Quote from: dooglus on November 20, 2012, 02:43:11 AM

Quote from: SRoulette on November 20, 2012, 01:44:27 AM

This is something we discussed with dooglus but he failed to appreciate, There is a tipping point with the house edge and bet range offered where martingale systems will start to work often enough to put the house at serious risk of going bust. The house edge is not a guaranteed earn and martingaling has the effect of reducing the house edge significantly (when the simulation data is averaged out of 10'000'000 rounds).

I still fail to appreciate it.

There's no betting strategy that changes the house edge.

I'd like to see your simulation code if that's possible.

Ive just dropped Code Monkey an email to see if he can tidy up the simulator for release, the one he has provided for me hooks into our main game engine in order to run simulations on any/all of our games, unfortunately this means it does not work as a stand alone application.

Quote from: darkmule on November 20, 2012, 03:10:38 AM

That is an odd contention. Are you sure you aren't talking about risk of ruin? The house edge on any particular bet should remain constant no matter what betting strategy a punter employs.

Martingaling does in effect reduce the house earnings dramatically which can be argued is reducing the house percentage (forgive my poor terminology). Perhaps a better way to state this is:

A house with 2% house edge where a single player bet for 1'000'000 rounds motecarlo style can expect ~2% earnings for the entire sum of all bets.
A house with 2% house edge where a single player bet for 1'000'000 rounds martingale style can expect ~0.05-0.01% earnings for the entire sum of all bets.

The bigger the range of bets, the further the houses expected earn is reduced until eventually you are leaving your business vulnerable to going bust.