Would you be able to win if you were to play a fair dice?

[sherbyspark]

I mean if you would have 50% chance of winning would any strategy make you win 100%? I always wondered since you cant win on normal casinos because the odds are against you but here in a perfectly fair dice would you be able to win ?

You should edit it to say dice without a house edge. Dice is already provably fair.
As for winning it without the edge, its a gamble again. But no one can guarantee winning for sure.

[Euthanasiaa]

i dont think any form of gambling is fair.. or wouldnt casinos be out of business.

IM NOT TALKING ABOUT CASINOS BUT ABOUT A 50% 50% dice, you guys dont get it??

50% is still damn 50 % a freaking low chance to win actually. no you would NOT be able to ''win''. you either lose or stop playing after you win once.

[adaseb]

No you would not. THe problem is not the degree of uncertainly it emotions. People would get emotional and they would lose. Thats why lotteries and casinos always make tons of money. Its not the edge. its the fear and greed of money.

[erre]

With a 0% house edge and really random numbers, u can expect to win 0% on the long run, no matter how you bet.

You can also martingale your very big bankroll and achieve big profits for a lot of bets, but on the long run u will for sure get busted (also with a 0% bankroll).

Remember that a 1% bankroll is 100 times bigger than a 0.001% bankroll.l, it means 100 time more losses to you (on the long run).

On the short run, u can " easly"  turn 1 to 1.2 on every dice site, after that u have a 49% chanche of turning it to 2.4 and so on....that's why more u win, more easy to win more...

[EvilPanda]

You should be able to win with martingale if the casino isn't rigged. Try it out by playing heads or tails or real dice. The only problem is that you'd have to start with really low bets and the chances of you winning big are low too, but at least you won't lose much this way. Unfortunately, some games are rigged to prevent people from using this strategy. I've seen a post by some guy, who had over 15 consecutive losses in a 50% dice game, after he won some money using martingale.

[WaffleMaster]

You should be able to win with martingale if the casino isn't rigged. Try it out by playing heads or tails or real dice. The only problem is that you'd have to start with really low bets and the chances of you winning big are low too, but at least you won't lose much this way. Unfortunately, some games are rigged to prevent people from using this strategy. I've seen a post by some guy, who had over 15 consecutive losses in a 50% dice game, after he won some money using martingale.

15 consecutive loses is nothing haha. Players should readily plan for at least 22+ if not 30+.

[nikona]

You should be able to win with martingale if the casino isn't rigged. Try it out by playing heads or tails or real dice. The only problem is that you'd have to start with really low bets and the chances of you winning big are low too, but at least you won't lose much this way. Unfortunately, some games are rigged to prevent people from using this strategy. I've seen a post by some guy, who had over 15 consecutive losses in a 50% dice game, after he won some money using martingale.

15 consecutive loses is nothing haha. Players should readily plan for at least 22+ if not 30+.

Yeah mate..15-20 in 2x bets is pretty common now...i think everyone should be prepared for it!

[EvilPanda]

You should be able to win with martingale if the casino isn't rigged. Try it out by playing heads or tails or real dice. The only problem is that you'd have to start with really low bets and the chances of you winning big are low too, but at least you won't lose much this way. Unfortunately, some games are rigged to prevent people from using this strategy. I've seen a post by some guy, who had over 15 consecutive losses in a 50% dice game, after he won some money using martingale.

15 consecutive loses is nothing haha. Players should readily plan for at least 22+ if not 30+.

Yeah mate..15-20 in 2x bets is pretty common now...i think everyone should be prepared for it!

Still this isn't by any means normal, even if you accept this is how the system works.

[cazkooo]

You should be able to win with martingale if the casino isn't rigged. Try it out by playing heads or tails or real dice. The only problem is that you'd have to start with really low bets and the chances of you winning big are low too, but at least you won't lose much this way. Unfortunately, some games are rigged to prevent people from using this strategy. I've seen a post by some guy, who had over 15 consecutive losses in a 50% dice game, after he won some money using martingale.

15 consecutive loses is nothing haha. Players should readily plan for at least 22+ if not 30+.

Yeah mate..15-20 in 2x bets is pretty common now...i think everyone should be prepared for it!

Still this isn't by any means normal, even if you accept this is how the system works.

martingale isnt worth it for long run anyway

lets say you hit a bad streak of losing , either way you need big bankroll for martingale to continue

[Phildo]

You should be able to win with martingale if the casino isn't rigged. Try it out by playing heads or tails or real dice. The only problem is that you'd have to start with really low bets and the chances of you winning big are low too, but at least you won't lose much this way. Unfortunately, some games are rigged to prevent people from using this strategy. I've seen a post by some guy, who had over 15 consecutive losses in a 50% dice game, after he won some money using martingale.

Martingale is stupid because you can win small or lose big.

15+ win/loss streaks are possible. How much do you win if you win 15 in a row using martingale? How much do you lose when you lose 15 in a row?


As for the original question, if the odds are 50/50 and the payouts are 50/50, you expect to win just as much as you lose, there would be no strategy to win more, you win if you are lucky, you lose if you are unlucky. It would be a little easier to make money than a game with a house edge becasue you don't have to beat that, but you will still have no advantage.

[NeuroticFish]

Martingale is stupid because you can win small or lose big.

15+ win/loss streaks are possible. How much do you win if you win 15 in a row using martingale? How much do you lose when you lose 15 in a row?

As for the original question, if the odds are 50/50 and the payouts are 50/50, you expect to win just as much as you lose, there would be no strategy to win more, you win if you are lucky, you lose if you are unlucky. It would be a little easier to make money than a game with a house edge becasue you don't have to beat that, but you will still have no advantage.

This is the best explained and correct answer.
The problem is that human mind has a flaw: it's programmed to hope.
And that's why most people still think that Martingale is a great approach (I also thought that until I started "testing" it live).

We don't (want to) understand that if a dice has 50% chance to return "high", that 50% is met if for an infinite number of tries. That means that losing streaks of 20-30 is not unusual. If you have an infinite amount of money, you'll regain your loses back.

[Light]

You should be able to win with martingale if the casino isn't rigged.

Mathematics and common sense in general speak differently. In the short term with luck on your side you may be able to profit, but the reality is that there are ridiculous patches of bad luck (ie. doog reported some guy got hit with 31 losses in a row running martingale). The only way to profit with martingale is if both:

a) you have infinite money (why are you gambling then - for the lols?)
b) there is no max house bet (which there always is otherwise you'd be able to bankrupt the casino very easily if you got lucky)

So basically the house edge will always get you if you play long enough (or just have shitty luck).