Chase system for above average cappers? Good or bad?

[shdw01]

I know if we flip a coin, play roulette, blackjack, or anything else with a house edge, chase/martingale is only as good as how deep your pockets are. and when you think about table limits/sportsbook limits, to win long term is basically impossible.

What if you are a 55% capper? aren't you way better off utilizing a chase system where every win is +$? or do you think the same obstacles apply here?

 

[Defying]

Because of how it's been beaten into my head chase systems don't work, I've completely wrote them off.. However, I think if you can win at 55%, you could be extremely good with a chase system. I wish was more open minded in the past tbh.

However, I wouldn't go with a true martingale system, i'd have to stop after 5 losses max, and just reset.

 

[shdw01]

I agree with having a stop point. Having a limit with how much you can lose per "set" also allows for money management planning.


if you can hit at 55% you can win flat betting, but if you can increase your winning % by utilizing a chase, then why not? I don't really know cause I haven't (not sure I know how to) run the numbers

 

[Defying]

trying to win $100 per chase with standard -110 juice... Here's what you'd have at risk per leg

leg 1-110
leg 2-220
leg 3-473
leg 4-993
leg 5-2086

-3882 in a 5 game chase is what you could lose...

 

[shdw01]

trying to win $100 per chase with standard -110 juice... Here's what you'd have at risk per leg

leg 1-110
leg 2-220
leg 3-473
leg 4-993
leg 5-2086

-3882 in a 5 game chase is what you could lose...

that is the easy calc defy

but how often do you lose a 5 game chase when betting at a 50% rate? at a 55% rate?

 

[PatsFan1283]

There is only 1 way to win at gambling/speculation long-term

That is making +EV bets/investments/decisions

Everything else is hog wash....Progressive betting systems don't work. I think someone mentioned this in a similar thread to this just a few days ago.

Oh also chasing at 55% isn't much different than 50%. Bad variance will kill you either way, it will just come more often at 50%, but the end game largely the same.

 

[shdw01]

There is only 1 way to win at gambling/speculation long-term

That is making +EV bets/investments/decisions

Everything else is hog wash....Progressive betting systems don't work. I think someone mentioned this in a similar thread to this just a few days ago.

Oh also chasing at 55% isn't much different than 50%. Bad variance will kill you either way, it will just come more often at 50%, but the end game largely the same.

I agree with making +EV decisions.

However, I think it is hard to tell if progressive systems at 55% will kill, mainly because we would need a 55% win rate which isn't easy.

I have seen many chase systems win +units (on extremely low sample sizes) while not hitting anywhere near 55%....makes me wonder what happens if we can hit at that high %.


if you went chase system at 50% (minus vig) you should break even. I know that sounds like and obvious comment.....but it tells us how big the vig is and how the chase might not be the faulty party (variance has an argument)

 

[PatsFan1283]

I'm not really sure what the question is then?

If you bet and win 55% of the time and adjust your bet each time while keeping risk of ruin low then that is fine.

 

[slapshot]

http://www.therxforum.com/showthread.php?t=565315 ...youmean like this one Ace has since 2008

 

[PatsFan1283]

http://www.therxforum.com/showthread.php?t=565315 ...youmean like this one Ace has since 2008

is he just fucking around? that is obviously terrible logic

 

[slapshot]

is he just fucking around? that is obviously terrible logic

Nope chase is +$4,410 ...and all together+$21,905

 

[PatsFan1283]

Nope chase is +$4,410 ...and all together+$21,905

yeah cause he never lost 7 in a row in the time period

losing 7 in a row is easy though, doing what he did over a large sample size wouldn't end well

 

[shdw01]

I didn't go through all the pages but I saw 1st and last.....I don't know if he is flat betting but it looks like:

so he is hitting at 53.09% (much less than 55%) and :

chase at $10 wins him $4,410

flat betting $400 or $500 a game wins him $17,495

why I don't think this is comparable is because looking at page 1, losing 7 in a row costs him $1741 total in the chase system, If he loses 7 in a row at $450 (not sure $400 or $500 so splitting the diff) he loses $3,465 (essentially double).....this is not to mention the numbers don't make sense when I look at total record and total $

 

[shdw01]

yeah cause he never lost 7 in a row in the time period

losing 7 in a row is easy though, doing what he did over a large sample size wouldn't end well

he said he lost 7 in a row once.......495-1 (and he hit at 53.09%, at 55% he probably is 496-0)

 

[TyBounce]

Very few cappers that hit 55% do it by going 5-4 every 9 picks.

If you find somebody thats 55% over a hundred selections you can be assured that they've had winning and losing streaks of more than 5 games.

Its not going to be a consistent 55%.

 

[PatsFan1283]

Very few cappers that hit 55% do it by going 5-4 every 9 picks.

If you find somebody thats 55% over a hundred selections you can be assured that they've had winning and losing streaks of more than 5 games.

Its not going to be a consistent 55%.

If you simulated 55% over like 1k picks with binomial distribution, it wouldn't be profitable doing what he is doing. That is just way too aggressive doubling up each time...

You would actually lose a lot

Everytime it works you win 10-20, if it loses you lose 1700

 

[slapshot]

The side money 1741 varies in amount per playThe thing about a chase is you still need to be selective in plays or you will crash quickly

 

[PatsFan1283]

The side money 1741 varies in amount per playThe thing about a chase is you still need to be selective in plays or you will crash quickly

I think it is flat betting he says but either way, don't try it!

 

[shdw01]

Very few cappers that hit 55% do it by going 5-4 every 9 picks.

If you find somebody thats 55% over a hundred selections you can be assured that they've had winning and losing streaks of more than 5 games.

Its not going to be a consistent 55%.

in this scenario, every 9 picks you win 5 units vs win 1 unit flat betting.....

EV of .555 units every game bet vs. EV of .111 every game you bet on. you don't think that difference per game isn't enough to make up for the large amount of units you would lose on the chase? (diff units for different levels of chase)

 

[TyBounce]

If you simulated 55% over like 1k picks with binomial distribution, it wouldn't be profitable doing what he is doing. That is just way too aggressive doubling up each time...

You would actually lose a lot

Everytime it works you win 10-20, if it loses you lose 1700

I agree 100% , and a gambler/handicapper is not even going to have binomial distribution , its going to be streaky.

If you pick 1 game per day for 100 days and you end up 55-45 , your going to have had runs of 13-4 and 5-12. ...its not going to be evenly distibuted 55%.