Martingale WSEX Blackjack $500 --> $1,000,000

anyone see the 2+2 thread with the guy that had $500 in his WSEX account and was gonna go $1 martingale until he wins $1,000,000 or busto? Pretty funny.

I think an hour or two in he realized that he might lose a shitload and decided to go back to $1 if he lost his $64 bet.

The funny part is how when the thread started everyone bashing his stupid theory....but as the guy went up $100, $200, $500, etc. People knew it was stupid but started rooting for the guy. Now, this guy wasn't smart, he quit up a few hundred when he lost by splitting a 20? WTF? I want a mad baller on here to give us play-by-play using a better strategy.


In case anyone wants to read through 10-15 pages of comments
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthread.php?t=190481

I'm reading the thread now, shdw01. It was my 1st time to log into 2+2 in over a year as I wanted to change the thread setting to 100 posts per page to be easier to read. Only 3 pages that way, LOL.

Anyway, I already have an opinion about this as you can imagine. Will share as I finish reading that thread...

* CalvinTy

I know exactly your thoughts.

start with an $.80 bet, if it loses, $1.60, $3.20 and so on....

when you win, $.20 bet and if you lose $.40, $.80 and so on.

or was it 40%-20%-40%...damn my memory

Just a guess but I think this is kind of how it works....your system without juice....the kinks are the DD/Split factors....they are kinks cause those options I believe are player advantage and should not be ignored for the sake of money management

Done reading the thread, but it turned out to be a bad thread when the OP blew it on poker, which was nothing to do with the BJ thread.

Grins, you are remembering the MM system that I still use; essentially this series format: 2x,x,2x. So yes, it is like a 0.80 unit bet when betting on the combined Outsides bet amounts (2x+2x = 4x). Remember that after a loss, the loss amount is spread 1/3 to all three parts.

I went on a long losing streak in sportsbetting last fall and again at the beginning of the year but I can't believe that in recent weeks after some nice wins, I essentially am back even from last fall. I learned to be more aggressive as I'm usually ultra conservative in going deep into a series. The key is "when picking an amount for your unit, you go down that by half or more." Really. This allows me to go 4 or 5 deep instead of ONLY 3 deep, which is more realistic given the mathematics involved. I still have never wagered 10 units as my highest was limited to less than 5 units. I finally am more flexible with 5-8 units if I have the right bankroll at the specific book.

The BJ idea--- I have done the normal martingaling and flat-betting and progressive betting. Ironically, I find flat-betting to be the best return even if you are introducing tons of variance.

That 2+2 thread was missing one summary statement:

"across millions of BJ $1 bets, playing optimal basic strategy, with house advantage of around 0.5%--- for every $100 wagered, you are essentially giving up 50 cents every play."

I had done flat-betting whenever I was bonus clearing. Even when I'm not on a bonus, I'd bet so small -- the table minimum-- regardless of my BR and maintain that for a number of hands (1K hands is probably too small). I try to find a time where I'm up a number of "bets" and then increase to $2 bets for the next 1K hands or whatever number I hit when I'm at + xx bets. That strategy is just another fallible one but it's what I do if I play BJ, which I haven't done in ages.

* CalvinTy

if blackjack is 0.5% house edge vs. 5% house edge at most books...wouldn't the calvin MM system apply much better in blackjack?

in my no-juice-easy-calculation world.....

$100 unit example

Bet one - $80
Bet two - $134 ($214 total at risk)
Bet three - $224 (438 total at risk)
Bet four - $375 (813 total at risk)
Bet five - $627 (1440 total at risk)
Bet six - $1047

these are provided you lose....but it sounds like after bet five, you either reset or go to the same bet adjustment that is still fuzzy (I think cause it is bettors discretion)

It looks ugly, but for a complete failed system (reset time), 14.4 units isn't too bad. Although 5 game losing streak is very easy for me.

