Yet Another Martingale Question.
Thread Rating:
I know the Martingale system is a guaranteed loser in the long run and has been discussed over and over here. Yet, here I am, a newbie registering and making a thread about it within the first thirty minutes. I feel like I should stand back and let you guys throw a few tomatoes at me before I continue.
I have stayed away from roulette so far because of the odds, but I can't help but be tempted to play...It just looks like fun.
Since the game is sure to eat your money over a long session, I was thinking about taking a martingale approach with defined boundaries. Find a 5 dollar table, and keep wagering 5 on even-money bets. Winning bets are set aside, and losing bets are doubled to 10, then 20, then 40, then 80. After the 80 loses, a total of 155, I walk away with whatever has been set aside. Another option would be trying to find a 2.50 roulette terminal to reduce my exposure.
I'm not offering up anything that hasn't already been proposed before, but I guess I was wondering if you guys see this as a reasonable way to approach the occasional roulette session when one just feels "like gambling." The way I see it, As long as you're prepared to lose the entire 155, it seems like you would have a good chance to approach making even and enjoying the thrills of betting big (to me, anyway), all while not risking a huge bankroll. Any personal stories of tears or triumph using this exact approach? I'd never be so brazen as to keep going past 80.
Sorry if this exact question has already been posted...there's a ton of info on this forum. Happy gambling!
Good luck and have fun.
Quote: JimmerI have stayed away from roulette so far because of the odds, but I can't help but be tempted to play...It just looks like fun.
I doubt you'll be having much fun when you eventually lose 5 in a row.
When I was in college I started playing roulette and using my limited math knowledge I thought I had almost a 100% chance of winning by waiting for a streak of 3 black or red and then betting the opposite color with a 6 step Marty (5-10-20-40-80-160).
It only took a few trips to the casino for a killer streak of 9 to appear and wipe me out.
I was stubborn and thought the loss was a fluke, so I continued to use the same system. Not surprisingly, I got crushed several more times before I finally realized roulette was one of the worst casino games offered and Marty was one of the worst systems ever created.
Unless you are obsessed with roulette and don't mind donating all of your money to the casino, I suggest you to stay away from roulette and Marty.
If you want to have fun and play a game with some of the best odds, go with craps. I recently discovered from reading the Wizard's main site that betting the don't and laying 10x odds reduces the house edge to a measly 0.128%. That's pretty good compared to roulette's house edge of 5.26%!
and download the results from a roulette table from today. Play the outcomes like
you would at a real casino. This will give you a good idea what you're
up against. Better than good, it will show you exactly what will happen.
There are also the 12's bet on roulette, 1st 2nd and 3rd 12. I had success once be it a loose dealer looking for tips, a lucky variance, or a wheel that played itself out at true odds. There's also the 3 column bets that also pay 3-1. a 3-1 wager allows for a martingale variant that goes something like this. 5,5,5,10,15,20,25.... I also lost using it. I have no plans to play the game again.
There's also the single number bets, 35 bets to lose before a raise.
Like a previous poster said it's a strong wager for both house a player. One win can wipe out all the previous losses, and one more loss breaks the player.
Quote: TankoNothing wrong with it?
We knew we were in for a show when a guy carrying two sheets of paper with his "System" written on them bought in to the Mini-Baccarat table for $5,000.
He even brought along two friends to watch him break the bank.
He started off with $50 units, but as with all progressive betting systems, his bet size had to grow as he lost more hands than he won.
When he lost his $5,000 after two and one half shoes, he began shoving chairs and cursing the dealer.
"Thanks for that F@#$%n streak."
Must have been that eleven-hand Player streak.
He bet Banker all the way.
No need to guess what he was thinking.
Then he stormed out of the casino, red faced, leaving his entourage in the dust.
I have enjoyed the James Bond approach more than any other Roulette systems and not gotten hurt too badly by it, and end up a winner about 1/2 the time. (If you're not familiar, it's looking at the history and betting the 2 twelves that are running best w/ your base bet, then moving to the other one after one of the first 2 loses twice: at 3:1 if either hits you win 2x your loss.) I also prefer multiplying winners rather than chasing losers with a pre-determined ceiling where I go back to base (take my winnings) on even-money bets like you're suggesting, whether paigow or bac or red/black. When you win, double up; at least you're not betting double your losses like a Martingale, just risking your base. But I do see where you're banking your winnings, so maybe that works better for you.
Quote: JimmerGreetings all, I am a newcomer to this forum. Also being relatively new to casino gaming, I am so glad I found this site and have been able to gamble knowing exactly what advantages the casino has against me, and in what games. It has been shocking going in and seeing people I'm SURE have gambled for decades, still making sucker bet after sucker bet.
I know the Martingale system is a guaranteed loser in the long run and has been discussed over and over here. Yet, here I am, a newbie registering and making a thread about it within the first thirty minutes. I feel like I should stand back and let you guys throw a few tomatoes at me before I continue.
I have stayed away from roulette so far because of the odds, but I can't help but be tempted to play...It just looks like fun.
Since the game is sure to eat your money over a long session, I was thinking about taking a martingale approach with defined boundaries. Find a 5 dollar table, and keep wagering 5 on even-money bets. Winning bets are set aside, and losing bets are doubled to 10, then 20, then 40, then 80. After the 80 loses, a total of 155, I walk away with whatever has been set aside. Another option would be trying to find a 2.50 roulette terminal to reduce my exposure.
I'm not offering up anything that hasn't already been proposed before, but I guess I was wondering if you guys see this as a reasonable way to approach the occasional roulette session when one just feels "like gambling." The way I see it, As long as you're prepared to lose the entire 155, it seems like you would have a good chance to approach making even and enjoying the thrills of betting big (to me, anyway), all while not risking a huge bankroll. Any personal stories of tears or triumph using this exact approach? I'd never be so brazen as to keep going past 80.
Sorry if this exact question has already been posted...there's a ton of info on this forum. Happy gambling!
Different systems change your variance. Here is a good discussion about the martingale system.
https://easy.vegas/gambling/martingale-betting-system
