
If you double your stake after you lose the side-bet (i.e. win the 'virtual' lottery), you'd be playing a well-known system known as the 'martingale' (despite not being a gambler myself, I know one or two things about gambling systems

RickH wrote:Someone once suggested selecting a set of numbers but never buying a lottery ticket. Every week your numbers don't come up add £1 to your virtual balance. If they win a prize deduct it from your total. It is very unlikely that you will end up with a negative balance.
661-Pete wrote:Didn't someone calculate that you're more likely to be struck by lightning...?
661-Pete wrote:I think this thread's worth a bump.
Seems Theresa's lost herself yet another minister, over the Gov's prevarication on cutting the FOBT limits. Not really surprised, considering how unprincipled the powers-that-be are....
But glad to hear that at least one Tory minister has got principles. Good for her!
Don't follow you: whether the 'odds' are fixed or not, it's still a game of chance. The odds on Schrödinger's cat's survival are fixed too - but the cat may still die....Bonefishblues wrote:Remember also that the odds are fixed (FOBT, see!) such that the bettor receives on average 98p+ back from every pound they stake.
Audax67 wrote:Often thought about buying a ticket but never have. Funny thing is that, at the end of the year, all the money I saved on not buying tickets doesn't magically turn up in my pocket.
You have a point.Bonefishblues wrote:What does puzzle me is that by the measure of every survey, alcohol is significantly more addictive than betting, yet we bemoan the loss of pubs whilst railing against the pariah of the High Street - the betting shop. Just saying...