Roulette analysis

Syph, a person that never posts about BJ but only comes here to attack people, alluded to a �Roulette System� in reference to advantageplayer.com. I thought a few words about Roulette advantage play are in order.

Can you think of any game where you get to bet after the game has already started? In BJ do you get to bet after seeing your cards? In Craps (heavily pushed by Stanford on the Green Chip pages) do you get to bet after the die is cast? Can you bet horses when they are coming around the last turn? Well, in Roulette, you can still bet after the wheel is put in motion and the ball is wending its way through the last turns. This is the only casino game I can think of where you get to bet after the game is put in motion. Think about that for a moment.

Now I was still skeptical when I was approached to write Roulette analysis software. I checked into the background of Laurance Scott. I found he did indeed own his own engineering firm instead of being a life-long gambling degenerate like many in this field.. So I looked at the strategy. At the end, Michael Barnett (often derided owner of a casino surveillance company) warned the casinos that this was indeed the real deal. That also meant something to me. Listen to your enemies.

Can you actually predict the exact slot in which a ball will land? Of course not. No more than a high true count guarantees a snapper. But, you don�t have to. You get paid a staggering 35:1 when you get it right. If you can determine the correct quadrant one-third of the time you have better odds than 2:1 BJ. Think about that.

So yes indeed I invested time in creating Roulette analysis software. I don�t expect to make any money for this effort and have never even advertised it. But, I am fascinated by advantage play and could not resist the opportunity.

Now I have to say that beating Roulette is not easy. It is more difficult than card counting. But then, the person that runs BJF says card counting is a scam and you cannot make money at BJ. Unless you know their secret methods that they won�t tell you. Or, unless you use the weakest card counting strategy ever advertised.

would be an arcade where you shoot at moving ducks. When you get really good at it, head for the casino. Then you buy Norm's software to find how many quadrants you'll be hitting on a daily basis. Norm, would the software speed up as you become more proficient?

Once you've become an advantage quadrant player, it's only a short step to start picking the number in the quadrant. To accomplish this, you head back to the arcade. Now you aim at the tip of the ducks beak until you're scoring 80%. How hard can it be?

Remember, your goal is to get at that staggering 35:1 payoff while the casino only gets a paltry 37:1

My RA software is not practice software. It is analysis software. And it has nothing to do with wheel bias as most will assume.

Remember, your goal is to get at that staggering 35:1 payoff while the casino only gets a paltry 37:1

That's the way a gambler might look at it. An advantage player will say he only needs to be right 1 out of 34 times to have a better edge than you get playing BJ with early surrender, a level III system and three side counts. Call me silly, but I think that's worthy of investigation.

As I said the strategy is not easy. I have never advised anyone to quite their day job and play Roulette, or BJ professionally.

This links to Surveillance Technology's website, it covers some aspects of roulette advantage play.

More particularly it covers the recent investigation by the National Weights and Measures Testing Laboratory, which was commissioned by the British Gambling Commission.

If you are concerned that I will leap through cyberspace and nab you based on your IP address, use a proxy.

It's the same as the principles used to beat the big six wheel. If you can predict which half of the wheel will be nearest the top you get paid 40 or 45 to 1 on a 27.5 to 1 bet. That's a huge overlay.

the outcome of a mechanical device. It's amazing if you can do it but you would have to be amazing to do it. Transferring that skill to someone else would also be amazing. Good Luck, I hope you are successful. It must have taken a great deal of effort on your part.
Placing a bet just before the ball falls takes a great deal of speed and dexterity.

"It's amazing if you can do it but you would have to be amazing to do it."

At 58 I posses the dexterity of a geriatric elephant but I have a young wife :-)

Actually if you read this you�ll find that some casinos make it really easy.

Norm, if you can't handle people retaliating ... don't instigate.

It's really quite simple.

As for roulette ... well, I'll guess we'll have to look at the ROR, standard deviation, EV, Score, and such, in order for it to be considered anything other than another TARGET.

Fair enough, yes?

I anxiously await the numbers.

Later,
Syph

(ps What was the price again?)

I agree with them that a player shouldn't use external devices to improve his or her chances of winning. Using devices for record purposes and preparation for a session should be enough to win.
Players using devices also give the casinos excuses to get tougher laws passed that favor themselves.

