EvenBob
EvenBob
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
  • Threads: 431
  • Posts: 24860
May 2nd, 2021 at 9:50:31 PM permalink
Quote: Wellbush

Thanks EB. I am not proposing that the Marty be used in real life. I am proposing the concept, from which another potential negative progression system may have merit.



But it doesn't have merit. It's not even a system. It's just having a bottomless pit of money and spending it until you win. I'm not trying to make you angry, but you're really new at this aren't you. The stuff you're talking about is what new gamblers go through, it's 101. There is an old story that goes a couple times an hour a couple of new gamblers in the world discover the Martingale and think they've got it made.
"It's not enough to succeed, your friends must fail." Gore Vidal
Wellbush
Wellbush
Joined: Mar 23, 2021
  • Threads: 4
  • Posts: 427
May 2nd, 2021 at 10:50:25 PM permalink
Quote: EvenBob

But it doesn't have merit. It's not even a system. It's just having a bottomless pit of money and spending it until you win. I'm not trying to make you angry, but you're really new at this aren't you. The stuff you're talking about is what new gamblers go through, it's 101. There is an old story that goes a couple times an hour a couple of new gamblers in the world discover the Martingale and think they've got it made.



Youíre entitled to an opinion.

I wouldnít be so presumptuous to disqualify something I donít know about. If I knew what I was doing, any newbie coming along would have their system checked through by me, easily. But here, people just debunk based on what they think the end result will be. They donít have any idea whatís being proposed. And actually, when I get into the crux of a system, the more people here seem not to understand how the maths works. E.g. you saying that ďmy system being an endless pit of money until I win,Ē shows you have a very simplistic understanding of what my system is. Iím not trying to insult. Itís just my impression from what youíve written here and elsewhere.

But if you already have the answers like everyone else here, then Iím not going to stop you from going on your merry way, Bob
Last edited by: Wellbush on May 2, 2021
Only gamble 'a little' for fun, or, if 'you know' you can win.
BoSox
BoSox 
Joined: Mar 9, 2021
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 135
May 2nd, 2021 at 10:58:20 PM permalink
Quote: EvenBob

But it doesn't have merit. It's not even a system. It's just having a bottomless pit of money and spending it until you win. I'm not trying to make you angry, but you're really new at this aren't you. The stuff you're talking about is what new gamblers go through, it's 101. There is an old story that goes a couple times an hour a couple of new gamblers in the world discover the Martingale and think they've got it made.



EvenBob you sure have a lot of patience!
Wellbush
Wellbush
Joined: Mar 23, 2021
  • Threads: 4
  • Posts: 427
May 2nd, 2021 at 11:06:17 PM permalink
Quote: BoSox

EvenBob you sure have a lot of patience!



And youíre good at derision without even an inch of understanding.
Only gamble 'a little' for fun, or, if 'you know' you can win.
EvenBob
EvenBob
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
  • Threads: 431
  • Posts: 24860
May 2nd, 2021 at 11:14:56 PM permalink
Quote: BoSox

EvenBob you sure have a lot of patience!



I think it's running out, it's a hopeless case. I'm breaking my own rule about wising people up and it always ends the same way. Let him keep going, he'll stumble on the truth eventually.
"It's not enough to succeed, your friends must fail." Gore Vidal
Wellbush
Wellbush
Joined: Mar 23, 2021
  • Threads: 4
  • Posts: 427
May 2nd, 2021 at 11:27:08 PM permalink
Actually, I think far closer to the truth is the other way around! That most posters here donít understand the math. It doesnít take long for their replies to reveal it. But hey, they wanna believe in their truth, Iím not gonna get in the way
Only gamble 'a little' for fun, or, if 'you know' you can win.
TomG
TomG
Joined: Sep 26, 2010
  • Threads: 14
  • Posts: 2259
May 2nd, 2021 at 11:33:41 PM permalink
It is somewhat hilarious that this is still going on.

Quote: Wellbush

Okay, let me make this simpler. A high-roller goes into a casino. He has a gynormous credit line at this casino. He starts playing BJ. He uses a Martingale. He plays and comes out a winner from the casino because the Martingale allows him to do so.



That doesn't mean much at all. Even using a martingale system, there was a chance he could have lost. If he made bets without using a martingale system, there was a chance he could have won, and even won more than he would have using a martingale betting system.

Quote: Wellbush

In fact, every time he goes to the casino, he comes out a winner, for the same reason. The Martingale system allows him to win every time.



The martingale system does not allow someone to win every time. Saying that it does is just another one of your attempts to troll the forum.

Quote: Wellbush

That's what my original question was, at the start of this thread. As long as someone has a sufficient bankroll for any given number of losses, they will come out a winner using a Martingale or Fibonacci betting system.



Even with a starting bet of 1-cent and a max bet of $1 million, there is a non-zero chance of losing everything with a martingale or Fibonacci system. Perhaps the chance is so low that it would never happen in any of our lifetimes. But at the same time, using $1 million to earn $0.01 has a very high opportunity cost. And in this example, the millionaire still lost value by not doing something else better with their money.

Quote: Wellbush

The only reason that the above would not be true, is if the player ran out of money during a catastrophic losing sequence.



Given enough opportunities, any imaginable sequence will happen, including catastrophic losses.
MichaelBluejay
MichaelBluejay
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
  • Threads: 38
  • Posts: 936
May 3rd, 2021 at 12:45:09 AM permalink
Quote: Wellbush

I wouldnít be so presumptuous to disqualify something I donít know about.

Oh please. That's all you've done since you got here!

And let's not forgot this gem:

Quote: Wellbush

Mathematicians have been saying that it's theoretically impossible to beat the dealer using such a strategy [Fibonacci series combined with taking breaks]. Don't be fooled by their ignorance. I will tear their theories apart and shove them in the bin, where they belong.

Wellbush
Wellbush
Joined: Mar 23, 2021
  • Threads: 4
  • Posts: 427
May 3rd, 2021 at 5:51:58 AM permalink
Quote: TomG

That doesn't mean much at all. Even using a martingale system, there was a chance he could have lost. If he made bets without using a martingale system, there was a chance he could have won, and even won more than he would have using a martingale betting system.
How could he have lost using a Marty, Tom? Yes to the rest, and? You trying to inform? 🤔

The martingale system does not allow someone to win every time. Saying that it does is just another one of your attempts to troll the forum. Oh yeh. You got me totally worked out, Tom! Clever! If you actually read all the posts, I explained that this was a highroller with an insane credit line. Further, I was using the Marty concept, not necessarily the real deal. It was a fantasy scenario, if you like. I think you need to start from scratch????

Even with a starting bet of 1-cent and a max bet of $1 million, there is a non-zero chance of losing everything with a martingale or Fibonacci system. Sorry Tom. This sentence doesn't make a whole lot sense!

Perhaps the chance is so low that it would never happen in any of our lifetimes. But at the same time, using $1 million to earn $0.01 has a very high opportunity cost. And in this example, the millionaire still lost value by not doing something else better with their money. Not something I don't already know. I wasn't suggesting using a Marty or Fibo to make $1! I was imparting the concept!

Given enough opportunities, any imaginable sequence will happen, including catastrophic losses. Depends how you define catastrophic loss! E.g. Are you suggesting every hand dealt for 3 decks will favour the dealer? Highly unlikely, even if it's some highly abnormal turn of events.

Only gamble 'a little' for fun, or, if 'you know' you can win.
TomG
TomG
Joined: Sep 26, 2010
  • Threads: 14
  • Posts: 2259
May 3rd, 2021 at 6:20:23 AM permalink
Quote: Wellbush

How could he have lost using a Marty, Tom? Yes to the rest, and? You trying to inform? 🤔



By losing several consecutive bets, that either puts him over the table limits, or completely wipes out all his money.

Quote: Wellbush

I explained that this was a highroller with an insane credit line. Further, I was using the Marty concept, not necessarily the real deal. It was a fantasy scenario, if you like. I think you need to start from scratch????



And in that fantasy concept, there is still negative expected value, and changing bet sized based on previous results is not profitable in the long run for the bettor. Saying that it is, is trolling the forum.

Also, it is not possible for me to start from scratch until you provide the starting point, which is something you will not do.

Quote: Wellbush

Not something I don't already know. I wasn't suggesting using a Marty or Fibo to make $1! I was imparting the concept!



Then go ahead and tell us how much they will make. Tell us what the lowest and highest bets are. Tell us what triggers changes in bet sizes. Tell us the game, or the odds of the game. And how many total bets they make. Once you do that, lots of people here can show you the math (and "math theory"), including overall chances of winning or losing, and overall expected profits. Your continued refusal to provide any of these details throughout your word salad posts is another example of trolling.

For another example of trolling: you only talk about concepts, then seem to want other people to speak of concrete details that you refuse to provide.

Quote: Wellbush

Depends how you define catastrophic loss! E.g. Are you suggesting every hand dealt for 3 decks will favour the dealer? Highly unlikely, even if it's some highly abnormal turn of events.



Given enough opportunities, virtually any sequence of results that could be defined as a catastrophic loss will occur, including the one you described. Given only few opportunities, then it starts to depend on other things, such as bet size. For example, someone who bets all the money they have on every hand until they lose, will likely lose everything within a few hands. Someone who bets extremely small, they will only lose a small amount, even if they lose 28 hands in a row. If someone varies their bet sizes from small to large, the results will likely fall in between losing only a small amount and losing everything they have.

  • Jump to: