Quote from: Coef on September 13, 2015, 06:30:51 AM

Quote from: Bardman on September 12, 2015, 05:39:33 PM

Quote from: Coef on September 12, 2015, 10:53:36 AM

Quote from: buddu on September 12, 2015, 09:59:26 AM

Quote from: phibay on September 12, 2015, 09:29:19 AM

Quote from: hensi on May 15, 2014, 06:08:09 PM

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