Beating roulette by wheel clocking?

[lefty rosen]

Is this a common occurance for wheels that have been in use for a long time to develop a slight warp or groove that favours certain numbers ie wheel clocking. Also do casinos recognize wheel clockers quickly and ban them abruptly, also is this legal( I suspect this is).

[Beerfund]

ummmmm no its not illegal and if you can find a roulette wheel that can be clocked please let me know. This isn't something that happens today unless this is 1923......

[lefty rosen]

I know a guy who claimed to be a wheel clocker and on a BJ board I forget which one another poster stated that he was a wheel clocker and got run out of a casino because of it. Now obviously do I think you can walk into any casino and clock the wheel, no but it's a possibility if management doesn't know about the trueness of the wheel.

[Beerfund]

How could they not know if the wheel was worped?? The "wheel clockers" probaly guessed right 10 times in a row and decided the wheel was biased.....but it's just not a logical thing today

[Terry]

Here are some typical procedures used in maintaining roulette wheels.

Suspended on hooks beneath at least one of a casino’s roulette tables is a large carpenter’s level. All wheels are checked for level daily, and adjusted as necessary.

Wheel heads are rotated to a new position daily, upon opening or closing.

Wheels are frequently moved from table to table, and in casinos with an extra wheel, changed in and out of play with one in storage. It is necessary to learn to recognize a “specific” wheel if you think you’ve spotted a “defect”.

Wheels are regularly broken down for inspection and maintenance, cleaning and oiling the bearings.

Surveillance will occasionally chart a couple hundred spins of each wheel. If any bias is to be strong enough to overcome the 5.26% house advantage, it must show up very quickly. If anyone tells you a story of clocking/charting a wheel for weeks, it is certain that they have not detected an “exploitable” bias.

While some high heat casinos with particularly unknowledgeable management (Barbary Coast comes to mind) might occasionally back off a wheel player/clocker, it is much more common for a casino to extend a very high level of comps to a wheel player with a system, literally sending the limo to pick you up.

Good luck. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Jim Kuhn]

I think 'clocking the wheel' means something else. My Brother would 'clock' by seeing what number was up when the ball was released and then betting on a number corresponding to where the ball should land. He was actually trying to clock the dealer's release. He believes in it but I do not. By the way he is still working his regular job.

[PairTheBoard]

There is a book called "The Eudaemonic Pie" in which Wheel and Ball Timing was accomplished with the assist of a microcomputer back in the 1970's. The ball's speed is timed so that a prediction can be made about where it will fall off the rim. The Wheel is also timed to predict where it will be when the ball falls off the rim. Even if you are only able to predict which HALF of the wheel the ball will drop and settle into, you have produced a HUGE EDGE. Just bet numbers on that half of the wheel before bets are called off.

Of course if you are caught using a computer to do this you will be arrested and charged with a felony. But theoretically, if a computer can do it, it should be possible for a human savant to do the same thing. I'm afraid I'm not such a savant but suppose there was something else going on to simplify the job for a human.

Here's the thing I noticed while watching wheels. You can check this out for yourself the next time you're in a casino. I found a number of wheels with the following weakness. Whether it's due to a slight tilt or a worn rim, there are wheels where the ball habitually comes off the rim in the same area almost every time. Certainly if there's even a very slight tilt the ball would tend to drop from the highest part of the rim. Also, if the rim's drag is not completely uniform the ball would tend to drop from the area of greatest drag.

Now suppose you've found such a wheel. The relatively fixed ball drop area simplifies a big part of the job done by the computer. The ball no longer needs to be precisely timed to determine where it will drop. Of course you still need to predict when it will drop. But now suppose you find a further weaknes, this time in the Dealer. Suppose he spins a very consistent speed for the wheel - the slower the better. You can then use the wheel speed to aproximate the ball speed BY EYE. All you need to do is predict HOW MANY more ball revolutions remain before the drop. You can focus on one area of the rim and use the ball as a STROBE for the wheel. The ball will pass the spot at the same time as a wheel number. The next time around for the ball you will see the number on the wheel advance - ie. the ball is going faster than the wheel at this point. The next time around the number will advance less. When the ball is getting ready to drop the wheel numbers will be retreating. Practice doing this until you can predict, based on the timing of this Advance-Retreat, the number of ball revolutions left before drop. When you have your prediction for the ball you will also know where the wheel should be at drop time as well, based on how much retreating it will do for the number of ball revolutions left. Taking into account the average amount the ball travels over the wheel before it settles, place your bet on a number or numbers in that half of the wheel. If you can predict the correct half of the wheel in which the ball will settle significantly better than half the time you have yoursef an edge at Roullete!

I actually tried this at several Casinos years ago. Believe it or not I got HEAT for my play. At the Frontier they actually called down for another dealer and instructed him to spin the wheel as fast as possible - so it was impossible to estimate how far the ball would travel bouncing around the wheel before it settled. I couldn't believe it LOL. Getting Heat at a Roullette table! The dealer had the wheel spinning SO FAST the ball was actually popping out of it and onto the floor some of the time. I was marking on a piece of paper my successes and failures at predicting the correct half of the wheel - thinking I would look like just another guy with a Roulette system. Evidently that didn't work at the Frontier. Unfortunately, after some hundreds of trials at various casinos I found my tally came up just about 50-50. I really thought I could do it but the results just didn't hold up. I decided to give up on the project and devote my time to becoming the greatest single deck blackjack player alive - total recall of all the cards with perfect strategy variation based on the effects of removal. As my blackjack Act wasn't much better than my Roullette one I finally switched to poker.

I still think this can be done though. The best way would be with a team of at least two players. One to do the wheel-ball timing and small bet red black - odd even etc. as signals to the partner on which wheel section numbers he should large bet.

This is the first I've mentioned this outside a close cirle of friends. If you do it, just count me in for a point or two of the profits.

[Terry]

The strobing method you describe is pretty much what Laurence Scott presents in his “Visual Prediction System” which he sells for around $300. Unfortunately, it doesn’t work. I have it on good authority that Scott knew that it didn’t work, but had invested so much time and effort in it that he decided to publish it anyway, thereby losing his credibility, and eventually aligning himself with other questionable system sellers Jerry Patterson and Frank Scoblete.

I had the experience several years back of playing on a roulette computer team (not the Eudaemonic Pie team), so I’ll tell a few stories. First let me make clear that we never played in Nevada; you are quite right, it is a felony there, but not everywhere.

OK, a general description of the setup. The computer was custom made in very limited quantities, and very expensive (six figures). The computer itself was encased in opaque plastic resin so it was impossible to open it to examine the workings without destroying the whole shebang. The software had to be downloaded through a laptop and was deleted immediately by a single keypress after each play, so there was no chance that anyone could ever discover just what the thing did.

The operator wore the computer and a battery pack strapped to whatever part of his body he found comfortable, two or three keypads molded to his thigh, chest or arm, and an induction coil (so radio frequency transmission was kept to a minimum) worn as an epaulet inside the jacket which activated a custom molded earpiece worn invisibly deep inside the ear so he could hear the computer. Yep, it talked.

The big player (BP) wore only a battery pack, epaulet, and earpiece.

The operator would take a seat near the wheel head and, while making small bets, proceed to navigate through the computer’s menu system using the (concealed) keypad to calibrate the ball speed. That was a simple process of choosing one of the vertical canoes (the little arc shaped silver thingies around the apron of the wheel that the ball bumps into on its’ way down), and pressing the proper key to “mark... mark... mark... “ each time the ball passed the reference point, and then “end” when the ball finally left the track. The computer used physics formulas to determine coefficient of friction and orbital decay, thereby “learning” when the ball was due to drop out of the track.

Note here that the speed at which the ball leaves the track is a function of physics and is completely independent of the ball’s initial speed. The ball leaves the track when it no longer has sufficient momentum to maintain its’ orbit, no matter who spins it, nor how fast. It is, however, subject to change from things like humidity and barometric pressure, which are included in the coefficient of friction. Although it is somewhat counterintuitive, the casinos best defense against computer play involves a really “wimpy” spin, not giving the computer enough time to do its’ work. Computer play (and past posting [betting after the ball drops]) is the reason that the dealer now “waves off” calling “No more bets”, instead of allowing players to bet right up to the time that the ball drops.

I’m getting a lot more detailed here than I had intended, but what the hell, it’s fun reminiscing.

Back to the game. The computer tells you it has enough information to predict orbital decay (the rate at which the ball slows down), and we move on to the next phase... seeking “tilt”. You have it right, tilt is necessary. It can nearly always be had, if by no other means, then by having a large person lean on the corner of the table, pressing it into the carpet until the dealer chases him away. /images/graemlins/wink.gif So we go now to the “mark... mark... mark... end” thing, and then enter the section of the wheel where the ball dropped. After a few tries, if all goes well, the ball is falling from the same high point on the track often enough that we hear “We got tilt.”

A few clicks on the keypad and we are ready to “calibrate rotor”. Using the same vertical canoe and the now familiar “mark... mark... mark”, the coefficient of friction formula does its’ thing and begins to predict the speed at which the rotor is slowing down. No orbital mechanics here, this is purely friction, but we do have to spend some time at it to get several “windows” of speed, since most dealers intentionally vary the speed at which they spin the rotor.

Step aside here to mention that the casino’s proper defense here is a very fast rotor speed, resulting in the increased “scatter” that you noted.

So we’ve got two or four or eight different speed “windows” set up for the dealers on our game. We’ve got the orbital decay rates for the balls on the table, the current humidity and barometric pressure. Seems we should be able to predict where the ball will intersect the rotor as it drops from the track. We give it a few tries, and bingo! A couple clicks to signal in the BP.

Now, the BP has a skill. He has memorized the order of the numbers on the wheel, and practiced so that when he hears in his earpiece, for instance, “seven”, he can very quickly spread out three to six bets on the numbers directly following the seven on the wheel, to cover the scatter effect, which is frequently minimized, by the way, by the choice of a vertical canoe, since the ball will frequently drop straight down into the number when hitting it, instead of bouncing around.

Another casino countermeasure. When computer play first began, the roulette wheel manufacturers added additional canoes to the wheels, hoping to create additional scatter. Wrong. The more canoes, the more likely it is that the ball drops straight keplunk into a number and stays there.

Something they got right are the lower frets (the metal things that separate the number slots on the wheel). They do produce some added scatter by making it easier for the ball to bounce out of one number and into another. And something else they got wrong – higher quality smoother turning bearings. We want that; clunky chunky jerky rusty old bearings aren’t nearly so easy to predict as these super smooth state of the art things.

And that’s pretty much how it worked. We traveled in teams of three or four; one BP, the others being operators, so the same two people didn’t spend too much time together at the same table.

What kind of edge did we get? 17%. It was so strong that we lost one newly trained operator to panic. He got all set up and calibrated, signaled in the BP, chunk... winner, chunk... winner, chunk... winner. He got so shook that he pressed the panic button, telling everybody to clear out and go to the meeting place. He said “It’s too strong. We’re gonna get in trouble.” It took a long time for him to calm down. The next day he agreed to go back in. chunk... winner, chunk... winner. We last saw him grabbing a cab to the airport.

So... 17%. Did we make a ton of money? Yep. A ton. Did it last very long. No. Why not? Because, well, because chit happens, ya know... International travel while carrying unidentifiable electronic equipment and large sums of cash, particularly when the team member carrying the equipment is, unbeknownst to the rest of us, also carrying several passports, has its’ hazards. The same qualities that make a good BP also mean that a good BP will, by his very nature, tend to talk too much. It is extremely disconcerting to sit down in a European casino and have a total stranger lean over and whisper “So ‘ow are ya doin’ with your computer?”

Like I said, chit happens, but it sure was fun. Hope you’ve enjoyed this trip down memory lane as much as I have.

[PairTheBoard]

Wow! 17%. The promised land of gambling. The Mother Lode. If it's that doable and you can get away with it I can't help but wonder why computer clockers haven't put Roulette out of business by now. I would sure hate to get caught doing it though, whether there were local laws specificly against it or not.

I still can't help but think that if a computer can do it for 17% a human might be able to do it for something less. To really prove the method for a human you could let him practice on a private wheel under controled conditions. I suspect the key to doing it in a Casino would be finding a dealer who spun a very constant slow wheel, along with the tilt. Certainly there should exist human savants with computer-like capabilties along these lines.

[scalf]

/images/graemlins/grin.gifgr8 post..

gl /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

[Terry]

I can't help but wonder why computer clockers haven't put Roulette out of business by now.
>>The computer was custom made in very limited quantities, and very expensive (six figures).

Even having the cash (and the willingness to spend it), a person must still be within a certain “loop” to have the opportunity to buy the equipment. Only six of the model I used were ever produced. I am aware of others being sold for prices ranging from $12,000 to $65,000. From what I hear, some of them work, some of them don’t. Let the buyer beware.

To really prove the method for a human you could let him practice on a private wheel under controled conditions.

Done that. The guy who bought the computer we used and who was bankrolling the operation called three of us to join him in this venture. He FedExed the equipment to us (he was living in Florida at time, playing BJ in the Caribbean) right before leaving on a month long European tour to scout locations. Unfortunately, he forgot to send the instructions. This being pre internet/cell phone days, he was pretty much incommunicado, and unaware of our dilema.

There we sat, three long time professional gamblers / advantage seekers, with two roulette tables set up in my kitchen and living room, and a computer we couldn’t train on. Enter the Laurence Scott roulette method.

Since I still seem to be in verbose mode, I’ll interject some background information here, to show you this was not some pie in the sky group of dreamers looking for easy money.

The four of us had first met during one of the all time classic blackjack promotions in the late 1970's. The Royal Inn or the Royal Vegas, I don’t remember which right now, was paying $10/hr to play $5 minimum single deck BJ. We exchanged knowing grins at the tables when we found that we had all discovered the same little “subtlety”. The dealer would shuffle up if you tried to increase your bet by more than double, but, if you “innocently” tried to play two hands of $5, they would politely inform you that to play two hands, both hands must be at least double the table minimum... plunk... one hand of $5 to two hands of $10 at the dealer’s request. /images/graemlins/wink.gif So there we were, making $20/hr playing the game, getting $10/hr (and free meals) from the casino for doing it, and gaining respect for each others’ knowledge of BJ.

We developed a nodding, “how ya doing” relationship over the course of some other BJ promotions in other casinos. Then came progressive video poker and (beatable) Deuces Wild machines. When we all showed up independently at the very first banks of beatable games for both, all having developed our own computer generated strategies, we realized that we were among our own kind. When we all showed up at the same super beatable BJ game in Korea, a lasting friendship began. We started sharing information and research, and on occasion pooled bankrolls to help overcome some of the volatility of the games we played in those early days.

Between the four of us, we have, for over 25 years, beaten every beatable casino game we have ever discovered. One of the group even managed, through finding a biased set of balls in a now defunct Las Vegas casino, to gain an edge at Keno. When he calculated his win rate, including the time it took for research up until the time the joint figured out that something was wrong and ditched the balls, he made a little over $1/hour, but he beat Keno.

For those of you who have read this far, here is a little nugget that none of has ever talked about publically before, but since none of us are actively pursing this lately the guys say it OK to let this one out of the bag now: Bingo, played with the electronic cards, can be beaten – not for a lot, but a meaningful edge can be had (and I’m not talking about the $1/hr range here). No, I ain’t saying how. I will say that the method has definitely NOT been published, so don’t go browsing the system hucksters’ websites. If you are a would be advantage seeker, study some simple probability, go join the old folks at your local Bingo hall for a few sessions to see how it operates, and settle in to do some serious thinking.

Back to the background info. So you see, no pie in the sky dreamers, no glamour, no fast life, no high rollers. Dedicated long term oriented guys, willing to work, to train, to crunch numbers, to grind at small edges, to pound the sidewalks of the world in search of positive EV.

Whew, man, can I go off on some tangents, or what... /images/graemlins/wink.gif Back to Terry’s House of Roulette and the Laurence Scott system.

So, here we are, all having scheduled a month to train with the computer (it turned out not to take that long once we actually got underway), one of the guys having come from another state... what to do. Well, our plan called for first learning as much as we could about the mechanics of the roulette wheel, so we did learn to disassemble and reassemble them (told you were serious), and learned what we could about the history and manufacture of the wheels.

Our out of state BP-to-be wanted to go to the Gamblers Book Club, always an interesting place to spend some time. We spotted the Laurence Scott thing. We had heard of the guy, and he seemed to be pretty knowledgeable about, uh, some things. Although the thing was pretty pricey, we decided to give it a try.

Back to the house. We go through the book and watch the included training video... verrrry interesting... hmmm. Like I said, we had two wheels set up, so we gather around the kitchen table, spin the wheel, spin the ball, and “holy jumpin’ j...” “do you see it?” “I see it!” “me too”. The strobe effect seems to freeze the action of the ball and rotor, and we can actually see the ball advancing toward, meeting, and progressing beyond the zero reference point.

Three guys who are not easily impressed by “gambling systems” scramble toward the other wheel in the living room, giggling like school girls. “Yep” “It’s there” “There’s something to this.”

We head for the nearest casino for something to eat, and yep, we see it on both of their wheels, too.

Home again. Reread the book. Watch the video a few more times. Set up a spreadsheet and start recording results. A week. Two weeks. Three weeks. The results? Same as yours. Random. Our EV? -5.26%. It “seemed like”, it “felt like” there was something there, but there was not.

We get a call from Scotland... “Sorry guys. I’ll have someone overnight those instructions to you tomorrow. I’m gonna travel around here and play BJ until you’re ready to come over.” And so began our greatest adventure... so far.

Epilogue: After we got a handle on the workings of the computer we talked a lot about our try at Scott’s visual method. When using the computer, the human operator enters the ball movement and the rotor movement separately, and the computer calculates the correlation. We think that human reflexes and the speed at which the human brain processes information are just not fast enough to process both ball and rotor data in time to give useable results. While it may be possible for some Rainman savant to do it, the typical man in the street needs electronic assistance.

[Homer]

Keep 'em coming! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

-- Homer

[PairTheBoard]

Very interesting. It sounds like your group did this a number of years ago. With the further development of cheap, powerful technological tools in the past few years, the large population of talented people who can develop software and work with hardware, and the relatively simple physics involved, it seems to me the potential payoff would stimulate the engineering of more Computerized Roulette Timers and the formation of more Teams like the one you belonged to. I can't help but think there is a little more to the story, like the potential risk in getting caught and Casino technology at work to catch such Roulette "cheats". If it could be done without use of computers I don't think the laws against cheating would apply. But it's hard for me to believe that there is a Casino on the planet where use of computers would NOT be considered cheating and dealt with accordingly if uncovered.

Thanks for the great posts and expert information. I've been curious about this subject for years. I really don't remember what got my interest started on this. I may have seen an advertisement for the Lawerence Scott method and rather than spend the money on it, tried to figure it out for myself. I'm somewhat pleased to hear I came up with the same observations and method as Scott. Considering the difficulty if not impossibility in making it work, I'm also pleased that I didn't spend the money to buy what Scott was selling.

oh, and on the subject of "Clocking" as was described by another poster as spotting the location of a number on the wheel when the dealer releases the ball, then correlating it to the number or area of the wheel the ball finally settles in; This would essentially be the most primitave version of this same general idea. Extremely primitave and with no chance of working imo. I do think I've heard of people touting it though.

[lunchmeat]

Terry’s passing mention about playing bingo with a positive expectation has gotten me thinking about that foul game more than I ever thought I’d care to. I didn’t even know the rules when I woke up, but now as I’m just about to go to bed I’ve got some ideas about how someone could beat bingo over the long run. At the end of the post I’m going to list the various methods I think could and could not work. I’d appreciate it Terry if you could tell me if I’m on the right track or barking up the wrong tree… or just using too many clichés in this sentence.

The easiest way to beat a game like this would probably be to run a past-posting type scam where an electronic card could be brought in and used according to what numbers have already been called. This way you could always have bingo after the first five (or four if you use the free space) numbers have been called. I assume Terry’s nobler than this type of hustle, so I won’t go any further with it.

Another way would be if the electronic system was not completely random. If certain numbers were either more or less likely to be called, you would play cards that would reflect the non-random tendencies of the number calling. I don’t think is likely either, just from the way Terry worded the text.

So assuming a random game with no cheating, the only variable that you can control is the cards that you play. Specifically, there are four factors you can manipulate in choosing a card that will affect your outcome. They are:
1) The total number of cards you play
2) The numbers on each individual card
3) The sequences of the numbers on the card(s)
4) The exclusivity of the numbers on your card(s)… By exclusivity, I mean the number of other people who hold the same numbers as you do.

I believe the fourth factor of exclusivity is the most important one, so I’ll give you my theory on that first.

It is a big advantage if you have numbers on your card(s) that no one else, or very few others have. For example, if you have a space for N32 on your card, and everybody else does too, you gain nothing when N32 gets called. Sure, you’re one square closer to BINGO, but so is everybody else. Thinking this square does you any good is like thinking you have the lead in a footrace because you’ve taken one stride, even though the other runners have taken a stride alongside you. On the other hand, if you’re the only person who has a space for N32, and N32 gets called, you gain a huge advantage because you’ve gained while everyone else has remained in the same place. I’ll call this concept “General Exclusivity.”

