Like you have correctly pointed out, Martingale is essentially a strategy to increase risk at every loosing stake and decrease risk at every winning stake. This strategy originated from France during 18th century and doesn't hold much significance at current technological point of gambling industry where everything is algorithm driven. Martingale works when a game is probability driven and that's how it has started to see a lot of application in games industry.
Instead this strategy may work in forex market. I have found a very nice article which explains this strategy in a very detailed manner but for forex industry. That may help a lot of forex traders to educate themselves on this strategy,
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/forex/06/martingale.asp
But I second the statement of OP that this strategy is not really meant for gambling and especially online gambling!
Topic: Why martingale is PURE SHIT. - page 5. (Read 2144 times)
legendary
Activity: 1358
Merit: 1565
The first decentralized crypto betting platform
Yes, absolutely! That's what I was trying to tell everyone - maximum you can win using this strategy is your INITIAL BET and there comes dilemma: on one hand you want this number to be the biggest possible, because you don't wanna win $1, on the other hand the more you bet the more exponentially you lose in the end. E.g. first bet was $50, that goes up to $1,6k if you get only 6 loses in a row (and we all know that sky is the limit, it can be 12 as well). Therefore, if you constantly play martingale you're doomed, eventually you lose everything.
Yes, and that’s without counting the rake. Let’s say that with those $50 you play a toss-coin-like game in a land-based casino, and they charge you 5% rake on the profit. If you win the initial bet, your net profit is gonna be $47.5. For the second bet it’s gonna be $45, for the third, $40, for the fourth, $30, for the fifth $10, and for the sixth you won’t have any potential profit at all. It will all be loses.
Correct me if I’m not correct.
Its because people are still thinking that they can really take and win a lot of money through martingale. In the long run it won't work and the risk factor is multiplied. So I agree, I don't understand some people's infatuation about this system. I have used this strategy short term and change strategy based on what I think is good that time. No fixed set of strategies, just saying.
Yes, absolutely! That's what I was trying to tell everyone - maximum you can win using this strategy is your INITIAL BET and there comes dilemma: on one hand you want this number to be the biggest possible, because you don't wanna win $1, on the other hand the more you bet the more exponentially you lose in the end. E.g. first bet was $50, that goes up to $1,6k if you get only 6 loses in a row (and we all know that sky is the limit, it can be 12 as well). Therefore, if you constantly play martingale you're doomed, eventually you lose everything.
legendary
Activity: 1358
Merit: 1565
The first decentralized crypto betting platform
We keep getting threads about how martingale or martingale-like strategies work, and no matter how many times I (and others) explain it; we still get people saying that it works.
For example:
Or
With this post, I want to point out and emphasize why it is a pointless strategy: using martingale, you constantly increase your risk to earn proportionally less.
Let’s say that you bet $1 for heads, you toss a coin and lose. For the second bet, you are risking double ($2) to have a net profit of $1. That is the key point and if someone doesn’t understand it I will explain it in more detail. If you lose, in your third bet you are going to risk $4 to have a net profit of $1, and so on. This calculations are made thinking of you playing to toss coins with a fried but if you play in a casino, you have to take into account that the potential profit for one bet is less than 1$.
There is no point in betting for increased risk and decreased potential net profit.
I am sure that we will keep getting shitthreads about how martingale works but I hope some of you understand it and never use that shitstrategy.
For example:
yes, I think the martingale strategy is more suitable for playing dice because by doing this strategy we can manage the betting money we have well even though this strategy is quite risky but this strategy has been widely used by gamblers
Or
... Martingale works in your normal life, but it doesn't work in online gambling where wins are calculated by a computer that does it for all players at once every second.
If you throw a coin and martingale the strategy will seem to work. Try doing it in online gambling like dice and you'll go broke.
If you throw a coin and martingale the strategy will seem to work. Try doing it in online gambling like dice and you'll go broke.
With this post, I want to point out and emphasize why it is a pointless strategy: using martingale, you constantly increase your risk to earn proportionally less.
Let’s say that you bet $1 for heads, you toss a coin and lose. For the second bet, you are risking double ($2) to have a net profit of $1. That is the key point and if someone doesn’t understand it I will explain it in more detail. If you lose, in your third bet you are going to risk $4 to have a net profit of $1, and so on. This calculations are made thinking of you playing to toss coins with a fried but if you play in a casino, you have to take into account that the potential profit for one bet is less than 1$.
There is no point in betting for increased risk and decreased potential net profit.
I am sure that we will keep getting shitthreads about how martingale works but I hope some of you understand it and never use that shitstrategy.
Jump to: