120,000 bet at roulette

HateMG said:
The problem is they don't have big enough balls to accept such bet.
I thought roulette wheels all used the same size balls.
 
But the guy won ;.)

However, I've seen the guy on TV over here (Germany) and he did it!
This won't work twice so ... my congrats to Ashley Revell :)
 
I'm glad he won.whatever a person does with there money is there business.who are we to judge? so he made a " risky investment" that turned out great. God Bless him!
 
clj7221 said:
I'm glad he won.whatever a person does with there money is there business.who are we to judge? so he made a " risky investment" that turned out great. God Bless him!


I fully agree with your statement cj.His money his decisions.I'm glad he beat the casino.
I have read on the double or nothing that the bet would be 120,000 not 75,000.
 
Last edited:
casinomeister said:
When I see people waste money like this, it really burns me up. I hope and pray he loses - and that the casino has the decency to donate his loss to some charitible organization.

Not quite sure of the policy of posting links here but the article below points out how his bet was/would have been refused at Caesar's Entertainment, Harrah's Entertainment and MGM Mirage. Hard Rock only refused the bet due to concerns about possibly violating the Wire Act. Unfortunately, the COO of Barrick Gaming Corp, owner of the Plaza, staunchly defends the bet while creaming his pants over the incredible free publicity they got.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
 
hhcfreebie said:
If he has to bet, then he should choose european roulette in europe, not the killer double zero american roulette.

If he went to somewhere in Europe (may be with the exception of Monte
Carlo???), there would be no TV, no story, we would not be talking about
it here. If you want publicity, you have to go to Vegas, the gambling capital
of the world. No?
 
Someone bet 170,000 (US$300,000) on Manchester United to beat Milwall in the FA Cup final. Betting on Man Utd to win is usually better than to bet on red or black on roulette, although with hindsight the best bet would have been to bet on Arsenal not to lose in the Premiership.
 
170,000??? Damn that's what I call gamble :eek2: .By the way betting on Man utd is not very safe bet because we have seen from them many up and downs in terms of perfomcance this year.
Do you know what was the odds for Man utd to win? I'm sure the sportsbook has huge advantage on every given bet otherwise they wouldn't offer them in the first place.They know that they will win in the long run.Am not ggod at maths though to explain it properly :(
 
gfkostas said:
Do you know what was the odds for Man utd to win? I'm sure the sportsbook has huge advantage on every given bet otherwise they wouldn't offer them in the first place.
Ladbrokes was offering 1/3 on Man Utd to win the game (excluding extra time and penalties). Sportsbooks typically take 10% of the total stake on the outcome of single games, more on multiples or in bets with lots of potential outcomes such as the winner of a tournament.

If you do it correctly, running a sportsbook can be a risk-free business, you just have to adjust the odds in response to the demand and you can make a profit regardless of the outcome.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Meister Ratings

Back
Top