Re: Programming to Beat the Odds in Gaming

On Apr 28, 3:00 pm, "Rickey" <rickey.bro...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I am a person with limited programming skills.

Uh, oh.

Professionally, I work as a government engineer.

How many programmers does it take to change a light bulb?

None, it's a hardware problem!

Since my programming skills are limited, I am seeking
to partner with someone who possesses advanced programming skills in order
to develop a method for consistently beating the casino in a perfectly legal
way.

Looking for the black cat in the dark room that isn't there, eh?

I play one game only. It is roulette.

Don't believe what you see in the movies.

The game of roulette is based on statistical probability which gives the
house a slim enough margin that the player would not be able to win
consistently over the long run. The closest strategy method which gives the
player any chance of breaking even at roulette is what is called the
Martingale. But even the Martingale cannot guarantee winning each time the
player plays.

Duh.

The strategy methods available at other games are too numberous to mention..
I prefer to stick to one game only. That is the game of roulette. Others
would easily disagree, saying I would be better off secretly counting cards
at the blackjack table.

They say that because it actually works?

But counting cards at blackjack or even being
suspected at blackjack counting draws unnecessary heat from casino brass.

Duh.

Therefore, in the long run it is more convenient to play above board, in the
open, and attempt to beat the house at its own game in a straightforward
way.

The house will only encourage you to try your roulette Martingale.

I am adequate at programming in the language of Adobe Flash, which is
Actionscript.

Worthless.

I used Actionscript to build myself a few basic Martingale
programs. The idea was to test run simulations of walking into the casino
with as little as a couple thousand dollars and be able to double it.
Employing a modified Martingale strategy, I more than doubled my seed money
on numerous occasions. However, over the long run, my winnings were never
consistent.

Well, obviously you're not a good programmer, hence, this post.

Often I loss more times than I won.

Duh.

As an engineer, I am obligated to know a lot of mathmatics.

The wrong kind, apparently.

Statistical probabilities in gaming
are based on consistently uniformed betting patterns.

They are?

One need not be a
rocket scientist to know, in a situation such as this, the key to winning
more than losing is for the player to vary his betting patterns to such a
degree that it is not, or does not seem to be, uniformed.

How many rocket scientists do you know who got rich playing roulette?

That is where the person with advanced programming skills come in.

And goes right out.

I would need him or her to be able to design a program which can generate
thousands of trial run over a short period of time.

Which proves what, exactly?

In short, the program
would have to do what my programs are already doing manually. Moreover, the
program would be well written enough to be able to self-analyze how many
times it wins, how many times it busts, and adjust its betting patters
according. What I am saying is that it will be a programs which improves on
its own intelligence.

Aren't you forgetting something? Such as correlation to reality?

Respond if interested. If you are serious, I will share with you the
programs I have written thus far, which have built-in random number
generators mimicing roulette spins.

It is said the roulette wheel isn't completely random, that the guy
operating the wheel can influence the outcome by how he spins the
wheel
and drops the ball. That would really *** up your system, wouldn't
it?

We can split all profits made. Anyone who is interested but wary of being
taken down a path leading nowhere should know that models built by engineers
and programmers are difficult to maintain should the partnership every break
down.

I got a Lotto system that can lose money so fast it will make
your head spin. Wanna try it?

.

Quantcast