bwin – the world's biggest online gaming platform

It is well known among certain circles that roulette wheels can often exhibit bias. This basically means wheels that are showing numbers coming more than are statistically normal. On a 37 number wheel then each number will arrive once every 37 spins. Over a long enough series of trials then you will tend to see this distribution or near as damn it. But there are often reasons where certain wheels are showing numbers that are coming more often than what they should be!

This can be to do with temperature differences or the main reason is usually to do with faults that are present inside the actual wheel itself. This could be a looseness in the actual frets or canoes that are absorbing energy as the ball lands and thus warping the outcome of the event.

If this leads to so much as a certain number coming one spin in every 36 spins instead of one in every thirty seven spins then this would allow the player to be at evens with the house. It is easy to see then that if a player was seeing any individual number arrive at a rate of once every thirty fives spins or greater then this would not only reveal a bias but also a bias that was large enough to give the player enough of an edge to make a theoretical profit.

The main problem comes from detecting a true bias and this means that seeing false patterns is all too real with detecting wheel bias. I would ascertain though that any number that was coming more than it should over say 200 spins would merit further investigation. If that continued to as much as 500 spins then it would have to then be taken very seriously and after 1000 spins then wagering money could seriously be considered.

I can well understand anyone who thinks that the dealer cannot control a roulette ball. After all, their views and opinions are backed up by scientific evidence and the “pro” brigade don’t have any proof.

It is the lack of proof that is so frustrating but no one will ever convince me that dealers cannot spin sections. I have heard the question asked so many times that if dealers could do this then why wouldn’t more of them work in collusion with punters or friends and associates?

Well I have a very simply answer to that, firstly how would anyone ever get to find out that dealers were doing this. The dealers and the accomplices certainly wouldn’t tell. Secondly in my experience only a very small percentage of croupiers ever have the ability. It takes considerable practice to build up this skill.

The staff turnover in casinos due to the conditions of the job and the fact that the working hours are not conducive to a social life means that many leave within a year or two. So most of the croupiers never get to acquire the skill. Even most of the longer term croupiers are simply not bothered by trying to win money.

But getting an edge is all a croupier can do. The house starts off with a 2.7% house edge, so the dealer needs to affect the result enough to offset this first. Even a very skilled dealer cannot guarantee success. So to make a considerable amount of money doing this would involve having a considerable bankroll and the confidence to be able to withstand losses that may have been far bigger than what you have ever experienced.

This is very difficult, but even if you are successful then the casino will not allow you to remain that way and will take countermeasures against you or any other winner.

See you soon

Carl

Back when I was in gaming, the casino’s never trusted their own staff. Although this is hardly bad because if I owned my own casino then I wouldn’t trust the people who worked for me either.

My experience of human nature is such that if people are given the opportunity to steal and especially when they can get away with it then they will do so. It is just nothing more than human nature. The situation is made worse by the fact that croupiers and casino employees are not well paid compared to other professions.

Although it has to be said that paying staff more money would not deter them from cheating. I have been approached numerous times by crooked punters. They tended to find out where we socialised out of work and then hung out there.

We were expressly forbidden to mix with punters for this very reason although that didn’t stop it from happening. I should have reported these approaches but didn’t as I did not want to stir up any more trouble. I figured that I had been targeted for a reason and that reason was because it was common knowledge that I was disgruntled working in that job.

So it isn’t surprising that certain punters must have heard my conversations with other members of staff in the pit area. But I knew of cases where staff were colluding with punters and there were numerous cases where staff were actually caught stealing. I have heard of cases where chips were passed to punters by all sorts of ways.

I have seen dealers deliberately pay losing bets and I have known that it was deliberate but when you lump all of this together then you can hardly blame casinos for watching their staff.

You wear trousers, shirts and waistcoats without pockets and belts were not allowed where I worked and even watches inside one casino although that was for other reasons as well.

