This is why you shouldn't use martingale

[Josepht]

I don't know if this is the right place, but I wanted to share this with you.
I want to give you a little advice: don't use the martingale betting system.

I just visited just-dice.com and noticed this user:

[1715637368]

1715637368

[1715637368]

1715637368

[1715637368]

1715637368

[1715637368]

1715637368

[1715637368]

1715637368

[Pony789]

Wow, she just lost 127.5 BTC in 30 seconds

[Light]

Wow, she just lost 127.5 BTC in 30 seconds

Well that's degenerate gambling for you. I mean she literally burned $60,000 USD in under a minute which I'm pretty sure some people would explode over. Anyways, it only goes to show there's never a 'system' mathematics and probability will always get you in the long term unless you manage to get out with a profit and run.

[Pony789]

Wow, she just lost 127.5 BTC in 30 seconds

Well that's degenerate gambling for you. I mean she literally burned $60,000 USD in under a minute which I'm pretty sure some people would explode over. Anyways, it only goes to show there's never a 'system' mathematics and probability will always get you in the long term unless you manage to get out with a profit and run.

Unless you are the house, and probability will be on your side

[Caesium]

That's not even my money and I still feel a little bit sick looking at that

I went through a (very short) phase of trying gambling systems but fortunately it was a lot less than $60k lost to stop :p

[icey]

ouch, That's some serious money. I wondered where all the profit came from this morning, I guess this is my answer!

[Shogen]

That's pretty insane. A martingale with base value at 0.5 btc.

[Caesium]

That's pretty insane. A martingale

Fixed that for you

[seandaniel]

all i can say is OUCH..

[Evil-Knievel]

This message was too old and has been purged

[Josepht]

What a highly unlikely loss streak.
I would go ahead and carefully double check the "provably fair values".  
It is going to be alright, I would still double check ... "just in case".

Why is this highly unlikely? Losing 8 times in a row is just normal. It happens on average once every 256 times.

[Financisto]

What a tragedy: thousands of $$$ turned into dust within seconds... 

[Josepht]

What a tragedy: thousands of $$$ turned into dust within seconds... 

Into dust? Is is transferred to the investors of the site.

[Financisto]

Poor mary lou...

[TwinWinNerD]

Well, I guess if you gamble with >100 BTC you know that there is the risk of losing it all, right?

Then I don't feel so bad, also she had 100 BTC to begin with, can't be that poor!

[xetsr]

Was the 64 one the final roll? Should have started out smaller if that's all she had for martingale.

[DiamondCardz]

Strange, although it doesn't change anything it's unlike the human mind to decide that after getting a low your best bet is to bet low the 2nd time round. If she didn't change at all that losing streak wouldn't have happened.

[zolace]

See as long as there is a max profit you cant beat the house.  its not only edge that effects you, is the Max limit, the amount of money you have to bet.  if the investment  is 31,000 you will need a max cap of 1 million to beat the house.  Since Dice sites have limites I dont bet is only good to do small bets

[TwinWinNerD]

See as long as there is a max profit you cant beat the house.  its not only edge that effects you, is the Max limit, the amount of money you have to bet.  if the investment  is 31,000 you will need a max cap of 1 million to beat the house.  Since Dice sites have limites I dont bet is only good to do small bets

What if I told you that you can't beat the house even if you had no maxbet restriction?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martingale_%28betting_system%29

[Light]

if the investment  is 31,000 you will need a max cap of 1 million to beat the house. 

Actually, that maximum may not be enough - you'd need an infinite amount of money and a limitless maximum bet in order to be able to guarantee a profit. Unlikely as it is, it is possible to lose n times in a row (probability prior to rolls occurring is 1/(2^n)), so unless you have money to cover the previous loss (ie infinite) you'll eventually bust in the long term.

[Nobitcoin]

A very nice example... Maybe get a few people to think while playing on those dice games. 

[koshgel]

Losing 9 in a row isn't even that unbelievable.

I've seen 20+ losses in a row.

Only gambling noobs use martingale

[zeeshanblc]

24 reds few times, once 25reds, not martingale just fixed autobot just to see how many times it will be under 50. Martingale just not worth it

[member1]

   That's a lot of money..

 Some people gets their lessons on the hard way...

[gondel]

Hi,
I tried the martinagle system some times and i always lose! It is just one of the fastest losing systems

BR,

Gondel

[Pony789]

See as long as there is a max profit you cant beat the house.  its not only edge that effects you, is the Max limit, the amount of money you have to bet.  if the investment  is 31,000 you will need a max cap of 1 million to beat the house.  Since Dice sites have limites I dont bet is only good to do small bets

What if I told you that you can't beat the house even if you had no maxbet restriction?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martingale_%28betting_system%29

Exactly.
What people don't understand is "rare" events do happen.

[phpTaskForce]

We have developed automated script based on martingale's betting system, and it plays hi-lo game on freebitco.in.
Only a few users have experienced more than 12 losses in row.
However, others had more luck and they've doubled their profit very easily using our script.

Chances for loosing the bet 12 or more times in row are very small,
but even if there is a slightest probability that some event can happen then it will happen in limited time period.

phpTaskForce Team

[cp1]

Strange, although it doesn't change anything it's unlike the human mind to decide that after getting a low your best bet is to bet low the 2nd time round. If she didn't change at all that losing streak wouldn't have happened.

I was thinking that too.  And what if that person had started off the other way, they would have won every bet.

[koshgel]

Strange, although it doesn't change anything it's unlike the human mind to decide that after getting a low your best bet is to bet low the 2nd time round. If she didn't change at all that losing streak wouldn't have happened.

I was thinking that too.  And what if that person had started off the other way, they would have won every bet.

Each roll is an independent event. Doesn't matter what she chooses.

[DiamondCardz]

Strange, although it doesn't change anything it's unlike the human mind to decide that after getting a low your best bet is to bet low the 2nd time round. If she didn't change at all that losing streak wouldn't have happened.

I was thinking that too.  And what if that person had started off the other way, they would have won every bet.

Each roll is an independent event. Doesn't matter what she chooses.

Clearly, you didn't read what I said properly before posting. Like the majority of your posts, probably something to do with your PrimeDice signature, I guess. Anyway, I'm aware that it doesn't matter, I was commenting that it was unlike the human mind to do that.

[Light]

Strange, although it doesn't change anything it's unlike the human mind to decide that after getting a low your best bet is to bet low the 2nd time round. If she didn't change at all that losing streak wouldn't have happened.

I was thinking that too.  And what if that person had started off the other way, they would have won every bet.

Each roll is an independent event. Doesn't matter what she chooses.

Yeah she would have eventually hit a losing streak and lost - even if now she avoided it, it is inevitable and she would have busted. Well at least as an investor martingalers are great as although they may take money in the short term you can guarantee that one day you'll get their whole stack.

[boumalo]

Strange, although it doesn't change anything it's unlike the human mind to decide that after getting a low your best bet is to bet low the 2nd time round. If she didn't change at all that losing streak wouldn't have happened.

I was thinking that too.  And what if that person had started off the other way, they would have won every bet.

Each roll is an independent event. Doesn't matter what she chooses.

Yeah she would have eventually hit a losing streak and lost - even if now she avoided it, it is inevitable and she would have busted. Well at least as an investor martingalers are great as although they may take money in the short term you can guarantee that one day you'll get their whole stack.

If she bet low instead of high or the other way around it will probably not have been the same result anyway...

Playing a martingale is the same as betting a big amount to win a small amount

[Rulishix]

Martingale is good in the right hands and if you use the right strategy but it's still dependent mainly on luck. A lot of fucking luck!

[Light]

Martingale is good in the right hands and if you use the right strategy but it's still dependent mainly on luck. A lot of fucking luck!

The are no 'right hands' or 'right strategy' when it comes down to dice based gambling. Since you have no control over the outcome (ie no skill is required) hence the whole thing is entirely chance based meaning that martingale is just as -EV as any other 'strategy' and will lose in the long term.

[FanEagle]

who the hell needs long term give me 10 minutes off green martingale and we are done.

[dooglus]

A few facts that haven't been mentioned here:

* That losing sequence went 1/16, 1/8, 1/4, 1/2, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64 - so 11 losing bets in a row.

* That guy had been coming to the site day after day, and winning 10 BTC each day on 3 different accounts.  So 30 BTC per day.

* This is the first time he busted - previously he only got up to 64 twice and won it both times.

* He's still around 460 BTC *up* overall.

* Here's a chart of the combined profit against number of rolls from the 3 accounts:



So while it's true that in general martingale isn't a winning strategy, in this case it all worked out pretty well for him!

Edit: here's a list of the bet details:

+------------+---------+------+-------+----------+
| betid      | bet     | high | nonce | time     |
+------------+---------+------+-------+----------+
| 1063871599 | 64.0000 |    0 |    23 | 09:59:27 |
| 1063871035 | 32.0000 |    1 |    22 | 09:59:17 |
| 1063870799 | 16.0000 |    0 |    21 | 09:59:13 |
| 1063870573 |  8.0000 |    1 |    20 | 09:59:09 |
| 1063870357 |  4.0000 |    0 |    19 | 09:59:05 |
| 1063870086 |  2.0000 |    1 |    18 | 09:59:00 |
| 1063869842 |  1.0000 |    0 |    17 | 09:58:56 |
| 1063869565 |  0.5000 |    1 |    16 | 09:58:51 |
| 1063869383 |  0.2500 |    0 |    15 | 09:58:48 |
| 1063869197 |  0.1250 |    1 |    14 | 09:58:45 |
| 1063869067 |  0.0625 |    0 |    13 | 09:58:43 |
+------------+---------+------+-------+----------+

Edit 2: here's a list of all his bets over 20 BTC.  Notice he won 2 out of 3 at 64 BTC and 9 out of 12 at 32 BTC!

+------------+--------+------+---------------------+--------+
| betid      | uid    | bet  | date                | profit |
+------------+--------+------+---------------------+--------+
|  954417255 | 444612 |   32 | 2014-04-01 04:47:48 |  31.36 |
|  972923827 | 390060 |   32 | 2014-04-04 10:07:09 |  31.36 |
|  979554255 | 443793 |   32 | 2014-04-05 10:04:31 |  31.36 |
|  997244196 | 444612 |   32 | 2014-04-08 07:21:56 |  31.36 |
| 1001940814 | 390060 |   32 | 2014-04-09 05:42:09 |    -32 |
| 1001941194 | 390060 |   64 | 2014-04-09 05:42:15 |  62.72 |
| 1019802937 | 443793 |   32 | 2014-04-11 23:58:17 |  31.36 |
| 1025835234 | 443793 |   32 | 2014-04-12 23:45:06 |  31.36 |
| 1025845181 | 443793 |   32 | 2014-04-12 23:47:22 |    -32 |
| 1025845427 | 443793 |   64 | 2014-04-12 23:47:25 |  62.72 |
| 1041768962 | 390060 |   32 | 2014-04-15 11:33:18 |  31.36 |
| 1041786397 | 390060 |   32 | 2014-04-15 11:37:03 |  31.36 |
| 1057748701 | 444612 |   32 | 2014-04-18 04:03:02 |  31.36 |
| 1063871035 | 444612 |   32 | 2014-04-19 09:59:17 |    -32 |
| 1063871599 | 444612 |   64 | 2014-04-19 09:59:27 |    -64 |
+------------+--------+------+---------------------+--------+

[dooglus]

Well at least as an investor martingalers are great as although they may take money in the short term you can guarantee that one day you'll get their whole stack.

It's looking like that 64 BTC loss was this player's last bet.  They've already withdrawn hundreds of BTC of profit over the last few weeks.  Maybe they have the discipline required to quit while they're ahead!

[Light]

It's looking like that 64 BTC loss was this player's last bet.  They've already withdrawn hundreds of BTC of profit over the last few weeks.  Maybe they have the discipline required to quit while they're ahead!

Good for them - some people have a lot of luck (at least more than me). That's why I love being the house - don't need to rely on luck maths will help you out. Anyways, I'm not so sure, from what I've seen whales seem to be degenerate gamblers who eentually give some/most of it back before quitting.

By the way, doog just out of curiosity how much do you keep in the hot wallet? Do you have a dead man switch in case something happens to you and Deb?

[howzar]

It's looking like that 64 BTC loss was this player's last bet.  They've already withdrawn hundreds of BTC of profit over the last few weeks.  Maybe they have the discipline required to quit while they're ahead!

Good for them - some people have a lot of luck (at least more than me). That's why I love being the house - don't need to rely on luck maths will help you out. Anyways, I'm not so sure, from what I've seen whales seem to be degenerate gamblers who eentually give some/most of it back before quitting.

By the way, doog just out of curiosity how much do you keep in the hot wallet? Do you have a dead man switch in case something happens to you and Deb?

I think I can answer:

He has 500 btc loaded each time in the hot wallet.

Deb has access to the funds and *probably* someone else.

[boumalo]

It's looking like that 64 BTC loss was this player's last bet.  They've already withdrawn hundreds of BTC of profit over the last few weeks.  Maybe they have the discipline required to quit while they're ahead!

Good for them - some people have a lot of luck (at least more than me). That's why I love being the house - don't need to rely on luck maths will help you out. Anyways, I'm not so sure, from what I've seen whales seem to be degenerate gamblers who eentually give some/most of it back before quitting.

By the way, doog just out of curiosity how much do you keep in the hot wallet? Do you have a dead man switch in case something happens to you and Deb?

I think I can answer:

He has 500 btc loaded each time in the hot wallet.

Deb has access to the funds and *probably* someone else.

Let's hope for the investors that someone else has access to the funds as well or maybe he choses 4 persons and they can have access to the address if 3 of them sign in together : his mother, his best friend, his partner and a trusted escrow for exemple

[omahapoker]

Well at least as an investor martingalers are great as although they may take money in the short term you can guarantee that one day you'll get their whole stack.

It's looking like that 64 BTC loss was this player's last bet.  They've already withdrawn hundreds of BTC of profit over the last few weeks.  Maybe they have the discipline required to quit while they're ahead!

he will be back. no doubt about it.



i may try this 

[hilariousandco]

Maybe they won most of it Martingale-ing it and this was just their loss streak?   Martingale is only foolproof if you've got a hell of a lot of funds to gamble and can keep going until you win.

[boumalo]

Well at least as an investor martingalers are great as although they may take money in the short term you can guarantee that one day you'll get their whole stack.

It's looking like that 64 BTC loss was this player's last bet.  They've already withdrawn hundreds of BTC of profit over the last few weeks.  Maybe they have the discipline required to quit while they're ahead!

he will be back. no doubt about it.



i may try this 

I bet that he will be back as well

They were very lucky if they withdrew hundreds of btc from a 0.5-64 martingale

[cp1]

Could be a marketing ploy to get other people to martingale

[MikeCorleone]

That same player has won over several 100btc in the past week or 2. Gotta lose sometime. Sorry to see it, i was there when it happened.

[rhino34567]

Maybe they won most of it Martingale-ing it and this was just their loss streak?   Martingale is only foolproof if you've got a hell of a lot of funds to gamble and can keep going until you win.

No, it's not. According to internet sources, going 50%-49% gives you better odds than martingale.

[boumalo]

Could be a marketing ploy to get other people to martingale

It shows a martingale gone wrong so it should push people away of playing a martingale

[hilariousandco]

Could be a marketing ploy to get other people to martingale

It shows a martingale gone wrong so it should push people away of playing a martingale

Haha. He must've thought the guy won, but who would be making this marketing ploy exactly?

