Roulette

[DSchles]

In the listings you gave, they started with 0 (no 00). As, in that first line, they were simply listing all the numbers on the wheel, it seems clear that that was a European wheel with no 00.

Don

[toolyp]

In the listings you gave, they started with 0 (no 00). As, in that first line, they were simply listing all the numbers on the wheel, it seems clear that that was a European wheel with no 00.

Don

Data is for AR – American Roulette. FR is French Roulette on their site. I couldn’t find results for FR.

German as they may be, Hamburgers make a big mistake. They treat the spins as numbers. The computers treat 00=0. No German at this end, but I figured out the right way. The spins should be treated as words. Then the words 00 and 0 are different.

The results are in table format and there is no 00. I thought first all Hamburg wheels were badly biased. No 00 in over 1000 spins! No way! Can I post a link? Truncated spielbank-hamburg.de/esplanade/#permanenzen then Archiv, then Date, Table (Tische) then Zeigen. No 00.

I couldnt find a bias as in OPs observation because 00 was replaced by 0. 00 and 0 have different sectors as opposite sides.

A German-speaking guy here should bring this to Hamburg Spielbank bosses. Their Permanenzen are erroneous. I don’t say they do it on purpose to mislead system players.

BTW as per Norm’s post. Every roulette wheel is biased. I don’t think there a roulette wheel where all numbers have equal frequencies. But the bias is different from wheel to wheel. Maybe OP is onto something.

[Archvaldor]

BTW as per Norm’s post. Every roulette wheel is biased. I don’t think there a roulette wheel where all numbers have equal frequencies. But the bias is different from wheel to wheel. Maybe OP is onto something.

Even on an unbiased wheel the numbers will rarely have equal frequencies due to random fluctuation except over an extremely large sample size.

Assuming that all wheels are biased-which is questionable this isn't that interesting in itself. A weakly biased number with probability of occurrence of say 1/34 isn't worth betting on because of the high variance associated with a 35-1 shot even if you could actually verify it existed. A sector might be-but mainly you are looking for strong bias of <1/30.

[toolyp]

Even on an unbiased wheel the numbers will rarely have equal frequencies due to random fluctuation except over an extremely large sample size.

Assuming that all wheels are biased-which is questionable this isn't that interesting in itself. A weakly biased number with probability of occurrence of say 1/34 isn't worth betting on because of the high variance associated with a 35-1 shot even if you could actually verify it existed. A sector might be-but mainly you are looking for strong bias of <1/30.

Yup, bias sounds a strong word. The roulette wheels always show different frequencies. Hamburg Spielbank table1 showed frequencies varying from 1 to 10 in 220 spins (one day). Did the top 12 numbers show the same trend the following day? I don’t know. I might take a chance and play them the following days. Frequencies from 7 to 10. There is a real chance some numbers will repeat sooner. I not saying it’s a bias.

Lets forget mechanics for a while. Look at random generators. All generate roulette numbers with different frequencies. Every random run looks a lot like a physical roulette wheel. The wheels are random too. But being mechanical, there is wear and tear.

I have a theory. The most physical roulette dealers have the greatest impact on wheel bias. The OP should bet on his observation for a while, with the special dealers spinning. Increase the bet a bit after a loss. He should quit if losing more than he can afford to. Live to play another day.

[toolyp]

Yup, bias sounds a strong word. The roulette wheels always show different frequencies. Hamburg Spielbank table1 showed frequencies varying from 1 to 10 in 220 spins (one day). Did the top 12 numbers show the same trend the following day? I don’t know. I might take a chance and play them the following days. Frequencies from 7 to 10. There is a real chance some numbers will repeat sooner. I not saying it’s a bias.

Lets forget mechanics for a while. Look at random generators. All generate roulette numbers with different frequencies. Every random run looks a lot like a physical roulette wheel. The wheels are random too. But being mechanical, there is wear and tear.

I have a theory. The most physical roulette dealers have the greatest impact on wheel bias. The OP should bet on his observation for a while, with the special dealers spinning. Increase the bet a bit after a loss. He should quit if losing more than he can afford to. Live to play another day.

OP said “usually”. That implies “a majority of cases or over 50%”. He doesnt need to be right even 50%. Just 4 out 10 spins and he plays with a 15%+ advantage. At 50-50 his advantage is 45%+.

[Archvaldor]

OP said “usually”. That implies “a majority of cases or over 50%”. He doesnt need to be right even 50%. Just 4 out 10 spins and he plays with a 15%+ advantage. At 50-50 his advantage is 45%+.

If a dealer was capable of that control even 50% of the time you could bankrupt the house in a relatively short space of time. That doesn't seem that likely offhand, though I'd keep an open mind.

You would think this would come out more often publicly if this type of thing were possible. For example there are fairly frequent public stories about slot machine programmers building cheat codes into their own games-then later cleaning them out.

[toolyp]

If a dealer was capable of that control even 50% of the time you could bankrupt the house in a relatively short space of time. That doesn't seem that likely offhand, though I'd keep an open mind.

You would think this would come out more often publicly if this type of thing were possible. For example there are fairly frequent public stories about slot machine programmers building cheat codes into their own games-then later cleaning them out.

I stumbled upon a YouTube video. I thought it was created by the original poster in this thread. The YouTube author was, he claims, a casino veteran, up to casino manager. He was also a roulette dealer trainer. He claims that newbie dealers create biases like our OP describes in his post. One dealer landed the ball in the opposite sector (6 slots) from the last roulette number. Then in the same 6-slot sector as the last number spun! OP’s system would have worked 2 out of 2 spins!

Worth watching – truncated link
youtube.com/watch?v=f5MtY0VPjOw&t=919s
“Secrets of Roulette Prediction: Unveiling the Unseen Patterns”

[Archvaldor]

I stumbled upon a YouTube video. I thought it was created by the original poster in this thread. The YouTube author was, he claims, a casino veteran, up to casino manager. He was also a roulette dealer trainer. He claims that newbie dealers create biases like our OP describes in his post. One dealer landed the ball in the opposite sector (6 slots) from the last roulette number. Then in the same 6-slot sector as the last number spun! OP’s system would have worked 2 out of 2 spins!

Worth watching – truncated link
youtube.com/watch?v=f5MtY0VPjOw&t=919s
“Secrets of Roulette Prediction: Unveiling the Unseen Patterns”

As a full-time youtuber I can tell you any one using whiteboard animation is out to lunch. It means they couldn't be bothered to get any footage or demonstrate what they are talking about visually. Or spend more than an hour making it. They just pay some guy in Slovakia $10 to do it.

He could have just used a screen record to show a wheel online and select a few examples of a consistent throw. He was too lazy to even do that.

I've heard many people claim dealers can control the ball. Maybe some can but there isn't much evidence to that effect that isn't anecdotal. Every dealer I have tested was not close to being predictable.