Progressive system, im getting +EV. check my math?

[Redwing41]

With a total price of $96 dollars for the total martingale bets.. read the math to see if its correct
You bet another set of martingale behind the first set + adjust the price. Meaning = 15 losses at a total martingale price of $96 for the first set. If you manage to lose 15 straight that is an extra $256.
You carve your edge even more by halving the 5th bet only on the first set of bets. Expected profit is $ for every 10,000 bets. starting at 2 dollars flat bet. You would need a sample size of at least 20 thousand bets I would imagine, so it would become an actual job. 10 thousand bets would take 26 days of 8 hour shifts.


Here is the math: 10K total bets. $2 (player bet)* 4932 = $9864 - $3648 - $1216 = $5000 per 10,000 bets (26 days 6 hours a day)




Corrected price $5000 per 10,000 bets at $2 per bet.




EX: bet amount, amount of wins per 10k bet(win%) Profit/loss

2 - 2660(24.38%) -5586 = 0


2 - 1330(12.19%) +2660 = 0


4 - 665(6.095%) +2620 = 0


8 - 322(3.0375%) +2576 = 0


16 - 161(1.523%) +2576 = 0


32 - 78(0.76%) +2496 = 0


32 - 38 (0.38%) -3648(-$96 every time you lose this bet) -1216(-$32 every time you win this bet)


2 - +19.4 +38.8


4 - +9.7 +19.4


8 - +4.85 9.7


16 - +2.4 4.8


32 - +1.2 2.4


64 - +.6 1.2


128 - +.3 .6


256 - +.15 - (.075%) ... +$.15 loss = -$0.765

[u21c3f6]

2 0.4932 9,864.00 2 0.2500 0.00 4 0.1267 0.00 8 0.0642 0.00 16 0.0325 0.00 32 0.0165 0.00 32 0.0084 (2,674.19) 32 0.0086 (8,243.80) Net (1,053.99)

First, your numbers have to be off as there is no betting formula that will turn -EV wagers into +EV. It will fail unless you can wager an unlimited amount with an unlimited bankroll.

Above are the numbers I ran based on the approx win rate of .4932 on your wagers up to the second 32 loss. Notice I show a net loss. Going further will only increase this loss. Check my math to see if maybe I misunderstood something.

Joe.

[Redwing41]

Double post.

[Redwing41]

2 0.4932 9,864.00 2 0.2500 0.00 4 0.1267 0.00 8 0.0642 0.00 16 0.0325 0.00 32 0.0165 0.00 32 0.0084 (2,674.19) 32 0.0086 (8,243.80) Net (1,053.99)

First, your numbers have to be off as there is no betting formula that will turn -EV wagers into +EV. It will fail unless you can wager an unlimited amount with an unlimited bankroll.

Above are the numbers I ran based on the approx win rate of .4932 on your wagers up to the second 32 loss. Notice I show a net loss. Going further will only increase this loss. Check my math to see if maybe I misunderstood something.

Joe.

You are missing a 2 in your chart and you added a 32. Can you run the numbers with the martingale below. Do not include the one win into the martingale do that seperate.
I need a second pair of eyes. 15 total progressions


Wins = $2 martingale = 2,2,4,8,16,32,32,2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256.

[u21c3f6]

To clarify, please note that the % column totals 1. The first 2 is if you win. The second 2 is if you lose which has no effect until you end the martingale which also applies to the 4, 8, 16 and first 32. The second 32 is if you win (which is a net 32 loss) and the third 32 is if you lose that wager which is a net 96 loss. Again, going further will only increase the loss. Does that clarify?

Joe.

[u21c3f6]

Sorry, let me recalculate. I see the need for another 2 now.

Joe.

[Redwing41]

You still missed a 2. You do not win anything on the martingale losses. The percentage is based on how many lose exactly that amount.


$2 .049 Win

Win go to chart above, lose chart below starting at 2nd $2

$2 .25% lose
$2. 125% lose
$4 .0625% lose
....

[u21c3f6]

Stop confusing me!

My chart is correct. I accounted for the second 2 in the second 2 in the chart. The %'s are for when you win at that level. So you will win the first two .4932 of the time, the second 2 .25 of the time, the 4 .1267 of the time etc until you get to the 32. You will hit the first 32 .0165 of the time, the second 32 .0084 of the time and you will lose the second 32 .0086 of the time. Clear?

