There's two sources for the rice/wheat 'chessboard' problem, in the one from 1256 the story is attributed to the inventor of chess who asked for that in payment from the monarch for inventing the game. They accepted assuming it would be a meager amount. I'm sure I heard a third one on the radio the other day but can't remember it, I think that one went back to the mid 5th century. Definitely before YT thoughCallumPerry wrote: ↑Thu Oct 11, 2018 6:29 pmI've seen the rice on a chessboard example before, it was in a daft YT cartoon that showed how a prisoner escaped with his life by tricking the queen into a bet she could never win or something like that; one of these stupid pub bet vids.
Another Stupid Martingale Question
- ShaunWhite
- Posts: 9731
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
- ShaunWhite
- Posts: 9731
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
Or he became a high ranking advisor apparently.....
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheat_a ... rd_problem
This thread has turned into "In our time" (the radio prog not the book obv)
I bet he was crap at chess!ShaunWhite wrote: ↑Thu Oct 11, 2018 10:27 pm
Or he became a high ranking advisor apparently.....
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheat_a ... rd_problem
This thread has turned into "In our time" (the radio prog not the book obv)
Ask a question about the Martingale and it's not surprising members quickly get bored of the discussion.
Thanks for all the esoteric philosophy folks!!
Back to the martingale stupidity and ignorance question, let us assume that statistically, my trading strategy had a 66% success rate and that on any trading day I was only prepared to lose 2% of my trading bank, if I doubled up on loss days, how long until I go broke?
Back to the martingale stupidity and ignorance question, let us assume that statistically, my trading strategy had a 66% success rate and that on any trading day I was only prepared to lose 2% of my trading bank, if I doubled up on loss days, how long until I go broke?
- ShaunWhite
- Posts: 9731
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_ruin
If you can figure out out the maths I think the answer is in here somewhere
If you can figure out out the maths I think the answer is in here somewhere
Depends what you mean by "prepared to lose 2%". If you mean prepared to risk 2%, you would never hit zero as you would always have 98% of your bank left, but once you're down to 50p you wouldn't be able to stake less than 2%.MugPunter wrote: ↑Thu Oct 11, 2018 11:44 pmThanks for all the esoteric philosophy folks!!
Back to the martingale stupidity and ignorance question, let us assume that statistically, my trading strategy had a 66% success rate and that on any trading day I was only prepared to lose 2% of my trading bank, if I doubled up on loss days, how long until I go broke?
A 66% strike-rate doesn't tell us anything - it depends on the amounts you win and lose.
This is the one the OP requires.ShaunWhite wrote: ↑Thu Oct 11, 2018 11:53 pmhttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_ruin
If you can figure out out the maths I think the answer is in here somewhere
Martingale (betting system)
I'm no mathematician but I understood this paper and thought it's well explained.
I think the Bet Angel site is infested with a virus that has mutated and jumped the bridge to humans. Earlier today we had a member asking how to make money from betting without going to the trouble of placing bets, and now we have a member who wants advice on how to lose money and how quickly it can be done!!!!
just press F9 for updatesMugPunter wrote: ↑Thu Oct 11, 2018 11:44 pmThanks for all the esoteric philosophy folks!!
Back to the martingale stupidity and ignorance question, let us assume that statistically, my trading strategy had a 66% success rate and that on any trading day I was only prepared to lose 2% of my trading bank, if I doubled up on loss days, how long until I go broke?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Thanks Gutuami, nice sheet!!! Everytime martingale is mentioned the Betangel police come charging out with trudgeon in hand, but I guess they're in the business of selling software subscriptions.gutuami wrote: ↑Fri Oct 12, 2018 1:03 amjust press F9 for updatesMugPunter wrote: ↑Thu Oct 11, 2018 11:44 pmThanks for all the esoteric philosophy folks!!
Back to the martingale stupidity and ignorance question, let us assume that statistically, my trading strategy had a 66% success rate and that on any trading day I was only prepared to lose 2% of my trading bank, if I doubled up on loss days, how long until I go broke?
Everybody who replied to your post is a member of this forum, not Betangel. We're not in the business of selling software subscriptions
- ShaunWhite
- Posts: 9731
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
It looks even worse when you factor in the commission.
btw +1 on Derek's comment, I'm nothing to do with BA either.
Not 'police', just the normal concern any person would have if they saw someone who's just about to jump off a bridge.
My take on martingales and such 'systems' is that if hundereds of thousands of people have spent hundreds of years studying gambling (lets say a million man years), and martingales still have a bad reputation, then my few grey cells aren't going to find a magic way to make it work. Ditto every other hair-brained, over-simplified, get rich easy scheme that every new gambler thinks they've discovered, but was actually disproven about 500 years ago.
Thanks for bringing out the cudgel again, did you take the time to look at Gutuami's spread sheet or read Derek's link which included Anit-martingale?ShaunWhite wrote: ↑Fri Oct 12, 2018 4:37 amIt looks even worse when you factor in the commission.
btw +1 on Derek's comment, I'm nothing to do with BA either.
Not 'police', just the normal concern any person would have if they saw someone who's just about to jump off a bridge.
My take on martingales and such 'systems' is that if hundereds of thousands of people have spent hundreds of years studying gambling (lets say a million man years), and martingales still have a bad reputation, then my few grey cells aren't going to find a magic way to make it work. Ditto every other hair-brained, over-simplified, get rich easy scheme that every new gambler thinks they've discovered, but was actually disproven about 500 years ago.