Money management - works ?
Poll
| No votes (0%) | |||
 | 13 votes (100%) |
13 members have voted
May 12th, 2011 at 1:54:31 AM
permalink
In (50-50) games such as casino war or baccarat (or even pai gow) money management (martingale) system with a cap (4-5 bets) should be profitable?
This is not a question poll of theoretical martingale where the player would double ad infinitum but at a certain cap depending on bankroll?
I understand the problem with pure martingale but this is not what I am polling about.....
This is not a question poll of theoretical martingale where the player would double ad infinitum but at a certain cap depending on bankroll?
I understand the problem with pure martingale but this is not what I am polling about.....
Lady Luck is a Fickle Bitch and her name is Karma
May 12th, 2011 at 2:44:26 AM
permalink
I don't quite understand this money management stuff ...
If the Banker/Player decision should not be influenced by the recent past results, why should the size of the bet be influenced by the recent past results?
If the Banker/Player decision should not be influenced by the recent past results, why should the size of the bet be influenced by the recent past results?
May 12th, 2011 at 3:28:16 AM
permalink
Quote: AndrasIn (50-50) games such as casino war or baccarat (or even pai gow) money management (martingale) system with a cap (4-5 bets) should be profitable?
No. 1*.95 < 1; 2*.95<2; 4*.95<4..................................
It doesn't matter how you spread it out, if you are betting against a negative expectation you get a negative result.
Such a system might:
make your bankroll last longer that session
hit chance (not "luck") at a good time for a good result
or change the monotony that is "casino war."
Profit? Nope.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
May 12th, 2011 at 3:59:53 AM
permalink
If it worked, why would you cap it?
http://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/general/10042-woes-black-sheep-game-ii/#post151727
May 12th, 2011 at 4:53:43 AM
permalink
I'd need more information about your cap to give an opinion. But it's irrelvant. No system works. And the games you quoted are NOT 50/50. No game is.Quote: AndrasIn (50-50) games such as casino war or baccarat (or even pai gow) .....
For the record, I have a feeling that if there ever WERE a true 50/50 game, players would still lose due to systems hitting table limits and exhausting the bankroll.
Does that answer your question?
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
May 12th, 2011 at 6:34:03 AM
permalink
Quote: AndrasIn (50-50) games such as casino war or baccarat (or even pai gow) money management (martingale) system with a cap (4-5 bets) should be profitable?
NO. If your cap is 4 bets, you lose BIG every time the dealer wins 5 (or more) in a row. That happens 6.25% of the time in a 50% game. If your cap is 5 bets, you lose BIG every time the dealer wins 6 in a row. That happens 3.125% of the time. Also, the games you listed aren't 50/50. They're 52/48 (there's a house edge...)
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
May 12th, 2011 at 11:10:44 AM
permalink
Capping is for doubling when lose. In baccarat there are certain patterns of course quite hard to predict but they exist. When using these patterns with martingale with a cap, you might get lucky and win some. This is not a "system", i.e. not a positive EV.
Quote: WizardofEnglandIf it worked, why would you cap it?
Lady Luck is a Fickle Bitch and her name is Karma
May 12th, 2011 at 11:24:34 AM
permalink
Quote: AndrasCapping is for doubling when lose. In baccarat there are certain patterns of course quite hard to predict but they exist. When using these patterns with martingale with a cap, you might get lucky and win some. This is not a "system", i.e. not a positive EV.
The so called, "pattern" is only visible after it is too late to change your wagers. Historical information is not actionable when shoe penetration is not very deep.
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo da Vinci
