Originally Posted by Apex
There is no way to lower the house edge in roulette with any kind of staking strategy. You will lose the percentage of money you bet relative to the house edge. The casinos give you a tiny amount of this back in comps. You will lose money overall.
It isn't any more complicated than that. Don't do it.
There is literally no difference in the expected value of different roulette strategies. There is no player input on roulette, so you just make a bet and win it or lose it. The only difference is how those losses might be distributed. For example, Martingale allows you to take small wins with a few catastrophic losses mixed in that tend to revert you back to the house advantage.
The Cash Cow.
.
i find it kinna fun and amusing to think about a reverse martingale at roulette or baccarat - keep doubling your bet until you lose
you would experience a net loss in your progression every time you lost
unlike a regular martingale you would never run out of funds while doubling (until you lost all the funds you came with after many different progressions)
and if and when you hit the table max -
you can't double anymore - so you would be forced to accept a very large win____________________(-:/
.
Last edited by drunk; 10-29-2024 at 11:28 AM.
Please don't feed the trolls
I think you are missing the point. If I'm being rated by the number of spins or bets, using a conservative strategy is far more valuable than getting it all on black. The original question washow do I maximize spins or bets while prolonging the eventual loss of the money I'm willing to gamble with?
Also, this is nonsense that all strategies lose money equally. There are bad strategies, that increase the house edge. For instance in BlackJack, what is I only bet my max bets when the count is negative, and only bet the minimum if the count is positive. It's a strategy right? What does it do to the house edge???
You're stubborn. ALL STRATEGIES LOSE MONEY EQUALLY. Roulette is not blackjack. There are no good or bad strategies. There is a fixed house edge on each spin. In double-zero, it's 5.26%. In single-zero 2.70%. You can stand on your head, or on one leg, or throw chips at the layout, or play some stupid Martingale progression; IT DOESN'T MATTER. In the end, you will lose that percentage of all the bets you make. Period. End of story.
Don
You and I both know, that no matter how many times you say this, the internet trolls that proliferate these forums will constantly tell us "we're wrong" and how they constantly beat roulette with some stupid "system" or it's new form, a "METHOD".
Where did I mention anything about beating roulette?
In post #15. You literally asked "How do you beat Roulette?" This implies that you were entertaining the possibility and wanted to know how.
This was a simple question about earning Tier Credits.
It took a few posts before you introduced this concept. Probably should have said that at the beginning.
This is nonsense that all strategies lose money equally.
Percentage wise, they all lose money equally. This is not up for debate. It all comes down to your average bet size and the house edge. Consider the following "strategies":
1. You bet $155 on every spin.
2. You do a 5-bet progression of $25, $50, $100, $200, $400 (for this example, assume that you continue this betting regardless of winning or losing).
Both of these betting styles will lose the exact same amount over time because both of these strategies have a betting average of $155. At this amount, with double zero on the wheel, you would lose approximately $8.15 per bet. The first form would be a more steady loss, while the second would be a massive roller coaster of highs and lows.
There are bad strategies, that increase the house edge.
I'm sorry but there are not.
For instance in BlackJack, what is I only bet my max bets when the count is negative, and only bet the minimum if the count is positive. It's a strategy right?
You're not comparing apples with apples. You asked about RNG. In BJ, the edge that you have is literally changing each time a new card comes out. If you're playing BJ with a RNG (the equivalent of shuffling between each hand), there is no longer any change in the house edge. And just like Roulette, no strategy will ever work because the house edge is frozen since each new hand is random.
That's the bad thing about random. There is no memory of what happened previously, and therefore, no player advantage.
I think you are missing the point. If I'm being rated by the number of spins or bets, using a conservative strategy is far more valuable than getting it all on black.
This you may be right about. I say "may" because I know nothing about online gambling and therefore know nothing about comps. I would suspect that a computer is recording your every bet and therefore knows what your average bet is. It may rate you and give something of intrinsic value back to you, but it most certainly will not overcome the house edge, not even close (unless it's an accident which is a different topic).
