See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 40 to 52 of 59

Thread: What kills the progression player?

  1. #40


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Tthree View Post
    They send limos to the airport and pay the airfare to get martingalers that are well funded to the casino. Th idea that they fear them in any way is ridiculous and shows you just don't understand the interaction between house edge and bets. They will win your total amount bet times the house edge. Why wouldn't they want you to bet more? It increases their EV.
    They dont fear martingalers because of the table limits set; the casinos know these martingale players wont be able to keep doubling their previous bet all day long. They will eventually hit a losing streak big enough that reaches table max and then they will not be able to recoup their losses and make one more double of their previous bet. If there were no table limits and you were extremely wealthy, you would bankrupt a casino due to lack of table limits. By the time your .000001% chance of the same color coming out 50 times happens or whatever number you think will happen, the wealthy martingaler would have extracted millions from casinos. The most common longest losing streak on roulette that happensi believe is 9 of the same colors coming out in a row which happens every 100 spins or so. Is it a coincidence that the spread of minimum to maximum on roulette is only about 7 or 8 times the double of your previous bet starting with the minimum? Newsflash, it's not a coincidence. Martingalers wont be able to double their bet anymore by the time they reach their 9th loss or so and reach table max. They now are screwed and have to start all over with a minimum bet and never get their money back. Even if they switched casino and tried to find a high roller table to get their 9th double up of their previous bet, first off they will be hard pressed to find a table that has those limits, and if they do find a table with those limits they then would have to play those tables limits with a higher 'minimum' to offset the ratio of the high 'maximum' on the table and they will end up with the same dilemma when they are not able to double up on their 9th loss because they will have reached table max on that high roller table as well.

    It's that simple. Go find me the last table in the world that hit the same color more than 15 times or 20 times in a row on roulette? Or in your other example, lets say someone kept switching casino and kept betting the same color, etc, go find me someone that lost 20 or even 30 times in a row betting the same color? You know what, go find me the most consecutive same color spins ever recorded on roulette. I bet it's not more than 30. And you're telling me a wealthy guy with tens of millions cant wipe out that casino if there were no table limits and with no minimum to maximum limit? Someone with tens of millions will easily kill a casino without table limits because the chance of these streaks going so high to wipe out someone with that bankroll just isnt feasible by the time it takes a martingaler to extract significant amount of money from them. A wealthy martingaler with tens of millions would easily have bankrupted a casino by then if there were no table limits. High roller tables have the same ratio from minimum to maximum as do low roller tables, and thats because without table limits and about a 7-8 ratio of doubling bets from minimum bet, casinos would go out of business due to martingale, plain and simple.

    Also the idea of separating high rollers and low rollers is a reason for table limits, makes no sense and ill go back to what I wrote previously. Why do high roller tables have about the same ratio of spread of minimum to maximum as do the low roller tables? Because martingale without table limits on any game will wipe them out if some dot com millionaire comes in or billionaire comes in.
    Last edited by LoneWoLF; 08-24-2016 at 10:42 PM.

  2. #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    In orbit around Saturn
    Posts
    897


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Casino don't fear bad players and martingalers are bad players.
    But casino fears crazy gamblers.
    Even with 1 billion and 1% advantage would you play 1 million per hand (CVCX is your friend) ? Without table limit casino would have no choice.
    Last edited by Phoebe; 08-25-2016 at 02:59 AM. Reason: poor grammar

  3. #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    10-20-40-80-160-320-640--1,280--2,560--5,120--10,240--20,480--40,960--81,920--163,840--327,680--655,360--1,310,720.

    Just to endure a 17 losing streak with a win, you need to risk $2,621,4440 just to win $10. So to recoup 1 loss you would need to start 2,621,444 progressions just to break even (Plus one for the loser). I have seen a lot of losing runs that long in my career. I have seen them to at least 26 losses straight. To go another 10 losses your top bet would be $6,710,886,400 and you would be risking $13,412,772,790 to win $10. You would still lose 17 in a row eventually.

