Bitcoin Forum

In martingale, a gambler increases the bet size to double in the hope to recover the loss from the previous bet. I have tried it a few times & to be honest with you, I have never had a good return on my bets; I have lost most of the time.
On the other hand, the Anti martingale strategy is- to double the bet size when you are winning & halving the bet size when you are losing. In such a condition, when you are winning; you are doubling the size & you will lose from your winning. WEell, this strategy is more risky I guess though some have told it as less risky than martingale.
Have you ever tried ti? What's your opinion? Which one is more risky; Martingale or Anti Martingale?

the casino game that you play is of course provided as well as a kind of automatic button to adjust the increase in the bet to make a kind of martingale bet 2x bigger when a loss occurs, but you need to remember that the house will always win regardless of what strategy you use, using martingale or anti martingale depending how do you play that strategy and how to control yourself as well as luck

To be honest, I use the martingale technique not only in casinos but also apply it to trade in the crypto market where there is a dump and pump of certain altcoins, I will still be profitable using the martingale technique

I do think that this strategy is riskier given the initial bet which is to double it. Assuming that you lost, you will also half your bet from your initial bet in which it does not nullify your previous loss from your first bet. The purpose on why the Martingale strategy is recommended is due to its nature being able to recover your loss in one entire bet and luck. Of course, its only limitation is needing a huge capital/resources in order to at least win.

At the end of the day, it all boils down to your luck. If you feel like you are lucky and the odds are with you, do the anti-martingale strategy. But if you are experiencing some losses where you would want to recover them quickly, do the martingale strategy.

In theory... if you are using a casino where they claim that they are "Provably Fair" ....no variant of the Martingale strategy should work. Each bet should be unique (using a Client & Server seed and the RNG)

That said, I have tried it on several casinos and none of it worked. The straight Martingale strategy just eat away at your balance the higher you bet. Which casinos have you tried? 

This is the problem with the martingale, as you are required to double your bet every time, after a while the amount you have to bet becomes so large, it is almost impossible to imagine actually betting that amount or having table limits to support it.
and luck is not necessarily on your side, using martingale is not as easy as the example you get and not as easy as people say, you have to master it and you also have to have large capital to double it.

   -   Many have tried and done this technique, and most of those who did were ultimately unsuccessful. This method is also quite risky for a gambler who is not rich but just playing to grow their small amount.

Perhaps as I see it martingale is only in favor of really rich gamblers who seem to never run out of money. It's hard to imagine if you start with your bet of 1$ and then every time you lose in rolling you will do it x2 or x3, then there is a chance that you roll 20x and you don't win, how much can you lose? So it is not favorable or practical for gamblers whose only goal is to grow money.

Not exactly, but what we do in poker, and I understand that it is the same in sports betting, is that we go up levels when we reach a certain bankroll amount, and when we lose due to a bad streak and the bankroll drops below x, we go down a level.

It is essentially similar, what happens is that in casino games that are EV-, you are going to lose money in the long term, unlike in poker where you can earn money in the long term making EV+ moves, so in casino games what will happen is that the money you have in your account will last longer, but do not expect to get profitability from it.

First time I am hearing about the Anti Martingale Strategy (AMS), sounds pretty funny to be honest. Martingale is my standard betting strategy I use when I don't want to think too much about gambling. It works best for my gambling behaviour as it guarantees in most cases that I will finish with a positive gambling evening. Only one win will recover all my previous losses, which is great if you want to build up your bankroll steadily over time. The big issue unfortunately is the tail risk, that you can get wiped out in a single session when we are facing a loss streak. Another drawback of the martingale strategy is the large capital requirements, we need a decent bankroll to start with to withstand several losses in a row. Would be nice to see the strategy in action and see how well you are doing with it. For how many rounds have you used the strategy? Did you make a decent win of it? Assuming that we are losing a bit more than we are winning, we are going to double up less often than in a martingale strategy. So the AMS should actually be less risky than the traditional martingale strategy.  