Casino owners do not want punters asking a croupier what time it is and then realising that it is time to go home

see you soon

Carl
If you get tired of reading my blog, why not try the bwin poker blog

It always used to amaze me (and still does) that live casinos like punters to know that blackjack is a game of skill which can be beaten. But yet when anyone exhibits enough skill to be able to do so then they are prevented from playing in the same way or even from prevented from playing at all in some locations.

I find this behaviour objectionable to be quite frank and always have even when I was in gaming. I understand perfectly the casino’s position. At the core of it all is a company who is providing entertainment and nothing more. But if this is the case (which it is) then these companies shouldn’t (even in the past) have lured people in to play the game in that way.

So what they are basically saying is, we want all of the players who think that they can play the game with skill but who are deluding themselves but anyone who really has the skill is not welcome. I don’t mind not being welcome and never have but I have never liked some of the tactics of the casinos where I worked.

Skill can also be obtained on roulette as well, if you don’t think that is true then you obviously haven’t read enough of my posts. Like I said with the biased wheel post yesterday, it is possible for a player to obtain an edge on roulette on the right wheel greater than a card counter can obtain on blackjack.

In all my posts it has become evident to me that I have not revealed any clues as to how to spot biased wheels. What we are looking at here are what should be normal random distributions of numbers.

The next step is to look at if these numbers are appearing outside of what is normal random distribution. Seeing the number 4 arrive three times in four spins is certainly not evidence of bias. Most biased wheels are not biased enough to overcome the 2.7% house edge on single zero roulette.

We now need to get into areas like confidence levels here but in no way am I a mathematician. I just have access to confidential data that is all so I cannot vouch for the accuracy of the figures…..just the sources that they stem from.

Modern Huxley wheels have bias detection software but I believe that most casinos would not employ these very expensive wheels when they could use cheaper varieties. The figures that I have seen recommend tracking a wheel for an initial 200 spins.

This represents the initial assessment, if a wheel has a strong enough bias to be worthwhile then it will show itself during this length of time. The next step is to take a look at the frequencies involved but that is for a later post.

see you soon

Carl
why not try some of the sophisticated roulette systems and Play Roulette online at bwin?

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

I had someone e-mail me a few days ago who wanted to ask me about becoming a croupier and how easy it was. They had read my blackjack book which kind of painted a somewhat negative picture of life as a croupier.

Despite what I said in that book, there are many advantages to becoming a croupier. Firstly it is something where a person can create a very respectable career without having loads of qualifications. Anyone can be a croupier almost, as long as you don’t have a criminal record or maybe visible tattoos then you should be able to train as a croupier.

There are probably other factors that prohibit someone from becoming a croupier as well but not having qualifications isn’t one of them. The natural career path in the UK used to be a six week training course followed by doing the actual job for real.

Then anyone with at least 18 months experience as a dealer would be considered for promotion to Inspector. Then there were further career advancements to Pit Boss and then Manager followed by General Manager.

So a person could end up with a very good job if they showed the proper initiative and attitude. The money at that time wasn’t great but then again I am referring to the area where I worked and I am going back to 1998.

There is always the possibility for croupiers to work abroad and many follow that option and see exotic places whilst getting paid to do so. I never personally had that option because I had a family at the time but it can be a far better career for single people in many aspects.

Working night shifts isn’t for everyone but I didn’t mind it as I always liked to get out of bed whenever I wanted rather than having to be forced to get out of bed first thing in a morning. So all I can say is that the career has different appeal to different people depending on individual circumstances so do not be put off or swayed by anything that I have said either in this post or in the past.

see you soon

Carl
Play blackjack online at bwin

My first ever encounter with “The Salmon” was memorable. Actually I really ought to point out here that the use of the term “Salmon” has been taken from a blackjack card counter back in the sixties who was dubbed the “Salmon” by casino staff because he was winning and not losing consistently like everyone else. The name came about because Salmon swim up stream against the flow of the water.

This term was in the classic blackjack book “Beat the Dealer” by Ed Thorp and I figured that this name would suit my own version of the “Salmon” on roulette. I recall one early evening at about 7pm, I was dealing on American Roulette 1 when a guy walked up to my table with a couple of his friends. He looked something of a nerd and was about 5ft 9in tall, slightly overweight with a terrible hair style.

He watched the game for a while whilst talking to his associates and he sort of sounded quite irritating. After about fifteen minutes of watching me spin the ball, he then proceeded to place 50p which is £0.50 on number 17. I had no reason to suspect that this wouldn’t be anything more than a losing bet but a few seconds later I was placing the dolly on number 17 and paying him £17.50. He took his chips and put them into his pocket but left the original £0.50p bet on the number.

I gave the ball a big spin and then he appeared to think for a couple of seconds and proceeded to take the cash chips back out of his pocket and place them all back on to number 17. This gave him £18 on the number and this time my eyes were glancing at the wheel as the ball began to slow. With the final half revolution, I knew that it would be close and it was. It bounced around 17 for a second or two until finally coming to rest right in the middle of number 17.

His friends couldn’t believe it and neither could I, this guy had just won £630 from 50p in the space of two spins. A 1260 return on investment but there was nothing to suggest at this stage that this was nothing more than luck and I was sure that it was no more than that…..time would prove me very wrong.

look out for more on “The Salmon”

Carl

Over the years, I have encountered more than my fair share of roulette wheels. From the older high profile wheels to the new John Huxley “Saturn” design with built in bias detection software and electronic readouts.

In my experience, whilst every possible precaution is made by the actual manufacturers themselves to make the wheels unbiased, bias is actually inevitable. Some years ago I was exploring the possibility of bias appearing intermittently and then disappearing again.

I felt that certain atmospheric conditions could contribute towards bias in some instances but I have never been able to properly fathom why this could be the case. Wheels are moved frequently so in the process of moving them then bias can appear.

On several wheels that I have worked on in the past, the diamond shaped canoes have become loose or in some instances the metal pocket dividers that separate the actual numbers have become loose. What happens in these instances is that when the roulette ball makes contact with metal that is loose then the movement of the metal absorbs the energy of the moving roulette ball.

What this means is that the ball is then attracted to a certain area of the wheel and is less likely to be thrown into another area. This type of reaction may seem trivial but when you consider that the house edge at single zero roulette is a mere 1.35% then you can see the effect of a bias and how that can possibly lead to advantages being secured in certain types of situation where you can perhaps ascertain that certain numbers will not arrive on a certain spin.

Think about this for a moment because if you know for instance that given the dynamics of the situation that two numbers will not arrive during this spin then what this means in essence is that you could in theory back all the other 35 numbers where the pay-off is 35-1.

This means that you would return 36 chips and win 1 chip at whatever the chip denomination was. It gets a little more technical than this but this is how you can manufacture an edge at roulette and take advantage of it.

Carl

Many people are put off by the sight of roulette and its apparent complexity. But yet this is far from the truth and to be honest, I find this game to be easier to learn than blackjack. Although it has to be said that if you know how to play Pontoon then you are well on your way to knowing how to play blackjack anyway although in some instances then it can be a handicap.

Everyone knows that you can bet on a number on roulette and that bet pays 35/1. But in most areas where there is a line amongst the numbers or a cross section then you can place a bet there. These bets all pay varying odds and on single zero wheels, there are thirty seven numbers which are 1-36 and zero. The house should pay 36/1 if it was a fair bet but they obviously need an edge to be able to make some money so they only pay 35/1 instead.

Now this edge is very small and is only 1.35%, all those of you who are alert and have already figured out that 100% divided by 37 equals 2.7% have overlooked one tiny thing, the house only takes 50% of even money wagers when zero comes in. The average punter though by bad betting increases this edge quite substantially to a stage where they can easily be conceding around 3% to the house.

This is precisely why very good roulette systems can do so well and why some casinos don’t like them. When you only have a 1.35% edge (assuming single zero wheel) against you and that edge is the number zero for the house (once again assuming that you bet on even chances) then you can go for very long periods of time winning money with roulette systems. The ones that are not doubling up type systems that prohibit reaching the table maximum are perfect and when the online casino in question gives you money to begin with then the dynamic can shift alarmingly.

see you soon

Carl

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