Casinos have an edge and they make money, FACT. Players bet on Roulette and the game has a built in edge in the casinos favour. The player wins or loses on individual bets, but the casino is looking at the odds over the LONG term.

It's a bit like the way the insurance companies calculate insurance premiums, they lose sometimes, but they have an edge in their favour where premiums collected are more than their payouts.

Therefore, Individual bets even out over the long term and the casino earns according to the following equation:

Casino Profit = (Total Bets All Players) x (House Edge)

Roulette balls and dice have no memory. Every spin in roulette is independent of all past events and the current spin is not influenced by previous spins. This combined with the house edge dooms all roulette systems to failure.

Roulette systems cannot work, as there is no reliable data to base a system on in the first place. If you don't have data you rely on, you can't have a system that works!

Over time, the longer you play, the ratio of money lost to money bet will get closer to the house edge. If you win in the short or long term, it is purely down to chance, or luck.

Progression systems are based on the belief that this equation can be beaten. It is an attempt to ignore the truth and tries to place bets according to a set equation in an attempt to change the house edge in favour of the player. There are two main types of progression roulette systems:

A system where wagers are raised after a losing bet is called a negative progression. The logic behind this type of betting system is the frequency of winning sessions.

It assumes that in almost every session, the player will be able to leave on a win.

The downside is that losing sessions can be very expensive for the player. The most famous of these systems is the Martingale system. While a player would lose over time anyway, the casino gives itself some added protection restricting the number of consecutive bets!

Another method is positive progression, pyramiding, or letting a profit ride.

Players are willing to gamble more aggressively with money they have won in order to win bigger amounts.

The downside of these systems is the player needs to keep winning.

The player needs a long series of wins and the odds are strongly against him, in fact the house edge tells you that he can't win and the longer he plays the more obvious this will become.

The fact they are sometimes playing with winnings is irrelevant over time to their overall profitability.

It is obvious from the above that casinos can't lose over the long term because of the house edge.

The above systems will not work, as there is no reliable data to base them on.

Players can win in the short term, (by chance), but the longer they play the more the casino gains an edge and wins.

To get the house edge down to its lowest level does not require roulette systems, all you need to do is know the right bets and how to place them.

San Antonio could replace the cry “Remember the Alamo!” with “Don’t forget the Spurs.”
Many NBA observers predicted pre-Playoffs that Dallas successfully would defend the NBA Western Conference crown it won a year ago and go on to emerge victorious in the Finals.
Some would-be lawyers and present-day Professional Handicappers League members make a strong case for the Spurs, however.
The two Texas clubs already have displayed vulnerability and are 1-1 entering the third game of their respective opening series.
Houston’s Rockets, who are up on Utah two games to one, are a third Lone Star State representative and still loom as a long shot threat in the West.
Golden State, making its first Playoffs appearance in 13 years, beat the Mavericks in Game 1, while Denver did the same to the Spurs.
Dallas was laying 4 1/2 points in Mile High City action Friday night, while San Antonio was a 2-point road choice on Saturday.
UNLV pre-law graduate Jorge Gonzalez forsees a Finals rematch of the 2005 meeting between the Spurs and Detroit, which leads Orlando 3-0 in their first-round series.
“San Antonio is going to beat the Pistons,” he declared, even though the Spurs likely would have to get past Phoenix — owner of a 2-1 edge on the Los Angeles Lakers — before any date with the Mavs.
Right now, though, the Vegas Wise Sports Service operator and Sin City sports radio host simply is enjoying watching postseason play.
Gonzalez believes that top to bottom, this is the most talented Playoffs he recalls seeing and a tough one to pick.
“It just jumps up and grabs you,” he said.
“There’s true parity in the NBA this year.”
The Spurs get a star from Gonzalez, who ruled the PHL’s pro hoops standings last season, because of the punch their three leading scorers pack.
“(Tim) Duncan, (Tony) Parker and (Manu) Ginobili,” Gonzalez said, clicking off names of the trio, which collectively staved off a late Game 2 Denver rally in San Antonio.
Gonzalez has had five No. 1 finishes since he joined the PHL about five years ago.
Nationally-known handicapper Big Al McMordie went on record targeting Dallas as the team to beat, but nevertheless had only nice things to say about the Spurs.
“San Antonio always is a dangerous team come Playoffs time, and, surprisingly, led the league in margin of victory, at plus 8.81 ppg going into (the last game regular-season game),” McMordie, an attorney by training, noted.
“The Spurs’ (regular-season record wasn’t as gaudy as Dallas’ (58-24 vs. 67-15), but Gregg Popovich’s crew bested Dallas in victory margin.
“Some of this has to do with the Spurs’ poor record this year in close games, and Dallas’ great record in that department.
“San Antone has blown out the bad teams this season, while struggling against the better teams …
“I expect San Antonio to get to the Western Conference Finals, at the least.”