Is a Martingale system effective in limited situations?

[BigGamesOnly]

A Martingale system is one in which you bet on a series of related events where if you lose the first bet you double your second bet. If you lose your first 2 bets then you bet 4 units on the third bet.

Normally this is not a good way to bet since it is inevitable that you will eventually lose several bets in a row, bankrupting your bankroll. But I came across a special circumstance that I feel may have benefitted from such a system.

I was reading the news where Minnesota Twins manager Ron Gardenhire was quoted as saying it would be great if his team could clinch the division at home. The Twins had 2 games left in the current home stand. I bet 5 units on that game (normally I bet 1 unit on each bet) that the Twins would win thinking that if they lost that game I would bet 8 units on the second game for a 3-unit profit. I thought it very unlikely that the Twins would lose both games since they were motivated to win against a team that was out of the playoffs at the end of a long baseball season.

Is this type of betting profitable in limited situations?

ps-The first bet of 5 units won. The Twins were able to celebrate the clinching of the division in front of their fans.

 

[Brazil4Worldcup2002]

My friend tried that in blackjack then hit the table limit....ouch for him.

I can see it being effective when you have thousands of dollars and are playing in a big bookie with basically unlimited limits (ladbrokes has £100,000 limit on football (soccer)). Although football is 3 way betting, one can always bet the asian line (2-way).

 

[TheGeneral+]

BigGamesOnly.

This theory get its laughs from many who have never put thought behind it. It can be used and used effectively when one has studied scenerios and situations.

If bets...

I have 4 games i like in a certain sport where the last 2 are not running on top of each other but later than 1 & 2. Odds are very strong that I will not go 0-4. If i lose 1 & 2 for a unit, then I will place an If bet on the opposite of my 3rd selection, placing enough units on game 4 to recoup all losses.

game 1 loses
game 2 loses
Bet game 3 to win & opposite of game 3 to win for small $ with larger units on game 4 to win. If i lose game 3, then i am liking my chances in game 4 alot.

If I go 0-4, sucks being me. I do not do this often, but it has been useful.

 

[JackDee]

well said.

i too like it in some limited situations. Also, it does not have to be martingale per se, but some percentile raise in the units bet. Of course sporting events are not interconnected, thats is if i lose a coule of over 2.5s on a team in soccer, that does not mean the third over on that team stands more chanches, but if i am any good in capping over/unders and i have figured out this team stands good chances for overs, then it's reasonable to expect some regression to the mean on the third game and an over, and hence it's reasonable too for me to raise my units on that third bet.

 

[pja101]

If you are lucky enough to have a money tree in the backyard which ensures an unlimited bankroll, the martingale system will work for you. If you don't, it won't.

General,
You said if you lose game 3, you like your chances in game 4 a lot. Why? Does losing three in a row increase your chances of hitting game 4? No, of course not. Using this system will be profitable more times than not, but those few times where you will actualy go 0-4, it'll kill you. The martingale system is just another name for "chasing". Stay away from it. Period.

 

[TheGeneral+]

Welcome to The Rx.com pja101.

 

[mhk]

Only way I have seen it win with some consistency is basically fading a team in the playoffs. Ex, there 8 teams left in the playoffs of whatever sport.. You feel no way does team "x" win the whole thing. You fade them, but what if they win round 1? All of a sudden you might have the equivalent of a -900 line in round 2.. I've never done it, but have seen it work several times.. The theory is you might not predict who will win the whole thing, but you can usually eliminate a couple of teams with little or no chance..

 

[mt]

PJA said it. Losing 3 in a row has no effect on the outcome of the fourth game. That would be chasing a loss, which often digs the hole deeper because desperation clouds judgement.

I think something which most people here would agree with is streaks. Most tend to run hot and cold. If you find yourself on a good streak, or have a particulary strong card, I think many tend to increase the size of their bets.

However, the BoDog newsletter last week discussing money management, cited something like such a scenario (increasing units after a win) as one of the primary ways to wipe an account.

I believe most here will agree that the best way to build your roll over time is consistent picks and discipline. Sure, we've all increased our wins by bulking up our units after a particulary good stretch, but we've also lost a lot faster doing the same thing.

 

[JackDee]

" Losing 3 in a row has no effect on the outcome of the fourth game."

