The general view of implementing martingale staking is accepted as a high risk, bank busting approach. However, The Silk Run has seemed to have found a way of using martingale staking in a "controlled" approach and incorporated dutching into the mix too. (maybe at micro stakes with a write off element)
The bit about being told/taught comes across a little high and mighty. We can only share our thoughts and let others make their own minds up.
My view is a staking plan is best when increasing stakes from a profitable bank and not chasing. The emotions are then in control.
You either (W)in or you (L)earn...there is no such thing as (L)ose.
Is little Acorns genuine or a blag!?
For a while now, I've believed that Peter and Dallas should put a gold star (or something to that effect) next to the posters who have proven to BA they pay PCwearthefoxhat wrote: ↑Thu Aug 25, 2022 11:34 amThe bit about being told/taught comes across a little high and mighty. We can only share our thoughts and let others make their own minds up.
I know there's a risk that the forum would become a 'them & us' scenario, but it would certainly help identify those who know how to trade, and not just talk a good game
- ShaunWhite
- Posts: 9731
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
wearthefoxhat wrote: ↑Thu Aug 25, 2022 11:34 amThe bit about being told/taught comes across a little high and mighty. We can only share our thoughts and let others make their own minds up.
You can have your own opinion but you can't have your own facts. Mathematically there's no edge in staking plans. Does Kelly have an 'if I lost' element.
Yep with microstaking you might avoid the 1000yr case but who want to win micro amounts?
- The Silk Run
- Posts: 921
- Joined: Mon May 14, 2018 12:53 am
- Location: United Kingdom
How patronising is that !!!LeTiss wrote: ↑Thu Aug 25, 2022 11:56 amFor a while now, I've believed that Peter and Dallas should put a gold star (or something to that effect) next to the posters who have proven to BA they pay PCwearthefoxhat wrote: ↑Thu Aug 25, 2022 11:34 amThe bit about being told/taught comes across a little high and mighty. We can only share our thoughts and let others make their own minds up.
I know there's a risk that the forum would become a 'them & us' scenario, but it would certainly help identify those who know how to trade, and not just talk a good game
I don't pay premium charge as I run multiple proxy accounts that are designed for churning and to avoid the premium charges.
Their seems to be this misconception that all gamblers are mugs, which is very far from the truth, and somewhat naive.
We have all the available tools, plus more than what a professional sports trader has. And now how to utilise them.
Personally, I think sports trading falls into the realms of gambling anyway. Because most don't understand the concept, and most don't profit.
- The Silk Run
- Posts: 921
- Joined: Mon May 14, 2018 12:53 am
- Location: United Kingdom
It was an interesting topic, and debate. But, as often happens the snowflakes have to have their say ....
- ShaunWhite
- Posts: 9731
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
That's splitting hairs, I 'pay' PC but like you that's a £0 bill. I think you know what he means.The Silk Run wrote: ↑Thu Aug 25, 2022 12:43 pmHow patronising is that !!!
I don't pay premium charge as I run multiple proxy accounts that are designed for churning and to avoid the premium charges.
- wearthefoxhat
- Posts: 3221
- Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2018 9:55 am
Personally, I don't need or look for validation.LeTiss wrote: ↑Thu Aug 25, 2022 11:56 amFor a while now, I've believed that Peter and Dallas should put a gold star (or something to that effect) next to the posters who have proven to BA they pay PCwearthefoxhat wrote: ↑Thu Aug 25, 2022 11:34 amThe bit about being told/taught comes across a little high and mighty. We can only share our thoughts and let others make their own minds up.
I know there's a risk that the forum would become a 'them & us' scenario, but it would certainly help identify those who know how to trade, and not just talk a good game
The gold star idea is alright, but it doesn't mean that the gold star poster(s) would know more than others not on PC who are likely to be the next PC generation coming through.
I'm content to post up and reply to ideas/strategies that are interesting ones for general discussion. I've even given away bots and free info that has taken time to research, even got accused of trying to gain kudos from others on the forum for doing so
I remember an old forum that was alive with posters swapping/sharing methods and systems, some completely useless of course, but it was thought provoking and a good craic along the way. It became defunct when the owner tried to cash in with a private service and in the process ripped off a few along the way. The point being, this forum also has a few members more than willing to post up and give info away, it's just a question of sifting through it and finding what's relevant to you.
- wearthefoxhat
- Posts: 3221
- Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2018 9:55 am
Have heard the term "snowflake" a few times but never really bothered to find out what it really means....interesting...The Silk Run wrote: ↑Thu Aug 25, 2022 12:51 pmIt was an interesting topic, and debate. But, as often happens the snowflakes have to have their say ....
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
I personally think that the best way to deal with Martingale/loss recovery type staking plans is to just ignore the post and hope it fades away due to lack of response. Le Tiss jumped in top post, page 3. Here we are 2 pages later with no contribution to the actual post title and just bickering about nothing really. He made a valid point but I doubt it will make any difference.
-
- Posts: 260
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 12:10 am
- Location: Ballygarvan,Cork Ireland T12D2VR
- Contact:
It seems like you cant have contrary views without getting strident opposition. I dont think anybody posts with nefarious intent. Although i was thinking of setting up this investment company called rope-a-dope services Inc.
- Crazyskier
- Posts: 1167
- Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2016 6:36 pm
Loss recovery can only ever work long term if both the bank size and liquidity are massive enough to cover the inevitable long losing runs.
Like Minnie Lai and others, I also have some high-frequency dogs strategies that involve increased stakes after loss (to a preset stop-loss point), that have proved moderately profitable over several years. All of this talk of being ''doomed to failure'' when increasing stakes after loss are not always accurate, given the right preset boundaries and discipline. It's certainly not for the faint-hearted, but there seem to be a lot of shutting down of debate on the matter - and that's never a good thing in my book.
CS
Like Minnie Lai and others, I also have some high-frequency dogs strategies that involve increased stakes after loss (to a preset stop-loss point), that have proved moderately profitable over several years. All of this talk of being ''doomed to failure'' when increasing stakes after loss are not always accurate, given the right preset boundaries and discipline. It's certainly not for the faint-hearted, but there seem to be a lot of shutting down of debate on the matter - and that's never a good thing in my book.
CS
-
- Posts: 4327
- Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 12:50 pm
I wouldn't doubt you or Minnie, I've always found you both to be straight shooters but you guys aren't talking about Martingale in its basic form but some kind of staking plan that has elements of it that seems to work for you. Thats probably where the confusion lies and why these kind of threads can go round in circles. If somebody is thinking of exploring MG and read your posts then they'll take out of it what they want which is that it works but they ignore the nuance of what you're saying. Not your fault but their own biases getting in the way.Crazyskier wrote: ↑Fri Aug 26, 2022 10:51 amLoss recovery can only ever work long term if both the bank size and liquidity are massive enough to cover the inevitable long losing runs.
Like Minnie Lai and others, I also have some high-frequency dogs strategies that involve increased stakes after loss (to a preset stop-loss point), that have proved moderately profitable over several years. All of this talk of being ''doomed to failure'' when increasing stakes after loss are not always accurate, given the right preset boundaries and discipline. It's certainly not for the faint-hearted, but there seem to be a lot of shutting down of debate on the matter - and that's never a good thing in my book.
CS
I think if you are on either side of an argument all you can do is state facts, but you can't convince others through argument. You just have to trust that others, eventually, see your point.
Despite trading for over two decades people still regularly argue with me, even if I give them a specific answer to a problem that has made me a lot of money. So I've just come to accept that a difference of opinion is what makes a market and ultimately you are judged by the market in terms of your long term profit and loss. That tells you everything you need to know.
Despite trading for over two decades people still regularly argue with me, even if I give them a specific answer to a problem that has made me a lot of money. So I've just come to accept that a difference of opinion is what makes a market and ultimately you are judged by the market in terms of your long term profit and loss. That tells you everything you need to know.
It's not just the risk of going bust that makes Martingale systems foolhardy, it's increasing stakes for no other purpose than recovering losses. Have you made a comparison between your profit on turnover and what it would have been to level stakes?Crazyskier wrote: ↑Fri Aug 26, 2022 10:51 amLoss recovery can only ever work long term if both the bank size and liquidity are massive enough to cover the inevitable long losing runs.
Like Minnie Lai and others, I also have some high-frequency dogs strategies that involve increased stakes after loss (to a preset stop-loss point), that have proved moderately profitable over several years. All of this talk of being ''doomed to failure'' when increasing stakes after loss are not always accurate, given the right preset boundaries and discipline. It's certainly not for the faint-hearted, but there seem to be a lot of shutting down of debate on the matter - and that's never a good thing in my book.
CS
- ShaunWhite
- Posts: 9731
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
It's not just the risk of bankrupcy, imo it's the way it limits your gains.Crazyskier wrote: ↑Fri Aug 26, 2022 10:51 am. All of this talk of being ''doomed to failure'' when increasing stakes after loss are not always accurate, given the right preset boundaries and discipline. It's certainly not for the faint-hearted, but there seem to be a lot of shutting down of debate on the matter - and that's never a good thing in my book.
In the interest of debate, What's your starting stake? What do you stand to gain from each cycle? And as Derek has said, what's the actual difference between your staking plan and level staking?
Are you able to sell the concept with some facts rather than expecting people to simply believe it?