Joe.

[Redwing41]

Stop confusing me!

My chart is correct. I accounted for the second 2 in the second 2 in the chart. The %'s are for when you win at that level. So you will win the first two .4932 of the time, the second 2 .25 of the time, the 4 .1267 of the time etc until you get to the 32. You will hit the first 32 .0165 of the time, the second 32 .0084 of the time and you will lose the second 32 .0086 of the time. Clear?

Joe.

The first $2 is counted by the % that losses EXACTLY 1 time = 25%. If you add all your numbers for 10,000 bets you get:

10,000 X.4932 = 4932
10,000 X .25 = 2500
10,000 X .125 = 1250
10,000 X .0625 = 625

Just out of those 4 = 9k, which is not correct. It can not be 9000/10,000 that are losses.
You can count from 5078 losses and it will give you the equivalent to the first loss at 25%.

You can see in order to lose exactly 1 time you need to win on the 2nd try. So the numbers percentages start at 25% since you can not lose 50 percent of all the bets and an additional 25% on the next. Why? because there are overlaps. you can lose 1, lose 2 and lose 3 in a row, but will count as a 3 loss and not effect the score of 1 loss and 2 loss.

[Redwing41]

Knowing this information is the chart correct that I posted originally. The profit is exactly 5000.. which is almost like it was not by mistake.

[u21c3f6]

Redwing, I am sorry but I really don't understand what you are saying.

To clarify my chart more, you win the first 2 .4932 of the time which means you lose the first 2 .5068 of the time. Therefore you win the second 2 .5068*.4932 (.25) of the time. If you lose the second 2, you win the 4 .5068*.5068*.4932 (.1267) of time etc. until you get to losing the second 32 which is .5068^7 (.0086) of the time.

Joe.

[u21c3f6]

Knowing this information is the chart correct that I posted originally. The profit is exactly 5000.. which is almost like it was not by mistake.

Redwing, I am not sure what you are missing but your chart cannot be correct because there can never be a profit making -EV wagers regardless of how one adjusts their wagers.

Joe.

[Redwing41]

Say I play 8 bets. I lose 6 in a row and win the remaining 2. That would give me the statistic of 6 losses in a row. How it works is each set of losses is independant.

It would not look like this.

8 games. 2 wins, 6 losses in a row

2 - 1 count = 1 X 1 = 1
2 - 1 count = 1 X 2 = 2
4 - 1 count = 1 X 3 = 3
8 - 1 count = 1 X 4 = 4
16 - 1 count = 1 X 5 = 5
32 - 1 count = 1 X 6 = 6 (6th loss)
32 - 0 count ~

Adding that up it would give a total of 21 losses and 2 wins.
That is why they are considered independant.

How it looks should like in the graph is:

2 ~
2 ~
4 ~
8 ~
16 ~
32 - 1 count = 1 X 6 = 6 (6th loss)
32 ~

= 6 losses, 2 wins = +2 units

I am 95 percent positive, that using an adjusted martingale, back to back martingale(to elimate most of the large streaks 8-11) you lose you do not lose a huge sum when the streak is 12-15+.

[Redwing41]

When you count that the first loss 50% it is 50% in relation of all bets which we can all agree on. But in relation to all losses it is 25%.. 100 coin flips = 50 losses

You will get in theory out of 100 flips. 50 losses.

25: first losses followed by an immediate win. 25/100 = 25%
12.5: two in a row losses followed by a win. 12.5/100 = 12.5%
6.25: three in a row followed by a win third loss = 6.25/100 = 6.25%

Out of those statistics

you get 25+12.5+6.25. = 43.5

43.5/100. Continue and you will get 50/50 as there is no vig counted and at 50% win rate.

Therefore this theory is correct (I still would only do martingale up to 7-8 back to back)

10K total bets. $2 (player bet)* 4932 = $9864 - $3648 - $1216 = $5000 per 10,000 bets (26 days 6 hours a day)

2 - 2660(24.38%) -5586 = 0


2 - 1330(12.19%) +2660 = 0


4 - 665(6.095%) +2620 = 0


8 - 322(3.0375%) +2576 = 0


16 - 161(1.523%) +2576 = 0


32 - 78(0.76%) +2496 = 0


32 - 38 (0.38%) -3648(-$96 every time you lose this bet) -1216(-$32 every time you win this bet)


2 - +19.4 +38.8


4 - +9.7 +19.4


8 - +4.85 9.7


16 - +2.4 4.8


32 - +1.2 2.4


64 - +.6 1.2


128 - +.3 .6


256 - +.15 - (.075%) ... +$.15 loss = -$0.765

[u21c3f6]

Redwing, you are making a very serious error in your calculations. My chart was for 10,000 series of martingales or approx 20,100 total wagers. It includes all the scenarios that you would encounter and the chance of that happening. We can adjust the chart for 10,000 wagers. The chart below shows how many series wagers would be made at each level (all numbers rounded). ie. At the 4 level you would have 630 series or 630*3 (1,890) wagers, total wagers of all the series in the chart below would be 10,000 total wagers. Please note that the expected loss is 524 and not a 5,000 profit. Again, you cannot martingale -EV wagers into a profit.

	10000
2	2454	4,907
2	1243	0
4	630	0
8	319	0
16	162	0
32	82	0
32	42	(1,330)
32	43	(4,101)
	Net	(524)

[u21c3f6]

PS. I know you extend the martingale further than I have and I assume that is included in your 5,000 profit, however, going further only increases the loss I have shown above, it cannot decrease the loss. Again, you are making some serious calculation and/or assumption errors.

Joe.

[Redwing41]

PS. I know you extend the martingale further than I have and I assume that is included in your 5,000 profit, however, going further only increases the loss I have shown above, it cannot decrease the loss. Again, you are making some serious calculation and/or assumption errors.

Joe.

It still needs some work. I probably wont use this system, but its interesting to find the stats. Both our stats are wrong. Can you disprove it or agree with the math?

Real stats 50% win rate per 10,000 bets

1250 + 1245 +933 +625 + 389 + 233..... = 4675. Eventually it will = 50%
Expected profit per 10,000 bets at $2 = +10000 - 6448 = $3552 per 10,000 bets.

Parameters:

Stop betting if you lose 7 in a row and let the losing streak end. (In return for letting the streak run its course you lose -$2*19 = -$38). Losing the 5th, 6th and 7th bet will cost per loss $-2 on top.

2 1250 *1 = 1250 losses = ~
4 622.5 *2 = 1245 losses =~
8 311.25 *3 = 933 losses =~
16 155 *4 = 625 losses = - 16 dollars (14+2 for a regular bet) = -2480
16 77 *5 = 389 losses Lose - 16 dollars (14 + 2 for a regular bet). 16 * 77 = -1232
32 38*6 = 233 losses Lose - 16 dollars (14 +2) 16 * 38 = -608
32 19 *7 = 133 losses = 19 times you will lose 7 times exactly. 19 times you will lose 8 or more(wait till the streak ends)
19 * (110 +2) (2 for a regular bet) = $-2128

[u21c3f6]

Redwing, my charts are correct (rounded). Please note they are based on the original scenario with a .4932 win rate. I really don't understand the basis for your math.

All I can say is to google martingale and maybe some resource can explain it better than I why a martingale of -EV wagers always has a negative expectation in the long run.

Joe.

[Redwing41]

Redwing, my charts are correct (rounded). Please note they are based on the original scenario with a .4932 win rate. I really don't understand the basis for your math.
Joe.

All I can say is to google martingale and maybe some resource can explain it better than I why a martingale of -EV wagers always has a negative expectation in the long run.
Joe.

You have a bias to believe the narrative, but you are still open to understanding the math, which is good and you have helped me to further my system. Whether it is wrong or right it would be if I can validate the math.

If we go by common logic for just a second to make it easier to understand. In a game of baccarat the odds roughly to see 1 or 2 losses exactly and 1 or 2 wins exactly together is about 50%. So knowing that we can check if reality matches up with my theory.

My chart is the amount of times of losing exactly X amount of games. The chart you have has overlaps, and is giving you wrong numbers when you add up the results. If I play 6 games and lose all 6 I only put that in my chart as one stat.

200 bets total = 100 total loses. Add up the results if it equals 100 losses it is 95% correct. Test again to see if the numbers are accurate and have basis.

1st bet = odds of losing exactly 1 bet would mean I have .50 odds of losing then odds of winning .50. So .5^2 = .25. losses = 200*.25 = 50 OR 100 *.5 = 50
2nd bet = odds of losing 2 bet in a row (.50*.50*)and winning the third (.50) = 50^3 = .125 = 200* .125 = 25
3rd bet = 50^4 = .625 = 6.25 = 12.5
4th bet = 50^5 = .3125 = 3.12 = 6.25
5th bet = 50^6 = .16225 = 1.5 = 3.125
6th bet = 50^7 = .8162 = .8 = 1.55
7th bet = 50^8 = .4321 = .4 = .775

If the above = 100 I am 95 percent sure it is correct. I will need to test it a few more different ways.

50 + 25 +12.5 + 6.25 + 3.125 + 1.55 + .755 = 99.18. That is with 7 martingale bets, continue and it will hit 100 losses out of 200 total bets.

So the real stats are

odds of losing exactly X in a row = Y% of A = amount of times it will occur every A
A= total # of bets

1 = .25% total # of bets
2 = .125% total # of bets
3 = .625% total # of bets
4 = .3125% total # of bets
5 = .16225% total # of bets
6 = .8162% total # of bets
7 = .432% total # of bets

[Redwing41]

odds of losing exactly X in a row = Y% of A = amount of times it will occur every A
A= total # of bets

1 = .25% total # of bets = 1250/10k
2 = .125% total # of bets = 625/10k
3 = .625% total # of bets = 312/10k
4 = .3125% total # of bets = 155/10k
5 = .16225% total # of bets = 75/10k
6 = .8162% total # of bets = 37.5/10k
7 = .432% total # of bets = 18.7510k

Therefore these statistics below are correct. If the math is done correctly

50% win rate per 10,000 bets

Expected profit per 10,000 bets at $2 = +10000 - 6448 = $3552 per 10,000 bets.

Parameters:

Stop betting if you lose 7 in a row and let the losing streak end. (In return for letting the streak run its course you lose -$2*19 = -$38). Losing the 5th, 6th and 7th bet will cost per loss $-2 on top every time you lose that bet.

2 1250 *1 = 1250 losses = ~
4 622.5 *2 = 1245 losses =~
8 311.25 *3 = 933 losses =~
16 155 *4 = 625 losses = - 16 dollars (14+2 for a regular bet) = -2480
16 77 *5 = 389 losses Lose - 16 dollars (14 + 2 for a regular bet). 16 * 77 = -1232
32 38*6 = 233 losses Lose - 16 dollars (14 +2) 16 * 38 = -608
32 19 *7 = 133 losses = 19 times you will lose 7 times exactly. 19 times you will lose 8 or more(wait till the streak ends)
19 * (110 +2) (2 for a regular bet) = $-2128

[Waterstpub87]

You original post is unclear and it is difficult to understand what you are actually advocating. Based on the back and forth, it looks like you are advocating a martingale strategy, starting with a 2$ bet., ending the chase at 7 losses. Is this correct?

I am going to assume you are laying 2.20 to win 2 to start with.

	Win	To win	Profit		Loss	Bet	Losses	Net
1st Series	5000	2	10000		5000	2.2	-11000	-1000
2 Series	2500	4.2	10500		2500	4.62	-11550	-1050
3rd Series	1250	6.62	8275		1250	7.282	-9102.5	-827.5
4th Series	625	9.282	5801.25		625	10.2102	-6381.375	-580.125
5th series	313	12.2102	3821.7926		313	13.431	4203.903	-382.1104
6th series	156	15.431	2407.236		156	16.9741	-2647.9596	-240.7236
7th series	78	18.9741	1479.9798		78	20.87151	-1627.9778	-147.99798
								-4228.457

So, you start with 10,000 bets. 5000 are wins and 5000 are losses. Break the losses to the next row, half are wins and half are losses, and so on.

Again, I am not really clear what you are particular advocating.

People have been trying to use martingale systems for like 500 years. Hasn't worked so far.

[Redwing41]

You original post is unclear and it is difficult to understand what you are actually advocating. Based on the back and forth, it looks like you are advocating a martingale strategy, starting with a 2$ bet., ending the chase at 7 losses. Is this correct?

