What kills the progression player?

[LoneWoLF]

They send limos to the airport and pay the airfare to get martingalers that are well funded to the casino. Th idea that they fear them in any way is ridiculous and shows you just don't understand the interaction between house edge and bets. They will win your total amount bet times the house edge. Why wouldn't they want you to bet more? It increases their EV.

They dont fear martingalers because of the table limits set; the casinos know these martingale players wont be able to keep doubling their previous bet all day long. They will eventually hit a losing streak big enough that reaches table max and then they will not be able to recoup their losses and make one more double of their previous bet. If there were no table limits and you were extremely wealthy, you would bankrupt a casino due to lack of table limits. By the time your .000001% chance of the same color coming out 50 times happens or whatever number you think will happen, the wealthy martingaler would have extracted millions from casinos. The most common longest losing streak on roulette that happensi believe is 9 of the same colors coming out in a row which happens every 100 spins or so. Is it a coincidence that the spread of minimum to maximum on roulette is only about 7 or 8 times the double of your previous bet starting with the minimum? Newsflash, it's not a coincidence. Martingalers wont be able to double their bet anymore by the time they reach their 9th loss or so and reach table max. They now are screwed and have to start all over with a minimum bet and never get their money back. Even if they switched casino and tried to find a high roller table to get their 9th double up of their previous bet, first off they will be hard pressed to find a table that has those limits, and if they do find a table with those limits they then would have to play those tables limits with a higher 'minimum' to offset the ratio of the high 'maximum' on the table and they will end up with the same dilemma when they are not able to double up on their 9th loss because they will have reached table max on that high roller table as well.

It's that simple. Go find me the last table in the world that hit the same color more than 15 times or 20 times in a row on roulette? Or in your other example, lets say someone kept switching casino and kept betting the same color, etc, go find me someone that lost 20 or even 30 times in a row betting the same color? You know what, go find me the most consecutive same color spins ever recorded on roulette. I bet it's not more than 30. And you're telling me a wealthy guy with tens of millions cant wipe out that casino if there were no table limits and with no minimum to maximum limit? Someone with tens of millions will easily kill a casino without table limits because the chance of these streaks going so high to wipe out someone with that bankroll just isnt feasible by the time it takes a martingaler to extract significant amount of money from them. A wealthy martingaler with tens of millions would easily have bankrupted a casino by then if there were no table limits. High roller tables have the same ratio from minimum to maximum as do low roller tables, and thats because without table limits and about a 7-8 ratio of doubling bets from minimum bet, casinos would go out of business due to martingale, plain and simple.

Also the idea of separating high rollers and low rollers is a reason for table limits, makes no sense and ill go back to what I wrote previously. Why do high roller tables have about the same ratio of spread of minimum to maximum as do the low roller tables? Because martingale without table limits on any game will wipe them out if some dot com millionaire comes in or billionaire comes in.