Topic: Does martingale really works? - page 98. (Read 123290 times)
i bet there is one 31 bet losing streak
By the way, I sent those 0.02 BTC directly from my just-dice account to 1CNPpAx, is that a problem? (it's still not on the blockchain)
Yeah, that would have been a problem, 'cos I said I would send winnings back to the sending address, which in your case is a random address in the JD hot wallet. But since only 3 people played and they all have JD accounts, I'll just pay their winnings directly to their JD accounts.
Notice that the 50 BTC is all used up now, so I'll announce the result early:
Quote
10:26:06 (484707) Withdrawal successful. Sent 47.99999800 to [1CNPpAxC].
10:26:14 (484707) shit this is going to be the longest week ever.
10:26:20 (715770) HOLY SHIT
10:26:25 (778360) 30 fucking k
10:26:25 (99999) Gl
10:26:28 (678506) just fill the bet and let us know lol
10:26:30 (484707) left 1BTC open for others...
10:26:14 (484707)
10:26:20 (715770)
10:26:25 (778360)
10:26:25 (99999) Gl
10:26:28 (678506)
10:26:30 (484707)
I fill the remaining <1 BTC myself just to get it over with. And now my script is checking for the longest streak.
Then this happened:
Quote
10:30:49 (99999) Dandiilion you want to do insured $5000 with a $3000 kick back on a win?
10:32:13 (484707) BAC that sounds good to me . im going out now, ill PM you my email so we can coordinate this later?
10:32:20 (99999) Sounds good
10:32:39 (99999) ya I'm going to enjoy my day and try nto to think about it too, but I really don't think there has been a 28 on 1 user
10:32:13 (484707)
10:32:20 (99999)
10:32:39 (99999)
so I'll wait and give them a chance to work out their insurance deal before announcing the result.
Of course, I don't know how long the script will take to run either.
Thanks for playing everyone.
Quote
(568076) 1.0000000
(forum) 0.0019001
(484707) 47.9999980
(1) 0.9981019
(forum)
(484707)
(1)
The martingale system doesn't work.
As time passes , you risk an ever increasing amount while having a chance to win only 1 unit.
So , if you've lost 27 bets in a row , your next bet will have a 50% (actually 49.5% chance) of winning , while costing you 1.342 BTC and may win you 1 satoshi on total.
Now , you will realise that you will win 1/134,200,000 of your input , but having a very very low chance of losing till then.
TLDR ; Martingale is a slow system. You basically increase the input continually to reduce your chance of losing everything. It doesn't really ever make you win , the house always wins.
As time passes , you risk an ever increasing amount while having a chance to win only 1 unit.
So , if you've lost 27 bets in a row , your next bet will have a 50% (actually 49.5% chance) of winning , while costing you 1.342 BTC and may win you 1 satoshi on total.
Now , you will realise that you will win 1/134,200,000 of your input , but having a very very low chance of losing till then.
TLDR ; Martingale is a slow system. You basically increase the input continually to reduce your chance of losing everything. It doesn't really ever make you win , the house always wins.
I tried an auto player with martingale used in the codes.Well it works for a little time,but when you start losing it keeps on losing.
Tell me about it. It is so massively disproportionate with the losses it dishes out. Seemingly moreso than the house edge suggests.
I think that the trouble with Martingale is that while you will get a statistically fair distribution of wins/losses on a 49.50/50.50 split, you will find that all it takes is the losses to be distributed close together consecutively.
Say that you are guessing Heads H to win, and Tails T is a loss assume 50/50 chance:
H H T T T T T T T T H H H T H H H T H H
There is an equal number of H and T, but the distribution is such that if you were to stop or run out of funds by roll 10 then you would be screwed out of the other six heads you were due for the extra tails. Of course that's not a fair example as things even out over time, not just a few turns.
But it highlights the point that you could have a bad streak and lose hard
Martingale has its limitations and it could be quite damaging than profitable.
More accurate codes are needed to win more precisely.
I thought of all the above already before you wrote it, which makes me regret offering the bet even more. Even if I win, I lose credibility, since someone's bound to think I cheated, and there's no way I can prove I didn't.
Well, you seem to be quite trusted in the community, so it'd only be the losers who lost quite a bit at gambling who already have a grudge against you, IMO.By the way, I sent those 0.02 BTC directly from my just-dice account to 1CNPpAx, is that a problem? (it's still not on the blockchain)
I'm fairly certain after 28 losses in a row @ 49.5%, the 29th will be a winner. I'm also fairly certain DOOG will be confronted as a cheater if this even ends up happening.
Dude, each dice rolled, each coin tossed, each bet made are independent events from each other.
You should really take some time to read the wiki page suggested by alani123 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy).
if doog has found a 27 streak once, then if you fall for the fallacy, all we need is to find another 27 streak which will turn into the 28 streak! 50% woohoo
I'm fairly certain after 28 losses in a row @ 49.5%, the 29th will be a winner. I'm also fairly certain DOOG will be confronted as a cheater if this even ends up happening.
