Make money with martingale applied to dice game ?

[iMark]

That seems like an unreasonable risk to be taking, thinking you will have a huge chance in the long run. At the end of the day, you will still end up on the wrong side of gambling which is loss.

Mathematically it is possible to win a huge amount if and only if you have a huge bankroll, actually infinite bankroll and the maximum bet payout from the house is also infinite. Both of these in real life and impossible and ideal situations that wont exist. So even if you try to run it anyway you want after some greens reds will follow.

Its not important to run a strategy and in fact there is no guaranteed winning method in games of chance, rather its important to manage your bankroll properly.

because we don't know, how many consecutive defeats can be obtained in a dice site, because I once used this strategy and a small bet amount with sufficient capital, but in fact I could lose in a row more than 8 times and make my capital run out, there is no strategy that guarantees you to win

[el kaka22]

Mathematically it is possible to win a huge amount if and only if you have a huge bankroll, actually infinite bankroll and the maximum bet payout from the house is also infinite. Both of these in real life and impossible and ideal situations that wont exist. So even if you try to run it anyway you want after some greens reds will follow.

If something is possible mathematically then that also should be possible in real world otherwise it denotes something somewhere is going wrong. I mean to say that we have not tested martingale strategy in "complete" theoretical manner. It means we need a random number generator or a real dice to make sure how many consecutive red may happen and for the other criteria, you just mentioned.

Its not important to run a strategy and in fact there is no guaranteed winning method in games of chance, rather its important to manage your bankroll properly.

This is where gambling sounds like a trading environment but in trading also we are not able to make sure-shot winnings. Hence, nothing wrong in martingale strategy and as well with gambling houses. Still, we need many other factors to favor us to win consistently.

[o_e_l_e_o]

If something is possible mathematically then that also should be possible in real world otherwise it denotes something somewhere is going wrong.

There are entire branches of mathematicas that are theoretically possible but not possible in the "real world", as you put it. Complex and imaginary numbers, for example. You can't show me (2+3i) oranges. It is possible to mathematically guarantee that you will always win with Martingale - all you need is an infinite amount of money. In this case I could ride out any losing streak, even one that is infinitely long, without ever going bust.

Unfortunately for OP, he does not have an infinite amount of money, and so the longer he uses Martingale, the more the probability of him losing everything approaches one.

[wxa7115]

Hello, I know martingale  is useless for long term for dice game  but   if you have a big bank and can support  1 serie of 20 loose, you will always win no ,?
The world record  for the roulette is one serie of  26 red , it will never happen again,the odd are just very low 
So if we   do martingale  with a bank that can support  20-25 loose, we will definitly make money

The expected values in the game are not going to change just because you can endure more losses, this only means that you will be able to play for a longer amount of time using your martingale system but eventually like everyone that tries that system you will go bust, the math doesn't change just because you can lose more money, it is true that it is going to be very unlikely that you are going to lose that many times in a row but if you keep playing you will eventually lose.

People have tried to martingale system probably since gambling games exists and while in the short term you will definitely get some profits you will eventually lose it all so it is better for you that you forget about that idea because it's not going to work.

[onrise]

That seems like an unreasonable risk to be taking, thinking you will have a huge chance in the long run. At the end of the day, you will still end up on the wrong side of gambling which is loss.

Mathematically it is possible to win a huge amount if and only if you have a huge bankroll, actually infinite bankroll and the maximum bet payout from the house is also infinite. Both of these in real life and impossible and ideal situations that wont exist. So even if you try to run it anyway you want after some greens reds will follow.

Its not important to run a strategy and in fact there is no guaranteed winning method in games of chance, rather its important to manage your bankroll properly.

This is the case that you need to have unlimited money to try this strategies which actually is not really possible unless in starting itself if you win it that it is your luck. So practically speaking play for fun and if won enjoy the money and move out and not to become so greedy that even the winning amount is lost.

[mOgliE]

Hello, I know martingale  is useless for long term for dice game  but   if you have a big bank and can support  1 serie of 20 loose, you will always win no ,?
The world record  for the roulette is one serie of  26 red , it will never happen again,the odd are just very low 
So if we   do martingale  with a bank that can support  20-25 loose, we will definitly make money

You will definitively make money until you collapse against a 26 loose serie. Then you lose everything.

And you have to understand something:
2^25 is 33 millions dollars.

Are you ready to play roulette or dice with 33 millions on your account by making a martingale bot?

At the very best you'll earn what? 3 or 4k$ on an hour?
You're ready to risk 33 millions dollars to earn maybe 3k in an hour? While knowing if you're really unlucky you'll lose your 33 millions?

i'm not.

[TheUltraElite]

because we don't know, how many consecutive defeats can be obtained in a dice site, because I once used this strategy and a small bet amount with sufficient capital, but in fact I could lose in a row more than 8 times and make my capital run out, there is no strategy that guarantees you to win

Like I said already. There is no sufficient capital for running a successful martingale. The theoretical value should be infinite and thus you will never be able to do it. A large bankroll might be possible but thats relative as to how much? Even the biggest pots can break with a stream of reds.

