bwin – the world's biggest online gaming platform

You recall me talking about “The Salmon”…..if anyone does not understand what I am talking about here then see my previous post. The next instance of me seeing him on roulette occurred a few days later.

I recognised him instantly because of his looks and also because of what he had done on roulette a few days earlier. This time I was watching him like a hawk but I was more concerned in allowing him the opportunity to bet so I could observe him more.

What I didn’t want to do was to blow him away from the table by dealing aggressively and also speeding up the wheel to a ridiculous level. So I kept the wheel at the same speed which was quite slow and before long he was buying in for a £5 stack of colour chips.

He watched my spin for a few minutes and then started to bet. His first few spins missed but each of them was not far away and he was unfortunate enough to have three spins where the ball landed next to his number.

He lost his initial £5 but he then bought some more colour chips and started to spread his bets more. Within thirty minutes he proceeded to win back the money that he had lost and about another £50 on top.

I also noticed that when I left the table for a break……so did he. This got me thinking that there was obviously something about my spin that he liked. I became intensely fascinated by what he was doing and he almost seemed unbeatable. It could just have all been luck so I then decided to track the amount of money that he was winning.

I already knew that he was about £650 ahead over the two sessions that I had seen him. Over the next few months, I managed to watch him an awful lot without him knowing both when he was on my table and also adjoining tables that I could observe clearly.

I kept a running total of bets that I could see. I expanded this by bringing in someone else to help me watch him. We both had a keen interest in controlling a roulette ball and visual prediction. The following three months was alarming, out of a total of 44 sessions, “The Salmon” lost just 7 times and each loss was only in the region of about £20-£50 but when he won he would win anywhere from £50-£150.

These were figures which the casino never bothered to clock but his total over that period was that he was ahead in the region of about £2500……now I was really taking notice.

Carl “The Dean” Sampson
Experience the thrill and Play Roulette online at bwin

It is common knowledge that roulette systems fail because of house limits. In fact the great gambling figure of the seventies and eighties John Scarne once remarked how casinos should protect themselves from system players by reducing their maximums and their minimum to maximum ratios.

In theory of course, a casino with no or very high limits and a punter with a massive bankroll could ensure profits. But in reality this simply isn’t the case. The overwhelming majority of system players do not have adequate bankrolls so they stop doubling up before they reach the maximum anyway or they are fearful of losing more money.

The trouble with roulette system players isn’t in the house maximums but in how roulette systems are applied. If you asked any person to describe a roulette betting system then they would undoubtedly talk about the classic doubling system. They may not even know it by name as the “Martingale” but they would be aware of this way of betting.

They could either be unaware of the chances of reaching maximums after a number of losses or they may be thinking along the lines of the house maximums being a deterrent to roulette systems. These are myths and faulty knowledge for the simple reason being that there are many roulette systems that prohibit reaching the table maximum or the chances of it being highly unlikely. They also don’t need a massive bankroll like the Martingale does as many of them are not doubling up systems.

In fact why people persist in the Martingale is beyond me, a sequence of losers with a $5 minimum and a $1000 maximum would go like this….$5, $10, $20, $40, $80, $160, $320, $640. The next bet takes them over the maximum. But a total of $1275 has been lost already, how many players have this sort of money on them and how many would be prepared to take it this far?

What would be the point in risking all this money to win one measly dollar? What would be the point in making yourself incredibly tense and nervous for a dollar in profit? In all my years in gaming I only ever saw one system player reach the maximum who was prepared to bet it on roulette. I saw something similar on blackjack with a player who used basic strategy and a progressive betting system.

But the trouble with roulette systems isn’t the house maximum but the ignorance of the player using the system.

Carl “The Dean” Sampson   www.bwin.com

The Lebouchere betting system is akin to the Martingale in many ways as it is whats called a progressive betting system. It also increases the wager after a loss like the Martingale but its advantage is that it is far less likely to hit the table maximum.

This is probably the least easy to operate of all of the roulette systems as you will need some facility to write down numbers unlike the Martingale which is straught forward in nature. You first write down a line of numbers that could be anything within reason. A popular aggressive line would be 1-2-3-4. Let us say that you are betting in dollars.

The first bet would be the first and last numbers in that line so 1+4 = $5 and so the bet is $5. If that bet wins then the first and last numbers are cancelled out. This then leaves the 2 and the 3 remaining. This then means that the second bet would also be $5 (2+3). If that bet wins also then the line is cleared and a new line starts with the player being $10 ahead.

