thank you for sharingQuote:OnceDearAs a little exercise, I've created an Excel workbook which illustrates dramatically how a progressive Martingale will generally give a bankroll with quite a steady initial uptrend punctuated with death defying crashes.

It allows you to experiment with waiting till xNumber of Reds appear before starting a martingale bet on the possibility of a Black to break the cycle.

It's nothing sophisticated and does not use macros, so is safe to run in excel 2010 or later.

the Marty is a fun way to play for many, for sure

oh

I used it in excel 2007

with no problems

there are also

free

add-ins that turn a spreadsheet into a simulator with no code to write too

I have one and use it sometimes

======================================

i bring this up because of your statement

"How often do you double your bankroll before crashing? About half the time !!!"

this is not even close to being a true statement

in my opinion

I get simulated about 62% to bust the $5k bank (that makes 38% success rate, far far from "About half the time")

using your sheet and another one i have this to show

no color added until feeling better

color in me other simulator

Mully

Quote:mustangsally

i bring this up because of your statement

"How often do you double your bankroll before crashing? About half the time !!!"

this is not even close to being a true statement

in my opinion

I get simulated about 62% to bust the $5k bank (that makes 38% success rate, far far from "About half the time")

Mully

This is strange indeed!

You would have better results if you bet all your bankroll in the first spin.

Maybe numbers lie after all...

Can you explain you results logically?

yeppQuote:KavourasThis is strange indeed!

You would have better results if you bet all your bankroll in the first spin.

or just bet $2500 at a time = 47.2992701%

or $1000 at a time = 43.2824583%

trying to double a $5000 bankroll $2 at a time takes timeQuote:KavourasMaybe numbers lie after all...

Can you explain you results logically?

and lots of spins in the OP example

that looks abouts likes 2500 betting units

$1000 bets = about 5 betting units

and on average abouts 25 spins - to success or ruin

of course it could take more than 25 spins - only 65% chance it happens by #25

this is where more is less

and less is better

units that be

Mully

Quote:sc15Well, I can think of a situation where martingale has value especially in vegas.

A hooker wants $500 for the night and you have $450. The odds are in your favor for getting laid tonight. But you'll still wake up with less money than you started :)

I'm sure shell take $50 off if youre fast enough

Quote:mustangsally...I bring this up because of your statement

"How often do you double your bankroll before crashing? About half the time !!!"

...

I get simulated about 62% to bust the $5k bank (that makes 38% success rate, far far from "About half the time")

Thanks Sally for adding to my analysis. Your observation is interesting and seems to be correct.

I'd made the intuitive assumption that the chances of doubling bankroll would be similar to the 48.65% chance of doubling with one, bankroll sized bet. To my very rough estimations .4865 is close to a half. Can you live with that level of inaccuracy :o)

But it does transpire that if bet size is small compared to bankroll, and consequently you can take many consecutive losses before busting out, then your chances of doubling bankroll seem to be further diminished. It's not obvious to me quite why this should be and frankly I cannot be bothered to figure it out. Maybe it's the impact of greater repeated exposure to house edge, or maybe it's some consequence of the partial last bet of a losing streak.

Frankly I'm not too bothered, having proven that such a Marty is not sensible in trying to make a significant gain.

So, I'll just modify the comment in my workbook to read :-

"How often do you double your bankroll before crashing? Less than half the time !!!" and leave it at that.

To any latecomers to this topic: The charts shown are just examples created from the spreadsheet. So feel free to download and try it for yourself.

Quote:OnceDearQuote:mustangsally...I bring this up because of your statement

"How often do you double your bankroll before crashing? About half the time !!!"

...

I get simulated about 62% to bust the $5k bank (that makes 38% success rate, far far from "About half the time")

...It's not obvious to me quite why this should be and frankly I cannot be bothered to figure it out....

I think I've figured a simple logical explanation without complicated maths:-

With one £5000 wager, either,

Sum of winning wagers = £5000 and Sum of losing wagers = £0

or

Sum of winning wagers = £0 and Sum of losing wagers = £5000

Therefore the Sum of 'Action' on the table is (£5000+0) or (0 + £5000), which is £5000 in either case.

So, with one bankroll sized bet, Sum of Expected Loss Equals (1/37 * 5000)

BUT

With a multitude of smaller bets being placed in any other system, there will be some winners that are cancelled out with some losers as we progress to the final outcome:-

Sum of winning wagers >£5000 and sum of losing wagers >£0 if we are to successfully double

or

Sum of winning wagers >£0 and sum of losing wagers >£5000 if we are to eventually fail.

So, Sum of Expected loss will still be 1/37 * (Sum of winning wagers + Sum of losing wagers), but (Sum of winning wagers + Sum of Losing wagers) must be > 5000.

Therefore with small and occasionally cancelling wagers, Sum of Expected loss Greater than 1 / 37 * Bankroll

I cannot be bothered to quantify the difference, but I can see why it arises.

you could also add this to excel online (for you free) and that way a person does not need to have Excel to try itQuote:OnceDearSo, I'll just modify the comment in my workbook to read :-

"How often do you double your bankroll before crashing? Less than half the time !!!" and leave it at that.

https://office.live.com/start/default.aspx

one suggestion is to add a max table bet just to be more realistic

===============================================

also, to give Marty players even more excitement at 0Roulette

turn $5k into $7.5k, not double but just 50% increase (start bet =2)

now we are at about 55% success to hit 7.5k (one time probability that is)

now a favorite to hit the win goal target!

more winners by not being greedy

many will say

(of course, many spins on avg still required abouts 3,000 of them)

now

start bet =5

success rate abouts 57%

and only 1,161 spins on average to hit 7.5k

keeps getting better (think of the comps too)

better = more fun

time is money

Mully

http://www.toxicdrums.com/doubling-system.html

nice pics to view here too

I'm sorry but I don't understand that comment. Please explain.Quote:mustangsallytwo two ?

As to your other comments about using Marty to achieve modest objectives, you are quite correct. With the caveat that using Marty multiple times with multiple modest objectives one after another will still be as risky as one continuous session. Let us not encourage Marty exponents who think that quitting a session while ahead and coming back another day is a good idea.