Another important type of exclusivity has to do with 8 key squares on the bingo card. The 8 key squares are the four corner squares, and the four squares in between the corner squares and the middle free space. (If anyone is having trouble picturing this, if you drew a big “X” from corner to corner on the bingo card, the squares covered by the lines of the X are the key squares). These squares are important because if the number for one of your key squares is called, you have 3 potential ways to make BINGO (horizontally, vertically, and diagonally). When a number for one of the other 16 squares gets called, you have gained only 2 potential ways to make BINGO (horizontally and vertically). Since the key squares are important, you want to have exclusivity on your key square numbers. For example, if you are one of 4 people who hold B7 on a key square, and B7 gets called, you all gain the same amount. However, if four people hold squares with B7, but you are the only one with B7 on a key square, and B7 gets called, you have gained more than the other B7 holders because you have gained three ways to make BINGO compared to their two. I’ll call this concept “Key Square Exclusivity.”

There is a second gradation of squares that I’ll call the middle squares. They are the eight squares going down through the middle column and across through the middle row (so if the key squares form an X, the middle squares form a cross). The middle squares are important because, while they only give you two ways to win, one of those ways involves use of the free space. The free space helps because, obviously, you need one fewer number to be called when using the free space to make BINGO. So, while not as important as Key Square Exclusivity, you want to have Middle Square Exclusivity as well.

The remaining eight squares are the least important. You want to have General Exclusivity on these, as you want with all your squares, but there is no advantage to being the only player holding a number on one of these squares that other players hold on better squares.

So General Exclusivity, Key Square Exclusivity, and to a lesser extent Middle Square Exclusivity are all important advantages to hold over your opponents when playing bingo. They’re probably big enough to allow you to play bingo with a positive expectation even after the house takes its cut. Unfortunately, being aware of these advantages and gaining these advantages are two different things. To consistently gain exclusivity advantages, you must know what numbers and patterns of numbers your opponents are going to play (or somehow handicap the likelihood your opponents will play certain numbers in certain patterns). I think a highly skilled, highly observant person playing against a small number of opponents could arrange his or her cards to have Key Square Exclusivity on a consistent basis simply by looking at other people’s key square values and choosing different key square values for himself. Against a large field of opponents, some sort of computer program that could tap in to the bank of electronic cards already picked could theoretically produce very accurate exclusivity ratios for a player’s card(s). At first it seemed pretty silly to me that someone would go through all the trouble of writing an advanced computer program just to beat bingo, but then I saw the size of some online bingo jackpots and it didn’t seem so silly. Considering Terry’s background with the Roulette computer, my best guess is that he beat bingo with an exclusivity computer similar in practice to what I’ve mentioned here. There are, however, other possibilities…

Without knowledge of the numbers on other players’ cards (again assuming a random game with no cheating), a +EV bingo strategy must make use of multiple cards. For just one card, no matter what process you use to choose your card, it is no better than picking numbers at random unless you have outside information. Playing multiple cards alone, however, will not increase your EV (unless you get extra cards for free or something like that.) It needs to be combined with at least one of the other aspects of bingo you have control over: the numbers on the cards and the sequence of numbers on the cards.

The numbers on the cards I don’t think are too important. Having completely different numbers on different cards might affect you standard deviation, but I don’t see how having repeat numbers on different cards would change your EV any. The secret could very well lie in having cards in which the sequences of numbers are such that you’ll never have repeat strands of 5 in a row. Buy enough cards and you could cover enough possibilities to have a positive EV. But even if this could work I doubt it would be feasible, as it would probably require an enormous number of cards.

So did any of my guesses come close Terry?

1) Past Posting seems easiest to accomplish, but if you did get away with cheating I don’t know why you’d start talking about it now. So I’d say this is very unlikely.

2) Is electronic card bingo non-random, and asking to be taken by advantage players? I doubt this too, but it’s my second guess.

3) Is there a way to obtain exclusivity, as I call it, in bingo? If there is a way to beat bingo, I think this is it.

4) Or is it just a system of choosing the right pattern of cards? With all the possible combinations of cards I find this highly unlikely as well.

