Reverse Martingale, with a twist
I know...I know...after years of reading the Wizard's website(s), I know and believe that systems are not going to beat the casino, long term. One of the Wizard's commandments is to not gamble more than you can afford...expect to lose. Cool.
That being said...wouldn't the Reverse Martingale be a semi decent way to gamble with a game like Blackjack, using optimal strategy of course? If you lose...you're losing one unit. If you win more than 3 hands in a row, you're maximizing profit, and only losing one unit when you eventually use.
A buddy of mine said he uses a variant...assuming units of betting...
1 2 4 4 4 8 8 8 16 16 16
...and so on.
He said it allows the player to retain SOME profit if they get to the 4 unit level and above, rather than doubling every time, and forcing yourself to stop at a set level. I can see that logic. He also said that optimal BJ strategy does call for you to split/double as "required", which figures into the Wizard's percentages when figuring house edge...so I know that an unsuccessful double down or two can ruin this way of doin' it in one swoop.
For sake of hammering home the point that this way can backfire...he lost close to a grand playing this way recently...so yeah...I know it's never fool proof.
I KNOW people are gonna say there is a ton of proof this betting system sucks, with tons of proof...but it seems to me that this "system" is a good way to ensure you're losing small on every bet(which you should expect to do), winning big when you streak, and maximizing your time in the casino...which is fun, right? Gambling should be fun...yes?
Anywho...I hope you are all running good, and have a great holiday. Be well.
Single Zero at my Casino is either not at my Casino(Seneca Niagara), or in the High Limit room...and that's too big for me LOL
Quote: offtheteamBingo...can I ask, 'cause I'm stupid, and have limited Craps experience...how would that work? Bet the pass, I assume, and then put odds behind it if there is a point made? Would I use the same sequence for both the pass and odds bets?
Count the amount you'll be taking in odds in your bet. For instance, if it's uniform 5x odds being offered, every time you win, divide your winnings by six, round down, and put that amount back on the line. (Or every time you lose on the come-out roll, do the same for the 5x you had behind it, or when you win, for the 7x you now have.)
If it's 3-4-5x odds, you'll probably want to play the dark side (uniform 6x) to keep things clean.
2 books on the subject are:
1. "Progression Blackjack" Dahl
2. "Twenty-first Century Blackjack" Thomason
I use a different sequence of 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 8 ,8, 8, 8. Top bet 8. Fibonacci. A math expert did some sims on this and thought the 1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8 was slightly better.
I use a short buy in of 5 units, max loss of 15 units per day and 45 per month.
I have about the same number of losing days as winning days but the big wins result in more $$ on winning days on average than the 15 units on losing days.
PM me with your email address if you want more info.
However, it makes a lot more sense to increase your bet when you're on a winning streak than when on a losing streak.
The key is to know when the streak will end, before it ends. Good luck with that part of the puzzle.
Quote: 24BingoAs you said, doubling and splitting somewhat wrecks this strategy. If you're going to do this, craps with full odds is probably a better bet, or roulette one way (single-zero if at all possible).
24Bingo,
Let's try to stay away from the 5.26% negative on double green Roulette and 2.6% on single green.
Craps with full odds or 21 with Vegas strip rules and perfect basic strategy.
Quote: bigpete8824Bingo,
Let's try to stay away from the 5.26% negative on double green Roulette and 2.6% on single green.
Craps with full odds or 21 with Vegas strip rules and perfect basic strategy.
The thing is, when you're betting a progression on an even-money bet, the effective edge shoots right up, since you'll probably end up betting significantly more than your initial unit. Just for the sake of illustration, say you bet the pass line with no odds five times in a row - you have a 2.91% chance of winning 31 units, for an effective edge of 6.87% on a 31:1 bet, worse than even double-zero roulette. That's why I specified that he bet one way.
(Of course, with full odds it's a different story, but I can't be bothered to do the math. I recall I did the math for baccarat, and that's worse as well, for either bet.)
