Acclaimed|Jordan Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 This is an extreme method of staking. It is almost guaranteed to win you consistent money but in the long run after many stakes there is great probability you will defy all odds and get cleaned. This is best used boxing with maxed mains as there are little variance and variables. The only requirement is a minimum of 162 times the amount of your initial stake. Originally, martingale referred to a class of betting strategies that was popular in 18th century France.[1] The simplest of these strategies was designed for a game in which the gambler wins his stake if a coin comes up heads and loses it if the coin comes up tails. The strategy had the gambler double his bet after every loss so that the first win would recover all previous losses plus win a profit equal to the original stake. As the gambler's wealth and available time jointly approach infinity, his probability of eventually flipping heads approaches 1, which makes the martingale betting strategy seem like a sure thing. However, the exponential growth of the bets eventually bankrupts its users. I am going to show you two methods of the the martingale. The extreme one is seen below and this will allow you to gain double all your losses. Few people consecutively lose at boxing maxed mains 6 times in a row. X=Original Stake Original Stake = 10M = X Lose Bet 2x Lose Bet 6x Lose Bet 18x Lose Bet 54x Lose Bet 162x Win. Now you will see the traditional martingale which involves less significantly less risk and will almost guarantee you to win your current initial stake. Original Stake = 10M = X Bet 10M Lose Bet total losses (20) + x Lose Bet total losses (30) + x Lose Bet total losses (60) + x Win Use these to your advantage. There will be revisions, just have to write the formula for the 2nd one.
PkraNger|Ahrim Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 No matter what way you put it, it's still a 50% chance.
Swag Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 There's millions of different formulas that people use.
Acclaimed|Jordan Posted February 28, 2011 Author Posted February 28, 2011 No matter what way you put it, it's still a 50% chance. That is the whole point of the martingale. Its capitalizing on that coinflip 50% chance.
I Xx Xx Xx I Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 lol there's no "capitalizing" on the 50% chance, it just skews the probabilities so you have a small chance of losing big and big chance of winning small, but your expected value of earnings is precisely 0 still. If you had 31m to start and your initial bet was 0, probability you lose 31 is (1/2)^5, = 1/32 (probability of losing 5 times in a row). probability you win 1m is 1-(1/2)^5 = 31/32. Expected value is still 1m*31/32 - 31*1/32 = 0.
Acclaimed|Jordan Posted February 28, 2011 Author Posted February 28, 2011 https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0AtkizBubm2HkdGdNR21GdGx3NXAxOGpTZDhKdnl2Znc&hl=en Here is the spreadsheet If you had an infinite bank you will win.
Briggsy Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Bullshit. Basically stake until you win, you can lose 10000 matches in a row... its all luck
Olbermannn Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 I did this before this way. Bet 1m, if i lose bet 2m, if i lose bet 4m, if i lose bet 8m etc until i win. Well. I lost 8 stakes in a row and got cleaned.
Adam|Note Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Im facepalming the fuck outta this thread
Acclaimed|Jordan Posted February 28, 2011 Author Posted February 28, 2011 I did this before this way. Bet 1m, if i lose bet 2m, if i lose bet 4m, if i lose bet 8m etc until i win. Well. I lost 8 stakes in a row and got cleaned. thats not true martingale, you need to bet all your losses + your initial bet Im facepalming the fuck outta this thread facepalm these nuts
Paxman Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 martingale is the name of my dog's collar design. You can't beat a 50% chance. Simple. You also can't have an infinite bank. If you won with an infinite bank you still wouldn't make bank as ur bank is infinite, you can't get higher than infinity ;) EDIT: 900 Potscount :battle:
Toby|Doggie Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Wouldn't this formula be nulled if two people were using it?
Beastdefire Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 Ele is right. The only true way to have a long-run expected value of over 0 is to have some sort of advantage, be it rules, stats, first hits, etc.
Acclaimed|Jordan Posted March 1, 2011 Author Posted March 1, 2011 ^ I agree completely, you need some sort of advantage to be +ev In my OP I stated that eventually you will get cleaned. The strategy had the gambler double his bet after every loss, so that the first win would recover all previous losses plus win a profit equal to the original stake. Since a gambler with infinite wealth will, almost surely, eventually flip heads, the Martingale betting strategy was seen as a sure thing by those who advocated it. Of course, none of the gamblers in fact possessed infinite wealth, and the exponential growth of the bets would eventually bankrupt those who chose to use the Martingale. It is therefore a good example of a Taleb distribution - the gambler usually wins a small net reward, thus appearing to have a sound strategy. However, the gambler's expected value does indeed remain zero because the small probability that he will suffer a catastrophic loss exactly balances with his expected gain. It is widely believed that casinos instituted betting limits specifically to stop Martingale players, but in reality the assumptions behind the strategy are unsound. Players using the Martingale system do not have any long-term mathematical advantage over any other betting system or even randomly placed bets. On a side note: I gross 500M+ a day using this. I say gross because people have a stake in me. I also do know that I will eventually go broke if I keep doing this. There will be that 1/128 chance that I will lose 7 times in a row. It hasn't happened yet but I know it will and I have been extremely close to it.
Slee Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 lol there's no "capitalizing" on the 50% chance, it just skews the probabilities so you have a small chance of losing big and big chance of winning small, but your expected value of earnings is precisely 0 still. If you had 31m to start and your initial bet was 0, probability you lose 31 is (1/2)^5, = 1/32 (probability of losing 5 times in a row). probability you win 1m is 1-(1/2)^5 = 31/32. Expected value is still 1m*31/32 - 31*1/32 = 0. As retarded as I feel saying this, Ele whore's post made more sense than the entire first post. Strictly put, it's still gambling, the best way to win big at arena is to get higher levels to 1.5 or 2x you.
Acclaimed|Jordan Posted March 1, 2011 Author Posted March 1, 2011 lol there's no "capitalizing" on the 50% chance, it just skews the probabilities so you have a small chance of losing big and big chance of winning small, but your expected value of earnings is precisely 0 still. If you had 31m to start and your initial bet was 0, probability you lose 31 is (1/2)^5, = 1/32 (probability of losing 5 times in a row). probability you win 1m is 1-(1/2)^5 = 31/32. Expected value is still 1m*31/32 - 31*1/32 = 0. As retarded as I feel saying this, Ele whore's post made more sense than the entire first post. Strictly put, it's still gambling, the best way to win big at arena is to get higher levels to 1.5 or 2x you. You must have bad reading comprehension to not understand the OP.
Fear my fez Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 makes sense o.O nice find, so because it's a 50-50 chance then if you lose, based on odd's you'll win next time and if you lose multiple times in a row, then you've got an even higher chance of winning. I'm a bit confused on the formula though, what's with the 3x bet each time?
gfdgfd Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 Jim did this on online roulette, he won £170, then lost it all.
Cellblock A Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 So a guide teaching you how to get cleaned? cool.
CandyMan Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 so why not do this, after you reach a reasonable ammt of gain bank what you started with, and play with only winnings so u never go broke... no point to risk it all just to make faster and end up with jack sht..
Smush Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 Yeah. I do this sometimes. Except, I lose. So really you will win sometime, but you also have a chance to get cleaned in the process. I don't need mathematical bullshit to prove any of that.
Blitz Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 I lost 49 stakes, in a row, losing bank. All box stakes, all 50/50 chance. Cool.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now