[Terry]

I’m glad you guys have enjoyed this little tale. Thanks for your thanks. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

RE: Bingo. I’m not talking about any sort of scamming or cheating, nor any nonrandom flaws in the system. I’m talking about a quantifiable mathematical advantage; when you have it, you will know you have it, and you will be able to calculate it and write it down.

I mentioned it only as an example of positive EV sometimes being found in unexpected places. Should it become widely known, the advantage will, of course, evaporate. I will not respond to any further questions on this particular subject, either publically or privately – if you have an interest, you’re on your own.

RE: Roulette computers and modern advancements in computer technology. Well, the International Space Station runs on 386's. It’s not so much a matter of processing power – the old technology is sufficient (as long you’re not trying to run Windows.) It’s more a matter of having and knowing how to use expensive and sophisticated electronic lab equipment to design, manufacture, and calibrate the precise timings needed for the setup. I think it very unlikely that roulette computers will ever become a mass market item.

RE: Even where they’re not illegal. Although there are many locales where there are no “device laws”, there are certainly hazards involved should a person who is literally wired from head to foot with a concealed electronic device be discovered sitting at a roulette table. I think that too will always tend to limit the “popularity” of such a thing. Add in the recent increase in difficulties that might arise while trying to board an airplane with a bag full of electronic equipment that is obviously designed to be worn covertly on the body, in conjunction with a large amount of cash, and you have something that will likely remain, shall we say, of limited appeal.

[PairTheBoard]

I don't know much about how Bingo is played using Electronic Cards. It sounds like Terry is talking about something else, but if people create their own E-Bingo Cards using their favorite numbers then it seems to me the Exclusivity principle has merit. Choose commonly unpopular numbers when creating your E-Card. This would be the same method advocated by Ziemba for theoretically gaining an edge in lotteries. As this brings to mind the Ziemba system for Show betting in Horse Racing, I think I'll start a thread on that topic as I've always wondered if anybody ever made that work.

[Terry]

“I have a job” Jamie said to the kindly stranger who had smiled at him in the buffet line. “I’m an official bingo player” he beamed, his obvious enormous pride being acknowledged with bemused and understanding looks from those within earshot.

I doubt very much that any of those who witnessed this often repeated scene ever had any idea that their understanding was incomplete, that Jamie was indeed an “official” bingo player for quite a few years.

Sure, his brother and his mother managed the money, worked out the math, did the legwork scouting locations, provided transportation and supervision, etc., but that stuff is a part of any business endeavor. Jamie did the “job” – he put in his hours sitting in the bingo rooms, playing the games. He contributed to the family income. Even the grouchiest of old ladies never seemed to begrudge him his paydays or his “bingo dance.”

Jamie was lucky. He managed to escape the drab gray institutionalized life that could have been his, and lived the sometimes boring sometimes exciting life of an “official” gambler. Jamie is gone now, but his brother said he thinks Jamie would be very happy for you guys to know that he had a job.

[crazy canuck]

I'm just curious...how did you hear about Ziemba? I was in his classes last year.

Anyhow, the conclusion for lottery was that it does have a positive expectation (especially when carryover happens...meaning when nobody wins the jackpot and the price is added to the next drawing) but it would take millions of years to take advantage of it.

[crazy canuck]

I don't know anything about bingo but I just read some places in Vegas have progressive jackpots, so it's possible there can be +EV there(just like lottery).

And damn you Terry for getting me to think about this /images/graemlins/smile.gif...fun thread tho.

[crazy canuck]

If you want to win at Bingo, play bingo on nights that are generally slower for the operators (Monday - Thursday usually less players than weekends). Being a game of chance if there are fewer players then there are fewer cards in play. If you have as many cards as you can comfortably play and there are fewer cards in play, due to lower crowds, then you have a larger percent of cards in play. Odds in your favor? I think so, especially if the hall you play at offers electronic bingo (computer bingo) and you have 2 or 3 cards per game.

[PairTheBoard]

Doesn't Bingo pay off according to the monies wagered - like a mutual pool? I've never played Bingo so I don't know how it works.

[PairTheBoard]

I bought his book years ago, around 1986 I think, on beating the horses using the Win/Show Mutual pool descrepencies. I've always wondered if anybody ever made that system work for them.

[crazy canuck]

I have know clue about bingo either (learned more about the game in the last hour than in my whole life), but I believe not all prices are pooled.