[ QUOTE ]

Yes, or 10000, or 100000... etc.

It gets worse: there is as much chance to get such a sequence, beginning from your first observation, as any other specific sequence you may choose.

So you could really start out with a bad beat here [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes its a perculiar how probability works. A BJ card counter might find the ultimate table that gives him an incredible 5% edge against the house. Yet he run the risk of being wiped out by a long chain of losers right from the start! If he restarts with a fresh pot after that, he still may get wipe out right from the first hand!

Gambling is indeed gambling. [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]

For a martingale player on Roulette even chances, his chances of getting 10 losers in a row is 100% - 99.83% or 0.17%. A 0.17% risk of ruin.

The question is...BJ card counters run about a 1% risk of ruin (just guessing, not sure kekeke) even with a positive edge. Does this mean a card counter is as likely to go broke as a martingale user? Is Professional Gambling a myth? With more than 0.17% risk of ruin we're better off doing martingale (which doesn't work by the way)?? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]