Quote:
Originally Posted by Didace
Depends what you mean by "best". What is your goal?
Good question.
I'm not really interested in roulette but this nozero roulette might improve some strategies based on progressions.
I mean that the probability to be ahead (and then restarting the process) is improved as any bet will have a fair expectancy.
As nick stated, a low p tends to increase the house edge along with a high volatility tipical of a low p.
On the other hand, frequent and more "controllable" winnings tend to produce more small "cuts", so enlarging in frequency the money deducted from the wins.
So what could be a "best" approach, meaning for it a less disadvantaged approach, considering both the probability to win (and its volatility) for any bet and the subsequent global cut effect?
I'd think that a p slightly over of 50% might have the best results in terms of volatility and in terms of cut effect.
Roulette is a perfect symmetrical and independent game, especially on this type of wheel, but certain opposite situations studied in form of multiple distributions tend to produce low volatility values.
This fact should increase the likelihood to be ahead several times by the use of multilayered progressions.
An example might be to get two fictional fake "even" chances as dinamically choosing 19-20 numbers on one side vs the remaining 17-16 numbers on the other one.
We could be wrong about our dynamic selection, still our bets won't be EV- before we'll decide to quit a winning session.