Martingale Revisited

[to75ne]

Nobody lives forever and Liverpool are Champions of England!

sad but true

[grindhog]

Oops you have broken thru finally. What the hell."The Earth is still spinning"

[Headless Chuck]

Having thrown the toys out of the pram Ive come back to confirm. MARTINGALE DOES NOT WORK! I had the opportunity to read all the posts
and nearly everbody in here knows more about Martingale than I do. I was not expecting that I would have to defend it and I found the
number of posts overwhelming and did not read most of them until now. Most of the posts were critical and some were possibly required
a response.I apologise to anybody that I insulted by appearing to ignore their questions to me.
In general I am not familiar with the way social media works (over 60 now) but do know that if you post something you should be able to defend it which I was not able to do. I have been gambling all my adult life and thankfully it has given me something good. A zen-like
emotional detachment that comes in very handy when you lose.
Of course what I have been doing is only a third cousin of Martingale twice removed but I really do not want to be involved in any further
discussions on it (as I cant defend it without showing it in action). Trumps snake oil - Hydroxyclorine all over again

Looking back, I don't think the system previously described by myself was actually Martingale as, although it did have a recovery element, it never went "all in" which is, frankly, lunacy.

It would be an interesting exercise to test run it for a while but alas it would require dedicated BF and BA accounts and I'm not that interested.

[Derek27]

I think it's time to let this thread fall by the wayside - until the next Martingale thread.

[burntheory]

I think it's time to let this thread fall by the wayside - until the next Martingale thread.

...which will need to be twice as long to give believers the chance to win an unwinnable arguement

[firlandsfarm]

Well we have a happy conclusion until, as Derek said, the next time! When the next time arises, and it will, I would suggest the protagonist's attention is drawn to "A grain of Wheat and a Chessboard" as the best example of Martingale staking. Ask them to come back with how much money would they need to fund the longest 'expected' losing run +1!

[jamesedwards]

I have an automation going that has a straight up 50/50 chance of winning in each event.

Currently I'm sitting at 15 losing markets in a row (and counting)!

Good job my name's not Martin Gale. If I was and had started at £1 to win £1 I'd be £32,767 in the hole and about to bet £32,768 to try and get to my original £1 profit target.

[jamesedwards]

Now 17(!!!) losing markets in a row.

I would now be £131,071 in the hole and about to bet £131,072 to try and get to my original £1 profit target.

This is why you never never never Martingale!

[MemphisFlash]

This is why you never never never Martingale!

at last someone with sense not to try recovery systems!!!

[firlandsfarm]

Now 17(!!!) losing markets in a row.

I would now be £131,071 in the hole and about to bet £131,072 to try and get to my original £1 profit target.

This is why you never never never Martingale!

Agreed, many (newbie) people just don't realise how quickly the stakes (pun intended! ) rise with every losing bet. Take the longest losing run by favourites since BSP began. After the 20:15 race at Chepstow on 16/08/2018 it was not until the 17:15 race at Dundalk the next day that a favourite won another race … that was 25 races later. And you would have had to resolve a dilemma before placing that last bet … which race? There was also a 17:15 at Nottingham that day! If you had chosen the favourite at Dundalk your stake would have been £1,605,364 and you would have won your £1. Your total stakes to win that £1 would have been £2,263,562! If you had chosen Nottingham your stake would have 'only' been £470,640 but you would have lost and needed a stake of £3,135,666 on the next race (Newmarket 17:25). Yes you would have won your £1 but in total you would have staked £4,264,505 Note: during this losing run 6 odds-on favourites lost!

For interest here is a list of the bets …

25LosingFavourites.png

Now tell yourself this a one off run of non-winning favourites? Well, yes, because it's the longest losing streak since BSP began but long losing runs are not that infrequent. Since BSP has been available (Dec 2007) there has been the following runs of favourites' losing sequences of 10 or more (where losses exceed £500 in the above example requiring another £283 to be bet on the next favourite) …

26 1
23 2
21 2
19 3
20 6
18 6
17 8
16 22
15 27
14 50
13 68
12 105
11 136
10 239

… so maybe not that infrequent, 675 occasions in about 12.75 years … that's more than 50 times per year on average!

If you are still thinking of Martingale go see a 'shrink' first!