The martingale won't work if the table has a limit. Remember, casino owners are not gamblers, they are businessmen, and they get to make the rules. About the only way to beat them involves a ski mask, a gun, and a fast car...or in your case, a fast motor boat. But hey, you are there to have fun. Don't gamble more than you are willing to lose.
Roulette Strategies
- Thread starter AACJ
- Start date
Well, the Martingale "System" doesn't work anyway, so that is nothing to worry about. If you know what you are doing, play the right games (avoid the carnival games), and avoid the sucker bets, you should be able to come out ahead.
I've worked in casinos 13 years. Roulette, and 5 card stud are the worst for the players. Especially roulette with double 0.
If u want a chance, play black jack with basic strategy. With it the house has only a minimal advantage. If u can count the cards u have better chance than the house. (But this is illegal)
Good Luck Anyway
There is only one roulette strategy that I have heard that made sense to me, but it was one that didn't involve making any money at the end of the night.
Basically, bet either red or black only, with a relatively small bet. If you lose, double up until you return to your original amount. If you win, only bet your original bet and keep the profits for future losing bets. Leave at a point where you are back to your original amount.
The point? The casino would provide free drinks to gamblers that were actively playing. The only purpose of the strategy was to get free drinks, and the system fell apart if you get greedy and try to win money as well. (Not sure if the system was developed by a Canadian, but given the goal might as well have been.
)
Not sure how it works on a cruise ship (this was in Vegas) and I suppose if you lost on a 0 or 00 you could just think of it as a cheap price to pay for your drinks (assuming you weren't betting big money.)
Basically, bet either red or black only, with a relatively small bet. If you lose, double up until you return to your original amount. If you win, only bet your original bet and keep the profits for future losing bets. Leave at a point where you are back to your original amount.
The point? The casino would provide free drinks to gamblers that were actively playing. The only purpose of the strategy was to get free drinks, and the system fell apart if you get greedy and try to win money as well. (Not sure if the system was developed by a Canadian, but given the goal might as well have been.
)Not sure how it works on a cruise ship (this was in Vegas) and I suppose if you lost on a 0 or 00 you could just think of it as a cheap price to pay for your drinks (assuming you weren't betting big money.)
It may seem counterintuitive, but it is craps, seemingly the most intimidating game, that is the best bet for the rookie. It's the only game you can play blind drunk without hurting yourself in terms of odds. The staff at the craps table is the best the casino has to offer, and you'll get paid even if you can't see the table.
The misunderstanding about the house's edge is a failure to realize that it applies to the total action. It's not a matter of "They have a 4% advantage, but I'm only wagering five bucks, so what's that? Twenty cents?" Even if you're a small player, your action may quickly go into the thousands, and that's how they make there money.
Roulette is a pretty fair game, but it's that 0 and 00 that's the hidden killer. Without it, look at at this way: If you bet 1/3 of the field, you'd expect to win 1/3 of the time. Say you make that $5 bet sixty times (sixty is almost always the best number to use for situations like this). You'd expect to win 20 times (for 20x10=$200) and lose 40 times (for 40x5=$200), for a wash.
Casinos love blackjack, because everyone thinks they're James Bond and the smartest guy in the house. If you play perfectly, you can, in theory, do well. The idea of counting is not to predict what is going to come next, only to ascertain the relative likelihood based on how the appearance of certain cards detracts from the true randomness of the deck(s). If you're smart enough to do it, and have the cajones to back it up with cash, you should be allowed to, since the house's loss will be more than offset by the poor players who think they know what they're doing. Even if the odds are very slightly in your favor, you can still get crushed when counting cards because you're required to make such large bets that you may not be able to afford to lose. A big hit against the house is only temporary for them. In that regard, they're like insurance companies- they have no problem collecting from some drunken slob, but don't want to pay out when it's their turn.
The Martingale is enticing on paper, but although it's easy to win a small amount, what's the point? Are you going to fly to Vegas for one $100 bet? The odds still even out in the long run- you may win one of your first bets the first several times you try it, but you'll eventually face the nightmare scenario. Even if there were no limit, do you think it's a good idea to have to put up (in cash) $25,000 to win the $100 you intended on walking away with?
The misunderstanding about the house's edge is a failure to realize that it applies to the total action. It's not a matter of "They have a 4% advantage, but I'm only wagering five bucks, so what's that? Twenty cents?" Even if you're a small player, your action may quickly go into the thousands, and that's how they make there money.
Roulette is a pretty fair game, but it's that 0 and 00 that's the hidden killer. Without it, look at at this way: If you bet 1/3 of the field, you'd expect to win 1/3 of the time. Say you make that $5 bet sixty times (sixty is almost always the best number to use for situations like this). You'd expect to win 20 times (for 20x10=$200) and lose 40 times (for 40x5=$200), for a wash.
Casinos love blackjack, because everyone thinks they're James Bond and the smartest guy in the house. If you play perfectly, you can, in theory, do well. The idea of counting is not to predict what is going to come next, only to ascertain the relative likelihood based on how the appearance of certain cards detracts from the true randomness of the deck(s). If you're smart enough to do it, and have the cajones to back it up with cash, you should be allowed to, since the house's loss will be more than offset by the poor players who think they know what they're doing. Even if the odds are very slightly in your favor, you can still get crushed when counting cards because you're required to make such large bets that you may not be able to afford to lose. A big hit against the house is only temporary for them. In that regard, they're like insurance companies- they have no problem collecting from some drunken slob, but don't want to pay out when it's their turn.
The Martingale is enticing on paper, but although it's easy to win a small amount, what's the point? Are you going to fly to Vegas for one $100 bet? The odds still even out in the long run- you may win one of your first bets the first several times you try it, but you'll eventually face the nightmare scenario. Even if there were no limit, do you think it's a good idea to have to put up (in cash) $25,000 to win the $100 you intended on walking away with?
Not at the poker table.
Ever hear of the rake? That's 5% of EVERY bet (subject to a max). The house still wins and they're not even gambling!!!
I've never seen a rake that is 5% of every bet. That's ridiculous. And the house doesn't win like you think.
Last edited:
Wow. Lots of bad information here. A few good tidbits though. For all you could ever want to know, live here for a few days:
http://www.wizardofodds.com
The Bible for all serious gamblers. In short, there is no way to "beat the house" playing by their rules. In the short-term, you might come out ahead... but Las Vegas is built (and continues to run) on the long-term. Eventually, the House always wins.
Roulette is one of the worst games on the casino floor (from a House Edge perspective. Meaning the Player has the worst odds.)
Yes, even then. In fact, some casino owners argue that a poker table is complete profit for a casino, since they never have to wager House money. All money played and bet is player's money, and all the House does is take a percentage of each pot.
Craps never has a Player edge. Nor does Blackjack - although playing perfectly, you can get the House edge for both down to under 1%. Video Poker, also is setup (if setup properly) so the House has a slight edge. If a Player ever had an edge, casinos would eventually go broke.
Here are the probabilities in baccarat (from wizardofodds):
Hi, Wizard. Let’s say I have $300 to gamble with, and can accept a 25% risk of ruin. What should I do to maximize my upside? Thanks! — Jerry T from Hertford
I would make the banker bet in baccarat. My betting advice would be to do what is known as a two-step progression. First, bet 1/3 of your bankroll. If that wins, walk away. If that loses, then bet the other 2/3. Again, if you win, walk. With any tie, just bet again until the bet is resolved. Here are the probabilities in baccarat:
Banker: 45.86%
Player: 44.62%
Tie: 9.52%
The probability of a banker win, given that the bet is resolved is 45.86%/(45.86%+44.62%) = 50.68%. The probability of losing both steps of the progression is (1-0.5068)2 = 24.32%. The banker bet pays 19 to 20, so you will have a 75.68% chance of winning $95, and a 24.32% chance of losing $300
The House wins with each hand of Poker that gets to the minimum pot size for a rake (which is most hands).
http://www.wizardofodds.com
The Bible for all serious gamblers. In short, there is no way to "beat the house" playing by their rules. In the short-term, you might come out ahead... but Las Vegas is built (and continues to run) on the long-term. Eventually, the House always wins.
Roulette is one of the worst games on the casino floor (from a House Edge perspective. Meaning the Player has the worst odds.)
Not at the poker table.
Yes, even then. In fact, some casino owners argue that a poker table is complete profit for a casino, since they never have to wager House money. All money played and bet is player's money, and all the House does is take a percentage of each pot.
Craps never has a Player edge. Nor does Blackjack - although playing perfectly, you can get the House edge for both down to under 1%. Video Poker, also is setup (if setup properly) so the House has a slight edge. If a Player ever had an edge, casinos would eventually go broke.
Here are the probabilities in baccarat (from wizardofodds):
Hi, Wizard. Let’s say I have $300 to gamble with, and can accept a 25% risk of ruin. What should I do to maximize my upside? Thanks! — Jerry T from Hertford
I would make the banker bet in baccarat. My betting advice would be to do what is known as a two-step progression. First, bet 1/3 of your bankroll. If that wins, walk away. If that loses, then bet the other 2/3. Again, if you win, walk. With any tie, just bet again until the bet is resolved. Here are the probabilities in baccarat:
Banker: 45.86%
Player: 44.62%
Tie: 9.52%
The probability of a banker win, given that the bet is resolved is 45.86%/(45.86%+44.62%) = 50.68%. The probability of losing both steps of the progression is (1-0.5068)2 = 24.32%. The banker bet pays 19 to 20, so you will have a 75.68% chance of winning $95, and a 24.32% chance of losing $300
The House wins with each hand of Poker that gets to the minimum pot size for a rake (which is most hands).
