Labouchere (aka Cancellation/Split Martingale ) Betting System

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 22 ธ.ค. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 115

  • @TheOddsMustBeCrazy
    @TheOddsMustBeCrazy  4 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Part II : FIbonacci Betting System - Does it work? : th-cam.com/video/Cds0ZebNBeE/w-d-xo.html

    • @herilopez1467
      @herilopez1467 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      This is just superb, I've been looking for "reverse martingale binary options" for a while now, and I think this has helped. Ever heard of - Aonyanaler Bewildering Asset - (search on google ) ? It is a great one of a kind guide for discovering how to making money with a proven roulette system minus the headache. Ive heard some great things about it and my buddy got amazing success with it.

  • @kristofferkarlsson4260
    @kristofferkarlsson4260 2 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    This is very educational! All gamblers should go through your videos at least once, before even setting a foot in a casino.

  • @mikec3059
    @mikec3059 4 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Hi, Interesting video, never used the Labouchere before, was always playing Martingale system
    I have had great results playing Labouchere.
    Thanks so much for your advise.

  • @JoeKind1958
    @JoeKind1958 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    As most all 1000 bet results show, keep your session short and be happy with a modest win. Greed will get you in the end and the house wins. Personally I really like the Labouchere 2to1 system on betting on just one of the dozens. Stay on the same dozen the whole session. Moving to another dozen that you think is hot will almost guarantee a win on the dozen you just left. I had 20 losses and just 4 wins the other night and ended the session a winner. Amazing !

  • @alexatl89
    @alexatl89 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Thank you for all the different blackjack strategy charts on your site! They are super helpful!

  • @CSLintheCASINO
    @CSLintheCASINO 4 ปีที่แล้ว +10

    Excellent explanation. Very clearly stated case with mathematical evidence.
    Now, I’d appreciate it if you would convince craps players that
    dice control/influencing isn’t real. LOL!
    My ultimate question regarding dice control/influencing is:
    • If the first & primary goal of dice control is to maintain the same axis, Then what’s the difference between the dice going off axis after hitting the table/back wall verses shortly after leaving the shooter’s hand?
    Answer: There is no difference. It’s a random roll regardless of WHEN they go off axis.
    I believe dice control is theoretically possible, but there are too many variables for it to actually happen. The question above encapsulates why a shooter can’t have the dice flip, twist and turn in virtually countless ways after hitting the table, yet it’s somehow a controlled roll because the toss was on axis. The dice have changed axis multiple times before coming to a rest.

    • @truckerdzoe2122
      @truckerdzoe2122 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      theres a lot of debate anout dice control going on... im of a belief that its nothing but hocus pocus

    • @CSLintheCASINO
      @CSLintheCASINO 4 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      Trucker Dzoe, Agreed! It funny that Dice Controllers pay so much attention to what the dice do during their throw (stay on axis, turn together, nice & pretty), then they completely ignore everything the dice do after hitting the table/wall.

  • @truckerdzoe2122
    @truckerdzoe2122 4 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    this video needs more views! im sick n tired of seeing YT videos abt “winning systems”, that are usually nothing but a double-up/martingale system that doesnt work long term speaking.
    what is even more sad is that such videos get hunders of thousands and sometimes millions of views.
    Ppl are sheep, and gullible and they should be educated with videos like this one!

    • @CSLintheCASINO
      @CSLintheCASINO 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Trucker Dzoe, you’ve made some excellent points in this comment section. We need more intelligent gamblers like you in the TH-cam craps community. There are far too many people that only partially analyze. Then it’s self fulfilling prophecy until they lose all their money. LOL!

    • @CBG81
      @CBG81 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@CSLintheCASINO you would need an infinite bankroll and no table limits to make these double up systems work every time.

    • @CSLintheCASINO
      @CSLintheCASINO 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Alokin Ciguz , Exactly!!

    • @CBG81
      @CBG81 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@CSLintheCASINO I had to learn the hard way mate... after the initial small success it went south from there rather quickly... NEVER AGAIN

    • @truckerdzoe2122
      @truckerdzoe2122 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      been there done that

  • @potzblitz49583
    @potzblitz49583 2 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    Why playing ten units? Play four units and it's nearly impossible to lose.