We then have to explain what happens if a bet loses. In the 1-2-3-4 sequence, if that $5 initial bet loses then the number 5 is added to the line to make 1-2-3-4-5, the next bet is $6 (5+1)…..if that loses then the 6 is added to the line to make 1-2-3-4-5-6 and then next bet is $7. If that wins then the 1 and 7 are cancelled leaving a line of 2-3-4-5 and the next bet is also $7 (2+5) etc.

If you look at certain betting sequences with regards to the Lebouchere then you will see that gains can be made when the losses exceed the wins which makes this one of the better betting systems on roulette that there is. The starting line of 1-2-3-4 is relatively aggressive becasue if the table maximum is say $200 on the even chances then you are already 2.5% of the way there. Less aggressive starting lines are preferred with online casinos as your betting system cannot get you an edge in itself. But when used with sign up bonuses then they can be very effective.

see you soon

C

No blog on roulette systems would be complete without me mentioning what is the most well known of roulette betting systems…..The Martingale. In fact this system is so popular that many people actually stumble upon it purely by accident by themselves. This doubling up systsm is very dangerous, it hits or approaches table limits and can do so very quicky. Risking a large amount of money in order to win the table minimum is hardly a good system to use.

The system basically doubles up after every loss, at first it seduces people who cannot seem to see how certain sequences of numbers arrive far more often than they can percieve. This system is actually over 200 years old as are most systems and in fact I recall reading somewhere that its origins could be as old as 300 years.

This is another system that is applied to the even chances. If you bet $1 and it wins then you are up $1. If you bet $1 and it loses then you bet $2 on the next spin…..if that wins then you are up $1. If that loses then you are down $3. You then bet $4 on the next spin, if that wins then you are up $1…..if that loses then you are down $7 and thus bet $8 on the next spin to make your $1.

Long series of losses makes this system very expensive when it goes wrong, it is also a system that is heavily handicapped by table maximums.  In roulette, there is a ratio between table minimum and the maximum. If that ratio is 100/1 then what basically happens is this,

$1…. $2…..$4…..$8……$16……$32…..$64……$128

After just seven consecutive losses, the eighth bet will shove you over the maximum and would not be allowed. You are therefore only allowed to wager $100. This isnt enough to get back the $127 that you are behind. If you walk away then you are down $127, if you bet $100 and win and then you are down $27. If you bet $100 and lose then you are down $227. That is an awful lot of $1 wins if you are thinking of clawing that back. Most of the time then you will win $1 as you will not hit this sequence. I have known punters attempt all sorts of variantions to try to combat this.

They will wait for maybe three consecutive blacks or reds to appear before betting in the logic that they are already three spins into a losing sequence. The roulette wheel has no memory, it is an object made of metal and wood…..it cannot know that there has been a sequence. I also used to see sequences that would wipe out a Martingale bettor ost evenings when I was a croupier.

So take my advice, in this series of systems……side step the Martingale.

see you soon

There is absolutely nothing wrong with using betting systems on roulette as long as you understand how they work. If you want to play roulette then there are many systems that can offer you the potential for short term profits without running the risk of doubling up and hitting the maximums.

The French system, d’alembert is one such system and I will explain it to you here. It is what is known as a “pyramid system” and was named after a French mathematician. The basis of the system is that it is structured around equilibrium theory that d’alembert worked on more than two centuries ago. So by using this system, not only are you using a piece of history but this system also precludes you from having large losses. The gains are small also but this has merit with an awful lot of cautious roulette players.

This system mainly works on even chances. The system in itself is very simple and revolves around adding one unit to the bet if you lose and removing one unit of the bet if you win. The problem with the d’alembert tends not to be the table maximums but the table minimums as removing bets after wins can allow this to happen in that you can fall below the minimum. I am going to show you a sequnce of numbers here where the d’alembert  was operational.

The table minimum was $2 and the system player in this instance started with a $5 bet which was $3 above the minimum.

BET $5…….LOST……RESULT -$5……..BET $6…….LOST…….RESULT -$11…….BET $7……WON…….RESULT -$4……

BET $6…….LOST……RESULT -$10……BET $7……WON……RESULT -$3…….BET $6……WON……RESULT +$3

You can see here that after six spins with three losses and three wins that the system is up by $3.  This system works very well when the total number of wins is equal to the total number of losses. It also does better with single zero wheels over double zero wheels. If you want a system on roulette to help you stay not only entertained but which will also help you to work off these juicy sign up bonuses then the d’alembert is a classic system that will not only give you hours of pleasure but will also possibly provide you with profit.

Have fun

Carl