Quote: DJTeddyBearYou're right. Mere mention of the word "system" can make some people's hair stand on end.
However, it makes a lot more sense to increase your bet when you're on a winning streak than when on a losing streak.
The key is to know when the streak will end, before it ends. Good luck with that part of the puzzle.
Oh you aren't kidding LOL...like I said...I've been a Wizard fan for awhile, so I got it drilled into my head that systems are bad, and slot machines are a sucker bet, and never take insurance, and never play the Big 6 Wheel, etc...but it seemed to me that there should be a system that could minimize loss while taking advantage of streaks.
Doubling when you win seems like the best way to do that, but NOT doubling every hand, but every third hand after the 4 unit sequence would sort of take some of the "when should I stop" decision making out of it, right? I mean...if you keep going until you lose, you're still maintaining the profits not spent in those two bets you held off on before upping the bet.
That sounded better in my head that how I wrote it, but I'm not retyping it. heh
Quote: DJTeddyBearYou're right. Mere mention of the word "system" can make some people's hair stand on end.
However, it makes a lot more sense to increase your bet when you're on a winning streak than when on a losing streak.
The key is to know when the streak will end, before it ends. Good luck with that part of the puzzle.
You do not know when the streak will end so you keep betting until the streak ends with one losing hand (if that is your method). That is mine. My longest streak 2 years ago was 14 or 15 hands when I went to the Casino 70 days that year. I do not remember if there was also a blackjack in there but I do remember a double down or two. Biggest winning session that year.
1 2 4 4 4 8 8 8 16 16 16 32 32 32 ** 64(lost this one)
I just think that for a casual gambler, this is a nice way to maximize your time at the casino. I just enjoy bein' there...the sounds...everything.
(maybe this means I got a problem LOL)
If you're going to do this, it's important to understand these things:
1. It does not overcome the edge in a -EV game. No betting system does. You will lose in the long term. If you are doing this because you believe it will make you a long term winner, you need to stop now. Don't go back into a casino until you understand that this is not the case.
2. Overall, you are betting about twice as much as you would if you were flat betting. This means that, long term, you will lose twice as much as you would if you were flat betting. So, you may want to reduce the size of your initial bet.
3. (this is the part that most people forget) You are significantly changing the distribution of your winning and losing sessions. In particular, you are trading a lot of small wins for the occasional big win. That means that you will lose the vast majority of your sessions. You need to be mentally prepared for this. No whining about how unlucky you are when you lose 10 or 20 sessions in a row! This will happen. If you can't handle it, flat bet. People talk a lot about not betting more than you can afford to lose, but, for most people, there is a psychological limit that is well below what they can actually afford. I have talked to people who I know have many millions saved and make more than a million per year who have said that they couldn't imagine losing a couple of thousand in a weekend. Obviously, they can afford it, but that's not the point -- it's the psychological limit that they are exceeding, not the financial limit. My point here is, don't push your psychological limits. Be prepared to lose every dime you put on the table for several sessions in a row. This happened to me -- I've modified my craps strategy because I was just losing every single time I played and it made me not want to play any more. Now I'm a lot less aggressive with my pressing.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceMy opinion is that there is nothing wrong with progressions, so long as you understand them. I press my bets in craps all the time -- it adds to the fun of the game!
If you're going to do this, it's important to understand these things:
1. It does not overcome the edge in a -EV game. No betting system does. You will lose in the long term. If you are doing this because you believe it will make you a long term winner, you need to stop now. Don't go back into a casino until you understand that this is not the case. 100% understood, thanks to The Wizard, and many years of playing. I mostly play poker, honestly...but sometimes I enjoy Blackjack. I never lose more than I can afford, and I don't have a high enough limit on my ATM card to hurt me LOL
2. Overall, you are betting about twice as much as you would if you were flat betting. This means that, long term, you will lose twice as much as you would if you were flat betting. So, you may want to reduce the size of your initial bet. When I step into the main casino from the poker room, the highest I play is $10 units...and that's only if $5 isn't available. Here's the thing though...and maybe I'm just missing it....assuming you are losing one unit per losing hand, whether you are flat betting, or using the 1 2 4 4 4 8 8 8 etc. system...isn't not doubling EVERY HAND kinda a way to ensure you don't lose it all when the streak ends? Isn't there profit being held back in there? I KNOW I'm getting ya'll to think about a stupid system...apologies...
