Eventually all gamblers lose... This proves it

[Daddy Warbucks]

[ QUOTE ]
hey ash its Suze. Why haven't u called me back? PM me please.
xxx

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe because you're starting false rumours about him on the internet?

[Ashley Revell]

[ QUOTE ]
hey ash its Suze. Why haven't u called me back? PM me please.
xxx

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry babe, been real busy. email me soon.
ash@pokerutd.com

[Erik Blazynski]

This is totally irresponsible to make this a public event. I am sure you are paid by the casino industry or something. People are stupid enough to try this sort of thing and they see you do it and win. This is just a horribly irresponsible promotion of irresponsible gambling. Someone was going to do it, why not you right? This is a despicable publicity stunt by both you and the casino.

-Erik Blazynski

[rageotones]

ash = suz gimmick account ?

[Erik Blazynski]

this is just a disgusting publicity stunt. I am sure that there was no life savings, I am sure that this was completely staged. Then it's supposed to be viral and everyone forwards it, and people gamble more.

[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.

[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.

[Ashley Revell]

[ QUOTE ]
This is totally irresponsible to make this a public event. I am sure you are paid by the casino industry or something. People are stupid enough to try this sort of thing and they see you do it and win. This is just a horribly irresponsible promotion of irresponsible gambling. Someone was going to do it, why not you right? This is a despicable publicity stunt by both you and the casino.

-Erik Blazynski

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. It is pretty irresponsible to gamble everything. But people do it all the time and I know alot of them lose and that's a shame. It wasn't a publicity stunt though, but the end result of a life time of gambling and a craving to win the 'big one'

[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"!!