Why the martingale system sucks! (doubling down on losses)

[Fredomago]

As I've said for others, they're saying that it works for them but not for me and for you and for the others too. I agree that the casino in the long term will always be the winner.
That's why house edge has been set and even it's just 1%, that's already a huge thing to profit with by the casino.

Even if it's smaller than that if gamblers will keeps on playing using this system end results will still favor the house, not unless gamer knows how to work with both emotions and time,

You need to know if your own system will work in times that you are working with martingale,  chances of losing when you disregard setting up both your money and your spend time is high, leading you to miscalculates your chances and ended you up burning up your
bankroll.

[Smartprofit]

The Martingale gaming system cannot guarantee the player a win. 

Yes, in many casinos the use of this system is limited.  Therefore, many believe that the martingale gambling system is very effective.  In fact, this is not the case.  The casino provides itself with insurance in advance against all troubles.  The casino has essentially an unlimited supply of money. 

The player plays with real money.  The casino only promises to pay out the winnings. 

This is the fundamental difference.

[Silberman]

The problem with personal experiences is that there is a lot of bias, if another member says that it has worked for them I believe them in the sense that I do not think they have suffered catastrophic losses yet, but the math is clear, martingale has been disproved mathematically over and over again as a technique that works as it does not change at all the probabilities of the game, taking this into account the only reasonable explanation for those that argue that it works is that they have simply not used the strategy long enough.

The problem with personal experiences is that people like to show their strengths and hide their weaknesses, which is why they will brag about winning and keep quiet about losing.
That is simply human nature, we like to display our strengths while hiding our weaknesses.

Correct, and we only need to take a look at social media to see this is the truth, most people are going to post things about their life but most of it is going to be positive as they want to project a positive image over their life, occasionally they crack down and let their real selves to show up but this is rare, the problem with this is that people begin to deceive themselves thinking that in fact there is nothing wrong with their lives and the same kind of logic applies here as well.

[mirakal]

The problem with personal experiences is that there is a lot of bias, if another member says that it has worked for them I believe them in the sense that I do not think they have suffered catastrophic losses yet, but the math is clear, martingale has been disproved mathematically over and over again as a technique that works as it does not change at all the probabilities of the game, taking this into account the only reasonable explanation for those that argue that it works is that they have simply not used the strategy long enough.

The problem with personal experiences is that people like to show their strengths and hide their weaknesses, which is why they will brag about winning and keep quiet about losing.
That is simply human nature, we like to display our strengths while hiding our weaknesses.

Correct, and we only need to take a look at social media to see this is the truth, most people are going to post things about their life but most of it is going to be positive as they want to project a positive image over their life, occasionally they crack down and let their real selves to show up but this is rare, the problem with this is that people begin to deceive themselves thinking that in fact there is nothing wrong with their lives and the same kind of logic applies here as well.

They only do that for the sake of views, a lot of people are interested in this strategy and they would not watch if this strategy is not working. Everything that we saw in social media, especially on youtube could be biased, remember that the main intention of the uploader is just to increase his views to make more money. Maybe we just need to experience it ourselves so we can tell based on our real experience, but I'm sure this would not work to anyone.

[goinmerry]

Everything that we saw in social media, especially on youtube could be biased, remember that the main intention of the uploader is just to increase his views to make more money.

Correct at some point.

There are even agreements between sites and streamers as it can introduce the site to a large audience - which is the purpose of the influencers. The audience wants that kind of video reference since they like to see first how's the experience of playing on the site before they will play.

And the fact that these influencers make a video for it, the audience will think of it as a good website.

[Fredomago]

Everything that we saw in social media, especially on youtube could be biased, remember that the main intention of the uploader is just to increase his views to make more money.

Correct at some point.

There are even agreements between sites and streamers as it can introduce the site to a large audience - which is the purpose of the influencers. The audience wants that kind of video reference since they like to see first how's the experience of playing on the site before they will play.

And the fact that these influencers make a video for it, the audience will think of it as a good website.

Influencers always takes the benefits, either way they can make money. Some websites pays for advertisements and that's the intentions from the influencers, taking advantage of that opportunities sucking money out from the house. They create video to bring audience to the site and like what mirakal said some are bias and most of the time they've won a lot and showing the luxuries of taking decent profits.


You need to carefully assess each gambling sites, or even the strategy those influencers shared if you want to avoid busting all your bankroll. Strategy like martingale or enhance martingale are present when video was created, be wise or else, it cause you a lot losing money from following those influencers.

