I agree, so the question in this thread is somehow difficult to answer because each of us had different experience using the martingale. Maybe rich gamblers are successful using it because they will never run out of money in a table without a limit and the risk are slower. Some failed because of a losing streak. So I think it is better to always assess the situation or think of a strategy that will better suit it.
True this. The Martingale strat works wonders if you have quite a big of money on the table since if you win just once, you can basically get the amount you lost quickly. No matter the amount, as long as you keep going, you'd sooner or later regain whatever you've lost. The logic is quite good tbh, and is understandable, hendce its popularity. But really, luck is something you don't understand using logic. It's called luck for a reason.
It is a profitable strategy - maybe you haven't tried it out yet.
You just have to have a huge amount of fund in order to follow this strategy or start with a small initial bet.
If one of those two terms is fulfilled then you will be about to make good money.
It isn't. Yea, if you have huge fund yes, but even starting with a small initial bet can without a big enough fund can cause you to lose pretty hard. It isn't really a strategy to follow up tbh. It's entirely based on luck and basically a forced pattern of you losing and winning depending on the amount of losses you've started with. It's not like your chances of losing is being reduced with each loss, so really, it's pretty useless.
). People are becoming a victim of this kind of behavior that letting the winstreak go over their head and thinking that there is a little chance of losing when in fact it is statistically high. In conclusion betting a double for a all or nothing is not worth the risk when you are gambling, remember you are playing for fun and that you win some and lose some, never mind people coaxing you to bet more, listen to yourself and play at your own pace.