If something is possible mathematically then that also should be possible in real world otherwise it denotes something somewhere is going wrong. I mean to say that we have not tested martingale strategy in "complete" theoretical manner. It means we need a random number generator or a real dice to make sure how many consecutive red may happen and for the other criteria, you just mentioned.

Mathematics is based on a number of assumptions. Not every assumption is correct but they taken for granted because experimental results tally with them - thats how different results being used in branches of physics and engineering came to existence. Being not able to produce it physically is simply because you can establish the prior assumptions. Bring in an infinte bankroll and a casino that has no limits on maximum possible outcome bets and see how it works out.

This is where gambling sounds like a trading environment but in trading also we are not able to make sure-shot winnings. Hence, nothing wrong in martingale strategy and as well with gambling houses. Still, we need many other factors to favor us to win consistently.

I disagree, trading is not similar to gambling. Its different on several aspects. But thats a topic for another discussion.

[eternalgloom]

That seems like an unreasonable risk to be taking, thinking you will have a huge chance in the long run. At the end of the day, you will still end up on the wrong side of gambling which is loss.

Mathematically it is possible to win a huge amount if and only if you have a huge bankroll, actually infinite bankroll and the maximum bet payout from the house is also infinite. Both of these in real life and impossible and ideal situations that wont exist. So even if you try to run it anyway you want after some greens reds will follow.

Its not important to run a strategy and in fact there is no guaranteed winning method in games of chance, rather its important to manage your bankroll properly.

Even with a huge bankroll, you won't last very long with Martingale.
I think you're grossly underestimating the prevalence of losing streaks, it's not too rare to see a 10+ turns losing streak.

Then couple that with the fact that you're taking pretty significant risks, just to win ver small amounts of profit each time.

Yeah, I'm not a fan of Martingale personally.

[Betwrong]

Hello, I know martingale  is useless for long term for dice game  but   if you have a big bank and can support  1 serie of 20 loose, you will always win no ,?
The world record  for the roulette is one serie of  26 red , it will never happen again,the odd are just very low  
So if we   do martingale  with a bank that can support  20-25 loose, we will definitly make money

You will definitively make money until you collapse against a 26 loose serie. Then you lose everything.

And you have to understand something:
2^25 is 33 millions dollars.

Are you ready to play roulette or dice with 33 millions on your account by making a martingale bot?

At the very best you'll earn what? 3 or 4k$ on an hour?
You're ready to risk 33 millions dollars to earn maybe 3k in an hour? While knowing if you're really unlucky you'll lose your 33 millions?

i'm not.

That's right, with just $1 as initial bet you'll need over $33 million to beat a losing streak of 25 reds in row. That's what many people forget about when they start autobetting with martingale settings. They think that $500-$600 on their bankroll is more than enough for not getting busted because they "know from their experience" that it's extremely rare for a coin to land, say, heads up 5 times in a row, let alone more than that. But they leave out of account that they never make thousands of tosses per hour in real life.

[mirakal]

Hello, I know martingale  is useless for long term for dice game  but   if you have a big bank and can support  1 serie of 20 loose, you will always win no ,?
The world record  for the roulette is one serie of  26 red , it will never happen again,the odd are just very low 
So if we   do martingale  with a bank that can support  20-25 loose, we will definitly make money

This is very risky because you need to build a bankroll that is big enough to cover the martingale bet.
I would say, this method is so risky and I would not try this as we do not know our luck, anytime we have beat the work record of losing streak.
One thing I just want to say to you, don't be so greedy in gambling as you will only lose more.

Forget any strategy as when there is a house edge, you'll never win.

[TheUltraElite]

Even with a huge bankroll, you won't last very long with Martingale.

The assumption that martingale is profitable does not stand if you dont have an infinite balance and the casino does not have any restrictions on maximum payouts. You are confusing huge bankroll with infinite bankroll. The two are not same.

I think you're grossly underestimating the prevalence of losing streaks, it's not too rare to see a 10+ turns losing streak.

Even if you have a huge red streak there will be a green after it. Question is: Can you sustain that red streak to hit the green at the end to continue the martingale? Answer is Yes if you have an infinite bankroll and No if your bankroll is within finite limits.

Another point to ponder over : since we assume a mathematically profitable martingale to be starting with an infinite bankroll - ask yourselves if someone has infinite bankroll why would they gamble?

[8Habits]

Hello, I know martingale  is useless for long term for dice game  but   if you have a big bank and can support  1 serie of 20 loose, you will always win no ,?
The world record  for the roulette is one serie of  26 red , it will never happen again,the odd are just very low 
So if we   do martingale  with a bank that can support  20-25 loose, we will definitly make money

When you are playing a game that is based on pure luck, you will going to still lose even if you do martingale. This is because the casinos have already setup that at the end of the day they are going to win because of the house edge advantage.

However, if you win big and cashout, then you are really lucky but the house will still be able to recover from other bets of other players.

[wxa7115]

This is the case that you need to have unlimited money to try this strategies which actually is not really possible unless in starting itself if you win it that it is your luck. So practically speaking play for fun and if won enjoy the money and move out and not to become so greedy that even the winning amount is lost.

What many gamblers do not realize is that even an infinite amount of money is not going to be enough to make the martingale system effective, casinos have table limits precisely for that reason, if you use a martingale system you will need to increase your bet more and more and eventually you are going to hit the table limit that is established by the casino and once you do that you will be unable to recover the money that you have lost with your martingale system.

Casino owners are not dumb, they know their games and they know the strategies that people could use to try to make money in the casino and probably the most tried strategy is martingale so they have created ways to protect themselves from people that have big amounts of money.

[Barcode_]

Even though the odds for hitting 26 reds in a row on dice game with a 50% win chance might seem low, but there is still a slight probability of that scenario to happen, and even if a player does have a huge bankroll to use the martingale strategy on dice sites, it will never work too as there is always a maximum win limit set by the casino owner. So I believe as long as a player continues to play for a long period of time in the casino, they will eventually lose to the casino no matter what strategy they use.

[swogerino]

First of all never trust an online dice game that they will not roll 33 or more times always a lower or a bigger number because they can do that and screw you because they are computer software controlled. They don't have a memory of how many times it rolled a lower or a bigger number and do not care about statistics at all.

Martingale is dead from a longtime, it is just an old myth in the gambling scene, you cannot really apply any strategies to win in gambling, it is just luck that matters.

[rickadone]

First of all never trust an online dice game that they will not roll 33 or more times always a lower or a bigger number because they can do that and screw you because they are computer software controlled. They don't have a memory of how many times it rolled a lower or a bigger number and do not care about statistics at all.

The randomly generated sequence will always be UNPREDICTABLE hence you cannot say "that cannot happen" or "that can happen". 33 or more times of consecutive up or lower may happen to me at the same time that software may not generate same set of things to you, because, it is based on some algorithm of random number generation. Purely in other words, ANYTHING MAY HAPPEN. That is the actual reality and happening with most of online dice gambling houses.

Martingale is dead from a longtime, it is just an old myth in the gambling scene, you cannot really apply any strategies to win in gambling, it is just luck that matters.

A mathematical thing cannot go dead, I am sorry. It may not be useful for you to crack profits. That's all. When luck matters  in an environment, you cannot be depending on something to get your preferred results. When moment of luck is highly randomized, your results also will be randomized. Simple .

[Betwrong]

Even though the odds for hitting 26 reds in a row on dice game with a 50% win chance might seem low, but there is still a slight probability of that scenario to happen, and even if a player does have a huge bankroll to use the martingale strategy on dice sites, it will never work too as there is always a maximum win limit set by the casino owner. So I believe as long as a player continues to play for a long period of time in the casino, they will eventually lose to the casino no matter what strategy they use.

I agree with you. Although it looks like almost impossible to hit such a long losing streak, it happens, especially when players are using auto betting on sites with high speed. There are sites where you can make 7 bets per second.

7 x 3,600 x 10 = 252,000

With 10 hours of autobetting you can make 252k bets in a single day. It's roughly a million of bets in just 4 days.

Odds of losing 26 bets in a row at 49.5% win chance on a site with 1% house edge: once every 52 million bets. So, playing like this, you will hit the losing streak within 6-7 months almost definitely, and of course you can hit it much earlier.

[TheUltraElite]

When you are playing a game that is based on pure luck, you will going to still lose even if you do martingale. This is because the casinos have already setup that at the end of the day they are going to win because of the house edge advantage.

House edge is not technically an "advantage". It is the edge that the casino has due to the design of the game of chance over the player. In other words in every EV- game the odds are against the player and so even if they do whatever mind-boggling strategy they will lose at one point be it short term or long term. The casino does not have any "advantage" over its players. That would be cheating.

However, if you win big and cashout, then you are really lucky but the house will still be able to recover from other bets of other players.

Most big winners actually end up losing the amount they won because of greed.

[davinchi]

When you are playing a game that is based on pure luck, you will going to still lose even if you do martingale. This is because the casinos have already setup that at the end of the day they are going to win because of the house edge advantage.

House edge is not technically an "advantage". It is the edge that the casino has due to the design of the game of chance over the player. In other words in every EV- game the odds are against the player and so even if they do whatever mind-boggling strategy they will lose at one point be it short term or long term. The casino does not have any "advantage" over its players. That would be cheating.

That is not cheating. Probably you are misunderstanding how house-edge is working, it is very much similar to having an extra advantage against your opponent. Yes, gambling houses are having extra advantage against every gambler in the name of house edge.

In normal environment, you and your opponent are having exact 50% chances for winning for any gambling. But, along with the house edge the chances go like (for example) 60% to houses and 40% to gambler. Why not we call it as an advantage to houses?

But why am not ready to call this as a cheating, because we are accepting those house-edge before playing with any gambling houses (or at least we are all aware of something which is existing). When some rules and regulations are informed well in advance, we cannot call that cheating. If we prefer and accepting those rules filled environment, we may go for playing with them otherwise we may opt for staying away from them.