The last few times I played BJ, I had used a BJ tracking program found online. I saw that I think my highest "non-win" bets streak was 17 (including pushes) and that I remember my highest "non-loss" bets streak was 13 (remembering this well; went 12 wins and 1 push). Flat betting, I lost only $17 during that worst losing streak at $1 per bet (no double-downs during that span, I guess). I *still* managed to come out of that "session" in profit, and this was still with $1 bet all the way! I just rode out the variance even though I know I quit when I was at a "peak".

No modified MM system like the one I use would be realistic or possible for BJ. It's because "too much of the original bet lost" is added to the next bet. As you gave an example, even at +100/even odds, by the 6th bet, we are talking about a 10.4 unit bet on *only* the 6th BJ bet. Not good when 10+ streaks are easily possible in BJ.

The modified MM system's problem is how the loss from previous bet amount to 67% of that bet (adding 33% to each Outside bet to the next bet). That bankrupts anyone in the short run. With sportsbetting, you know you go through small losing streak, but if you go 10 straight losses, you shouldn't be betting until you figure out why it's happening.

* CalvinTy

If I had to play a martingaling strategy, I probably would do a similar thread on here like I did for a very short time last fall, a "survivor" style of betting with a capped level.

(all amounts to win regardless of juice; next amount should be equal to the original $1 risked + amount won so far; example below presumes +101 like Matchbook-style & taking 1% commission for baseball games won)

0-0 $1; wins the original $1 bet
1-0 $2 (original $1 + $1 profit)
2-0 $4 (original $1 + $1+$2 profits)
3-0 $8 (original $1 + $1+$2+$4 profits)
4-0 $16
5-0 $32; wins; stop here for a 6-0 run of $31 bucks.

Here, this is where I'd stop and play this series all over again. My attitude is that in sportsbetting (still not in BJ because not much control of your bet itself), you hope to find yourself on a 6-0 run once every 10 or even 20 times around. As long as you get the next $31 bucks profit before losing on the next 30 $1 attempts to reach 6 wins, then you are making SOME money, whoopie.

Example:

Attempt #1: WWWWWW (you go 6-0; wins $31)
#2: WWL (lost $1)
#3: L (lost $1)
#4: WWWWL (lost $1)
#5: WL (lost $1)
#6: L (lost $1)
#7: WWL (lost $1)
#8: WWWL (lost $1)
#9: L (lost $1)
#10: WL (lost $1)
#11: WL (lost $1)
#12: WWWWWW (you go 6-0 again; you win another $31 but lost $10 in the 2nd go-around try so your net profit is $21 for this 2nd go-around)

So after 12 attempts, you have a profit of $52. I realize this is a dream anyway. We are talking about having to have a record of 26-10 in that example at 1 unit each (but normal betting would have been only profit of $16; more than 3x less).

The motormouth Calvin in action! :toast:

* CalvinTy

with this example, you win $62, lose $10 for a net of $52.

your record is 26-10 over the span (which seems tough)....you have:
an 8, 4, 2, 3, and 6game winning streak, with only 3 2-game losing streaks.


Why not just play 6-team parlays that $63 (double your $31) for 6-0? Then you will have a net profit of $63+$63-$10 = $116

shdw01 said:

Why not just play 6-team parlays that $63 (double your $31) for 6-0? Then you will have a net profit of $63+$63-$10 = $116

Click to expand...

Come to think of it, you are right. Regardless of whether the bets are done sequentially or all-at-once, the goal is to have 6 W's. So the 6-team parlay paying much better odds would be the answer.

It's probably better to play a parlay like this (if someone has the control not to play too many parlays) because with one base unit, betting 16 units for the final "leg" can be too much to handle. Might as well as select 6 potential selections all-at-once for a 63-1 payout instead.

I guess people don't do much of this because it can get bored losing 40-50 of those 6-team parlays without cashing.

* CalvinTy

On peut faire sauter la banque. Regardez ici:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Wells_(gambler)