martingale will always fail on dice because there is a limitation on max bet for each site..
like on primedice there will be max bet of 20 btc..so it will limiting our step
Topic: Does martingale really works? - page 20. (Read 123256 times)
Let me put an end to the new ppl that keep coming back.
Read hanovers posts about martingale.
http://www.forexfactory.com/showthread.php?p=8495533#post8495533
Read hanovers posts about martingale.
http://www.forexfactory.com/showthread.php?p=8495533#post8495533
No, you are wrong, that is not the gamblers fallacy and you are wrong thinking martingale works at short term because it doesnt, the term does not matter, no strategy works at short, mid or long term.
No, that is Gamblers Fallacy....
DEFINITION of 'Gambler's Fallacy' When an individual erroneously believes that the onset of a certain random event is less likely to happen following an event or a series of events. This line of thinking is incorrect because past events do not change the probability that certain events will occur in the future.
So him saying if short term is good, or past events(martingale short term) Past events do not change the probability of certain things happening in the future.
I am defining short term in this case as this: say I have .01 coins. I want to gain .00001 coins. If I played martingale with a base bet of .000001. I would need to win 10 times before losing 9 in a row. Your odds are pretty damn great you are going to win 10 times before you lose 9 in a row.
Nothing is guaranteed to work short-term, though. Every single time you bet you have a 50% chance to lose. You could lose everything or lose nothing.
With gambling and especially with online bitcoin dice, short term has greater odds than long term.
Generally with small house edges, gamblers lose money when they gamble long term.
even if you have thousand of btc to play with martingale, you will not be able to cover your loss somehow if you get bad streak.
No, I Lost 0.40 the other day on primedice 
No, you are wrong, that is not the gamblers fallacy and you are wrong thinking martingale works at short term because it doesnt, the term does not matter, no strategy works at short, mid or long term.
No, that is Gamblers Fallacy....
DEFINITION of 'Gambler's Fallacy' When an individual erroneously believes that the onset of a certain random event is less likely to happen following an event or a series of events. This line of thinking is incorrect because past events do not change the probability that certain events will occur in the future.
So him saying if short term is good, or past events(martingale short term) Past events do not change the probability of certain things happening in the future.
I am defining short term in this case as this: say I have .01 coins. I want to gain .00001 coins. If I played martingale with a base bet of .000001. I would need to win 10 times before losing 9 in a row. Your odds are pretty damn great you are going to win 10 times before you lose 9 in a row.
Also your calculations make no sense, your odds are great? Your odds are exactly the same with any other strategy, greater odds lower rewards, lower odds greater rewards.
No, you are wrong, that is not the gamblers fallacy and you are wrong thinking martingale works at short term because it doesnt, the term does not matter, no strategy works at short, mid or long term.
No, that is Gamblers Fallacy....
DEFINITION of 'Gambler's Fallacy' When an individual erroneously believes that the onset of a certain random event is less likely to happen following an event or a series of events. This line of thinking is incorrect because past events do not change the probability that certain events will occur in the future.
So him saying if short term is good, or past events(martingale short term) Past events do not change the probability of certain things happening in the future.
I am defining short term in this case as this: say I have .01 coins. I want to gain .00001 coins. If I played martingale with a base bet of .000001. I would need to win 10 times before losing 9 in a row. Your odds are pretty damn great you are going to win 10 times before you lose 9 in a row.
Nothing is guaranteed to work short-term, though. Every single time you bet you have a 50% chance to lose. You could lose everything or lose nothing.
No, you are wrong, that is not the gamblers fallacy and you are wrong thinking martingale works at short term because it doesnt, the term does not matter, no strategy works at short, mid or long term.
No, that is Gamblers Fallacy....
DEFINITION of 'Gambler's Fallacy' When an individual erroneously believes that the onset of a certain random event is less likely to happen following an event or a series of events. This line of thinking is incorrect because past events do not change the probability that certain events will occur in the future.
So him saying if short term is good, or past events(martingale short term) Past events do not change the probability of certain things happening in the future.
I am defining short term in this case as this: say I have .01 coins. I want to gain .00001 coins. If I played martingale with a base bet of .000001. I would need to win 10 times before losing 9 in a row. Your odds are pretty damn great you are going to win 10 times before you lose 9 in a row.
Yes and playing at 99% odds its pretty damn good odds as well but that doesnt mean it works on short term, the odds are always going to be 99% no matter how much you play.
No, you are wrong, that is not the gamblers fallacy and you are wrong thinking martingale works at short term because it doesnt, the term does not matter, no strategy works at short, mid or long term.
No, that is Gamblers Fallacy....
DEFINITION of 'Gambler's Fallacy' When an individual erroneously believes that the onset of a certain random event is less likely to happen following an event or a series of events. This line of thinking is incorrect because past events do not change the probability that certain events will occur in the future.
So him saying if short term is good, or past events(martingale short term) Past events do not change the probability of certain things happening in the future.
I am defining short term in this case as this: say I have .01 coins. I want to gain .00001 coins. If I played martingale with a base bet of .000001. I would need to win 10 times before losing 9 in a row. Your odds are pretty damn great you are going to win 10 times before you lose 9 in a row.
Everyone who has been a part of any gambling site must have tried martingale. so i just wanted to know your experience that have u ever gained profit from martingale? or its name should be changed to martinfail?
Lol yeah indeed, it should be renamed to martinfail
I have tried martingale several times and always lose while using that methodIt really doesn't work, let's just depend on luck
Just like gambling in general, that is why we do it. With Martingale you are more likely to win in the short term than anything else. The problem is no one is good at the short term and eventually, you get beat. It is going to happen!
But you are not really more likely to win at short time, if you could always win at short term then you should win at long term too and that is not possible.
That is the gamblers fallacy. Just because you win in the short term does not mean you are going to win long term. This is why casinos have a house edge. You might win in the start, the more and more you play the more likely you are to get some bad streaks/or equal to the house edge. You are definitely more likely to win in the short term at Martingale, but if you hit 1 big lose streak, game over!
No, you are wrong, that is not the gamblers fallacy and you are wrong thinking martingale works at short term because it doesnt, the term does not matter, no strategy works at short, mid or long term.
Technically yes if you have unlimited bitcoin... But even if you have lets say 1 million bits & u start the bet @ 1 bit. 1-2-4... you will eventually lose if you get a long enough streak.
I think it will works IF you have big bankroll like 10btc or something. because we don't know if we got long streak tho. and don't forget to play any dice website, don't play only 1 website. it will reduce our chance to bankrupt 
Only infinite bankroll and a site without maximum bet would work. Can you explain further how playing on multiple sites reduce our chance to bust?
I think it will works IF you have big bankroll like 10btc or something. because we don't know if we got long streak tho. and don't forget to play any dice website, don't play only 1 website. it will reduce our chance to bankrupt
Martingale some times work especially in the beggining, some times are not. We all know that there is no strategy that can give you a winning straight. The best thing you can do is when you're winning , stop and runaway before you bust all your balance.
I tried it last night on a dice site but it didn't work. The only thing that worked is I lost more bitcoins 
This strategy is for the risk takers with a lot of money to spend on gambling.
This strategy is for the risk takers with a lot of money to spend on gambling.
This method only works if someone had an infinite bankroll. I've lost 10x more row in a many Dice sites. Don't say this strategy works.
It is not enough if you have an infinite bankroll; the house should have one too.
Most casinos have a maximum betting limit.
Everyone who has been a part of any gambling site must have tried martingale. so i just wanted to know your experience that have u ever gained profit from martingale? or its name should be changed to martinfail?
Lol yeah indeed, it should be renamed to martinfail
I have tried martingale several times and always lose while using that methodIt really doesn't work, let's just depend on luck
Just like gambling in general, that is why we do it. With Martingale you are more likely to win in the short term than anything else. The problem is no one is good at the short term and eventually, you get beat. It is going to happen!
But you are not really more likely to win at short time, if you could always win at short term then you should win at long term too and that is not possible.
That is the gamblers fallacy. Just because you win in the short term does not mean you are going to win long term. This is why casinos have a house edge. You might win in the start, the more and more you play the more likely you are to get some bad streaks/or equal to the house edge. You are definitely more likely to win in the short term at Martingale, but if you hit 1 big lose streak, game over!
It's also worth noting you can have the bad streak in the beginning, so it's not even a viable short-term plan.
We need a FAQ on this topic. The mere fact that this thread is still alive after everything being explained again and again proves that.
Everyone who has been a part of any gambling site must have tried martingale. so i just wanted to know your experience that have u ever gained profit from martingale? or its name should be changed to martinfail?
Lol yeah indeed, it should be renamed to martinfail
I have tried martingale several times and always lose while using that methodIt really doesn't work, let's just depend on luck
Just like gambling in general, that is why we do it. With Martingale you are more likely to win in the short term than anything else. The problem is no one is good at the short term and eventually, you get beat. It is going to happen!
But you are not really more likely to win at short time, if you could always win at short term then you should win at long term too and that is not possible.
That is the gamblers fallacy. Just because you win in the short term does not mean you are going to win long term. This is why casinos have a house edge. You might win in the start, the more and more you play the more likely you are to get some bad streaks/or equal to the house edge. You are definitely more likely to win in the short term at Martingale, but if you hit 1 big lose streak, game over!
Everyone who has been a part of any gambling site must have tried martingale. so i just wanted to know your experience that have u ever gained profit from martingale? or its name should be changed to martinfail?
Lol yeah indeed, it should be renamed to martinfail
I have tried martingale several times and always lose while using that methodIt really doesn't work, let's just depend on luck
Just like gambling in general, that is why we do it. With Martingale you are more likely to win in the short term than anything else. The problem is no one is good at the short term and eventually, you get beat. It is going to happen!
But you are not really more likely to win at short time, if you could always win at short term then you should win at long term too and that is not possible.
Jump to: