Martingale revisited

[STT]

Bet Martingale but only start with 1 Satoshi bet.   Then you never run out, you get your wish to always win in a session (most likely) but with the drawback its unlikely you ever win anything big.     If you somehow still fail to win with this strategy, then give up and do not just try again with more.   Find a method or a game that works on the smallest bets and only then go forward with that.

[deisik]

Bet Martingale but only start with 1 Satoshi bet.   Then you never run out, you get your wish to always win in a session (most likely) but with the drawback its unlikely you ever win anything big.     If you somehow still fail to win with this strategy, then give up and do not just try again with more.   Find a method or a game that works on the smallest bets and only then go forward with that

If by Satoshi you refer to Bitcoin of Satoshi Nakamoto fame, then you'll get busted in the blink of an eye

Well, within a week or two or after a few hundred thousand rolls (probably, less). The only way to consistently profit by martingale is to use doges and start rolling at the minimum possible denomination (i.e 0.00000001 Doge). Then if you have like a few million dogecoins, you can actually be immune to 20+ consecutive losing rolls. It is simply not possible with Bitcoin as most casinos limit the max bet amount by just a few bitcoins, so even if you were Nakamoto incarnate, your millions of bitcoins would be of no help anyway

[1982dre]

Bet Martingale but only start with 1 Satoshi bet.   Then you never run out, you get your wish to always win in a session (most likely) but with the drawback its unlikely you ever win anything big.     If you somehow still fail to win with this strategy, then give up and do not just try again with more.   Find a method or a game that works on the smallest bets and only then go forward with that.

Even with 1 sat you can be busted within a short time. I don't think a lot of users will bet 1btc at the end to win just 1 sat back.because 1 satoshi is the nett profit after every green.

[deisik]

Bet Martingale but only start with 1 Satoshi bet.   Then you never run out, you get your wish to always win in a session (most likely) but with the drawback its unlikely you ever win anything big.     If you somehow still fail to win with this strategy, then give up and do not just try again with more.   Find a method or a game that works on the smallest bets and only then go forward with that.

Even with 1 sat you can be busted within a short time. I don't think a lot of users will bet 1btc at the end to win just 1 sat back.because 1 satoshi is the nett profit after every green

This is certainly true if you are using Bitcoin

As you can't bet more than a few bitcoins due to the limits put in place by casinos (they are not fools), so starting with 1 satoshi and 50% win chance, you are signing off your death sentence. It is not uncommon to see losing streaks that would theoretically end in a few hundred bitcoins (read, the loss of your balance is sort of guaranteed)

Anyone can try that with doges and see for themselves. Using the doge coin itself somewhat alleviates this problem but then other factors kick in. For example, many casinos don't allow to start rolling with the lowest denomination (I talk about Dogecoin specifically here), which quickly makes the whole effort an exercise in futility and stupidity

[STT]

I wouldnt have thought 1 satoshi would roll up into any problems with max bets.   The maths is deceptive to most people, thats really why most shouldnt do this.    I would never continue anywhere close to the limit, if its rolled from 1 sat into anything more then throw anyway amounts I just give up because the system test is a failure and thats all 1 sat is meant to be.   Carrying on further would entering into the sunken cost fallacy.

[deisik]

For the inquiring minds, I've been running this setup for over a month now at wolf.bet

A couple of times I came quite close to busting (in fact, was stopped just 1 roll short once), the inference being that you shouldn't actually be pursuing some daily targets like 1% or whatever as it is through variance that you can earn and ultimately bust

Thus you should be paying particular attention to it rather than averages if you are going to take this route at gambling. Ironically, I've made so many rolls (presumably over 4M already) that I can't even gather stats anymore (which I wanted to share here)

[deisik]

Okay, guys, now I've been able to collect some stats:



The bets are pretty fast at wolf.bet, so it is no surprise I rolled over 5M times by now. My win chance is and has been set to 37% all this time, so it seems that the wagered amount to profit ratio as well as wins to losses ratio reflects this setup pretty well despite a few occurrences of high variance that I encountered during this period. And while we are at it, below are the stats collected on August 7 and 16 (note that profits don't include free coins):





As you can see (in fact, as anyone can see), my profits continue to grow no matter how inherently flawed martingale can be

[swogerino]

Martingale works only if we have a huge bankroll and your stats that you have collected are lucky ones taken only in a certain interval of time.If the user continues these stats will change for sure in the near or distant future.

