Roulette Ideas

Let's suppose that House Edge is an insignificant issue, merely a taxation on our profits, thus the major obstacle we have to overcome is variance.
So how could we deal with variance?

For the example's sake I'm going to present you with a hypothesis on which we are gambling in a 50/50 game, such as even chances on Roulette, "banker" VS "player" on Baccarat, "pass" VS "don't pass"...etc.

When there's positive variance we have to do nothing because we are winners, but when we have negative variance we have to wait until variance undone its own manifestation...in other words, if we were trailing by 10 losses more than wins, we would be unable to overcome the negative deficit simply because we can never be 100% sure about when exactly a win is going to occur, with any kind of progression/MM.
Yes. we are going to win eventually, but since we don't know exactly when it's useless, or even harmful to attempt to raise the bets when negative variance still in action.

So by making an assumption that negative variance will eventually anule,offset,negate its own negative with a positive variance the only thing which we would have to be concerned with is the HE in regards with the duration since the negative variance begun till the time negative variance will end.

Let me become more specific;
I've found myself 10 losses in the hole, I kept flat betting for the whole duration till after 3 cycles of 37 spins/bets the positive variance made me win 10 times more, effectively offsetting the negative variance before, but since there were 111 bets I'm still -3 units overall thanks to the House Edge, at exactly this point in time, when there's not any losses left from negative variance, we are going to bet just enough to surpass the negative balance coming from the HE exclusively!
On the specific example 4 units bet in order to come on top with only a single win in the positive side (ours).
In case that eventful moment wouldn't come with a win, then wait again until the losses will become equal to the wins, then bet again to overcome the HE deficit plus any lost units from previous, failed attempts.

I want to be 100% clear, I'm not advocating such betting method, like I said before it's merely based on the assumption that only variance could "beat" itself.
Let's assume that this hypothesis is true, but how long before setting the record straight???
Hours? Day? Weeks?

I would really appreciate your colaboration, I want to know about what do you really think, could be such an approach viable, effective and practical?

I provided a table of optimal stopping which is relevant here.

Also relevant is the arcsine law and things like zero crossings of random walks of a coin flip / even chance outcome.

The reality is that your particular path or history of outcomes on a random walk will be mostly biased on one side or the other with extremely few crossing where outcomes even up. Playing until even is not practical as house edge will erode your bankroll.

The math says that if you flipped a coin 1 million times you will on average see the counts of head and tails being equal less than 6 times! Of course not every 1 million flips will have less than 6, some will have a lot and some will have none, but the point is we can expect an EC to even up less than 6 times in 1 million spins ignoring zero.


However math also shows that you can optimise your expected value by stopping at optimal points on that random walk and you can refer to my post for that which was computed by simulation as published research.

It might sound like Voodoo but it's based on a simple argument. If you win the first coin flip then stop, if you don't then keep flipping until heads and tails is break even to get the "average" which is 1/2. Your expected return is 1/2 + 1/4 = 3/4 because half the time you win the first time and of the half you lose you keep flipping (potentially forever) until you get the average which is 1/2 and 1/2 of 1/2 is 1/4 and adding those two expected values is 3/4 which is better than 50/50 or 1/2.

Playing forever is not practical, so my table provides the rules for achieving positive EV by stopping in a truncated/practical version.

I see where you are coming from, nice insight!

I've claimed in yester years that the best selection for EC is to follow the last result.
This way you will win by streaks which are the foundation of standard deviations.
Whether a deviation is going to decrease or increase you will gain.
Of course there are chops but those don't last for long and personally I prefer to stop betting after every loss till I witness what would be a won bet.

But all that is just me, there are some "gurus" who prefer to bet against the face of reason..."wait for 5 virtual losses and then bet for 5 more times", anything before the 5 virtual losses is a waste of time and everything after is a waste of money, so as you see some self proclaimed betting gurus don't understand that even if you bet against a 17 streak it could become even longer!
When they win is just a temporary luck, but in their mind think that they are smart, how naive and foolish and fortunately for the casinos there will never be a shortage of them!

If some people would like to realize what I'm and you are "TwoUp" are talking about they would theirselves a favor, me and you have nothing to gain from their losses.