This is correct, BUT a team underperforming, will eventually regress to its mean performance (which, and that's a provision here, you have capped correctly) and consequently, losing three in a row due to a team underperfoming does mean that a. they stand more chances not of winning but eventually regressing to the mean (that goes for a team overperforming) b. getting a better line because gamblers tend to overestimate teams either performing very well or very badly. Regression to the mean should NOT be confused with the due factor.

"I think something which most people here would agree with is streaks. Most tend to run hot and cold. If you find yourself on a good streak, or have a particulary strong card, I think many tend to increase the size of their bets."

This is a myth, and i for once have stopped increasing or decreasing units when "hot" or "cold". Actually what you said about events been independent and losing three in a row not affecting the outcome of your next wager, applies here too. Although there are streaks, in the sense of sequential wins or losses, being on a good streak does not actully raise the possibility of a win, because that is pretty much set according to your capping and betting prowess. A capper hitting on average 57% (provided the sample is large enough) will always pick with a probability of 57% percent regardless of being hot or cold, provided losing streaks or winning streaks do not affect him/her very much psychologically. It's similar to the hot hand research in basketball.

 

[BigGamesOnly]

I think the comments about a team losing 3 in a row has no effect on the 4th game have value. However, I can see where a team down 0-3 in the series would have more motivation to win the 4th game due to being eliminated than the team up 3-0 would be.

All this being said, I think most of you missed something about this scenario that perhaps I didn't make clear. That is, how likely a team would be to lose all 4 games of a series independent of the individual games.

I plan to do a study of the American Baseball World Series. That is a best-of-seven series with the team that wins 4 games being the winner of the series. I will do this because the results are easily obtainable and will report back here after doing the analysis.

 

[BigGamesOnly]

OK, here are the results of the study. Since 1903 there have been 99 World Series held (there wasn't one held in 1904).

Scenario:
-If a person were to bet $100 on the American League team and won the first game, that person would quit and be ahead $100.

-If the American League team lost the first game, that person would bet $200 on the American League team for the second game. If the American League team won the second game, the person would be ahead $100 and would quit.

-If the American League team lost the second game, that person would bet $400 on the American League team for the third game. If the American League team won the third game, the person would be ahead $100 and would quit.

-If the American League team lost the third game, that person would bet $800 on the American League team for the fourth game. If the American league team won the fourth game, the person would be ahead $100 and would quit.

-If the American League team were to lose all 4 games the person would be out $1,500.

The results:
The American League team lost all 4 games in the World Series 7 times resulting in a loss of $10,500 for those series ($1,500 x 7). In the 92 series where this method won the bettor would have won $9,200 resulting in a net loss of $1,300 ($9,200 - $10,500).

Results for the National League team are somewhat worse. The National League team lost all 4 games in the World Series 10 times. That would result in losing $15,000 while winning 89 times for $8,900 with a net loss of $6,100.

As I look over the history of this series there are times when using this system would result in the bettor being ahead. Perhaps this is not a large enough sample to be considered conclusive but it does illustrate how using this system does not guarantee a winning result.

I still believe there are certain situations where this system would work but it would take a decided advantage to know when it would work and I'm not sure how a person would decide that advantage. Perhaps if a person had inside information that a player was going to be benched for example then it might work.

 

[5teamparlay]

In the right situation one has a shot. Think one needs a max loss (x number of bets) and then one starts again. I used a system once for 20 winning sessions in a row at the dice table. Then the particular casino changed the layout.

 

[VegasVic]

The results:
The American League team lost all 4 games in the World Series 7 times resulting in a loss of $10,500 for those series ($1,500 x 7). In the 92 series where this method won the bettor would have won $9,200 resulting in a net loss of $1,300 ($9,200 - $10,500).

..and this, of course, is not considering any kind of odds that would be taken or laid.



In regard to the losing three bets and feeling that "I like my chances" for wager four. I've been gambling for a long time and have always found luck runs in streaks. I can't spell out any logical reason why this is but it's been a consistant from my experiences. If I have lost three sport bets in one day and have a fourth coming up I may still be convinced that I have the right side of that final wager but also have diminished confidence in it's outcome.

Any craps player will tell you the key to winning money is pressing when you're on a heater or walking away when you're not.

 

[quantumleap]

I was thinking about this with the Diamondbacks looking to clinch their Division against the Giants last night. If they didn't win last night they would be more motivated today. They did win last night so I didn't get in on that.