I am going to assume you are laying 2.20 to win 2 to start with.

	Win	To win	Profit		Loss	Bet	Losses	Net
1st Series	5000	2	10000		5000	2.2	-11000	-1000
2 Series	2500	4.2	10500		2500	4.62	-11550	-1050
3rd Series	1250	6.62	8275		1250	7.282	-9102.5	-827.5
4th Series	625	9.282	5801.25		625	10.2102	-6381.375	-580.125
5th series	313	12.2102	3821.7926		313	13.431	4203.903	-382.1104
6th series	156	15.431	2407.236		156	16.9741	-2647.9596	-240.7236
7th series	78	18.9741	1479.9798		78	20.87151	-1627.9778	-147.99798
								-4228.457

$	Exact losses in a row.	Odds of losing in a row. Independant of the bet(s) above it	times it will occur out of 5000 losses (10,000 bets)	amount of losses in a row * frequency=total losses	Amount loss = Amount of times it will occur*$ value
2	1	25%	1250	1250	~
4	2	12.5%	625	1250	~
8	3	6.25%	312.5	937.5	~
16	4	3.125%	156	624	$-16*156= -$2496
16	5	1.56%	78	390	$-16*78= -1248
32	6	.78%	39	234	$-16*39= $-624
32	7	.39%	19.5	136.5	$-110*19.5= $-2145
	8+	.39%	19.5	178	$-110*19.5= $-2145
	Total	50% lose rate	~	5000	10,000 - 8658 = $1342	Start at $2 profit= $1342 per 10,000 bets	13.42 percent return on investment.

So, you start with 10,000 bets. 5000 are wins and 5000 are losses. Break the losses to the next row, half are wins and half are losses, and so on.

Again, I am not really clear what you are particular advocating.

People have been trying to use martingale systems for like 500 years. Hasn't worked so far.

People have been using the martingale system wrong for 500 years. They did not adjust it or even calculate it right... you can not lose 2 out of 2 and have the stat sheet say you lost 2 in a row and 1 in a row at the same time. That would = 3 total losses.

Take a small-medium size loss at 7 steps,because in the long run you still payout +EV, no need for a huge loss. This is with an adjusted $ values, I need to test it with the standard martingale too at 7 steps. It is sort of difficult to explain but look at the 5th column and add the totals. Work backwards from there.

For baccarat you have near even odds for even payout. I added the information in your quote above. The values for $ are confusing since the martingale goes. 2,4,8,16,16,32,32.

Please if you do not understand ask for clarfication. My belief is if you can explain to someone from scratch then I myself know it like the back of my hand. Does not mean the math is correct but I believe it is correct and need someone with the mathematical brain to sift through it.

[Waterstpub87]

You don't know what you are talking about. Stopping at any number of bets is not going to matter.

Ok, sure so your bets are not doubling, you are betting those amounts. I assume you mean you are playing the banker in Baccarat. So forgetting ties, the banker wins approximately .507 with a 5% commission on wins (I have no idea how baccarat works).

	Total Bets	Wins	Stake	Profit		Loss	Stake	Profit		Net
1	10000	5070	2	9633		4930	2	-9860		-227
2	4930	2499.51	4	9498.138		2430.49	4	-9721.96		-223.822
3	2430.49	1232.25843	8	9365.16407		1198.23157	8	-9585.8526		-220.688492
4	1198.23157	607.503406	16	9234.05177		590.728164	16	-9451.6506		-217.598853
5	590.728164	299.499179	16	4552.38752		291.228985	16	-4659.6638		-107.276235
6	291.228985	147.653095	32	4488.6541		143.57589	32	-4594.4285		-105.774367
7	143.57589	72.792976	32	2212.90647		70.7829135	32	-2265.0532		-52.1467631
									Net	-1154.30671

You still lose. You don't have an edge. Changing your bet size isn't going to change that.

[Redwing41]

You don't know what you are talking about. Stopping at any number of bets is not going to matter.

Ok, sure so your bets are not doubling, you are betting those amounts. I assume you mean you are playing the banker in Baccarat. So forgetting ties, the banker wins approximately .507 with a 5% commission on wins (I have no idea how baccarat works).

