I know it is insane, I have no doubts the odds of it happening are slim and if I had not seen the wins myself when he would make his once every couple years trip to the casino I would not believe it. I know he has a record of all of this so I will try to get the actual numbers from him sometime along with his "rules". We were in Vegas together the same weekend BF happened and I got to witness in person him crush a table only betting 13. This could be the trip where the casino gets their revenge but I hope it isn't so we have more money for the strippers.

but you have to realize that this is nothing more than variance... standard deviation away from the mean... which is still negative.

betting patterns can yield closer odds to break even, but they never get close beyond say -2.000%... that is still a negative expectation. the only way to win is to stand up as soon as you are in the plus column of variance.

You're preaching to the choir man! I agree with everything you have posted, except that my Dad is an idiot

Less about how -EV this is and more about the going to the strip club with your dad.

Have you all done this before?
Is it/ will it be awkward?

I take it all back

Have done it a few times in the past, only time it got weird was when he got a warning from the stripper at my Bro in Laws bachelor party.

I don't think OP (or his dad) think that it is actually +ev. The guy is successful and like to gamble every once in a while and has some superstitions. Who gives a ****

When you have this type of disposable income, that's not the point. The point is hitting the rushes and riding the superstition

I believe that all tables at MGM allow up to $500 to a number, at least all of the ones that I watched last week.

I think "your dad is an idiot" stems not from a guy with cash to spare liking to gamble on roulette. Plenty of people dig the pit or slots or any number of -ev things in life. OP's dad is an "idiot" because he thinks he has a "system" to beat roulette.

I know my comment about the math predicting a giant downswing was meant to reference the same sort of lack of understanding the very basic principles of probability and Gambler's Fallacy.

His "system" is to gamble every couple years mimicking the actions that led to his first wins, he isn't in the casino every day trying to become a millionaire. He is the first to admit that it is dumb luck.

Ive seen lots of people play roulette. They all have dumb "systems". I love the game but try not to play it anymore. I don't like playing against the house. But I would definitely take some side action against your dads system. Lol

I hope he wins a ****load of money again.

It's a way to have fun with the game. Same way people with disposable income enjoy craps because they like throwing the dice a certain way, or betting on their lucky number when they roll, or betting hard ways or YOs and having parlay "systems." It's a way to enjoy the game and when you ride a rush it's fun because you "outplayed" the game.

It's not an actual belief in having an edge. It's completely different from Joe Martingale grinding out $15 at a time or betting on/against red/black trends.

+1

Lucky 13

Bear in mind that OP's Dad's EV on his next spin is the exact same as it was (assuming 0 slot count is the same) 20 whatever years ago. He's not "due" for a down swing. We're talking about independent events with a fixed expected outcome every time he makes a bet. He's just as likely to smash the place this time as he was last time.

And I hope he does it. GL OP. GL OP's Dad. Congrats on getting hitched.

Does the bellagio let you bet up to 10k on a single number on the main floor, or only in the high limit room only? Some guy at the poker room was telling us his buddy just won 320k on roulette, and we all saw the guy's buddy carrying a duffel bag full of cash. My impression was they had won it on the floor.

Anytime i hear someone asking about maximum inside bets I assume theyre contemplating some sort of martingale system. My bet would be that this is what OP Sr. is up to. And if i lost that bet, i would make it again for double the amount.

Roulette is especially appealing to players wanting to pursue a martingale strategy because it allows one to to increment the odds of the bet before resorting to incrementing the amount. So for example, OP's dad might start with a minimum even money outside bet like red/bl, then graduate to a column bet, then to the same bet divided between 2 4 number splits, then to the same bet on a single 4 number then to a two number, then to a single number. Its not until after the single number misses that he actually has to begin incrementing the actual amount of the bet.

Now everyone knows that martingale does not effect the actual EV of the bets... the series of bets is still the weighted sum of its parts. However, OP's dad still has a pretty valid money management system that gives him a lot of excitement with little variance. In fact, spitballing i would expect some sort of negative progressive strategy to be pretty optimal at limiting variance and giving a player the maximum fun for the money. Having a money management system when gambling does have utility, even when it doesn't effect the EV of the bet.

For example, lets say I have $1000 to gamble with on a vegas trip. I can walk up to the whole roulette table and the whole shebang down on a single number. I can minbet the even money bets. I can bet bet the inside bets. I can do several at once. None of this is going to change my ev, since nearly every bet on a roulette table has the same expectation. But this does not mean roulette is roulette and that they are all precisely the same thing. The money management decision i make is a function of what is important to me when i balance the possibility of an exceptional return and my desire to be able to use my gambling bankroll to keep myself entertained for the entire trip.

IDK how superior it is to merely betting the minimum, but I imagine its certainly much more exciting.

Whoa

V thoughtful post

This is exactly how money management systems should be viewed.

Don't be the fool who somehow thinks a betting system can overcome the negative EV. It can't.

However, a betting system can help do things like minimize volatility etc and add utility to the gambling process. Ie. I like playing 2 hands of pai gow at $50 instead of one hand at $100. I get to play 2x, and it minimizes the swings.

I mean that is pretty stanard/basic bank roll management and why there is always a rush to judgement for players coming to vegas with small'ish BR's versus the BI amounts they are going to play, and why I constantly preach larger is better(even though others around here seem to have a bigger pain threshold) . Playing under your roll size has an insulating factor that many players either don't get or choose to ignore.

Mixed in with all this is threshold to pain factor that each and everyone of us has and that is very individualistic... still the fact remains, that while chomping off smaller butes won't change expected value, it does allow you to play longer and increase the window in which you MIGHT BE able to land on the plus side of variance and stand up from the table ahead.

I really don't think martingale is the way to go. Doubling your bet as a break even strategy doesn't take into account the FREQUENCY that one needs to win at just to be able to reach the breakeven threshold

In this particular case, bankroll management is irrelevant. Bankroll management is a concept that applies to balancing expectation and risk of ruin. Since there is no risk of ruin at a roulette table, there is no need to balance that against expected return.

Im not sure i get your point about the frequency at which one has to win. In order for a martingale strategy to be effective, one merely has to win once in every series of bets. since the winning bet is always the last bet, and it always breaks the player even, the frequency at which ones is imaterial, provided he wins before either casino limits or the amount of money available prevents him from doubling his bet.

Starting with a 25 even money outisde bet and a limit of a $500 single number bet, a player is quite unlikely to go broke. he's probably less than 3 percent even to have to go to inside bets.

if I had $500 to piss away how about $1 video poker (9/6), 5 credits, 100 spins and bink the royal!

Thanks for all the input and the laughs, I talked to Pops today and told him of this thread. He was very appreciative of all the advice, especially the single 0 tables. I might attempt a live TR and if I do I will include pics of the big bets if I am around to witness it. He is going to LV 2 days before us and staying 2 days after us, I don't know how much roulette he will get in while I am there but hopefully he crushes before we arrive.

actually reading the thread more closely its $2500+ in the piss fund. OP's dad is betting 500 a spin on the proposition that 13 will hit within 5 spins.

That's so misguided it's not even funny... good luck with that strategy.

You realize what you are touting is to risk ever increasing BR units, BY ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE, to merely recoop an inital bet that lost and you're not concerned with frequency/winrate... that's idiotic and doomed to failure.

That is the epitome of chasing losses.

Dad is getting there two days ahead?

Dad likes $500 on the inside in roulette?

Dad never knew about single zero roulette?

You're going to find him sucking c0k in the alley for $10 behind the bus station by the time you get there.

And I mean that in the nicest way possible.