Casino games plebs like us must play

[LUCKMCFLY]

~ Don't believe those plebs like us who says that the Martingale System works because 100% of the time is, they're lying. Martingale System with a small/limited amount of capital, played in casino games with house edge low or high, is a quick path to ruin.

Indeed, if you want to make money through martingale, it's a shortcut to disaster. Even if your initial bet is as small as $0.20 you are doomed. However, you can still use martingale playing for your entertainment. I'm doing it all the time. But I'm starting really low, like a thousandth of a cent, and if my target is, say, 99x, I'm not doubling my bet each time, but rather every tenth time or so. And most of the time I hit it eventually, like today, for instance:



but considering what I have previously lost, my real winning is just around 10 cents. So, like I said, it's not a way of making money. Don't try to start from a higher amount to win more in the end. This may end very badly.

That is a great example and with the illustration it is the best to do it, I think that the martingale is a way of betting for those who want to feel the adrenaline at its maximum level, although I have applied it I do not recommend it, because most of Sometimes I have lost, and it is not advisable to tell people to lose their money, because it would be something very bad, it is best for the person to bet without resorting to that strategy, there are many strategies, but above all I believe that before applying any technique it is necessary to emphasize that the strategies are only some of the ways that the players have to follow a type of pattern and enjoy. It is not a sure thing to earn money.

[Haunebu]

So, like I said, it's not a way of making money. Don't try to start from a higher amount to win more in the end. This may end very badly.

Contrary to popular belief, it's actually possible to earn big amounts through martingale only in the short-term as long as luck sides with you big-time. It's a high-risk, high-reward solution only in the short-term.

Hasn't worked for me yet, but it worked for many others despite being a negative progression strategy.

[minime0105]

Remember that in gambling, luck is the majority factor that can either make or break your day. A person with no skill at all can still win tons of money in gambling if he has the luck for the day. But a person who does not have any prior experience nor skill in trading is most likely to fail and to experience losses.

I agree. Trading is not entirely relying on luck because skills and knowledge are necessary to have a chances to gain and succeed as a trader. While in gambling you can't apply any strategy as proven to be working since it's more on luck, unless you're not playing a chance based game wherein having a knowledge is an edge like in sports betting. Therefore these two are different, although they're both risky. Anyway, regardless of your choice to make money, remember to take time gaining knowledge and know what you're getting into to be aware of the consequences and be prepared. Don't gamble if you can't handle losing your money, same goes if you decided to become a trader.

And if you know that gambling won't make you money if you're unlucky, you better not try hard. Trading will suit you better because you can learn how to make a profit from trading. Although each comes with a risk, in trading, if you don't sell your coin when the price goes down, you still have a chance to make a profit when the price goes up again. But in gambling, once you lose, it means you have lost money and it will be difficult to recover those losses because gambling is all about winning and losing.

The different between gambling and trading is that gambling is game of luck and prediction due to your level of understanding of gambling and that particular gambling specifically, why trading due occur through luck also, but the different between them is that trading is something you will like the risk which is involved in trading without having anything like double mind, so therefore someone may have advantages in trading than gambling.

[serjent05]

~ Don't believe those plebs like us who says that the Martingale System works because 100% of the time is, they're lying. Martingale System with a small/limited amount of capital, played in casino games with house edge low or high, is a quick path to ruin.

Indeed, if you want to make money through martingale, it's a shortcut to disaster. Even if your initial bet is as small as $0.20 you are doomed. However, you can still use martingale playing for your entertainment. I'm doing it all the time. But I'm starting really low, like a thousandth of a cent, and if my target is, say, 99x, I'm not doubling my bet each time, but rather every tenth time or so. And most of the time I hit it eventually, like today, for instance:



but considering what I have previously lost, my real winning is just around 10 cents. So, like I said, it's not a way of making money. Don't try to start from a higher amount to win more in the end. This may end very badly.

We all agree that martingale sucks our bankroll dry in an instant if we happen to hit a series of losing streaks.  Even though we won at the last spin, the most we can win is the amount of our initial bet.  I have tried this kind of approach and created different kind of variables, still at the end no matter what strategy we do, we will end up in a lost.

So, like I said, it's not a way of making money. Don't try to start from a higher amount to win more in the end. This may end very badly.

Contrary to popular belief, it's actually possible to earn big amounts through martingale only in the short-term as long as luck sides with you big-time. It's a high-risk, high-reward solution only in the short-term.

Hasn't worked for me yet, but it worked for many others despite being a negative progression strategy.

The key factor in here is doing the reverse martingale and stopping at the right time.  In reverse martingale, we double as we win, if we are lucky enough to have 5 consecutive wins and stop. In a bet of $2 dollars 5 consecutive wins can earn us $64 at most.

[Dunamisx]

The more I often come across this thread on gambling board it gives me that impression that gambling is not been specific on the category or kinds of gamblerse that it must constitute, some gambling is been designed in a such way that makes every gamblers get equal right in serving others right since they were out for business, as long as the casinos will always care and show them it worth it, money is the common and general language they can understand be it from plebs or not.

[Haunebu]

The key factor in here is doing the reverse martingale and stopping at the right time.  In reverse martingale, we double as we win, if we are lucky enough to have 5 consecutive wins and stop. In a bet of $2 dollars 5 consecutive wins can earn us $64 at most.

Reverse martingale and other variations of martingale are actually a lot worse when compared to the original which is why most gamblers including me tend to stick to the original strategy itself.

Another reason as to why the original is more popular in comparison is because many gamblers are unaware of its variations.

[Wind_FURY]

So, like I said, it's not a way of making money. Don't try to start from a higher amount to win more in the end. This may end very badly.

Contrary to popular belief, it's actually possible to earn big amounts through martingale only in the short-term as long as luck sides with you big-time. It's a high-risk, high-reward solution only in the short-term.

Hasn't worked for me yet, but it worked for many others despite being a negative progression strategy.

"Short-term" doesn't prove anything. It's an excuse. Would it really count if "the gambler" used the Martingale System, won a big amount, them stopped gambling forever? Would that really prove that the Martingale System as "practically useful" for gambling? I believe not, unless "the gambler" used his winnings to gamble with the Martingale System again, which will prove that it isn't an effective system when you're playing casino games that have a house edge.

[wxa7115]

Contrary to popular belief, it's actually possible to earn big amounts through martingale only in the short-term as long as luck sides with you big-time. It's a high-risk, high-reward solution only in the short-term.

Hasn't worked for me yet, but it worked for many others despite being a negative progression strategy.

"Short-term" doesn't prove anything. It's an excuse. Would it really count if "the gambler" used the Martingale System, won a big amount, them stopped gambling forever? Would that really prove that the Martingale System as "practically useful" for gambling? I believe not, unless "the gambler" used his winnings to gamble with the Martingale System again, which will prove that it isn't an effective system when you're playing casino games that have a house edge.

A strategy can either give consistent profits or not, due to the randomness of the games some gamblers can obtain some profits but the negative expected value of their bets will continue to exist, however those profits have nothing to do with martingale and instead they have to do with the nature of gambling itself.

So the only way to judge the martingale strategy is by applying a long term approach to it, and whenever this has been done martingale has been proven to be a useless strategy.

[Desmong]

So, like I said, it's not a way of making money. Don't try to start from a higher amount to win more in the end. This may end very badly.

Contrary to popular belief, it's actually possible to earn big amounts through martingale only in the short-term as long as luck sides with you big-time. It's a high-risk, high-reward solution only in the short-term.

Hasn't worked for me yet, but it worked for many others despite being a negative progression strategy.

High risks to low reward ratio is want I don't used to like looking at the high risks I will take with lower or small rewards is not good for my liking. I do like taking little risks so my chances of winning with be high and even though what I am winning is little, I will still prefer it since I am having a consistent winnings always.

[Newlifebtc]

So, like I said, it's not a way of making money. Don't try to start from a higher amount to win more in the end. This may end very badly.

Contrary to popular belief, it's actually possible to earn big amounts through martingale only in the short-term as long as luck sides with you big-time. It's a high-risk, high-reward solution only in the short-term.

Hasn't worked for me yet, but it worked for many others despite being a negative progression strategy.

High risks to low reward ratio is want I don't used to like looking at the high risks I will take with lower or small rewards is not good for my liking. I do like taking little risks so my chances of winning with be high and even though what I am winning is little, I will still prefer it since I am having a consistent winnings always.

That you are right for that particular statement you made anyone who would like to take a low risk 4 involvement of gambling third person might have big close to winning or having what did you have in mind predicting higher was thinking to get her I think it will make you To lose your target particularly.

[Oilacris]

-----

---

If a small amount of capital is the problem, then the adjustment that plebs must do that makes good logical sense is, make your bets smaller.

Smaller amount of capital = smaller bets.

Don't believe those plebs like us who says that the Martingale System works because 100% of the time is, they're lying. Martingale System with a small/limited amount of capital, played in casino games with house edge low or high, is a quick path to ruin.

Only those people who doesnt have experience about martingale system would definitely be saying that small capital would turn out to be big if they would be using up this strategy.
They are really be able to experience for themselves about the bitter truth.
If your capital is just too small even placing up with the smallest possible minimum bet or lowest one then it would really be still be blown up in fire
in short losing streaks.
Lots have tried and experienced ones would definitely tell that it isnt something worth it to try. This is really just the fastest
way on busting up your entire bankroll.

[Wind_FURY]

Contrary to popular belief, it's actually possible to earn big amounts through martingale only in the short-term as long as luck sides with you big-time. It's a high-risk, high-reward solution only in the short-term.

Hasn't worked for me yet, but it worked for many others despite being a negative progression strategy.

"Short-term" doesn't prove anything. It's an excuse. Would it really count if "the gambler" used the Martingale System, won a big amount, them stopped gambling forever? Would that really prove that the Martingale System as "practically useful" for gambling? I believe not, unless "the gambler" used his winnings to gamble with the Martingale System again, which will prove that it isn't an effective system when you're playing casino games that have a house edge.

A strategy can either give consistent profits or not, due to the randomness of the games some gamblers can obtain some profits but the negative expected value of their bets will continue to exist, however those profits have nothing to do with martingale and instead they have to do with the nature of gambling itself.

So the only way to judge the martingale strategy is by applying a long term approach to it, and whenever this has been done martingale has been proven to be a useless strategy.

Please try to understand my point. House edge makes sure that a player/user is a long term loser. The Martingale System has nothing to do with winning or losing, BUT has everything to do with how fast/quick that he/she loses his/her capital. Visualize being long term loser in a casino game that has 5% house edge against you, and doubling the amount of your bets everytime you lose. The casino might already be counting the amount of their profits from you before they happen.

[delfastTions]

Contrary to popular belief, it's actually possible to earn big amounts through martingale only in the short-term as long as luck sides with you big-time. It's a high-risk, high-reward solution only in the short-term.

Hasn't worked for me yet, but it worked for many others despite being a negative progression strategy.

"Short-term" doesn't prove anything. It's an excuse. Would it really count if "the gambler" used the Martingale System, won a big amount, them stopped gambling forever? Would that really prove that the Martingale System as "practically useful" for gambling? I believe not, unless "the gambler" used his winnings to gamble with the Martingale System again, which will prove that it isn't an effective system when you're playing casino games that have a house edge.

A strategy can either give consistent profits or not, due to the randomness of the games some gamblers can obtain some profits but the negative expected value of their bets will continue to exist, however those profits have nothing to do with martingale and instead they have to do with the nature of gambling itself.

So the only way to judge the martingale strategy is by applying a long term approach to it, and whenever this has been done martingale has been proven to be a useless strategy.

Please try to understand my point. House edge makes sure that a player/user is a long term loser. The Martingale System has nothing to do with winning or losing, BUT has everything to do with how fast/quick that he/she loses his/her capital. Visualize being long term loser in a casino game that has 5% house edge against you, and doubling the amount of your bets everytime you lose. The casino might already be counting the amount of their profits from you before they happen.

Yeah!  These are exactly what you pointed out, I totally agree, a good example. 
Of course, you can also gamble on the Martingale strategy.  But the question always arises, how long, how many cycles of the game will sustain your budget and the money that you can afford to lose.  This is where you start to figure out .. count ...
And you understand that you should not play according to this strategy for the simple reason that the game itself will not last too long, you will enjoy the game for too little time (which is generally the most important thing when playing  casino!). 
And besides, a series of frustrations from losing, it still grows as the size of the lost bet grows. 

So I, perhaps, am not a supporter of a clear and strict use of such a strategy. 
But, of course, maybe someone likes to play like that.?

[LUCKMCFLY]

I'm actually a little dissatisfied with why the OP thinks that there should be some kind of special casinos for the plebs.  

Of course when betting thousands of dollars in a gambling area like Las Vegas, it's not for the plebs.  And that those millionaires who play there are better than those players who bet $10.  How are they better???  Yes, they are all much worse than us ordinary people who honestly earn a living, and do not squander crazy money from the inheritance, or people like SBF (Well, of course, until the collapse of FTX! ) ).  
In general, it is unfair to divide players into plebs and no-plebs.  
Where is the boundary of such a division - there is none!

Well, in that you also have to do a little analysis, it is not the same as those people who have so much money and bet big, obviously they have a bigger stomach to bear certain types of expenses, while people who do not have so much money must place bets more moderate without spending a lot, a player regardless of their economic position must do and have control of their expenses, and what is allowed to win or lose, is not something simple, even those who have the most money can lose a lot and become decapitalized, If there is an amount of money willing to lose, it is what can be enjoyed in the game and at the same time have options to win.

I believe delfasTions didn't get the actual context of where my viewpoint is for the topic. I was merely suggesting that for plebs like us, it might better to play more casino games with lower house edge because it would make us lose less, and make is lose in a slower rate than the average. Plebs like us don't have much money to use for gambling, so if a pleb wants to gamble, it might be good to have a wiser casino game preference with lower house edge, like BlackJack or Craps.

Well, according to my personal experience, when I started in the world of gambling and casinos, what I played the most was craps on freebitco.in, and there used to be a very essential technique with 10,000 sats, you could take 11,000 sats per day, in a matter of 30 consecutive days doing the same strategy you could get a good capital, of course without making bets leaving with the entire balance or with the martingale, because when the martingale was applied it was most likely to lose everything and very quickly, and throwing away the effort of many days was not something that was in the calculations, that is why I believe that more things can be done with little balance, and already at mushroom heights, with little balance I play slot machines without looking to win, just to have fun.

[Wind_FURY]

Please try to understand my point. House edge makes sure that a player/user is a long term loser. The Martingale System has nothing to do with winning or losing, BUT has everything to do with how fast/quick that he/she loses his/her capital. Visualize being long term loser in a casino game that has 5% house edge against you, and doubling the amount of your bets everytime you lose. The casino might already be counting the amount of their profits from you before they happen.

Yeah!  These are exactly what you pointed out, I totally agree, a good example. 
Of course, you can also gamble on the Martingale strategy.  But the question always arises, how long, how many cycles of the game will sustain your budget and the money that you can afford to lose.  This is where you start to figure out .. count ...
And you understand that you should not play according to this strategy for the simple reason that the game itself will not last too long, you will enjoy the game for too little time (which is generally the most important thing when playing  casino!). 
And besides, a series of frustrations from losing, it still grows as the size of the lost bet grows. 

So I, perhaps, am not a supporter of a clear and strict use of such a strategy. 
But, of course, maybe someone likes to play like that.?

I'm not against the use of the Martingale System, I'm merely trying to debate if it's truly an effective betting system to help plebs like us win some money in the casino. I have heard others trying to argue that playing casino games is not for profit/just for entertainment. OK, but perhaps using the Martingale System might make the entertainment last for only 10 minutes in the casino because you doubled your bets to zero. Hahaha.

But as you posted, maybe someone likes to play like that.

[bitbollo]

I'm not against the use of the Martingale System, I'm merely trying to debate if it's truly an effective betting system to help plebs like us win some money in the casino. I have heard others trying to argue that playing casino games is not for profit/just for entertainment. OK, but perhaps using the Martingale System might make the entertainment last for only 10 minutes in the casino because you doubled your bets to zero. Hahaha.

But as you posted, maybe someone likes to play like that.

I am against martingale system and I think this is one of the worst gambling approach.
You need an endless wallet to be able to reach a win/profit with Martingale system. there are tons of explanation about it, any gambler must be aware of that. also the final result. You will get a win of the initial amount even if you doubled your bets a lot of times. It means you're getting an high risk for a minimum benefit!
Another reason I don't suggest this gambling approach, also because this is the mental result for "addiction". I will bet more/doubling my bet so I can win...

[bitmaster2023]

Hi folks,

Just stumbled on an interesting on-chain gambling site, you can directly bet ETH using your MetaMask wallet, without depositing funds 

https://ethgames.fun/pokerdice.html
https://ethgames.fun/twodices.html

Have fun.

[Wind_FURY]

I'm not against the use of the Martingale System, I'm merely trying to debate if it's truly an effective betting system to help plebs like us win some money in the casino. I have heard others trying to argue that playing casino games is not for profit/just for entertainment. OK, but perhaps using the Martingale System might make the entertainment last for only 10 minutes in the casino because you doubled your bets to zero. Hahaha.

But as you posted, maybe someone likes to play like that.

I am against martingale system and I think this is one of the worst gambling approach.
You need an endless wallet to be able to reach a win/profit with Martingale system. there are tons of explanation about it, any gambler must be aware of that. also the final result. You will get a win of the initial amount even if you doubled your bets a lot of times. It means you're getting an high risk for a minimum benefit!
Another reason I don't suggest this gambling approach, also because this is the mental result for "addiction". I will bet more/doubling my bet so I can win...

I believe the same argument can be applied in day-trading. If a day-trader's stop-loss has been activated repeatedly and it has caused him lose 20% of his capital, should his next trades be double in size before he lost 20%? NO, that would be stupid, he SHOULD make his trades smaller in size to preserve capital, and wait for a better/bullish situation in the market. If he doubles his/her trades during losing streaks, he will have NOTHING by the time everything is bullish again.

[LUCKMCFLY]

So technically you are saying that gambling can be more ideal as a stress reliever than making a trade?. well it depends in trading if you have knowledge regarding the position you would like to do is you make the right time and proper preparation at the same time, if you execute the trade properly its good but if not you have a mistakes every thing right there has a lesson but in playing gambling is you just make a deposit, play and let the game you choose to decide if you are a winner or not, gambling is more stressful because you are just letting other people make your luck not yourself with your knowledge and skills.

IN my opinion gambling is much more stressful than day trading, I say this for the following reason: for example if a person takes 100$ and that person starts making sports bets, that person bets 10$, loses, bets others 10$ and loses again, bet on 10$ wins, but then goes back to bet on 10$ and loses again, this person will start to get stressed because he sees that his bankroll is reducing all the time, and he doesn't know how to reverse this situation, then panic starts to take over him, but when doing trade he will always put stop - loss and he can do hodl for some time until he has profit, then he will not have stress when doing trade

In my view you cannot really compare gambling and trading. Gambling should not be stressful, it is just a game and it has to be played for leisure, except pro-poker and the like. But trading is not a game, it is a real profession and done properly, is based on facts and analysis, a different thing is people trying to think of it as being a game. I would rather say it may be a profession.

Yes, in fact, for me trading is like a profession because it is being studied all the time and there are more and more cases in which more and more can be learned, in fact the large number of books that there are and the number of things that It has happened to many traders who consider themselves professionals, it is something to take into consideration, learning is unique, the game is as you say, just to have fun, except that in poker sometimes you need to have that touch of luck to win with more ease, in particular I really like poker, it is one of the most exciting games, but I must admit that sometimes one can feel pressured and stressed at the same time.

[ethereumhunter]

Remember that in gambling, luck is the majority factor that can either make or break your day. A person with no skill at all can still win tons of money in gambling if he has the luck for the day. But a person who does not have any prior experience nor skill in trading is most likely to fail and to experience losses.

I agree. Trading is not entirely relying on luck because skills and knowledge are necessary to have a chances to gain and succeed as a trader. While in gambling you can't apply any strategy as proven to be working since it's more on luck, unless you're not playing a chance based game wherein having a knowledge is an edge like in sports betting. Therefore these two are different, although they're both risky. Anyway, regardless of your choice to make money, remember to take time gaining knowledge and know what you're getting into to be aware of the consequences and be prepared. Don't gamble if you can't handle losing your money, same goes if you decided to become a trader.

And if you know that gambling won't make you money if you're unlucky, you better not try hard. Trading will suit you better because you can learn how to make a profit from trading. Although each comes with a risk, in trading, if you don't sell your coin when the price goes down, you still have a chance to make a profit when the price goes up again. But in gambling, once you lose, it means you have lost money and it will be difficult to recover those losses because gambling is all about winning and losing.

The different between gambling and trading is that gambling is game of luck and prediction due to your level of understanding of gambling and that particular gambling specifically, why trading due occur through luck also, but the different between them is that trading is something you will like the risk which is involved in trading without having anything like double mind, so therefore someone may have advantages in trading than gambling.

And if they already know that they have an advantage in trading over gambling, they are better off concentrating on trading and not gambling at all. It will be better for them because their profit potential will be greater by trading than by gambling. They should be aware of this and not try to gamble or they can still gamble occasionally and take a few moments for fun between trades. And we already know the difference between gambling and trading so we can choose which is good for us and make money with that choice.