sextoushop.com.br/hodof-el-estudio-clerical.php So it makes sense that if you want to predict the winning number, you need to consider what is making the ball land where it does. The physics of roulette is actually quite mundane and simple. Casinos know their business better than average players. And casinos share information between other casinos. See the page about how to test your roulette system.
It teaches you how to properly test, without risking any money. Perhaps applying the above knowledge to actual systems will help you understand why a system loses. Below are some well-known losing systems, and why they lose:. This is not a system for bet selection. All you do with the Martingale is change bet size on different spins.
TurboGenius is one of many roulette forum members who mislead others by winning on rigged and flawed online games. He avoided any reputable tests. His system involves betting on numbers that recently appeared more than once in a 37 spin cycle. This is a betting progression and money management strategy. It can be fun to play with, but is no different to random bets with random bet size.
In fact it took me around 10 years of developing roulette systems before I had anything that worked, or even understood the basics of why my systems failed. So I understand the mind of the typical roulette player. The winning number is determined by real physical variables, like wheel and ball properties, spin spins etc. If spins are random, the odds of winning are fixed. For example, if you bet on 0, you expect to win about 1 in 37 spins on a single zero wheel. The payouts never change.
They are casino rules. For example, a win on a single number pays 35 It is simply unfair payouts when you do win. Almost every system is based around junk like the law of a third, waiting for numbers to hit then betting, martingale progression etc. So the odds are unchanged, and the payouts are unchanged. The result is guaranteed long term loss. No betting progression changes it. The average player has no idea of these simple fundamental facts, which is why they keep coming up with losing systems, again and again. Everything in roulette is long term, unless you have detailed data that accounts for why the ball lands where it does like dominant diamond, rotor speed, ball bounce.
You cannot possibly test a system properly from a few minutes or even weeks of play. Proper testing requires months, otherwise a loss or win can be plain good or bad luck. So for proper testing to be practical, you need at least 50, recorded spins from a real wheel. Most players will either flat ignore the above, or not have proper understanding of it. It is difficult to change old ways of thinking. Sure you may get lucky and win, but what happens if you lose?
Then you would be changing the odds of winning. Unfortunately the average website about winning roulette is full of rubbish. But at least now you may be better able to identify systems and strategies that are guaranteed to lose, without needing to test or even buy systems.
See the www. They all apply physics to predict the winning number and improve player odds. Roulette Computers www. What makes it special is the data cross-referenced to ensure accuracy. This enables the player to better find hidden patterns in spins, and in less time. Also it enables players to quickly adjust when conditions at the wheel change. The method of cross referencing is not exclusive to roulette, and can be applied to other casino games.
But this particular roulette system is combined with other predictive methods that are exclusive to roulette. Which roulette strategies really work, which eventually lose, and WHY? Here are the facts every player should know. The problems with progression strategies are: 1.
You only tested 1, spins. What if 10, players all used the same system?
What if 1 player used the same system 10, times? FICTION: Roulette has streaks you can use for advantage Even with numbers from a random number generator, there will inevitably be times where the same number spins several times in a row. FICTION: Winning after you reach your target profit for the day helps ensure daily profits It makes no difference if you play 1 spin a day for days, or spins in 1 day. The Illusion of a Winning System The casino thrives on delusions and illusions. These players are convinced they have a winning system. Then this happens: The inevitable bankroll crash winnings and more lost Betting progression is like a loan that must be repaid, plus interest.
Does it rely on betting progression, or same-sized bets flat bets? Does it use triggers that assume there some sort of balance will occur? If losing streaks are rare, will they wipe out the bankroll?
Below are some well-known losing systems, and why they lose: The Martingale This is not a system for bet selection. TurboGenius Repeaters TurboGenius is one of many roulette forum members who mislead others by winning on rigged and flawed online games. Tier et Tout This is a betting progression and money management strategy. In the Simplest Terms Possible 1. It is always there no matter what combination of bets you choose. The overall expected return or expected value is:. And therefore they arbitrarily conclude that roulette strategies or progressions or bet selections make no difference and offer no advantage.
They call that average expectation. Their verdict: You can not win at roulette, because it is a negative expectation game. Why this is too much narrow-minded mathematics and too little real life. I want to emphasize that the house advantage is a considerable disadvantage for any roulette player. It eats up part of our winnings. But generally speaking, its significance is greatly overstated.
Here is why:. To finish this issue once and for all, I challenge all the house-edge-obsessed gentlemen: Show me a system that would win if there was no house edge. I dare anyone to show me a system that could beat roulette if there was an edge in favor of the player! Now show me a system that will win with these favorable conditions! This means a system that will generate profit in real life. If you give me such a system I most certainly could turn it to successful system taking into account the house edge.
How else can I explain it to you?
If the negative expectation is not such a big issue, then why do we lose at roulette? A valid question. Indeed, the extreme difficulty to be profitable in roulette, is one of the reasons why the house edge myth is so popular. However it is not the true and complete explanation. The main reason for the losses of most serious and thoughtful roulette players is something totally different: It is the variance from the average, the difference between theoretical expectation and actual outcomes , the extreme fluctuations.
That is the reason we lose. We lose because sometimes we experience crazy spin sequences that fall in the tails of the normal distribution graph.
You just cannot beat those roulette spins from hell. The real problem, and the reason we could always lose at roulette is that, no matter what the theoretical expectation, it IS possible to have a spin sequence with only 37 Blacks! And such a low hit rate would be possible even if there was no zero and no house edge. The house edge in roulette is a reality. However this is by no means proof that he can not be profitable with the right strategy. And anyway, the house advantage is a minor issue compared with much more important issues the roulette player has to deal with, like the variance from the expected average of spin outcomes.
Don't rejoice too quickly, gamblers. As a result, professional gamblers should probably stick to the games where math and skill still reign supreme over chance, like poker. Professional gamblers know that when it comes to the game of roulette, the best strategy is the same one that supercomputer Joshua applied to nuclear war in the movie WarGames : "The only way to win is not to play. Of course, Small adds that, "even if the odds are in your favor, there is still a probability of losing, and losing big.
As the researchers note in the paper, "for the casino the news is mostly good—minor adjustments will ameliorate the advantage of the physicist-gambler. I'm an Associate Editor covering science and cutting edge tech.