Martingale Variant

I've never been much of a gambler but a friend told me he's been doing very well using the Martingale system. After giving it a careful look and after reading all about the fallacies of betting systems, I decided it's not for me. However, I did come up with something a little different using baccarat. Let's say my main bet is $5. Next is $10, then $20. If I lose the $20, I start over at $5 and never bet over $20 no matter what. So this gives me 3 chances to win my $5 back. A few times while practicing online I've lost as many as 9 in a row, which REALLY tells me no way would I use a pure Martingale system. But I also constantly switch back and forth between banker and player. I don't have a set time when I switch other than I stay on one until I get a win. Then I may or may not switch. So if I get 8 losses in a row, I don't switch until I get a win, and I may or may not switch at that time.

Overall it has worked well enough in my favor. Yes, I absolutely know for a fact this system can bust me. I went live though and won my initial deposit back and will NEVER re-deposit if I go back to zero, meaning at this point I will never lose anything more than my time playing. So as I write this I will never "lose" again, even if I do go to zero. (My deposit was only $300, which I now have back in full including my fees). This is playing online, not in a casino.

Just want to get some feedback on this. Thanks.

Quote: OahuPlayer

I've never been much of a gambler but a friend told me he's been doing very well using the Martingale system. After giving it a careful look and after reading all about the fallacies of betting systems, I decided it's not for me. However, I did come up with something a little different using baccarat. Let's say my main bet is $5. Next is $10, then $20. If I lose the $20, I start over at $5 and never bet over $20 no matter what. So this gives me 3 chances to win my $5 back. A few times while practicing online I've lost as many as 9 in a row, which REALLY tells me no way would I use a pure Martingale system. But I also constantly switch back and forth between banker and player. I don't have a set time when I switch other than I stay on one until I get a win. Then I may or may not switch. So if I get 8 losses in a row, I don't switch until I get a win, and I may or may not switch at that time.

Overall it has worked well enough in my favor. Yes, I absolutely know for a fact this system can bust me. I went live though and won my initial deposit back and will NEVER re-deposit if I go back to zero, meaning at this point I will never lose anything more than my time playing. So as I write this I will never "lose" again, even if I do go to zero. (My deposit was only $300, which I now have back in full including my fees). This is playing online, not in a casino.

Just want to get some feedback on this. Thanks.

If you enjoy betting that way, give it a shot. The house advangtage takes the same bite no matter what.

Like AZDuffman says, it's just a different way to bet. No advantage, no disadvantage. The disadvantage of the huge loss swings is offset by the "guaranteed" winning. I am saying guaranteed in a very facetious way!

I use the Martingale in blackjack sometimes. I do it because I love "always" winning. I also enjoy when the bets get bigger, as my heart rate increases, real gambling excitement. But it's really no different from a guy that sometimes flat bets at $10, then when he wants some more excitement, bumps his bets up to $100. Still has the same chance of winning or losing, but there is more excitement because his risk of ruin has increased.

My method is to take it to six losses in a row. If I lose six in a row, I have lost 63 units. I've gone a long time without losing six in a row. I have also lost 12 in a row twice. It is no magic system by ANY means.

I'm sure this is apparent to all reading this but I wanted to add that I realize I have to win slightly over 7 times to break even (after factoring in the -5% on every banker win), 8 to get ahead for every time I "lose" (three losses in a row = one loss with this strategy).

I've practiced doing straight bets on banker and found this to be much better so far. SO FAR.

Quote: BigTip

Like AZDuffman says, it's just a different way to bet. No advantage, no disadvantage. The disadvantage of the huge loss swings is offset by the "guaranteed" winning. I am saying guaranteed in a very facetious way!

I use the Martingale in blackjack sometimes. I do it because I love "always" winning. I also enjoy when the bets get bigger, as my heart rate increases, real gambling excitement. But it's really no different from a guy that sometimes flat bets at $10, then when he wants some more excitement, bumps his bets up to $100. Still has the same chance of winning or losing, but there is more excitement because his risk of ruin has increased.

My method is to take it to six losses in a row. If I lose six in a row, I have lost 63 units. I've gone a long time without losing six in a row. I have also lost 12 in a row twice. It is no magic system by ANY means.

I tried some sports-martingale on MLB this summer. Wait until a team has won 5-6 in a row then bet one unit the other way, and martingale it. This has the advantage of you are getting better than 1:1 in most cases. It is a winner short-term, but I know eventually my bankroll will not allow to continue. But fun for some small wins. And if I can get some comps/payback for my play that helps.

Quote: AZDuffman

I tried some sports-martingale on MLB this summer. Wait until a team has won 5-6 in a row then bet one unit the other way, and martingale it. This has the advantage of you are getting better than 1:1 in most cases. It is a winner short-term, but I know eventually my bankroll will not allow to continue. But fun for some small wins. And if I can get some comps/payback for my play that helps.

There's an excellent reason for betting the way you do, and it has nothing to do with a "martingale" or any other betting system. The public overvalues streaks. Thus, the price is almost always WAY too high to bet with a team on a winning streak, and also, way too LOW for a team on a losing streak. Thus, betting the other side gives good value, vs. a team on a winning streak, and betting WITH the team on the losing streak also is a good value, for the same reasons. The best bets are when the winning-streak team has their #4 or #5 pitcher going, or the losing-streak team has their #1 or #2 pitcher going. The public will see the streak and not the pitcher, thus, you will get a very good price better on the other team(s).

It goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway, that in most cases where you expect the line to be driven by the public's sympathies, the later you bet, the better off you will be. Five minute before game time would be ideal.