Eventually all gamblers lose... This proves it

[Daddy Warbucks]

I'm surprised nobody has pointed out how hilarious the thread title is yet!

[Ashley Revell]

Just to set the record straight.
Yes this is old news
No I haven't gone bankrupt. In fact things have never been going so well.

Hope this puts an end to that rumour and this thread. The Brandi story is so much more interesting!! What on earth is going on there???

[Tony.T]

=rigged

Why would a english dude go to Vegas to bet it all when he only needs to walk in to one of the mayfair casinos in London?

Why would he go bust opening site? Online poker is not dead just because Party died

I dont belive it

[blackjack777]

This is reeeeeeeeeeallllllllly old news.

[Peter McDermott]

[ QUOTE ]
=rigged

Why would a english dude go to Vegas to bet it all when he only needs to walk in to one of the mayfair casinos in London?



[/ QUOTE ]

English casinos wouldn't take his action.

Neither would most of the Vegas casinos, come to that. Why not? Because casinos make their money from taking their edge in lots of little slices. By putting up a large chunk of dough against a single roll, they stand the greatest chance of losing most money. The longer they can get you to keep on wagering smaller sums, the more chance they have of getting your whole bankroll.

So when he started to approach casinos with this gamble, almost all of them rejected the proposition, and I'm pretty sure that the casino that accepted only did so for the publicity value, not because they thought it was +ev.

[Clowny]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
=rigged

Why would a english dude go to Vegas to bet it all when he only needs to walk in to one of the mayfair casinos in London?



[/ QUOTE ]

English casinos wouldn't take his action.

Neither would most of the Vegas casinos, come to that. Why not? Because casinos make their money from taking their edge in lots of little slices. By putting up a large chunk of dough against a single roll, they stand the greatest chance of losing most money. The longer they can get you to keep on wagering smaller sums, the more chance they have of getting your whole bankroll.

So when he started to approach casinos with this gamble, almost all of them rejected the proposition, and I'm pretty sure that the casino that accepted only did so for the publicity value, not because they thought it was +ev.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont really think the casinos were concerned about the size of the wager here, or how it was wagered...it really wasnt that great a sum in the grand scale of things. The reason the casinos were backing out is they knew it was pretty much lose/lose. Either lose the wager or win and become known as the casino that took all "that British guy's lifetime savings"!!

[magoo]

"All"? You are certainly in error.

[sputum]

[ QUOTE ]
"All"? You are certainly in error.

[/ QUOTE ]
Her sample size>yours [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]
So:
roulette = good
ecommerce = bad
Got it.