Quote from: kuverty on June 13, 2014, 10:51:10 PM

Quote from: nimda on June 13, 2014, 10:27:15 PM

Quote from: dooglus on June 13, 2014, 09:39:25 PM

Quote from: nimda on June 13, 2014, 09:01:04 PM

First, I love how martingale charts look. A perfect martingale will be a straight line with periodic drops of varying magnitude, where deeper drops are exponentially more rare.

Second, is there any way to calculate the probability of a bust on a martingale procession while taking into account the ever-increasing bankroll it provides?

I think it wouldn't be exactly straight, even connecting the peaks, because a:
-1 -2 +4
and a
-1 -2 -4 -8 -16 +32
both add 1 to the total bankroll, but take different numbers of steps to do so.

I've seen people play like:
-1 -3 -7 -15 -31 +63
before, which *does* lead to a perfect straight line, since the net gain is equal to the number of steps. The 6 numbers in the previous line sum to 6. It's equivalent to starting a new martingale of size 1 each bet:

First bet, bet 1 (and lose)
Second bet, bet 2 for the first martingale, and 1 for the new one you're starting: so 3 in total
Third bet, bet 4 for the first, 2 for the 2nd and 1 for the new one: 7 in total
...
Sixth bet: bet 32 for the 1st, 16 for the 2nd, ..., and 1 for the new one and this time we win, finishing off all 6 concurrent martingales at once.

I think the first person I noticed playing this way was the owner of the BTC Guild poll, Eleuthria. It didn't work out too well for him in the end, and unfortunately I can't remember his account number to show the chart.

Oh, you're right. Normal martingale is only a straight line if you ignore the losses Tongue

That's an interesting variation on the martingale, too. It busts much quicker, but it's also a faster earner. Maybe something to try with tiny amounts.

Well, nothing too special. Really just like a "one step quicker to lose" version of martingale.

With regular martingale the bets are 2ⁿ (starting at n=0): 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32...
The other is 2ⁿ⁺¹-1, so it's 1, 3, 7, 15, 31...

Sure it's faster because you the bets are risen faster. Why stop there, you could choose to bet 1, 10, 100, 1000, 10000... an even faster earner and faster loser. Or bet n factorial; 1, 2, 6, 24, 120, 720... (exponential growth is for the basic martingaler, boooriiing)

I myself think it's too slow losing all my money with these noob strategies, betting strategies based on sequences given by primitive recursive functions are super boring anyway. The Ackermann function can give nice sequences to follow, use it to your needs, that's a real pro tip. You make good dough if you keep winning!

You make good dough if you win Grin

I think martingale can be funny because you have a false sense of winning each time : +1 +1 +1 +1 ect. until you bust Wink

which will happen sooner than late