    If you think risking almost $13.5 billion to win $10 is a good idea you should definitely quit trying to be an AP. You don't understand what it takes. Wait your suggestion was risking around ($13,412,772,800^2/4 - $10) to win $10. That rare lose that will happen can happen at any time. So Mr. The World Is Against Me And My Luck Is The Worst In The World gets together more than $50,570,000,000,000,000,000 and loses it in the inevitable 51 bet loss streak the first week of plying his massive martingale. If you can raise that BR again, you will have to start and win more than 5,057,000,000,000,000,000 progressions just to break even. Yeah, you have the stuff to be an AP. One thing you should learn as an AP is if you play long enough you will see it all so be prepared.

    Why wouldn't the casino let you do this? Because the casino would need to have $50,570,000,000,000,000,000 in their casino's VAULT to book these bets to comply with the law. The casino must have the cash reserves in their cage and vault to cash every chip it gives out whether bought or won. It is the law and they audit this constantly. There are many reasons they track large denomination chips. This is one of them. Are you starting to understand? It isn't that the casino doesn't want to book the massive martingales bets. It is that the casino is not dumb enough to have that kind of money sitting in their vault rather than making money for someone elsewhere.

  4. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Philippe B View Post
    Casino don't fear bad players and martingalers are bad players.
    But casino fears crazy gamblers.
    Even with 1 billion and 1% advantage would you play 1 million per hand (CVCX is your friend) ? Without table limit casino would have no choice.
    Well said.

  5. #44


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    T3
    Make it easier on yourself - instead of starting with a $10 bet risking 2.6 million, why not start with a buck. Less shrinkage, in more ways than one

  6. #45


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by LoneWoLF View Post
    ...And you're telling me a wealthy guy with tens of millions cant wipe out that casino if there were no table limits and with no minimum to maximum limit?
    Yes. Several people have told you that. That wealthy guy betting at a $10 table with no max is risking increasingly large amounts to win ... $10. No matter how large his bet gets, he never wins more than his original bet. No casino truly fears a $10 bettor. And few "wealthy guys" are going to risk a considerable portion of that wealth to win $10.


    Quote Originally Posted by LoneWoLF View Post
    ...A wealthy martingaler with tens of millions would easily have bankrupted a casino by then if there were no table limits. ... Because martingale without table limits on any game will wipe them out if some dot com millionaire comes in or billionaire comes in.
    Again, this is simply not true. Let's imagine that our putative billionaire at a $10 - no limit table does win their 20th progression with $10,485,760 riding on it. You seem to be thinking that the casino lost $10+ million dollars. The truth is that the casino has only lost (and the player has only won) $10... In 21 hands/spins. That's no way to "break" a casino.

  7. #46


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    2^30 = 1,073,741,824

  8. #47
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    I am sure I have seen 30 straight losses before. A 1,073,741,823 unit loss is hard to come back from. Maybe if you continued playing into your next few lives you could cut that loss in half.

  9. #48


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Tthree View Post
    A 1,073,741,823 unit loss is hard to come back from.
    No, no, no, it's easy. You just bet 1,073,741,824 on the next round.

  10. #49
    Random number herder Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The mote in God's eye
    Posts
    12,461
    Blog Entries
    59


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    When using a Martingale, I always bet in pico-dollars
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

  11. #50
    Senior Member Bubbles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    South West
    Posts
    957


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    When I use martingale, I make sure the count calls for a larger bet.

    Sent from Tapatalk

  12. #51


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Norm View Post
    When using a Martingale, I always bet in pico-dollars
    Come on Norm, that is so 1980's.

    When I Martingale, I always bet in Satoshi or otherwise known as one hundred millionth of a single bitcoin (0.00000001 BTC).

  13. #52
    Random number herder Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The mote in God's eye
    Posts
    12,461
    Blog Entries
    59


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    I still have a 500 Cruzados Novos bill from the days when Brazil had 1,000% inflation. They actually stamped three zeros on bills at some point. Worth a tiny fraction of a penny now.
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Why not use a bet progression?
    By Nogumby in forum The Disadvantage Forum
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 12-22-2012, 03:49 AM
  2. M.: Don: Betting Progression
    By M. in forum Main Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-30-2002, 02:39 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

About Blackjack: The Forum

BJTF is an advantage player site based on the principles of comity. That is, civil and considerate behavior for the mutual benefit of all involved. The goal of advantage play is the legal extraction of funds from gaming establishments by gaining a mathematic advantage and developing the skills required to use that advantage. To maximize our success, it is important to understand that we are all on the same side. Personal conflicts simply get in the way of our goals.