Well, the entire difference between the house and the player is that the house has the edge, so the house always wants the player to indefinitely recycle their winnings until they have none.
It's more than an inverse in thinking, it's how the house makes money.
Comments
From the article:
I loved that line, because it's the converse of a casino player in a hole, thinking maybe they can make it back if they keep on playing.
Well, the entire difference between the house and the player is that the house has the edge, so the house always wants the player to indefinitely recycle their winnings until they have none.
It's more than an inverse in thinking, it's how the house makes money.
No, it's the same thing as the dumb guy in a hole. They already know this guy has an edge over them. The more he plays, the worse that gets.
But, as you pointed out, they can't ban him, because they have no way of recognizing him when he walks back in.
Oh, as in Stunna was gambling that the player didn't have an exploit and that the developers were drawing the right conclusion. I'll allow it. :)