I have a theoretical question and I'd like to get the opinion of some of the "regulars" in this forum.
In a nutshell, is there ever a situation where you think the Martingale system would be profitable?
Now, before you criticize, let me explain. The Martingale system is a betting system where you double up your bet each time you lose so that you "win" back all your previous losses. It sounds great in theory, but in the real world it fails spectacularly. I know there are no casinos in the world where this system would work. The casinos have constraints on betting limits that make it impossible. However, I'm talking just theory. I'm not gonna run out to a casino and try to use this.
Here's the scenario. You're placing a bet and if you win, you double your money. You're allowed to bet any amount from $1 to $10,000 and you are allowed to stay and bet for as long as you want. Your odds of winning your bet is actually 47% so there is a noticable house edge. You start with a bankroll of $20,000 and you bet $1, doubling when you lose and going back to $1 bets when you win.
Assume that if you lose the $20,000, you'd be sad but not devastated. Yes, winning $1 at a time isn't a good way to make money, but this is theory, not real world.
Under these circumstances, would you play? If not, what would you change to make it worth it?
And for those of you wondering about trying this, please note that I AM NOT recommending the Martingale system for any real gambling in any real casino.
pdq2010-05-08T05:47:13Z
Favorite Answer
"Is there ever a situation where you think the Martingale system would be profitable?"
In a nutshell - yes. It would be profitable if you used it just 1 time, and only if you were lucky enough that it worked. There are a few (very few) people who have gone to casinos using something like this and have won. Then they've never played another casino game in their life. For these people, the Martingale System, or whatever system they used, worked like a charm.
If my life depended on making $500 at the roulette table one time, and I had a $20K bankroll, I might try the Martingale System. It would most likely work, too. When I got to $500, I would sigh a 'heavy sigh', then never do anything so foolish again in my life.
If you had to rely on the Martingale System for any long-term profit, then my answer is a resounding NO!
The website below shows a variety of iterations of 10,000 spins at the roulette table using the Martingale System. In the first 10,000 spins, the person gets up to $60,000 (starting with $10 bets) before losing a lot, but they STILL make a profit after 10,000 spins. However, that's the only time they make a profit. They do it another time and lose their bankroll after 100 spins! Then they run the whole 10,000 spins 10 times, then 100 times, then a million times! What's interesting is just how bad the Martingale System ends up working. It ends up losing much more than flat betting, which I don't understand exactly why it would.
There is no practical scenario where Martingale is profitable in the long run. You are always limited by a finite bankroll and finite table limits.
Martingale is a good way to win a little bit of money most of the time and lose a crapload of money every once in a while.
If you try Martingale with roulette, you will get around 30 spins per hour. You will win approximately 14 of these bets (~47%), so you will win $14 per hour most of the time (assuming there is no table limit). Once you lose 14 bets in a row, you won't have enough money to recover your losses. Losing 14 bets in a row is rare, but it will eventually happen (0.0138% probability of happening for every $1 cycle). Bet #: Bet Amount 1: 1 2: 2 3: 4 4: 8 5: 16 6: 32 7: 64 8: 128 9: 256 10: 512 11: 1024 12: 2048 13: 4096 14: 8192 15: 16384 <-- You won't have enough money to make this bet
Sure, everything is fine in theory. The Martingale system itself it fine, in theory... but you run into betting limits. If there were no betting limits in the casino, and you had infinite money, it would work just fine.
But if I had $20K, I wouldn't be playing for $1 at a time.
That's no different then when I download the on-line casino and can bet 10 cents on a hand or a spin. If I've got $2,000 in the account, the ratio of 10 cents to 2K is the same as $1 to 20K. I'm not going to do it, because I'm not going to waste my time playing 10 cents at a time. Could I show a profit, sure... but even if I can't specifically quantify how much my time is worth, it's worth more than 10 cents a hand.
Now, if the game was something that was really fun, and enjoyable... then I'm getting more entertainment value for my time... I don't mind the fact that my lifetime winnings of on-line poker is basically the identical amount to the amount of prize money I've won in 3 specific tournaments... meaning that I've broken even for every other thing I've played over the years, because I enjoy playing.
You didn't mention what this game is, but if as simple as rolling dice and winning 47% of the time, that's not a tremendous amount of stimulation.
EDIT: Sorry, doesn't look like anyone else read past "Martingale System" before posting their answers.
Martingales have bankrupted more people than Iceland, and they will never work - the casino establishes a maximum bet for exactly this reason - you'll reach the limit pretty quickly on a losing streak. You also have the problem that even if you could bet up to the full twenty grand, you'd effectively be staking 20,000 to win a dollar back (you only ever win the basic bet with a martingale). Maybe there are people out there with the stones to pull that off, but I've never met one in more than 10 years as a casino professional.
There are a lot of people who seem to believe, against all evidence, that the casino offers a consistent income, if only you can find the right System. These people are called addicts, and they have paid my mortgage for years.
Roulette is at least as addictive as heroin, and plenty of players have ended up losing house/car/wife/kids after starting out doubling up small bets on a night out with their friends.
Steer clear of systems - gamble only for pleasure, not to win. If you go to a restaurant, you don't expect to come away richer - casinos are no different, and it isn't charity that pays for the fancy lights and the nce surroundings.
no its even worse for doubles split cause if u lost one of those u would have raise ur bet 4 or 8 x. Its not a great system but if u must use it best aplied to don't pass in craps or player bet in baccarat cause those best even money bets in casino except if u can find a a single wheel with surrender or en prison which i have never seen but red are available in Europe. Those bets all under 2% house edge Anti martingale could work if cimbined with counting. u raise ur bet after u won if there alot of faces and aces left in deck. This allows u to bet the casinos' money when the odds favor u. I have been moderately succesful with this appraoach Basic counting track cards in ur head 2-6 add1 789 no chanfe 10,j,q,k,a -1 the higher the count the better ur chances also high counts make insurance a god bet. Fewer decks are better contant shufflers are to be avoided. Also if u get cut card thin 2 win. Also time braks to lv table during low counts can save u money 2. Tiping dealers often slows them down and gets them to let u skip routine decision like 20 ec and gives u more time to count. Good luck have fun