Bitcoin Forum

Before anything else, I would like to define Blackjack as a game of skill or skill-based gambling game.  Means we have more grasp on winnings the more skilled we are in this game.  With this I happen to read an article Titled: The Three Best Blackjack Betting Strategies (https://kiowacasino.com/the-three-best-blackjack-betting-strategies/).  I was somehow surprised when I see that Martingale betting strategy is one of the best betting strategies for Blackjack, I was kinda hesitant to believe it until I realized that BlackJack isn't a game of chance so it is sensible that Martingale Betting will give a better percentage in winning a gambling session.  Here is what the article explains about this strategy.


I am still hesitant about this betting strategy but my rationality thinks it is possible, at least martingale on blackjack is way better than martingale on any luck/chance-based games. How about you what is your thought on Martingale betting strategy used on blackjack? Is it effective for this type of game?

---

[1] https://kiowacasino.com/the-three-best-blackjack-betting-strategies/

other references:
https://upswingpoker.com/the-best-blackjack-betting-strategy-basic-explanation/
https://www.casinoreports.ca/blackjack/best-blackjack-systems/

People take it in different way. I personally see anything with gambling needs to be luck than skills to develop strategies. Even with blackjack, if the player is lucky he'll get the right cards after shuffle as well as while making a draw. So, there are more luck factors that decides the winning/losing. This happens even when you play well with good skills and strategies.

This is about how much are you willing to bet to win your initial bet which is like chasing your initial loss. Sure its a skill-based gambling game but you  are now going to be entering to a luck base strat by doing so. You can win eventually but it could eventually gone the other way if you are not lucky.

You'd  probably reach up to $5K just to win the initial $10 bet you follow martingale with losing streaks. Depends I guess to the gambler.

Bullshit article. I did not see any argument in favor of the fact that the Martingale in Black Jack is in any way different from the Martingale in other gambling games.
There is a simple rule: if you have a winning strategy, then it works without Martingale. If you have a "winning" strategy based on the Martingale, then you are deluded about its winningness and in the end you will lose all the money.

You can start to bet with as low as $1, if you do that and lose 10 times, but losing 10 times means you are losing $512, that is huge. I will prefer to apply it but my strategy of do not use more than what you can afford to lose to bet is working for me, using another strategy may result to me to use gambling to chase money and I know the result may be bad. But what I am thinking is that this can result to winning opportunity though but I may be wrong and I will not advice anyone to do that. For anyone that try it, anytime the person won should just be enough not to continue to bet but waiting till next time.

Effective or not will be based on the result, most people will say a strategy is effective if the result is good but other may say it is not effective because they get bad result. I tried my self martingale strategy in blackjack game when I participated in a contest of profit percentage. What was my result? It was good in some sessions and it was really bad in other sessions. What I want to say is, it is fine to use martingale strategy but we should know that the result will always base on our luck.

Then this strategy is not for me, I'm just a small gambler.

But still, Blackjack is my favorite card game, you can find easily how you can win and I consider it as a game of chance, a provably fair game. Unlike poker which needs skill but is more complicated to play cause there are different pay tables according to the ranking system.

I used to play this before aside from the dice game, but for me, this strategy is not effective in this game, the possibility of losing is always there.

Since blackjack is skill based, the martingale strategy may be effective to use depending on how in depth your skill of the game is. This strategy should be almost exclusive to the professionals as it's application at a stage where you are not confident in your skill level to turn out an outcome favourable for you can mean a loss of your money even more than you could have predicted. Invest quality time in sharpening your skill and knowledge of the game before considering application of the Martingale strategy.

Martingale strategy is never been effective on any game unless you have an infinite bank roll to cover your losses especially when the heavy lose streak occur. Blackjack is a skill based which means you can lose more by  having a poor decision making aside from having a bad card.

This strategy only works for people who have a good self control and huge bank roll due to it’s nature of increasing of base bets whenever you loss.

This is not effective, even if you have an infinite bankroll but do you think the house will allow your to do martingale all the way? How about the limit, I think they can limit every gambler to protect their bankroll too and for them to have the edge all the time.

They are in the business to make money, not to lose money. simple as that.

Well perhaps on a different approach.
It could be blackjack based on skill but it is also more than based on luck upon dealing the cards. If you are not lucky enough it could be your cards will be in a bad situation --though you have enough skills on it, it is useless.
All I can say perhaps OP was very lucky by getting the right card when it was shuffled and that is perhaps actually happened.
So for me --that strategy will not work.

If you play blackjack with a perfect strategy, then you can reduce the house edge to a minimum, which will depend on the exact rule set of the table you are playing at. It is still very much a game of chance though, the house will always have an edge, and no amount of skill or strategy will remove the house edge (unless you are able to card count, which is obviously impossible online or with a continuous shuffler as many casinos now use).

This sentence is absolutely nonsense. You are no more likely to win after a streak of losses than you are to win on any other hand. This is the classic gambler's fallacy. And you never get a "much higher payout" on Martingale. All you ever get is break even plus your original bet, which in this example, will be $5. Doesn't matter if after 10 losing hands you are now betting $5,120 and you win $10,240. If you add up all your bets prior to that win they come out at $10,235, meaning you've just risked $10k to win 5 bucks. ::)

It's not effective for any type of game, but if you are going to use it, then all that matters is finding the game with the smallest house edge. Blackjack played perfectly might well be that game.

And If you don't have a huge bankroll you'll lose because you are chasing a small amount, I hate and love martingale it's a strategy that will excite you but at the same time it will leave you zero in your bankroll, it will not always work the mathematics and the house edge always make the house wins, martingale will not always work in practice and theory, only newbies who opted not to believe will always employ and challenge the belief.

Blackjack still has a house edge, so we will still lose in the long run.
https://edge.twinspires.com/casino-news/the-house-edge-in-blackjack-everything-you-need-to-know/

Winning in blackjack is possible if we do card counting which is prohibited in most casinos.

About the martingale strategy, if this is really working 100%, then everyone will be using it and will just abuse casinos, unfortunately it's not, it does only look attractive but if we apply this in real practice, we wil know that the law of average will happen and that house edge will beat us in the long run.

Well, you're more likely to break even with it since you have some form of control or idea of knowing when you're about to lose or win, but profiting? Honestly, I don't even think it matters that much, Martingale isn't a strategy even for actually profiting, it's just for breaking even at most imo. So with that and the existence of house edge, no matter what the gambler would still lose out in the long run.

This process is Martingale, but the end result is kinda different? Is the writer of the article even familiar with or knows how to use at the very least Martingale? You are NOT likely to win imo, chances always reset to 50/50, and as o_e_l_e_o said, the big win at the end would only ultimately cancel out the losses you needed to reach that win, it's not a profit that would be worth it imo.

Of course, lately I also often see articles and hear about martingale, this system is used by gambling bettors in blackjack or roulette games.

I once asked my friends, how does the Martingale system actually work, or how to do it, they also don't know for sure the Martingale system, he has also just heard of systems like the Martingale being effective in blackjack betting.

But to prove and dispel my curiosity about the Martingale system, I tried to find several sources, finally I got as below.
• The Martingale Myth: Does This Betting System Really Work? (https://www.casino.org/blog/the-martingale-myth-does-this-betting-system-really-work/)

Of course, I can conclude, if the Martingale system is in fact what I quoted, it means that the risk is greater and what many people say does not fully work the Martingale system, contrary to what we have heard so far.

I might stick to my strategy as usual, if I'm playing blackjack and roulette.

To be honest, the martingale strategy really sucks when you are playing a luck based game.
The amount of losses considering the house edge will eat up all your balance in your account.
But since you mentioned that you are playing black jack which involve skills then it also depends on how good you are at the game.
If you think you are pretty good at the game then you can try your luck with this strategy.
I would recommend to go for it but with smaller amounts and gradually increase your base bets after a few consecutive wins.

I've used martingale strategy in bj for many years, i had some success with it for some time but also had some major losses as loosing 8 to 12 hands in a row tends to happen quite a bit especially during daily long sessions, that would usually put a big dent on my bankroll.

True, everything is still based on luck, although others may argue that Black Jack is more of a skill base or at least if you have skills like card counting but still not guarantee that you can win specially if you have like 8 or more hands that you lost already. Also depends on the bank roll itself, obviously. So there's no perfect strategy as others say, really depends on how you are going to manage your bankroll. If you win base don this system then good, but it's not going to be like this always, sooner or later the house edge will caught up on you.

Depending on the gambler, if he is good at blackjack games then he can easily use any strategy including Martingale, Blackjack is not a difficult game but also not easy even though this game only focuses on dealer cards. I mean when going to hit but previous you must predict a closed dealer card, Increasing the bet when you lose is also not bad, it's even better to get a card that can be split.

I don't think that Martingale would be good as betting strategy, because you need a fat wallet to sustain it. Anyway, Blackjack is also a game of strategy and patience, so, I don't think that this kind of strategy would be

cool with that kind of game (You've also to consider that I'm not a lover of martingale because there are many risk of loss).

If it's possible then give it a try but of course, it should be your own choice to try it, so far it's being frowned upon by the community, it's hard to prove that martingale has a good winning ratio on any game of chance or even skill, we have to take gambling as it is, have some fun be entertained don't force your way to win, gambling should be fun so when you got up you feel relaxed and not stress because of the money you lose.

there is no strategy that really works in gambling especially playing blackjack, whatever the formula, or the strategy if someone plays for unlimited time and bets with the house, then I make sure you will lose a lot of money. Actually there is nothing wrong with the Martingale strategy, it's just that one has to limit betting and stop when enough regardless of losing or winning. The most influential factor in gambling is luck nothing else.

Martingale as a betting strategy in the core should work.What I mean by that is that if we have a huge balance and start from the lowest possible bet and keep increasing the bet after each loss then one time we will win,a good example is if we roll the dice in roulette 100 times based on the law of probability it is impossible to fall 100 times red or 100 times black on a physical casino so out of 100 bets we should be able to win one in order to get back all the money plus the initial small bet winnings.This works in an ideal world where betting limits are not in place but unfortunately they are both in online casinos and offline casinos.The same is in place for Blackjack.

Starting with just $0.10 if possible or with altcoin like TRX and it might just save the gambler from big loss. Probably for dice, blackjack has higher minimum bet so a gambler is set to lose big. $1000 is not enough balance to play this strategy but you win when you stop after luck favors you.  Not a recommended strategy nor this game.

No it isn't. It is unlikely, yes, but it isn't impossible by any means.

If you double your bet every time you lose you do with Martingale, even if your first bet was only a single satoshi, then you can only make 50 losing bets before you breach the 21 million coin limit of all the bitcoin in existence. And even if you win a bet, your maximum winnings is still only ever going to be a single satoshi.

Martingale only makes sense if you have infinite money. Since nobody does, you will lose everything if you run it for long enough.

If the Martingale strategy worked, the big players would constantly beat the casino, but it does not happen because the casino limits the maximum bet. In addition, you should understand that each successive bet has nothing to do with the previous one, so it may happen that a row of very many losses. Just enough so that you run out of money. At least it happened to me just like that. So don't count on this strategy to lead you to winnings.

it can be a devastating strategy.
it is not unusual to get long "trails" of unfavorable hands.
Imagine you take 10 consecutive losing hands. Starting at $ 10, the first hand will get you:
-10
-20
-40
-80
-160
-320
-640
-1280
-2560
-5120
A  total of $10230 loss ! You would risk such a sum to really win what amount? The initial 10 dollars?

In practice you would always play to make up for a previous disadvantage and never to "increase" your real win.
it seems to me a destructive game mode ...

In the end of it, it all boils down to bankroll. for it to work, you would need an incredible amount of bankroll so you wouldn't run out of money while you are on a losing streak. and if you are a high roller you should hope that you wouldn't hit the maximum bet limit(which almost all casinos may it be online or not have) while you are on a losing streak since you'd have no choice but to either keep betting on their maximum bet until you win a round, start the strategy again or completely abandon the strategy.

Martingale is not a winning strategy at any casino, and casinos are not that stupid. Any player who thinks they can win this way will lose their money in no time.
no accurate strategy can beat the casino, and if there is one. As you said, there will be a lot of people using that strategy or any strategy that will put the casino out of business.
if anything, it's probably down to luck or really getting the hang of it and doesn't mean never losing.

Yup this is definitely one of the worst strategies to do martingale (even though all will eventually cause a large loss some ideas like resetting every 8 bets greatly increases the time it takes for you to lose your entire bankroll).

The safest way to play blackjack seems to be by using the same size bet each time - I've seen a lot of people on YouTube at brick and mortar casinos be able to stream for 10 hours+ and still end up withdrawing $7-9k in chips with an initial $10k down on the table (often playing with 2 or 3 hands too).

Pretty sure that they wont be playing all BJ for 10+ hours of stream but yeah it varies though. Most streamers tend to play on BJ because the main point on streaming is to prolong the stream thus getting more revenue from the stream therefore playing on a game with low house edge tend to be the best strategy for them and also viewers love it


Eactly, every martingale is just pure stupidity though

As long as you keep winning it's no problem. But you have to keep in mind that there are sites that work with a certain limit on their casino. And if, for example, you can only bet $ 500, then you can no longer double from 1,2,4,8,16,32,64,128,512. So you would already be stuck there. You could also use a martingale principle at a basketball game or football game with more or less than that many goals scored. But you can also lose 10 times in a row and then what?

I don't know how to play blackjack so I can't say if this article is right or not. but speaking of sports betting this martingale strategy does not work in sports betting, at least in my opinion. for example in sports betting games with odds of @1.50 are good, because in a way the bookmakers are already favoring the team with odds of @1.50, but from a profitable point of view in the long term these odds do not pay off and if if we add martingale to this equation then the person will be bankrupt in a few days. I just gave a small example that martingale is dangerous in sports betting, I don't know if blackjack works or not. I can't say that because I don't play blackjack, but I can say with conviction that using martingale in sports betting is a ruin

The article is attached with the gambling fallacy of "eventually we will win", so automatically the belief that the Martingale Betting Strategy as one of the best strategy is a fallacy itself.  Like the earlier replies, it needs a limitless bankroll but the problem with that is Casino has bet limits.  It is easily countered with continuous shuffle where the deck refreshes every single bet so card counting would be impossible to apply.

This is true and doesnt matter on what game you are involving into even on a strategic based on which Martingale method wont really give out assurance for you to win since we know that
losing streak could really be long and plus having those max bet limit with those sites which does simply means that you cant totally able to follow and ending up losing huge amounts
if you couldnt able to hit a win on that particular series of bets on using martingale.This had been a common method since from the beginning of time but there are people who do
really love on pushing through into this kind of method and do realize in the end that it wasnt really effective at all but hey its peoples money then its their right on what
strategy they could be using.

An excellent demonstration of the absurdity of the Martingale system! I think one more corollary should be mentioned: when using Martingale (even if you have infinite money) your winnings as a percentage of your deposit will be zero (infinitely small). Is it worth starting in this case?
Probably the sponsor of that article is a casino that lures new simpleton players  ;D

Well maybe, but looking at the article they are not encouraging player to use the Martingale betting system if a player has a low bankroll.

The article is about "best betting strategy" not a best-winning strategy, though I think they put up martingale because it is one of the popular methods used by those playing Blackjack.  The title should be the Three Most Best Popular Betting Strategy because I can't find martingale as one of the best betting strategies since the majority of us frown on this betting method and most often leaves player's bankroll easily depleted.

Before choosing any game to apply martingale, gamblers should think about doing it in reverse. Reverse martingale works best on min 2x multiplier since chances are high to hit back-to-back winning streaks, unlike bigger multipliers. I have used a gambling bot to bet on roulette 2x but at some point it busts the whole bankroll due to unbeatable house edge. Anyways, blackjack or other skill-based games don't increase our chances no matter which strategy you apply to profit. Better to simulate the strategy with a "perfect Blackjack chart" before doing it with real bets.

I agree that the use of martingale is beneficial in a game where the player's chance of winning does not depend solely on luck.
In games based only on luck, the player will always lose, as the math points to the house's victory, the use of martingale will only delay these losses and give the player a false sense of winning.

However, in a card game where strategy is mixed with skills, the martingale can indeed bring good results if used wisely and the player knows how to impose limits.

I do not believe in martingale as pointed out by others here. The risks exponentially become higher the longer you lose streak.

And as you point out, blackjack is a skill-based game. Meaning you can win with skill alone, and if luck favors you, you can win more. I do not think you still needs to use martingale in it. What you need is to hone your skills more and practice counting without the casino catching you.

Besides, the tip came from a casino. Do you think they will give you something that will make them lose money? I don't think so.

I couldn't have put it in a better way, it's so true what you just said, if you have a good strategy, you don't need the martingale system, and blackjack is mostly luck just like all casino games, and speaking on martingale system, you can win a couple of times but you'll end up losing in the long run.

From my experience, it'd be better to look for another strategy because even though blackjack requires a bit of skill it's still not enough to make any strategy that effective since blackjack still has that luck factor as you rely on the cards you get. I get that it's better to have skills when playing blackjack but to me, it seems like you're just making the most out of a certain situation since you can't really do much against certain rounds whenever a dealer gets so much good cards in consecutive rounds.

This is silly to me. Martingale remains as Martingale regardless of which game it is used. Regardless if it is blackjack or not, Martingale will prove to be a wrong strategy in the long run, unless if you have a very deep pocket that you can absorb a long losing streak and could still manage to double every succeeding bet.

But, make no mistake, it is wrong to classify blackjack as a skill-based game. It isn't a skill-based game. There are indeed skills used in the game, but your cards are given to you randomly. So there is still a big amount of luck needed for you to win consistently.

I guess the creator of that article thought that because there is skill involved in playing blackjack, the player has a higher chance of winning rather than just completely relying on luck. I guess he never really factors in how much fund is actually needed or the rules casinos have put in place.

compare to the majority of casino games? yeah, I'd consider blackjack somewhat skill base game.

For me I dont see any difference in using martingale strategy on Blackjack or any other games. However there's an advantage if you're playing a game that is not only relying on luck, in short skills and strategy has a participation in order to maximize your chance to win. Its a risky strategy but can bring profit if the player has a huge bankroll and can bear losses even consistently. Because you cant tell how much money you need to spend first before winning the game.

It is very effective for the Casino to make money at your expense. And the answer is in your quote

This is simply not true because you do not take into account the total amount bet. The bottom line is that you bet increasing amounts to win the initial amount, which is small compared to the increasing stakes. Smaller and smaller.

Why martingale is PURE SHIT. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4963525.0)

Just like any other strategies/algorithms/patterns, martingale is also useless against the house edge and the other limitations. The casino protects itself with the house edge and most of them won't let you wager more than a certain amount. (maximum bet limit)

When a player uses martingale, he mathematically ruins himself.  Since blackjack is also a game where player is against the house, the limitations are pretty much there. There isn't much of a difference than playing dice using martingale.

Better in blackjack than in dice? Possibly. But for a martingale strategy to work it requires a large amount of capital. There could be instances that the house will be on a good roll and keeps on winning every set of game. Ending up with nothing more to bet will cut the strategy leaving you with nothing in return.
But yes, it's better used in a game like that where there's a chance you might get 1/10 win. Pulling off that one win will clear things back with profits and then reset.

Regardless of the capital you have, I don't think it will work. For example, if you do martingale strategy on dice and let's say you have an infinite bankroll, do you think the casino will not limit your bet? I think it's a wrong perception that the martingale strategy would really work since a limit is always implemented in every casino.

yes I agree with this statement, many gamblers are stuck with the martingale technique, many believe that with a big bag they will be able to overcome a losing streak. However, many forget that the house has certain limits on each bet. especially for the game of blackjack, 10 times a person's losing streak will not be able to return the funds that have been staked. so I don't think there is a strategy that really guarantees victory, including the martingale. 
so I guess the answer is not effective.

Gambling alone is a game of chance and luck. Whether players come to gamble with prepared skills and strategies, i don't think they can easily win bets without luck in them. Although there are games that are sometimes considered skill based, but in reality the fact that you gamble, you should have more luck other then skills for it to work. Martingale may increase our chances to win but its certainly very risky that it could be a source of your quick losses and leaves you empty handed.

It doesn't matter how big your final bet is with Martingale, you get your initial bet back, that's it. There are some variants but it is not the OP case.

Sometimes it's not just about applying a strategy, people complain a lot about martingale, but they have no idea of ​​additional information needed, they just understand that it's just doubling the bet and you winner.

In the case of blackjack, like roulette, they are successful but because you have a bankroll and an adequate bet, also do not forget to manage the odds, it is important to be more successful and avoid unnecessary long losing streaks that have a psychological effect on negative, depending on how experienced you are or how adequate your banking is.

I do not use martingale because of the size of my bet (Blackjack), it would break my bankroll, sometimes I have lost up to 6 times in a row and the calculations do not give me to apply it, it is easier for me to lose 7 times and then recover at long time.

It is a classic mistake of those who apply Martingale to think I have lost "x" times this one that comes if I win and that is when the variance does its thing.
In the case of roulette, it does not accept "skills", but in Blackjack you can "change" those odds of losing.

Then, retreat, stand, etc. they make the difference of not taking a loss +,  that they will make the next bet put you in limits that you do not manage and then they make you play badly, betting $500, $1000 in a BJ hand when you are not used to that size of bet, so it distracts you.

In any case, I think that everything always depends on the scenarios and what you want, so wagers, a winning streak, etc.
In any case, always do the  game calculations and be aware that if the variance decides that day to change things, if your limit is $1,000, a variation of one more loss means that you should have $2,000, by the way, if you have the capacity for large bets, find out what limits maximums the table has, "you can't double the bet", it is "fatality^{Mortal Kombat : )} for the strategy.

---

Considerations:

• Martingale is a game strategy, it is not a 100% winning ticket as they want you to understand, the strategy works for any scenario, not for any individual.
• Learn to play BJ.
• Use play money with that strategy before using your real money.
• Know and study the odds of the BJ.

People should put up into their minds on whats martingale and how it should be treated.This isnt some sort of that holy grail where some people do believe on.They would really be finding
and realize those things once they have been fucked up with martingale strategy even on a BJ game it wont really be giving out guarantees that you cant really be having a long losing streak.
So better make use of this strategy on your own risk and dont push up yourself too much because you are indeed just trying these strategy whether you do end up on profitable
or getting wrecked.So the best thing to be done is knowing on when to quit when you are in greens.

Somewhat, yes. Because as I've said there are indeed skills used in blackjack. But those skills are secondary to luck. Whatever your skills in blackjack are if you are given a bad hand compared to the dealer's hand, you would lose. So the primary factor is still luck. Your skill doesn't help you if the dealer's hand is an ace and a 10.

Of course if you compare blackjack with roulette for example, blackjack is less of a luck game. But it doesn't mean luck doesn't have a significant factor to the point of calling the game skill-based.

The article clearly stated that means for serious players who are willing to put up whatever amount it takes to chase their losses small or big amount, anything that chases your losses on an ongoing session or in the past sessions are considered risky, it's not logical to chase a $5 loss on your $1000 bankroll, it takes away the fun and sets you out in risky behavior to regain what is lost and take profit.

Blackjack, dice, or any other games with speed in each round will have the same finale.
It will all depend on how deep the well of money you have as it is a martingale strategy.
A lot of trouble comes when a bad streak of losses happens. It might work though if you are using a currency with lesser value, that way you could start with dust, and even if it ends up in a losing streak the online casino will have no way to limit you.
Never used this strategy as it's expensive. I might use this one made by @seoincorporation although it will be time-consuming.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5406456.0

If you don't know how to treat losing streak, this strategy will give you same outcome, it will wrecked your balance and burned everything inside your bankroll, it's more on your emotions that will dominate your game, once you experienced long losing streak your adrenaline to recover in the quicker manner will blind you up.

It's a strategy, but not all can utilize this system, either you tweak it and find some changes to favor you.

The best thing is to make sure that you understand the risk and you know when to quit to avoid losing all your money.

That is the summary of what I said in my previous post, but what surprises me is that, despite the fact that what we are talking about has been known for 3 centuries, there are still many people who believe that it is a good strategy. If I were a casino owner or had invested in casino bankrolls as I did some time ago, I would be very happy to see how people are self-deluded to explain to themselves that martingale and its variants are good strategies.

I will post a source in Spanish but I will put the text translated into English:

Martingale (https://economipedia.com/definiciones/martingala.html#:~:text=La%20historia%20de%20la%20martingala%20se%20remonta%20al%20siglo%20XVIII,se%20encuentra%20cerca%20de%20Marsella.)

'The history of the martingale dates back to the 18th century. At that time, the martingale was regarded by the players themselves as a naive strategy and a strategy of rude minds. Its name originates from the French village of Martigues (martingales in French), which is located near Marseille.'

<...>

'An example that illustrates this strategy well is the heads or tails bet with a coin. Let's bet 1 euro on heads, and if it comes out wrong we double it.

An example that illustrates this strategy well is the heads or tails bet with a coin. Let's bet 1 euro on heads, and if it comes out wrong we double it.

We bet on heads. We lose Bet: 1 euro
We bet on heads. We lose Bet: 2 euros
We bet on heads. We lose Bet: 4 euros
We bet on heads. We lose Bet: 8 euros
We bet on heads. We lose Bet: 16 euros
We bet on heads. We win Bet: 32 euros

On the sixth throw we finally win, we recover the 32 euros invested and we also win 32 euros. The real profit is the result of subtracting from the 32 euros of profit all that was lost previously.

Winning = 32 - 16 - 8 - 4 -2 -1 = 1 euro'

Betting 63 euros to win 1 is objectively a bad strategy.

In general, it was a joke, but it follows from the logic of the article that this strategy is beneficial. Therefore, a naive player can believe this and try to play this way either by lowering the initial bet (thus he will be able to increase the bet by martingale for a while) or by borrowing money to play with a large bankroll. Both options will bring disappointment, but the second is extremely dangerous.

When i was a noob back then on which i do really have those kind of common thoughts on using martingale.Yes, you might not really be able to be busted up on early phase but once you do find yourself
too confident on using and ending up on leaving your pc open for some hours and believing that you are profiting then its good if you havent busted up yet but in most cases we know that
losing streaks could really make your capital vanish out into thin air and ending up on getting frustrated and would tend to make out more deposits just because you would be chasing up
with your losses and this is what casinos do really like.  :D

Every time I hear someone suggesting the Martingale strategy, it implies that the person must have a huge capital at his disposal. The good thing about it implementing and integrating it into BlackJack is that, by odds, the Martingale strategy can pay itself in the process. As you bet more in BlackJack, the chances of a person winning and getting a favorable hand increases during the process which makes this strategy fairly effective.

The only problem that I see in this strategy is that, the odds may also be against your favor which may result into using large and large amounts of capital. The more you lose, the bigger the capital that you use in this strategy which makes this not beginner and newbie friendly to all.

Although blackjack is a card game, I think I still can't agree with that. I really don't know why but for me, the only card game that is based on skill is poker but that must be a traditional poker or the ones that is only being played offline.

Maybe I can agree with you that blackjack can be a skill based game if that was being played offline because I always think that all online casino games are rigged but in terms of strategy, yes that was true that a martingale can also be used in blackjack, not only in blackjack actually but to almost any other gambling games as well. If I remember the games where I use martingale are keno, limbo and plinko.

Hi,  :)
It's a strategy! and mathematically it works, there is no doubt about that,  is it?

Note that I started my thread with the phrase you quote, it is simple and concise, that is, I do not support its use, nor do I say no.

This strategy can be efficient, effective, good or bad, it depends on each person, it is what I try to explain in the rest of my idea.


It's definitely not for you, but it worked. You get the point. beware! I repeat I only analyze the situation or the scenarios, remember this that I already wrote:

"This strategy can be efficient, effective, good or bad, it depends on each person."

Conclusion for you, bad, maybe not effective but efficient.

Then another player sees things like "wager", increasing the bet and getting more profit.
Another player reduces the bet 10 times, adapts the Ev- and intends to do it several times until obtaining certain profits.
Another player comes up with something else with that strategy and it works for him, another player misapplies it to things like sports betting and doesn't even take 50/50 into account, etc.

E.G. is like the coin toss, you toss the coin 100 times and it only lands tails once and right on the 99th toss, oh! shit failed martingale?.
Really!, fail your strategy by not having enough bankroll to weigh those kinds of odds.

In conclusion, we must proclaim "study Martingale and learn to use it or not."

---

^{Martingale (probability theory)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martingale_(probability_theory)}

It all depends on what you mean by the word "works". If you mean that, on average, players who use this strategy lose money, then yes, it works (for the benefit of casino owners). Why do you say that the effectiveness of the strategy depends on the person? If this is a real strategy and not a set of misconceptions, then it should work the same for everyone. In addition, it can be formalized and used without a person at all, but with the help of some kind of automation. And by the way, Martingale has already been tested both by individuals and with the help of automation - it does not work.

Martingale in Black Jack : doubling every time you loose? What about the cards you have ? How will you consider the luck factor? It's skills as well therefore if your skills are god awful and you are doubling every time you are loosing then you will loose a lot honestly.
The amount of money that you would use would be a lot as well and it's about who can afford that much, therefore at the end of the day not only you might end up loosing so much money because you might not have money to complete the whole martingale system but at the same time you cannot really take into account the luck factor.

Just like what famososMuertos stated, it is a strategy, depending on the person's skill/luck, he may opt to use it or not. If the gambler is skill is too awful then using martingale would be a disaster to his bankroll but if he is so damn good with luck, then it won't be wrong to use the martingale betting method.  In short, the use of the martingale betting strategy is conditional.


Mathematically it is true if we got a long red streak. But if we got green in every 3 - 4 red streak and we are using a martingale variation of increasing bet 3x each loss then I think we are all good with a bigger profit.

Even ignoring the house edge and assuming a completely fair 50%/50% chance to win/lose each game, then you will go bust very quickly. As anyone who has ever gambled will tell you, runs of 3-4 reds are exceedingly common. With a 50/50 game, you have a 1 in 8 chance of any 3 rolls being all red and a 1 in 16 chance of any 4 rolls being all red. Those are not good odds. If you change the multiplier from 2x to 3x, all you are doing is reducing the number of reds in a row you can hit and speeding up the rate at which you will run out of money.

I used to remember those old days where Yolo is the last resort when losing streak hits me up, just a quick smile and a scratch on my head when the outcome turns against me, either adding or topping up additional balance to continue or to stop and wondering how come I lost everything, regretting that it should be better to quit when the system still favoring you.

But it's too late to realize as everything was busted and the only thing left is the regret that will haunt you for some time. ::) :P

I think this statement is slightly wrong. From all other skill based gambling games (like poker), Blackjack is the game with the biggest amount of "luck". You can play on pure skill only in case when you a good mathematician and count cards and probabilities right on the game. Like Edward O. Thorp, you can see here his video - Edward O. Thorp — Beating Blackjack and Roulette (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNvz91Jyzbg)

In all other cases is luck-based game the same as some roulette.


Doesn't work, since you can't obtain all money in the world.
Do not thanks, it's easy.

It can also be very effective. You can also have a really long good streak and make significant gains. But there comes a time when you also have a long loss steak. The problem is that after losing 8x you have to bet the 9th time that you will actually win only minimally because the concept is based on winning your bet from bet number 1. have to bet a huge amount to win only 5 eur, for example. You would be better off applying Martingale to football matches than in a casino.

Martingale is rooted in bullshit, it is false and only idiots regurgitating it thinking they've come up with some miracle strategy to dig themselves out of a deep hole would believe it. It ignores a fundamental fact that the house will always have an advantage in every game - or what would be the point in them offering it, they've got bills to cover. It also ignores the fact that you will run out of money long before the casino, so they can afford to keep matching your doubled bet until you run out of money. People projecting this garbage as having some shred of truth are the real hindrance to it being condemned to the garbage heap and utterly forgotten, as it should be.

Blackjack is one of my most favourite card games after poker, I have been playing it for years and tried out a lot different strategies. Most strategies in blackjack fail to increase our chances of winning. The only real strategy that is consistent in bringing our chance of winning above 50% is card counting. Card counting is very hard to master without getting noticed by casinos, and if you don't want to get banned by a casino better don't do it regularly. As for martingale betting it's very popular in roulette and dice game. I like the strategy and think it's working most of the time. There are two issues with martingale betting strategies, first out bankroll is not infinite and secondly the casinos limit the maximum amount we can bet on at a table. Because of that we can't make too many bets in a row, it's best to start small so we have the most chances of making a profit.

It's effective if you play it right since after all, the game is not just a luck-based game. Just do your best on every round especially if your losing streak is now growing continuously to the point that it will reach already x5 and your bet at stake is now higher.

If you lose here for about over 5x streak, and it is always what happened, then don't play Blackjack anymore lol.

Choose other games instead as you don't have any skills in that game. Imagine losing over 5x several times in a row in strategy-based games. That's worst.

Hesitancy means you are not sure if you have a chance to beat the house edge but you can proceed and check if martingale can help you win, even if its proven thousands of times that doubling your bet or martingale is still a 50/50 chance to win or get busted, people are very persistent in using a martingale, all I know is martingale can excite you but do not use it to challenge the house edge my own experienced in martingale is very worse 15 straight losses wiping all my tokens I've earned from bounty campaign for 4 months in just 5 minutes using this strategy.

At which game did you encounter 15 straight losses precisely? It would be surprising you got that at BJ especially if you are not a bad player. I think the martingale strategy could be applied to a hot shoe if you have counting enough cards before, but it's certainly better to just raise your stake in this case. Using it at freebet blackjack could also gives better results since you get free splits and then more chances to break losing streak.  

Yes, don't excite yourself as Martinfail will lead you to a worse nightmare, not just you but many gamblers who have same sentiments I have mine but the longest losing that I've experienced using martinfail is 10, after that, I only played with my own strategy and I forget martinfail from my system.

Though it's still on your personal take, martinfail might give you some wins if you are good at controlling your appetite with gambling.

But be aware not all the time the system will allow you to win, worse the martinfail system will mostly lead you to lose.

Martingale as one of the best blackjack betting strategies? Forget about it. Martingale won't help you win either in blackjack or in any other game in the long run.

I'm not saying Martingale is a completely bad strategy altogether. Many people have been using it. I use it myself. But only with the full awareness that it is not a strategy that guarantees anything.

Martingale is as good as gambling itself. Sure, you can try it. But it is either you recover your loss and even earn a little profit or you will go home quickly with nothing.

On point, In fact it might amplify the user losses once he has a bad card streak because he keeps increasing his bet for a consecutive losing hands. Casino has very huge bankroll that is impossible for normal player even whales to empty it. This is the reason why martingale will never be helpful for a long run games because player bankroll has a limitation while don’t have.

And also the max bet is another safety precautions of casino to make sure that they will not loss to players even with huge bank roll. Because there’s a limitation on the amount that you can bet to recover your losses while there’s a human error which will surely bring down players to sure lose overtime.

This result is easy to achieve in any game if you have chosen the appropriate odds (if you bet not on x2 but on x1.1, then of course a series of 15 defeats in a row will wait a very long time). For example, when playing dice choosing <49.5% you will get similar results. In Black Jack, the house edge varies depending on the variations of the rules and is close to 0.5% at best. Whether you are a good player or a bad one, if you play long enough, you will easily see a series of 15 defeats in a row, and if you used Martingale, it will bankrupt your deposit.

Is either you win more or lose more with the martingale style of betting because it involves you betting in consecutively in accumulation. You only end up being carried away with the potential profit that you are aiming for while if you miss it like you said, you come running home fast. There is nothing bad about martingale though for a big player who has more money to through in because he is making more chances for himself to win or recover the losses.

Martingale has many flaws but one of the most obvious is the max bet allowed by the casinos, casinos know of the martingale strategy and an easy way to counter it is by setting a maximum amount of money you can risk on each bet.

This is effective because as we know in the traditional martingale strategy each time you lose you double your bet, so sooner or later you will reach a point in which you will lose several times in a row to the point your next bet will have to be higher than the maximum limit, and at that point your martingale strategy gets negated since you will not be able to recover all the money you have wagered in a single bet.

This is not the fault of the casino that they have maximize for the player the potential to bet and win. It is left for the gambler to choose between guning for the profits at a roll or play one after the other to estimate and balance the risk appetite and profit longing for. This is why we need to bet as we can bear the risk.


It is always a business for the casino and no credit play is allowed so automatically when you are short of fund then you have limit to what you can gamble and if eventually you are not able to come back from running low then you come back next time  ;D

Correct, casino took advantage to counter martingale system, the chance that you will be having a lot of losing strict is very possible while playing inside the house, and with that limitations you won't be able to double your bet and you'll be force to bet only the amount that the house allows you, it will be an additional aggressiveness since you are into a losing side.

House understands that inside gambler's mind, they will keep trying to recover in a quicker way, in if shit happens to you instead
of recovering, you'll again suffer from another losing streak that will suck the entire amount inside your wallet.

The major flow of martingale is that it is very expensive.  It needs a huge fund to operate successfully and Casino thinks that this kind of strategy might be exploited by people with limitless bankroll so Casino saw this reason why they limit bets on their platform.


Indeed the bet limit is very effective against the martingale betting strategy.  Plus the house edge makes it more difficult for martingale strategy.

This is not even that the casino has influence as such over the amount of game or martingale strategy you use but if you run out of resources then of course you won't be able to play multiple games anymore but to play within the limit you have. People use martingale because to want to quick profit or accumulated profit.

I'd rather not use this kind of martingale betting strategy ever again, do you think this is a quick profit method? Of course not, the opposite will happen. I don't consider this as effective, the chance of getting lost over, again and again, is more possible.
I will not risk high bets just to win a base bet.

OP to be honest I have never applied that strategy to a blackjak game but maybe I can say that the martingale strategy will not be effective in the long term. I wouldn't use that strategy for many occasions but it might be worth a try and get some luck on craps, crashes, or maybe sports betting.

So far I'm not familiar with the martingale strategy, so it's definitely not working for me. But anyway, I think it might be good for some very lucky people if they manage to win on their umpteenth try.

On very few occasions I have been with a game of martingale in the strategy playing Black Jack, but from my own experience it has not gone very well for me, I do not know if I have applied the strategy at a bad moment, I would not know how to tell what the moment is more suitable to do it, but I feel that I still need it, and I think that the martingale strategy is too dangerous, because it is very easy to lose everything. However, I greatly admire those who apply this strategy and do well, and they manage to be very successful, but I think it is a very risky, very reckless strategy, thanks to this I hardly apply it.

In a personal opinion, I once applied the martingale in a game of poker, or it could be said that the martingale is applied when you make very high bets and each time they are superior to each other, under which, it has given me very good results , but after I take the risk and if it is beneficial for me, I still regret it, ´because I feel that I have been irresponsible, and even though the adrenaline feels 1000%, it is not good to take this type of risk when you can enjoy the game much more, I think this could kill the illusion of any player who is starting out in poker and the risk makes him end up with nothing.

Again, it boils down on your capital and your risk appetite, for some maybe just used this strategy if you started on a winning and maybe just go for 3 or 4 successive runs (reverse martingale) and that's it.

But if you wanted to take full advantage and willing to go all in and attempt more runs, it's up to you. Nevertheless, there is no perfect strategy and casino knows that if you are a whale and have big capital, you might attempt this strategy so they put a limit for such bets.

I think the reason why martingale doesn't work in the long run is because there is an house edge and this makes the casino won the longer the player places a bet. Like you, I never tried martingale on black jack but I only use it on a dice game and I think that it feels very weird if I will apply the method on any other games. It's been a long time since I abandoned this strategy and whenever I play dice now, I just bet flat using the auto bet feature. I feel that the game is more fairer that way than the other.

If you're not familiar with a certain start then you better not use it for a real game as there is a big chance that you can lose but you better practice it first in the demo version of the game or by using some play money if possible.

It's not really a "bad moment" kind of thing imo, though it's just the martingale is a really bad strategy to use. It isn't really a strategy that improves the chances of you winning, nor does it improve the chances of you breaking even. It's just a strategy that says "IF you win even once, you get all your money back". I had to bold the "IF" because that IF encompasses the fact that no your chances of winning isn't increasing and no, your profit realization isn't anything big actually, it just lets you break even. It's not even about doing well, it's just you having enough money to reach that big IF moment so that you can get everything back.

Yeah, I doubt that "strategy" would work. All casino has an house edge, for which in the long run you will be losing your money to the house no matter what strategy you use. Blackjack does depend on some skill, but most of them are based on luck. You might be luck on first few rounds using the martingale strategy, but keep gambling using the same strategy, you will end up with having almost nothing left with you. The best and most effective strategy is to quit when you are winning or if you have lost a lot.

The knowledge itself can be used as your advantage when using this strategy, I mean if you have good control with your appetite with how much to set your target both win and lose amount, you may have good result but long term and keep playing without any restrictions or control house edge is the key factor where house always win, and sooner or later using martingale will annoyed you especially if losing streak shows up unexpectedly. The long red will keep you from pushing forward and will lead you to Yolo and lose everything after.

Martingale is a valid strategy when it comes to gambling, it's not a guaranteed win but it helps to recover all previous losses with winning one game. In Blackjack the most basic strategy has a winning chances of around 42%, with more advanced strategies this can be increased to 45% and higher. But even the best strategy will remain below 50%, only card counting is a valid strategy that will bring our winning chances to above 50% consistently. So the more Blackjack we play the closer our results will be to the average numbers. With that in mind we can run a martingale strategy on top of any advanced Blackjack strategy. The drawbacks of martingale strategies are they require a lot of time to make a decent profit, because of fairly small bet sizes and you need a large bankroll to cover a losing streak. As long as we can avoid a losing streak that is so long that it wipes us out we will be fine. The important thing is to not look at martingale as a strategy that will work 100%, there can be outlier and tail events that will be very costly.

 

martingale requires high patience. and no one can do that.. in the end the casino wins again

That's not the most obvious flaw. The most obvious one is to think that continuing to double the bet in order to recover the initial bet is a good strategy for anything at all.
Betting $1, then $2, then $4, $8, $16, $32 etc to win $1 net is pretty dickheaded.

The martingale strategy in blackjack does not allow you to beat the casino if you play often. 

Yes, if you only play one game, you will most likely win it.  But most likely you will want to play a few games.  And that will lead you to failure.  There are no guaranteed winning strategies in gambling based on luck. 

Martingale is a good strategy for players who do not like to lose very often, but like to lose rarely, but large sums of money.  Such people can use the martingale strategy.

the problem of working or not I think depends on luck too. using a progressive strategy like martingale is actually quite effective in black jack games (with a note of being lucky). 

the real problem is self-limitation, sometimes we don't really know when is the right time to stop playing, especially when we are getting consecutive wins, yes this is a common problem regardless of the betting system someone uses when gambling. or even the opposite, we can run out of money before winning.

and some of the fact that houses usually have a minimum bet limit that we might reach if we really have an unfavorable loss and I think it's hard to say to be able to recover all losses.

true, it requires patience but what martingale's strategy really requires is an extremely huge fund, without it, you'll eventually lose. also, aside from that, online casinos and physical casinos have put a maximum bet rule on their games which further makes the martingale strategy useless.

You need huge funds if you aim to win because for this you can extend your time and make things right when you are in losing side, but actually if you just want to have fun you can use small amount of money and bet minimum amount for sure you will enjoy the game for sure many players do this.

Absolutely, even if we have unlimited fund then we will fail while doing martingale strategy once we get a long lose streak and we reach the max bet/profit in the casino. There is no strategy that guarantee us to win in gambling, the only thing that make a strategy works is a luck regardless what game we are playing.

Am not sure if this is applicable in Black jack but it has been proven that Martingale is only for those who have a Big or huge capital to bet in and small time gamblers wont afford doing it so this is only a limited chances .
and also its not promoted for the majority of gamblers as we knew we are mostly looking for happiness and also for small profit and then go out of the table .

Yes, because even if you can be patiently waiting for your win yet you already lose the amount for doubling your bet then this strategy will be over .

As long as there's a house edge, it's hard to win if we are looking for consistency, but if we are lucky, we have to make sure we go all in so we can have a bigger profit. Winning does not happen most of the time in gambling, we are just gamblers, we are not in the position to make money, we spend and casinos are the ones making money, that's very simple.

Luck with good self-control. I mean, if you know how to work with luck, you will be able to maximize your profits. Even you have a huge amount of bankroll there's no guarantee that you will be able to win against the house, remember that there's limitation that house implemented for their advantages, once you hit that particular amount you can't continue doubling or increasing your bet.

Which will add frustrations and aggressiveness inside you. Being out of control will favor the house side, un-control betting will lead you to lose your entire bankroll.

It sounds like if the player keeps his composure it will save his bankroll  ::) The sad truth is that it won't help. The player will lose his deposit in any case (if he makes enough bets) and Martingale will only speed up this process, since when using this system, the risk grows exponentially, and the potential gain does not grow at all.

You can be lucky in gambling but no matter what strategy you may apply, you'll still end up losing if you don't know how to control your emotions and limit yourself. We can never beat the house so we should know when to hit our target goal and when to stop for a while. You'll only ruin your gambling journey if you won't put limitations and control. Strategies won't work with too much greed.

Martingale is extremely effective if we describe its propagation as an idea, great stuff but as to furthering profits nearly not so much.   Its never convinced me beyond the moments when I first heard of it decades ago sitting in a bar, its simple to describe and pass on as an idea.   Its more of a virus then a profit making system, common appeal.
  The only good use I can think of is to deploy it as some idea attached to advertising or referral bonus system and then maybe its really going to help you get peoples attention and so float your desired objective of getting more customers.
But the house must be paid so right from the start there is no default right or reasonable expectation in perpetuity to win.   If winning was inevitable perhaps it would be a genius thing.

As long as there is no law which restricts about what strategy you can use in a blackjack on a site that you are playing then you are good to go of applying the method. See if it is really working for you or not but I think it will work on the early tries and when you feel that the losses is getting consistent then maybe that is the time stop playing and comeback again the next day or two.

If you don't have a big capital then you can start with a little as 8 sats per bet as I think lower than that won't trigger the martingale anymore. If you are looking forward on playing to have fun then there is no need to use such strategy as that will only make you bust faster.

Yeah right, it will just speed it up but maybe some luck and good control will also give a gambler a chance to enjoy a small amount of earnings if he manage to quit while he still in a profitable side, though in most cases, it's really tough to quit when you feel that luck is already on your side. Martingale system will entice you more to keep betting and keep trying to increase your potential winnings, but once the red losing streak starts to flow, your aggressiveness will always be triggered.

I see your point and I don't have any argument since in reality the kind of outcome mostly happened when using this strategy.

The martingale strategy is simply a bad strategy, there is no way around that, even if for example you were one of the few players which were able to play with an advantage at sports bets if you do not have a strong money management strategy then you will eventually lose it all anyway.

Why? Because as we know there are times in which you are simply unlucky and you lose a lot of times on a row, and if you cannot endure those losses with most of your capital intact then it does not matter if your sport bets strategy is great you will never make any profits with it, and martingale is a strategy that forces you to raise your bet when you are losing, which is precisely the moment you should not do this.

True theoretically, the Martingale method is very effective but this is nullified by the house edge, house bet limit, and series of red streaks.  So even with an unlimited bankroll, martingale can't be effectively used because of the house bet limit thus once the succeeding bet hit the betting cap, martingale is automatically nullified.



Lol, the one you quoted is believed to be a gambler's fallacy and has proven to do no good to a player if the player believes in that theory.  That quotation plus the martingale method= destruction of a player's bankroll.



I highly agree, knowing how to work with luck will greatly change the players' gambling outcomes.  Good self-control is really needed because greed always shrouded our reasoning and judgement so we need to control the greed.

I get it, it's bad in the long run and that's why I don't really believe in the only strategy for betting.
Every gambler needs luck to win bets. Skill is only a supporting factor and will not determine victory, so nothing is really good if we only rely on strategy and skill to win bets because luck is the last word that will determine.

It is not to be in doubt that martingale is always for those with high level capital and those ready for risk taking because of their risk taking. Small capital players need to avoid the martingale strategy. You don't double your bet when the first has not been cashed out because you need the capital to continue playing instead lose at a goal.

Those are already big words, it really is something hard to lose like this because of the martingale, for me it is a strategy that I do not recommend following, however when one plays Black Jack sometimes one tends to forget those airs of prudence, and one risks (more if is having some type of drink) in my case I have lost a lot with this strategy applied to Black Jack and in my beginnings as a player in Dice, which, I don't have good experiences either, I think that for Bj you can take other strategies that provide more security for us as players, and always have foresight not to risk the entire balance so as not to have rages or have bad moments.

I know the fact that Martingale isn't advisable for luck-type games that is why I am hesitant, but I am considering BlackJack as a skill-type game where the outcome of the game is greatly affected by the skill of the player, especially when the deck isn't reshuffled every round.  Those who are good with card counting can fully take advantage of the Martingale betting system because they have a huge chance to know the result on the later round before the card is reshuffled.  But of course, it will be a different story if the card is freshly shuffled every round.

does not guarantee that with a large capital one can turn things around after consecutive losses, we all know, casinos have a maximum limit on each bet. Whether it's playing blackjack, roulette or craps, everything has its limits on each bet. 
if a person has reached the maximum limit due to a losing streak, it is very difficult to recover any losses that have been suffered.

however, on the second point we agree. we can use a little money and bet with a definite minimum amount, in addition to enjoying each round of the game but to avoid bigger losses.

Yes, and aside from max limit house edge also the big factors of any casino with H.E the cut coming from your bet will be added to your losses even you have a huge amount of capital if you suffer with long losing streak and you reach the limit then house automatically wins against you, unless you got some lucky winning streak and manage to quit before you suffer another losing streak.

That add some enjoyment when playing if you are getting some good result with the strategy that you are using,

but most of the time martingale will only lead you to suffer from huge losses. Better to use your own customize strategy.

In theory, the martingale strategy will work for any game where there is a chance of winning. Be it blackjack or any other game, the concept is the same. Every time you lose you double the bet till you hit a win and recover your previous losses plus your initial bet.
But in practice things are totally different. As mentioned in the article you quoted, you may hit a long losing streak which may drain your wallet and the remaining balance will not be enough to place a new bet.

By the way, the fact that Martingale is a profitable strategy in general sounds doubtful even theoretically. After all, as you know, money has a value. This is a few percent per year (depending on the country) if you took out a loan, then you pay this interest. If you have money but you do not earn money in some way, then you lose this interest. With Martingale, a huge amount of money must be kept in reserve in order to win the minimum initial bet. This means that at a certain cost of the loan, even if you win, you will be at a loss because it would be more efficient to place the money in the bank  :D

Very effective, as long as everything just keeps going according to plan. But then the inevitable happens, you lose 7 bets in a row. Knowing that you started with a $1 bet, that's a decent amount. 1,2,4,8,16,32,64 already lost together. Then you have to bet 128$ the 8th time to be able to win only 1$. Then you realize it's crazy. Again, it could work but you need high table limits and be able to absorb 10 losses in a row by continuing to gamble. It may happen that you have lost even 12 times in a row and you are still betting to only win 1$. Not logical actually.

That's why I said if you are a good player and you have counted enough cards to be able to know that the remaining shoe is more in favor of the player than of the dealer. You can maybe still encounter 15 defeats in a row as you say but it's highly unlikely. In addition to that if you are playing at a Freebet Blackjack version, you are very likely to get a free split during this 15 rounds, and to get an additional chance to beat the dealer for free. As BitcoinAccepted said this strategy has certainly a very bad risk-reward ratio but if you have a wide bank roll and you have fixed a clear limit before starting the game, it could be ok if the shoe is hot.

Using Martingale in sports betting is a useless and meaningless strategy, in sports betting for example you should never run after the loss, the person should focus on making a profit and when you have a loss you should continue to make bets normally as if nothing had happened. in sports betting, for example, you should not bet on odds below @1.60 because it only generates long-term damage unless the person makes a multi bet and adds it to the parlay of games with odds of less than 1.60, this is profitable. but using Martingale in sports betting is a serious mistake

That's not making sense. You conclude already that it's a sure win if a bettor always does a parlay with sets of bets within the odds of less than @1.60 since you say it's "profitable". That's even a risky move compared to a single bet.

When you say "profitable" the winning chance should be high but I don't see how betting on a parlay with the sets of small odds can make it possible.

Aside from that, to feel the profits on a parlay with the series of matches with low odds, you need to include more parlay legs on that bet adding some more risks. Placing a high stake won't also do the trick and that's even riskier.

It is not really a problem of losing so many times and trying to recover but if you don't have much capital left, you have no choice to stop. I think that has regulated the control for a gambler who wants to control themselves by funding very little so that if it is exhausted then playing in martingale stay will not continue. But it doesn't stop an addict from going on to play by all means including borrowing.

If you don't want to lose a lot funding, your gambling activities with small funds will save your ass. Just make sure not to top up once you already consume everything. It's time to move away and quit for the day. Nothing will harm you even you are using martingale as long as you know when to stop and quit if it's already triggering both your losing balance and your target profits.

This is very true. Like what I usually comment when people ask for a strategy, the martingale system comes into mind. But the only limitation comes with the amount of capital that you are willing to shoulder in case of a losing streak. As you all know, the higher the losing streak, the higher the money that you have to bet in order to neutralize you losses in the given bet.

Personally, the martingale strategy works best for me. My brother also used the same strategy but there was a time where he had to bet like $500 in order to recover all of his previous losses. At the end of the day, this strategy is not for the faint hearted.

The rule of thumb is that any game that involves CHOICE over a set or randomized factors have a combination of both luck and skill. This goes for Trading, Card Games such as Blackjack, Poker, Living Card Games ect..

The difference with BlackJack (compared to poker for example) is that you're not competing against other players,only the dealer, this significantly decreases the skill factor in the game so luck does indeed plays a huge role.

Do you think that odds above 1.6 are fundamentally different from odds below 1.6? In my opinion, in both cases there is no difference and the bookmaker has the same advantage. Martingale in sports is also bad because, compared to dice and other casino games, the bookmaker has a greater advantage than house edge. The minimum bookmaker edge is 4%, and in dice the house edge is 1%. Therefore, using Martingale in sports, you are forced to raise bets more sharply than in a regular casino.

I've never applied the martingale strategy to sports betting, but seem to use it quite often on dice, but I just think that winning is luck with that strategy. Odds on sports betting can fluctuate for every match, even if it's a multy bet then I think gamblers should really consider the odds. But on dice, we can set it ourselves based on need.

It all really depends on luck, gambling can provide entertainment for anyone but don't get lost in subconscious feelings. There are so many gambling players who cannot control their emotions when they are losing, even though they know that in gambling games they must always prioritize patience. Emotions and patience have different roles, gamblers must have more patience than emotions, because when emotions overwhelm a person, his soul will be difficult to realize, someone will realize when his money runs out and eventually regret his careless actions when betting.

The problem with sports betting is that each event is unique there, and if, for example, we see odds of 2, then this does not mean at all that this event will happen with a probability of up to 50%. Nobody knows the real probability, but due to fluctuations in both directions over a long distance, the bookmaker is always in the black due to the advantage. In dice, everything is much simpler - there the probabilities are completely known and if we choose x2, then we know that this event will happen with a probability of 49.5%.

Exactly, that's a great explanation KTCampions.
Apparently I can conclude that in fact the strategy that we will apply in gambling more often makes us hesitate when implementing it. I believe strategy can sometimes help us win bets more often, but basically it can't consistently make us win every bet. So have fun, this shouldn't bother us and stress.

You can do a modified martingale wherein it is multiplied by 3 and above so that when you hit a win, you get more than $1 profit.  The downside is, that it is far riskier and needs more funds to execute. It is also devastating if the red streak is more than 8 .


That is why some gambler thinks that Martingale betting strategy is the way to recover losses in their last bet which is quite correct if he wins the bet.  Though Martingale  is proven to be devastating but some gambler use it with controlled factor wherein they give up doubling if its reach a certain threshold of losses.