Chase System and Multiplication Factor

[dawsonbar]

Hey everybody, I am new to the forum and didn't know what my first post should be, so I guess this is as good as any.

As judging from what I have seen so far this is a very advanced community with regards to sports gambling knowledge, I am sure everyone knows what a chase or "Martingale" system is. Typically, one bets a specific unit amount on a team that fits a specific criterion, and if that bet loses, one bets on the next team that fits the criterion, doubling the unit, then quadrupling if that loses, etc. etc.

My question is, instead of multiplying by two between every losing bet, to account for the typical bookie vigorish where lines are set at -110 instead of even, shouldn't the "chase factor" be 2.1. Otherwise, if one were to use a chase factor of 2 on -110 lines, the returns would gradually be diminished as the chase continues.

Sorry if my wording is cloudy. I am very interested in the probability and game theory behind sports gambling and thought of this conjecture recently.

[johncrud]

Regardless what those so-called experts have to say here, Chase system is the best way to make money.. There are no +EV on single betting.

Single betting=coin flip. Vegas love people who does single betting because in the long run they know you will 100% lose. Make sure the chase system you use is well-researched with plenty of backtracked data.

[LT Profits]

Regardless what those so-called experts have to say here, Chase system is the best way to make money.. There are no +EV on single betting.

Single betting=coin flip. Vegas love people who does single betting because in the long run they know you will 100% lose. Make sure the chase system you use is well-researched with plenty of backtracked data.

Wrong on all counts.

No matter what, you can't turn a -EV play into a +EV play, and using any multiplier in a chase system merely because the previous play lost is just suicide.

Also, anyone that can't find +EV betting single plays isn't trying hard enough.

[dawsonbar]

I'm not really familiar with the -EV and +EV terms. Care to explain?

[Justin7]

Sorry, no chase system threads in the think tank.
+EV means bets with a positive expected value - likely to win money in the long term. -EV means the opposite.

[Ruifgalmeida]

forget about chase sistems, the important in the long run is odds and analisis, or you have +EV or your going to lose money.
Chase only will give you a sense of wining in the short run, but what will you do afther 8 losing bets(it will happen),
MARTINGALE=SUICIDE

[Dunder]

Disclaimer: Chase Systems are a bad idea. Don´t use them

In answer to your question, yes the multiplication factor would need to be adjusted to account for juice. Some even use a multiplication factor of 3.

[tonyhomo]

Regardless what those so-called experts have to say here, Chase system is the best way to make money.. There are no +EV on single betting. Single betting=coin flip. Vegas love people who does single betting because in the long run they know you will 100% lose. Make sure the chase system you use is well-researched with plenty of backtracked data.

vegas does love bettors who think they can make money doubling up after every loss

[dawsonbar]

Disclaimer: Chase Systems are a bad idea. Don´t use them

In answer to your question, yes the multiplication factor would need to be adjusted to account for juice. Some even use a multiplication factor of 3.

Thank you, and I don't believe in chase systems, as it is statisically proven (optimal stopping theorem I think) that one will lose money over the longterm using them.

But I think that there are some very rare systems in which there is very little line deviation from play to play in the chase and there is a proven track record of success that can be profitable.

[Dunder]

Thank you, and I don't believe in chase systems, as it is statisically proven (optimal stopping theorem I think) that one will lose money over the longterm using them.

But I think that there are some very rare systems in which there is very little line deviation from play to play in the chase and there is a proven track record of success that can be profitable.

That may be the case, but only if (as other have mentioned) the plays themselves are +EV. If you are able to select plays which have +EV then you will win with a more sensible staking plan.

[LT Profits]

Thank you, and I don't believe in chase systems, as it is statisically proven (optimal stopping theorem I think) that one will lose money over the longterm using them.

But I think that there are some very rare systems in which there is very little line deviation from play to play in the chase and there is a proven track record of success that can be profitable.

If that is the case, identify the specific situations that make the "chase" profitable and use Kelly on those games only.

For Example (And this totally made up to make a point), lets say that history shows that a team has gone Under 56% of the time following two Overs where all the games had a posted total of less than 40 points (I told you I made it up...LOL). Rather than chasing those Unders to pick up one unit on the series, ignore the first two games and wait for a "Chase C play" to occur. Then use Kelly on that game using a 56% expectancy.

[Sawyer]

Of course, it's possible to make money on the long run by using a chase system. Finding a good chase system is not easy but it's an another subject..

As long as you know what you're doing, you can have success with chase systems but you should limit your chase. Because you can't chase something forever, your bankroll won't let you to do that.

For example, 2 or 3 game chase is enough in my opinion and yes, you can find EVEN (+100, 2.00) bets. (not always unfortunately)

Chase Montreal UNDER after two consecutive OVER. Chase Phoenix UNDER after two consecutive OVER. I made very good money last 2 season by chasing good UNDER teams like NJ. Specially, devils were a moneymaker.. Bruins were also a very good bet. I remember my teams never went on a 5-game Over streak. Even if they go, it's not the end of the world only -7 or -8 units..

You can do the same in baseball as well. I'm sure people from Statfox knows me well. I was running a Baseball Total Chase system. 76 Winners and only 3 losers. Every lost is equal to approximately -8 or -9 units so it was a very profitable system

[LT Profits]

Of course, it's possible to make money on the long run by using a chase system. Finding a good chase system is not easy but it's an another subject..

As long as you know what you're doing, you can have success with chase systems but you should limit your chase. Because you can't chase something forever, your bankroll won't let you to do that.

For example, 2 or 3 game chase is enough in my opinion and yes, you can find EVEN (+100, 2.00) bets. (not always unfortunately)

Chase Montreal UNDER after two consecutive OVER. Chase Phoenix UNDER after two consecutive OVER. I made very good money last 2 season by chasing good UNDER teams like NJ. Specially, devils were a moneymaker.. Bruins were also a very good bet. I remember my teams never went on a 5-game Over streak. Even if they go, it's not the end of the world only -7 or -8 units..

You can do the same in baseball as well. I'm sure people from Statfox knows me well. I was running a Baseball Total Chase system. 76 Winners and only 3 losers. Every lost is equal to approximately -8 or -9 units so it was a very profitable system

Chase systems can win for many years, especially if the number of plays are limited, but at some time that losing streak will come that wipes out years of profits. It is mathematically inevitable that if you are chasing with -EV plays (which is 99% of the time), the system will fail at some point. There is no way around it, as again you can't turn a -EV play into +EV no matter what you do.

[Masu485]

Chase systems can win for many years, especially if the number of plays are limited, but at some time that losing streak will come that wipes out years of profits. It is mathematically inevitable that if you are chasing with -EV plays (which is 99% of the time), the system will fail at some point. There is no way around it, as again you can't turn a -EV play into +EV no matter what you do.

I am NOT a proponent of chase systems and will NEVER use them, BUT I can still see them working. Short term and long term are just relative terms, so people CANNOT just say the system may work in the short run but lose in the long run. Maybe 20 years is considered short term for someone. Just because he HAS to lose at some point in the future does not mean he will ever run into that. He isn't playing forever, and you can go 20 or 40 years or longer winning with chase systems (and those 20 or 40 years can be considered short term).

[Sawyer]

Chase systems can win for many years, especially if the number of plays are limited, but at some time that losing streak will come that wipes out years of profits. It is mathematically inevitable that if you are chasing with -EV plays (which is 99% of the time), the system will fail at some point. There is no way around it, as again you can't turn a -EV play into +EV no matter what you do.

It's a very flat, straight mathematically approach LT. The thing you said is correct for casino games like roulette etc but sports betting is something different specially if you have a system. As I mentioned above, a losing streak doesn't wipe out all profits. It causes just a small damage.

The only problem about chasing baseball totals is sometimes odds for totals can be -120. You know baseball total odds are not always -110 like NBA. However, as long as you chase maximum 3 games, chase multiplication factor won't increase dramatically. However, it increases DRAMATICALLY after 4th step. So don't chase after 3rd step.

GL guys!