The only way to beat the game of roulette is to beat the croupier over the head and steal the money from the tin -Albert Einstein In short, Einstein is wrong... Before you call me a lunatic or delusional or an outrageous narcissist, I am not purporting to be anywhere near as intelligent or capable as Einstein. I just dont think that Einstein was a roulette player. What Einstein meant by the quote was that, because of the way that the odds are constructed, it is utterly impossible to design a coherent and consistent SYSTEM for beating the game of roulette. Payouts of 35:1 for something that happens at a 1/38 odds and 1:1 for something that is an 18/38 (as opposed to 18/36 which would be even $ and totally pointless) create a game where the best someone could hope to do is run out a streak of luck in the short-run and quickly run with his winnings. The course of time would ultimately even out these short-run victories due to the strong law of large numbers and the best indicator of how much a player playing randomly could expect to lose would be a function of bet sizing and time spent. HOWEVER... Einsteins apparent 10 minutes of consideration of this gambling game fails to consider one important aspect of the game: the human aspect. A human croupier, not a machine, is responsible for both maintaining an acceptable wheel speed, as well as spinning the ball. The fundamental underlying premise to the question of whether or not roulette is beatable is this: can a human being truly create randomness? Specifically, can a human being doing the exact same thing 4-500 times a day create said randomness? Moreover, assuming that truly perfect randomness were not possible to create in such a situation and the croupier had some agency in manipulating the outcome, would he really strive to avoid pattern-like behavior with a decided conflict of interest against doing so, considering tip incentive? Okay, for those of you (that are still reading) who are scratching your heads and wondering what the hell Im talking about, here is some clarification. From my personal experience over nearly 200 hours of live in-casino roulette play, I believe that roulette is beatable by betting numbers on the inside (the 35:1 payouts) by improving the odds of hitting a given number, or more importantly, a given RANGE of numbers, on a given spin of the wheel with certain croupiers within the context of the right environmental conditions. For credibility, because I know that openly going against something Einstein said sounds like arrogant insanity and that many people will resolutely shake their heads and write me off as a gambling addict or loser, I will cite some personal success statistics: I recently spent a week in Vegas, playing blackjack and roulette. In roulette, I played for approximately 40 hours, betting anywhere from $1-$25 (in very rare instances) on anywhere from 1 to 20 numbers at a time. Over the course of the week, I profited $1100 in roulette. Before writing this off as luck, consider the fact that expected outcome on an American roulette wheel are (if I recall) negative 5.28%. The roulette wheel usually spins once a minute on average. So, over the course of the week, we are talking about a sample size of 2,400 with an average bet of probably $25. Assuming I was playing random roulette, the odds of my achieving such results over that long of a sample size betting individual numbers is truly astronomically low. In previous trips to gambling cities, I have had numerous successful runs of betting numbers on the inside to include: Turning $100 into $1000 in the space of 45 minutes betting 18 numbers in a wheel that I had determined to be biased. Turning $100 into $6-700 over the space of 1-4 hrs 4 or 5 times using methods I used in Vegas this week and will describe later. On a dare, studying three wheels histories (the last 14-22 spins are proudly displaced on every wheel in the country) to discern a pattern, picking a wheel and croupier that I believed to be predictable and using these observations to correctly select ONE number 24 to place a $25 bet for my friend Ryan Kluck profiting him $875 after my claim that I was pretty good at picking numbers (This, of course, is not meant to be an assertion that I could come anywhere close to always doing this, but this instance was of singular importance because it was the first (and only one of two) bets that we made and it was after I noticed an extremely consistent and strikingly predictable pattern of croupier behavior) I have another 4 or 5000 words to talk about on this subject, but I need to pack so will post for now and edit later...
Posted on: Sat, 03 Jan 2015 15:51:25 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015