Personal computing discussed

Moderators: askfranklin, renee, emkubed, Captain Ned

 
Hawkwing74
His Holy Gerbilness
Topic Author
Posts: 13961
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2003 5:51 pm
Location: Streamwood, IL

Martingale strategy of gambling on roulette

Wed Feb 02, 2005 4:22 pm

I found this amusing on wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martingale

It seems that if you're always willing to double your bet, you can't lose money without a bad streak of rolls of the wheel.

Example:
You bet Black for $5. If you lose you bet black for $10. Each time you lose you double your bet. If you win, you should get that bet plus all other bets back.
1st bet - black $5 lose, down $5
2nd bet - black $10 lose, down $15
3rd bet - black $20 lose, down $35
4th bet black $40 win, up $5

I guess the key is not going on a losing streak of more than 5 or 6...
 
AMM
Gerbil Jedi
Posts: 1996
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2003 9:12 am
Location: London
Contact:

Wed Feb 02, 2005 4:30 pm

Why do you think there is a house limit on the amount you can bet?

You cannot win in a casino in the long term, and there are no strategies that work for games of chance (Roulette, Craps etc).
To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion.
 
Hawkwing74
His Holy Gerbilness
Topic Author
Posts: 13961
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2003 5:51 pm
Location: Streamwood, IL

Wed Feb 02, 2005 4:34 pm

But if you keep your bet low?
 
Looking for Knowledge
Darth Gerbil
Posts: 7032
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 11:31 am
Location: AM's underground complex
Contact:

Wed Feb 02, 2005 4:45 pm

Hawkwing74 wrote:
But if you keep your bet low?


Then you can't keep doubling up past a certain point.

I tried this once at a little casino in Jack Pot, Nevada when I was in college....
Right as I was plunking $80.00 down to cover the $40.00 I had just lost, the manager came over and told me to, "Take a break, you've had too much to drink."

I went home $75.00 in the hole from 4 spins of the wheel. :evil:
Probably PUI. Definitely an كافر
 
Hawkwing74
His Holy Gerbilness
Topic Author
Posts: 13961
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2003 5:51 pm
Location: Streamwood, IL

Wed Feb 02, 2005 4:52 pm

I agree, that's the main flaw, no one has infinite wealth.
 
hellokitty
Gerbil XP
Posts: 391
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2004 10:29 am

Wed Feb 02, 2005 4:54 pm

There are minimums too.

You can't win because sooner or later you will have a streak of more than 10 red or black in a row. It happens more often than you think.

Important thing to remember is, the table and the little white ball don't know anything, they are inanimate objects. So it makes no difference whether red or black has come up 10 times in a row. When you bet on either one for the 11th time your chances are still only less than 50% ( 50% - house numbers , 0 and 00 ).

So lets see what happens if you run into that kind of a losing streak ( and you will ):

First bet is $5, if you keep doubling
$10
$20
$40
$80
$160
$320
$640
$1280
$2560 10th bet

You are already down $5000 or so, ( don't feel like adding up )

Now you gotta put down $5120 and you have less than 50% of a chance to go up by $5 if you win. If you lose the 11th time in a row, you will be down $10 000.

Even if you win, you'll age pretty quickly if faced with this kind of pressure every time you have to put down a larger amount. And every time you win, you increase your total winningds by only $5.
 
Hawkwing74
His Holy Gerbilness
Topic Author
Posts: 13961
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2003 5:51 pm
Location: Streamwood, IL

Wed Feb 02, 2005 4:56 pm

The issue I have is, how often does such a streak occur? There's no way to determine?
 
hellokitty
Gerbil XP
Posts: 391
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2004 10:29 am

Wed Feb 02, 2005 5:00 pm

Every single day if you play long enough.

I tried it , used to go to Atlantic City every weekend.
 
Hawkwing74
His Holy Gerbilness
Topic Author
Posts: 13961
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2003 5:51 pm
Location: Streamwood, IL

Wed Feb 02, 2005 5:06 pm

I'm not a gambler type, ask anyone who plays D&D with me (Action Jim, Starfalcon, idchafee) but it might be fun to try with a small amount of money. The other problem with the strategy is the minimal gain inherent in it.

Hellokitty, did you lose a lot of money?
 
UberGerbil
Grand Admiral Gerbil
Posts: 10368
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2003 3:11 pm

Wed Feb 02, 2005 5:24 pm

Can't seem to bring up that Wikipedia page, but it seems to overlook something else: in American casinos, at least, there are two non-red, non-black slots: 0 and 00. This makes the odds worse than 50-50, and makes this strategy a long-term loser even if you could keep raising bets indefinitely. Those two numbers give the casino a long term advantage over any strategy involving odds and evens, red and black, and the like.