Last edited:
Poor wording on my part. I didn't mean to intimate that the player ever has the advantage over the house, but the four games I mentioned all have very low house odds, if proper strategy is used. Very few use proper strategy, however.
The only strategies are more of a money amount strategy then what bets to place. Look up a cancellation system. I forget the details, but you write down a 4 digit number, say 1252. Then you place a 50/50 bet....like red or black or odd or even. Somehow the end digits of your 4 digit number dictate how much you bet. There is a martindale strategy which is you bet 5 if you lose you bet 10....then 20....40....80....160 etc. The cancellation system is basically a safer version of that. I forget the details of the system though, sorry.
After the casino pays the dealers, floor, & cocktail staff...there's not a ton of net profit in a B&M card room from the drop (unless maybe that room is packed 24/7 & has a higher than normal drop rate). That's why the comp system is different at many casinos for slot/table game players vs poker players, there isn't enough profit for the casino to justify them doing so. I'm not saying they don't make any profit & it's true that they have no money at stake but the margin is so thin that many properties don't bother with a poker room if they feel they can better use that space for slots or tables games with a higher profit margin. It's all about greed.
Online poker is a different animal. Way more tables, way more hands dealt per hour, waaaay less overhead = cash cow. The drop is probably comparable though.
The house will win in the long run. You can beat them if you get lucky early, then pocket your winnings and walk away. But then what do you do for the rest of the cruise, or the rest of the Las Vegas weekend? What kills gamblers..IF they are ahead they don't want to walk away from a winning streak. If they are behind, they want to get their money back. I was playing slots in Las Vegas once, the guy on the next machine hit for a thousand dollars. Bells rang, lights flashed, they came over and counted his money out to him. I said, "Must feel pretty good, huh?" He said, "Oh yeah. Three thousand more and I will be even."
gambling is nothing but testing how greedy you are. ymmv.
If u count the cards, play the basic strategy, and use a proper money management u have advantage against the house. The main thing in the gambling that more u play more u loose...(Easy to imagine that if somebody make 3 bet for example on roulette even chances maybe lucky and win if he stops to play, but if u risk 10 times or 100 or 1000 much more chance to loose) That's why the casinos love the strategy players
The only game u can kill the casino if u are a pro black jack player....this is the most dangerous for the house especially if u play 1-4 decks.
100% completely false. Playing that way, you can bring the House edge to under 1%, but there's no time (other than group cheating, a la the MIT group a few years back) that the Player has an edge over the House.
If it were as simple as counting cards, playing basic strategy and using "proper" money management, casinos would constantly be broke.
Big +1. Co-workers of mine used to come back bragging about their winnings. "Hit for $1200 last night." Really? What'd you spend, though? "...well...$1400." So, you took a hit for $200 then. My ex-wife had this problem. We'd get some daylight, and she'd never want to leave. If not for me holding out on her we'd have lost out every single time.
My strategy is to treat it as entertainment that is going to cost me, but it has been a long time.
Years ago in Puerto Rico I took $100 bucks into a casino and left with about $75 after about 2 hours at a low minimum Black Jack table. I left well-fed and got to keep a deck of cards as a souvenir. Money well spent!
Years ago in Puerto Rico I took $100 bucks into a casino and left with about $75 after about 2 hours at a low minimum Black Jack table. I left well-fed and got to keep a deck of cards as a souvenir. Money well spent!
Actually, an individual can have an advantage, albeit a small one over the house. The way the casinos keep making money is by the people who "think" they have an advantage. Casinos make money off the general public who have no idea what they are doing. In contrast, they lose a very small amount to the players who really can count cards.
The casinos have been shooting themselves in the feet for years by chasing away the "advantage" gambler, if anything they should encourage that type of play. If they get the reputation of a friendly place to play with good odds, they will attract more of the less knowledgeable gamblers and thus increase their take. Instead, they chase these players away, lower the odds (6:5 Blackjack anyone?), and generally chase away the more knowledgeable players.
Enough of that. As far as roulette goes, you pays your money, and you takes your chances!
Unfortunately, that's what casinos want you to think. They cherish the idea of people "counting cards" because such a low number of people can actually do it, and are actually GOOD at it, that the more people who try it, the better for the casino.
http://wizardofodds.com/houseedge
At no time, in any legit game in Vegas (or any legit casino) does a player have an edge over the House.
Agreed with the rest of your post.
From the Wizard's own website:
# Full pay deuces wild simple strategy (return of 100.71%)
# Full pay deuces wild optimal strategy (return of 100.77%)
http://wizardofodds.com/videopoker
Additionally, based on comps or Progressive Jackpots, a game can become a positive expectation situation.
Similar threads