[tabas]

As I've said for others, they're saying that it works for them but not for me and for you and for the others too. I agree that the casino in the long term will always be the winner.
That's why house edge has been set and even it's just 1%, that's already a huge thing to profit with by the casino.

Even if it's smaller than that if gamblers will keeps on playing using this system end results will still favor the house, not unless gamer knows how to work with both emotions and time,

You need to know if your own system will work in times that you are working with martingale,  chances of losing when you disregard setting up both your money and your spend time is high, leading you to miscalculates your chances and ended you up burning up your
bankroll.

Those who are using the strategy might be aware of it and they're going to stop if it no longer works for them. They know how to deal with it and if they keep on losing, they'll stop.
I'm one of those that have tried it with few times but stop quickly because I've already concluded that this strategy won't work for me even in short or long time. But for the others who keep on using it, they probably can control things under the heat.

[Obito]

The belief in the system is that when you do it, you basically win back all your losses from previous matches so you are basically trying to gamble by just breaking even. That's what I don't get in this system, besides doubling down on losses, you only have one way in this system and that is as I have said, breakeven.

[Silberman]

The problem with personal experiences is that there is a lot of bias, if another member says that it has worked for them I believe them in the sense that I do not think they have suffered catastrophic losses yet, but the math is clear, martingale has been disproved mathematically over and over again as a technique that works as it does not change at all the probabilities of the game, taking this into account the only reasonable explanation for those that argue that it works is that they have simply not used the strategy long enough.

The problem with personal experiences is that people like to show their strengths and hide their weaknesses, which is why they will brag about winning and keep quiet about losing.
That is simply human nature, we like to display our strengths while hiding our weaknesses.

Correct, and we only need to take a look at social media to see this is the truth, most people are going to post things about their life but most of it is going to be positive as they want to project a positive image over their life, occasionally they crack down and let their real selves to show up but this is rare, the problem with this is that people begin to deceive themselves thinking that in fact there is nothing wrong with their lives and the same kind of logic applies here as well.

They only do that for the sake of views, a lot of people are interested in this strategy and they would not watch if this strategy is not working. Everything that we saw in social media, especially on youtube could be biased, remember that the main intention of the uploader is just to increase his views to make more money. Maybe we just need to experience it ourselves so we can tell based on our real experience, but I'm sure this would not work to anyone.

But this is my issue, it is not necessary to go through personal experiences in order to find out that martingale does not work, in fact you only need a spreadsheet software and a few formulas and you can see by yourself that martingale does not work, you could run a simulation for as long as you need and you will see that in every single scenario your money will run out and reach zero, but since many people do not understand the math they prefer to follow the personal experiences of others or their own generating disastrous results.

[Questat]

The belief in the system is that when you do it, you basically win back all your losses from previous matches so you are basically trying to gamble by just breaking even. That's what I don't get in this system, besides doubling down on losses, you only have one way in this system and that is as I have said, breakeven.

The system is not created for you to break even, you started an exact amount then double it if you lose until you win, that's the only process you have to do and you don't use any kind of system as the system itself is very simple to follow. However, is it effective? the answer is yes if you have an unlimited bankroll.

[Mahanton]

The belief in the system is that when you do it, you basically win back all your losses from previous matches so you are basically trying to gamble by just breaking even. That's what I don't get in this system, besides doubling down on losses, you only have one way in this system and that is as I have said, breakeven.

The system is not created for you to break even, you started an exact amount then double it if you lose until you win, that's the only process you have to do and you don't use any kind of system as the system itself is very simple to follow. However, is it effective? the answer is yes if you have an unlimited bankroll.

But unlimited bankroll does only exist on dreams and not on real life.No matter how rich you are you would easily get wiped out when using up martingale.
This is why its never been suggested on relying with this kind of strategy because the more losing streak you would have the more deeper losses you would make and that wont really be sustainable as long the game would run plus imagine about doubling losses everytime then having a long streak will surely
blow up your account and this is why this strategy sucks but if you do know how to control yourself on getting out when you are in greens then that would
be a good news.

[uneng]

I would like to know from gamblers what they do instead of doubling the bet on loss, since martingale is so horrible. If you don't raise your bet after a loss, you are never going to make any profit from gambling. That is my perception on this matter. For this reason people use martingale, because they want to have a chance to make profit at least on short run.

If there were better ways to gamble, would martingale be so popular?

And who said that you should profit from gambling? Every casino warns you to play for fun, not for profit. If you want to profit, then go work, do something.

Everyone (should) plays aware about the risks, but it doesn't mean we play to lose. We play knowing we may lose, but always trying to increase maximum as possible the probabilities of earning some profit and that is why strategies were developed and adopted. Although they don't assure profit on long run, they increase the chance you are going to profit on short run, and that is what we expect when gambling, isn't it?

Why is martingale popular? It's the simplest strategy that comes close to the humans minds. People think: When I lose, the chance of win next time increases, so let's double and get the loss back + some profit. Simple and easy, right?

That is true, however it's not the main point here.
People are complaining about Martingale and I just would like to know what strategy they use since Martingale doesn't fit their gameplay style.

[iv4n]

The belief in the system is that when you do it, you basically win back all your losses from previous matches so you are basically trying to gamble by just breaking even. That's what I don't get in this system, besides doubling down on losses, you only have one way in this system and that is as I have said, breakeven.

The system is not created for you to break even, you started an exact amount then double it if you lose until you win, that's the only process you have to do and you don't use any kind of system as the system itself is very simple to follow. However, is it effective? the answer is yes if you have an unlimited bankroll.

Why do you think that you need to have an unlimited bankroll? With auto betting settings you can make miracles... you can simply play first rolls at 1 satoshi bet, and only after a "certain number of losses" you start rising bets! In this case, you need to use "add amount", not "increase amount"...
You can play to wager, you can play to make a nice profit! But what's important is that you need to find a perfect base bet for your bankroll, and not be greedy with your goals! And it can be effective, just if you stick to that!

[lixer]

you can simply play first rolls at 1 satoshi bet, and only after a "certain number of losses" you start rising bets!

Could you please put some more light on this? Do you mean that you need to stick within 1 satoshi bet for some times before increasing the bet amount? How do you come to know the exact number of "certain number of losses".

For example, if you stick with 1 satoshi bet for 5 rolls, and your 4th roll is positive then you may not get chances to recover your previous losses.

Martingale strategy is all about "immediate recovery of losses before going for another round of betting". It means if your 3rd bet is a negative then you need to go for recovering it from your 4th bet onward until you find a positive roll. So, immediately doubling your base bet from the next roll onward alone will serve the purpose of going for martingale strategy. Keep sticking with same bet amount is definitely not a martingale strategy.

[iv4n]

you can simply play first rolls at 1 satoshi bet, and only after a "certain number of losses" you start rising bets!

Could you please put some more light on this? Do you mean that you need to stick within 1 satoshi bet for some times before increasing the bet amount? How do you come to know the exact number of "certain number of losses".

For example, if you stick with 1 satoshi bet for 5 rolls, and your 4th roll is positive then you may not get chances to recover your previous losses.

Martingale strategy is all about "immediate recovery of losses before going for another round of betting". It means if your 3rd bet is a negative then you need to go for recovering it from your 4th bet onward until you find a positive roll. So, immediately doubling your base bet from the next roll onward alone will serve the purpose of going for martingale strategy. Keep sticking with same bet amount is definitely not a martingale strategy.

If you stick with 1 sat bet for 99 rolls at x100 payout (win chance 0.99%) you will be positive even if you hit it in the last roll! So how do you come to know the exact number of losses is simple, you set the payout (win chance) and you know what you can expect.... max red streak, after how many streaks you rise bet, and how much you raise/add to bet!
To make it simple let's take x2 payout (win chance 49.5%)... I saw 33 reds, some people talk about even longer red steaks... but that happens rarely, it's usually between 5-20 reds!
So it goes like this... for base bet 1 sat at x2:

-On every streak of 15 losses add to amount 100 sat
-On every streak of 16 losses add to amount 200 sat
-On every streak of 17 losses add to amount 300 sat
...

You can have fun with all this, depending on the payout you choose and your bankroll you can set up your own strategy! As you see from this example, the first 15 bets are 15 sats cost, but your 16 bet is bringing the profit, and depending on your bankroll/base bet/payout you can create a strategy for any losing streak...

You can go with:

-On every streak of 15 increase amount by 1000%
-On every streak of 16 increase amount by 100%
-On every streak of 17 increase amount by 100%

For x 2 it's easy to cover 40 reds if you play with a bunch of "whole coins"... TRX, DOGE, XRP... you can even wait for 20 reds and only then to start rising bets! It's up to you and how risky you want to play it! More risk = higher possible profit, less risk = lower possible profit!

Well, I hope you get the point!

