[TheMoneyShot]

Been doing this system for almost 6 months now.

I love laying wagers for 500 a shot. That's just my thing. But what if you took the pride out of it? Started wagering smart? You can't lay $20 a game? Not enough?

System is very simple. Know your wagering strengths. Reasons why we lose.... we get nervous... lose confidence and go away from our usual patterns when we lose BIG.

If you stay with your normal patterns... you'd never lose $. Think about it. Most of your net losses in a day come from poor money management... and typically higher risk amounts.

If you keep it simple... you'll always make gains. Won't be HUGE GAINS. But you'll never lose.

Think about it.

[KVB]

There's no doubt money management is the #1 reason bettors go broke. That said, suggesting progressive betting strategies as a solution is hilarious.

It's only a small Martingale at the beginning...

[TheMoneyShot]

There's no doubt money management is the #1 reason bettors go broke. That said, suggesting progressive betting strategies as a solution is hilarious.

It's only a small Martingale at the beginning...

It's up to you to decide what the Martingale game limit is. Truth be told... if you're losing 6 straight wagers on your most calculated and precise analyst and you still lose... you shouldn't be sports gambling.

[evo34]

So all bettors have an edge? Not just laughable, but theoretically impossible. It's a zero-sum game.

[TheMoneyShot]

So all bettors have an edge? Not just laughable, but theoretically impossible. It's a zero-sum game.

Why give the sportsbook the edge? They already have it on you. It's all in what you're happy enough in winning. Some people aren't happy with small wins. They want BIG WINS. With BIG WINS come 2X BIG LOSSES.

There are a few steps in this program.... not going to give you nerdy formulas. Just keeping it simple.

Step 1.... what are you comfortable with? Just like my above post... I said I love shooting for $500 a pop. Of course I'm not going to win every game... but what if I broke that $500 into small wagers?

I'm actually more loose wagering this way. I put the law of averages in my hands. Like I said.... if I lose 5-6 straight -110 wagers... I shouldn't even be doing this. Haven't jammed myself yet doing it this way.

Again.... you must first decide dollar amount. And be satisfied with your choice.


What's the point trying to hit 52-53% all the time? And never having a gain? Why waste your time doing this? I can hit at a 36-40% clip and still make a consistent profit.

[rake922]

if you have never lost 6 bets in a row, you haven't been doing it that long

[KVB]

It's up to you to decide what the Martingale game limit is. Truth be told... if you're losing 6 straight wagers on your most calculated and precise analyst and you still lose... you shouldn't be sports gambling.

I agree with Rake...this is nonsense. This is kind of belief above is one thing that separates long term winners from the pack.

Like I always say, it's not that gamblers don't know, it's that what they know is wrong.

[swordsandtequila]

if you have never lost 6 bets in a row, you haven't been doing it that long

[Buffalo Nickle]

The smarter strategy is to bet as little as your manhood will allow you on your average game and larger on your best games. Martingale is a recipe for disaster because you will eventually destroy your account because anyone is going to go 2-19 or so at some point. I'm currently in a 5-19 downturn despite betting games I really liked and having major CLV on almost every bet.

[Buffalo Nickle]

The way to use Martingale is when your account eventually gets so low and you are fed up with gambling, you wait for that one big game and bet to get even. Maybe give yourself a couple of chances. That's how you can get back to even and have some pride left.

Gambling is more about pride than money. Once you learn to put away the pride and your manhood in your bets, you will have a lot less problems. That's basically what you are learning but still haven't worked it out yet.

[BetterBizness]

I like the Gale more than the Martin....

[AUSTINRUSSELL]

if you have never lost 6 bets in a row, you haven't been doing it that long

This man gets it.

[dhristov211]

With 1000 bets you can pick 60% and lose 6 in a row several times

[KVB]

...Gambling is more about pride than money. Once you learn to put away the pride and your manhood in your bets, you will have a lot less problems...

Well put and very true.

[MoneyLineDawg]

I always thought about this...couldn't you martingale every MLB team until they win one game each season? You would guarantee a win if you can bet high enough

[Buffalo Nickle]

I always thought about this...couldn't you martingale every MLB team until they win one game each season? You would guarantee a win if you can bet high enough

Yes, that is the advantage of Martingale betting. You are guaranteed as long as your money holds out. Problem is not the idea. It is the funding.

[KVB]

Yes, that is the advantage of Martingale betting. You are guaranteed as long as your money holds out. Problem is not the idea. It is the funding.

Especially if the market reacts to the streaks and you end up laying far too much just to get the win.

[VeggieDog]

Yes, that is the advantage of Martingale betting. You are guaranteed as long as your money holds out. Problem is not the idea. It is the funding.

I think that's what the OP was talking about - starting small enough so that you don't max out your bankroll by the time you hit a winner.

[Buffalo Nickle]

I think that's what the OP was talking about - starting small enough so that you don't max out your bankroll by the time you hit a winner.

Yes, he has figured out the idea that he needs to bet smaller. That's where people need to leave it. But it just isn't very exciting. Martingale makes things a lot more interesting but it doesn't help you win or take less risk.

Almost all bettors practice this strategy. It is called "chasing."

[GREG1021]

if you have never lost 6 bets in a row, you haven't been doing it that long

Agreed..I'm currently on a terrible run despite trying to find value on the games I'm wagering. Key is to stay consistent. At least it is for me.

[blueguitar]

The only way a Martingale can work is if a person has an infinite amount of money. And if they had an infinite amount of money, then winning a bet couldn't increase the amount they had. Because they already had an infinite amount.

[Kindred]

I can't believe the thinktank has sunk this low.

[Kindred]

I think that's what the OP was talking about - starting small enough so that you don't max out your bankroll by the time you hit a winner.

Not possible, unless you have an infinite amount of money and the bookie/casino is has no limit on bet size. Eventually you will hit a streak that will wipe you out or put you way past the betting limit, it's just a fact don't delude yourselves.

[70CoupeDeVille]

The only way a Martingale can work is if a person has an infinite amount of money. And if they had an infinite amount of money, then winning a bet couldn't increase the amount they had. Because they already had an infinite amount.

House limits.

[rkelly110]

The money shot has a clue. Funny how losers debunk.

Don't know if this is still available to buy, but the systems in here http://www.golden-systems.com/ are exactly what the op was talking about. Bookie Buster by Frank Bellinger. I have it.

[KVB]

Alright, it's official...Saloon this shit.

[FreeFall]

I can't believe the thinktank has sunk this low.

Think tank is long dead. It used to be more fun when Justin7 was posting trash because it fired up the smarts to bark back. Now it's just trash.

[TheMoneyShot]

Wow... didn't know this thread took off? Just checked it today.

Again... there are several variables to this system that I've been working on. Some gamblers like to wager 5-6 games a day... some like to hit 5-6 games a week. Some like to hit just games on TNT... some like to hit games on ESPN. Some like to just wager college basketball. You have to narrow down what you're trying to do.

Take a good look at all games in the NBA on TNT this year. Take a good look at all the NBA games on ESPN. Write down the patterns. There's patterns in every outcome. Oddly enough... most favorites are covering. Have 6 underdogs covered straight on TNT this year? Nope. Have 6 underdogs covered straight on ESPN? Nope.

In fact I've been doing the NBA study on TNT for 3 years now. You'd be surprised at the percentage of the underdog covering.

But if you start just throwing $ everywhere on the board... hoping for wins... Martingale won't save you. But, if you use calculated percentages from past results... and a Martingale system... it is working. Not only it's working well... I don't really sweat anything out. I start with $30 a game. But you can start with whatever you feel comfortable with.

Every sport is different though. I don't use the same technique for the NBA... to NFL... to NCAA Football... to MLB.

[Martinr]

I dunno man. If I'm betting $33, targeting a $30 win, and following your idea through 5 losses, then I'm betting around $1000 on the 6th game, which will net me just $30 if it wins. I'm not sure I'd enjoy sports betting with the stress that would come with risking $1000 to win $30 on a 50/50 game.
If I'm placing moneyline bets instead of spread bets then the risk $ amount will change, but the odds of getting into a similar hole don't.
I get that you're saying only bet the games where you feel you have an edge, but what if the stress of risking so much $ deep into a losing streak affected your ability to find a +EV game?
Is handicapping ability affected by the level of stress involved with each pick?
Then, if the losing streak extended to 6+ there could be problems in getting all the money down at recreational books.
One of the best things I ever saw that E.Feustal wrote pertains to bankroll management at low and micro levels when the subject of a player's minimum stake came up. Basically, he was saying that if you don't practice good BR management when starting out with a low bankroll, then it will be difficult to practice at higher levels.
I agree with him that a $2-$5 bettor should practice bankroll management just the same as a $200-$500 (or higher) bettor.
Starting with a low bankroll and betting a fixed percentage while learning the game of sports betting is a stress free way to bet and is far more enjoyable in my opinion. You can always add to the bankroll gradually by setting aside an amount each week from other income, and it doesn't take ages to build up a decent sized roll.
Problem with this forum is that so many guys feel the need to big note the size of their bets and belittle those with lower stakes. I think it probably prevents a lot of worthwhile discussion on bankroll management.

[indio]

I always thought about this...couldn't you martingale every MLB team until they win one game each season? You would guarantee a win if you can bet high enough

Win what? Why can't people like you use their minds and think things through and realize how idiotic this thought is. What if someone wanted to win $100 on each team in 1988 using your genius theory? The Baltimore Orioles lost their first 21 games of the season. I'm not going to look up the odds for those games, but let's say for simple math they were a pick'em the first 12 and the last 9 road games of the 0-21 they were +200. After the first nine games where your goal is to win a lousy $100, you have lost $51,100. Now, since they go on the road and everyone knows they stink, they'll be +200 every game. By the 17th game, you've lost 1.3 million dollars. Now, considering the normal limits for a regular season baseball game, where are you going to get a bet down of $656,000 for the 18th game? And if you had already blown $1.3 million, why are you going through all this trouble, and the attention it brings to win $100? If someone had $1 million dollars and wanted to make $100, I think they'd have better options than martingale on baseball games.

[Rich Boy]

It's up to you to decide what the Martingale game limit is. Truth be told... if you're losing 6 straight wagers on your most calculated and precise analyst and you still lose... you shouldn't be sports gambling.

This will happen no matter what guy. Martingale is just a way to trick yourself into thinking you can win.
You CANNOT turn -EV wagers into a winning propostion no matter how you spin it.

[blueguitar]

[QUOTE=TheMoneyShot;25169909]




I'm actually more loose wagering this way. I put the law of averages in my hands. Like I said.... if I lose 5-6 straight -110 wagers... I shouldn't even be doing this. Haven't jammed myself yet doing it this way.




Really good sports bettors will sometimes lose 5 or 6 in a row. They might lose 6 in a row and then win 9 in a row. The martingale is not new, it's been around for hundreds of years. Lots of people know about it. If it was a really effective system the books would be badly bruised. If you told a Las Vegas book that you were working on a martingale do you think they would be frightened? The martingale is a doomed system. The only question is when is your day of doom.

[xdodger19]

I think you have to incorporate some juice for yourself
You have to beat the vig
Such as
Parlay +125
Djokovic over Murray
Spurs -2 vs Cleveland

Or if you martingale in baseball teams like Oakland were covering the runline at 80 percent of there wins as favorites.
when they are a dog take the on the moneyline
Or you bet 1 unit on the cardinals every game they play

[blueguitar]

Most experts recommend bet sizing that is not based on streaks but is based on your edge and the size of your bankroll. It is known as the Kelly Criterion named after a telephone company engineer who devised this method. It is used by many pro blackjack players and can also be used by sports bettors. Your bet size would only increase if you perceive a greater edge on a certain bet or if the size of your bankroll has increased due to previous wins. Since the size of your edge in a sports bet is only theoretical you should estimate it very conservatively. Every single day on some gambling forum somewhere there is somebody who is touting the martingale. People are attracted to it because it's so easy. But it just doesn't work like that. Winning at gambling is possible but its not easy. It requires a lot of hard work and dedication. You have to pay your dues.

http://www.albionresearch.com/kelly/