An advantage player will say he only needs to be right 1 out of 34 times to have a better edge than you get playing BJ with early surrender, a level III system and three side counts

A better edge but a lower SCORE, unless you are willing to bet almost every number. Having criticized OPP, I think not that unfairly, for using edge rather SCORE, you shouldn't use that metric for Scott's roulette system.
Scott is persuasive and intelligent. And your comments on this matter via e-mail were persuasive also. I believe you believe that Scott's system works, and that itself makes me think Scott may be onto something. Thorp's endorsement of physical roulette prediction "Approximate calculations yield an advantage of 15%", also suggest this discipline may be profitable.

However, the fact remains that Scott wants an amount of money that is non-negligible for a red chipper, for a system we don't really have any data on. A test under controlled conditions would be very helpful.
Then I'd be willing to stump up $3000 let alone $300 for the system, and I'm sure others would.

As for roulette ... well, I'll guess we'll have to look at the ROR, standard deviation, EV, Score, and such, in order for it to be considered anything other than another TARGET.

The trouble is, each roulette wheel and dealer is different. The majority are untrackable, certainly. Some might not be. If they are the variables would be neccessarily different for each game. Roulette isn't mathematically quantifiable like blackjack: even if predictable dealers exist their predictability could change on a whim and you could end up betting into the usual usurous house edge.

For those unwilling to shell out for Scott's writings, I created a simple system (basically a rip-off of Thorp's method for calculating dealer signature with a few obvious modifications) which would at least tell if you have an edge or not. It comes with the following wealth warning, this system is worth what you pay for it: nothing.

I don't try and track roulette personally, too much work, though I do believe I managed to play with positive EV under certain unusual conditions you used to be able to find in some London clubs.

I don't have a system and am not trying to sell anybody on it. The only strategies that I have developed are for BJ and are free. My point in making the post was to counter syph's post ridiculing something he knows nothing about. His entire post had not one word of truth in it. I'm certain you agree that anyone that thinks BJ is the only beatable game has no imagination. He should read Beyond Counting to get a sense of what AP is all about instead of spending his time attacking people.

I will say that you are certainly correct that it makes no sense to talk about SCORE, edge or any other metric to the strategy as a whole. Obviously, the wheel and dealer and arc size make enormous differences. BJ has benchmark games. Roulette has no benchmmark wheels. Roulette is not BJ. Of course standard deviation is used in determining a good bet. My reason for using edge in the post is that many people believe there can be no positive edge. I don't quite agree with your comment that you need to bet nearly half the wheel for a reasonable risk. Remember, the S.D. in BJ comes mainly from the bet spread. Roulette has a higher payoff (depending on arc size;) but it doesn't have a large bet spread.

In any case, I made the point that I intended and questions on Roulette should be directed to Larry, not me.

His entire post had not one word of truth in it. I'm certain you agree that anyone that thinks BJ is the only beatable game has no imagination. He should read Beyond Counting to get a sense of what AP is all about instead of spending his time attacking people.

I wouldn't go quite that far. Wong was called on his craps methods and faced down the naysayers in a challenge under controlled conditions. At that point, the vociferous arguments of the anti-camp were basically silenced. Scott could probably do that, and I hope he does, but he has not as yet.
And, I assure you Syph is quite aware other games are beatable. He is a very creative young man who will probably get very rich from gambling.

The trouble with all this is tribalism. No one has actually said anything really untrue about Carlos, David McDowell or Laurance Scott. They all have something to offer but there methods are open to a few questions, sometimes ones of importance. Bjfonline maximizes the flaws of those who throw in their lot with RGE. RGE maximizes the flaws of those who side with BJfonline. It is a pity that people who come along with new ideas walk straight into a turf war between two rival AP camps fighting over a small, virtually nonexistent market. Everyone knows what certain posters who are associated with certain camps are going to say before they say it. We have seen some of the same arguments and counter-arguments do 180 degree backflips in recent months as advocates for the defense become agents of the prosecution. In the meantime, genuine scam artists like John Patrick, E Clifton Davis and Leonard Benson carry on peddling worthless shite.
It becomes a turn-off.