Dude, each dice rolled, each coin tossed, each bet made are independent events from each other.
You should really take some time to read the wiki page suggested by alani123 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy).
Or maybe this was a plausible deniability attempt by you all along, to make us think: "Hah! What a sucker!" whereas you secretly already know the result! 
I'm kidding, I trust you, and I bet a whole dollar worth of 0.002, lol!
And if you do win a whole lot of BTC from this bet, some people are probably going to claim it was rigged, that you already knew...
And if you lose, sorry for being the catalyst for this bet.
I'm kidding, I trust you, and I bet a whole dollar worth of 0.002, lol!
And if you do win a whole lot of BTC from this bet, some people are probably going to claim it was rigged, that you already knew...
And if you lose, sorry for being the catalyst for this bet.
I thought of all the above already before you wrote it, which makes me regret offering the bet even more. Even if I win, I lose credibility, since someone's bound to think I cheated, and there's no way I can prove I didn't.
I started work on processing the giant bet list to find long streaks. There's a bit of a problem, in that I don't record whether the bets win or lose, only the profit or loss. For zero stake bets, I just record that the profit was zero, and can't tell easily whether it was a win or a loss. To work that out I have to recalculate the 'lucky number' and see if they guessed hi/lo correctly.
But the plan is to find a 28 streak of non-zero bets. If I can do that, then the zero bets are moot. Mostly people don't bet zero anyway.
I've extracted a list of all the 49.5% bets, and am currently splitting them into one file per userid. To check the script was working, I did a search for the "longest streak so far" after processing the first few million bets. It found a 24:
Quote
betid,stake,nonce,uid,profit
6931159,1,263302,3557,1
6931170,1,263303,3557,-1
6931180,3,263304,3557,-3
6931191,7,263305,3557,-7
6931200,15,263306,3557,-15
6931209,31,263307,3557,-31
6931218,63,263308,3557,-63
6931224,127,263309,3557,-127
6931232,255,263310,3557,-255
6931237,511,263311,3557,-511
6931242,1023,263312,3557,-1023
6931250,2047,263313,3557,-2047
6931256,4095,263314,3557,-4095
6931261,8191,263315,3557,-8191
6931266,16383,263316,3557,-16383
6931272,32767,263317,3557,-32767
6931279,65535,263318,3557,-65535
6931283,131071,263319,3557,-131071
6931286,262143,263320,3557,-262143
6931292,524287,263321,3557,-524287
6931295,1048575,263322,3557,-1048575
6931300,2097151,263323,3557,-2097151
6931304,4194303,263324,3557,-4194303
6931308,8388607,263325,3557,-8388607
6931310,16777215,263326,3557,-16777215
6931316,33554431,263327,3557,33554431
6931159,1,263302,3557,1
6931170,1,263303,3557,-1
6931180,3,263304,3557,-3
6931191,7,263305,3557,-7
6931200,15,263306,3557,-15
6931209,31,263307,3557,-31
6931218,63,263308,3557,-63
6931224,127,263309,3557,-127
6931232,255,263310,3557,-255
6931237,511,263311,3557,-511
6931242,1023,263312,3557,-1023
6931250,2047,263313,3557,-2047
6931256,4095,263314,3557,-4095
6931261,8191,263315,3557,-8191
6931266,16383,263316,3557,-16383
6931272,32767,263317,3557,-32767
6931279,65535,263318,3557,-65535
6931283,131071,263319,3557,-131071
6931286,262143,263320,3557,-262143
6931292,524287,263321,3557,-524287
6931295,1048575,263322,3557,-1048575
6931300,2097151,263323,3557,-2097151
6931304,4194303,263324,3557,-4194303
6931308,8388607,263325,3557,-8388607
6931310,16777215,263326,3557,-16777215
6931316,33554431,263327,3557,33554431
This guy actually martingaled from a single satoshi, lost 24 in a row, and still ended up winning!
So I'll leave the script to finish splitting the bets into multiple files, and not search for streaks until the 7 days are up.
I'm fairly certain after 28 losses in a row @ 49.5%, the 29th will be a winner. I'm also fairly certain DOOG will be confronted as a cheater if this even ends up happening.
Sorry to the guy who lost 27 times in a row... i mean... jesus christ man. I threw up a little in my mouth for you.
Sorry to the guy who lost 27 times in a row... i mean... jesus christ man. I threw up a little in my mouth for you.
The chance of winning on the 29th roll is still the same it ever was.
I'm fairly certain after 28 losses in a row @ 49.5%, the 29th will be a winner. I'm also fairly certain DOOG will be confronted as a cheater if this even ends up happening.
Sorry to the guy who lost 27 times in a row... i mean... jesus christ man. I threw up a little in my mouth for you.
Sorry to the guy who lost 27 times in a row... i mean... jesus christ man. I threw up a little in my mouth for you.
I'm really enjoying this bet. I especially liked the bit where I said:
ffs.
Hah, it's actually like ~200 million against 1.2^8 is 128
ffs.
Or maybe this was a plausible deniability attempt by you all along, to make us think: "Hah! What a sucker!" whereas you secretly already know the result!
I'm kidding, I trust you, and I bet a whole dollar worth of 0.002, lol!
And if you do win a whole lot of BTC from this bet, some people are probably going to claim it was rigged, that you already knew...
And if you lose, sorry for being the catalyst for this bet.
I'm really enjoying this bet. I especially liked the bit where I said:
ffs.
2^8 is 128
ffs.
i tried all types of martingale but everytime casino wins
Quote about Gambler's Fallacy from Wikipedia.
The whole piece is worth a read:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy
Edit:
Also, botdice is a fun tool to use. Give it a look if you are thinking to use martingale:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/botdice-online-simulator-play-100k-just-dice-satoshidice-rounds-for-free-160852
Quote
The most famous example of the gambler’s fallacy occurred in a game of roulette at the Monte Carlo Casino on August 18, 1913,[5] when the ball fell in black 26 times in a row. This was an extremely uncommon occurrence, although no more nor less common than any of the other 67,108,863 sequences of 26 red or black. Gamblers lost millions of francs betting against black, reasoning incorrectly that the streak was causing an "imbalance" in the randomness of the wheel, and that it had to be followed by a long streak of red
The whole piece is worth a read:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy
Edit:
Also, botdice is a fun tool to use. Give it a look if you are thinking to use martingale:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/botdice-online-simulator-play-100k-just-dice-satoshidice-rounds-for-free-160852
I tried an auto player with martingale used in the codes.Well it works for a little time,but when you start losing it keeps on losing.
Tell me about it. It is so massively disproportionate with the losses it dishes out. Seemingly moreso than the house edge suggests.
I think that the trouble with Martingale is that while you will get a statistically fair distribution of wins/losses on a 49.50/50.50 split, you will find that all it takes is the losses to be distributed close together consecutively.
Say that you are guessing Heads H to win, and Tails T is a loss assume 50/50 chance:
H H T T T T T T T T H H H T H H H T H H
There is an equal number of H and T, but the distribution is such that if you were to stop or run out of funds by roll 10 then you would be screwed out of the other six heads you were due for the extra tails. Of course that's not a fair example as things even out over time, not just a few turns.
But it highlights the point that you could have a bad streak and lose hard
Would it be considered cheating to ask exactly how many of those were 49.5%?
What do you mean? They were all 49.5% chance.
He's asking about the total number, not the 27 streak.
But I don't know the answer. I didn't do any analysis on the bets yet.
I tried an auto player with martingale used in the codes.Well it works for a little time,but when you start losing it keeps on losing.
Would it be considered cheating to ask exactly how many of those were 49.5%?
What do you mean? They were all 49.5% chance.
Unless he is somehow suggesting foul play by the house?
Would it be considered cheating to ask exactly how many of those were 49.5%?
What do you mean? They were all 49.5% chance.
Maybe you're right, but I doubt it. I've never seen more than 27 in a row, but with over a billion bets at Just-Dice I would be surprised if there wasn't at least a 28 streak at one point. 2^20 is about a million, 2^8 is 128, so it would take about 128 million bets on average to see a 28 loss streak at 50%. And quite a few less at 49.5%.
People keep asking me "what's the longest streak on JD?". I didn't look. It will be a pain in the ass to go through the data and work it out. But if you want to make a little wager on the existence of a 28 loss streak at 49.5%, that would make it worth my time.
So how about it? Promise I won't cheat and look it up ahead of time.
Here's the 27 streak:
http://i.imgur.com/S5zjWv8.png - photo of most of it
http://i.imgur.com/AeIqshZ.png - screenshot of all of it
Holy shit at that sucker. Is he still around in the chat or something?People keep asking me "what's the longest streak on JD?". I didn't look. It will be a pain in the ass to go through the data and work it out. But if you want to make a little wager on the existence of a 28 loss streak at 49.5%, that would make it worth my time.
So how about it? Promise I won't cheat and look it up ahead of time.
Here's the 27 streak:
http://i.imgur.com/S5zjWv8.png - photo of most of it
http://i.imgur.com/AeIqshZ.png - screenshot of all of it
128 million to one, similar to lottery wins. He just won the fail lottery, heh, poor guy. 1.216 billion bets, so it does seems plausible it happened once or more... You assume at least half of those are 49.5% bets, I think more like 25%. And also somebody could rage-quit before that...
Very interesting bet.
Would it be considered cheating to ask exactly how many of those were 49.5%?
Jump to: