Is Roulette Sniper the real deal?

NADA · 25-09-2008 1:41am #1

OK so I've been looking into roulette alot online recently. Now I do realise the game is unbeatable in a sense but all of these guys swearing to be making 16000 dollars a week using this programme rouleelte sniper makes me curious. I actually think the guy in this video is Irish

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnunUY8PR8I&feature=related

Wanna try this stuff but don't wanna be a sucker so I'm not taking any chances. Anyone wanna shed some light on this subject if they have experience especially if they have negative experience.

ArmaniJeanss · 25-09-2008 10:04am

I haven't read the link, but I can tell you with 100% accuracy that it is a scam. Roulette is not beatable, and anyone who claims it is is therefore or a fool or a scammer.

p.s. No offence, but this is the 2nd thread you've started about an online casino. I can't emphasize enough that you will lose money if you keep playing these.

ErinGoBrath · 25-09-2008 10:26am

Why would a guy who's earning 16000 dollars a week need to:
a) pimp some 'special software' when he's already 'minted'?
b) let anyone else in on his money making plan? Oh I see, he's giving something back/act of charity. Nice.

Scam, he'll make money on you believing the hype. Avoid.

NADA · 25-09-2008 1:45pm

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

I haven't read the link, but I can tell you with 100% accuracy that it is a scam. Roulette is not beatable, and anyone who claims it is is therefore or a fool or a scammer.

p.s. No offence, but this is the 2nd thread you've started about an online casino. I can't emphasize enough that you will lose money if you keep playing these.

Yeah I know ha! Ah thing is I never played at online casinos so I won't be losing my money ha!

Car Mad · 25-09-2008 5:11pm

NADA wrote: »

OK so I've been looking into roulette alot online recently. Now I do realise the game is unbeatable in a sense but all of these guys swearing to be making 16000 dollars a week using this programme rouleelte sniper makes me curious. I actually think the guy in this video is Irish

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnunUY8PR8I&feature=related

Wanna try this stuff but don't wanna be a sucker so I'm not taking any chances. Anyone wanna shed some light on this subject if they have experience especially if they have negative experience.

Stay away brought it useless basicaly martingale progression small wins huge loses:(

NADA · 25-09-2008 7:11pm

Yeah that's what I got from playing with the trial! Just doubling bets and all that bull****!

TheDude2008 · 26-09-2008 6:14pm

Id love to own a casino with fools like the op around would make a fortune, there is no system to win idiot, you go play in a casino you will loose in the long term, better off burning your money instead.

Mellor · 26-09-2008 7:00pm

OP, without even looking at that link, I can say that its boll0x,
not only is roulette not beatable in a sense, its just not beatable.

TheDude2008 wrote:

Id love to own a casino with fools like the op around would make a fortune, there is no system to win idiot, you go play in a casino you will loose in the long term, better off burning your money instead.

this however, is not true

cherrypicker555 · 26-09-2008 7:41pm

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

I haven't read the link, but I can tell you with 100% accuracy that it is a scam. Roulette is not beatable, and anyone who claims it is is therefore or a fool or a scammer.

p.s. No offence, but this is the 2nd thread you've started about an online casino. I can't emphasize enough that you will lose money if you keep playing these.

It is but you need a massive bankroll and only win a small amount on spins in your favour, Example.

Bet 20 red lose.

Bet 40 red lose.

Bet 100 red win 100....Profit £40.

Problem is within a few losing spins your into betting lots of money, most tables have a £ 500 limit on betting on red/black, odd/even, so you cant chase your loss. Also place I go has a £20 minimum red/black bet.

I have had 9 spins in a row go against me testing this at home, which would have had me bettin a few grand to win back my loss and profit.

Saying that sometimes I like to play this system as it feels like money for nothing.

Last time I won £100 after three spins, cashed up and walked out.

Its a mad buzz.

thedini · 26-09-2008 7:56pm

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

Its a mad buzz.

LOL

Mellor · 30-09-2008 4:25pm

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

It is but you need a massive bankroll and only win a small amount on spins in your favour, Example.

Bet 20 red lose.

Bet 40 red lose.

Bet 100 red win 100....Profit £40.

Problem is within a few losing spins your into betting lots of money, most tables have a £ 500 limit on betting on red/black, odd/even, so you cant chase your loss. Also place I go has a £20 minimum red/black bet.

I have had 9 spins in a row go against me testing this at home, which would have had me bettin a few grand to win back my loss and profit.

Saying that sometimes I like to play this system as it feels like money for nothing.

Last time I won £100 after three spins, cashed up and walked out.

Its a mad buzz.

lol,
busto soon

dsmythy · 30-09-2008 5:08pm

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

It is but you need a massive bankroll and only win a small amount on spins in your favour, Example.

Bet 20 red lose.

Bet 40 red lose.

Bet 100 red win 100....Profit £40.

Problem is within a few losing spins your into betting lots of money, most tables have a £ 500 limit on betting on red/black, odd/even, so you cant chase your loss. Also place I go has a £20 minimum red/black bet.

I have had 9 spins in a row go against me testing this at home, which would have had me bettin a few grand to win back my loss and profit.

Saying that sometimes I like to play this system as it feels like money for nothing.

Last time I won £100 after three spins, cashed up and walked out.

Its a mad buzz.

Mad as in you'd have to be mad to try it. Like using crack.

CHD · 03-10-2008 2:43am

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

It is but you need a massive bankroll and only win a small amount on spins in your favour, Example.

Bet 20 red lose.

Bet 40 red lose.

Bet 100 red win 100....Profit £40.

Problem is within a few losing spins your into betting lots of money, most tables have a £ 500 limit on betting on red/black, odd/even, so you cant chase your loss. Also place I go has a £20 minimum red/black bet.

I have had 9 spins in a row go against me testing this at home, which would have had me bettin a few grand to win back my loss and profit.

Saying that sometimes I like to play this system as it feels like money for nothing.

Last time I won £100 after three spins, cashed up and walked out.

Its a mad buzz.

Thats not beating the game thats gambling.

cherrypicker555 · 03-10-2008 12:39pm

CHD wrote: »

Thats not beating the game thats gambling.

Only because you can't chase your losses beyond a £500 bet on one colour, (not sure about in the US, expect if you did play this they would ban you) , Roulette can be beaten but no casino would allow you to consistantly win and you need a massive bankroll.

Example :

1.Bet 20 red lose

2 Bet 40 red lose

3 Bet 80 red lose

4 Bet 160 red lose

5 Bet 300 red lose.

6 Bet 620 red lose.

7 Bet 1240 red lose.

8 Bet 2500 red lose.

9 Bet 5020 red....Win....Profit 20.

When tested at home the system makes around £ 500 an hour profit, then a huge amount of spinds go the other way, as stated, I once spun 9 black in a row.

Saying that the house advantage of Roulette over the punter is less then that of the high st bookmaker.

Dodge · 03-10-2008 1:10pm

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

Only because you can't chase your losses beyond a £500 bet on one colour, (not sure about in the US, expect if you did play this they would ban you)

No they wouldn't. They know you'd be bak losing to them all the time because

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

Its a mad buzz.

Casinos are fine for entertainment purposes. Playing even simple strategy at BJ can win in the short term but the house edge will nearly always see you lose. If you're willing to part with the cash, it can still be an enjoyable time. People gambling on cartoons and computer programmes are doomed to fail though

cherrypicker555 · 03-10-2008 3:45pm

Dodge wrote: »

No they wouldn't. They know you'd be bak losing to them all the time because

Casinos are fine for entertainment purposes. Playing even simple strategy at BJ can win in the short term but the house edge will nearly always see you lose. If you're willing to part with the cash, it can still be an enjoyable time. People gambling on cartoons and computer programmes are doomed to fail though

But if you have a massive bankroll and followed the above system (if an unlimited max bet was allowed on one colour) how could you lose ?

http://www.inside-edge-mag.co.uk/casinos/masterclass/194/roulette.html

........Heres the alternative, watch the wheel as an example spin 6 red x then bet black, if you lose chase your money and add some on.

"When I'm betting against the wheel, if I wait for, say, six red numbers in a row, then I'm closer to hitting a black than if I bet on black straight away, although there's no mathematical logic in this. Waiting for ten reds would be even better, but runs of ten aren't as frequent.

Nevertheless, the longest recorded run is said to be 27 of the same colour, so that whoever was following the wheel that day cleaned up. The world record for the same number hitting is seven times running and happened in Bristol many years ago. I've seen the same number hit four times in a row - long, long odds.

With online casinos, the software records the previous numbers, making it easier to know what numbers have recently hit. In many real casinos, a number board will display the past 15 or so numbers behind the wheel.