	Total Bets	Wins	Stake	Profit		Loss	Stake	Profit		Net
1	10000	5070	2	9633		4930	2	-9860		-227
2	4930	2499.51	4	9498.138		2430.49	4	-9721.96		-223.822
3	2430.49	1232.25843	8	9365.16407		1198.23157	8	-9585.8526		-220.688492
4	1198.23157	607.503406	16	9234.05177		590.728164	16	-9451.6506		-217.598853
5	590.728164	299.499179	16	4552.38752		291.228985	16	-4659.6638		-107.276235
6	291.228985	147.653095	32	4488.6541		143.57589	32	-4594.4285		-105.774367
7	143.57589	72.792976	32	2212.90647		70.7829135	32	-2265.0532		-52.1467631
						= 9,551/10,000
									Net	-1154.30671

You still lose. You don't have an edge. Changing your bet size isn't going to change that.

Counting your chart the losses bolded = 9551/10,000 bets.
You do not lose 9551 out of 10,000 bets. Like I said before nearly everyone calculate it incorrectly.

Please look over my chart again knowing this. I do believe if I can get someone to understand my system from scratch that I will know it like the back of my hand.

[Waterstpub87]

You misunderstand.

Add the total bets column and you get 19584.3 bets made. You lost 9551 of them for a loss % of 48.8

The total number of martingale series is 10,000 not the bets

[Redwing41]

You misunderstand.

Add the total bets column and you get 19584.3 bets made. You lost 9551 of them for a loss % of 48.8

The total number of martingale series is 10,000 not the bets

Out of 10,000 bets we know 5000 are losses. Can we agree on that? That means the chart below = 5000 losses out of 10,000 then it is correct.


1 loss = 1250
2 loss = 625 * 2 = 1250 This bet is multiplied by 2 Example: give you $2, 625 times = 1250
3 loss = 312.5*3 = 937.5
4 loss = 156.25*4 = 625
5 loss = 78.125*5 = 390
6 loss = 39 * 6 = 234
7 loss = 19.5 * 7 = 136.71
Total losses out of 10,000 bets = 5000/10,000. 5000 losses out of 10,000

Now we know that in 10,000 bets, 1250 bets will be exactly 1 loss. Meaning the odds of losing 1 loss exactly is 12.5 % not 50%, not 25%.

[Waterstpub87]

	Total Bets	Wins	Stake	Profit		Loss	Stake	Profit		Net	Win %
1	5106	2588.742	2	4918.6098		2517.258	2	-5034.516		-115.9062	0.507
2	2517.258	1276.24981	4	4849.74926		1241.008194	4	-4964.0328		-114.283513	0.507
3	1241.00819	629.191154	8	4781.85277		611.8170396	8	-4894.5363		-112.683544	0.507
4	611.81704	310.191239	16	4714.90683		301.6258005	16	-4826.0128		-111.105974	0.507
5	301.625801	152.924281	16	2324.44907		148.7015197	16	-2379.2243		-54.7752454	0.507
6	148.70152	75.3916705	32	2291.90678		73.3098492	32	-2345.9152		-54.0083919	0.507
7	73.3098492	37.1680935	32	1129.91004		36.14175565	32	-1156.5362		-26.6261372	0.507
Total Bets	9999.7204	5069.85824		25011.3846		4929.862159		-25600.774		-589.389006	0.507

Here is the table updated to allow a max of 10,000 bets.

[Waterstpub87]

Column1	Number of Series	Winning Stake	Win	Cumulative Losses per series	Total Losses	Net Profit Per Series
1	2588.742	2	4918.6098	0		4918.6098
2	1276.249806	4	4849.749263	2	-2552.499612	2297.249651
3	629.1911544	8	4781.852773	6	-3775.146926	1006.705847
4	310.1912391	16	4714.906834	14	-4342.677347	372.2294869
5	152.9242809	16	2324.449069	30	-4587.728426	-2263.279357
6	75.39167047	32	2291.906782	46	-3468.016842	-1176.110059
7	37.16809354	32	1129.910044	78	-2899.111296	-1769.201253
Stop	36.14175565			110	-3975.593122	-3975.593122
						-589.3890062

Maybe you aren't factoring in the vig, which is why you are coming up with positive values?

[Redwing41]

	Total Bets	Wins	Stake	Profit		Loss	Stake	Profit		Net	Win %
1	5106	2588.742	2	4918.6098		2517.258	2	-5034.516		-115.9062	0.507
2	2517.258	1276.24981	4	4849.74926		1241.008194	4	-4964.0328		-114.283513	0.507
3	1241.00819	629.191154	8	4781.85277		611.8170396	8	-4894.5363		-112.683544	0.507
4	611.81704	310.191239	16	4714.90683		301.6258005	16	-4826.0128		-111.105974	0.507
5	301.625801	152.924281	16	2324.44907		148.7015197	16	-2379.2243		-54.7752454	0.507
6	148.70152	75.3916705	32	2291.90678		73.3098492	32	-2345.9152		-54.0083919	0.507
7	73.3098492	37.1680935	32	1129.91004		36.14175565	32	-1156.5362		-26.6261372	0.507
Total Bets	9999.7204	5069.85824		25011.3846		4929.862159		-25600.774		-589.389006	0.507

Here is the table updated to allow a max of 10,000 bets.

Martingale we are calculating losses in a row. So that number 2 = 2 losses in a row. If I had 1241 pairs of shoes how many shoes do I have?

Take all your wins and losses and divide by 2 and you will get my numbers. Then multiply it by the numbers on the far left for that row.

[Redwing41]

So your starting to believe that it is correct. Take the red pill.

I will have to come up with the stats in the morning including vig, but I am positive it will still be +EV. The edge only accounts for about 124 games lost extra out of 10,000 which also = -124 wins. So it does cut into the profits, hopefully not too much.

[Waterstpub87]

So your starting to believe that it is correct. Take the red pill.

I will have to come up with the stats in the morining including vig, but I am positive it will still be +EV. The edge only accounts for about 300 games lost extra out of 10,000. It will make very little difference as baccarat's odds is in the realm 1.2%

I think you misunderstand. I don't believe at all. Your math is obviously wrong. Why are you positive that this is +EV? Where does your edge come from? Look at the table I posted. Those are the series. What part of it do you believe is incorrect?

Its your money. Bet it as you would like. Believe this is true if you want, but you won't convince anyone with a basic understanding of math that you can get around making bets with a negative hold. If you did have an actual edge, you would not generate extra profit following your betting strategy. You would just increase your variance.

[Redwing41]

$	Exact losses in a row.	Odds of losing in a row. Independant of the bet(s) above it	times it will occur out of 5124 losses (10,000 bets)	amount of losses in a row * frequency=total losses	Amount loss = Amount of times it will occur*$ value
2	1	25.62%	1312.76	1312.76	~
4	2	12.81%	656.38	1312.76	~
8	3	6.405%	328.19	984.57	~
16	4	3.2025%	164.0961	656.5	$-16*164.0961= -$2625.53
16	5	1.601%	82.04805	410	$-16*82.0480= -1312.76
32	6	.800625%	41.024025	246.14	$-16*41.240= $-656.38
32	7	.4003125%	20.512	143.58	$-110*20.512= $-2256.32
	8+	.403125%	20.512	136.5	$-110*20.5= $-2256.32
	Total	51.24% lose rate	~		9752 - 9107.31 = $644	Start at $2 profit= $644per 10,000 bets	Every bet is a +106.

Okay I couldnt sleep so I ended up doing the stats. I need to double check again all the math.

Per 10,000 bets = $644 at $2 starting

[Redwing41]

I think you misunderstand. I don't believe at all. Your math is obviously wrong. Why are you positive that this is +EV? Where does your edge come from? Look at the table I posted. Those are the series. What part of it do you believe is incorrect?

Its your money. Bet it as you would like. Believe this is true if you want, but you won't convince anyone with a basic understanding of math that you can get around making bets with a negative hold. If you did have an actual edge, you would not generate extra profit following your betting strategy. You would just increase your variance.

Thats fine. I got what I needed. Everytime you debate me I have to question the system, and I always give you a solid response, which gives me more feedback. Thank you.

My math is proven already. Trust me the numbers look misleading that you have. Everyone gets it wrong. The stats are how many times you lose in that series, not the total amount lost. Losing a 7 series would mean losing 7 losses * the amount of times you will lose that series.

Regular martingale 2,4,8,16,32,64,128 = -1000 every 10,000 bets.