Martingale Strategy?

[FloridaPhil]

Discussion of this strategy is limited to the Recreational Forum.   If you want to talk about it, this is the place.Personally, I am not a big believer in Martingale.   However, everything works some of the time.  Betting bigger and bigger when you are losing seems counterproductive to me.   Sooner or later you will build up a loss so big no jackpot can ever overcome it.From my experience you are better off limiting your loses instead of compounding them.  Luck is what we are talking about here, not mathematics.   It seems to me when I am lucky, I'm lucky no matter what I do.  When I'm not I could bet the moon and lose it faster than you could say "green cheese".  The real trick is knowing in advance if you are going to be lucky or unlucky.  I have yet to figure that one out.Olds442jetaway has access to some interesting games at the Mohegan Sun.  They increment coin bets much higher than 5 coin max and they don't penalize you for betting short coin.  He seems to do well using Martingale on these games.   I don't know if he makes a long term profit, but I've seen his jackpots and they are bigger than most.  In the past he has reported annual losses big enough to cause me to consider jumping off a bridge.   Maybe he will chime in and give us his thoughts?The bigger question is,  Do you believe VP results are determined primarily by luck or something else?   I think luck has a bigger influence on long term VP results than some players want to admit.   If skill and math are the only determining factors, it seems to me there would be a lot more long term winners.   I believe mathematical odds and accuracy can accurately predict long term results, but it takes a lot longer than a players lifetime to have enough influence to be of any concrete value.  Obviously others  have different opinions.

[DAAnMAAn]

Obviously the main drawback to the martingale system is that sooner or later, that 5-6-7 loss in a row is coming and will negate the wins and then some. However, it can, most of the time, in the short term have you survive and make a small profit while everyone else loses their shirt. For example, I used to bet martingale on the craps pass line. Started with 10, then 20, then 40, then 80. Would stop at 80 and repeat one more time. If I won around 50 bucks, I would stop. I hardly ever lost doing this, but when I did, it was expensive! I know a lot of gamblers who bet some type of modified martingale and they claim yardage yadda. But the bottom line is, the odds don’t change no matter how one bets. But without totally trashing the martingale, it can be a way to gamble a long time.
P S have tried martingale for vp...it’s never worked for me. Pot shots? Different topic.

[Vman96]

How much luck factors in results depends on how you play, and how much you play. I think VP machines spit out random cards at all times, so in the shorter term, luck matters a lot. In the long term, luck is less of a factor.

If one Martingales though, luck will play a bigger factor because the bet size will tend to increase until the "comeback hit" occurs. And God forbid the times it never appears before you go broke, or reach the max bet level.

Compared to most, I am a very flat bettor. I rarely increase my stake based on winning/losing. My "luck" seems reasonable so far. In the last couple of years, it's definitely been "above average". Hope it stays that way!

[billryan]

I imagine if I started at a penny and doubled my bet each hand, I'd do okay most of the time, as my bigger bets would be manageable and eventually a win would get me even. Maybe some day when ?I'm old, I'll sit around sucking down beers and playing a penny a hand. Not any time soon though.

[Vman96]

I imagine if I started at a penny and doubled my bet each hand, I'd do okay most of the time, as my bigger bets would be manageable and eventually a win would get me even. Maybe some day when ?I'm old, I'll sit around sucking down beers and playing a penny a hand. Not any time soon though.

I tried to lose 100 hands in a row at a penny a hand. I quit at 50.

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=Vman96]How much luck factors in results depends on how you play, and how much
you play. I think VP machines spit out random cards at all times, so in
the shorter term, luck matters a lot. In the long term, luck is less of
a factor.
[/quote]I agree with this statement.  The next question is how many hands qualify as short and long term? 

[Vman96]

[quote=Vman96]How much luck factors in results depends on how you play, and how much
you play. I think VP machines spit out random cards at all times, so in
the shorter term, luck matters a lot. In the long term, luck is less of
a factor.
I agree with this statement.  The next question is how many hands qualify as short and long term?
[/QUOTE]

Unfortunately, it varies on a lot of factors. Some of which depend on individual playing behavior and tolerance of expected results.

For example, if you played 9/6 JoB perfectly and you wanted your Actual Return to be 99% likely to be within 0.01% of expected return. it would take millions and millions of hands. At the one million hand mark, every Royal hit is still worth 0.08% of your total return if you wager the same every hand.

But if you only needed to be 80% likely to be within 1% of the optimal return, it will take a lot fewer hands.

[FloridaPhil]

Great answer.   As you pointed out, the player's tolerance and behavior are factors in these calculations.   According to the math, if a player found a game with a positive edge including comps and incentives and played it 100% computer accurate, they would see a positive result.   I believe that.The problem is humans are not machines.  Who looks forward to going to a casino to play the same game like a computer for millions and millions of hands?   I tried it for years and my results were dismal.   It wasn't the fault of any math or strategy and the machines weren't rigged.  The problem was me.  Attempting to play like a computer wasn't fun, it was drudgery. Strategies like Martingale are "pot shots".  The player is not using a systemic approach, they are hoping the intersection of jackpot and increased wager can produce a jackpot big enough to make a profit.  CS was similar in some respects, except it advocated playing small which had the benefit of holding down the amount put at risk.  Both are more exciting than flat betting and both work "some of the time".How you play depends upon what you want for your casino dollars.  Some players like my wife can play the same game with the same bet all day and never waver.  I can't.  I go to the casino to "gamble" and that's what I want to do.   I play some VP.  I play some slots and I move around a lot.   Who comes out better?  As you would expect, her results are consistent and mine are all over the place.  If you put a calculator to it, we are both about the same long term.  Both of us enjoy what we do and a good time is had by all.Unless you can play positive games like a computer, you are going to pay to play long term.  By limiting your bets and managing your money on a daily basis you can enjoy casino gambling without undo stress.  You will have good days and you will have bad. Losing still hurts, but the pain will be worth the cost. 

[mdmick67]

Phil, check your in box, I sent you a message. Somethings can't be discussed on the forum 

[FloridaPhil]

Some topics can't be discussed?  I never discuss politics or religion with my customers.  I guess VP somehow falls in this category?  With all the terrible things going on in the world today, why does VP strategy create so much anger in some people?   If a professional wants to make his/her living banging away on a video poker machine, who cares?   More power to them, but do we all have to play the same way to keep from being crucified on some forum?   I think we need to hit the reset button and stop fighting over what cards we keep.   It's not going to change my lifestyle if I hit a royal flush.  If it does for you, you shouldn't be gambling in the first place.