Besides understanding the game better than most, the other reason I win is that I work to preconceived plans. I set modest win targets and tight loss limits. Winning consistently is the only true goal. Anyone can win sometimes, but usually they'll lose overall. In Las Vegas, the average visitor loses $400 or so. They expect to lose - and, without wishing to be unkind, they deserve to lose because they don't care enough about winning. Most will say they had a great time. Great time? Losing money? Come on!

Stick to your budget
There are two aspects to money management. First, fix a budget you can afford and stick to it. Don't carry cash you don't really want to risk. Don't top up your lost money with visits to cashpoints. Set a modest loss limit in advance. If you have £400 to play with, divide it into four chunks of £100 and play with one at a time. If you lose one chunk, then stop for a while before starting again - but without expecting to win back the entire £100 lost (a 100% win target is just plain greedy). Reach your next win target of, say, 20-30% and stop. Take a break. Relax with a beer or a meal, or log off for a while, and then start again with another modest win target. You may well win back what you lost over a session or two more.

Have a staking plan
The second aspect of money management is system play - in other words, what you stake. I don't have the space here to explain all the different approaches, but the simplest advice is to:

Keep stakes low
Keep stakes at the same level while you're losing (or even reduce them)
Increase the stakes when winning.
Play the table-minimum stakes until you get ahead. It's no crime to be a small player: you're not playing to impress the girlfriend, wife or casino boss. You're playing to win! Most players lose because they run out of money by betting too much, too quickly.

Take a tip from the casinos: they don't lose, and they don't expect to win more than a small percentage on each spin. At roulette, at worst the odds are just over 5% in the casino's favour. If you bet £100, casinos expect to win only between £5 and £6 at most each spin. In reality, most people arriving with £100 will lose it all for ignoring the guidelines I've set out. The casinos' edge chips away relentlessly. Casinos shrug off the hard knocks when the high rollers win their millions because they have the resources to carry this type of loss. Your approach must be the same: the more money you have available, the greater the chance that you can manage it successfully by being modest in your goals and patient in your plans to get there.

Playing roulette to win is hard work. It's also enormous fun. I guarantee that taking time to learn to play properly will bring rewards. In the long run, no matter how exciting the action on the internet or in the casino, it's far more fun to win than lose. Don't be a moose - play to win!"

ArmaniJeanss · 03-10-2008 5:42pm

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

Playing roulette to win is hard work. It's also enormous fun. I guarantee that taking time to learn to play properly will bring rewards. In the long run, no matter how exciting the action on the internet or in the casino, it's far more fun to win than lose. Don't be a moose - play to win!"

I see on your website you phrase it slightly differently.

Playing to win is hard work. We guarantee that taking time to learn to play properly will bring in rewards. In the long run, no matter how exciting the action on the internet or in the casinos, it's far more fun to win than lose. Don't be a moose - play to win!

http://www.roulettesystemwinner.com/

Shills are scum.

cherrypicker555 · 03-10-2008 5:50pm

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

I see on your website you phrase it slightly differently.

Playing to win is hard work. We guarantee that taking time to learn to play properly will bring in rewards. In the long run, no matter how exciting the action on the internet or in the casinos, it's far more fun to win than lose. Don't be a moose - play to win!

http://www.roulettesystemwinner.com/

Shills are scum.

Its not my website, no need to throw your toys out of the pram !

Dodge · 03-10-2008 7:13pm

http://wizardofodds.com/gambling/bettingsystems.html

SOme reading material

thedini · 03-10-2008 7:19pm

Dodge wrote: »

http://wizardofodds.com/gambling/bettingsystems.html

SOme reading material

yea had read that before, some people just have blinkers on!!

jhegarty · 03-10-2008 8:39pm

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

But if you have a massive bankroll and followed the above system (if an unlimited max bet was allowed on one colour) how could you lose ?

That system can work...

All you need is to have infinite money, in a casino that takes any bet, and is open for ever.....

give it ago if you can arrange the above...

trynabe · 05-10-2008 12:05am

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

But if you have a massive bankroll and followed the above system (if an unlimited max bet was allowed on one colour) how could you lose ?

http://www.inside-edge-mag.co.uk/casinos/masterclass/194/roulette.html

........Heres the alternative, watch the wheel as an example spin 6 red x then bet black, if you lose chase your money and add some on.

"When I'm betting against the wheel, if I wait for, say, six red numbers in a row, then I'm closer to hitting a black than if I bet on black straight away, although there's no mathematical logic in this. Waiting for ten reds would be even better, but runs of ten aren't as frequent.

Nevertheless, the longest recorded run is said to be 27 of the same colour, so that whoever was following the wheel that day cleaned up. The world record for the same number hitting is seven times running and happened in Bristol many years ago. I've seen the same number hit four times in a row - long, long odds.

With online casinos, the software records the previous numbers, making it easier to know what numbers have recently hit. In many real casinos, a number board will display the past 15 or so numbers behind the wheel.

Besides understanding the game better than most, the other reason I win is that I work to preconceived plans. I set modest win targets and tight loss limits. Winning consistently is the only true goal. Anyone can win sometimes, but usually they'll lose overall. In Las Vegas, the average visitor loses $400 or so. They expect to lose - and, without wishing to be unkind, they deserve to lose because they don't care enough about winning. Most will say they had a great time. Great time? Losing money? Come on!

Stick to your budget
There are two aspects to money management. First, fix a budget you can afford and stick to it. Don't carry cash you don't really want to risk. Don't top up your lost money with visits to cashpoints. Set a modest loss limit in advance. If you have £400 to play with, divide it into four chunks of £100 and play with one at a time. If you lose one chunk, then stop for a while before starting again - but without expecting to win back the entire £100 lost (a 100% win target is just plain greedy). Reach your next win target of, say, 20-30% and stop. Take a break. Relax with a beer or a meal, or log off for a while, and then start again with another modest win target. You may well win back what you lost over a session or two more.

Have a staking plan
The second aspect of money management is system play - in other words, what you stake. I don't have the space here to explain all the different approaches, but the simplest advice is to:

Keep stakes low
Keep stakes at the same level while you're losing (or even reduce them)
Increase the stakes when winning.
Play the table-minimum stakes until you get ahead. It's no crime to be a small player: you're not playing to impress the girlfriend, wife or casino boss. You're playing to win! Most players lose because they run out of money by betting too much, too quickly.

Take a tip from the casinos: they don't lose, and they don't expect to win more than a small percentage on each spin. At roulette, at worst the odds are just over 5% in the casino's favour. If you bet £100, casinos expect to win only between £5 and £6 at most each spin. In reality, most people arriving with £100 will lose it all for ignoring the guidelines I've set out. The casinos' edge chips away relentlessly. Casinos shrug off the hard knocks when the high rollers win their millions because they have the resources to carry this type of loss. Your approach must be the same: the more money you have available, the greater the chance that you can manage it successfully by being modest in your goals and patient in your plans to get there.

Playing roulette to win is hard work. It's also enormous fun. I guarantee that taking time to learn to play properly will bring rewards. In the long run, no matter how exciting the action on the internet or in the casino, it's far more fun to win than lose. Don't be a moose - play to win!"

this fella makes sense listen to him no1 else
i used a system like this ,, live casinos only wait for 4 conseq colours then use martingale system, i made hundreds ,,,,,however i lost it all in one night ,, i think 11 conseq colours is a record i hit ten so bye bye cash ,, realistically if you had a system that made money why would you tell people
with roulette quit when your ahead thats the only sytem to win only use it for fun ,,its statiscally and mathematically unbeatable ,,if your an engineer then balances in the wheel can hellp you get an edge which will win long term but i dont think the casino will let you record the results haha
good luck

cherrypicker555 · 05-10-2008 12:29am

thedini wrote: »

yea had read that before, some people just have blinkers on!!

In terms of pure maths you are correct,each spin has an even chance of red/black BUT, the spins are not insolation, hence 2 spins landing on red has more chance then 6 spins landing on red in a row.Thus betting black after the wheel lands on red 4x in a row on red has a better chance then betting red after the wheel just landed on black x1.

Example if you had to play Russian roulette, 1 bullet six chambers with 3 people, the first persons chance is 6/1, the seconds 2/1, the thirds 3/1 of shooting themself, not 6/1 each time.

ArmaniJeanss · 05-10-2008 1:02am

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

In terms of pure maths you are correct,each spin has an even chance of red/black BUT, the spins are not insolation, hence 2 spins landing on red has more chance then 6 spins landing on red in a row.Thus betting black after the wheel lands on red 4x in a row on red has a better chance then betting red after the wheel just landed on black x1.