  • @wildfoodietours
    @wildfoodietours 4 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    Such a fascinating system. Thank you for sharing, Wizard. To make sure I understand correctly for a player bet in baccarat (let's use $100 units) starting with 100 units, the probability of reaching a goal of 10 units is 89.52%. So with a $10,000 bankroll, nine out of ten times you'll win $1000 and be done with the session in only about 20 hands on average? That is a GREAT probability and sounds too good to be true. What am I missing?
    At 5:46 you were already up $500 (balance $10,500) on just the eighth hand, and several other times you were up anywhere from $100-900. You eventually win your goal of $1000 with a maximum loss at any point in time of $1600 (balance of $8,400). The goal is 10 units, but if a player was to settle for reaching just 20-90% of his goal, wouldn't that decrease risk dramatically and perhaps be a more optimal way to play? After all, the shorter the session the greater the chance of winning.
    Ultimately, it seems one should be able to consistently walk away with smaller 2-6ish unit wins with occasional 10+ unit wins, which would more than make up for the 10% of the time one does not come close to reaching the stated goal. The key is to stick to a variable goal percentage (depends on the flow of the game and luck) of profit target or units won and an absolute maximum stop loss.
    While gambling is supposed to be unpredictable, I believe there are streaks and patterns one can take advantage of given strict discipline and an understanding of money management.
    What are your thoughts? I really wish to understand more about this topic.

    • @CitizenRare
      @CitizenRare 4 ปีที่แล้ว +8

      The problem here lies within the ratio of money lost versus money bet, which is shown at the end of the video to approach the house advantage every time. Your example of winning 9 times out of 10 is correct only when you apply the full $10,000 bankroll (ie in your example, when you lose, you do not have a maximum loss of $1600, you have lost the entire bankroll). A session concludes when you have either reached your goal or lost the bankroll. If you say, give yourself a restriction of having a maximum loss less than that of your entire bankroll (like your $1600 example), your probably of a winning session goes way down (it just means your bankroll was $1600, not $10,000). A $1600 maximum loss in your example is essentially a 16 unit bankroll (far less than the minimum 50 units shown in the video, so the probability of a winning session is way lower).
      So the point is to illustrate that while your probability of a single winning session is high with a higher bankroll at your disposal, the latter half of the video clearly shows that surviving even just 1000 sessions with a profit is extremely difficult. Possible? Yes. But more often, as shown, most graphs are negative for the player. And even if you do profit over 1000 sessions, it's a fraction of what the average loss is (in the 2500 unit bankroll case in the video, there was a net result of -20,000 units whereas the highest was +5000 units). As you progressively increase the bankroll size, the losses are larger, even though the probably of a single session is high. Hence, this is not a net positive strategy for the player. The pesky house advantage is a mathematical certainty.
      Hope this helps :)

    • @truckerdzoe2122
      @truckerdzoe2122 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      i think the point of the video, is that no systems will work long term

    • @wildfoodietours
      @wildfoodietours 3 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      @@CitizenRare Thank you for the excellent response. It was very helpful. However, your explanation was in regards to playing a full session, ie you either win $1000/10 units or lose your entire bankroll of $10000. I just wish to clarify some more things. In the video, by just the 8th hand he was already up $500/5 units or 50% of his 10-unit goal. Assuming a player would be content with reaching just 20-90% of his stated goal, wouldn't this be a more optimal way to use this system because much less money is at risk? In the first eight hands, his maximum loss at any point was just $500 (balance $9500). In my mind a player with a 10k bankroll could use this system continuously with regular success if he either quits the session after being up just a few $100 units or stops once he reaches his stop loss number. The only way I could see him losing is if in his sessions, he continuously hits his stop loss before reaching his win goal. But that's why lowering the win goal to just a few units was suggested. I mean, at $100 units, it doesn't take much variance to be up a few units at any given time.

    • @himethisisme
      @himethisisme 5 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @@wildfoodietours The goal and the bankroll are both decisions made by the player. Changing your mind halfway through just means you need to re-calculate the odds with the new bankroll/goal values per the formula.
      Obviously you could set your goal to be $1 (even in the middle of a session, after you've already hit it!) and that would improve your odds, but you still can't play forever - as the number of sessions increases, you will eventually lose, and even with a small bankroll (like $100, again, even if you went in with 1k but changed your mind at the table and decided not to go below 100), the potential loss is massive compared to the potential gain of $1.

  • @sarahjohanson1296
    @sarahjohanson1296 4 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    I was always wondering how this system works and it was hard for me to fully understand it. Thanks Mike for your explanation. You explained it in an easy to understand way.

    • @YaNykyta
      @YaNykyta 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Mike tough as always!

  • @CitizenRare
    @CitizenRare 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    EXCELLENT vid from the GOAT. Was hoping you’d provide a mathematical analysis of this strategy on a video one day. Definitely one of the more interesting methods out there. Your work is a huge service to the industry. Great stuff Mike!

  • @armaanpandher6683
    @armaanpandher6683 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    How'd u calculate the probability that's what I'd like to know!!!

  • @mysticalchildofficialyoutu9007
    @mysticalchildofficialyoutu9007 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Hey Mike, thank you for taking the time to upload this. And thank you for all the information.
    I hope you and your family are all doing well and staying safe.
    Look forward to seeing you and Heather on the next AMA livestream. 🙂

  • @iamzae6123
    @iamzae6123 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Martingale is and always will be the king betting strategy if you don’t want to count cards.

  • @RealmsOfThePossible
    @RealmsOfThePossible 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    I am fairly new to Baccarat and Roulette and of course have been going down the rabbit hole of systems but it is great to get some cold hard facts. This must have took a lot of time to get together and I am very thankful.

  • @phiberoptik232
    @phiberoptik232 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Hello mike! Good to see you back.

  • @philiphobday1490
    @philiphobday1490 ปีที่แล้ว

    Does a french roulette table (50% of bet returned for a Zero) improve this system much?

  • @marim8051
    @marim8051 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    As a beginner who likes maths, I would like to say that this system is very interesting and I will definitely try out the Labouchere 😀

    • @TheOddsMustBeCrazy
      @TheOddsMustBeCrazy  4 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      As long as you understand that no betting system can beat the house.

    • @artonospancer3308
      @artonospancer3308 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@TheOddsMustBeCrazy a group of student from MIT did beat the casino back in 90's.. have u ever watch 21 movie? It base on a true story. & They rite a book "Beat the dealer" . U can find it in Amazon.com

    • @einimol97
      @einimol97 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@artonospancer3308 Yeah but they didn't use a betting system; they used card counting

  • @zexilion
    @zexilion ปีที่แล้ว +1

    The minimum balance you chose seems low to me. Based on the tests I have done, I think that you should have a balance of at least 1500 times the desired bet. For example, if you want to earn 4 dollars (4x1500: 6000) you need 6000 dollars.
    Additionally, creating 10 rows seems quite risky to me. A consecutive losing streak can make the situation very bad. I usually create 2 rows (2, 2) and minimize the risk. If I want to earn $20, I repeat this 5 times.

  • @stentasch
    @stentasch ปีที่แล้ว

    Hi. How its works if I do edge over game 2 % - 10% ..can I use it to increase profits ?

  • @tonymancini5482
    @tonymancini5482 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    If I understood this correctly, Labouchere strategy is not an appropriate option for players with smaller bankrolls?

  • @dannyring2493
    @dannyring2493 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Would the results be different if you played a system with this betting system

  • @drewbogardi4550
    @drewbogardi4550 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    When you say for example in your player bet simulation "50 UNITS" what does that mean exactly? Is it your goal of winning 50 dollars so start with $100.00 or does it mean you start with a bank of $50.00?
    Just trying to clarify is all :)

  • @dannyring2493
    @dannyring2493 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    can you start with just 4 numbers?
    I always try to make $100 a shoe.

  • @royberg328
    @royberg328 4 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    I appreciate what the wizard does. But who in your right mind would bet player every hand for 1000 shoes

  • @IllPropaganda
    @IllPropaganda 4 ปีที่แล้ว +13

    Any day you get schooled from Mike Shackleford is a damn good day!

    • @CBG81
      @CBG81 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      word!

  • @ytfeverguy8367
    @ytfeverguy8367 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Interesting analysis. What about using baccarat patterns in conjunction with Labouchere? What I mean by patterns is identifying shoe biases and betting the Chop, streaks then applying the LB progression? The gambler in me wants to try it out but I wonder if stats analysis would yield a similar negative result.

  • @mikec3059
    @mikec3059 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Hi Michael,
    Can you explain, not sure why the probabilty % is greater if you aim to win more units? i thought it would be exactly the same as your upping upping your stake to suit profit,
    Eg. betting $5 to win $50 profit or betting $50 to win $500, would take the exact hands to win the amount of profit your chasing.

  • @dcvaldez1993
    @dcvaldez1993 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    What if your strategy is not based on banker or player, but on the combination of the two ?
    I have try it on real life casinos, with hand shufles of 6 decks and out of 25 shoes,the results
    where : 13 wining units per shoe X 23 . And a minus _ 3 units on the remainig 2 shoes.
    ¿Can you apply this to a hundred and tell me if it is any good? Thanks Michael . Cheers DC.

  • @chpstaker
    @chpstaker 4 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    If there is a 97.53% chance of winning your target when betting 500 units, then that means the house only has a 2.47% chance of beating you. How is this not a positive expectation betting system? I would think that any percentage of winning over 50% would be a positive expectation.

    • @grifter84
      @grifter84 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      It's because wins and losses aren't equal. The 97.53% of the sessions you win yield a 10-unit profit each, but 2.47% of the time you'll lose 500 units. Just a few massive losses like that will more than wipe out all those little wins it took so long to stack.

    • @dr.alluahir
      @dr.alluahir หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      This is right it's impossible to win

  • @ritakoy3222
    @ritakoy3222 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Congratulations on a great video! 🙉 I know where you can get more than 76 free spins.Best choice.
    My late husband loved that machine!! He always seemed to do well on it.

  • @funandgames2339
    @funandgames2339 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Nice video. Thank you for sharing!

  • @RouletteMan
    @RouletteMan 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Amazing video! Good point about the pronunciation. 3 points/questions:
    1. Since we need roughly a 1/3 win rate for an Even Chance bet, I wonder what was the win rate in the lost sessions, especially those with 2500 units bankroll. That would be interesting to know.
    2. A method people playing negative (up as you win) progressions use, is to handle a progression as a step of a larger progression. Say, you lose a session, now you play the next session with a bigger bet etc. Sort of a Labouchere within a Labouchere. That may be interesting to test.
    3. What about Reverse Labouchere? It would be very interesting to compare the same spin sequence played with the reverse strategy.

    • @Veaseify
      @Veaseify 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      You are overthinking this, the house edge is all that matters in gambling. If you bet Even money chances on single zero roulette you will lose 2.7% of the total amount of money put in play over the long term, no matter how much each individual bet is.

  • @mikec3059
    @mikec3059 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Hi Michael,
    You also say you need to win 1/3 of bets for the system to work, correct me If I;m wrong, but this will not make you profit

  • @Cheesinfornoreason
    @Cheesinfornoreason 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Ok but what is the bank roll number that would reduce your chance of losing to not happening in your lifetime.

    • @grifter84
      @grifter84 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      It would have to be so massive that there wouldn't be any point gambling. Your 10-unit wins would be infinitesimal relative to your bankroll, and you'd still be putting a gigantic amount at risk.

  • @GameOP890
    @GameOP890 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    is it much safe to bet 1000 first... then use 10k flat betting... if you win first bet... you go home with 1k win 😅

  • @marktirabassi7160
    @marktirabassi7160 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Why does nobody tell us how a shark wins at black jack. ? How do they bet?

  • @kurtbrown4492
    @kurtbrown4492 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    FIBONACCI ON A DOZEN WILL ALWAYS PROFIT
    For eg
    Betting on 3rd dozen starting with just 10p bets using Fibonacci sequence
    Bet ; 10p, 10p, 20p, 30p, 50p, 80p, 1.30p, 2.10p 3.40p
    Work out spent eg for the above would be....
    10, 20, 40, 70, 1.20, 2.00, 3.30, 5.60 and so on, adding what has been spent after each bet.
    Work out what you win, eg for above demo,
    30, 30, 60, 90, 1.50, 2.40, 3.90, 6.30 and so on, but as you can see.... If you work out diffence between spent and win = profit :)
    You will always profit when it lands on your dozen.
    Reply with comments in what anyone thinks and if people are using Fibonacci sequence on a dozen already.

  • @johnanthandoe1144
    @johnanthandoe1144 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Awesome video mike thx

  • @jejmyscot9216
    @jejmyscot9216 4 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    this --> 19:41 " the ppl that sell betting systems are quacks, they are charlatans

    • @VegasGrind
      @VegasGrind 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      I call BS... Mr. S talks about systems not working and he can prove it mathematically. All the calculations are done using computers over millions of hands. Well guess what, you, me, and Mr. S. combined won't be here for millions of hands. So throw those calculations out the window and think outside the box...I do

  • @chhaysokhoeun452
    @chhaysokhoeun452 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    So good for explain

  • @Harouni_fba
    @Harouni_fba 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    That’s why the key to gambling is to QUIT WHILST YOURE AHEAD.
    Also, there are much safer laboucher systems- eg adding 0s in the sequence. (1,1,0,1,0,1) for example. Much safer and a lot more secure long term.
    That said, never play more than three sessions in a row and that keeps the house advantage down. 👍🏼

  • @moshejun
    @moshejun 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I tested labouchere system with 30 units several times, but it only reached 20 units profit, and then went to zero units... Mathematically, thou shalt not believe in betting systems - the most important principle in betting.

  • @misterneckbreaker88
    @misterneckbreaker88 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    martingale is risky but it is the way to make a profit. what ive been doing recently is putting £4 on red or black whatever last result colour was and put £1 on zero and just martingale and add £2 to the colour im betting. if zero comes i win and leave. target is £10 profit then stop or martingale 4 spins in a row then stop.

    • @roberthobson5110
      @roberthobson5110 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Could you please elaborate

    • @misterneckbreaker88
      @misterneckbreaker88 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@roberthobson5110 put bet on zero and a colour. £1 zero £2 red or blk if lose martingale only the colour until your at a loss of £35 which is the winnings if zero comes in. If you win colour you will be £1 profit. Zero you win 35 to 1 walk away. Betting zero and a colour puts you at advantage 2 to 1

  • @billabong2155
    @billabong2155 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    You are Rock 🌟

  • @escapefelicity2913
    @escapefelicity2913 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I like the way you think.
    I spent many 100s of hours on this a few years ago.
    I used a string of 9 and when there was 1 left I bet 2X that last one.
    I'll go at it again anf use your set of 10..

  • @hamidbohluli3692
    @hamidbohluli3692 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Gambling is like smoking...
    Every one knows that gambling is harmful and would ruins and damages life but no one can quit the gambling for long time ...😢

  • @woonchungliong4173
    @woonchungliong4173 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Hey Mister, don't waste your time! Stay at home & watch TV!

  • @CBG81
    @CBG81 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    To quote the Wizard himself: "thou shalt not believe in betting systems "

    • @VegasGrind
      @VegasGrind 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      That's what makes this a free country. I do believe the Wiz is right about the long run, however, I can never find out what he has to say about the short run... There are Systems that DO work in the short run!

    • @CBG81
      @CBG81 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@VegasGrind short term sessions plus short term plus short term adds up and gives long term. Long term you going to end up losing more overall

    • @VegasGrind
      @VegasGrind 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@CBG81 You're talking about the long run, so yes I agree. However, none of us will be here that long. Some systems like Vegas Grind are designed for the slow and steady player, and also employs a Hit And Run Technique

  • @Bower_
    @Bower_ 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Do you have twitter/instagram?

    • @TheOddsMustBeCrazy
      @TheOddsMustBeCrazy  4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Hi Aurelio, Twitter: twitter.com/Wizard0fOdds , my website : wizardofodds.com

  • @angravante
    @angravante 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    The bank wins more than the player but you pay 5% if you bet on bank and win. You should bet with the trend not just on one side. If the table is choppy bet opposite of what came out.If streaking, bet on the side that is in a streak. You will do much better.

    • @grifter84
      @grifter84 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Wrong. Those trends you think you're spotting are meaningless and only appear in hindsight. Past results tell you nothing about how the next hand will play out. Google "independent trial," or just spend some time on the Wizard's website to learn more about how probability actually works.

  • @baccaratoramikir1444
    @baccaratoramikir1444 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    so the key point, is short win, get out when winning.
    thank you

  • @trevorloughlin1492
    @trevorloughlin1492 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Simply use a mathematical system to change the actual odds and send the results back from the future.

  • @haroldmoss6864
    @haroldmoss6864 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    The only system that works for me is walk in with a bankroll.Money management.When you're up grab your chips and leave.No hanging around talking to people who are gambling.Just Go

  • @mike44scv1
    @mike44scv1 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    I look at it this way. Let's say you play a simple coin flip game against the casino. Heads you win...tails, you lose. Sounds even on the surface. But, the snake is in the payoff. Every time they win....you give them $1.....but every time you win....they give you 95 cents. Even if Warren Buffett played long enough....you might see him in a soup kitchen.

  • @michdax7627
    @michdax7627 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    in most casino's the tables have a max bet allowed. all these require you to exceed the max, which will not be a allowed. All systems will fail

  • @mixey01
    @mixey01 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Guess Christoper Michael could learn a thing or two from your strategies

  • @Mr.Caring
    @Mr.Caring 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    WSay what🤔
    Were made in HIS image. HE made us with the power of free choice
    A good prayer:
    I'm a sinner JESUS please forgive me for all my sins I know you shed your Blood for me on the cross at Calvary. Thank you JESUS for my salvation and for shedding they Blood for me. I love you JESUS.
    Romans 10:5/10 ct...❤️k
    JESUSisLord!Amen...
    Amen..
    If you'd like to call someone who cares
    83
    For
    Truth.
    bc you don't know when you'll die?
    .y r u hesitant. .. .... .... ...

  • @ManMountainManX
    @ManMountainManX 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    TY.
    /

  • @haroldmoss6864
    @haroldmoss6864 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Casinos are waiting for all the people in the world that has a system.Vegas was built on loosers not people that win.Thats why there open 24 hrs a day.Of course you can win once and awhile.But in the long run you're going to loose.The greed would get you every time.My theory is walk in win and leave.Do not hang around there long.

  • @limphandy1282
    @limphandy1282 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    No good for this stagtagy

  • @golbaharrose4839
    @golbaharrose4839 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Brother it’s dangerous betting. Sisterm
    Long bancer Finesh you
    I can give you sistem. Guaranty. No lose

  • @drdontpassone8164
    @drdontpassone8164 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    more craps subject matter

  • @fredsibarney7094
    @fredsibarney7094 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Long story short it's impossible to win long term

  • @SkillandLuckCRAPS
    @SkillandLuckCRAPS 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Just say it’s a bad betting strategy. No need to drag this all out.

    • @ron564339
      @ron564339 4 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      He's pretty much said that for the last 30 years on his site. ALL betting systems are bad, and none of them make any effect whatsoever on the house edge (not counting betting "strategies" like card counting).
      I appreciate videos like this because they go through the variance and the trends that tend to happen. In the long run, if you risk the same amount of money on bets with the same house edge, it doesn't matter how you split it up in terms of how "bad" the system is. You're going to lose the same amount regardless (or rather, you expect to lose the same amount based on probability....the variance can give all different kinds of results).
      But, different people get different amounts of fun depending on how they play. That's why I enjoy hearing these kinds of breakdowns of systems so you can get a feel for whether or not you think it would be fun to play that way.

    • @CSLintheCASINO
      @CSLintheCASINO 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Will564, well said 👍

    • @hawaiidispenser
      @hawaiidispenser 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@ron564339 In the long term, yes, but the short term has exceptions: 1) Apply a wagering system in the short term and once you have a small profit, walk away from it forever. (Not very practical, granted, but it's relatively safe profit) Or, 2) If you can find a game that has a very high/no maximum bet limit and you have access to a large enough bankroll. With that, you could potentially make life-changing money in the short term, quit, and be set for life. (Hard to find such games or get access to such a bankroll, granted).

    • @TheOddsMustBeCrazy
      @TheOddsMustBeCrazy  4 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      @@hawaiidispenser What can't be trusted in the long term can't be trusted in the short term.

    • @ron564339
      @ron564339 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@hawaiidispenser As the Wizard said, the issue is that you can't fully trust it. Sure, it's POSSIBLE you'll come out ahead. And with certain systems, you can risk a whole lot of money with a high probability of a small gain.
      But the problem is nothing is guaranteed. It's like betting on a sports favorite at -10000 or something like that (a cliff jumper, as the Wizard has called them in the past). Sure, you're very likely to win $100 by risking $10000, and if you stopped forever, you'd walk away with a profit. But the question is...is it worth potentially losing such a large amount of money to win such a small amount? If you happen to lose it, you're burned so badly that it makes you question whether it's worth taking the chance at all.
      And for your second example....sure, you have a chance of winning life-changing money, but that means you're also just as likely to lose that same amount of life-changing money.
      Really, in both of your cases, if my goal is to make money and I already have a large bankroll, I would much rather just invest the money. In those situations, you do have a mathematical advantage and still have variance. (Unless you just put it in a high-yield savings account, which will get you a modest return with pretty much no risk). I would much rather put my money in an account to get 1% interest instead of risking my money at a game with negative EV to potentially get that same 1% return.
      My point is...we don't gamble to make money. If you want to make money, you should use your money to do something with a positive expected return. Most forms of gambling have a negative expected return.
      We gamble for entertainment and fun. Any gambler should decide how much money it's worth it for them to lose to have the amount of fun to justify losing that amount.