+ Register

[esoito]

This extract is for sports betting. 

It's taken from Frank Belanger's Bookie Buster

Forumites might find something of value -- a different perspective, perhaps.



If you use Martingale, it will eventually deteriorate your bankroll, despite the fact that you have
been accumulating steady 1 unit profits over some time.

If you limit the martingale to 3 to 5 steps in favorable situations, you can still
make profits without severely damaging your bankroll.

A 3 step Martingale risks 7 units and a 5 step Martingale risks 31 units (1 + 2 +
4 + 8 + 16).

However, there is a way to use the martingale at sports betting in
order to perform very well.

The trick is to use a pre-determined series of Win/Lose games.

If you have a pre-determined Win/Lose betting sequence of 5 steps
(say W, L, L, W, W) what are the chances that you will be right on all 5
bets?

The answer is 50% (or 1/2) multiplied 5 times by itself, or 1 in
32.

That means that if you tell yourself that for the next 5 bets you will be
betting W, L, L, W, W regardless of the outcomes of the games, there
is 1/32 probability that you will be hitting all your bets right.

This is a very low probability.

However, the opposite is also true, that the probability of hitting all
your 5 bets wrong is also 1 in 32.

That means, that if you use a pre-determined sequence of W, L, L, W, W, by using a 5 step Martingale
betting method, you have a 31/32 or97% chance that one of the 5 bets will hit right.

Now this is a very high probability.

One important thing that you should know is that it is not unlikely to
get the exact opposite pattern: L, W, W, L, L even if it will happen 3%
of the time.

The fact is, if you bet your pattern (W, L, L, W, W)
continuously, statistically you should hit the opposite pattern within
the next 32 bets.

The result would be the lost of all your winnings.
We don't want this to happen.

So, the strategy will be to change the pattern after every winning
sequence.

This way you will be attacking the next 5 bets, with an
equal probability of 97% winning chances from session to session.

[KingsRoulette]

Martingale always looks like a panacea but risking 31 units for gaining 1 unit is not a wise idea, irrespective of u use it for a fixed bet or randomise the series of bets, bet it on roulette, baccarat, craps, coin flipping or sports bet. It is one and same.

[esoito]

Martingale always looks like a panacea but risking 31 units for gaining 1 unit is not a wise idea, irrespective of u use it for a fixed bet or randomise the series of bets, bet it on roulette, baccarat, craps, coin flipping or sports bet. It is one and same.

It certainly works for sports betting.  Mr Belanger expands on the above quote, of course.

You would need to buy his book to get the full picture.

I use the strategy as part of a portfolio of profitable sports betting strategies.

[KingsRoulette]

Certainly is a wrong word. If it works for certain, you are the richest man on the earth too, for certain. There are thousands of betting options every day in sports bet. Start minting money.

[JohnLegend]

Martingale always looks like a panacea but risking 31 units for gaining 1 unit is not a wise idea, irrespective of u use it for a fixed bet or randomise the series of bets, bet it on roulette, baccarat, craps, coin flipping or sports bet. It is one and same.

Good points Esoito and Kingsroulette. For me a mild martingale is workable. And can be justified if the strikerate has the potential to overcome that you are risking.

Everyone by now knows PATTERN BREAKER has a minumum buy in of 7 UNITS. What amuses me is people will attack that three step Martingale. Then speak of riding out downturns of 300 plus units with their own methods of play.

You only have to think about that to realize the attitude makes no sesnse. I will only use a Martingale style progression if I feel its use is justified.

[KingsRoulette]

Good points Esoito and Kingsroulette. For me a mild martingale is workable. And can be justified if the strikerate has the potential to overcome that you are risking.

Everyone by now knows PATTERN BREAKER has a minumum buy in of 7 UNITS. What amuses me is people will attack that three step Martingale. Then speak of riding out downturns of 300 plus units with their own methods of play.

You only have to think about that to realize the attitude makes no sesnse. I will only use a Martingale style progression if I feel its use is justified.

7 units may be recovered with a dash of goodluck or average strike rate as JL said but 31 units loss will be irreparable.
 

[TwoCatSam]

Pardon me for saying this, but this idea---when it applies to roulette or back-a-rat---simply won't work.  I know; I tried it years ago

Any sequence you can think of is no different than any other sequence.  R R R R R  and R B R B R are exactly the same.  Now, I know nothing about sports betting and it might make a mint there. 

Sam

[esoito]

All please take note:

I've NOT stated anywhere I'm in favour of it for table games, nor should anyone attempt to pin that label on me..

[I'm not having a go at anyone -- I just want to clarify. OK?]


I have tried to stress the quote is OUT OF A BOOK FOR SPORTS BETTORS.


It's presented here for you to mull over.

Take from it what you will.


Let us not forget the name of this forum -- it has a wide application...not just to roulette...!

[KingsRoulette]

This Martingale and Grand Martingale type of progressions are proven failures. We should try something lesser harmful.

[Ralph]

This Martingale and Grand Martingale type of progressions are proven failures. We should try something lesser harmful.

If you are well informed sports betting has very low if any HE.   I would parly at 1.4 rate.

[JohnLegend]

This Martingale and Grand Martingale type of progressions are proven failures. We should try something lesser harmful.

I don't dismiss the use of a mild 2 or 3 step Marthingale. I think they can be very rewarding and powerful. I am totally against a suicidal Martingale. Like I and many others tried years ago.

Where you would wait for say 3 reds or blacks. Then using a 9 stepper 1,2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256

Betting you wouldn't see 12 reds or Blacks. You could win hundreds of times. I did, then get wiped out when that 12 was staring you in the face or even 10 reds peppered with a couple of ZEROS.