FOBT - why its' not like _casino roulette

harry 3 · Post by **harry 3** » Sat Aug 20, 2005 8:50 am

I wouldn't start calling people names with a username such as Althegreat.

mjd · Post by **mjd** » Tue Aug 23, 2005 12:50 am

I too think roulette is not random.. it just seems to give it if it wants to, and if it doesn't you will miss everytihng constantly, or if you have loads of things covered it will hit you on a place where your going to win less than what you put on..

nudgesuk · Post by **nudgesuk** » Tue Sep 06, 2005 12:55 am

after working in a bookies and seeing thesethings day in and dayout and now also playing them nearly everyday i know there rigged i have no evidence and the fact that sum guy can stand there and tellme as soon as i press the "bet" button exactly where the balls going and the fact that when the screengoes blackwhen you press "bet" means the ball is goingto land on either 13,22,30 there called the blackout numbers so if thats random then im britney spears also theres been times whenive seen a run of 17 reds now thats a kick in the balls when you bet black all of those 17 times aint it and after ifinished andlost a lot of cash i was toldthat a bloke not long before me had collected £700 off £20 so its just the machine evenin itself out just like a fruity these things will pay when they want but when they dont you will know all about it .........

but another argument is that i put £160 in an fobt and got down to £2.50 no wordof a lie i swear on my life ...and this bloke cameup to me and said ok that number came out so one of these shouldfollow and nearly everytime he was right and won me back £200 but after following his tip's i have found this to betrue but youhave to be willing to stake to reepthe benefits cos 4 25p's on sum corners aintgonna get you no where ....ifanyone wants to know a little info on this pmme andill trade for sum m/c info you got cheers

nudges

p.s. this rift will rumble on for a long time to come whilst the bookies laugh in our faces as we pound ££££££ through these monsters

smarm · Post by **smarm** » Tue Sep 27, 2005 2:58 pm

i know we havnt seen eye to eye but i want to hear your system,ill trade you something

Cardinal Sin · Post by **Cardinal Sin** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 4:01 pm

Can't believe the amount of rubbish (some of it illiterate as well) that is being spouted on this subject.

Let's get a few things straight...

The machine is random. Whenever you press start, it requests a number from a RNG housed elsewhere. The number is returned back to the machine.. e.g. 14 . The machine then loads the graphics sequence which results in the ball landing on 14. People can predict what number the ball is going to land on because they've seen the sequence before. Whilst it might be a nice party trick, it's useless cos they can't change the bets once the sequence has begun. There was a scam a while back involving turning the machine off (once you knew which number was going to come in) and then turning it back on again, but you'd be more likely to find an unchipped Donkey Kong.

14 reds in a row? WOW! What are the chances of that happening? I'll tell you, 2 to the power 14, or 1 in 16384 . Quite high, but look on it another way, the chances of getting black, red (repeated another 6 times), is exactly the same, 1 in 16384. I'm sure you've all seen strange things going on on these FOBT machines, but it's all just down to luck, either good or bad. It's like the national lottery, you're just as likely to see 1,2,3,4,5,6 bonus ball 7 as the winning numbers as you are 11, 24, 30, 32, 40, 47

And another thing, why would all the FOBT manufacturers, and indeed, the bookies, risk everything for the sake of fixing their software? Roulette is a guaranteed money spinner for them, espeically considering the addictive nature of the game, and the addictive personalities of the people who play them. If they really were fixed, then it would only take one whistleblower to expose it all. Have we heard anything? No, of course not, because they're not fixed.

Now I'm not saying I'm on the side of the bookies at all. These machines, and the s16 machines in arcades, are made almost exclusively for addicts. Most people who play them for any length of time have got an addiction. Most fruit machine companies employ people who have studied the psychology of gambling behaviour (presumably not to try and make games less addictive). I see no reason why bookies and the like would not do the same.

It might be comforting to think that you've been cheated out of your money rather than falling the victim to bad luck, but you are just deluding yourself.

harry 3 · Post by **harry 3** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 7:11 pm

The odds of getting 14 reds in a row is 18/37^14 which is 1 in 24044 a big difference to your calculations. This is one of the reasons Martingales fail along with a house limit. Anyone that gambles in a betting shop is a mug. There are online opportunities that beat every form of gsmbling here, except maybe AWP's. Good punting.

mjd · Post by **mjd** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 7:20 pm

I find it hard to be convinced its random, when 'you press start at the same time, we get the same number'.. stuff like that..

harry 3 · Post by **harry 3** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:39 pm

The RNG only throws out x numbers a minute so if you press simultaneously you are going to get the same number. Roulette is a very simple game fundamentally. For real gambling you would have to go in for poker, or backgammon.

mjd · Post by **mjd** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:44 pm

I need to play poker for real somewhere, The online games just mug you whenever they want, with a 1 million - 1 odds cold deck!

luckyben2 · Post by **luckyben2** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:50 pm

I have to say that recently I have been pretty lucky on the ladbrokes roulettes (or in fact Wild Spin which is like roulette but with consecutive numbers - downside is a double, American-style zero).

Anyway, I tend to play 25p, 50p and £1 at different sections of the board. However, sometimes I get a feeling to put a £5 on a number or 2 and this has won 4-5 times out of the 6-7 I have done it:

Bet 32 - Just the single £5 and it hits.
Bet 28, 29: Win
Bet 22,23,24: Win
Bet 17, 27: Win

Now this is obviously some pretty decent luck. Once I put in £20 and cashed in £250.

However, when I first started I had a lot of losing sessions. Just the other day I saw a guy bet £100 over the board covering every number apart from 2. One of the non-covered numbers came in. Again, unlikely and I am sure the guy was very annoyed. But it's simply the reverse of my 'luck'. As has been stated before, with a house edge of 2.7 (or double that in my double-zero game) the casino is bound to win.

And as for 'blackout' numbers and the like, the machine simply has videos stored in it of numbers spinning in. As the RNG (Random Number Generator) tells the machine the winning number, it loads the video to display the result. So a person watching the machine a lot will learn the videos... nothing magic about that at all.

Just me 2 cents worth.

B.

harry 3 · Post by **harry 3** » Wed Oct 05, 2005 7:29 am

Most casinos now have poker rooms. You usually pay per hour. Not like the US which rakes a certain percentage if the pot goes over a certain amount. Even easier set up a game at home. You can buy chips really reasonably priced in the high street or places such as amazon.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASI ... 47-9081406

luckyben2 · Post by **luckyben2** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 7:45 pm

Best single bet win ever today...

not a good start, down by £80... But then put in another £40 and get my £5 bet on 18 to hit for £180.

Then decide to do a few more spins... about 4/5 later I get a £6 hit.. that's the highest I ever got on a single bet.

So... £288 out for £120 in. Not bad. I DON'T think these are fixed - sure you get bad runs that seem like the one number you don't cover comes in, but you get some nice hits too.

B.

harry 3 · Post by **harry 3** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 10:13 pm

The odds of your "favourite" number not coming in for a 100 spins is only about 8/1.

stuart4010 · Post by **stuart4010** » Sun Dec 18, 2005 3:15 pm

harry2 wrote:What an uneducated set of replies. The reason they are not fixed is they don't have to be, because the 2.7% takeout erodes your stake over time. The longer you play the harder it is to break even or win. Then when you are chasing losses you increase your stake. The odds on your number not coming in for a hundred spins is what ?

a) 1 in 9
b) 1 in 900
c) 1 in 90000

I'll post answer soon.

Several times I have put £20 in and won £200, £300 or more. Then again I have lost £3500 in twenty minutes. I have seen a number repeat 4 times and 5 zeroes in nine spins. This isn't unusual or fixed over several thousand spins. Try reading up on statistics or probability before posting drivel on here.

ps The answer is a)

pps. I don't mind if you give me some stick over my losses. You can not win at roulette over time. Just add up all the numbers to find an apt nickname for the game.

Just been browsing what i'd started, and oh dear, you were way out here mate. I don't care about how words are spelt, but telling someone to read up on statistics and probability when writing what you did was nothing short of comical. The odds on your number not coming in during 100 spins is 37/1... i.e. exactly the same chance of it not coming in on any single spin of the wheel. Each spin of the wheel is an INDEPENDENT event, i.e. there can be no summation of odds. And the 2.7% part? That would imply that the bookmaker only makes 2.7% on these. 2.7% might be the statistical figure in casino roulette, but as people have posted before, the bookmaker is 2-300% up every single day.
In future, I suggest that your use of the word uneducated is given some consideration before posting non-sensical, and inaccurate postings like the one you made.

stuart4010 · Post by **stuart4010** » Sun Dec 18, 2005 3:31 pm

harry2 wrote:The odds of getting 14 reds in a row is 18/37^14 which is 1 in 24044 a big difference to your calculations. This is one of the reasons Martingales fail along with a house limit. Anyone that gambles in a betting shop is a mug. There are online opportunities that beat every form of gsmbling here, except maybe AWP's. Good punting.

It gets better, I shouldn've read the whole thing first. You CANNOT sum or multiply probabilities relating to independent (i.e. completely unrelated) events!!!!! The odds of 14 reds in a row is simply 18/37! I don't know where you get your theory from Harry, but it's completely wrong. Have you ever undertaken any probability or statisical study before? If you have, I suggest a review of it, as your understanding as incorrect.