Either you are deliberately misleading people, or you are completely and utterly deluded.

Each spin is in isolation. 4 reds in a row has absolutely zero bearing on whether or not the next spin will be red or black.
They still have a completely similar chance of occuring.

cherrypicker555 · 05-10-2008 9:32am

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Either you are deliberately misleading people, or you are completely and utterly deluded.

Each spin is in isolation. 4 reds in a row has absolutely zero bearing on whether or not the next spin will be red or black.
They still have a completely similar chance of occuring.

You are looking at each spin in isolation, when in fact its part of a sequence, just a a horserace is, the chances of spinning red x 2 are not the same as spinning red 6 in a row.

Hence the odds on the ball landing on red 6 x in a row are much longer. Therefore the last sequence does have a bearing.

I would suggest you cut down the personal abuse, or stick with doing your 50p win doubles, ha.

thedini · 05-10-2008 10:04am

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

You are looking at each spin in isolation, when in fact its part of a sequence, just a a horserace is, the chances of spinning red x 2 are not the same as spinning red 6 in a row.

Hence the odds on the ball landing on red 6 x in a row are much longer. Therefore the last sequence does have a bearing.

I would suggest you cut down the personal abuse, or stick with doing your 50p win doubles, ha.

of course the odds aren't the same hitting 6 reds in a row as opposed to 2. where you are confusing the issue is that you are talking about mid sequence.you say for example if it hits 4 blacks in a row that the odds on a black hitting next isn't evs. can you tell me what the odds are so and mathematically back it up to prove your argument.

pyure · 05-10-2008 10:22am

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

You are looking at each spin in isolation, when in fact its part of a sequence, just a a horserace is

No it's not. Why ? Because the roulette machine has no memory of previous numbers, so on every spin the odds of black v red are still 50/50. Waiting for 6 reds in a row, then betting on black does not mathimatically improve your chance of black coming up next - it's still 50/50.

cherrypicker555 · 05-10-2008 11:13am

pyure wrote: »

No it's not. Why ? Because the roulette machine has no memory of previous numbers, so on every spin the odds of black v red are still 50/50. Waiting for 6 reds in a row, then betting on black does not mathimatically improve your chance of black coming up next - it's still 50/50.

Thats only true over one spin, the odds on the ball landing on red 2x or red 6 x in a row are significantly different. If the ball lands on one colour numerous x, its less likely to land on that colour next spin. Thats a statistical fact.

thedini · 05-10-2008 12:00pm

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

Thats only true over one spin, the odds on the ball landing on red 2x or red 6 x in a row are significantly different. If the ball lands on one colour numerous x, its less likely to land on that colour next spin. Thats a statistical fact.

what are the odds so:rolleyes:

ArmaniJeanss · 05-10-2008 12:23pm

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

I would suggest you cut down the personal abuse, or stick with doing your 50p win doubles, ha.

Eh, there was no personal abuse, merely pointing out that you are either lying or wrong.

Clearly you are either a) deliberately misleading people by referring to loads of scam artists who are claiming to have winning systems for a game that is just not beatable

or else
b) you are deluded enough that you genuinely think the maths stuff you are coming out with is true.

You seem to think that because the odds of an RRRRRR string is greater than the odds of an RRR string therefore once we come across an RRR string that it is now time to bet black.
However this thinking is deluded because the 4th spin exists in isolation and the chances of Red or Black are still identical.

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

stick with doing your 50p win doubles, ha.

:pac:

cherrypicker555 · 05-10-2008 12:43pm

thedini wrote: »

what are the odds so:rolleyes:

Exclude 5% house advantage.

red x 1.....2/1

red x 2 in a row.....4/1

red x 3.....8/1

red x 4 .....16/1

red x 5 .....32/1

red x 6 64/1

red x 7 128/1

Therefore as you can see on the 5th spin the odds on the ball landing on black are 2/1 or 50/50, on red 32/1. Even though over 1 spin its 50/50.

pyure · 05-10-2008 1:29pm

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

"When I'm betting against the wheel, if I wait for, say, six red numbers in a row, then I'm closer to hitting a black than if I bet on black straight away, although there's no mathematical logic in this. Waiting for ten reds would be even better, but runs of ten aren't as frequent.

Says it all really.

thedini · 05-10-2008 1:42pm

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

Exclude 5% house advantage.

red x 1.....2/1

red x 2 in a row.....4/1

red x 3.....8/1

red x 4 .....16/1

red x 5 .....32/1

red x 6 64/1

red x 7 128/1

Therefore as you can see on the 5th spin the odds on the ball landing on black are 2/1 or 50/50, on red 32/1. Even though over 1 spin its 50/50.

your odds are all wrong to begin with but anyway, so you will give me 32/1 on it being red, if so i will meet you in any casino whenever you want.and since when is 2/1 50/50?:rolleyes:

trynabe · 05-10-2008 7:13pm

lads
i dont know whos right or wrong here but i did check it out before and the record is 11 or 12 straight colours in a row ,so that would prove the odds increasing however its still 50/50 on wich colour hits so i dont know ,, maybe a maths or stats man could help or some college prof ,, either way im baffled ,
good luck to ye

Dodge · 06-10-2008 9:32am

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

Exclude 5% house advantage.

red x 1.....2/1

red x 2 in a row.....4/1

red x 3.....8/1

red x 4 .....16/1

red x 5 .....32/1

red x 6 64/1

red x 7 128/1

Therefore as you can see on the 5th spin the odds on the ball landing on black are 2/1 or 50/50, on red 32/1. Even though over 1 spin its 50/50.

I've never seen a poorer grasp of roulette, and maths in general. :eek: There isn't a single thing right.

enda1 · 06-10-2008 9:40am

Especially love the end! where did the other 15/32's go?

jaykay74 · 06-10-2008 9:25pm

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

Exclude 5% house advantage.

red x 1.....2/1

red x 2 in a row.....4/1

red x 3.....8/1

red x 4 .....16/1

red x 5 .....32/1

red x 6 64/1

red x 7 128/1

Therefore as you can see on the 5th spin the odds on the ball landing on black are 2/1 or 50/50, on red 32/1. Even though over 1 spin its 50/50.

Cheers, I haven't laughed so much in a long time.

On 5th spin 50% chance black, 32/1 chance red, that doesn't quite add up to 100%. Do you deal in sub prime mortgages much ?

twerg_85 · 06-10-2008 10:01pm

for anyone who's confused, look up "conditional probability".

Prob(RRRRRR) = 1/64 (ignoring green for simplicity)
Prob(R) = 1/2

but Prob(RRRRRR) given that (RRRRR) has already happened is 1/2, not 1/64, i.e the same as the remaining Prob(R). This is because as has already been stated, each spin is independent of all previous spins.

For anyone who's genuinely confused re Martingale systems, the problem is that you may lose all your money before you win anything. Once you've lost your entire bankroll, you can no longer implement your system, so you have lost.

It's a low reward,high risk strategy. If you follow a martingale system, you will either win 1 unit or lose entire bankroll. If you repeatedly follow this system, you will eventually lose everything.

cooperguy · 11-10-2008 11:28pm

cherrypicker555 Vegas has built its massive hotels on people like you. Your lack of a grasp on pretty basic statistics is astonishing. However your insistence that you are right is hilarious.

Davey Devil · 11-10-2008 11:54pm

trynabe wrote: »

lads
i dont know whos right or wrong here but i did check it out before and the record is 11 or 12 straight colours in a row

A few years ago I was waiting for a cash game in the Fitz and was watching the roulette. People were piling on red after 10 straight blacks. Nobody had any money left when it landed on red after 21 BLACKS IN A ROW.

trynabe · 12-10-2008 8:42pm

thats me fixed anyway davey hahaha i should of looked harder ,, needless to say i dont play roulette anymore ,i was ahead but like your story one night all my winnings were gone ,kept my original start out stake so at least i could say i had a run and sme fun ,but the only way to win at this game is quit when your ahead and leg it far away from the wheel fast and spend the money
good luck all

reilly110 · 16-10-2008 12:40pm

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

Thats only true over one spin, the odds on the ball landing on red 2x or red 6 x in a row are significantly different. If the ball lands on one colour numerous x, its less likely to land on that colour next spin. Thats a statistical fact.

hmmmmm --- lol

this is comical stuff

premierstone · 16-10-2008 1:20pm

I'm only getting to read this thread now, dont know how i missed it, and its some of the funniest stuff I have ever read, I assume cherrypicker has realised he was talking absolute sh*te or did he have to pawn his laptop to pay he's roulette debts

Bobeagleburger · 16-10-2008 8:29pm

cherrypicker = Legend

holdemfoldem · 17-10-2008 12:50am

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

Thats only true over one spin, the odds on the ball landing on red 2x or red 6 x in a row are significantly different. If the ball lands on one colour numerous x, its less likely to land on that colour next spin. Thats a statistical fact.

ok i may be wrong here but im pretty sure you have somehow merged two branches of mathematics.. or just don't understand either.

