! |
GENERAL MODNOTE This topic moved to debunking section. |
Moderators: kiore, Blip, The_Metatron
! |
GENERAL MODNOTE This topic moved to debunking section. |
romansh wrote:I am reminded of discussions with my father in law. His system was to watch a roulette wheel for a long time and then bet on the number that has not come up and then bet on that number. Keep telling him telling him … if he is going to bet on that sort of foolishness, he may as well bet against that number. The wheel might not be true.
romansh wrote:My father in law has stats going back for the pools, nags and dogs.
I'm With Stupid wrote:In theory it works.
mindhack wrote:It’s probably best if your first experience is a very negative one, so you won’t go for a second one.
The_Metatron wrote:
It took me an entire evening of playing a roulette wheel while pretty girls kept bringing gin and tonics to lose my original twenty buck stake, and I left. I’ve spent twenties more foolishly than that evening. I’ve polished enough coins in slot machines in NCO clubs in Korea to blacken my fingers before I learned their lesson: you won’t lose much, but you will lose. Which is foundational to the idea of gambling, I think. You won’t lose much, but you will lose. The institutions (casinos, lottery commissions, etc) wouldn’t and couldn’t exist if it were any other way.
YairPatton wrote:While there may be some individuals who claim to have gotten rich using the Martingale system, it is important to understand that betting strategies like these are often based on statistical probabilities and do not guarantee success.
! |
GENERAL MODNOTE YairPatton, we don’t allow spamming or soliciting here. Read paragraph 1.6 of the forum user’s agreement, to which you agreed when you signed up here. The_Metatron |
Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest