How do you think guys, is it possible to win with "Change color and double bet" strategy? exmpl. Bet $1 on black, spin, if lose, bet $2 on red and so on...
Joined: Jun '13
Location: Canada
Age: 80 (M)
Posts: 3700
It depends of the table you are playing some have min bet and max bet. So if you double depending of te max table yes you can loose depending of your luck
Joined: Apr '09
Location: Australia
Age: 40 (M)
Posts: 6483
The very very simple answer is that it is mathematically impossible to beat roulette. It is truly unbeatable, there are strategies that may lesson the house edge, but never over come it.
Joined: May '08
Location: Lithuania
Age: 39 (M)
Posts: 10090
ah the old "proven and tested" Martingale strategy (double up you stakes after every loss until your lose your stack or to your despair hit the max bet limit)- easy strategy to play, but to stressful. i've been a croupier and saw many attempts at "storming the Bastille".. sadly with no success- yeah you can be ahead at some point, but eventually if you play for too long- you're doomed. what i recommend is using the "Reverse Martingale"- double up only after a win, this way you attempt to win big using casino money... still no "guaranteed" win, but less painful and potentially more rewarding
Joined: Mar '09
Location: Greece
Age: 47 (F)
Posts: 14136
Have tried this system with play money on different sites. And i have to admit that i didnt manage to make a decent profit a single time. And when im saying decent i mean more than 5-10 dollars and that with a bet of 1 as a starting point. Not to mention that there is a limit in double ups so after some point you cant keep doubling Not that i would have reached at that point playing with real money though. Waste....
Joined: Feb '14
Location: Mauritius
Age: 34 (M)
Posts: 103
That's exactly my strategy when playing roulette, it's not a bad one but to win at it you have to set up a target of the amount you want to win let's say min 20% of your stack you want to risk...
Joined: Feb '13
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 47 (F)
Posts: 2372
Posted by jessthehuman: The very very simple answer is that it is mathematically impossible to beat roulette. It is truly unbeatable, there are strategies that may lesson the house edge, but never over come it.
I disagree. The martingale system mathematically beats roulette.
of course, you wont beat it because the house will always limit bets so eventually you will hit the limit and would have lost overall.
but mathematically, given an infinite amount of money and no max bet, this is a mathematical strategy that works ;p
Joined: May '13
Location: Mauritius
Age: 32 (M)
Posts: 2688
it is just random and the only thing that will make you money on roulette is luck, so hope for some luck and play like crazy and you gonna go to win some money. Though it might be longer and you will bust several bonuses first as in the short term luck is very small. Anyway good luck with the roulette you will need it as the house will have an edge in those games. Cheer have a nice night im going to sleep and play one last sng!
Posted by jessthehuman: The very very simple answer is that it is mathematically impossible to beat roulette. It is truly unbeatable, there are strategies that may lesson the house edge, but never over come it.
I disagree. The martingale system mathematically beats roulette.
of course, you wont beat it because the house will always limit bets so eventually you will hit the limit and would have lost overall.
but mathematically, given an infinite amount of money and no max bet, this is a mathematical strategy that works ;p
Say what?
Martingale will go to negative infinity, if there is no max bet... I'd say that does not constitute a working strategy...
Joined: Apr '09
Location: Australia
Age: 40 (M)
Posts: 6483
Posted by Mober: Not to mention that there is a limit in double ups so after some point you cant keep doubling
"professional" roulette players (professional losers) will co-ordinate their bets by having a 'team' of players, so when the limit is reached, another player effectively over-comes the limit by placing another, 'independent' bet.
Obviously the trick is to not get caught (violently ass-raped by casino security).
That said - some online roulette offer real tables, if you could mange to form a team online, via a site that has a real wheel so you're all betting on the same outcome, it may be easier to work in a team. That said - it may just prove easier to get caught, since once you hit the ceiling, suddenly multiple people would be better max and if you kept doubling, it would look really odd for more and more players to suddenly be betting max, on a 50:50 option with everyone choosing the same outcome.
Also - *even* if you do manage to form a team and get away with it, it is still impossible to beat. Eventually you will still run into a long enough run of losses that you lose everything..And at that stage, you may be risking millions, billions, zillions.. of dollars simply to win $5.
Joined: Apr '09
Location: Australia
Age: 40 (M)
Posts: 6483
Posted by marqis:
Posted by IceQueenAce:
Posted by jessthehuman: The very very simple answer is that it is mathematically impossible to beat roulette. It is truly unbeatable, there are strategies that may lesson the house edge, but never over come it.
I disagree. The martingale system mathematically beats roulette.
of course, you wont beat it because the house will always limit bets so eventually you will hit the limit and would have lost overall.
but mathematically, given an infinite amount of money and no max bet, this is a mathematical strategy that works ;p
Say what?
