You have one FREE Roulette spin on RED or BLACK for $100,000

[Fishhead]

What color do you place you free bet on???

[Philavanh]

Black

[DrStale]

Black

[LostBankroll]

Double Zero

[philswin]

Red 23

[jjgold]

red

[jayroy25]

dont matter same odds either way

[minet123]

It's free so take Green

[Money]

Put it on Black. Take out loan and put 50k on red. Take the 50,000$ guaranteed.

[Cougar Bait]

Red

[Masu485]

red for sure. psychologically most men would place their bet on black, so go the opposite

[TR88]

Red doubled my money many times.

[robmpink]

Gayest post of your posting life to date.

[bachngocduong]

3 time allin back

[sharpcat]

Half on red
Half on black

[ProfaneReality]

id fine someone to give me 45k for my spin

[maersksealand]

A guy did this few years ago


Man Bets Life Saving on One Roulette Spin



Written March 8, 2008 by Jack Jones


Back in 2006 there was a man who on live television walked into a casino in Las Vegas, and bet his entire life savings. This caught a lot of attention in the news, because it was such a large wager and that it was so odd for someone to risk it all. Mark Pilarski weighs in on his thoughts.
The person who did this was Ashley Revell, who put up his entire net worth of $135,300 on red at the roulette table while a British film crew recorded the event. However, it was not live as your question suggests, but taped delayed. The reason for the tape delay was because the Wire Act provides criminal penalties to anyone engaging in the business of betting when using a wire communication facility for the transmission of interstate or foreign commerce of bets or wagers on any sporting event, contest or betting information. I’m sure The Plaza Hotel-Casino in downtown Las Vegas, where the bet was placed, made sure the wager was taped and not broadcast live.
There isn’t a chance that I would have taken this wager if I was a casino owner. Even with the global exposure that the wager received, I would have nixed the idea of someone betting his or her life savings on one spin. This columnist has recommended countless times that you should only bet what you can afford to lose, not everything you own. Most of the casinos in Las Vegas would probably agree with Yours Truly; of course, the others would have had their limos curbside at the airport awaiting Revell’s arrival.
Finally, even though he won $135,300 (not $270,000, see below) when the ball dropped into the seven slot, a red number, I must challenge Revell’s wisdom for choosing roulette when risking his total net worth.
There were plenty of wagers in the casino that offer a better deal than double zero roulette, where the house edge is 5.26% on every bet you place on the table, including betting red. Revell broke the most fundamental principle of all of gambling; finding the best bet and conditions. He was not gambling smart when he decided a single spin at a double-zero roulette table is where he’d lay his brazen bet.
If Revell was so gung-ho on roulette, he should have at least made that same wager on a single zero roulette wheel where the house edge is a less murderous 2.70%. Better yet, he should have avoided Las Vegas entirely and made the play in Atlantic City, where some casinos have a special rule that allows only one half of the wager to be lost whenever the ball lands on zero or double zero (0, 00). This even-money outside bet is called Surrender. Surrender (or “en prison” in French) is allowed only on even money bets that pay off at 1 to 1 (Red/black, odd/even, 1-18/ and 19-36).
In Revell’s case of betting Red, if 00 or 0 came up, without Surrender, he would have automatically lost his bet. If Surrender were available at the casino where he made the play, half of his wager would remain on Red through the next spin. It’s called Surrender because his bet is temporarily held hostage, or “en prison” if you like, awaiting the outcome of the next spin. This Surrender option cuts the house edge on even money bets to 2.63% on the American game, and down to 1.35% on the European, single-zero table.
By the way, Danny, he did not win $270,000 as many news accounts reported. He risked $135,300 and won $135,300.

[OverUnder]

red all day

[JohnGalt2341]

"Do you play Roulette? Always bet on Green!"
Bruce/David Banner

[KKoz9]

red for sure. psychologically most men would place their bet on black, so go the opposite

What does it matter what "most men" do ?

Odds don't change by side bets on roulette.

[Cabo]

Red

[Poker_Beast]

Black

[Reload]

Black for me - the power color

[jeffksu]

i chose black and don't know why...

[pico]

i have 56 pts. going to put it all on red on sbr casino. report back soon

[pico]

play the single zero roullette

[pico]

red 18.

now i have 112 pts. told you red is the way to go

[pico]

here you go.

[vitalogist]

[pico]

let it ride

WagerType: Date: Team: Risking / To Win Ticket#:
STRAIGHT BET Jun 26 SOC [6005] USA +140 112.00 SBR / 156.80 SBR 264004

[pat venditto]

Scalp it obviously.

50k guranteed unless it hits 0

[mrmarket]

Get those posting numbers up fishy almost the end of the month already

[Herky]

RED!

[Fishhead]

RED with a slight lead.............

[mcbaseball10]

A guy did this few years ago Man Bets Life Saving on One Roulette Spin Written March 8, 2008 by Jack Jones Back in 2006 there was a man who on live television walked into a casino in Las Vegas, and bet his entire life savings. This caught a lot of attention in the news, because it was such a large wager and that it was so odd for someone to risk it all. Mark Pilarski weighs in on his thoughts. The person who did this was Ashley Revell, who put up his entire net worth of $135,300 on red at the roulette table while a British film crew recorded the event. However, it was not live as your question suggests, but taped delayed. The reason for the tape delay was because the Wire Act provides criminal penalties to anyone engaging in the business of betting when using a wire communication facility for the transmission of interstate or foreign commerce of bets or wagers on any sporting event, contest or betting information. I’m sure The Plaza Hotel-Casino in downtown Las Vegas, where the bet was placed, made sure the wager was taped and not broadcast live. There isn’t a chance that I would have taken this wager if I was a casino owner. Even with the global exposure that the wager received, I would have nixed the idea of someone betting his or her life savings on one spin. This columnist has recommended countless times that you should only bet what you can afford to lose, not everything you own. Most of the casinos in Las Vegas would probably agree with Yours Truly; of course, the others would have had their limos curbside at the airport awaiting Revell’s arrival. Finally, even though he won $135,300 (not $270,000, see below) when the ball dropped into the seven slot, a red number, I must challenge Revell’s wisdom for choosing roulette when risking his total net worth. There were plenty of wagers in the casino that offer a better deal than double zero roulette, where the house edge is 5.26% on every bet you place on the table, including betting red. Revell broke the most fundamental principle of all of gambling; finding the best bet and conditions. He was not gambling smart when he decided a single spin at a double-zero roulette table is where he’d lay his brazen bet. If Revell was so gung-ho on roulette, he should have at least made that same wager on a single zero roulette wheel where the house edge is a less murderous 2.70%. Better yet, he should have avoided Las Vegas entirely and made the play in Atlantic City, where some casinos have a special rule that allows only one half of the wager to be lost whenever the ball lands on zero or double zero (0, 00). This even-money outside bet is called Surrender. Surrender (or “en prison” in French) is allowed only on even money bets that pay off at 1 to 1 (Red/black, odd/even, 1-18/ and 19-36). In Revell’s case of betting Red, if 00 or 0 came up, without Surrender, he would have automatically lost his bet. If Surrender were available at the casino where he made the play, half of his wager would remain on Red through the next spin. It’s called Surrender because his bet is temporarily held hostage, or “en prison” if you like, awaiting the outcome of the next spin. This Surrender option cuts the house edge on even money bets to 2.63% on the American game, and down to 1.35% on the European, single-zero table. By the way, Danny, he did not win $270,000 as many news accounts reported. He risked $135,300 and won $135,300.

Would be interested in seeing what he has done since then. I would venture to guess that the thrill of him winning this money could never be matched and he will spend a lifetime trying to recreate this rush. I could be completely wrong though.