## Poll

No votes (0%) | |||

No votes (0%) | |||

No votes (0%) | |||

No votes (0%) |

**No members have voted yet**

I am running a bot script that bets a Martingale strategy. To keep it simple, i will use a 2x multiplier and a bet unit of 1 (which is actually like $0.0025)

Starting Balance = 128700

Starting Bet = 1

Multiplier on Loss = 2

Reset to Starting Bet on Win

Script Auto-Withdraws 1300 when balance = 130,000 and keeps betting

With these settings my 16th loss in a row will lose me a total of 65,535 and be unable to place the next bet of 65,536, since my remaining balance would be too small to be placed. So i am left with half(ish) my original bankroll plus 1300 times the amount of auto-withdrawals.

according to the dice site, the odds of losing 16 bets in a row at 49.95% is 1 in every 64497 bets

according to , the odds of losing 16 bets in a row over 64497 bets at 50.05% chance-to-lose is 39.314%

These results seem to be at odds. am i missing something?

Now to the meat of the question...

Should i double my starting bet? That would cut the number of bets before cashout in half, but reduces my bust(half-bust) number to 15 in a row (bust 1 in 32281 bets)

Should i halve my starting bet? That would double the number of bets before cashout, but increase my half-bust number to 17 losses in a row (bust 1 in 128864 bets)

...and up or down from there. Is there a safer option or is it does it all boil down to the same odds? is it the same odds if i double my starting bet or halve it considering there will be more or less bets?

I know that if i set my starting bet too high and only allow 5 losses in a row before half-bust, i will half-bust too often to be profitable. but am i taking on the same amount of risk by slowing down my withdrawals but vastly increasing my number of bets?

...whew...

Quote:Bullseye

according to the dice site, the odds of losing 16 bets in a row at 49.95% is 1 in every 64497 bets

according to , the odds of losing 16 bets in a row over 64497 bets at 50.05% chance-to-lose is 39.314%

These results seem to be at odds. am i missing something?

Maybe because you could possibly lose 16 times in a row more than once in 64497 rolls? And one site is telling you the chances of exactly once and the other is telling at least once?

In any event, why would you use a bot to automate rolling on a negative-expectation game? You're just going to lose faster. The whole point of playing dice is for the fun, not the profit, since you expect to lose.

Quote:BullseyeFun? Fun has nothing to do with money.

everyone is expected to do one thing on here otherwise you deviate and are assured to be called crazy. because the long term is bleak, you shouldnt believe that profit is ever possible because the math says so... someone please give me a generic response as to why i am wrong because even if you are right no one believes me or you

Quote:heatmapeveryone is expected to do one thing on here otherwise you deviate and are assured to be called crazy. because the long term is bleak, you shouldnt believe that profit is ever possible because the math says so... (snip)

I agree.

----

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/34655-the-labouch-re/

To the OP: I recommend you read the post about " the Labouchère" (Edit: see link above) for an example of why any betting system can not overcome the house edge, no matter how small that house edge is (at least see extract below, if you don't want to read the whole link).

Notice in the extract that the "Ratio money lost to Money bet" % is always the same, no matter what your starting bank roll is.

Extract:

"...As a reminder the house edge in baccarat on the Player bet is 1.365%, if you ignore ties. Here are the results. The starting bankroll is along the top row and the goal is to always win 10 units. The total sessions played in the simulation was over 12 billion...."

"

Starting Bankroll | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500 | 1000 | 2500 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Probability winning goal reached | 81.47% | 89.52% | 95.34% | 97.53% | 98.71% | 99.45% |

Average number of bets | 17.810 | 19.565 | 20.766 | 21.184 | 21.404 | 21.542 |

Average units bet | 82.023 | 112.075 | 155.106 | 189.515 | 225.548 | 275.329 |

Expected win per session | -1.119 | -1.530 | -2.117 | -2.584 | -3.078 | -3.754 |

Ratio money lost to Money bet | 1.36% | 1.36% | 1.36% | 1.36% | 1.36% | 1.36% |

---

Update (about 1145 pm)

About 3 years ago, I could play a game with a neutral or even a slight player edge, where the casino also paid me a commission### of 0.3% on all money wagered, so if you are in a similar situation where the "commission is greater than the house edge", then you could have a good/profitable system^^^.

###: They don't offer any game at the moment where the commission is greater than the house edge, so I don't play there anymore.

^^^: Flat betting is probably the best strategy to use, if you are getting paid a commission for your play and it is greater than the house edge.

Note: If they do offer a commission, then it is probably best to PM someone rather than post about it publicly, like I have done in the past, but it is your choice.

is there any type of rebate or some type of bonuses available?Quote:BullseyeFun? Fun has nothing to do with money.

Quote:Bullseye(snip)according to the dice site, the odds of losing 16 bets in a row at 49.95% is 1 in every 64497 bets (snip)

If the chance of winning is 49.95% and the chance of losing is 50.05%, then I get a 1/66,593... chance of losing 16 bets in a row out of 16 bets in total (not a big difference, but i don't know why our answers are different)

But you mention Martingale, and Martingale is a way of making losing money more fun..... But then you are letting the bot have the fun, so I guess writing and watching the bot is your source of fun.Quote:BullseyeFun? Fun has nothing to do with money.

Anyway, Just in case you think you have an idea for a profitable venture, let's knock that on the head with OnceDear's rule of thumb

Martingale is perfectly fine for making a small profit by putting a large bankroll at risk.

E.g. if you had $900 and were about to be shot unless you could bribe the firing squad with $1,000 then Martingale would probably save your life and would be a great idea.

But Martingale for income is on par with wagering on russian roulette.

Oh..... And believe me: Online casinos can get quite aggressive in confiscating funds from bot users.

Quote:BullseyeThis is a satoshi/crypto DICE site. This particular one has only a 0.1% House Edge<snip>

Now to the meat of the question...

Should i double my starting bet?<snip>

Bullseye,

The answer depends on your goal.

If your goal is to increase your bankroll (the usual goal of AP's), then the answer is no: rather, you should lower your starting bet to zero, because you never have an edge on your wager.

On the other hand, if your goal is something else, please provide a quantifiable goal and I or someone else here will answer you.

Hope this helps!

Dog Hand