Doubling bet after a losing hand..

Sonny · Dec 15, 2006

davidmcclung said:

That sounds almost exactly like Cipher's "switch-back" system, which was garbage:

http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?t=2042

I imagine this system is very similar.

-Sonny-

QFIT · Dec 15, 2006

davidmcclung said:

Is this according to Newton's Third Law of Springback?

eps6724 · Dec 15, 2006

azbetsgonewild said:

You run the risk of losing, A LOT!!
now, if there were no limit, why not TRIPLE the bet on every loss, at least then when you do finally get a win, you are not right back where you started, but where you started + a profit."

I had a friend introduce me to blackjack last year, and he explained his "guaranteed" system for winning-and this was exactly it. I tried it at my only four experiences in two dfferent casino's.

I since have new friends, and am learning everything I can about counting and advantage plays.
EPS

ThunderWalk · Dec 16, 2006

ihate17 said:

As with all systems, schemes, and methods, when Martingaling, you create a spread, or an outside limit on how much you're willing to lose at one sitting, based on the amount you walked in the door with.

It doesn't create vast wealth, or fast wealth, but it can be used successfully for short periods. If you don't believe that, buy six or eight decks of cards, some chips at the local toy store, and practice alone with one other person, or with three or four friends at home. If you stay with it, you'll win X amount every hand you play until you leave the table, or until the cards go against you.

Bet $10. If you lose, bet $20 the next hand. Keep doubling until you win, and then go back to your original $10 bet. On occasion, your loss will exceed your pocket money, so you need a cut-off point, just as you would with any other device. You may want to stop after a 1 - 4 spread, or when your bet reaches $80, or 1 - 5 at $160. You may also not wish to double-down, or split pairs, at that point until you get back on track. After making back 1 to 1-1/2 times your seed money, you may want to move on. You won't make a living betting this way, but it pays for a nice meal or the gas for the trip.

The fanatical opposition to Martingaling is ridiculous.

sagefr0g · Dec 16, 2006

Quote:
Originally Posted by ihate17 View Post
And finally after losing nearly 21 million on the hand before, and over 40 million in total I win on my 24th bet of just $41,939,040, whipe out that $41,939,035 loss and leave the casino up a whole $5 knowing that martingale works because I have a small country's national treasury and play in a casino with no table limits.

ihate17

ThunderWalk said:

in the short run yea maybe. but lets not forget those net loser sessions. now lets add up the win sessions and loser sessions over time. you'll find ihate17's scenerio play out.

ScottH · Dec 16, 2006

ThunderWalk said:

Because the system is complete BS! (Not basic strategy

)

ihate17 · Dec 16, 2006

The total effect is:

ThunderWalk said:

Thunderwalk
Martingale is a losing system but taken in the moderation that you speak about, is no more a losing system than flat betting. You get to the same place but with perhaps a more exciting ride in Martingale because of the bet changes.
This is non counting:

The flat better can expect to lose in most sessions, he will have some winning ones and some wins and loses will be small and big. Over his lifetime of play he should lose the percentage of his total bets X his disadvantage. So if were an average, semi basic strategy player at perhaps a 1% disadvantage against the house and bet 1 million over his life, he would expect to lose $10,000 lifetime.

The martingale better can expect to win in most sessions. The vast majority of his winning sessions will be small but many of his losing sessions will be huge. Over his lifetime of play he also should lose the percentage of his total bets X his disadvantage to the house. So if also bet 1 million, he would expect to lose $10,000

The result is the same, especially when played as you mention. If you are playing blackjack for a thrill and are not interested in learning how to have an advantage, then for many Martingale will be a more thrilling way to get to the same place.

If you want a way to be a lifetime winner then you have some work to do.

ihate17

ScottH · Dec 17, 2006

ihate17 said:

Thunderwalk
Martingale is a losing system but taken in the moderation that you speak about, is no more a losing system than flat betting. You get to the same place but with perhaps a more exciting ride in Martingale because of the bet changes.
This is non counting:

The flat better can expect to lose in most sessions, he will have some winning ones and some wins and loses will be small and big. Over his lifetime of play he should lose the percentage of his total bets X his disadvantage. So if were an average, semi basic strategy player at perhaps a 1% disadvantage against the house and bet 1 million over his life, he would expect to lose $10,000 lifetime.

The martingale better can expect to win in most sessions. The vast majority of his winning sessions will be small but many of his losing sessions will be huge. Over his lifetime of play he also should lose the percentage of his total bets X his disadvantage to the house. So if also bet 1 million, he would expect to lose $10,000

The result is the same, especially when played as you mention. If you are playing blackjack for a thrill and are not interested in learning how to have an advantage, then for many Martingale will be a more thrilling way to get to the same place.

If you want a way to be a lifetime winner then you have some work to do.

ihate17

Actually flat betting one unit is far superior to martingaling starting from one unit. The martingale player will be getting a lot more money down in a negative expectation game.

positiveEV · Dec 17, 2006

Flat bet: You win 1 unit 49.5% of the time and loose 1 unit 50.5% of the time, you loose 1 unit per 100 hands on average.

Martingale until 2: You win 1 unit 74.5% of the time and you loose 3 units 25.5%, you loose 2 units per 100 hands on average.

Martingale until 4: You win 1 unit 87.12% of the time and loose 7 units 12.88% of the time, you loose an average of 3 units per 100 hands.

Martingale until 8: You win 1 unit 93.5% of the time and loose 15 units 6.5% of the time, you loose an average of 4 units per 100 hands.

Etc.

You can always tell yourself "I am not going to be the unlucky bastard in this 6.5%", nobody want to be that guy, but a lot of people are and the casino just make more money.

ThunderWalk · Dec 17, 2006

My only point is... Martingale is a way of having a slight advantage without having to learn a counting system, and that is shouldn't be simply laughed at and discarded as though it was an odd-ball foolish idea.

I have a friend who counts (sometimes) and does well on most occasions. I've seen him almost always walk away with more than he sat down with. But I've also seen him play heads up with a dealer and lose every hand in the shoe. I have another friend who has a system where you bet big and try to go out. I've seen that person turn $1k into $3k using that method. Sometimes it works, sometimes not. I guess you gotta be... lucky!

If there's a fool-proof system that works every time, always, then I'd like to know about it and I'll switch to it starting now. Martingaling won't work in the long run if you play it out to infinity. But, like any system, you probably should have a point when you know you should leave the table.

Could Martingale be something for people to use if they're a casual player and they don't want to make a job out of playing Blackjack? Maybe. Could it be something you could switch to when the "scientific" methods aren't producing? Maybe. Is it the best method out there? Probably not. But I just don't think that's reason enough to make fun of it, or to laugh at people who have tried it. I think it's also a way of minimizing losses. When I'm losing small amounts, it doesn't bother me as much, and with the knowledge that I can double my next bet, and will eventually win a hand, I enjoy the game much more.

ScottH · Dec 18, 2006

ThunderWalk said:

Looks like you're only point is WRONG! The martingale DOES NOT give you an advantage!

shadroch · Dec 18, 2006

But playing the martingale is FUN!!!!!!!
Last week,in Vegas,my buddy and I continued a long running tradition. We martingale for lunch money.We start with $100 each,betting $10. Idea is to win $10 for lunch,nothing more.We both got a free lunch out of it each day. In the course of several years,we've never lost our whole $200 and must have had at least 50 free lunches.When the inevitable losing streak comes and we lose our $200,we'll still be way ahead of the game and had fun doing it.
I believe this and Oscars Grind have their place.Certainly not for the pro,but for the recreational gambler.Who happen to be 99.9 % of the people in a casino.

ScottH · Dec 18, 2006

shadroch said:

Which one are you?

shadroch · Dec 18, 2006

Certainly not a pro. Maybe someday,but right now I'd call myself an educated recreational player.

ThunderWalk · Dec 18, 2006

ScottH said:

I can only report the facts. If you don't want to believe it, that's your decision.

There's no place close to where I live to play Blackjack, so some friends and I usually have to plan a trip to play. Trips usually involve a long plane ride or a very long drive. In between those occasions, we practice in someone's kitchen with all the regulation toys. Even the chips are the correct weight so we have the "feel" of the game. We're not trying to make a living, or to impress anyone with how smart we are... we're having fun, and trying not to lose. Each of us has a different method we favor.

We played two nights ago, Saturday night, drinking (which I never do at a casino table) and having fun. There were four of us playing and a fifth person was the dealer through out. He's the best among us, has been playing years longer than the rest of us, knows a counting system, and he doesn't need practice. He's been all over Vegas and lots of other places. He catches our mistakes, even though he doesn't subscribe to our methods.

I sat at first base because one person complained that he didn't do well there the last time we played and got all the bad cards, so he took third. There were two other people between us. We played $10 minimum. I'd double my bet when I lost, and go back to $10 after a win.

Over the time we played, we went through four 6-deck shoes. Each of us came out ahead except for the person to my left who complained they just weren't getting the cards. We each stared out with $2,700 in chips, and I finished with $3,060 or $360 profit. It's not setting the world on fire, but it's better than leaving $360 short. In a casino, I'd tip the dealer, go have something to eat, and come back and do it again.

I'd call that an advantage.

shadroch · Dec 18, 2006

And you'd be wrong.
It really makes no sense to argue with people that believe in the martingale.
Only thing that convinces them is a losing streak.I know thats how I came to realize it .
For me,it came playing Sic Bo. Betting on an almost 50-50 prop(odd-even),I had several very nice winning sessions.Then came the inevitable losing streak.$1-$2-$4-$8-$16-$32-$64-128-table max of $200,followed by another $200 loss and a final $63 loss(my last money).
I did end up ahead while using this system,but realized very quickly that a losing streak of 10 or more is not only possible,but it is inevitable.The next losing streak would most likely wipe out my overall profits,so I quit using the system except for shites and giggles.

Sonny · Dec 18, 2006

ThunderWalk said:

This is not a case of believing or not believing. The facts are very clear: progression systems do not give you an advantage. If you still don’t believe it, read these:

http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/content/betting_systems_martingale_progression.htm
http://www.bjmath.com/bjmath/progress/prog.htm (Archive copy)
http://www.bj21.com/bj_reference/pages/10537.html
http://www.bjmath.com/bjmath/progress/unfair.htm (Archive copy)
http://www.bjmath.com/bjmath/progress/prog1.htm (Archive copy)
http://www.bjmath.com/bjmath/progress/prog2.htm (Archive copy)
http://www.bjmath.com/bjmath/progress/bootmm.htm (Archive copy)
http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/content/betting_systems_cancellation_progression.htm
http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/content/One_Million_Roulette_Experts.htm
http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/content/nonrandom_shuffle_blackjack_systems.htm

ThunderWalk said:

I’d call that luck. Just because you won some money after playing a few shoes doesn’t mean that you had an advantage, especially when you admit that you were making mistakes. You will eventually hit a losing streak where you give back all of your winnings. A simple search of these forums will show countless instances of progression players either going broke or learning the truth. You should listen to your more experienced friend. Either learn how to play properly or don’t expect to win.

If you decide to learn how to play, you came to the right place. Start with the free resources here:

http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?t=697

then feel free to ask any questions you have.

-Sonny-

ThunderWalk · Dec 18, 2006

Sonny said:

The fact is, it works more often than not, and I haven't found any system that works 100% of the time. I have a friend who counts, but occasionally experiences a set back, or walks away a loser. Add to that, that it's simple. I don't need to worry about someone talking to me at an inconvenient time and losing the count, or missing a hand because the dealer was too quick for me.

And then. there's the single point that keeps getting overlooked by people who want to argue about it. You have to know when to walk away. If I'm losing and not recovering, or if the bet is threatening to take away all of my holdings, I know better than to stay with that system, or that table.

Some people have a difficult time in letting go of the notion that counting is the only way to go, or accepting that other methods sometimes work.

shadroch · Dec 19, 2006

Yes,it works more often than it doesn't.But when it doesn't work,it is a disaster.Unless you are planning on never losing six hands in a row,you are going to take serious losses that will offset your small wins.
Assuming you are playing on a $10 table-look at what happens after six losses. $10-20-40-80-160-320=$630 in losses that streak. On your next bet,you'll be risking $640 just to break even..Your wins will all net you either $10 or you'll break even on them.Do you honestly think you'll average 63 seperate wins before you hit a six loss streak? If so,you don't have a very realistic understanding of the game.
If you must play a progressive,use Oscars Grind.It's much less dangerous and requires a much smaller bankroll.

QFIT · Dec 19, 2006

Russian Roulette with six people works five out of six times. I wouldn't call that a good bet.

Doubling bet after a losing hand..

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member