Probability deals with predicting the likelihood of future events, while statistics involves the analysis of the frequency of past events.

the probability of 8 reds hitting will be alot larger than that of 2 reds hitting but as the line above says probability is the study of future events. its not probable that you will hit RRRRRRRRRR but its not a fact that you won't.

statistically the odds are 50/50 ie there are only two outcomes red or black. if you flip a coin a million times it will be heads around 500,000 times and tails the other 500,000 times

No matter how many times the wheel is spun whether that be 10 straight reds or a million straight reds the next time the wheel is spun it will hit black 50% of the time and red the other 50%. and that my friend is a statistical fact.

nough said.

Mellor · 21-10-2008 9:43pm

Just so you know, that guy is completly wrong.
But probability is a branch of stats.
Say the reason he is wrong because he is confusing the two is wrong,
thats not wht he is wrong,
he's wrong because he fails at everything he has said and thought ever

Bobeagleburger · 21-10-2008 9:54pm

Mellor wrote: »

Just so you know, that guy is completly wrong.
But probability is a branch of stats.
Say the reason he is wrong because he is confusing the two is wrong,
thats not wht he is wrong,
he's wrong because he fails at everything he has said and thought ever

+1000000

david · 26-10-2008 3:37pm

Mellor wrote: »

Just so you know, that guy is completly wrong.
But probability is a branch of stats.
Say the reason he is wrong because he is confusing the two is wrong,
thats not wht he is wrong,
he's wrong because he fails at everything he has said and thought ever

Bit Harsh! Give the guy a break!

cherrypicker555 · 27-10-2008 12:44pm

Mellor wrote: »

Just so you know, that guy is completly wrong.
But probability is a branch of stats.
Say the reason he is wrong because he is confusing the two is wrong,
thats not wht he is wrong,
he's wrong because he fails at everything he has said and thought ever

Yer, but unlike you, I dont stay hiding behind a pc screen

Iget out and about in the real world.

Went to casino Sat night tested system 3 x now.

1st came out 100 up.

2nd 100 up

3rd at one stage 200 down, came out 600 up.

Its called having balls my friend, putting 300 quid on red or black.

Watch and bitch

Incidently a couple of students were 500 pounds up, lumped it on black and won :eek: That took balls.

Loads of young women in their playing, as well as students, dont know where they get the cash, one was 1800 quid down.

Arab fellow in there, looked about 18, lumping on 500 quid every bet.

.....................Love it.

Collie D · 27-10-2008 1:14pm

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

Yer, but unlike you, I dont stay hiding behind a pc screen Iget out and about in the real world.

Went to casino Sat night tested system 3 x now.

1st came out 100 up.

2nd 100 up

3rd at one stage 200 down, came out 600 up.

Its called having balls my friend, putting 300 quid on red or black.

Watch and bitch

Incidently a couple of students were 500 pounds up, lumped it on black and won :eek: That took balls.

Loads of young women in their playing, as well as students, dont know where they get the cash, one was 1800 quid down.

Arab fellow in there, looked about 18, lumping on 500 quid every bet.

.....................Love it.

Call it balls if you like, I'd call it luck. It's not a strategy. You are betting on pure chance. Nice to see you've gotten away with it so far but you're heading for a sharp shock. When you were 200 down I assume oyu put on three hundred to get a hundred quid up? What happened if you hit black then - next step is 600 to make a hundred profit. MOst casinos in Dublin I've been in have a 500 limit so you're screwed. How oyu can think it's not a 50/50 chance on every spin is beyond me (well actually factoring in the zero it's not but I digress)

Mellor · 27-10-2008 3:20pm

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

Yer, but unlike you, I dont stay hiding behind a pc screen Iget out and about in the real world.

Have to laugh at this, just because you don't know me hardly means i'm hiding behind a pc screen. theres plenty of people here who know me "in the real world". Most of them know me from the casino:eek:
Although, I prefer to play a game were I have an constant edge, call me old fashioned.

Is Roulette Sniper the real deal?

Comments