1. #1
    Redwing41
    Redwing41's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 05-29-16
    Posts: 71
    Betpoints: 72

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

    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
    Last edited by Redwing41; 06-02-16 at 12:27 PM.

  2. #2
    u21c3f6
    u21c3f6's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-17-09
    Posts: 790
    Betpoints: 5198

    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.

  3. #3
    Redwing41
    Redwing41's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 05-29-16
    Posts: 71
    Betpoints: 72

    Double post.

  4. #4
    Redwing41
    Redwing41's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 05-29-16
    Posts: 71
    Betpoints: 72

    Quote Originally Posted by u21c3f6 View Post
    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.
    Last edited by Redwing41; 06-02-16 at 12:46 PM.

  5. #5
    u21c3f6
    u21c3f6's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-17-09
    Posts: 790
    Betpoints: 5198

    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.

  6. #6
    u21c3f6
    u21c3f6's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-17-09
    Posts: 790
    Betpoints: 5198

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

    Joe.

  7. #7
    Redwing41
    Redwing41's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 05-29-16
    Posts: 71
    Betpoints: 72

    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
    ....

  8. #8
    u21c3f6
    u21c3f6's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-17-09
    Posts: 790
    Betpoints: 5198

    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.

  9. #9
    Redwing41
    Redwing41's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 05-29-16
    Posts: 71
    Betpoints: 72

    Quote Originally Posted by u21c3f6 View Post
    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.

  10. #10
    Redwing41
    Redwing41's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 05-29-16
    Posts: 71
    Betpoints: 72

    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.

  11. #11
    u21c3f6
    u21c3f6's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-17-09
    Posts: 790
    Betpoints: 5198

    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.

  12. #12
    u21c3f6
    u21c3f6's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-17-09
    Posts: 790
    Betpoints: 5198

    Quote Originally Posted by Redwing41 View Post
    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.

  13. #13
    Redwing41
    Redwing41's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 05-29-16
    Posts: 71
    Betpoints: 72

    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+.
    Last edited by Redwing41; 06-02-16 at 03:29 PM.

  14. #14
    Redwing41
    Redwing41's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 05-29-16
    Posts: 71
    Betpoints: 72

    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
    Last edited by Redwing41; 06-02-16 at 03:44 PM.

  15. #15
    u21c3f6
    u21c3f6's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-17-09
    Posts: 790
    Betpoints: 5198

    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)

  16. #16
    u21c3f6
    u21c3f6's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-17-09
    Posts: 790
    Betpoints: 5198

    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.

  17. #17
    Redwing41
    Redwing41's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 05-29-16
    Posts: 71
    Betpoints: 72

    Quote Originally Posted by u21c3f6 View Post
    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
    Last edited by Redwing41; 06-03-16 at 02:01 PM.

  18. #18
    u21c3f6
    u21c3f6's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 01-17-09
    Posts: 790
    Betpoints: 5198

    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.

  19. #19
    Redwing41
    Redwing41's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 05-29-16
    Posts: 71
    Betpoints: 72

    Quote Originally Posted by u21c3f6 View Post
    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
    Last edited by Redwing41; 06-03-16 at 04:22 PM.

  20. #20
    Redwing41
    Redwing41's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 05-29-16
    Posts: 71
    Betpoints: 72

    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
    Last edited by Redwing41; 06-03-16 at 04:20 PM.

  21. #21
    Waterstpub87
    Slan go foill
    Waterstpub87's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-09-09
    Posts: 4,043
    Betpoints: 7236

    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.

  22. #22
    Redwing41
    Redwing41's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 05-29-16
    Posts: 71
    Betpoints: 72

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterstpub87 View Post
    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.
    Last edited by Redwing41; 06-03-16 at 09:52 PM.

  23. #23
    Waterstpub87
    Slan go foill
    Waterstpub87's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-09-09
    Posts: 4,043
    Betpoints: 7236

    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.

  24. #24
    Redwing41
    Redwing41's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 05-29-16
    Posts: 71
    Betpoints: 72

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterstpub87 View Post
    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.

  25. #25
    Waterstpub87
    Slan go foill
    Waterstpub87's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-09-09
    Posts: 4,043
    Betpoints: 7236

    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

  26. #26
    Redwing41
    Redwing41's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 05-29-16
    Posts: 71
    Betpoints: 72

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterstpub87 View Post
    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%.
    Last edited by Redwing41; 06-03-16 at 11:27 PM.

  27. #27
    Waterstpub87
    Slan go foill
    Waterstpub87's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-09-09
    Posts: 4,043
    Betpoints: 7236

    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.

  28. #28
    Waterstpub87
    Slan go foill
    Waterstpub87's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-09-09
    Posts: 4,043
    Betpoints: 7236

    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?

  29. #29
    Redwing41
    Redwing41's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 05-29-16
    Posts: 71
    Betpoints: 72

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterstpub87 View Post
    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.
    Last edited by Redwing41; 06-03-16 at 11:41 PM.

  30. #30
    Redwing41
    Redwing41's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 05-29-16
    Posts: 71
    Betpoints: 72

    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.
    Last edited by Redwing41; 06-03-16 at 11:54 PM.

  31. #31
    Waterstpub87
    Slan go foill
    Waterstpub87's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-09-09
    Posts: 4,043
    Betpoints: 7236

    Quote Originally Posted by Redwing41 View Post
    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.

  32. #32
    Redwing41
    Redwing41's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 05-29-16
    Posts: 71
    Betpoints: 72

    $ 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
    Last edited by Redwing41; 06-04-16 at 01:46 AM.

  33. #33
    Redwing41
    Redwing41's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 05-29-16
    Posts: 71
    Betpoints: 72

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterstpub87 View Post
    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.
    Last edited by Redwing41; 06-04-16 at 02:29 AM.

Top