Harkback's Gambling Tip!

[Harkback Union]

So I was watching this documentary about detroit where they showed a new a casino, and I started thinking about casinos, and alll of the sudden...
EUREKA!
An Idea on how to milk casinos "endlessly" for money (actually there is slight <1% chance of losing all your money).

Start from very low and just keep betting higher and higher in a game with high probability to win (black or red in roulette, for instance). Make sure your next bet covers your losses from all your last losses + gives you a little extra, say, triple your bet. The chances of you not winning over the course of 10 games of black-red roulette betting is very slim. Of course your gains are also diminished by this method and casinos won't go bankrupt either, on the long run, the few cases in which people do lose should make them a ton of money... It works like a reverse Jackpot where casino-goers win most of the time, but there is a slight chance of losing, and when they do lose, they lose big time... unless someone has unlimited cash, then he will keep making money forever.

Now, I was wondering if this method was already discovered (I think it probably was, not that very complicated), and if it already has a name... does anyone know anything?

I also wanted to ask if any of you go to gambling places and if you could test this method and report back the results.

[Hirota]

Someone told me of the method a few years ago. I feel the urge to google.

Edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martingale_(betting_system)

[Harkback Union]

Blast! And for a moment I thought I invented something.

[Hirota]

Sorry to disappoint

Unfortunately, gambling has been in existence for so long that it's pretty likely that any "system" or "method" that can be considered has already been considered. Unless there is a paradigm shifting development in technology, I can't see anyone finding a foolproof method for gambling. Counting cards is probably the closest.

[Ashmoria]

black and red don't pay out enough to triple your bet.

the only way to win at a casino is not to bet at all.

what *I* do is to have an iron rule of taking an amount of money that I am willing to lose--no more than $100--and I leave when I either lose all that money or double that money (or when I feel like leaving before one of those 2 things happen)

far too many people win money then lose it all before they get out of the casino.

[L Ron Cupboard]

Sounds like the gambler's fallacy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy

[Ifreann]

If ever you found a way to beat the odds at a casino and consistently come out with more money than you started with, they'd throw you out.

[Yorkvale]

This doesn't work, and it is actually encouraged by casinos. They want you to think it's a secret, but in reality because you can't go out and spend a million dollars on a set of what you were talking about, you're very likely to stick it out, make a ton of money at first, stick it out so you can get more than a double gain and then lose. 99% of money gained at a casino is lost at a casino for a reason.

[Harkback Union]

This doesn't work, and it is actually encouraged by casinos. They want you to think it's a secret, but in reality because you can't go out and spend a million dollars on a set of what you were talking about, you're very likely to stick it out, make a ton of money at first, stick it out so you can get more than a double gain and then lose. 99% of money gained at a casino is lost at a casino for a reason.

That's why you are supposed to stop eventually!

[The Grim Reaper]

The Martingale was successful for a time, but most casinos now have an upper limit on any given bet, meaning you can't raise indefinitely. Even if you were allowed to, you can't, as Yorkvale mentioned, unless you're filthy rich.

The idea is, by the way, that when you win on the Martingale, you just start from the lowest bet again.

It's not quite the Gamblers' fallacy, because it doesn't ascribe an increased probability to an event that has not changed in probability. Gamblers' fallacy is when you flip a coin and it comes up tails three times, so you assume that it will come up heads the next time you flip it. The Martingale is based on the idea that if you can bet infinitely, any possible event is almost surely going to happen, which holds mathematically true. As long as the event is possible, Martingale will 'work' given infinite time and betting potential.

[Harkback Union]

The Martingale was successful for a time, but most casinos now have an upper limit on any given bet, meaning you can't raise indefinitely. Even if you were allowed to, you can't, as Yorkvale mentioned, unless you're filthy rich.

The idea is, by the way, that when you win on the Martingale, you just start from the lowest bet again.

It's not quite the Gamblers' fallacy, because it doesn't ascribe an increased probability to an event that has not changed in probability. Gamblers' fallacy is when you flip a coin and it comes up tails three times, so you assume that it will come up heads the next time you flip it. The Martingale is based on the idea that if you can bet infinitely, any possible event is almost surely going to happen, which holds mathematically true. As long as the event is possible, Martingale will 'work' given infinite time and betting potential.

Indeed, or you could just stop gambling and get out of the casino with some extra money.