.

[decodx]

I prefer martingale because it is more fun to watch how many losing streaks you will reach until you win again. There is no enjoyment in doing a one-time-bet for me, and doing this has higher chance of losing than martingale strategy. If you lose, there would be no chance to recover again unless you deposit more in your bankroll. Gambling is all about pure luck so people that win in a one-time-bet are very lucky. The chance of winning from it is like winning from a lottery.

Yes, martingale gives us a chance to get out of the pit of the bad losing streak. However, if we're not careful, there will be a risk of repeating the behavior that has landed us in such a pit of struggle.
There are so many times that we try to forget the past, when we found ourselves in such a scenario. However, the will to win and the feeling of satisfaction is just so powerful that we don't know how to stop once it has begun. All we want to do after winning is to keep on winning.

[1715623670]

1715623670

[1715623670]

1715623670

[1715623670]

1715623670

[1715623670]

1715623670

[1715623670]

1715623670

[alegotardo]

I prefer martingale because it is more fun to watch how many losing streaks you will reach until you win again. There is no enjoyment in doing a one-time-bet for me, and doing this has higher chance of losing than martingale strategy. If you lose, there would be no chance to recover again unless you deposit more in your bankroll. Gambling is all about pure luck so people that win in a one-time-bet are very lucky. The chance of winning from it is like winning from a lottery.

I have the same thought as you, luckily I gave up this addiction, and today I only bet on sports games.

But I guarantee you that martingale and other "techniques" that prolong the game are much more fun.
I also played a lot with bets where the probability of winning was low (less than 10%) but the reward was higher.

In the end, everything takes you to the same... an empty wallet, but what matters is the fun.

[adzino]

In fact, many now use the Martingale system instead of doing one stroke of luck, and the strange thing is that it is also liable to lose the same "chance" if it plays one betting with all the amount, and the question here is, why do gamblers prefer this system to a single roll?

Slows down your loss, but in the long term, you will get the same result. People think martingale will give them profit slowly. What they don't realize is that the how will always win due to the house edge. They think strategies will give them better chance of winning. Little do they know that game of chances doesn't depend on strategies. It depends on pure luck. No matter what strategy you apply, you will have the same outcome if you were playing for a long term. Martingale just gives you a chance to stop when you have made some profit. A single bet will either help you take the maximum profit or make the maximum loss.

[uneng]

I prefer martingale because it is more fun to watch how many losing streaks you will reach until you win again. There is no enjoyment in doing a one-time-bet for me, and doing this has higher chance of losing than martingale strategy. If you lose, there would be no chance to recover again unless you deposit more in your bankroll. Gambling is all about pure luck so people that win in a one-time-bet are very lucky. The chance of winning from it is like winning from a lottery.

I have the same thought as you, luckily I gave up this addiction, and today I only bet on sports games.

But I guarantee you that martingale and other "techniques" that prolong the game are much more fun.
I also played a lot with bets where the probability of winning was low (less than 10%) but the reward was higher.

In the end, everything takes you to the same... an empty wallet, but what matters is the fun.

The strategies to prolong the game are fun and without them the game would be very boring, lasting only a single or few shots. I think it doesn't make sense to play an one-time-bet, as the gamblers want to spend some nice time playing, enjoying the moment. The goal of a gambling game isn't to be finished in few minutes, but to last for several hours. Strategies like martingale make it possible.
First of all gamblers play for fun, because if it was only for profit many of them would have stopped already due to the losses on long run.

[romero121]

I prefer martingale because it is more fun to watch how many losing streaks you will reach until you win again. There is no enjoyment in doing a one-time-bet for me, and doing this has higher chance of losing than martingale strategy. If you lose, there would be no chance to recover again unless you deposit more in your bankroll. Gambling is all about pure luck so people that win in a one-time-bet are very lucky. The chance of winning from it is like winning from a lottery.

I have the same thought as you, luckily I gave up this addiction, and today I only bet on sports games.

But I guarantee you that martingale and other "techniques" that prolong the game are much more fun.
I also played a lot with bets where the probability of winning was low (less than 10%) but the reward was higher.

In the end, everything takes you to the same... an empty wallet, but what matters is the fun.

The strategies to prolong the game are fun and without them the game would be very boring, lasting only a single or few shots. I think it doesn't make sense to play an one-time-bet, as the gamblers want to spend some nice time playing, enjoying the moment. The goal of a gambling game isn't to be finished in few minutes, but to last for several hours. Strategies like martingale make it possible.
First of all gamblers play for fun, because if it was only for profit many of them would have stopped already due to the losses on long run.

Yes, with martingale or through placing of small bets the time of spending can be extended. However if the day isn't yours, even on such an extended spending what will be got at the end will be an empty wallet. So, it is not about martingale, single bet or some kind of strategy. Gambling is all about the luck, and the proper fund management. Better the fund management, lower will be the loss.

[Alisha-k]

In fact, many now use the Martingale system instead of doing one stroke of luck, and the strange thing is that it is also liable to lose the same "chance" if it plays one betting with all the amount, and the question here is, why do gamblers prefer this system to a single roll?

Greed plays out most during gambling and the desire to make it big has made so many adopt the martingale system instead. For me a one-time bet is good enough since both plays out the same outcome if it's a loss both experience the same outcome. It's even worst for martingale because it's vulnerable to loosing all your funds at once.

[electronicash]

In fact, many now use the Martingale system instead of doing one stroke of luck, and the strange thing is that it is also liable to lose the same "chance" if it plays one betting with all the amount, and the question here is, why do gamblers prefer this system to a single roll?

Greed plays out most during gambling and the desire to make it big has made so many adopt the martingale system instead. For me a one-time bet is good enough since both plays out the same outcome if it's a loss both experience the same outcome. It's even worst for martingale because it's vulnerable to loosing all your funds at once.

not really gurl. martingale will make you decide to continue or not while you are in the middle. it's not like you can lose it all in just a second. the moment you realize the amount is too big already to continue there is a chance for you to change your mind and then stop.

you start with $1 and then somewhere along you experience losing 10x straight already you might think $1024 seems too big to bet already. i'd have to stop and buy an altcoin instead  

[traderethereum]

I think there are some human desire to beat the house, because people are using all these strategies and none of them ever work. Some sites said that they have counters for the Martingale strategy, but I think they lie... if they use a Provably Fair system. You also get different variations on the Martingale strategy... like : "The Break-Even Martingale Strategy" or "The Inverse Martingale Strategy"

You also get "The D’Alembert Strategy" and "The Paroli Strategy" ..... but most of them will not drastically improve your chances to profit. It is all in the mind. 

Even we already know that whatever strategies applied, we will lose in the end, gamblers just want to experience the feeling of playing with their luck in the long run instead of doing a one-time bet. The chances of winning by doing multiple bets are higher compare to a one-time big-time bet.

The only thing now is, once won, get out or just play few rounds. A gambler must do everything to stop themselves in an event of winning. It's really hard to stop once we won because the feeling of being pumped is always there.

But using one time shot will not be better because we can not play in the next rounds.

1 time betting is never be a good option to choose by the gambler since this is so risky, we will lose everything in just a single bit and no chances to bounce back if we lose so I discourage gamblers to use this option. Martingale is more fun than doing that methods since on martingale we can do a good exhibition bets and from that we can really enjoy our game.

I will never use 1 time betting and risk all of my money in just one roll.
I know the percentage to lose with that will be more than 50% or I can say that I will not have a chance to win for just some money.
I prefer to use many betting times with small betting because I can gamble for some time and enjoy my free time.
Only a high-risk gambler will do that and they will not have a problem with the result and maybe they will do that at another time.

[Taskford]

I think there are some human desire to beat the house, because people are using all these strategies and none of them ever work. Some sites said that they have counters for the Martingale strategy, but I think they lie... if they use a Provably Fair system. You also get different variations on the Martingale strategy... like : "The Break-Even Martingale Strategy" or "The Inverse Martingale Strategy"

You also get "The D’Alembert Strategy" and "The Paroli Strategy" ..... but most of them will not drastically improve your chances to profit. It is all in the mind. 

Even we already know that whatever strategies applied, we will lose in the end, gamblers just want to experience the feeling of playing with their luck in the long run instead of doing a one-time bet. The chances of winning by doing multiple bets are higher compare to a one-time big-time bet.

The only thing now is, once won, get out or just play few rounds. A gambler must do everything to stop themselves in an event of winning. It's really hard to stop once we won because the feeling of being pumped is always there.

But using one time shot will not be better because we can not play in the next rounds.

1 time betting is never be a good option to choose by the gambler since this is so risky, we will lose everything in just a single bit and no chances to bounce back if we lose so I discourage gamblers to use this option. Martingale is more fun than doing that methods since on martingale we can do a good exhibition bets and from that we can really enjoy our game.

I will never use 1 time betting and risk all of my money in just one roll.
I know the percentage to lose with that will be more than 50% or I can say that I will not have a chance to win for just some money.
I prefer to use many betting times with small betting because I can gamble for some time and enjoy my free time.
Only a high-risk gambler will do that and they will not have a problem with the result and maybe they will do that at another time.

Actually I experience this before out of frustration but realize its wrong especially if you are chasing your losses, better to bet small amount since it will give you more higher chance to recover than doing this. Also maybe there are whales doing this but I think they are rarely do it maybe if they do they just want to experiment and try their luck if they can able to win by betting  huge in one roll.

[RealMalatesta]

Gamblers do really love to make the game longer thats why they do prefer on making use of different strategies and hope that they would able to make profits when they tend to use it up.

For one time bets then there are people who do make out such bet where they do put and roll it once or simply goes all in and if they lost then they would stop but depending
if they do still have money to spent or not.

Yeah, there are many different strategies, however the reality is that no matter what you do, in the end we are talking about losing in the long run. It doesn't matter how you gamble, house edge makes sure that you end up losing in the long run and that is why it is there. With the one-time all in bet at least you have a chance to win or lose and get out, if you lose at least you lose quickly and you know that you would have lost if you kept gambling as well, but if you win you can get out ahead and never come back.

However that means you only get to gamble once in your life and that just doesn't make any sense. Which is why I think it is obvious that there is a better strategy, which is either accepting the defeat before you start and focusing on the fun you could have (and meanwhile maybe you will get lucky) or not gambling at all, there is no system that can guarantee you profit.

[famososMuertos]

In fact, many now use the Martingale system instead of doing one stroke of luck, and the strange thing is that it is also liable to lose the same "chance" if it plays one betting with all the amount, and the question here is, why do gamblers prefer this system to a single roll?

Hi,
Let it go ... your OP, I thought, but in a way it has some odds / post, what you raise but breaking bankroll management or a simple strategy to play.

You know!! when they tell you mathematically it is possible ... but their probabilities are very low, it really depends on that, if I have 99% of winning and they pay me at 2x Yes!! a single bet, but if I have 99% and they pay me 1.02 % I say no. (If it's all my bankroll)

I think you mean the classic bet it "allin" at once, and when you say "amount" which in my case is my bankroll, then the best option to bet it all is a coinflip (50/50) with a 1: 1 payout because it is the option to compare it with matingala where the bet is doubled but you must guarantee a return of at least 2x, eg some apply martingale to sports bets with odss less than 2x, they lose in the medium term, it is not only about doubling the bet, it is about the ROI.

If you understand the above, you understand what your OP proposal falls into, to use martingale you just have to make a bet (single roll)

So sometimes a stroke of luck if you do not know what you are doing will not return your initial investment.

[traderethereum]

I think there are some human desire to beat the house, because people are using all these strategies and none of them ever work. Some sites said that they have counters for the Martingale strategy, but I think they lie... if they use a Provably Fair system. You also get different variations on the Martingale strategy... like : "The Break-Even Martingale Strategy" or "The Inverse Martingale Strategy"

You also get "The D’Alembert Strategy" and "The Paroli Strategy" ..... but most of them will not drastically improve your chances to profit. It is all in the mind. 

Even we already know that whatever strategies applied, we will lose in the end, gamblers just want to experience the feeling of playing with their luck in the long run instead of doing a one-time bet. The chances of winning by doing multiple bets are higher compare to a one-time big-time bet.

The only thing now is, once won, get out or just play few rounds. A gambler must do everything to stop themselves in an event of winning. It's really hard to stop once we won because the feeling of being pumped is always there.

But using one time shot will not be better because we can not play in the next rounds.

1 time betting is never be a good option to choose by the gambler since this is so risky, we will lose everything in just a single bit and no chances to bounce back if we lose so I discourage gamblers to use this option. Martingale is more fun than doing that methods since on martingale we can do a good exhibition bets and from that we can really enjoy our game.

I will never use 1 time betting and risk all of my money in just one roll.
I know the percentage to lose with that will be more than 50% or I can say that I will not have a chance to win for just some money.
I prefer to use many betting times with small betting because I can gamble for some time and enjoy my free time.
Only a high-risk gambler will do that and they will not have a problem with the result and maybe they will do that at another time.

Actually I experience this before out of frustration but realize its wrong especially if you are chasing your losses, better to bet small amount since it will give you more higher chance to recover than doing this. Also maybe there are whales doing this but I think they are rarely do it maybe if they do they just want to experiment and try their luck if they can able to win by betting  huge in one roll.

I guess many of us have that experience in gambling.
It is hard to recover our losses in gambling because we can get more losses if we still try playing gambling.
Maybe we need to realize that what we did before is wrong, and we do not have to chase the win as that will not work if we do not have luck.
That will be different if the whale does that because they have unlimited funds to do for anything they want.
They can easily experiment to know if that can work for them or not.

[iv4n]

I think there are some human desire to beat the house, because people are using all these strategies and none of them ever work. Some sites said that they have counters for the Martingale strategy, but I think they lie... if they use a Provably Fair system. You also get different variations on the Martingale strategy... like : "The Break-Even Martingale Strategy" or "The Inverse Martingale Strategy"

You also get "The D’Alembert Strategy" and "The Paroli Strategy" ..... but most of them will not drastically improve your chances to profit. It is all in the mind.  

Your post is the most quoted, and people agree with you! But I think that strategies work! I can give you strategies that will work for days, you don't have to turn off your computer at all! Like mining!

But there's one little thing (problem), or two... bankroll and base bet! It's where we fall, in the desire to make more and faster we rise bets, and bankroll can't support it... the result is well known, we get busted!

I like long-run strategies! It's why Wolf is great, you can make so crazy set up with their options! You can make it like any known strategy (martingale, paroli, d'alembert), or you can be imaginative and do it in your own way! And strategy will work as long as you know what can you do with your bankroll, and not being greedy!

"One-time bet" sounds a bit strange to me... I simply can't imagine rolling just one dice, or spin slot just once... it's usually a session with many bets! Depending on the game and the odds I want to catch (I like to chance +x1000 sometimes, on some games). And the question arises, how can you make a profit when you try to catch some huge payout without occasionally bet rising after some number of rolls? Basically, you have to play martingale or some variation!

[Goodluckmate.com]

As many people explained, the main difference is in the length of play. If you place one bet and lose, that's it for you for the day or week. If you win, you're very lucky and can keep playing or do whatever you want. With Martingale, the game is more of an experience I'd say. You must follow the rules for each bet, so you must be aware of what's happening on the table. It also prolongs the gameplay, so even with an unlucky streak, you get to play for more than 5 minutes.

So, if you want a quick adrenaline rush and possibly fast profit, you can just place one bet and be done with it. If you want to enjoy the gameplay and possibly win something, then go with Martingale. 

[Silberman]

I think there are some human desire to beat the house, because people are using all these strategies and none of them ever work. Some sites said that they have counters for the Martingale strategy, but I think they lie... if they use a Provably Fair system. You also get different variations on the Martingale strategy... like : "The Break-Even Martingale Strategy" or "The Inverse Martingale Strategy"

You also get "The D’Alembert Strategy" and "The Paroli Strategy" ..... but most of them will not drastically improve your chances to profit. It is all in the mind. 

Everything is on the mind of the gambler, it has been demonstrated many times that there is no way for a betting progression to improve your chances of earning money and beating the casino, this should not be surprising as if the house edge could be beaten so easily then casinos will not be around anymore as everyone will have the power to bankrupt them, people are always looking for ways to give themselves better outcomes and this is natural and in many instances this works out but unfortunately this is the wrong path in gambling and yet many people still keep taking it.

[carlfebz2]

I think there are some human desire to beat the house, because people are using all these strategies and none of them ever work. Some sites said that they have counters for the Martingale strategy, but I think they lie... if they use a Provably Fair system. You also get different variations on the Martingale strategy... like : "The Break-Even Martingale Strategy" or "The Inverse Martingale Strategy"

You also get "The D’Alembert Strategy" and "The Paroli Strategy" ..... but most of them will not drastically improve your chances to profit. It is all in the mind.  

Everything is on the mind of the gambler, it has been demonstrated many times that there is no way for a betting progression to improve your chances of earning money and beating the casino, this should not be surprising as if the house edge could be beaten so easily then casinos will not be around anymore as everyone will have the power to bankrupt them, people are always looking for ways to give themselves better outcomes and this is natural and in many instances this works out but unfortunately this is the wrong path in gambling and yet many people still keep taking it.

And this is the sole reason on why gambling business is really a profitable business type because of this actual or normal human behavior where people do chase up on making big profits in spite on already on the profiting side.

When it comes to behavior on how they do bet then its up to someone if they would prefer on prolong time than on making a single bet outcome which this is actually basing on users preference.
Overall the duration of two methods might differ but it cant still really change up the odds.

Not all would really be that patient to wait up on making profits for thousand rolls thats why they do decide on taking a single roll once and for all.

[traderethereum]

So, if you want a quick adrenaline rush and possibly fast profit, you can just place one bet and be done with it. If you want to enjoy the gameplay and possibly win something, then go with Martingale. 

Fast profit or fast loss
That is the risk that we should get if we use a one-time bet and there are no guarantee for us to know how big the percentage of losing or win but I guess the percentage of loss will be bigger than winning.
Many gamblers still choose martingale because they can play for longer and see the result in every round.
They hope that one or more rounds can give them winning, but that will depend on how good their luck.

[Silberman]

I think there are some human desire to beat the house, because people are using all these strategies and none of them ever work. Some sites said that they have counters for the Martingale strategy, but I think they lie... if they use a Provably Fair system. You also get different variations on the Martingale strategy... like : "The Break-Even Martingale Strategy" or "The Inverse Martingale Strategy"

You also get "The D’Alembert Strategy" and "The Paroli Strategy" ..... but most of them will not drastically improve your chances to profit. It is all in the mind.  

Everything is on the mind of the gambler, it has been demonstrated many times that there is no way for a betting progression to improve your chances of earning money and beating the casino, this should not be surprising as if the house edge could be beaten so easily then casinos will not be around anymore as everyone will have the power to bankrupt them, people are always looking for ways to give themselves better outcomes and this is natural and in many instances this works out but unfortunately this is the wrong path in gambling and yet many people still keep taking it.

And this is the sole reason on why gambling business is really a profitable business type because of this actual or normal human behavior where people do chase up on making big profits in spite on already on the profiting side.

When it comes to behavior on how they do bet then its up to someone if they would prefer on prolong time than on making a single bet outcome which this is actually basing on users preference.
Overall the duration of two methods might differ but it cant still really change up the odds.

Not all would really be that patient to wait up on making profits for thousand rolls thats why they do decide on taking a single roll once and for all.

There is evidence that gambling has been around since the dawn of civilization and I can get why people bet but once the science of probabilities began to make its way and it was demonstrated that it was impossible to beat casino games then people should have immediately switched gears and instead just gamble for fun, and yet despite the fact people know they cannot win on the long term as the odds are against them they still try to beat the casino, something that is quite astonishing for me.