Leland,

>I know about probabilities,

>> "Each time you lose increases the odds that the next round will be a winner"

That's just not true.

One hand, roll, spin is not affected by the hand, roll, spin that proceeded it or the hand, roll, spin that follows it.

Assuming the deck is reshuffled between hands, the dice are not weighted and there are no magnets in proximity to the wheel. *g*

> but if it didn't matter, why would the house always enforce a limit, and what does it mean when the limit is removed, so bets can be doubled without limit until a player wins back all losses, and if he plays correctly win a predetermined sum which would be the objective right from the start?

Betting limits are sorta outside the discussion of the correction I was trying to make. Betting limits and innumeracy are what allow casinos to pay for all the electricity they suck out of Hoover Dam. *g*