NO LIMIT !!!

[D1]

Hi Guy's.

Just wanted to put a question as Im curious as to what the answers might be.

If you had a roulette table with no limit and an unlimited bankroll to match we all know that you could play any bet you wanted and you would win.

But If you did have both of the above the question is what bet would you play and why

Kindest Regards,

D1.

[TwoCatSam]

Hey

Wouldn't make a particle bit of difference; you would always win.  The operative word in your post is "if".

I can just ol' Bill Gates betting twenty-five million units on red just to win a single unit.

Sam

P.S.  I'd choose the zero because I'm mad at it!

[vile]

If you had a roulette table with no limit and an unlimited bankroll to match we all know that you could play any bet you wanted and you would win.



D1.
[/quote]

There are such tables---casino WIEN,casino LISBOA,/Macau/,casino VENICE/Malta/....and only
these with membersh.can enter these rooms.But the difference is that they don't punt 10000 to
win 100 and walk away,but they play with 1000000 as we do with 1000...did you get my point.

[Drazen]

   
Well we have no-limit tables in some casinos my friend. They are very exclusive and privileged only for richest guys to play there.

Though I do know what one pro player does there and with which system he wins...

But that is far away from us, regular mortals... Dont bother with that..

Regards

Drazen

[Gordonline]

Hi Drazen


I think what D1 is asking is what bet would someone play if there were no limits.........so what bet does that pro player play if we were lucky enough to have won the lottery and were playing for fun !!!!


I think I would play the last 12 numbers on the marquee going for the repeat bet using a progression to keep me in front, rather than the obvious 50/50 bet !!!!!! 


Gordon 

[GARNabby]

"... if we were lucky enough to have won the lottery and were playing for fun!"

I'd settle for the lottery win, and forget about playing roulette.  Besides no one knows what all or infinity is, much less how to profit by it.

[Skakus]

With no limit an up as you lose progression is unbeatable. Any bet would do, you would just need to set your progression to your preferred profit margin.

If you could guarantee a profit of about 14c in the dollar on any investment then you would become very rich indeed.

I’d pick a simple middle ground bet, something like FTL Street, and just keep increasing the chips each time a win would profit less than 14% of the total invested stake.

Too easy!

[Robeenhuut]

With no limit an up as you lose progression is unbeatable. Any bet would do, you would just need to set your progression to your preferred profit margin.

If you could guarantee a profit of about 14c in the dollar on any investment then you would become very rich indeed.

I’d pick a simple middle ground bet, something like FTL Street, and just keep increasing the chips each time a win would profit less than 14% of the total invested stake.

Too easy!

Yeah. The problem with beating roulette is not a house edge but unlimited funds and limits on the side of casino.  But you better be prepared when you take on bunch of hungry guys and some with some skills 

[Skakus]

It would be interesting to see just how long it can take for any street to hit back to back.

Maybe someone can do a simple code to follow the last street hit for a back to back repeat. Then run it over a million spins to see what the longest gap is. Then you'd know what to allow for in the progression.

With no limits and a progression geared to earn a minimum 14% the more you bet the more you win.

I doubt you will ever see more than 100 or so spins between a repeat so how much would that cost? Quite a bit I think. 14% of quite a bit is also quite a bit.

[Robeenhuut]

It would be interesting to see just how long it can take for any street to hit back to back.

Maybe someone can do a simple code to follow the last street hit for a back to back repeat. Then run it over a million spins to see what the longest gap is. Then you'd know what to allow for in the progression.

With no limits and a progression geared to earn a minimum 14% the more you bet the more you win.

I doubt you will ever see more than 100 or so spins between a repeat so how much would that cost? Quite a bit I think. 14% of quite a bit is also quite a bit.

How about betting on line to repeat for 2nd time using 20 step progression?  Pins posted progression for betting on 1 line on VLS forum using 1111122233457791114161923  sequence.
Actually i just changed last step to be always in profit. I played with that and most logical would be betting for a repeat. However much better strike rate you get if you bet for another repeat.
If Line 1 hits for example 2 times in a row you bet for another repeat of Line 1. If L you start your progression and bet again after you see another repeat. In around  20k live spins  379W and 1L.  Interesting?  You need better than 32/1 strike ratio to be in profit without covering 0.  You risk 132u and win on average 4.25u. Problem is waiting - one game on average 40 or 50 spins.
Just an idea.

[iggiv]

i think that's what would happen if casinos had no limits. They would probably not play for wide public, because there are always would be some lucky bastards to empty their tables, but most of the ordinary people still would lose because they would not have enough bank. So basically it would be like a crazy lottery with the exception of the situation that regular lottery holders always get their share  are in plus no matter what and ordinary folks don't lose their last pants but this kind of lottery would threaten both players and casinos. Because it would be very tempting for some people to play this "lottery" and lose their last money. Of course it happens with regular roulette too but with no table limits it would happen much more.

so my conclusion is that table limit is actually in interest of most of the people. Most ordinary folks realize that they can't break bank with progressions and casinos are in business for wide public.

now about exclusive casinos for rich people with no table limits. there are very few people which would play in those casinos thus giving good chance to the casinos that lucky bastard won't be there but the house edge still will.

[GARNabby]

"... would be like a crazy lottery."

Very interesting reply, iggiv.

[D1]

Thanks for all the replies guys

always interesting to know what other people think

personally I would be undecided which bet to play as I would still want the bet that yielded the profit in the fastest possible way.

D1.

[TwoCatSam]

Easy!

Bet five D/S, or lines, with a huge Martingale.  Bet huge bets. 

Sam

[Proofreaders2000]

I would bet one number and martingale until it won.