a system where you store your wins and don't use them again for betting. You make a small profit if you eventually win while doubling up, but eventually you WILL lose everything by losing 6 straight times.

The thing is that by saving the 20's you win you might have made enough money to cover those loses with quite a bit extra before the odds get you.

Originally Posted by KALSTER

A while ago my ex boss told me about a way to bet with roulette so you don't lose all your money. You choose a base bet, say $20. What you do then is double up your bet every time you lose so that when you eventually win, you can win back all the money you have lost and then you can start again.

Last night I started thinking a bit about it and came up with an extra step. What you do, is you take enough money with you so that you have to lose 5 or 6 straight times before you run out of money. So it comes down to 20 + 40 + 80 + 160 + 320 + 640 = $1260.

The method then works like this:

You bet 20. If you lose, you bet 40, if you lose again, you bet 80, etc. until you win again and you start over. BUT if you win when you bet the first 20, you take the 20 you've won, put it in your purse and start again. Then after you have made enough money you can double the base bet to $40 and repeat the above procedure.

So, is there something I am missing (most probably)? Because as far as I can see, this system is foolproof, unless you lose 6 times in a row, which is not very likely. This isn't a very complicated system and many people must have thought about it before me. So why aren't everyone doing it? Is it one of those things that are frowned upon, like counting cards, where the casino will ban you once they realise you are doing it?

Give me a reason why I can't go out today and come home a millionaire tomorrow morning.

You will probably come back a pauper.

Let L be the probability of a loss on any given spin. To make the arithmetic simple, we'll assume that your starting bet is $1, and that you doulble down after any loss. If you want to start with $20, just multiply everything that follows by 20.

Let us consider one "turn". You are going to spin up to N times, double down on losses and quit if you win.

If you win on the Nth turn your last bet is your payoff is and your total bets to that point are So your net return on any spin in which you win is .

Next the probability of winning at least once in N trials is and the probability of loosing all N times is .

Therefore the expected value, E, of your net winnings after completing one "round" is



If L=1/2 then your expected winnings are 0. That is what you would expect.

But in a real casino, L>1/2 (that is what green numbers assure). So if L > 1/2 your expected winnings are negative. In the long run you will lose, and casinos deal only in the long run.

The doubling scheme works only if you have an infinite amount of money, and you don't. Eventually you will have an arbitrarily long losing streak, and then the casino wins big. In the interim you may win, but your take will always be just $1 per "round". So in the long run, you lose.

General principle. Casinos have calculated and recalculated the odds. If you are playing against the house, you are going to lose in the long run. That is why casinos only lose money when there is cheating going on, or when they have screwed up and not put a new deck in at the blackjack table.

If you want to make money at casino gambling try a game where you don't play against the house -- like poker. If you can play against idiots you can win. The casinos themselves are not idiots.

What I do is double up if I lose and start over once I win my money back. But if I win with the starting bet I put my profit away, not to be touched again, and start from scratch. Does your analysis above allow for that (sorry, virtually no math skills)? I was hoping that this system milks the odds.

As I have read, the chances are 47.37% that I will win for each turn, since the wheel includes a 0 and a 00.

What would be the odds of me having a 10 losing streak, say? The thing is once I win the money back I have at least as much money as before, but each time I win on the first bet, the money in my pocket grows. So I use the money I play with to cover the losing streaks and the 47.37% of the times I win first bet to let my takings grow. My limited understanding tells me that it is a matter of 47.37% VS the chances of having a 10 losing streak. I understand that eventually I will get enough of a losing to lose all my betting money, but if the odds are enough in my favour I should be able to take enough to cover for when I lose my entire betting stack. No?

I have been trying the system out on this website: http://wizardofodds.com/play/roulette/

You start with $500. After a few minutes I have won my pot up to $965 using the system. I started by betting $5 every time, but after a while moved up to $25. The longest losing streak was 7 in a row.

Originally Posted by KALSTER

What would be the odds of me having a 10 losing streak, say?

As the doc said, the probability of losing all N times is . So with N=10 and L=0.5, that's one in 1024.

Originally Posted by Harold14370

Originally Posted by KALSTER

What would be the odds of me having a 10 losing streak, say?

As the doc said, the probability of losing all N times is . So with N=10 and L=0.5, that's one in 1024.

Cool, so with 52.63% losing chance, you get one in 612 about. Dramatic difference.

So how would I predict what my winnings would be that I put aside? If I win 47.37% of my first bets, I will have $289.90 odd in my pocket after 612 turns. I would need $1023 to cover 10 loses to start out with. How do I predict how much total extra money I would win after winning eventually each time I have to double up to 9 times?

Originally Posted by KALSTER

What I do is double up if I lose and start over once I win my money back. But if I win with the starting bet I put my profit away, not to be touched again, and start from scratch. Does your analysis above allow for that (sorry, virtually no math skills)? I was hoping that this system milks the odds.

None of that matters. It is still a string of trials based on whatever limit you put on the number of spins. If the probability of losing is greater than 50% (and it is) you will lose in the long rung.

That is precisely what was shown in the analysis that I provided for you above. Your expected winnings are negative.

The fact that your expected winnings are negative does not mean that you are guaranteed to lose. Low probability events do happen. And it does not mean that you will lose quickly.

Casinos don't want you to lose quickly. That would eliminate the entertainment value of gambling. They want you to have fun and lose slowly. But they definitely want you to lose -- that is how they stay in business. Casinos are not charitable organizations.

You can "luck out" for a while. You might even be the lucky guy that actually comes out ahead. But if you play long enough the law of large numbers will guarantee that in the end you lose it all.

Since you seem to be convincned that your system will work, I am confident that you will lose a lot in the long run. You can't buck the odds. Casinos just love people with "systems". The only way not to lose is to put your initial winnings,if any away FOREVER and never risk them. But if you do that, you will soon be out of playing money and the gaming will stop. Once you are hooked you will keep playing, and the casino owns you.

So, one more time. If you want to make money gambling you cannot play against the house. You have to play against people who are not as smart as you. That pretty much means poker, and only against inferior players.

On the other hand, if you just want to have fun, then accept some losses, put a limit on how much you are willing to lose at given session, stick to that limit, and go enjoy yourself. Sometimes you will come out ahead. But don't let that fool you into thiinking that you can do it consistently.

To be clear, I am not at all "convinced" that I will win. I understand your analysis and agree that in the long run I, without fail, will lose. All I am trying to do is to try and lower the odds of losing and up the odds of winning in the short term. That would mean setting a reasonable target and walking away when you reach it. So, say, have 10 or 12 losses worth of cash to start out with and walk away after reaching a conservative target. Having said that though, I guess it doesn't matter much if you play maybe 200 rounds and walk away each day, because even in that event you would eventually lose and it works out precisely as if you have been playing all along, as I understand it. I also don't have the kind of spare cash lying around to go blow on mindless wishfull thinking. It is an interesting analysis that was done though and I am glad I know exactly what my chances are now, which is why I started this thread in the first place. Thanks for that.

I started the flash roulette game again and have again doubled the starting money. I am going to keep playing to see how long it takes me to lose it all again.

BTW, I like playing poker, but I am not confident enough to essentially become a professional poker player. Lots of fun though!

Originally Posted by KALSTER

To be clear, I am not at all "convinced" that I will win. I understand your analysis and agree that in the long run I, without fail, will lose. All I am trying to do is to try and lower the odds of losing and up the odds of winning in the short term.

It is true that your strategy would work to make you more likely to win in a given "round" of betting, since it's unlikely that you will lose six times in a row (or however many times you can afford to play). The problem is that if you do lose, you stand to lose a LOT more money than you win.

Suppose you initially bet a dollar and have a 50% chance of winning each time. You have $63, so you can afford to double your bet 6 times. The odds of losing 6 times in a row are 0.5^6=1.6%. So there is a 98.4% chance that you will win $1 and a 1.6% chance you will lose $63 dollars.

So to repeat, while you are more likely to win, the tradeoff is that you are risking a lot more than you stand to win. You could think of it as equivalent to placing a single $63 bet that only pays off $1 if you win but costs you $63 if you lose. In exchange for placing such a lopsided bet, you get to play a game that you are likely to win.

This might make sense if you're in a scenario where you need to hit a target amount of money that's close to the amount you already have. If you're in Vegas and need $64 to buy a bus ticked home, but only have $63, then there is a 98.4% chance you can win the extra dollar you need to get home.

If you make your initial stake small enough and restrict how much you play there is a good chance you will be dead before you lose everything.


However there is also a good chance you wil be dead when your wife/husband finds out you have gambled the house away

Don't do it man it's insane, but if you do do it take doctor rocket with you aand he can advise you on which colour to bet on :wink:

Better if you play on a "faulted" wheel...

This 14 has much probability to be the number than 2. Or 3 less probabilities than 4 or 5 has less probabibility to exit than 8. Or 8 less than 80

There is also a problem of table minimums and maximums here. You might use the doubling up method, but if it goes above the table maximum, it's harder to win your money back.

0,36
4,04
4,04
1,28
0,92
0,92
0,36
1,28
4,04
0,92
0,36
4,04
3,68
3,12
3,68
3,12
0,36
0,36
0,92
3,12
0,36
3,12
0,36
3,12
3,68
0,36
3,68
3,12
0,92
3,68
3,68
0,92
3,68
3,12
0,92
0,92
0,36
__________________________________________________ ________
37 extractions (french roulette)
2,078918919 win VS 2,07 of fishes

Indeed Kalster, I've discovered that system also and tested it on a simulator. The trick is to start with an insugnificant amount of your total cash: after a few doubles money can get pretty out of hand

1
2
4
8
16
32
64
128
256
512
1024
2048
4096
8192
16384

So if you start with 30k total, and bet 1, assuming there is no table limit(and that your not being watched too intently) you only have 15 consecutive losses before your system is broken.

Believe me, you will run loosing streaks worse than that. I tested this on a simulator, and though I often doubled my money quickly, on occasion I would loose it all. It would be a real bummer walking into a casino with your life savings and a head full of confidence only to loose it all. Make a real investment with your money. If you have 10k, start a business.

If you are going to do this, remember that casinos have the right to kick you out whenever they want. Including but not limited to the moment you just lost a bunch of money, the spin before you would have won it all back.

I can't preserve myself to begin with 30000$,if so,i will not to be interested of fate.
When i begin with 1 dollar i know that with your sistem i have to wait and to be sit down for ours before i can began win a dozen of dollars. With my sistem i can use 70% of this dollar and be sure after 3,4 spins i have doubled it. In ours i can exponentiate my found.

If you win after all this replays
1
2
4
8
16
32
64
128
256
512
1024
2048
4096
8192
16384

You win only a dollar

you can start at whatever amount you want, it doesn't change your chance of winning. I started at 1 to show how quickly numbers increase when you double them every time, I wouldn't intend for anyone to waste their time. If your going to waste your money, you may as well have free time to kick yourself in the ass.

Originally Posted by marcusclayman

So if you start with 30k total, and bet 1, assuming there is no table limit(and that your not being watched too intently) you only have 15 consecutive losses before your system is broken.

Believe me, you will run loosing streaks worse than that. I tested this on a simulator, and though I often doubled my money quickly, on occasion I would loose it all. It would be a real bummer walking into a casino with your life savings and a head full of confidence only to loose it all. Make a real investment with your money. If you have 10k, start a business.

If you are going to do this, remember that casinos have the right to kick you out whenever they want. Including but not limited to the moment you just lost a bunch of money, the spin before you would have won it all back.

You wouldn't need to worry about the casino kicking you out. People use this sort of betting strategy in casinos all the time, and casinos are happy to let them do it, because in the long run it always makes the casino money. They wouldn't kick you out if you had just lost a lot of money and wanted to keep betting - if anything, they would send you a free drink and offer you another night's stay in their hotel for free.

Draw an "immaginary" square with the same area of a circle.
Put it inside.
Join the points on circumference which they belong from circle and belong to the square;you have the diameter.
Rotate the figure several degrees such that we have the diameter horizontal.
Join the first point you encounter following the circonference counter clock-wise on the circumference to the diameter,from right, to have a triangule.
Also join this point to the center to have the ray.
Draw a line parallel to diameter that split the "ray" in two parts.
We can divide the lower part of the triangule in three triangulus as the first described in the upper side.
We have so four equal triangles.
From this figure we "extract" the "parallelepipedo" ("rectangle" with oblique sides")
whitch has four sides,two bases described as half-diameter and two oblique sides of lengh unknown.
Cut this figure through the ray and pun on the left side the "creature".
Split this new parallelogram through the diagonal and move the upper side to the lower side.
We have a rectangulus.
Now with euclidean theorem we can calculate needed lenghts to draw a prefect square that square a circle with the same area of the square we want.
So,in fact,we can find the height of the famous triangle we built initially,and point the coordiates to gain the quadrature.

All clear ?

No,my mistake.

some roulette wheels have a maximum bet amount, i.e $500, if you lose on that, you cannot double up to recoup your losses!

Kalster

The key point here, that some have already pointed out, is the table "limit". Doubling your stake, however low you start, will, on a losing streak, result in your hitting the table limit. Once you hit that limit, even a win will not recoup all your preceding losses. And further small wins (given tht you butted up against the limit) will not help recoup your losses either.

As the statistically savvy have pointed out, in any case the odds favour the casino, so these are not 50:50 bets you're placing - yet you're placing them (doubling up) on a 50:50 payout. Inevitably, losses will result, and probably large ones.

Any book on gambling, game theory, or games and strategies in general, usually points out doubling up early on as a mistake - theoretically appealling but always coming up against factors not quite factored in (table limit, house odds etc).

According to wiki, it's called the Martingale strategy, and they have some points to make about it... :P

cheer

shanks

Yeah, I did read up about it afterwards. I won't be playing into a casino's hands. Damn. In fact, I've still never been in one.

The only game worth playing is slots. If you like to complimentary drinks, that is

Poker and, if you like cheating, blackjack. Those two can be figured out and played on, specially poker, to the point where you often win much more than you lose.

Counting cards is not cheating, unless you are counting cards in a group and sharing counts

I have an interesting idea I just thought of. Please evaluate the feasibility of the system. (please overlook the table limit for the moment)

Say you start with 1 dollar
After losing once Bet 3 dollars
Then bet 9 if you lose again
Cycle continues, 27
81
143
729
And you finally win after betting 2187 dollars.
Notice that you win a profit of 1195.
Granted this system is a lot more risky but it allows for more profit after consecutive loses. In fact, this system works by just investing 1 dollar. (which is not very profitable if you employ the martingale strategy)

So what do you guys think?

It's basically the same idea. You're trading faster gains for faster losses.

Opposite that would be something like this:
- Bet $1 on your favorite number. The payoff on any number is 35 to 1, so if you win, you're ahead $35.
- If you lose, bet about $1 more than 1/35 of your total losses on one number. When you win, you'll end up ahead $35.

It takes longer to win that $35, but your bets at each stage are much smaller than the normal Martingale strategy. Of course, on average you will still lose the same as any other strategy.

The only way to win is to play a tiny percentage of the amount you have to play with, but this is boring, and it's hard not to get confident when you win a random streak, and easy to loose when you decide to take a chance and bet big.

Invest the money in something real if you want to, for example: start a business, or invest in one.

Originally Posted by marcusclayman

The only way to win is to play a tiny percentage of the amount you have to play with, but this is boring, and it's hard not to get confident when you win a random streak, and easy to loose when you decide to take a chance and bet big.

Invest the money in something real if you want to, for example: start a business, or invest in one.

Better yet, learn how to play the foreign exchange market. If you know what you are doing, there is no other way you can make faster money.

Personally, I'd just start a business, or put the money into some other asset that increases in profit, and adds to the economy.

Taking advantage of the foreign exchange, although legitimate, sounds like it will increase global inflation.

But, I guess there's nothing wrong with inflation, except of course to individuals who's incomes don't increase equivalently.