I have heard somewhere that roulette is beatable.
U have to take consideration dealer hand strengh(phyisics) and running wheel.
And u try to hit some (1/3)sector.
Is it possible.Any ideas of that?
You need to know others who can help you out. You need to network with other Advantage Players working roulette so as a group you can locate weak wheels and work them. For this kind of info you will have to bring something to the table for them to cut you in (Money). I have heard that it takes a lot of time and a good sized bankroll even after you find a biased wheel. As for just using betting pattens, I'm not sure there and all of this could be far more work than Card Counting.
Just my thoughts, Seeing Doubles
he or she can beat any game immaginable. They get lucky once or twice and that's all the information they need from then on. If you can't beat BJ at 1/2% disadvantage, you'll not consistantly beat a game that has a 5.26% disadvantage. There is a bias and it's in the players, not the game. If someone is beating roulette, he's also beating them in other games.
There are basically two ways.
The first, by keeping track of the results of a wheel over an extended period of time (24 hours a day to make certain they don't change the wheel) to see if the wheel produces statistically uneven results toward a number or numbers. However, today's wheels are made with tested precision and finding a biased wheel is highly unlikely.
The second is also highly unlikely, and since it involves the use of a computer, is illegal in most places. By being able to quickly input the location of the wheel where the ball first drops, a computer can isolate what section of the wheel it will eventually land, thus elimiating a large section of the wheel from possibilities. If it were possible to be able to make an instantaneous bet, you could win consistently.
However, this is near impossible to actually do even if you were allowed to use a computer.
I was talking to a dealer who claimed that experienced Roulette dealers (are they called dealers in roulette?) could manipulate the outcome. I chalked it up to more casino superstition. I don't hold any hope for beating the game.
You might be interested in this repost of the rudiments of a system I posted a while back. I made a little money with it, but I have no idea if I have an edge or not. The system is worth its price, which is nothing:)
To pursue this subject seriously you need to study everything on Laurance Scott's site at Advantageplayer.com, buy lots of somewhat expensive literature and spend a ridiculous amount of time practicing. Then you will probably find you have little or no edge. Sorry I can't be more positive.
I have some roulette experience. A remark in one of Thorp's academic papers on roulette prediction "Approximate calculations yield a 15% edge" caught my interest.
I derived a method from Thorp's analysis of dealer signature, the fallacious notion that dealer's spin the ball consistently enough to be somewhat predictable. The procedure is basically this:-
1) Calculate the average number of pockets a dealer dealer spins the ball away from the last number he rolled.
2) Calculate the RMS (Root Mean Square) error, presumably expressed in some number of pocket-widths, from the release point to where the ball falls off the track.
3) Calculate the RMS error, again expressed in pocket-widths, in the velocity of the rotor.
4) Calculate the RMS error in the velocity of the ball.
5) Add the root mean square errors together. Any figure less than 18 indicates a positive expectation can be attained. Now you can bet the last number rolled + the number of pockets around the track determined by your dealer's signature.
The problem is, as Thorp records, the RMS at each of the three stages is often larger than 18, let alone collectively. Thorp states that he would be willing to examine proof to the contrary. I tried to find it figuring some of the highly professional croupiers in London might be more predictable-guess what, I couldn't.
However, while the DS phenomena is non-existent or not exploitable as a practical matter, it can apply on individual spins. We can use our powers of observation to determine what those spins are.
For example, it should be possible to reduce the error caused by the ball falling off the track to pretty close to 0 by simple observation.
Similarly, with ball velocity, the error can be substantially reduced by observing the number of revolutions, or revolution-fractions in the period before the coupier calls out "no more bets please".
Often, it is simply obvious that the dealer has changed gear, and these spins can be eliminated as random noise.
Sophisticated roulette predictors use a "cadence", a song-fragment or sound, as a constant unit of time, to measure the number of revolution-fractions a ball has passed through in a given period.
Finally, because the variables of a given spin rarely behave themselves, you will not be betting on most spins. This a little like backcounting.
To fully exploit your advantage you need to understand how to diversify your bets to fully exploit your advantage. Without an understanding of optimal betting theory you are not going to make any money at this. You need to read up on this in Thorp's "Mathematics Of Gambling" available at bjmath.com.
Nope, going to lose a lot of money on the wheel, then the math says that he has to make it up when he plays blackjack.
:)
Experienced dealers can come close to sections enough to give you an advantage, but it requires looking at the wheel which they are not supposed to do.
forget the stuff about biased wheels or looking for patterns in numbers alone. See http://www.advantageplayer.com/roulette/index.html. But, if you are looking for something easier than card counting; this is very much the wrong direction.
is it reasonbale to buy this book,which is reffered its site.
you are willing to put in a great deal of effort. I suggest you master BJ first.