So yes, I'm sure the longer you play, the more you will get back. But would you hand somebody $100 only for them to give you 5 or 10 dollars back? No.
The roulette strategy he used was designed to minimize losses and maximize spins.
If by "minimizing losses" you mean "maximizing comps," then that may be possible (Sounds like snake oil to me). If you're saying that a strategy of betting can minimize losses apart from comps, then absolutely not. Math is stubborn. The house edge is fixed, period.
Percentage wise - would an App RNG be consistent with a wheel in a Casino?
No way to know for sure. Mathematically speaking it's kind of interesting if you want to get your geek on, but in real world betting it's "random enough" to ensure that you can't win.
If the aim is to maximize fun and not blow all of your money right away, some of these strategies are very good.
If the goal is making your money last, then the ONLY way to do it is to bet the table minimum. This is the slowest way to lose. Math sure is stubborn, isn't it?
You seem to be pretty determined to play this game. If you have money burning a hole in your pocket and you truly want to make it last as long as possible, the best way to do so comes down to only two possibilities:
1. Bet the table minimum, in a live casino or online.
2. In a live casino, bet big when the pit is looking and small when it isn't. They may credit you a larger average bet than you are actually placing. This could give you better tier/points/comps or whatever. You won't win, but you may decrease the HE due to human error in their system.
Let's use single zero roulette an example.
You bet 1 unit on a single number which pays 35 to 1. Your EV is therefore
(1/37 x 35) - (36/37 x 1) = 35/37 - 36/37 = -1/37 = -0.027 = -2.7%,
as Don said. You bet 1 unit on 2 numbers which pays 17 / 1. Your EV is
(2/37 x 17) - (35/37 x 1) = 34/37 - 35/37 = -1/37 = -0.027 = -2.7%
which is the same. Try doing the calculation for betting on the outside, the columns etc. No matter how many numbers you cover or how you do it, your EV will always be -2.7%.
As people have been telling you, and as I showed above, you can't change the rate at which you lose. Over time you will lose the house edge multiplied by the total amount you bet, no matter how you bet it.
You can however reduce the variance (i.e the size of the swings). At the extreme, betting 1 unit on every number will result in a 1 unit loss on every spin with no variation and would give you a precisely predictable loss while playing for comps, tier points or rewards. Of course they won't let you do that online or at a real casino and the tier points or comps will always be worth less than your loss. There are ways to cover almost every number in less obvious ways, but the casinos also know about them and won't allow it.
There do exist online promotions for roulette for which the value of reward is greater than the expected loss (at least in my locale). Reducing variance can be key to making steady profit in these cases. The most acceptable way is simply to bet the minimum on the outside (i.e red/black, odd/even, high/low). Anything more complex is probably overkill. Lower bet+more spins to clear the promotion results in lower variance but more time taken (i.e lower hourly win rate). You need to find the balance that works best for you.
Thank you breaking all of this down for. I understand your points, and I appreciate the fact that you understand what my question was. I was looking at the benefits of a Diamond Tier Status with Caesars and if you time your gambling won't their promotions you can get to the status faster. For instance there are 5x even 10x multipliers that turbo boost your status. I'm going to Vegas next month and I have a $450 a night suite comped for 12 nights. That's a $5,400 value. I also get $1,500 in resort credit. These Tiers matter. There are Vegas Influencers who break down how to get these high level Tiers without betting hundreds of thousands of dollars
Now to the math breakdown of EV. I appreciate that too. Maybe I'm looking at it from the wrong perspective. But this is my question... If I bet $10 on a number and hit, I win $350. If I play the two numbers split I now still have the same 2.7 percent chance to win - but if I hit I only get $170. So the payout, percentage wise is higher for playing the single number versus splitting it with another number. So how can the EV be the same? Thanks.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks