Does martingale really works?

[fenican]

Solve by inspection that Martingale does not work.

A few argue that it works with infinite bankroll but betting has no meaning if you have infinite money since your ROI will always be vanishingly close to 0%. ($finite/$infinity = 0% bankroll expansion per wager won)

[1714699461]

1714699461

[1714699461]

1714699461

[1714699461]

1714699461

[1714699461]

1714699461

[1714699461]

1714699461

[1714699461]

1714699461

[ranlo]

Statistics says there is no such thing as luck, but martingale involves a lot of luck.

I once won 150k sats. with freebitco's multiplier and then lost everything to reach a -75k balance I think I still have. If you are lucky enough, you will never experience a lossing streak, but usually you will hit one, sooner or later.

Statistics actually shows that it's PURE luck. You're either lucky (on the winning end of the streak) or unlucky (on the losing end). Claiming it's not luck insinuates there's skill, and there's no skill when it's statistics-based.

[Coef]

Everyone who has been a part of any gambling site must have tried martingale. so i just wanted to know your experience that have u ever gained profit from martingale? or its name should be changed to martinfail?

i use martingale on dice especially on autobet but its not that effective in the long run, i always end up losing so i decided to stop it. so martingale doesn't work (based on my own experience)

Matingale really doesn't work for players with small bank roll.I ended up at loss just like you when when I tried to use martingale.It works in favor of house when you keep using it.When you use martingale and keep playing it gives the idea to house about your playing strategy and after few winning stakes begin to appear just loosing stakes in a row.

Martingale doesn't work in the long run, not because the site will learn about your playing style, but because a long enough loss strategy is just bound to happen in the long run no matter how unlikely the chance it is.
As an example, if you play x2 bets in a 1% house edge site, the chance for you to hit a "10 red streak" in the first 10 bets is 0.10787% but the chance to hit a "10 red streak" in 10000 bets is 99.53229% 99.53254%.

Edit: I copied the wrong element in my prob matrix. The 99.53229% is in fact the chance to hit a "10 red streak" in 9999 bets and the chance to hit a "10 red streak" in 10000 bets should be 99.53254%.

If you are playing on 1% the chance to hit 10 red streaks will always be the same, that 99% is imaginary, that would mean that in 20000 bets i have more than 100% chance to hit the 10 red streak and that is simply not true.

I am not quite sure what you meant there, but nope probability will never be more than 100%.

For 49.5% bets, the chance to hit at least one "10 red streak" in  1000 bets is 41.29769%.
For 49.5% bets, the chance to hit at least one "10 red streak" in  5000 bets is 93.14820%.
For 49.5% bets, the chance to hit at least one "10 red streak" in 10000 bets is 99.53254%.
For 49.5% bets, the chance to hit at least one "10 red streak" in 20000 bets is 99.99782%.
For 49.5% bets, the chance to hit at least one "10 red streak" in 25000 bets is 99.99985%.

I know these numbers may look to be unrealistically big, but that's the reason why many martingale gamblers are surprised to see them losing after autobetting for a few hours, ie. most of them simply are unaware of or has underestimated the probability of ruin.


Some simple code in R for the calculation:

Code:

p_win <- 0.495
streak <- 10
bet <- 20000

P <- rep(0, bet)
P[streak] <- (1 - p_win) ^ streak
P[streak + 1] <- P[streak] + p_win * P[streak]

for (i in c((streak + 1) : (bet - 1))) P[i+1] <- P[i] + (1-P[i-streak]) * p_win * P[streak]

[JosIzem]

Martingale works for me but lust doesn't make it count

[XinXan]

Everyone who has been a part of any gambling site must have tried martingale. so i just wanted to know your experience that have u ever gained profit from martingale? or its name should be changed to martinfail?

i use martingale on dice especially on autobet but its not that effective in the long run, i always end up losing so i decided to stop it. so martingale doesn't work (based on my own experience)

Matingale really doesn't work for players with small bank roll.I ended up at loss just like you when when I tried to use martingale.It works in favor of house when you keep using it.When you use martingale and keep playing it gives the idea to house about your playing strategy and after few winning stakes begin to appear just loosing stakes in a row.

Martingale doesn't work in the long run, not because the site will learn about your playing style, but because a long enough loss strategy is just bound to happen in the long run no matter how unlikely the chance it is.
As an example, if you play x2 bets in a 1% house edge site, the chance for you to hit a "10 red streak" in the first 10 bets is 0.10787% but the chance to hit a "10 red streak" in 10000 bets is 99.53229% 99.53254%.

Edit: I copied the wrong element in my prob matrix. The 99.53229% is in fact the chance to hit a "10 red streak" in 9999 bets and the chance to hit a "10 red streak" in 10000 bets should be 99.53254%.

If you are playing on 1% the chance to hit 10 red streaks will always be the same, that 99% is imaginary, that would mean that in 20000 bets i have more than 100% chance to hit the 10 red streak and that is simply not true.

I am not quite sure what you meant there, but nope probability will never be more than 100%.

For 49.5% bets, the chance to hit at least one "10 red streak" in  1000 bets is 41.29769%.
For 49.5% bets, the chance to hit at least one "10 red streak" in  5000 bets is 93.14820%.
For 49.5% bets, the chance to hit at least one "10 red streak" in 10000 bets is 99.53254%.
For 49.5% bets, the chance to hit at least one "10 red streak" in 20000 bets is 99.99782%.
For 49.5% bets, the chance to hit at least one "10 red streak" in 25000 bets is 99.99985%.

I know these numbers may look to be unrealistically big, but that's the reason why many martingale gamblers are surprised to see them losing after autobetting for a few hours, ie. most of them simply are unaware of or has underestimated the probability of ruin.


Some simple code in R for the calculation:

Code:

p_win <- 0.495
streak <- 10
bet <- 20000

P <- rep(0, bet)
P[streak] <- (1 - p_win) ^ streak
P[streak + 1] <- P[streak] + p_win * P[streak]

for (i in c((streak + 1) : (bet - 1))) P[i+1] <- P[i] + (1-P[i-streak]) * p_win * P[streak]

Because those calculations are not real % you dont have a 99.9% real chances of getting the 10 lose streak, you always have the same % no matter how much you play

[Erza]

Everyone who has been a part of any gambling site must have tried martingale. so i just wanted to know your experience that have u ever gained profit from martingale? or its name should be changed to martinfail?

i use martingale on dice especially on autobet but its not that effective in the long run, i always end up losing so i decided to stop it. so martingale doesn't work (based on my own experience)

Martingale is always worked when you know how to stop it, I dont know many people said not effective on long run, which strategy is good for long run gambling? The answer is none, but if you know how to stop you will earn some good cash

[phibay]

Everyone who has been a part of any gambling site must have tried martingale. so i just wanted to know your experience that have u ever gained profit from martingale? or its name should be changed to martinfail?

i use martingale on dice especially on autobet but its not that effective in the long run, i always end up losing so i decided to stop it. so martingale doesn't work (based on my own experience)

Martingale is always worked when you know how to stop it, I dont know many people said not effective on long run, which strategy is good for long run gambling? The answer is none, but if you know how to stop you will earn some good cash

yup, that's the problem with me because i don't stop it and i just let my bitcoins grow but its not that effective growing btc by martingale that's why i always end up losing, my bad

[birdcat90]

all of my martingale method was failed..

still searching for the best setup..that can hold longer streaks..anyone has another setup that diff from 2x payout?

[ashour]

Martingale can't work in the long run, you should always us it short term and cashout once you are ahead.

[btccashacc]

martingale is double your luck, but hig risk, if your capital not strong you can lose all of your money in 1 time

[klf]

Martingale are just mad . addicts are also dependant on gambler's fallacy 10-20 losses in a row is literally impossible. trust me it is very possible

[Shibashi Dogemoto]

Everyone who has been a part of any gambling site must have tried martingale. so i just wanted to know your experience that have u ever gained profit from martingale? or its name should be changed to martinfail?

Sometimes martingale really works but sometimes it doesn't
What I mean is its all about luck, nothing more

[fkvidar]

This method only works if someone had an infinite bankroll. I've lost 10x more row in a many Dice sites. Don't say this strategy works.

[BTCevo]

This method only works if someone had an infinite bankroll. I've lost 10x more row in a many Dice sites. Don't say this strategy works.

Nope infinite bankroll doesnt make you win though, dice is a game full of luck, no luck although high bankroll will end up losing. 10x row is that many? I ever lose 100x in a row but luckily using small bet but still martingale works not for long run and sometimes you will need luck to win good amount of btc

[leex1528]

This discussion still going on?  Tough to argue, but Martingale, just like everything used in Gambling, will fail eventually.  There is no guarantee that you will ever win with a strategy on gambling sites.  There is a house edge for a reason.

[yanka50]

The reward is too little for the risk you take it is just not worth it.

[leex1528]

The reward is too little for the risk you take it is just not worth it.

This can be used in all forms of Gambling.  As a matter of fact I would say if you are going to gamble, and you want a pretty good shot at a small amount of profit with a lot of risk.   Do Martingale.

If you want to lose, play Martingale for awhile, it is promised to bankrupt you in the end!

[agustina2]

The reward is too little for the risk you take it is just not worth it.

The reward is too high too for the risk you will if you won. Well bottom line here is all strategy works and that martingale really works sometimes like other strategy. It's depend on calculation for every roll.

[confirmation120]

Everyone who has been a part of any gambling site must have tried martingale. so i just wanted to know your experience that have u ever gained profit from martingale? or its name should be changed to martinfail?

Lol yeah indeed, it should be renamed to martinfail I have tried martingale several times and always lose while using that method
 It really doesn't work, let's just depend on luck

[leex1528]

Everyone who has been a part of any gambling site must have tried martingale. so i just wanted to know your experience that have u ever gained profit from martingale? or its name should be changed to martinfail?

Lol yeah indeed, it should be renamed to martinfail I have tried martingale several times and always lose while using that method
 It really doesn't work, let's just depend on luck

Just like gambling in general, that is why we do it.  With Martingale you are more likely to win in the short term than anything else.  The problem is no one is good at the short term and eventually, you get beat.  It is going to happen!