Not in so many casinos; I used to use stake only most of the time and a few more sites if I find them impressive and have some good bonuses LOL. I'm not really much into this TBH. Well, I have lost a good amount trying with martingale; so does my friend who has lost more than $5k in a day following the martingale. I'm looking for some strategy to gamble with; as most of the times, I'm a loser LOL.

I haven't yet tried it. I'm confused if it works or not & whether it is less risky or not; hence, I'm here, mate.

Wouldn't this accumulate losses when say, you reach the minimum? In most cases, it'd be $1 but it'd still accumulate if you lose out a lot of times, especially if we consider how each win and loss usually offset each other, but with $1 being the minimum if it stacks up, it doesn't exactly offset anything. Though I guess if you consider how Martingale is, this one would be a lot better since the losses are set at the minimum, while Martingale requires you to have an insane bankroll to break even, and if you don't, well it'd be an insane loss.

This strategy comes with more risks than just the need for a large deposit. I tried to find all available information about it, but I have never been able to find confirmation that anyone was able to use it successfully on a long-term basis. The big risk is that every time you have to double the amount of the bet, and if the amount of the first bet is small, this is not so critical, but it will be small if we talked about testing the strategy, in practice everything turns out differently and this will necessarily lead to big losses.

As with all other strategies, sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. You can try it in some casinos with expert settings, like Wolf, choose some cheap coin, and just let it run on auto and you will see for yourself if it's good or not. The thing with Martingale and Anti-Martingale is that you need to start with some very low bet to be able to double after every loss, but in the end, you win the base bet.

I read this strategy a few years ago and have tried and lost on the many times I used it, its not 100% effective, I prefer to do a variation manually I can win in this strategy or lengthen my playing time, I have given up all these so-called strategies on dice because when you are playing with no strategy at all in luck-based games you have a better chance of winning, than forcing your win with a strategy.
But this is just my mindset maybe others have good success using this strategy, try all the known variations the most important is you enjoy the game, and its more thrilling to play without expectation.

Hahaha, I think the Martingale Strategy is one of the first strategy almost all gamblers try.
I remember when I found about, and I thought I'll be rich using this technique, what can go wrong, right?

I tried with dice, I even used a bot and I remember to have cash to hold until 12 straight losses, and guess what, in a few minutes I lost all. I tried 3 times to never try again.
In theory is guaranteed, but you need to have unlimited cash to work.

Never tried this anti martingale technique.

With BTC you can make this experience easily because there's more decimals to start.

But after all, you can be sure, 100% of users who already tried will say the same to you, the house always wins.

It won't work either way because there is this thing called "the house edge". And as long as it is there, any strategy you come up with will make you lose in the long run. The best and the only strategy to beat the house is playing less (ideally once) and wagering more. Only then you can become an exception mathematically.

Any other strategy which makes you play more will get the house working and that means you will lose for certain because that's how the house edge works. It takes the money from your pocket and put it in the casino's.

Every luck-based games are risky because there is a house edge and there's no proven method to win in a luck-based game, there's no proven strategy that can lessen your risk or increase your chances I have not tried it but I might add it to my variation I'm using on my dice game I don't expect much on these new strategies as I don't want to disappoint myself.

There are a lot of martingale variations and its up to you on how to use it and when to use but don't expect much and don't recommend it as a winning strategy if you have success doing it, the most ijmportant is you enjoy and you feel good when you log out.

For me still the same, not sure what games you usually do used martingale, but for me game like baccarat fits the martingale or anti-martingale as you put it. Nevertheless, still base on luck though, and the size of you capital. To be able to used this strategy, you need to have a good amount of capital to be able to "take advantage". Otherwise maybe in the 3rd or 4th double down from a lost, you might not have anything left if your are very unlucky.

Fair point. Bankroll size is the most important thing to be considered on this so called bet strategy because the bankroll needs to withstand the worst case scenario of losing streak in able for this strategy become effective. Even on dice game with 99% win rate can give a 10 lose streak or more then other games like Blackjack and Bacarrat can give more potential lose streak.

I really hate this kind of strategy because it will just lessen your chance to win in case long streak hits you in early stage of your gaming session. Betting on fixed bet and just wait for the win streak then stop betting in profit is still the best because your bankroll will can last longer even with long lose streak because the game result will always be balance at the end of the game with just a little bit of favor with the house due to house edge. You will not lose a lot if you are just playing on consistent bet type with same bet size.

No matter what search you do, friend, there isn't any, and no matter who else searches, even me, I can't find anyone who has succeeded in the martingale method. In short, everyone who used it was not successful in the end but still lost.

But the only surprising thing is, even though most people know that this method is a high risk, others continue to use it and gamble even though the chances of winning a large amount are remote.

I have tried it but in the long run, the result was still the same.

The best thing about that method is it will not make you feel that you are greedy, you are doing like seizing the moment because when you are lucky, that's when where you will double your bets. But honestly, I think the best strategy for me is just flat betting, I mean, with fix amount you will bet, it will not frustrate you easily, as long as you have the patience, you'll eventually be profitable if you win more than you lose.

Martingale or Anti Martingale a strategy that must be played calmly, this both of strategy I've tried in the slot too. Very useful for profit, the most part I gamble 60% has been lucky using this this both strategy at slot there (also not always lucky), but if asked which one is more risky I think we know that everything is risky because gambling using money which might be lose Sir.

I think even Martingale is really hard to achieved and have you winning and the money involved as your based. And for the reverse martingale or anti martingale, although this is more user friendly for beginners, doesn't mean that it is more effective that Martingale.

Here is a link, about a study on Reverse martingale, and it is based on their simulations.

https://i.imgur.com/MrMFXBE.png

http://gradientdescending.com/martingale-strategies-dont-work-but-we-knew-that-simulation-analysis-in-r/

Done this before and had the same result which is more on losses.
Whatever strategy we are going to use, we should always remember that we are actually playing against the house and of course its their system and they always have the advantage over us. Don't want to try this Martingale again because I lose faster and instead of enjoying the game, I'm making a lot of pressure for myself every time I gamble. Even if you are using a provably fair casino, you will still find a hard time to get a win using this strategy and you will only realize it the moment you lose everything.

What would you achieve trying this anti-martingale when it still has the same results, in the end, you will not lose everything instantly but will see you're winning slowly vanish, I never tried that anti Martingale I prefer to believe in my own hunch, and create my own sets of betting, my bet my rules that should be the case since this is a luck based game, instead of copying other strategies its fun doing this everything is unexpected.

to be honest I don't understand what using anti martingale is like, isn't martingale used to return the situation and lose money from the previous bet and increase the bet 2x, it's true it's based on luck but again the house will always win so play wisely so you don't become a addict  ;)

Never tried it even when back then when I was playing dice. Martingale was already risky for me and with your explanation of how anti-martingale works it sounds riskier than the original. If by some chance or bad luck comes you will just be winning all the halved opportunities, then losing at the full bet.
That will be a faster rekt and there will be times it could be confusing.
The other weak side of this is, if you break the discipline and try to chase your losses.

Firstly, I may have done it but I don't think it's anti martingale. If it is said to be anti, then it cannot be the other way around, which means that you have to switch to another strategy. I reduce or bet 1/2 of the previous loss because I have to adjust my balance and playing time in one session. I want to control the length of my game and of course that's not meant as anti martingale.

Martingale and anti martingale based on your understanding should not be a strategy worth considering in the long term. Both would not be very profitable as we would basically be at a loss with them. But if I may ask, what are the benefits of the anti-martingale strategy in your opinion?

I have tried the martingale strategy but have never tried the anti-martingale, but from what I understand in its definition or rather explanation, I would honestly tell us all that it is more risky.
Martingale in it self is very risky and for the few times I've tried it, I've sworn never to try it again, anti-martingale from the way I understand it seems more riskier since it is not possible to predict the outcome of the next game, a gambler could halve his bet amount because he is loosing, and double it immediately he starts winning in the hopes that the winning streak would continue, what if at the very top of the double the gambler loses?.

The most advisable strategy for me is to leave anything or strategy related to martingale in gambling.

Martingale in slot games? This is I think the craziest or maybe the dumbest strategy I have ever heard.
How can you do martingale while the outcome in slot game is random, no fixed multiplier like in dice game.
Can you tell me more about how you do it with more specific calculation of your martingale strategy?
And how much do you spend to use martingale in slot game since the minimum bet in slot game usually starting from $0.1
Aside from the bigger minimum bet, the chance of losing streak in slot games is bigger than in dice game, do you have really huge bankroll to play slot with martingale?

I've done that before but I couldn't remember my win or loss ratio anymore. It's a good feeling when you hit twice in a row but it doesn't feel that bad when you immediately lose on the next turn or roll.

I remember some players often use this strategy in a card game against me as the banker. It pisses me off when they cut their bets when I'm on a winning streak and starting to recover my losses hehe.

The martingale that I do it at slot, not must be to have a big of bankroll, because I also don't have a target to win a lot also wan't loss a lot. Sorry the minimum bet is not always $0.1, it varies I can play from $ 0.013 or in my country currency exchange rate around 200 Idr, I'll not to explain the minimum bet in more detail because I think you know it. Simply bet martingale to 8 or 10 spin if my bet win, it will go back to basic bet. This works if you play in one line slots Sir.

Martingale is a strategy that only works in perfect conditions which none of us can afford or else meaning we have an infinite bankroll and the casino where we play does not limit our bets so by using Martingale if we hit 100 times in red in roulette by doubling our bet it is impossible statistically that in an offline casino to hit 100 times black so most likely we will win.The problem is though that no casino lets you play unlimited bets with unlimited amount and most of us do not have unlimited amount.

The same can be said for anti Martingale,meaning will not work.Some people have even tried to play Martingale in sport betting by placing bets in odds over 2 for a team every weekend in a certain league but they too have been not successful.

I think that would just work all the same as the regular martingale strategy. If you win and you double down you're basically asking to lose everything the next turn. The other side of this strategy doesn't work well in practice as well, as you'd literally cost yourself higher wins for less losses. I hear you and I myself enjoy winning when I am gambling, so why not instead of applying an "anti" to the current strategy that works for high rollers, how about you try my discipline I found on one of the people in this forum. You win 3 times, you call it a day. You lose 3 times, you call it a day. That literally will allow you to pull yourself away from certain addiction, while at the same time ensuring that you don't lose that much, and you get to take your wins home as well.

Martingale is same like you want to be selfish and grab more profit if it is possible for you to get that but doing gambling after you see the results you did with the first gambling is better than doing the martingale accumulation. If you do martingale you spend more money in faster means and soon your capital is gone. So why not do single betting, wait for result before another betting section so you know the mistake and to adjust.

I had tried both, Martingale is used to recover losses in a single spin while the Anti-Martingale as you stated is to take advantage of the lucky streak a player has.  I can say if you are lucky, the anti-Martingale gives more benefits since the player's profit doubles every time he bets in a green streak.  The problem with this strategy is that you will lose all your winnings once you hit a red and the best solution for this is to know when to stop and reset.  

Between the two I still think that Martingale is way riskier in emptying our bankroll sooner since Anti-Martingale does not consume our bankroll as fast as martingale when we experience a series of red streaks.

A Martingale system is almost always associated with gambling in a casino. However, you can also easily try this system out at sports competitions. Look for odds of around 2.00 and then double your bet every time on another match. There are also Martingale systems for higher odds of 3.00, but that is more difficult to achieve a fast success rate. Incidentally, Martingale is no guarantee of profit, you can lose 10 bets in a row and then you have lost your entire bank account and you are left empty-handed. not the most logical strategy.

Both the Martingale and reverse Martingale strategies have their own strengths and weaknesses. It really comes down to your personal preferences. The classic Martingale allows you to recover losses quickly, while the reverse Martingale strategy allows you to maximize your winnings. However, both strategies also have significant risks, such as the potential for large losses if you hit a long losing streak. As a result, it is important to carefully consider the risks and rewards of these strategies before using them in online gambling.

Here is a comparison of the two strategies and their application to online gambling (source (http://gradientdescending.com/martingale-strategies-dont-work-but-we-knew-that-simulation-analysis-in-r/)) :

http://gradientdescending.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/example-vanilla.png

http://gradientdescending.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/example-reverse.png

In the end, the result is the same.

I have tried the Martingale system or technique in the game Roulette & BlackJack, but it doesn't work, it always fails, maybe my capital is too small to do the system
Martingale, I can't keep doubling my bet continuously with the result of losing.

In my opinion, if you don't have large capital, don't ever try to do the Martingale technique, let alone bet with a long enough time span, it will have a greater risk of losing than expected and one more thing if you play a casino with maximum betting limit provisions, don't use Martingale, you can't chase the score to cover your defeat, for now I've never done it again using the Martingale system.

---

Well, if for the Anti Martingale game, as you mentioned 'double' every time you win, this kind of strategy I often see my friends do in baccarat casino type games, maybe the Anti Martingale system is not the same as above, this only depends on winning, obviously I'm not too pushy to do both systems, if I don't have professional knowledge.

But if you are an expert in the Martingale strategy it is better to try the Anti Martingale system, the risk of losing is less than Martingale and you don't need big capital, you just need a win and fold the bet.

Use the search engine or go Review the different posts that exist, many, repetitive theme and explained over and over again.

Here we go in any case one more time because your context does not change the frequency of the response at all.

There is no personal experience in other players that explains whether it works for you or not.  That is paramount.

Martingale, above all, is a very basic strategy that has its Just success in certain games, in any case if that doesn't work for You is because  don't understand it or don't use the right bet size.

You have to understand that with Martingale if the variance decides to be enthusiastic about you i.e. fuck you the only way it works is a deep bankroll.

It can be martingale strategy or anti martingale strategy, the win happens if you are lucky. I've tried with martingale strategy and have lost good sum of bitcoin. Haven't tried with the anti martingale strategy, with gambling we try to experience win. When things didn't work surely we'll loss patience and one such scenario could end the success of these strategies.

Haven't tried it but it looks like if I do try it, it'll be faster for me to lose my bankroll as each win will double my bet and in case I lose I'll be losing much more than what I have won. Also, it doesn't look like it's an efficient way to bet as the risk is too much on this strategy.

Anyways, having this kind of strategy where you will not go back to your initial bet is a bit too much for a strategy as you'll be betting much higher amount so if you encounter a lose streak, you might end up losing everything too fast.

If you are saying that the result is the same in terms of losing the bankroll in the long run, then yes, I agree but if you are saying that the result of the bet is the same, then I beg to disagree.
In a long series of losing streaks, I think the Reverse or Anti-Martingale as OP stated is a safer method since it does not multiply the bet every time we lose.  Between the two methods I can say that Anti-Martingale is a lot safer than the Martingale method because in a series of green streaks, it gives better profit and in a series of red streaks, it does not eat up the bankroll exponentially.

The essence is still Martingale, you are doubling your bet based on an outcome. If you are doubling bets only after you win (which is not as often as when you lose) it will easily drain you of your balance because long streaks doesn't happen as often. Also when you're halving your bet every time you lose, eventually you will have zeroes out your bet amount that it becomes ineligible for you to play as long lose streaks tend to happen more. Anything that doubles the bet no matter the outcome of one roll is is bound to lose you money in the long run.

It will work if you are lucky but if not then it won't. Sorry but I think creating such strategies like this are only a waste of time because almost all gambling games are mainly based on luck except maybe in sports betting. Why can't we just bet based on our instincts? I think that will be more exciting and more enjoyable than following an existing strategy.

But, I admit that when I was a newbie I also tried and get hooked with strategies like martingale. That is right, you need to start with a low bet as it will still grow. Never heard of anti martingale before but this one should work the opposite way according to its name. So, you might be needing to start betting high.

Obviously, some say it's effective if such conditions are met. But what if the other way round happened?

Still, it requires a big bankroll to support those losing rounds.

The same as the usual martingale, should work on short-term betting but still, it's not a strategy to consider but rather a form of betting.

Either of those betting methods, be it martingale or anti-martingale or as you called it, just know when to exit when a good profit has already been achieved. In that way, users are just taking advantage of the luck scenarios using these methods as not all the time, luck will come to us.

I've tried the martingale technique once and to be honest it was a suck strategy, all I got was defeat and ran out of capital

My advice is never to try the martingale strategy if you only have the opportunity to make a few rounds because of your limited capital, the martingale strategy is only for those who have unlimited capital

You already admit you have lost most of the time, the risk is on the players not on the strategy if you believe that certain strategies will make money for you and you pour in a lot of money thinking that this strategy works when it's not, that's where the risk factors come in, anti martingale could increase the time before you lose your bankroll and if you're ok with it then go for it but I don't see it as less or more risky its the player's attitude and mindset that will make gambling less or more risky.

When I was just starting out playing in luck-based games like Dice, a card game I thought you have a chance in martingale because the logic is good doubling and waiting for the winning turn to show then you regain all your previous losses until you find out that you need a very big bankroll and even if you have a big bankroll there is a maximum bet on some casinos, this kills the martingale strategy and every known variation of it, it's less risky if you are a moderate player then employing a strategy but spending a lot and playing and trying to make money.

Don't want to try it as that might be the shortest and quickest version of Martingale.

We won't also be able to feel much about our profits since every time we will won, it's mandatory to risk that amount the next round.

In terms of the level of riskiness, I see that both are on the same level. In the end, if we try to be aggressive, the result will be the same, losing.

It's excatly as risky, and of course i have tried it. I tried most of the tactics when i build myself a bot in bustabit (scripting is allowed in there).  I thought i find myself a money machine until i finally lost all my bets and started to read more about these tactics. They all fall under gamblers fallacy because there's just no way to beat the odds when they are set for the casino. You are better off going with pure luck, because that's what martingale and reverse martingale comes to too.

The martingale strategy that tells you to double your bet every time you lose has a very clear purpose:

Every time you double the bet when you lose, you are guaranteeing that the moment you win, if you win at all, you will have managed to recover all the amount you lost in the previous bets and still stay in profit.

On the other hand, if you lower the amount when you lose, you will never be able to cover the losses, mainly because you will probably lose a lot more money than you win.

In my opinion, this is a bad strategy.

I like Martingale, but it needs to be played in conjunction with other strategies and risk management in order to be of any benefit to the player.

The best strategy is to know how to play wisely, managing your money and luck, without strictly following a "cake recipe".

Who hasn't tried Martingale? I guess all of us did try it. It's even a natural tendency to try to recover all losses at once. I have tried it myself. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. But it isn't really a sustainable strategy as losing streaks could really be long.

I'm not used to calling the other strategy anti Martingale. I think it's more commonly called reverse Martingale. I have also tried it. Sometimes if you really feel lucky, you are just going to make the most of it and double your bet each time you win.

In general though, I think I have used the classic Martingale more than the reverse.

What you don't tell is that the profit you are talking about is only the initial bet, while you have had to risk more and more, twice as much each time in order to recover that shitty initial bet.


Nonsense. The probability of winning or losing is the same, no matter how much you bet, if you reduce the size of the bet as you lose the money will last longer.


Do you make a lot of money with your 'strategies'?

I already tried both strategy in Baccarat. I double my bet when i'm in losing streak to recover my previous losses, but above that is i'm losing my patience thus I'd like to recover it fast. Don't get me wrong i'm aware how risky it is but what's in my mind is, if I lose then so be it, it's over and time to end the session. On the other side, the anti martingale is more effective to me (only in live Baccarat game). If you're playing this game and observing the results pattern, you'll know if there's a frequent outcome and that's the time to use this strategy. There's a chance to win the bet if this happened. Of course this game is a luck based so manage your expectation since it's not guaranteed.

I like martingale method but following this method requires adequate financial adequacy. If a gambler loses several games in a row with the martingale method, he exposes himself to huge losses. And when a gambler follows the martingale method with great confidence and moves one after the other then it is definitely fruitful. Basically, using the martingale method depends on how much risk a gambler can afford and what is his financial situation. Gambling depends on luck so one should take decisions depending on the situation.

Never tried the anti martinagle system, only ever tried to apply increasing the number of bets when I win, the conclusion is that it still requires quite a large amount of money, and also does not guarantee that the end of our balance will turn green because sometimes I get consecutive defeats and when I win and the multiplication does not cover the amount of loss that has been obtained before, and in my opinion the strategy in gambling cannot be applied for a long run especially by using autobet and leaving our account playing automatically without paying attention to it because in the end all funds can be drained.

I also tried this strategy a few years ago when I was using an old platform and I'm still not sure if they were legit or not because the result I got was not what I was expecting to see.
As far as I know, martingale will give you good results if you try it in a long-run game and you will need to have patience as you said because using this method you will change the bet size according to the result you get from the game.

Both martingale and martingale strategy doesn't work if you want to make money from gambling, every slots has a house edge, if you're trying to beat the house edge, there's no way except you're find the vulnerability and hack the system. But it's an illegal act and you would go to jail, there's a big risk for doing this. Actually you need to know if gambling is for fun, you wouldn't make money from gambling if you're playing slots.

Any strategy won't work if you are betting on a gambling platform with a huge house edge. That's why I choose sports betting because I believe there's no house edge if you will just bet on odds +100 and above. It's still gambling, and we know bookies make money from juices, and for me, I want to be an exemption, so they'll not get a juice with my winnings.

About martingale or anti-martingale strategy, I would not use that anymore, why? because it would easily frustrate me especially if I'm on a losing streak.

Almost the same strategy and this is for those with wide capital/deep pockets. Martingale or reverse martingale are game plans for long-term betting especially if you are running out of good luck.
I have never tried both and I think I won't even in the future. I'd rather try reaching a certain position of events where they give prizes to those with higher wages than this, perk of this is you are not losing too much money, just playing for longer span.

All strategies are risky, and if you want to avoid greater risks, you must reduce the bet amount and always use limits on bets so that if you lose, your loss is not as much as before. Whatever it is, if you double your bet when you win and halve your bet when you lose, it will not always work, especially when we play gambling, where the results always win and loses. But defeat is something we often face, which we must be aware of and avoid. I may have tried using it in my early days playing dice, but it also didn't work out well and resulted in a loss.

I feel the Anti martingale has the same problem as a normal martingale, and this is: You will get busted in the long run.

In the past, I made a bot with this strategy, and sometimes it worked fine, but in others it doesn't. I have the code and some screenshots here: http://justdice.lucky.lat/bot.html

And my main problem with this method, is When to stop, or how many consecutive wins are enough? I read some people get 20 consecutive wins in dice at 50% chance to win. But you need a lot of bets for that. I would say it happens each 1 million bets or more.

There are many types of Martingale, but they all lead to the same result. The Martingale that you described leads to the fact that you never increase your initial deposit (after a series of winning bets, there will always be a loss of everything that you have won at that moment). Thus, you will have a gradual decrease in the deposit at the rate of the initial bet, which is constantly halved with each loss.