Blackjack and Card Counting Forums -  

Go Back   Blackjack and Card Counting Forums - > Forums > General

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old September 1st, 2009, 01:19 AM
blackjackstudent blackjackstudent is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 62
Default Reverse martingale

Now, this is an interesting phenomenon. I have decided to raise this topic up here because my country's blackjack spread is very limited and I have heard that by limiting the betting limits, the casinos in Australia is increasing the house edge to their favour.

Of course, streaks cant be predicted but they just occur out of the ordinary. Say the table has a betting limit of between $ 30 and $ 600 which means as counters, you can only employ a 1-20 spread ONLY.

If you happen to win one hand, you then double to $ 60 and if you win the second hand, you double again to $ 120. If you win again you double to $ 240 and if you win that hand again you double to $ 480 then you cap your bets at $ 480.

If you lose any of the above hands, you only lose your original $ 30 ONLY which is equivalent to losing one unit. Yes the shoe deck has no memories of streaks but I have had long winning streaks of up to 10 consecutive hands playing with dealer heads on and playing only one box (spot).

If you happen to win the $ 480 (after the 5th consecutive win), you would have won 33 units. If you lose any of the above, go down to the lowest table limit.

I mean after 2000 hands played, there has to be a continuous winning streak of over 5 consecutive hands. The problem is you dont know when it will occurs.

Pit bosses wont raise an eyebrow if you use reverse Martingale at all.

Please post criticisms at the above system. I am relatively new to counting so feel free to post constructive/destructive criticisms.
Reply With Quote
Old September 1st, 2009, 07:43 AM
Sonny's Avatar
Sonny Sonny is offline
Executive Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 3,560

You can read through the Welcome thread in this forum to get more information about the Anti-Martingale system.

The low spread does not increase the house's edge, it only controls how much they can lose. A 1-20 spread should be fine especially if you can sit out bad hands.

Reply With Quote
Old September 1st, 2009, 07:09 PM
Mr. T Mr. T is offline
Executive Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Singapore
Posts: 347
Default Yes, Blackjackstudent it will work for me.

In Australia, as in my country you no doubt have these Touch Bet Roulette Machines. Your idea does lower the House Advantage from 2.7% to 2.1% ($30 loss according to your figures for total bet of $1410 equal 2.1%). Now let Sonny try to tear this apart.

You see where I gamble on the casino ship I have been using these Roulette machine to buy Comp points for the complimentary cruises. For every $1000 bet the casino will give me 1.8 points. With the expected loss of $27 it will work out to $15 per point. No doubt I am doing this because paying cash for the cruise will cost me 3 times as much. What I have been doing is to bet $10 on O and $180 on Black and Red simultaneously. Hence I am paying $10 every round for 0.67 points or to put it the other way round $15 per point. Now I would be paying only $12 per point. Thanks.
Reply With Quote
Old September 2nd, 2009, 01:19 AM
blackjackstudent blackjackstudent is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 62
Default Reverse Martingale, Oscars Grinding

On the past 10 occasions that I have been playing and have seen playing, I have seen people who have used progression betting (not necessarily reverse Martingale) come out on top. Those people are better off playing heads on with the dealer with only one or two betting spots/boxes.

I mean, there are winning streaks in blackjack/Spanish 21. I saw a guy betting $ 30/hand, then going to $ 60/hand after winning. After the second win, he went to $ 90 and then $ 120 (which he doubled and won $ 240). He ended making a grand overall on that night. However he was playing with one box against the dealer head on. If someone came in and opened multiple boxes, we cant say that he will win.

I often switch the number of boxes continually depending on the count. However if you have opened up three boxes betting at a spread on the higher scale of the spectrum and you lose the bet on all three boxes, then I often change the number of boxes. Thats why many people hate me but I dont give a rats.

This is all suspicions and in Australia, its common practice to back bet behind others.

Now I am not advocating this system at all - card counting has been shown to yield profits in the long run.
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:14 PM.

Forum Software vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005-2016