Btw I welcome the fact that you personally avoided personal criticism of Carlos and tried to stay objective on OPP.

is one-sided. Not a soul at RGE has said one negative word about Carlos. ALthough BJF claims the opposite. On the other hand, merely for pointing out that the system was Speed Count and that it had a far lower win rate than indicated in the article; I have been falsely accused of violating a contract I never signed; I have been falsely accused a dozen times of saying MS is not an expert when in fact I said "MS is a BJ expert;" I have been falsely accused with coming up with bad numbers in a book that I never saw until it was published and have nothing to do with; and have been called a liar, scammer, fraud, system-seller, and every other name you can imagine merely for giving the correct win rate for OPP. (Oh, and they say CV is a useless scam too:)) And as you say:

Btw I welcome the fact that you personally avoided personal criticism of Carlos and tried to stay objective on OPP.

There is NO war between RGE and BJF. There is a coordinated attack by BJF against RGE and also against BJ21 and CC.COM. And it harms all APs. I believe it harms us more than Patrick, Patterson and the scammers. I believe that the casinos are our enemy. That is our focus. Not other APs.

Blackjack Scams

There is a coordinated attack by BJF against RGE and also against BJ21 and CC.COM.

You may be right. If this is the case however, who really gives a shit? AP's compromise a small segment of the community. No website makes any real difference to the commercial success of another website or product. Serial attacks from one website attacking another have proved only counter-productive.

Nobody who writes books or publishes software or whatever is really going to be affected by OTT criticism, as if anybody involved in the business does it for the money anyway. No one but an idiot takes these personal slurs at face value. The broad mass of regular AP's care nothing for it.
Don't dignify the utter impotence and irrelevance of such critics filled with self-destructive hate with any kind of response. It shows that you give a damn, and you shouldn't.

At some point, people get a life and move on.

But:

1. An unchallenged, oft-repeated lie is believed. Joseph Goebbels taught us that.

2. There are players that will be harmed by the nonsense that is posted. Some of us have spent much of our time over the years exposing gambling scams and casino tactics. This is just one more danger that must be exposed.

3. Most of us are here because we enjoy the field. I could make a lot more money working for the casinos. But I can't imagine ever taking their side. Unfortunately, the atmosphere created by the formation of BJF and its constant drumbeat of attacks in an attempt to destroy other sites takes much of the enjoyment out of the field. And ignoring the problem doesn't solve it.

4. The attacks in this case are designed to distract people from the message. The message is that OPP has about 50% of the win rate of KO Rookie and one-third that of KO. That is still my message to those that might try OPP thinking it's a trivial system with almost the power of a pro system. The wild, false accusations are simply designed to kill the messenger and therefore the message.

3. Most of us are here because we enjoy the field. I could make a lot more money working for the casinos. But I can't imagine ever taking their side. Unfortunately, the atmosphere created by the formation of BJF and its constant drumbeat of attacks in an attempt to destroy other sites takes much of the enjoyment out of the field. And ignoring the problem doesn't solve it.

I always thought you would never get rich working for casinos. How much does Barnett make? Shakelford is far from a high roller. I don't think the Griffins are rich. Is there anyone that makes, say, $250K/year for 4 years straight working for casinos?

Now getting rich OWNING or RUNNING casinos is another matter.

Math Boy

Is there anyone that makes, say, $250K/year for 4 years straight working for casinos?

MB, I was talking about real money. Not just 250m:) And Bev is hardly an example of corporate success:) Use your imagination.

Can you point to even one person that makes $250K/year working in casino protection? I'm not saying that is or is not a lot of money, I'm just throwing a number out there. Perhaps if you would stretch the definition to include the CEO of the company that makes mindplay. (L'Machine, f*** you.) But according to them they aren't about game protection. And that is more engineering than computer programming. Do you have any experience in engineering? If you can't think of one person, you are saying that you are confident that you can outearn every single person in your field. This is in a field with which you have zero experience.

Imagination is one thing. But you say $250K/year is nothing and no one in the field makes that. You believe you can make multiples of everyone else in the world when you have zero experience in something. Personally, I would call that more delusional than imaginative.

But then again, if I went back in time 8 years and told myself what I was expecting to make in 2006 and how I was going to do it I would think myself delusional.

Math Boy