The potential destructive power of roulette systems

There has always been a tendency to belittle roulette betting systems. The time honoured so called “advice” of stating that the house has an indisputable edge tends to mean that roulette betting systems are massively undervalued in casino gambling. But in 1966, an eccentric Englishman called Norman Leigh used a betting system that spooked the French casinos so much that they not only shut the games down but they also informed the police and the authorities as well.

The system that they used was called the Reverse LaBouchere which is otherwise known as a reverse progression system. Reverse betting systems have tended to get some rather bad press down the years but the fact of the matter is that any system that does not rely on the normal doubling up Martingale type strategy in order to make money has to be seriously considered.

If you wanted a one off trip into a casino and you wanted to have the highest chance of making money from a table game then a roulette betting system would probably be the best way to go. Many people have accused Norman Leigh of writing a book and then expanding on the truth. One can hardly blame him for that but from someone who has worked in the casino industry for nearly ten years then I have met my fair share of system players.

There are some fantastically intricate roulette systems out there that are very unlikely to reach the table maximum. In his book Thirteen against the bank, Leigh ended up winning a very substantial sum of money from systems betting over a two week period. But in no way does this mean that roulette systems work in the long term because I have no evidence to suggest that they do.

I certainly wouldn’t rule out the possibility of something happening where a roulette betting system for reasons unknown to me at this present time for some reason…..actually worked. I am a big believer in that nothing is impossible and I keep an open mind to the possibility of a roulette system working. At this present time then there has been no evidence of such things working or ever having worked in the past.

Cleverly designed systems that wager money in such a way as to make reaching the table maximum unlikely can leave the player in a situation where they can consistently make money for long periods of time. In most progression type roulette systems then a long series of small wins gets offset by a large big loss. This is the end result of many betting systems but there are systems like the one that Norman Leigh used that really irritate the casinos.

In fact in one such casino where I worked, I had first hand knowledge of that irritation when one systems player on blackjack was actually barred from playing. He would often win in the region of around £400 whenever he won and this could go on for a long period of time. At the rate in which he played then he could go weeks and months before he lost. When he did lose then he would lose around £5-£10k.

He was prevented from playing not because he was a long term winner but merely because it affected the cash flow of the casino. This just proves that casinos dislike some systems players on certain casino games.

Carl “The Dean” Sampson