I dont disagree exactly but this site seems to be a lighter then directly giving out some system that would work for certain. No bettor should assume they can read something and acquire a certain device for winning, its always going to have to be a personal buildup of knowledge and good practise.
This is the same for any guide to 'how to' actually interpreting that into a personal method is another step beyond that. In this case I think its just padding out ideas on betting or even just winning mindsets roughly, seems to me its alot of reading and also digesting required which is no sure win for sure and to their credit I dont see them implying that exactly
http://sportstatist.com/4-betting-lessons-from-sir-alex-ferguson/
Topic: Popular Betting Strategies - page 3. (Read 561 times)
Unless we're talking about betting/wager on real-life result (sports, election or other major event results) where in-depth analysis or research might be needed, all strategy rely on your luck and how fast the the increment before you out of money.
Yeah. I think the title of this post should be: "Popular strategies to lose your money". Casinos are very interested in teaching people "strategies" so they believe they can beat the house but they will lose their money.
That's right. I have never counted how much I lost when trying different strategies one after other. Every strategy claims to be a winning one which would beat house edge until we find out its not. As you say, casinos are encouraging players to discuss strategies so, that it would eventually end up as beneficial for them.
legendary
Activity: 1358
Merit: 1565
The first decentralized crypto betting platform
Unless we're talking about betting/wager on real-life result (sports, election or other major event results) where in-depth analysis or research might be needed, all strategy rely on your luck and how fast the the increment before you out of money.
Yeah. I think the title of this post should be: "Popular strategies to lose your money". Casinos are very interested in teaching people "strategies" so they believe they can beat the house but they will lose their money.
The page you linked is extremely difficult for me to browse from a desktop at 100% zoom- the text font is tiny and all the same color, and I have to scan through all this. It's accessible, but not very neat. The page overall seems like something out of 2008 or something of the sort, too.
I like that the flaws of the Martingale method are linked on the site. There's been lots of discussion here and elsewhere about the method, and although the consensus is that the method really doesn't work at all, there are always people that ignore advice- nice to see that you pointed out the flaws of the method with math to make it clear that it doesn't really work.
Rather than on sites design one thing that caught my attention is on this.I like that the flaws of the Martingale method are linked on the site. There's been lots of discussion here and elsewhere about the method, and although the consensus is that the method really doesn't work at all, there are always people that ignore advice- nice to see that you pointed out the flaws of the method with math to make it clear that it doesn't really work.
Btw, going back on topic no matter how these betting strategies are popular it would still have the same outcome or results would vary on how lucky you are.
The page you linked is extremely difficult for me to browse from a desktop at 100% zoom- the text font is tiny and all the same color, and I have to scan through all this. It's accessible, but not very neat. The page overall seems like something out of 2008 or something of the sort, too.
I like that the flaws of the Martingale method are linked on the site. There's been lots of discussion here and elsewhere about the method, and although the consensus is that the method really doesn't work at all, there are always people that ignore advice- nice to see that you pointed out the flaws of the method with math to make it clear that it doesn't really work.
I like that the flaws of the Martingale method are linked on the site. There's been lots of discussion here and elsewhere about the method, and although the consensus is that the method really doesn't work at all, there are always people that ignore advice- nice to see that you pointed out the flaws of the method with math to make it clear that it doesn't really work.
Someone told me it was close to the Martingle method. But when I play games like Blackjack, Dice and Roulette. I use the strategies
X's 1, X's 1, X's 2, X's 2, X's 4, X's 6, X's 10
Play it until you loose.
So if your first bet is $10 it would be:
10,10,20,20,40,60,100
I have recently start changing it though to:
10,15,20,30,60,100 it gets you to the 10s 10 bet quicker but if you catch a BJ the first 3 hands then if you loose you are up 20-40 dollars!
X's 1, X's 1, X's 2, X's 2, X's 4, X's 6, X's 10
Play it until you loose.
So if your first bet is $10 it would be:
10,10,20,20,40,60,100
I have recently start changing it though to:
10,15,20,30,60,100 it gets you to the 10s 10 bet quicker but if you catch a BJ the first 3 hands then if you loose you are up 20-40 dollars!
List of the most popular Betting Strategies see here: http://sportstatist.com/betting-strategies/
Jump to: