martingale system
- Thread starter glovesetc
- Start date
:grin: 
Pros
-You will have small winning sessions more often
-It can be more fun than flat betting
-For online casinos it gets through your wagering requirements faster
Cons
-You will have occasional disastrous sessions where you dump a ton of money
-You will lose more money than flat betting because you are making bigger average bets
-It does not give you any advantage over other methods
-Sonny-
-You will have small winning sessions more often
-It can be more fun than flat betting
-For online casinos it gets through your wagering requirements faster
Cons
-You will have occasional disastrous sessions where you dump a ton of money
-You will lose more money than flat betting because you are making bigger average bets
-It does not give you any advantage over other methods
-Sonny-
Here is a write up I have done ages ago for martingale:
Lets say you want to play martingale and cover at least 7 losses in a row starting from $5 bet. So the money you need to make the 8 bets is $5+$10+$20+$40+$80+$160+$320+$640 = $1,275.
Let us use the martingale progression on roulette betting on red. The chance of winning is 18/37 (48.649%) and loosing is 19/37 (51.351%). So the chance of loosing my 8 bets is 0.51351^8 = 0.004835 (0.4835%). In other words I have a 100%-0.4835% = 99.517% chance of winning $5. So its extremely likely that I will win $5 each time I attempt the martingale, and extremely unlikely for me to loose $1,275. Infact the loss of $1,275 comes once every 1/0.004835 = 206.83 times I try to win $5. So the risk is always far more than any possible reward. In other words on average I will win 206*5=$1030 for every $1275 I Loose.
Betting on red is an even money bet. So I want to double my $1,275. That’s 1275/5 = 255 lots of $5, but as I said above the loosing streak comes up once every 206 bets. The chance of winning $1275 starting from $1275 is 0.99517^255 = 29.09%. This is why the martingale does not work.
So starting with $1275 you only have a 29.09% chance of double your money. While simply betting it all on red in one spin is 18/37 = 48.649% chance. So using martingale will actually loose money faster. This is because the average bet size on martingale progression is much larger than just flat betting $5. If you are going to play martingale you would be by far better off just betting all your money on one spin and calling it a day, win or loose.
Most people claim that martingale can win, if you avoid the bad streaks. But of course you never know when that bad streak will happen, so you cannot avoid it. Remember that extending any streak by 1 is the same odds as 1 streak. For example if you wait until black has spun up 5 times, then start the martingale, you will still fail. This is because a streak of 15 losses is just as likely as a streak of 10 after you have already waited for a streak of 5.
Lets say you want to play martingale and cover at least 7 losses in a row starting from $5 bet. So the money you need to make the 8 bets is $5+$10+$20+$40+$80+$160+$320+$640 = $1,275.
Let us use the martingale progression on roulette betting on red. The chance of winning is 18/37 (48.649%) and loosing is 19/37 (51.351%). So the chance of loosing my 8 bets is 0.51351^8 = 0.004835 (0.4835%). In other words I have a 100%-0.4835% = 99.517% chance of winning $5. So its extremely likely that I will win $5 each time I attempt the martingale, and extremely unlikely for me to loose $1,275. Infact the loss of $1,275 comes once every 1/0.004835 = 206.83 times I try to win $5. So the risk is always far more than any possible reward. In other words on average I will win 206*5=$1030 for every $1275 I Loose.
Betting on red is an even money bet. So I want to double my $1,275. That’s 1275/5 = 255 lots of $5, but as I said above the loosing streak comes up once every 206 bets. The chance of winning $1275 starting from $1275 is 0.99517^255 = 29.09%. This is why the martingale does not work.
So starting with $1275 you only have a 29.09% chance of double your money. While simply betting it all on red in one spin is 18/37 = 48.649% chance. So using martingale will actually loose money faster. This is because the average bet size on martingale progression is much larger than just flat betting $5. If you are going to play martingale you would be by far better off just betting all your money on one spin and calling it a day, win or loose.
Most people claim that martingale can win, if you avoid the bad streaks. But of course you never know when that bad streak will happen, so you cannot avoid it. Remember that extending any streak by 1 is the same odds as 1 streak. For example if you wait until black has spun up 5 times, then start the martingale, you will still fail. This is because a streak of 15 losses is just as likely as a streak of 10 after you have already waited for a streak of 5.
Speaking of coming out...
Check this out!
The sims on this sort of thing...
Posted by zengrifter on 06-Dec-2005 13:31:27 (#14799)
... indicate that due to the randomness of the events you are describing, lowering your bet will only reduce your profit over the long-haul.
Notwithstanding my response, IF we could ever get beyond the static statistical model(s) that we use, something like you propose could be workable.
Look at it this way - when meteroligists analyse annual weather probabilities they produce annual-statistical rainfall expectation... BUT when it is raining, predicted or not, they are free to come in from out of the rain, yes?
- zg(closet voodooist)
From here: http://www.blackjackinfo.com/cc/68.php
Check this out!
The sims on this sort of thing...
Posted by zengrifter on 06-Dec-2005 13:31:27 (#14799)
... indicate that due to the randomness of the events you are describing, lowering your bet will only reduce your profit over the long-haul.
Notwithstanding my response, IF we could ever get beyond the static statistical model(s) that we use, something like you propose could be workable.
Look at it this way - when meteroligists analyse annual weather probabilities they produce annual-statistical rainfall expectation... BUT when it is raining, predicted or not, they are free to come in from out of the rain, yes?
- zg(closet voodooist)
From here: http://www.blackjackinfo.com/cc/68.php
So lets say you had a huge bankroll and started at a $5 bet couldn't you basically win $5 every time?
I usually just play blackjack at the $3 table if I can since I dont have that much money but this betting strategy seems pretty interesting, only problem is that once you lose like 6 times you'll be over table max.
I usually just play blackjack at the $3 table if I can since I dont have that much money but this betting strategy seems pretty interesting, only problem is that once you lose like 6 times you'll be over table max.
You've answered you own question here. The problem you've stated is going over the table max. If you can't keep betting indefinetly higher and higher then this is not going to work as at some point you are going to go over the max and not be able to place the required bet. At this point you will have lost more than any win you've had and you won't be able to win it back .
RJT.
RJT.
