In before you go busto.
|
There must be some kind of logic to this 'system' and I am sure it is undeniably better than just going into a casino and placing £50 on red.
|
It's not actually. The EV of the spin is the same but risk of ruin is higher.
The fact is your system is actually worse than a standard martingale.
By playing both red and black until you get 4 in row, you are making a play where no possible outcome can earn you a profit.
You bet 1 on RED and BLACK.
RED WINS: +1 - 1 = 0
BLACK WINS: -1 +1 = 0
GREEN: -2
Odds on a single 0 table.
Green = 1/37
Black = 13/37
Red = 13/37
So you are getting
0*(13/37)+0*(13/37)+ (-2)*(1/37) =
-2/37 = -0.054
This is your expectation per feeler bet.
By betting normally. You bet 1 on Red only.
RED = +1
BLACK = -1
GREEN = -1
EV = 1*(13/37)+(-1)*(13/37)+(-1)*(1/37)
= -1/37 = -0.027.
So for each spin you are actually doubling the house edge for the 4 spins you are playing 2 chips.
 Quote by kyleball
There must be some way to explain it; rather than only focussing on the independence of the spins; causing the gamblers fallacy - since you know that long strings is rare - that is what you can focus your bet on.
|
What you are saying is the very definition of gamblers fallacy.
Quote by kyleball
I tried this with £50, and within 2 hours I had £2000. I know that some will not believe that, and I only use it as an example of the system in use, not to brag (since I do not know anyone here).
|
Standard. Small sample size.