How many of you guys do the Marginale method? If you're unfamiliar, it's probably the most popular method when playing roulette. You just double your money with each loss and once you win, you go back to the initial bet.
This method seems to be flawless because loosing 20+ straight is very unlikely to occur. However, this is NOT a good method. I'm just interesting in some success or failure stories you guys had with marginale method.
Marginale - or rather MARTINGALE - has fascinated many beginners.
It is a LOSER. The opposite ("Reverse Martingale") might be better.
The problem with "Reverse Martingale": We don´t know when to stop.
I suggest that you bet both RED & EVEN (OR BLACK & ODD)
and that you only double after winning both.
Yes I agree that this method is a failure method. Sooner or later, this method will zero out your bank and me being a beginner better has lost a lot of money with this method. Which one do you suggest?
Martingale is the best way of loosing all your money. I've ben there.
Even if with a stop loss you have to win too much times to gather back the money you have lost at the loosing session
(eg. a stop loss at the 4th step means you have lost 1+2+4+8=15 chips, so thinking that in every session you win 1 chip, in the future you have to catch 15 wins and no lose to get back your money).
Doubling up etc is the first thing players try.
I know that everyone knows what I'm about to point out, but just in case there's even one who doesn't, here goes.
Many members of this forum, Warrior to name one, has stressed the flat bet. If you can't win with a flat bet, the only way you can win is to have enough bankroll to outlast your losing streak from hell. Or, the accumulation of small losses, which without full recovery, can also wipe out your bankroll, eventually.
Yes, even with a capped martingale you will lose if you play long enough, and for some that won't be very long. For others it may be a very long time.
The rule is if you use an aggressive progression, you recovery losses quickly, but when you have a really bad run, your bets skyrocket rapidly. If you use a less aggressive progression, your loss recovery will be a grinder, and you may keep dropping into the hole so far the way out seems impossible.
If you're going to use a progression, pick the one that suits your personality best. For most it will be the safer progression because this gives you an opportunity to call it quits before you get into a death spiral.
I've posted a gillion progression ideas that can be used as is or tweaked to suit your risk tolerance.
My latest, favorite betting style is a blending of the flat bet parlay with the Project 202 idea. I bet 1 unit and let it ride once. I do this until I've played 120 spins.
I know that Project 202 recommends 40 spin cycles for roulette, but I prefer 120 spin cycles. For my roulette machine, that's 2 hours which is all the time I have to spare. Also, I figure that the even chances will have greater odds of balancing out after 120 spins than 40.
I have a 100 unit bankroll. If I get ahead 10% before the 120 spins end, I walk. If I am behind less than 10%, the next time I go, I play the same level. I bet 1 unit and let it ride once until 120 spins or until I reach +10% . If I'm ahead anything after 1 hour, I walk. The next time I get to the casino I play 1 unit and let it ride once until I'm ahead 10% or 120 spins go by and I'm still down more than 10%. The next time I play I bet 1 unit and let it ride twice until I'm ahead +10% or I'm still down 10% or more after 120 spins.
So, if I'm down 10% or more after 120 spins, the next visit I let it ride one more time that the last visit. Any time I'm ahead 10% I reset to the beginning. Any time I end the session less than 10% down, the next visit is at the same level.
Playing this way can be like torture sometimes. And it takes resolve to walk when you get ahead 10% after only a few spins, but that's part of the discipline. This is a simple way to play. Placing bets is easy and never rushed. I never make a mistake. I am always in control of how much money I'm willing to invest. If I miss a week or two, no big deal. I like it, so far.
By the way, I play on a double zero air-ball machine. You can't have worse odds than that. Unless you're playing on a crooked RNG game.
GLC
Very first method I ever played was a Marty. I actually took out a LOAN in order to play......yep, lost that.
Second method ever played......waiting until there were 7 of the same color, then start Marty. Yep, lost on that as well. THANK GOD those WASTED days of my life are over with!!!!!!!!!!!!
I feel like a moron even talking about it.
Ken
I am in the flat bet brigade, used progressions in the past, but now more. Most people take a lot of convincing.
Yep, I do flat betting 90% of the time. Years ago, it was 80% progressions. Live and learn I guess? (had some damn good weeks with progressions, keep in mind).
Ken
We all went through much the same losing and learning processes. There are two mindsets:
1. I'm going to increase bets and eventually I'll win and recover losses, or
2. If I increase the bet size, it has nothing to do with previous spins. All I'm doing is increasing the amount I risk on that spin.
#1 is of course wrong. Its probably the most common mistake. But its hard to see differently when you have made some nice profits from progression, and the approach does seem logical. After all, sure you can win back losses. But it's only from luck, not genuine advantage that can be sustained over long term.
My first system that I was "proud of" was a dozens progression. And I arrogantly thought I'd beaten the game others couldnt beat. Like when I was 13, I thought I knew how the world worked. At 14, I found I was wrong, and then thought I knew better. And same thing at 15 etc.. It took me until about 25 to "get it" that I on some level, I will always be thickheaded. Thats why "pride" is a "deadly sin", because it makes you overlook the facts, like you really know nothing.
Quote from: Steve on May 14, 01:29 AM 2014
My first system that I was "proud of" was a dozens progression.
The best system I ever used prior to my current one was dozens progression based, I paid off my house with the winnings from it. Luckily I was fortunate enough to see it had faults before I gave all my winnings back. My current one is flat bet based.
I think the only way to play Martingale is playing with pockets.
Explain:
In 20 spins you can see 20 blacks and no reds.
But in 200 spins you cannot see more than 136 blacks.
Having it in mind, I think you can play Martingale, flatbetting every 20 or 30 or 50 or 100 spins and rising bet after every pocket of 20 or 30 or 50 or 100, in case you're (-) until you're +
But the safe method playing this way is starting betting, after you have seen a great imbalance (eg you have seen 15 blacks at 20 spins, you start betting on reds flatbetting in every pocket of 20 or 30 or.....)
Of course a safest way is playing with the above pockets but not using Martingale but a softer progression like1,2,3,4... SOmewhen I think you'll be +
If you arent first beating roulette with flat betting, you cant do it with progression. The only exception is if you were doing something like predicting streaks, but this is increasing accuracy of prediction. There's no way around that
I really do like GLC's method of 120 spins. This method decreases the risk of losing your bankroll and can be very effective. I have found out through my years of gambling that progression methods are the least effective and will always zero out your bankroll in the long run.
Quote from: Bask on May 14, 10:31 AM 2014
I really do like GLC's method of 120 spins. This method decreases the risk of losing your bankroll and can be very effective. I have found out through my years of gambling that progression methods are the least effective and will always zero out your bankroll in the long run.
I'm under no illusion that my method is lose proof. Quite the contrary. It's just slow enough that I can cut bait in time to not tick off Mrs. GLC.
Cheers,
Mr. GLC
Quote from: Steve on May 14, 06:47 AM 2014
If you arent first beating roulette with flat betting, you cant do it with progression.
Do it once in your life starting at $!00 on black after 20 reds, and you won't get caught.
Yeah I know. No method is lose proof. That would be impossible. You method seems like it would work well because it minimizes the losses. Also, it incorporates when you should stop and when you should cash out. I do like it a lot.
Quote from: GARNabby on May 15, 01:53 PM 2014
Do it once in your life starting at $!00 on black after 20 reds, and you won't get caught.
If you mean bet once after 20 reds, and it will increase your chances of winning, no it wont. Because the odds dont change. You still have 50/50 chance (besides the 0). You could wait for 100 reds in a row, and the odds are still the same.
have you seen a hundred reds in a row?
Yes he's right.
Whatever method you try, whatever math you do, it all doesn't matter. Each event is independent from each other. You will always have the same chance every time you spin.
I leave you with your 50 or 100 spins of one particular EC. But the reality as observed at the scoreboards looks entirely different.( An dYOU KNOW it)
I know but one of my EC methods is rather succesful. Lately many of our well known US gambling gurus favor that approach: Betting for THE CHANGE ( mandates a very short term MoP.) NO MARTINGALE !!!
.Reason " higher table limits and therefore less exposure to the frequency of spins. But one cannot SIT at the tabl while not playing every spin..
Tamino
Quote from: nottophammer on May 15, 06:34 PM 2014
have you seen a hundred reds in a row?
No of course not, but I said it to make my point clearer: if 2 reds spin in a row, or if 100 reds spin in a row, the odds of black/red spinning next are still 50/50 (excluding green zero). Believing otherwise is a very common gambler's fallacy.
How many systems are based around the concept of "wait for some rare occurrence, then bet"? It doesnt work.
You need to increase the accuracy of predictions. I say it many times and there is no way around it.
Looking at what has happened in previous spins will only help if you correlate physical variables to outcomes, then model the relationship between them to predict future spins. I've never found another way of beating roulette that works and I've spent nearly 20 years on it.
Martingale is tricky. It seems you will get ahead with it because of the notion an even-chance is 'due'. Nothing is due.
Moreover the time involving waiting for 30 or
40 reds or blacks (or some event--You could wait all day for a trigger and not get one!)
Quote from: Steve on May 15, 08:19 PM 2014
No of course not, but I said it to make my point clearer: if 2 reds spin in a row, or if 100 reds spin in a row, the odds of black/red spinning next are still 50/50 (excluding green zero). Believing otherwise is a very common gambler's fallacy.
How many systems are based around the concept of "wait for some rare occurrence, then bet"? It doesnt work.
You need to increase the accuracy of predictions. I say it many times and there is no way around it.
Looking at what has happened in previous spins will only help if you correlate physical variables to outcomes, then model the relationship between them to predict future spins. I've never found another way of beating roulette that works and I've spent nearly 20 years on it.
Hmmm.....agree up to a point. Most if not all of what's shared online will not work. Just test it at a brick n mortar casino n u'll find out soon enuf - post2