[docthusinh]

~

make sure you check provably fair/seed regularly, I personally do not post username on gambling site, it is exposed and who know.

[deisik]

Martingale works only if we have a huge bankroll and your stats that you have collected are lucky ones taken only in a certain interval of time.If the user continues these stats will change for sure in the near or distant future.

Okay, let's run this setup for another month (or two) and see how it goes (and fares)

~

make sure you check provably fair/seed regularly, I personally do not post username on gambling site, it is exposed and who know.

This is still mostly dust anyway

So I don't think it makes a lot of sense to check the seed now and then as my task is not to catch them red-handed or whatever (but you are welcome). I'm just trying to implement the approach laid out in the OP and see how long it can last me and where it can take me (in terms of winnings). So far so good

[Harkorede]

Martingale works only if we have a huge bankroll and your stats that you have collected are lucky ones taken only in a certain interval of time.If the user continues these stats will change for sure in the near or distant future.

It doesn't matter how huge of a bankroll any player has got, when using the Martingale strategy, he's bound to lose them all, It's only a matter of how long the bankroll would last. But one thing is certain with the system, losing all your bankroll is inevitable.

[deisik]

Martingale works only if we have a huge bankroll and your stats that you have collected are lucky ones taken only in a certain interval of time.If the user continues these stats will change for sure in the near or distant future.

It doesn't matter how huge of a bankroll any player has got, when using the Martingale strategy, he's bound to lose them all, It's only a matter of how long the bankroll would last. But one thing is certain with the system, losing all your bankroll is inevitable

Technically, I agree with you

Still, it is a huge difference if you are going to lose everything in 30 years (when your are unlikely to continue playing anyway) and just 30 minutes. But that's the whole idea presented here. You earn something and that allows you to lengthen the period of time until you bust by steadily increasing your killing streak. Indeed, this is not a guarantee of any kind as your rolls are still random (read, you can lose your balance any moment) but statistically, it will last you longer

Regardless, I am still rolling:



Even though I haven't seen a lot of variance lately that would allow me to increase my winnings dramatically

[deisik]

It's been a while since I last posted my stats here. And you know what? I'm still rolling!



Since my last post in this thread I've seen a few bouts of high variance (read, long losing streaks) which allowed me to raise my profits significantly (as you can see, these streaks were not long enough to wipe me out yet). Yeah, I know it is still mostly dust in dollar terms, but Rome wasn't built in a day, right? So stay tuned, follow the thread, and keep your fingers crossed!

[Quidat]

It's been a while since I last posted my stats here. And you know what? I'm still rolling!

Since my last post in this thread I've seen a few bouts of high variance (read, long losing streaks) which allowed me to raise my profits significantly (as you can see, these streaks were not long enough to wipe me out yet). Yeah, I know it is still mostly dust in dollar terms, but Rome wasn't built in a day, right? So stay tuned, follow the thread, and keep your fingers crossed!

Thats some very long automated betting you had there since its 9M+ overall bets.You're still lucky that you havent been bust up.
Does your base bet is on minimal?

[Saint-loup]

To make things clear right at the start, I know that martingale is a losing strategy in the long term as there is no way to beat the house and its edge if only by chance alone (or by exploiting a bug in the system). And since martingale effectively removes the chance part from the equation, it is set to fail in the end

Martingale doesn't remove chance from the equation, it only removes  mischance. Because if you win you don't need to use it. You only double your bet when you lose.

[deisik]

Does your base bet is on minimal?