3. (this is the part that most people forget) You are significantly changing the distribution of your winning and losing sessions. In particular, you are trading a lot of small wins for the occasional big win. That means that you will lose the vast majority of your sessions. You need to be mentally prepared for this. No whining about how unlucky you are when you lose 10 or 20 sessions in a row! This will happen. If you can't handle it, flat bet. People talk a lot about not betting more than you can afford to lose, but, for most people, there is a psychological limit that is well below what they can actually afford. I have talked to people who I know have many millions saved and make more than a million per year who have said that they couldn't imagine losing a couple of thousand in a weekend. Obviously, they can afford it, but that's not the point -- it's the psychological limit that they are exceeding, not the financial limit. My point here is, don't push your psychological limits. Be prepared to lose every dime you put on the table for several sessions in a row. This happened to me -- I've modified my craps strategy because I was just losing every single time I played and it made me not want to play any more. Now I'm a lot less aggressive with my pressing.
This has never been a problem for me. I've always known, even before The Wizard, that the House is gonna win. Otherwise, there would be no casinos...very honestly...I enjoy the atmosphere of a casino....the sounds, people watching, interaction...hell the exercise...doin' laps around a main casino floor is just as good as "mall walking" and such...if I have $200 bucks to blow, it's gonna get blown on something.
My question...what's long term? Billions of hands, like the sims that The Wizard runs? Nobody in the history of gambling has played billions of blackjack hands. Aren't the various systems supposedly designed to give the dude who hits Vegas for a weekend a better shot at making some money(which I realize isn't the same as not getting broke)? I would think that a system that limits losses to one unit at a time(from the initial bankroll/money you plan/can comfortably lose) is ideal for the someone who knows they are up against strong odds, but wouldn't mind maximizing a win, should it happen.
Seriously...what is the real life application of the long term that debunks every system ever?
Quote: offtheteamAnd one more thing...and again forgive me...but alot of folks, and myself, know that systems do not work "long term". It's proven.
My question...what's long term? Billions of hands, like the sims that The Wizard runs? Nobody in the history of gambling has played billions of blackjack hands. Aren't the various systems supposedly designed to give the dude who hits Vegas for a weekend a better shot at making some money(which I realize isn't the same as not getting broke)? I would think that a system that limits losses to one unit at a time(from the initial bankroll/money you plan/can comfortably lose) is ideal for the someone who knows they are up against strong odds, but wouldn't mind maximizing a win, should it happen.
Seriously...what is the real life application of the long term that debunks every system ever?
You mention short term as a weekend in Vegas in your second paragraph. Then, you ask about long term application in your last question and paragraph. You answered your last question of long term by long term simulations run by the Wizard, etc.
As far as a weekend in Vegas, or a year of weekends in Vegas, reread my posts in your thread.
But systems were proven a loser over a billion plays, right? Who, in real life, has come close to playing a billion hands of anything? This is the point I'm trying to grasp. I know I've read that the Wizard says that systems might(MIGHT) win in the short term, but cannot overcome the edge over time...who has spent more than, say, 2000-3000 hands/spins/rolls of anything in one sitting(sitting being defined, in my mind, as say the "trip to Vegas" or "an afternoon at Seneca". While I am sure it can be proven that most systems lose even with that small a sample...anything that can assist in maximizing a profit with an understanding you just might/probably will get broke, can't be all that bad, right? Isn't all about knowing about the likelihood of a loss, accepting it, REALLY accepting it, and then betting in a way to make and retain a little profit when a streak happens?
