Walkinshaw30t
Joined: Apr 11, 2013
• Posts: 91
February 19th, 2014 at 6:12:45 AM permalink
Say you were using a 4 step martingale in bac and instead of busting out approx 6.5% of time, you would only bust out approx 4% of time.
Time will tell
rdw4potus
Joined: Mar 11, 2010
• Posts: 7237
February 19th, 2014 at 7:48:02 AM permalink
What factor(s) are altering your ruin %? Do those same factors also affect flat betting and other multi-step betting systems?
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
DeMango
Joined: Feb 2, 2010
• Posts: 2791
February 19th, 2014 at 7:58:24 AM permalink
You know if you have a 53% to almost 54% strike rate at baccarat, the 4 step Wink Martindale would probably work!
When a rock is thrown into a pack of dogs, the one that yells the loudest is the one who got hit.
24Bingo
Joined: Jul 4, 2012
• Posts: 1348
February 19th, 2014 at 8:16:10 AM permalink
I think I see what you're going for here: the chance of four straight player wins, if you count ties toward the four, is very close to 4%.

As always, you're only winning one unit (less a commission that could be as high as 40%), and while the ties will mean you don't always lose as much, it'll still make up for it.

Let's take a \$10 base bet.

50.7% of the time, you'll win \$9.50.
22.6% of the time, you'll win \$9.
10.0% of the time, you'll win \$8.
4.08% of the time, you'll win \$6.
3.97% of the time, you'll lose \$150.
3.38% of the time, you'll lose \$70.
1.08% of the time, you'll lose \$30.
0.154% of the time, you'll lose \$10.

Add it up and you get an expected loss of about 76.5¢ per cycle.
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
Walkinshaw30t
Joined: Apr 11, 2013
• Posts: 91
February 19th, 2014 at 8:35:39 AM permalink
Quote: 24Bingo

I think I see what you're going for here: the chance of four straight player wins, if you count ties toward the four, is very close to 4%.

As always, you're only winning one unit (less a commission that could be as high as 40%), and while the ties will mean you don't always lose as much, it'll still make up for it.

Thanks but no thats not what I was thinking- its purely to see the maths for the stated scenario.
Time will tell
rdw4potus
Joined: Mar 11, 2010
• Posts: 7237
February 19th, 2014 at 8:52:09 AM permalink
The game has a built-in edge, so your 6.5% number isn't quite right to start. But if we use 4% instead, you'll lose 15 units 4% of the time, and win 1 unit 96% of the time. (1*.96)-(15*.04)=.36 units won.
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
Walkinshaw30t
Joined: Apr 11, 2013
• Posts: 91
February 19th, 2014 at 8:58:50 AM permalink
Quote: rdw4potus

The game has a built-in edge, so your 6.5% number isn't quite right to start. But if we use 4% instead, you'll lose 15 units 4% of the time, and win 1 unit 96% of the time. (1*.96)-(15*.04)=.36 units won.

Thanks
Time will tell
24Bingo
Joined: Jul 4, 2012
• Posts: 1348
February 20th, 2014 at 8:47:12 PM permalink
Except what should be stressed is that the only way the odds could get that way is if individual trials were such that there would by just about any metric exist smarter ways to bet.
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
Walkinshaw30t
Joined: Apr 11, 2013
• Posts: 91
February 23rd, 2014 at 5:59:02 AM permalink
Quote: 24Bingo

Except what should be stressed is that the only way the odds could get that way is if individual trials were such that there would by just about any metric exist smarter ways to bet.

Can you explain what you mean?
Time will tell
24Bingo
Joined: Jul 4, 2012