Casino Visions and Caviar Dreams
Most of us have heard this before: “I’m going to get rich this weekend. I’m feeling lucky. I’m going to triple this money I have. It was set aside for the mortgage, but I know I’m going to win. I can feel it. I was so close last time.”
It’s beyond cliché. It’s a cultural phenomenon, with the optimistic playing the part of financial lemmings, eager to swim out in the ocean too far to swim back to shore (or in this case solvency).
The people who go to casino’s with such a “plan” usually end up leaving with their tail between their legs. 먹튀폴리스 먹튀검증업체
Casino towns are money siphons, an instant asset reallocation strategy for the hopeful. For every sensible vacationer who takes a preset allotment of discretionary income to a gaming community for some kicks and a show, there is a reckless gambling addict hurtling toward destitution. The trick, as the song said, is to never play the game too long.
So, according to the industry, you can rely on the lady luck long shot, the win some-lose more method long endorsed by the gaming community, or inflict upon yourself the relative tedium of card counting.
What other options are there for the gaming enthusiast looking for a sincere chance to beat the house advantage?
There is, some say, a formula.
The Formula
In today’s computer culture, advanced mathematical calculations are just an app away. Computation professionals are driving technology further, faster.
Is it really surprising that in an era where the numerics of card counting have tipped the scale in blackjack, to have another contender emerge and challenge the notion that the odds always favor the house?
This has indeed happened. It comes from France. It is called the Martingale method, and was considered high tech… by eighteenth century nobility.
The system revolves around the fundamental principal of doubling your bet each time you lose until you win.
The theory is that you are bound to get one right eventually, and you then will get the payoff you pursued in the initial wager.
One interesting point about this method is that at first glance the wagerer appears to be a gambling addict on a bender. Upon closer inspection, what looks like unstable behavior shows itself to be the execution of a discipline within the chaos of wagering. It can pay.
The method practitioner must have researched the technique and learnt the entire formula, which can be fully understood in hours armed with nothing more than elementary school math.
So far so good. The rub? One had better know their game. Losses get expensive quickly. A wagerer could be risking $16 to win the $1 they set out to win. If the first bet was large, the risks can be disproportionate.