[Rulishix]

Has anyone successfully used a half martingale approach to their gambling? You take the martingale and cut it in half effectively doubling your longevity.

[Light]

Has anyone successfully used a half martingale approach to their gambling? You take the martingale and cut it in half effectively doubling your longevity.

Not that I know of. Doesn't really work out because most people don't have enough money (and the house limit) to afford really long and unlucky streaks. The only way is to possibly have a 1 satoshi starting bet which would mean you'd survive something like ~ 23 losses in a row with a 1+ BTC deposit. But it would take you an eternity to actually make much profit.

[Rulishix]

Has anyone successfully used a half martingale approach to their gambling? You take the martingale and cut it in half effectively doubling your longevity.

Not that I know of. Doesn't really work out because most people don't have enough money (and the house limit) to afford really long and unlucky streaks. The only way is to possibly have a 1 satoshi starting bet which would mean you'd survive something like ~ 23 losses in a row with a 1+ BTC deposit. But it would take you an eternity to actually make much profit.

Some people have nothing but time, my friend. Especially when it comes to turning a profit in gambling. Time is an illusion. The only time now is party time!

[DiceMiner]

Thanks for clearing that up Doog.
I am the guy we are talking about here (390060 / 443793 / 444612)
I hope the guy that called me a "degenerate gambler" got to read this part.

Anyways, to prove my legitimacy, here is some info that only Doog would be privy to:

--------------------------------
--- 390060 -------
--------------------------------
bets: 13,593
wins: 6,915
losses: 6,678
luck: 100.81%
wagered: 2,622.21936140
(profit): 279.64896255

--------------------------------
--- 443793 -------
--------------------------------
bets: 2,755
wins: 1,380
losses: 1,375
luck: 100.22%
wagered: 1,408.70396357
(profit): 132.72196976

--------------------------------
--- 444612 -------
--------------------------------
bets: 4,006
wins: 1,986
losses: 2,020
luck: 99.28%
wagered: 1,584.80297668
(profit): 50.38480271


Anyhow, I came here to say, for anyone thinking of trying this, it's not only just a matter of pure Martingale. There's a little pattern that I took a while to feel out. Most sessions, the pattern seems to work and every once in a while, when it just doesn't "feel right", I log off, randomize seed and come back later.

I have seen in the chat rooms that people are selling their accounts. Doog, is there any worth in an account with a win ration like the 3 I have been playing with? I think I remember reading somewhere that it affects one's payout ratio when they invest.


Thanks,
DiceMiner


P.S. For anyone that happened to witness it, I was also the guy that accidentally won a 20x bet while aggressively 'galing a few weeks ago. I forgot that I had it set on 4.95% (instead of 49.5%), but luckily won about 13 BTC on my third or fourth bet. And yes, you better believe I contributed to the Rain-Jar that night!  

A few facts that haven't been mentioned here:

* That losing sequence went 1/16, 1/8, 1/4, 1/2, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64 - so 11 losing bets in a row.

* That guy had been coming to the site day after day, and winning 10 BTC each day on 3 different accounts.  So 30 BTC per day.

* This is the first time he busted - previously he only got up to 64 twice and won it both times.

* He's still around 460 BTC *up* overall.

So while it's true that in general martingale isn't a winning strategy, in this case it all worked out pretty well for him!

[Light]

I hope the guy that called me a "degenerate gambler" got to read this part.

Please note that I didn't specifically refer to you as a degenerate - merely my perception that whales seem to be degens.

Good for them - some people have a lot of luck (at least more than me). That's why I love being the house - don't need to rely on luck maths will help you out. Anyways, I'm not so sure, from what I've seen whales seem to be degenerate gamblers who eventually give some/most of it back before quitting.

[DiceMiner]

No worries man.  
Water under the bridge...

On another note, if there is someone out there that can ELI5 how to verify how my rolls were provably fair, I would be forever in their debt. I know JD is on the level, but I have never even *came close* to losing 11 bets in a row before that unlucky streak.

I would just like to learn more about the math of the whole thing.


Thanks,
DiceMiner

I hope the guy that called me a "degenerate gambler" got to read this part.

Please note that I didn't specifically refer to you as a degenerate - merely my perception that whales seem to be degens.

Good for them - some people have a lot of luck (at least more than me). That's why I love being the house - don't need to rely on luck maths will help you out. Anyways, I'm not so sure, from what I've seen whales seem to be degenerate gamblers who eventually give some/most of it back before quitting.

[dooglus]

Anyways, to prove my legitimacy, here is some info that only Doog would be privy to:

--------------------------------
--- 390060 -------
--------------------------------
bets: 13,593
wins: 6,915
losses: 6,678
luck: 100.81%
wagered: 2,622.21936140
(profit): 279.64896255

--------------------------------
--- 443793 -------
--------------------------------
bets: 2,755
wins: 1,380
losses: 1,375
luck: 100.22%
wagered: 1,408.70396357
(profit): 132.72196976

--------------------------------
--- 444612 -------
--------------------------------
bets: 4,006
wins: 1,986
losses: 2,020
luck: 99.28%
wagered: 1,584.80297668
(profit): 50.38480271

That's close enough.  It looks like the 390060 account has played a little more since you posted that, but the other two are spot on.

Anyhow, I came here to say, for anyone thinking of trying this, it's not only just a matter of pure Martingale. There's a little pattern that I took a while to feel out. Most sessions, the pattern seems to work and every once in a while, when it just doesn't "feel right", I log off, randomize seed and come back later.

I noticed your pattern.  It seems to be pretty simple: switch hi/lo on every loss, leave it the same on a win.  But sometimes you stop alternating on a loss, and I couldn't work out why or when.  Is that just gut feel?

I have seen in the chat rooms that people are selling their accounts. Doog, is there any worth in an account with a win ration like the 3 I have been playing with? I think I remember reading somewhere that it affects one's payout ratio when they invest.

I don't think so.  Every time you hit 'randomize' you get a new random seed, which isn't based on the history of your account at all.  The accounts which change hands for lots of coins are the ones with a large loss from investing.  Investors on pay commission on new profits, not on profits made after a big loss.  So while you're recovering investment losses, all profits are commission free.  Such accounts are worth up to however much they will save their new owner in commission.

On another note, if there is someone out there that can ELI5 how to verify how my rolls were provably fair, I would be forever in their debt. I know JD is on the level, but I have never even *came close* to losing 11 bets in a row before that unlucky streak.

I would just like to learn more about the math of the whole thing.

Not sure why you struck that out, but I'd be happy to walk you through the verification process.  The first place I'd refer you to however is the 'Fair?' tab on the site, and the verifier linked at the end of that tab.

[DiceMiner]

I noticed your pattern.  It seems to be pretty simple: switch hi/lo on every loss, leave it the same on a win.  But sometimes you stop alternating on a loss, and I couldn't work out why or when.  Is that just gut feel?

That is more or less it. Very simple. I mean, as random as the results are, they seem to have some patterns within. Using the same method, most sessions felt very similar, no matter the seed. The thing is, it's hard to explain, but sometimes it 'felt' like my method would not work on rare occasions. I don't know how to explain it. As if it was "alive" and had moods. I know, that sounds hokey... Many times, I would walk away mid-session if the results did not feel right.

And I must've misunderstood about the payout results being related to the wins on an account. Also, I have since verified the results of my last session from Hell.   

[Swordsoffreedom]

I don't know if this is the right place, but I wanted to share this with you.
I want to give you a little advice: don't use the martingale betting system.

I just visited just-dice.com and noticed this user:

Just Ouch that is painful but reading posts above guess it's not as bad
One years salary for some people down the drain for the normal folk though

[boumalo]

Martingale are fun when you win It is the same with gambling even if most gamblers probably like losing as much as winning, they are looking for the thrill of putting their faith in lady luck