|
Yeah I tried to use some immense system of doom and it failed 
I started at 50, got to 90 quid, then plummeted to 0. Fuckin' sucks. Thank god I have at least a shred of sense to get the fuck outta there, not before writing indignant hat-email at the site. Twice in a row I got 7 black numbers consecutively in roulette
Anyone ever played on a casino site that wasn't stupidly obviously rigged?
It seems that they are used to chimpanzees wearing nappies playing their games as that's the only way they should legally be allowed to rig games like that.
Anyway- life lesson learned = casinos hax.
Now i expect a bunch of replies involving 'kid' 'stupid', and 'not all chimpanzees are as dumb as you'. And now i doubly expect it cos i just mentioned it. argh!
 
|
i cried for the monkey in you
|
On March 14 2008 21:25 Resonate wrote:
i cried for the monkey in you
hohoho rofl
gambling is bad
unless you're rek
|
Well, I am up 125$ in 25$ red/black spins  Of course they are rigged, how on earth wouldn't they when e.g. the casino software in my poker lobby doesn't take any sort of rake that you may expect in a live casino...I don't think they are satistfied with the minor edge of probability to make profit.
|
erm don't play roullette if you want to win.
|
|
|
United States42259 Posts
Oh man. Both maths and logic dictate you will lose.
Firstly, roulette is mathematically balanced against you. It is not rigged (probably), it doesn't need to be. They will win your money anyway. Don't play roulette if you want to win. It's that simple.
Secondly, when will you stop. People don't know when they are about to lose so they keep going. Which means the gambling continues until you reach infinite money or 0, whichever happens first. And logic dictates that you'll go bust first.
So no, don't play roulette. This much should be obvious.
Go play poker, there is at least skill involved there.
And you didn't lose £50, you burnt it.
|
United States42259 Posts
On March 14 2008 21:46 Essence wrote:Well, I am up 125$ in 25$ red/black spins Of course they are rigged, how on earth wouldn't they when e.g. the casino software in my poker lobby doesn't take any sort of rake that you may expect in a live casino...I don't think they are satistfied with the minor edge of probability to make profit.
Of course they are satisfied with the minor edge. You can shear a sheep a hundred times but only skin it once. They'll take the tiny bit of EV every time you take a spin and be happy for it. Scamming you stops you coming back. The rake isn't an issue when their overheads are negligible.
|
Well Kwark the thing is that I played this system on several free roulette games and it always came off winning, it sucks . I don't think I am a fool for gambling, I am a fool for thinking the site (victorchandler.com) would be even close to fair.
The system is just you bet 1 quid on a colour, if you get the colour switch to the other colour and bet a quid. If you don't, then double your bet. You are always winning one pound, the maths support it, don't they? If you have enough money to go 100 doubles on the sum being bet, it should be nigh on impossible to lose, shouldn't it?
From the spins that i was getting, i was looking at about 1/4 of the time MY colour actually coming up!
|
On March 14 2008 21:47 G.s)NarutO wrote:
Tsunade anyone?
not everyones nick is naruto
|
roulette is worst i guess
|
The free roulette game is probably rigged in your favor to fool you into thinking you can win money with gambling. I hope you learned your lesson for being an idiot but I kinda doubt it. You should watch out because it can be addicting for certain people and destroy your life.
The system is just you bet 1 quid on a colour, if you get the colour switch to the other colour and bet a quid. If you don't, then double your bet. You are always winning one pound, the maths support it, don't they? If you have enough money to go 100 doubles on the sum being bet, it should be nigh on impossible to lose, shouldn't it?
There is no system in which you win at roulette, stop fooling yourself.
If you want to make money gambling the only way is to play against other people in a game that takes an amount of skill, provided that you have the skill and qualities it takes.
|
United States42259 Posts
On March 14 2008 22:15 HamerD wrote:Well Kwark the thing is that I played this system on several free roulette games and it always came off winning, it sucks . I don't think I am a fool for gambling, I am a fool for thinking the site (victorchandler.com) would be even close to fair. The system is just you bet 1 quid on a colour, if you get the colour switch to the other colour and bet a quid. If you don't, then double your bet. You are always winning one pound, the maths support it, don't they? If you have enough money to go 100 doubles on the sum being bet, it should be nigh on impossible to lose, shouldn't it? From the spins that i was getting, i was looking at about 1/4 of the time MY colour actually coming up!
I know the system. It doesn't change your EV (expected value) which is still around 0.95 your money back. It just polarises it. It means you win 19 times and lose everything the 20th. There is no system by which you win at roulette. To do so is mathematically impossible. Do you think you invented that system? If it worked people would live in casinos. And lol, VC is a reputable site. I've played poker there, as have a lot of other people on lp, without any problem.
Polarising the odds so your winnings are low (like 1/100th of what they would be if you put everything on red) but your chance of losing is low (like 1/100th of what it would be if you put everything on red) doesn't change the odds at all. It just polarises it. Instead of doubling up 49.9% of the time and losing 50.1% of the time you make a much smaller win but have a much smaller chance of losing. However the proportion has not changed.
|
United States42259 Posts
Erm, lets put this more simply.
Everything on red is when you put £50 on a coinflip then half the time you win 50 and half the time you lose 50.
Your system is when you put £50 on a 10 sided dice where 9/10 times you win 5.5 and 1/10 you lose 50.
It is mathematically the same, but more polarised. This system creates the illusion of winning (because your winchance is more like 99/100) so you rack up a lot of money before it finally happens and you lose everything.
|
United States42259 Posts
Oh, I suggest you email VCPoker with an apology and explain that you were just pissed off that you didn't understand statistics. I imagine their staff get a lot of shit from people like you and they don't deserve it.
In future just apply logic (ie would casinos offer me a game I can beat) before gambling. If you come up with a system you think can work find someone with a knowledge of statistics and run it by them before concluding that you're a genius and can win infinite money.
|
in roullette, the chance of getting black or red isn't 50/50. don't forget the 0. just one example of how roullette in engineered to make you lose.
|
United States42259 Posts
Oh, and I love that you concluded it was rigged. Chance of 7 same colour numbers in a row is 1 in 64 and I bet you played far more than 64 spins. I just keep reading your blog over and over because each time you claim it's rigged it tickles me a little inside. Definitely a 5 from me.
|
United States42259 Posts
On March 14 2008 22:48 distant_voice wrote:
in roullette, the chance of getting black or red isn't 50/50. don't forget the 0. just one example of how roullette in engineered to make you lose.
I was giving a basic example so he could understand that by lowering the win amount and lowering the chance of losing at the same time he didn't actually change the odds. But yes, it's the 0 that makes it unfair. The 0 that bends the odds that little bit against you.
|
Ew, why roulette online? Stick to BJ/Poker?
Hell, I don't even like roulette in a casino. I like to have at least SOME impact on my chances of winning.
|
ah. Yet again I am defeated by mathematical short-sightedness. I thought there was something askew  .
I'll stay away, I'll stay away. Can't imagine when I'm going to be earning 40 quid p/h again though!
btw I do understand the mathematics, kwark, just because I don't have a particular affinity for it and number crunching doesn't mean I am actually a dunce ¬¬, you don't have to be condescending
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