That said, it's possible to win at roulette, and it's been done. The trick relied on two main factors: 1: not all roulette wheels are well-balanced, which tends to cause the ball to fall in a particular direction over time, and 2: you need computing power and a reaonable estimate of wheel speed and ball speed to predict the quadrant of the wheel into which the ball will fall. Knowing the quadrant is enough to win over the long term. This was done back in 70s, by guys who went on to found the Santa Fe Institute (birthplace of Chaos theory) and Predictions, Inc. The computer was hand-made, using 70s technology, and built into a shoe. It's a somewhat legendary "hack" (in the original sense) immortalized in The Eudaemonic Pie Of course, the casinos are wise to this sort of thing today.

In general all the casino games where you bet against the house are designed to make you a long term loser. The only exception is blackjack, if they aren't using too many decks and you are able to count cards (and able to get away with it).
 
Kevin
Administrator
Posts: 6581
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Contact:

Wed Feb 02, 2005 5:38 pm

Hawkwing74 wrote:
The issue I have is, how often does such a streak occur? There's no way to determine?

It's all about probabilities. But again, you're left with the fact that on each spin the odds don't change. (Didn't we have a discussion like this in here before?)

Anyways, you're best bet is to count on Murphy's Law. That's the only sure thing in the universe.
Being right doesn't matter if no one listens.
 
mattsteg
Gerbil God
Posts: 15782
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: Applauding the new/old variable width forums
Contact:

Wed Feb 02, 2005 5:46 pm

Let's say there's a $5 minimum and a $500 maximum bet. You can lose 6 straight before going over the table limit. This would leave you with $185. 7 straight losses costs 635, FWIW.
To quantify the viability of such a strategy, you need to look at a few numbers. Losing n times in a row costs 5*(2^n-1). The odds of losing n in a row are 1/2^n.

First off, let's just look at some quick odds for successive losses:
1: .5
2: .25
3: .125
4: .0625
5: .03125
6: .015625
etc.

6 losses is the most you can do on a $500 limit table, and results in a loss of $315. 5 losses costs $155, 4 costs $75, 3 costs $35, etc. Simplify things by seeing how many times you'd need to "not lose" to make a certain amount of money - that amount/5. The odds of "not losing" a given series at this table are 1-.015625 = .9844. Hey, not bad. Let's make another quick list of the odds to win a given amount of money. .9844^n.
Bets: 1 Winnings: $5 Odds: 0.984
Bets: 3 Winnings: $15 Odds: 0.954
Bets: 5 Winnings: $25 Odds: 0.924
Bets: 7 Winnings: $35 Odds: 0.896
Bets: 9 Winnings: $45 Odds: 0.868
Bets: 11 Winnings: $55 Odds: 0.841
Bets: 13 Winnings: $65 Odds: 0.815
Bets: 15 Winnings: $75 Odds: 0.790
Bets: 17 Winnings: $85 Odds: 0.765
Bets: 19 Winnings: $95 Odds: 0.741
Bets: 21 Winnings: $105 Odds: 0.718

Hmm, about 72% to win $100, not too bad. What about a 50/50 point?
Bets: 44 Winnings: $220 Odds: 0.500

So, your odds of winning $220 are 50/50 if you risk 315? Ouch.

The strategy's only effective if you are happy contributing to the casino in the long run.

For kicks, the 50/50 point if you can go up to 640 with your bet is around $440 and $885 if you risk 1280, unless I messed up the math somewhere.
Last edited by mattsteg on Wed Feb 02, 2005 5:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
...
 
JavaDog
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2798
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 11:20 am
Location: Oahu, HI

Wed Feb 02, 2005 5:50 pm

mattsteg wrote:
The strategy's only effective if you are happy contributing to the casino in the long run.


...and most gamblers are. Vegas counts on it.
 
Hawkwing74
His Holy Gerbilness
Topic Author
Posts: 13961
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2003 5:51 pm
Location: Streamwood, IL

Wed Feb 02, 2005 5:52 pm

Thanks, mattsteg, that makes it a lot clearer.
 
mattsteg
Gerbil God
Posts: 15782
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: Applauding the new/old variable width forums
Contact:

Wed Feb 02, 2005 5:52 pm

JavaDog wrote:
mattsteg wrote:
The strategy's only effective if you are happy contributing to the casino in the long run.


...and most gamblers are. Vegas counts on it.
Of course. But personally I'd rather risk it differently. I suppose if you want OK odds on a small gain this strategy is OK, but I'd just as soon play it straight with more normal-sized bets.
...
 
Kevin
Administrator
Posts: 6581
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Contact:

Wed Feb 02, 2005 5:53 pm

To go with matt's post, even if you've lost 4 in a row, your odds of getting a win on the 5th is STILL 50-50 (assuming no 0 and 00 slots). Past performance is no indication of future performance. The probability of losing 5 in a row only applies if you calculate it BEFORE you start spinning the wheel.

I found the link where we talked about this stuff before: viewtopic.php?t=16407
Being right doesn't matter if no one listens.
 
JavaDog
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2798
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 11:20 am
Location: Oahu, HI

Wed Feb 02, 2005 5:56 pm

mattsteg wrote:
Of course. But personally I'd rather risk it differently. I suppose if you want OK odds on a small gain this strategy is OK, but I'd just as soon play it straight with more normal-sized bets.


I would rather 'gamble' with stocks than with Vegas/Casinos...at least I have a better shot at making money. Of course, still have a good chance of losing it too! :wink:
 
hellokitty
Gerbil XP
Posts: 391
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2004 10:29 am

Wed Feb 02, 2005 6:13 pm

Hellokitty, did you lose a lot of money?


No, I didn't have a lot to lose and I tried a different strategy ( although math/odds almost always come down to about the same ).

I either bet just random patterns/numbers or betting the 1st and 2nd twelve numbers. So I win if any of the first 24 numbrs comes up, lose only if 25 - 36 come up ( or zeros ). Obvously , this way you win most of the time, but you need to invest $20 to win $10. In the long run, you still lose. Once I spent 4-5 hours playing and staying even ( with $200 bucks betting $10 on each, 1st 12 and 2nd 12 field ) , and in the end winning 20 times in a row and leaving the table with $200.

I never won more than $800, and never lost more than $200, but in the long run I lost, because for every winning trip there were at least 2 losing trips. And whenever I won something like that $800, it was when playing just random numbers and hitting a few within 30 minutes.

Eventually I just gave up. You see you can't win, and it becomes boring rather quickly.
 
jdevers
Gerbil
Posts: 85
Joined: Sat Sep 07, 2002 10:08 pm
Location: Fayetteville, AR

Wed Feb 02, 2005 6:28 pm

There is a bit of a problem with Matt's numbers though, your odds of winning are NOT 50/50 on the first and subsequent individual spins. They are 17/36 because there are two non-red/non-black spaces. This isn't a huge advantage on a single spin, but over the course of 5 spins turns into a pretty big house advantage.
 
mattsteg
Gerbil God
Posts: 15782
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: Applauding the new/old variable width forums
Contact:

Wed Feb 02, 2005 6:38 pm

jdevers wrote:
There is a bit of a problem with Matt's numbers though, your odds of winning are NOT 50/50 on the first and subsequent individual spins. They are 17/36 because there are two non-red/non-black spaces. This isn't a huge advantage on a single spin, but over the course of 5 spins turns into a pretty big house advantage.
Of course it does. I just computed the numbers in that fashion to go along with the strategy's assumption of 50/50 odds. Like you said, the non-red/blakc spaces make a big difference.

Bets: 1 Winnings: $5 Odds: 0.978
Bets: 2 Winnings: $10 Odds: 0.957
Bets: 3 Winnings: $15 Odds: 0.937
Bets: 4 Winnings: $20 Odds: 0.916
Bets: 5 Winnings: $25 Odds: 0.897
Bets: 6 Winnings: $30 Odds: 0.877
Bets: 7 Winnings: $35 Odds: 0.858
Bets: 8 Winnings: $40 Odds: 0.840
Bets: 9 Winnings: $45 Odds: 0.821
Bets: 10 Winnings: $50 Odds: 0.804
Bets: 11 Winnings: $55 Odds: 0.786
Bets: 12 Winnings: $60 Odds: 0.769
Bets: 13 Winnings: $65 Odds: 0.753
Bets: 14 Winnings: $70 Odds: 0.736
Bets: 15 Winnings: $75 Odds: 0.721
Bets: 16 Winnings: $80 Odds: 0.705
Bets: 17 Winnings: $85 Odds: 0.690
Bets: 18 Winnings: $90 Odds: 0.675
Bets: 19 Winnings: $95 Odds: 0.660
Bets: 20 Winnings: $100 Odds: 0.646
Bets: 21 Winnings: $105 Odds: 0.632
Bets: 22 Winnings: $110 Odds: 0.618
Bets: 23 Winnings: $115 Odds: 0.605
Bets: 24 Winnings: $120 Odds: 0.592
Bets: 25 Winnings: $125 Odds: 0.579
Bets: 26 Winnings: $130 Odds: 0.567
Bets: 27 Winnings: $135 Odds: 0.554
Bets: 28 Winnings: $140 Odds: 0.542
Bets: 29 Winnings: $145 Odds: 0.531
Bets: 30 Winnings: $150 Odds: 0.519
Bets: 31 Winnings: $155 Odds: 0.508
Bets: 32 Winnings: $160 Odds: 0.497
...
 
Hawkwing74
His Holy Gerbilness
Topic Author
Posts: 13961
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2003 5:51 pm
Location: Streamwood, IL

Wed Feb 02, 2005 6:56 pm

Kevin wrote:
I found the link where we talked about this stuff before: viewtopic.php?t=16407
I know, but it's somewhat different, more practical...or something...
 
pyrodeus
Maximum Gerbil
Posts: 4891
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2002 11:23 am
Location: Under a pile of documents

Re: Martingale strategy of gambling on roulette

Wed Feb 02, 2005 11:46 pm

Hawkwing74 wrote:
I found this amusing on wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martingale

It seems that if you're always willing to double your bet, you can't lose money without a bad streak of rolls of the wheel.

Example:
You bet Black for $5. If you lose you bet black for $10. Each time you lose you double your bet. If you win, you should get that bet plus all other bets back.
1st bet - black $5 lose, down $5
2nd bet - black $10 lose, down $15
3rd bet - black $20 lose, down $35
4th bet black $40 win, up $5

I guess the key is not going on a losing streak of more than 5 or 6...


Actually the *real* trick is to find a roulette wheel that gives you 50/50 odds on red or black. Damned 0 and 00 green spots!!! So your odds per spin are only 18/38 (in the U.S., it's 18/37 in Europe because they have no "00"), not the 18/36 (1/2) that martingale strategy assumes.

If you played forever, and had infinite wealth, the expected value would be $0. If you had infinite wealth but could choose to walk away whenever then the expected value is better because you can set up an arbitrary rule like, I will walk away when I have won 4 times in a row. Worst case, you recover your losses in the first win, and the next three are pure profit. In the real world, where you have limited wealth, that could still be a bad strategy, because you might have to wait a while.

In the real, real world, where you have limited time and wealth AND Vegas knows more about Martingale strategies than you, the odds are still in the house's favor, because there is no 50/50 bet.

Not that I am at all bitter about the money I've lost to roulette over the years. Damned Vegas.
For a moment of night we have a glimpse of ourselves and of our world islanded in its stream of stars—pilgrims of mortality, voyaging between horizons across eternal seas of space and time.
--Henry Beston, The Outermost House
 
5150
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
Posts: 2389
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2003 6:22 pm
Location: Sales Tax Is For Commies

Thu Feb 03, 2005 6:39 pm

AMM wrote:
Why do you think there is a house limit on the amount you can bet?

You cannot win in a casino in the long term, and there are no strategies that work for games of chance (Roulette, Craps etc).


Wanna bet?
Ok, they did get the crap beat out of them, but there are ways of winning that are not "illegal."
 
UberGerbil
Grand Admiral Gerbil
Posts: 10368
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2003 3:11 pm

Thu Feb 03, 2005 6:58 pm

Specialists consider Blackjack (when played with a limited number of decks) to be a game of skill, not chance. And if you're good at it, casinos will treat card counting as "illegal."
 
AMM
Gerbil Jedi
Posts: 1996
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2003 9:12 am
Location: London
Contact:

Thu Feb 03, 2005 6:59 pm

That is exactly why I said for games of chance, which blackjack is not.
To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion.
 
drobber
Gerbil
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat May 22, 2021 7:37 am

Re: Martingale strategy of gambling on roulette

Thu Sep 23, 2021 7:31 pm

Hi, I play slots. This https://gry-hazardoweonline.pl/darmowe-spiny/ is my favorites. I used to play for virtual money, but now I play only for real money. As you delve deeper into the topic, you will learn that some slots have higher variance than others. There are games that often pay smaller amounts (low variance), while others pay less often, but still, yield larger prizes. You can win, so I play for money.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
GZIP: On