WaterFox

As you wish. I had come here with the expectation that I'd be able to discuss a strategy and some ideas and maybe approach this with the attitude that we're all trying to win against a group of organisations that all conspire against us. I might not have the perfect system but it works for me. I might also not agree with the view that it can't be beat but that's because I have had some success. Perhaps it's too soon to tell but I'm pleased with where I have go to. Sure, I would like your ideas ad your experiences if that's going to help and I'll share my programming experience in return. But, to be honest, from the first post, I've been insulted. I honestly don't think I deserve it but there we are. As you wish, I'll leave.

I'd hope that it would pay for itself.

Yes, I suppose in that sense, I am.

@Gkell727- And, no, I am not after flogging a system. My intention here is as I said at the beginning; to see if anyone is in interested in automation of roulette play. I'm happy to help code it, if they want, but it's really my point to understand how you play. I watch RocknRolla on YouTube a lot and can't fathom out his staking and number choices but it's really enjoyable to watch. Hence joining. I guess I am after seeing your own strategies, not selling you mine. Sorry, you have got me completely wrong.

@david1111I don't have a means of predicting the outcome, if that's what you mean by a system. What I do is model the worst, most extreme, cases of the longest losing runs (i.e. where none of the numbers I have placed are spun) and then create ways to manage those. But, as others here have alluded to, there is the possibility of foul play so I am really going to relying on the reliability of the Casino and mean reviewing the Casinos which, thank fully, you do here. The Casinos have been doing this for a long time and I have no doubt that they have developed very devious ways to seduce, convince and trap.

Actually, I also like the fact that you review and give your opinion on the trustworthiness of specific Casinos here.

Simply because of the doubt and the lack of clarity on whether the Casinos are corrupt is enough to make me defer to the possibility that they might be. I've seen enough posts of videos even on this site to strongly suggest it. It's either going to be the case that they are, and are willing to take the risk of licence lost and punishment, or they are not. If they are (corrupt) then they clearly think they need to be in order to make more money than the house edge offers or because there exists punters out there who can defeat the house edge. I agree viewing the roulette table and watching the Croupier scoop the chips into the chute should imply there's no need to gain more than the house edge but if it was theoretically possible to encounter an occasional punter who could, even by luck of timing, win more than the Casino was willing to accept then they would still wish for an advantage in that (rare) case. It's just wise to consider the possibility and to develop an approach that manages that, such as, for example, stopping when you experience a losing run that exceeds some reasonable multiple of the probability of it happening.

@Solario333- That's precisely what I am worried about and is the heart of my question. Thanks. I have only applied my program to Sky Vegas, because the stakes are small enough, and it would only currently work on other Casinos where I can control the execution of the spin. The pace is too fast otherwise, even for me let alone my program. But I'm vary of the potential for Casinos to have measures in place, exactly as you describe, to take money by breaking the randomness expectation. Thanks for the warning about Evolution Gaming and Immersive Roulette.

@philinvicta- I am in the UK. The Casino I play on has one zero, providing a 1 in 37 chance of winning. 1 to 36 is 36 numbers, plus the 0 gives 37 in total, so a 1 in 37 chance of winning as there are 37 possible placements. It allows me to bet on zero I thought that was odd as in others, from a long time ago admittedly, I have seen that prevented. It was the case that when zero came up the house took everything.

@Chair Slots- Thanks, I appreciate the clarification. Whist my question might be odd, as you put it, my perception is that the edge could be produced in a variety of ways and it might that the laws and rules which apply to land based Casinos could be different than for online. I'm not aware of this, hence the question. But a 35-1 payout versus 37-1 odds of winning is what I know from the land based Casinos so if this is true for the online then at least they align. This helps. Thanks.

Hi, All. Just wondering if anyone has any thoughts on online roulette probabilities of outcomes when the Casino allows you to bet on zero. To me this implies they no longer have a house edge but, if that's the case, then does the Casino in question have the outcome based on a percentage payout model rather than using an RNG? In other words, if you were to win several times consecutively, would you then start losing to ensure the payout percentage is met, in a similar way to slot machines?

@Denman- Okay, I understand and many thanks. My personal preference is, at the moment, solely Roulette but systemising/automating any strategy for someone is interesting. I might not make massive profits from Roulette but I do make small amounts which proves the point that it can be profitable but I respect that sports might be more profitable but, for me, there are too many variables and I'd find it difficult to weight them. I'll assume that the Roulette "save presets" is what I thought; numbers and stakes saved for future reuse. It's been good chatting with you and well done with your software and system. It's very satisfying to build something that works exactly the way you want it to.

I know this is an old post and apologies to add to it but it's an interesting subject. I spoke to a croupier, at Grosvenor, Luton, after seeing a consecutive run of three number and she told me that on one occasion she, herself, had actually spun eight consecutive spins of the same number so bizarre stuff like this can really happen. As a general rule, after I did some modelling (using 6 million simulated spins) I found the most extreme events tend be at around ten times their statistical probability. In other words, for example, if you were to cover twelve numbers that would be just under one third of the table so, statistically, you would expect to get a number right in (roughly) every three spins on average. The most extreme cases for you would probably be very close to being one in thirty.

@DenmanYes, I recall being able to save my favourite bets on one platform, I can't remember which one though. Is that what you mean about "save presets"? Well I am not entirely sure what opportunities, or it's profitability, you see but that's down to my own lack of commercial awareness. So I am happy to discuss what you have in mind.

There's a first time for everything, I suppose!