I'm only asking this because I just think that simply betting $5 - $5 - $5 all day, and playing until you reach a goal or get broke just isn't as fun. You lose $5 from your initial stack whether you progress or flat bet...but with the progression, hopefully(crossed fingers), you've strung together 5, 6, 7 hands in which you've retained a little bit of profit.
Quote: offtheteamNo no...I get it. Systems are a loser, long term. I get that 1000%.
But systems were proven a loser over a billion plays, right? Who, in real life, has come close to playing a billion hands of anything? This is the point I'm trying to grasp. I know I've read that the Wizard says that systems might(MIGHT) win in the short term, but cannot overcome the edge over time...who has spent more than, say, 2000-3000 hands/spins/rolls of anything in one sitting(sitting being defined, in my mind, as say the "trip to Vegas" or "an afternoon at Seneca". While I am sure it can be proven that most systems lose even with that small a sample...anything that can assist in maximizing a profit with an understanding you just might/probably will get broke, can't be all that bad, right? Isn't all about knowing about the likelihood of a loss, accepting it, REALLY accepting it, and then betting in a way to make and retain a little profit when a streak happens?
I'm only asking this because I just think that simply betting $5 - $5 - $5 all day, and playing until you reach a goal or get broke just isn't as fun. You lose $5 from your initial stack whether you progress or flat bet...but with the progression, hopefully(crossed fingers), you've strung together 5, 6, 7 hands in which you've retained a little bit of profit.
Offtheteam,
I already answered this question in my posts. I have read over 200 books on the subject and wrote one.
If you want to have a shot at a decent win, buy the 2 books that I mentioned, unless you want to count cards. I do not have a better idea although another poster might.
Also, streaks seem to be linear in fashion as in minutes, hours, days or months meaning that I play less during cold time periods and play more during winning time periods. Read the story about Archie Karas who ran hot for months and made millions and then ran cold and gave back 100%. Konik wrote a chapter in a book about Karas.
These are things that sims do not consider except to point out how drastic standard deviation can be.
BOL
Quote: offtheteamNo no...I get it. Systems are a loser, long term. I get that 1000%.
I don't think you do. When you say that you understand that they lose in the long term, but you won't be playing for the long term, that makes me think that you don't get it at all.
Ask yourself... what do you want to accomplish?
1. If you want to win money, either learn to play at an advantage, or go find a job. Forget about casinos and betting systems.
2. If you want to have fun while losing money, a casino might be the right place for you. Now, what do you want?
2a. If you want to play as long as possible while losing as little money as possible, flat-bet the table minimum. Seek out places with the lowest possible table minimums. You will win sometimes, and lose sometimes. The longer your sessions, the higher percentage of losing sessions you'll have. Either way, your total losses will be bigger than your total wins.
2b. If you want to lose the VAST majority of the time that you play, and have a chance at a really big win, then play some progression where you increase your bet sizes after you win. Understand that you will go home a small - medium sized loser almost every single time you play. Once in a while you might book a big win. That big win will not be enough to overcome all those small to medium sized losses, though.
2c. If you want to win the vast majority of the time that you play, play some progression where you increase your bet sizes after a loss (eg, Martingale). You will win most of the time, but occasionally you will have a massive loss. That massive loss will be more than all your little wins combined.
The problem with 2b, which he understands and you don't:
A: In blackjack, such a progression has a chance of putting him at a point where he can't double or split, increasing the edge massively.
B: In any game, such a progression will give bigger wins when it does give a win, but only if you know when to quit. His progression takes that out of the equation - you play until you lose and still get a big win out of it.
I'd say, for myself, it's more fun to lose once and pocket a big win than lose once and wipe out completely what had been a huge win sitting in front off you.
Quote:I'd say, for myself, it's more fun to lose once and pocket a big win than lose once and wipe out completely what had been a huge win sitting in front off you.