Yep, I start with the minimal possible amount at 0.00000001 doges

To make things clear right at the start, I know that martingale is a losing strategy in the long term as there is no way to beat the house and its edge if only by chance alone (or by exploiting a bug in the system). And since martingale effectively removes the chance part from the equation, it is set to fail in the end

Martingale doesn't remove chance from the equation, it only removes  mischance. Because if you win you don't need to use it. You only double your bet when you lose.

Well, that depends on how you are going to end up

If you leave with your balance multiplied, it could be construed this way, i.e. you always end up winning at the end of every series of bets, every losing streak. That point I agree with. However, and this is what the part of my post you quoted refers to, if you end up broken, with no coins left, as this is the inevitable outcome of any martingale setup provided you run it for long enough (unless you are following the strategy described in the OP, of course), that mischance will eventually catch up with you, totally and irreconcilably

[1982dre]

Does your base bet is on minimal?

Yep, I start with the minimal possible amount at 0.00000001 doges

To make things clear right at the start, I know that martingale is a losing strategy in the long term as there is no way to beat the house and its edge if only by chance alone (or by exploiting a bug in the system). And since martingale effectively removes the chance part from the equation, it is set to fail in the end

Martingale doesn't remove chance from the equation, it only removes  mischance. Because if you win you don't need to use it. You only double your bet when you lose.

Well, that depends on how you are going to end up

If you leave with your balance multiplied, it could be construed this way, i.e. you always end up winning at the end of every series of bets, every losing streak. That point I agree with. However, and this is what the part of my post you quoted refers to, if you end up broken, with no coins left, as this is the inevitable outcome of any martingale setup provided you run it for long enough (unless you are following the strategy described in the OP, of course), that mischance will eventually catch up with you, totally and irreconcilably

With a min bet of 0.00000001 doge you can handle a very large red streak.

I also did this but the earnings are also very low after 24h rolling. It would be better if the rolls were much faster.

Don't know maybe the rolls are faster with dicebot on wolf.bet but that isn't working yet.

[STT]

^^  THis is still a loss in my take because you are spending so much time invested in trying to win a simple gamble on the site.   Are you even having fun, its not a good system on any point of view as if done properly you are not even involved as a player in deciding when to bet but are being forced to follow that strategy.
   Eventually after a long time of the tiny bets you might be able to walk away with a tiny profit rather then a loss, it could be worse but there was never any potential to win only to lose your own time on a pointless pursuit using a bad system.
   I think we can all do better then this, find a game you enjoy first then worry about this idea of a perfect strategy because its going to take a while either way.

[Vispilio]

Some casino sites might have slightly increased odds for rolling above 95 or below 5 for example, due to a bug or probably to impress some new players with big wins at lower bet amounts...

This can be exploited for a little while with a modified martingale like this: set your winning odds to something like 14 to 1, (roll above 93 to win), on loss increase bets by let's say 10-12%. With some luck, you might be able to walk out with considerable profits without hitting bankruptcy...

[Saint-loup]

Does your base bet is on minimal?

Yep, I start with the minimal possible amount at 0.00000001 doges

To make things clear right at the start, I know that martingale is a losing strategy in the long term as there is no way to beat the house and its edge if only by chance alone (or by exploiting a bug in the system). And since martingale effectively removes the chance part from the equation, it is set to fail in the end

Martingale doesn't remove chance from the equation, it only removes  mischance. Because if you win you don't need to use it. You only double your bet when you lose.

Well, that depends on how you are going to end up

If you leave with your balance multiplied, it could be construed this way, i.e. you always end up winning at the end of every series of bets, every losing streak. That point I agree with. However, and this is what the part of my post you quoted refers to, if you end up broken, with no coins left, as this is the inevitable outcome of any martingale setup provided you run it for long enough (unless you are following the strategy described in the OP, of course), that mischance will eventually catch up with you, totally and irreconcilably

"long enough" means nothing in the real world. Some people win the lottery while they had one chance on 10 millions. So people can win a very long series while using a martingale.