[KTChampions]

Could you please put some more light on this? Do you mean that you need to stick within 1 satoshi bet for some times before increasing the bet amount? How do you come to know the exact number of "certain number of losses".

For example, if you stick with 1 satoshi bet for 5 rolls, and your 4th roll is positive then you may not get chances to recover your previous losses.

Martingale strategy is all about "immediate recovery of losses before going for another round of betting". It means if your 3rd bet is a negative then you need to go for recovering it from your 4th bet onward until you find a positive roll. So, immediately doubling your base bet from the next roll onward alone will serve the purpose of going for martingale strategy. Keep sticking with same bet amount is definitely not a martingale strategy.

This is a misunderstanding of the Martingale strategy and it just misleads those who try to use this strategy. Mathematically speaking, when you increase your bet there is no retracement, you only increase your risk. Given the fact that your bets sometimes win and you return to the original bet (with a small profit), it seems to you that you are winning by changing the size of the bet, but in reality you are making a small profit only by increasing the risk.

[Botnake]

Could you please put some more light on this? Do you mean that you need to stick within 1 satoshi bet for some times before increasing the bet amount? How do you come to know the exact number of "certain number of losses".

For example, if you stick with 1 satoshi bet for 5 rolls, and your 4th roll is positive then you may not get chances to recover your previous losses.

Martingale strategy is all about "immediate recovery of losses before going for another round of betting". It means if your 3rd bet is a negative then you need to go for recovering it from your 4th bet onward until you find a positive roll. So, immediately doubling your base bet from the next roll onward alone will serve the purpose of going for martingale strategy. Keep sticking with same bet amount is definitely not a martingale strategy.

This is a misunderstanding of the Martingale strategy and it just misleads those who try to use this strategy. Mathematically speaking, when you increase your bet there is no retracement, you only increase your risk. Given the fact that your bets sometimes win and you return to the original bet (with a small profit), it seems to you that you are winning by changing the size of the bet, but in reality you are making a small profit only by increasing the risk.

That's the reality, doubling every loses is a big risk, some might not see it because they don't believe that they'll lose 10 in a row, which in actual practice using the martingale strategy, that would already result to a huge loses even if you only have a $10 starting bet.

[FatFork]

I understand that the martingale system is flawed and the casino still has an edge over you, because they have unlimited money, while our bankroll is much smaller. But what other system should we use then? As far as I am aware there is no system that is better than a martingale approach. With the doubling down strategy we have a fixed betting size, that guarantees us to recover all our losses from the previous rounds. The tail risk is that we lose 10 times in a row.

There is no such thing as a guaranteed always-winning strategy. If such a strategy existed, then any provably fair casino would go bankrupt. We can use different strategies to increase our odds, but sooner or later the house always wins. It's just math.

The Labouchere strategy is also popular. It's a bit more complex than the Martingale and Fibonacci strategies and is also known as the cancelation or split martingale.

[Distinctin]

I understand that the martingale system is flawed and the casino still has an edge over you, because they have unlimited money, while our bankroll is much smaller. But what other system should we use then? As far as I am aware there is no system that is better than a martingale approach. With the doubling down strategy we have a fixed betting size, that guarantees us to recover all our losses from the previous rounds. The tail risk is that we lose 10 times in a row.

There is no such thing as a guaranteed always-winning strategy. If such a strategy existed, then any provably fair casino would go bankrupt. We can use different strategies to increase our odds, but sooner or later the house always wins. It's just math.

If gamblers have that kind of mindset, then they will not fool themselves into believing that one day they'll find a strategy that could constantly bring them a profit. The only newbie would fall for that martingale strategy as they don't fully understand the risk until they fully experience getting their bankroll busted many times.

The Labouchere strategy is also popular. It's a bit more complex than the Martingale and Fibonacci strategies and is also known as the cancelation or split martingale.

I'm not familiar with this one, I think I'll take a look about this strategy.

[FatFork]

The Labouchere strategy is also popular. It's a bit more complex than the Martingale and Fibonacci strategies and is also known as the cancelation or split martingale.

I'm not familiar with this one, I think I'll take a look about this strategy.

You have a good description of the Labouchere strategy on the wiki:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labouch%C3%A8re_system
and also on the official website of Seuntjie's DiceBot:
https://bot.seuntjie.com/BettingSystem.aspx?id=2

As I mentioned, the strategy is a bit more complicated, so using a bot is preferred, but it can also be done manually with a little help of a pen and paper.