Interesting way of disproving martingale

**sickofpoker** · 12-20-2012, 03:44 AM

Some disadvantaged soul was trying to defend martingaling in my presence (first mistake). Their argument was that "there is always the next round." I decided, this time, I was going to ignore table limits and bankroll considerations and take a different approach since showing this person that one person is losing money on average is clearly not going to work.

Imagine there are a VERY large number (read: infinite) of people at a casino with no table limits running a progression system simultaneously. Now let's say they are all trying to win one unit ($10) and go home.

You can then do the math...

Assume they are playing european roulette and betting black, then they will win approximately 48.65% of the time. The house edge is 2.7%. EV is calculated per person.

Spin 1: 48.65% Win $10 - EV $4.865, 51.35% Lose $10 - EV ($5.135), EVPP [per ploppy] ($0.27) ... exactly the house edge, imagine that!
Spin 2: 24.98% Win $20 - EV $4.996, 26.37% Lose $20 - EV ($5.273), EVPP ($0.274)

Repeat until ploppy is satisfied that the martingalers are losing money as a group and then watch in amazement as they explain how they are all making money individually despite losing as a group. Not for those of weak constitution as sometimes the result is visible agony. Alternate line: Use entire population of the planet as an example to show the sheer absurdity of the amount of money the bets get up to.

You know, I think maybe the lottery has it backwards. Someone should start selling reverse-lottery tickets. Maybe varying denominations.

**dharmaprija** · 12-20-2012, 04:36 AM

Yeah but I saw Martingale work once...

**Three** · 12-20-2012, 04:46 AM

Few martingaler's listen to reason when people tell them to get out whie they are luckily still ahead. They think they found the goose that laid the golden egg. Then one day they are posting on how they lost all their winnings and are now more behind than they ever were ahead. They relent their pigheaded attitude when they realize they have little hope of ever being ahead again. I remember one were the guy was back posting his failure within a week of lots of people telling him how lucky he was to still be ahead and to get out with a profit before the inevitable happens. Of course he didn't and the inevitable was days away. I think he ran to his limit and lost 3 times in one day or maybe it was 2.

**sickofpoker** · 12-20-2012, 05:19 AM

Buy my lotto tickets already! They are only $100 and 19/20 are $105 winners!

**falcon45** · 02-26-2013, 02:08 PM

Originally Posted by dharmaprija

Yeah but I saw Martingale work once...

I wouldn't be surprised if casinos try to make games specifically with the illusion that Martingale will work. In fact, maybe that drives the popularity of War, which I will admit took me a few seconds to figure out how the casino makes money on (you have to double your bet to go war with the dealer, but still only win your original bet).

**Frostbyte** · 02-26-2013, 02:28 PM

Originally Posted by sickofpoker

Buy my lotto tickets already! They are only $100 and 19/20 are $105 winners!

Good business model, but I'm concerned loss aversion would poke a pin in it. People are a lot happier to accept lots of small to medium-sized losses with the occasional big win (e.g. the royal in any poker-based game ever, or the 3CP progressive) than they are to accept lots of small wins with the occasional colossal loss. You'd quickly run into trouble getting repeat business.

**zengrifter** · 02-26-2013, 09:46 PM

User is banned, content deleted.

**shadroch** · 02-27-2013, 12:12 AM

The attraction of the martingale is simple. It works most of the time. Just as a drunk driver knows he'll go to jail if he gets caught, but also knows the chances he'll get caught are slim, so thinks the martingaler.