Martingale will go to negative infinity, if there is no max bet... I'd say that does not constitute a working strategy...
lol exactly, what a ridiculous post and failure to understand maths.
If you played with an infinite amount of money and kept playing martingale, you would lose an infinite amount of money.
I mean, talking about gambling in infinites is stupid and talking about probability with infinite sets is stupid.
But that said, if you had an infinite amount of money and continued to play martingale style, across an infinite amount of spins you would simply accrue an infinite loss.
The house has an edge, you don't get paid the right amount, the gain is never worth the risk. Doesn't matter what betting pattern you choose, you cannot alter this fact.
Infinite money and infinite spins just means infinite loss.
@jessthehuman You are not right. And YOU don´t understand maths. Martingale WOULD work with infinite amount of money and unlimited max bet. Because of the INFINITE amount of money, you would be ALWAYS able to double your bet without running out of money and eventually you would hit your color.
Joined: Feb '08
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 35 (M)
Posts: 1886
Posted by ddblt1970: Because of the INFINITE amount of money, you would be ALWAYS able to double your bet without running out of money and eventually you would hit your color.
If you're talking infinity in maths you have to be careful. You can get INFINITY within INFINITY. If you played out every single combo of red-black eventually you would get infinite red and lose your infinite bankroll.
The real question is: given a bankroll of 1000 dollars, which is more likely to happen first, a point where you double your bankroll or the point where you reach your bankroll limit i.e you lose 1000 dollars. If the latter is true it doesn't matter how big your bankroll is, you lose in the long term.
Joined: Apr '09
Location: Australia
Age: 40 (M)
Posts: 6483
Posted by ddblt1970: @jessthehuman You are not right. And YOU don't understand maths. Martingale WOULD work with infinite amount of money and unlimited max bet. Because of the INFINITE amount of money, you would be ALWAYS able to double your bet without running out of money and eventually you would hit your color.
Next time use your brain a little bit more.
Yeah, but then it is no longer infinite - you're basically saying you want to continue doubling your bet until you win XX amount and then stop.. But you could say the same for any pattern.. I could just put $5 on 32 and spin an infinite amount of times with an infinite amount of money and at some stage I'd be up exact $42,000. And I could stop then.
With an infinite supply of money and infinite spins then its just stupid, every single possibility would play out and you could win or lose any amount you wanted to, by simply choosing to select a certain outcome in an infinite range of outcomes.
My point is - if you're spinning forever, doubling your bet every time, you bankroll will ultimately have a negative, linear progression.
There is a house edge, it doesn't matter how you bet, however much you bet, how you change your bet, the more you spin, the more your expected bankroll trends downward.
Infinite is stupid and isn't a real number. Maybe you'll spin an infinite amount of reds and you're betting black and doubling every time.
As aWood said, an infinite set can contain other infinite sets. Its just fucking stupid. There's no guarantee infinite spins/bankroll would eventually net you a win. You may bet on the wrong colour an infinite amount of times for all of eternity losing an infinite amount of money.
Joined: Jan '09
Location: Italy
Age: 53 (M)
Posts: 3871
Posted by jessthehuman:
Posted by ddblt1970: @jessthehuman You are not right. And YOU don't understand maths. Martingale WOULD work with infinite amount of money and unlimited max bet. Because of the INFINITE amount of money, you would be ALWAYS able to double your bet without running out of money and eventually you would hit your color.
Next time use your brain a little bit more.
Yeah, but then it is no longer infinite - you're basically saying you want to continue doubling your bet until you win XX amount and then stop.. But you could say the same for any pattern.. I could just put $5 on 32 and spin an infinite amount of times with an infinite amount of money and at some stage I'd be up exact $42,000. And I could stop then.
With an infinite supply of money and infinite spins then its just stupid, every single possibility would play out and you could win or lose any amount you wanted to, by simply choosing to select a certain outcome in an infinite range of outcomes.
My point is - if you're spinning forever, doubling your bet every time, you bankroll will ultimately have a negative, linear progression.
There is a house edge, it doesn't matter how you bet, however much you bet, how you change your bet, the more you spin, the more your expected bankroll trends downward.
Infinite is stupid and isn't a real number. Maybe you'll spin an infinite amount of reds and you're betting black and doubling every time.
As aWood said, an infinite set can contain other infinite sets. Its just fucking stupid. There's no guarantee infinite spins/bankroll would eventually net you a win. You may bet on the wrong colour an infinite amount of times for all of eternity losing an infinite amount of money.
Jess, Bro', quit this thread or you will be compelled to reply an infinite amount of times
Joined: Mar '09
Location: Greece
Age: 47 (F)
Posts: 14136
Never the less if you like to play roulette, go to a physical casino. Dont play in online ones. The chances of winning something there and we are talking about a small amount and not systematically using whatever system are close to none.
Not that i would have reached at that point playing with real money though.
