Gambler in a Casino & Stock Market

Genting Highlands..The first real good trip after coming to Kuala Lumpur. (Before you start reading the experience let me warn you this post is going to have some amount of technicalities in it) .
Many of you who are non-i-bankers, non management people believe that share trading is nothing but gambling. Well while this is not true from an expert (I am desperately searching for the right word for one who has gone through a course like portfolio management) trader's point of view - well sometimes it is true even for him - it is definitely true for the infinite number of traders who trades just on their instincts. Hence my first visit to a casino provokes me to compare the psychology of a gambler and a trader.
My enthusiasm in going to the Casino stemmed from my recent expertise in playing poker (of course with virtual money) in facebook. In just 10 or so days I have won 350 thousand dollars!!! and I am pretty well confident I can produce one hundredth of that performance in the real world. My wishes did not materialize,as in the casino that I had been to, you are not allowed to play against the table (the other players like me), you get to counter only the dealer (the casino representative say). This brings the game completely in to luck. Even if I assume that the dealer is absolutely fair my chances of winning is 0.5. In a normal poker game intelligence, patience, and confidence play a major role which was not possible here. Moreover the minimum bets in the poker tables was quite high and I decided not to play :(. One possible reason why a casual visitor is not allowed to play against the table might be the fear of street fights outside the casino. I don't know what happens in other casinos in Hong Kong or Las Vegas.
So finally having a good walk around the floor we as a group decided to play one of the simplest games. The simplest over here signifies the minimum amount that you need to play and nothing to do with complexity. For none of the games on the floor required any brain and in fact all the games had a basic probability of winning of 0.5. The game went as follows:
Three dices would be rolled, based on the various possibilities of outcome bets were placed. On the minimum risk case you bet whether you will get an even or an odd sum of the numbers. Another one was whether the sum would be more than 10 or less. Clearly probability of winning in each case is 0.5. Hence if we bet 5 RM a win gives you 10 and a loss nothing. I devised a trading strategy and let me tell you it is a winning formula. I am revealing the same over here under the assumption that there are not many gamblers who take a stop at my blogs :):
I am explaining taking the example of odd or even. Under natural circumstances, that is for an unbiased dice, E = Even and O = Odd should be alternating quite frequently. So my logic is you bet only when there have been two consecutive "E" or "O". There is high chance that the next would be "O" or "E" (that is the opposite). But bet lowest = 5. If you win you become +5 and happy else -5 but don't be sad for look at the last three outcomes, they all been either "E" or "O". Let's believe they have all been "E". So next I bet "O" and bet higher = 10 for the chances of an "O" is even higher. If you win you get to +5 (-5 + 10) and be happy else you reach -15 (-5-10) but still don't be sad for the next time the chances of "O" is even higher and you bet 20. Continue like this and I can guarantee you will reach a positive mark. The only restraint is you should have a deep pocket, strong balls and if you are unlucky the space of your winning becomes slow.
We followed the same strategy under my leadership and voila!! we won 75 rm in our first two series of games (Let me tell you we followed a similar cycle as explained above) and took us about two hours in winning this much amount.
Finally we decided to give it one more try. We garnered 250 RM and decided to win big this time. Again we decided our stop loss would be 75 that is if we fall below 175 we quit the game. The 75 comes from the figure that we have already won meaning worst case we get back home without winning anything.
The game began and yes soon we were at 275. Then we started losing and my order of bets was increasing as (5 , 10, 20, 40). That meant we were at 200 at that time losing 50. Since our stop loss was at 175 we could not bet 80 next, I had to bet 25. Though we won that round we ended up at 225. Ideally using my strategy we should have reached 280. See my strategy works but the problem was we did not implement it.
Next we again keep on winning a few and reached 250. Someone suggested we should back out. But I was sure of my strategy.
We proceeded and a similar situation came when we were back at 200. Again we had to bet 25 and this time we lost and ended up being at 175. We had to quit the game at this point according to our terms. So at the end of the day we did not win anything neither did we lose anything.
So where are the fallacies:
1) Clear enough we did not follow our strategy completely: Fear Factor which is so true for a trader: People become risk averse when they are losing thus failing to cash in on an market opportunity.
2) Did you notice the points which are marked in bold: Was the chance of getting an "O" really higher :). The events were independent and the probability was still 0.5. The same happens with a trader. Under the efficient market hypotheses the next set of stock movement is completely dependent on the next set of information coming in and nothing to do with old news.
3) 250 we should have stopped but greed was taking its toll. People become risk takers with deeper pockets.
But one thing is for sure, my trading skills are good. Alas HSBC did not recognize it and rejected me for not being "aggressive".