This is why I would think that doubling EVERY hand is not good even a little bit...because it forces you to think a little harder about when you stop and go back to one unit. It's why I don't do it.
"My"(not really MY, but you know) Way
100 units to start
Bet 1, wins now you have 102
Bet 2, wins now you have 104
Bet 4, wins now you have 108
Bet 4, wins now you have 112
Bet 4, wins now you have 116
Bet 8, LOSE now you have 108
Flat Bet
Bet 1, wins now you have 102
Bet 1, wins now you have 103
Bet 1, wins now you have 104
Bet 1, wins now you have 105
Bet 1, wins now you have 106
Bet 1, LOSE now you have 105
Double every winning hand
Bet 1, wins now you have 102
Bet 2, wins now you have 104
Bet 4, wins now you have 108
Bet 8, wins now you have 116
Bet 16, wins now you have 132
Bet 32, LOSE now you have 100
Now...forgive me if the math isn't right, because I did this quick on Lunch, but it seems to me that the slower progression is best in this VERY small sample, right? Meanwhile, if you lose anywhere in the mix of any of these scenarios...it's just one unit from your initial bankroll, which hopefully you've padded a little with little runs of 4-5 hands where you didn't bet all the profit in order to make more. And if you don't get those little streaks to pad the bankroll to fade the little 1 unit hits that will probably come, well...that's the Casino for you. Unless you're an AP, you're a dog in every game out on the floor, and if you don't accept that, then you're dumb. I assure you, I am not dumb. I just don't understand how flat betting vs. the slower progression is better when no more than one unit from your initial bankroll is ever in jeapordy.
(You're beating your head on your desk. I can hear it from here in Buffalo.)
100 units to start
Bet 1, wins now you have 102
Bet 2, wins now you have 104
Bet 4, LOSE now you have 100
Flat Bet
Bet 1, wins now you have 102
Bet 1, wins now you have 103
Bet 1, LOSE now you have 102
So...if that is the point I'm to understand...I get it. I guess what it comes down to is the gamble(why you're at the Casino in the first place) of that one unit in order to possibly string together that unlikely streak.
/working it out
First of all, it's funny to see how every time you repeat yourself that you know that betting systems don't work on the long run and all that and I know why you do it, because most of the forum users, just like to bash everyone who just willing to simply discuss/ask/propose anything related to a betting strategy, cause they know that it doesn't work and they like to lecture everyone else =)
Regarding in the long run, I was doing tests myself of different strategies based on million spins. What was important for me is out of million spins how many times I lost a whole session. From this I can know what is the average amount of turns until I will lose.
Then if the amount of the money won in the winning turns till the loss is lower than the amount loss in the one losing time, then the conclusion is that it won't work in the "long run". If it doesn't work on the long run, that makes the strategy not profitable. It might be profitable, but then it will be a matter of luck and not a matter of math.
Why is it important to check it on as much turns as possible? because this way you know in how many turns AVERAGELY you will lose and the more spins you test it on, the more accurate this average will be.
If the chance to lose is for example: 1/100 turns you know that if you will play only one spin, your chance to lose is 1/100, if you will play two spins, your chance will be 2/100, which is 1/50. So you can play very little and win in the "short run". But if you will come to the casino 50 times (doesn't matter if you play 100 rounds all at once or you just go to the casino 50 times and play 2 times each times. both ways its 100 times) and play 2 rounds each time, you should lose one time which will cover all the previous wins.
So to summarize, theoretically, if someone would come and play 1 round only in his whole life, then the longest double betting strategy, would be his lowest risk to lose, therefore in that case it would be his best strategy, but in the long run it wouldn't be. In the long run is what matters, because in the short run, is more a matter of luck (maybe this 1/100 times will happen on the 2nd spin and maybe it will only happen in the 80th spin, who knows). The billion times just gives you the most accurate figure of what will LIKELY happen. You don't need to play billion times, to get to this result, you just need to take the averages out of it.
I hope you get my point, cause I tried to answer your exact question about the "long run" =)
Really ?
Some people just want to discuss something, but some people see it as "oh another one who wants to convince us that he knows better".
Some time ago, NOT on this forum, I had a question about one of the strategies also, I wanted to understand something and specifically said that I am just curious from mathematical point of view and I said that I'm interested in replies with calculations (and was very polite in that!). Most of the replies I got was just simple stuff like: BETTING SYSTEM NEVER WORK or even something more rude than that or something like "better get a job", without any explanation or without any intent to try to understand what was my real question.
It happens not only in the casino forums, it happens in every forum. For example, once I asked on one forum if a tourist can buy a car in Europe and specified that I know about the prices and everything around it and my question is specifically that. Instead I got replies about renting a car is better and that if I wanna buy a car then probably I'm staying illegally and totally unrelated stuff, just so they can lecture someone =)
Anyway, it's getting really off-topic!
Hope I answered what I meant there. Didn't mean to offend anyone!
But I'm thinking that the person who isn't a professional gambler, who has a set amount to lose, might find a method to take full advantage of the streaks that might happen, might want to try something like this. It doesn't run into table maxs, it limits losses to one unit, and takes adavantage of winning streaks. Yes...it's very flawed, but c'est la vie.
What I will say, something I didn't understand/believe until I made this thread and worked it out, is that flat betting is really the best way to maximize your time in the casino. I get it now...I didn't before. I just think flat betting is kinda boring. There is something to be said for being on that streak and your up to 8-16 units...that's exciting for a recreational gambler, right? Fun...why one is supposed to be there.
Anywhoo...I really really enjoy this site, and these forums, and everything The Wizard has put together here...god bless...be well.
entertainment, then you'd probably bet a single unit on every hand. And, if you game was slightly more aggressive, then you would card
count and play a small parlay whenever the count is positive. A two win parlay might consist of adding a single chip to your previous win
making it a 1-3 combo, returning to a single unit win after the two streak has ended and then adding a single chip for as long as any win
run might go on. Or, one could play for a 3 win situation using the same tactic and this would amount to a 1-3-7 parlay. A favorite parlay
of long ago utilized a 3-7-10 sequence, suggesting that if you initially bet $15 (for example), then you would stack that win plus add
1 additional chip to make your next bet $35. If you win this bet, you'd have $70 in front of you, representing $20 of your money and $50
of the casino's. you'd then take your money out of play and make a $50 bet using only the house money. Of course, the problem with
any parlays is the additional risk you incur when encountering splits and double-downs. Long ago, I used to play with a "reverse
martingale" positive progression using 2,3,5,7,7,10, but I can assure you, I don't recall reaching 10 very often - if at all.
Quote: timbo123I suspect all betting systems lie in the "its a nice dream" arena. However, having said that I suppose if your objective was, more or less,
entertainment, then you'd probably bet a single unit on every hand. And, if you game was slightly more aggressive, then you would card
count and play a small parlay whenever the count is positive. A two win parlay might consist of adding a single chip to your previous win
making it a 1-3 combo, returning to a single unit win after the two streak has ended and then adding a single chip for as long as any win
run might go on. Or, one could play for a 3 win situation using the same tactic and this would amount to a 1-3-7 parlay. A favorite parlay
of long ago utilized a 3-7-10 sequence, suggesting that if you initially bet $15 (for example), then you would stack that win plus add
1 additional chip to make your next bet $35. If you win this bet, you'd have $70 in front of you, representing $20 of your money and $50
of the casino's. you'd then take your money out of play and make a $50 bet using only the house money. Of course, the problem with
any parlays is the additional risk you incur when encountering splits and double-downs. Long ago, I used to play with a "reverse
martingale" positive progression using 2,3,5,7,7,10, but I can assure you, I don't recall reaching 10 very often - if at all.
Wow, this is like the EvenBob line-return format on crack!
