Martingale Revisited

[johnsheppard]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTg0mqxuGeA

See look...this guys got 41,000 views, and he's talking about some other martingale maths stuff that makes my brain hurt even more...and he's writing on a whiteboard...

I'm sure there's money to be made here..

[Emmson]

I typed *Martingale* into the search engine on here and it came up with 34 pages of results.


search.php?st=0&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&keywords=martingale

It never goes away.

[Derek27]

For years I've been calling a Martingale a Martindale...no wonder I haven't made it rich

How do you guys decide what the maximum stake a market can take? e.g. throwing a $10,000 stake on a monday race (after your 15th straight loss)...is gonna throw a spanner in the works....if you're using a martindale....I mean martingale...

I've seen a very funny video (although it wasn't intended to be) of somebody doing a Martingale on roulette. He lost £10, £20, £40 and then £80. He got a winner next time but the maximum stake was £100.

[Derek27]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTg0mqxuGeA

See look...this guys got 41,000 views, and he's talking about some other martingale maths stuff that makes my brain hurt even more...and he's writing on a whiteboard...

I'm sure there's money to be made here..

I'm glad he wasn't my maths teacher - didn't have a clue what he was talking about. By the way, that was a greenboard. They replaced blackboards in the late 70s.

[johnsheppard]

I'm glad he wasn't my maths teacher - didn't have a clue what he was talking about. By the way, that was a greenboard. They replaced blackboards in the late 70s.

Oddly enough he has the same manorisms as my secondary school math's teacher....Mr Green....I have fond memories of him because he was so disillusioned with his job. Hundreds of kids that don't give a crap about maths would sorta do that to ya....

But as aside, I didn't have a clue either, but then I watched his his next video...on Brownian motion...that's actually sorta interesting...except that now I don't know who I am or where I live...plus I am drunk (not really)...Then I started googling stuff and found this...
https://medium.com/cantors-paradise/bro ... 5f02204b14

Now having blown a whole hour, I better get back to do what I was doing before...

[firlandsfarm]

I've never understood why Fibonacci has so many followers especially in the City … what is the mathematical basis? To me it's just a random sequence.

https://adamhgrimes.com/fibonacci-fibs/
https://adamhgrimes.com/fibonacci-thinking-deeper/
https://adamhgrimes.com/testing-fibonaccis-12/
https://adamhgrimes.com/fibonacci-conclusions-22/
https://adamhgrimes.com/whats-wrong-fibonacci/

.. athough maybe a bit off topic, cos he's lookin' at it as a signal rather than a staking method. But still interesting reads imho. Love his analysis style

Thanks Simon but I think you miss my point. I fully understand the numbers, how the sequence is derived and how they interrelate my reference to "random" was not in respect of a lack of understanding the sequence but that without a connection with the application of those numbers they are 'random' within context. Just about all fib articles refer to the same thing, every article feeding off the same proffered assumption of the previous. None of them give a mathematical reason why there should be a connection between fib and prices. It's like a financial version of the QWERTY keyboard! They are just a sequence of numbers. Why not use "e" and maybe extend it to "e" x "i" would be even more fascinating.

[Euler]

After about ten years of trading on Betfair I came to the conclusion people didn't want to profit, they wanted to win.

Winning is very different from profiting in the long term.

[Anbell]

After about ten years of trading on Betfair I came to the conclusion people didn't want to profit, they wanted to win.

Winning is very different from profiting in the long term.

Wise words.

I saw a similar sentiment recently re politics. "Group/Person X wants to beat the opposition. They don't want to win"

[Dr Ginhog]

Not sure about that one. Does anybody actually ever think about "the opposition" when they bet? Although some might have the motivation
to prove something rather than win which drives them on. What a waste of money that would be . I should know Im an expert on it.
I agree with Peter though and you might be in the category of wanting to make a profit when "you know the value of money" . Unfortunately
I personally am unable to put any major value on Money. There is something in our genetic makeup that makes us somewhat careful or frivolous with money. I can build quickly and lose quicker when Im gambling. When you know the value of money your less likely to gamble.
As regards Martingale for anybody who doubts it consider this. If you back say 2 selections in a race then you increase your win/loss
ratio, which in turn can reduce your sequence of losses making Martingale a little bit more viable. Of course you wont be making any money backing 1/5 shots so thats a factor. Also If back by Book % your using a single stake allowing you to provide a limit on that single stake.
There are questions that have been occupying my mind for some time and actually they are totally relevant to a winning strategy
(unless were delusional about that)
(1) If you have a winning strategy should you ever disclose it .- Shooting yourself in the foot maybe.
(2) Should you go for the jugular when you have a winning strategy - Make as much money as you can- Winning stategies may have unlimited capacity particularly preplay betting.
(3) What is Betfair;s view on big winners. Are they "Persona Non Grata" , not welcome and have the potential to be purged.
(4) If you independently find a strategy and somebody else uses it can Betfair claim colloaboration or pooling of accounts.
I cannot think of anything worse than being banned after having finally found a winning strategy.

[Derek27]

Not sure about that one. Does anybody actually ever think about "the opposition" when they bet? Although some might have the motivation
to prove something rather than win which drives them on. What a waste of money that would be . I should know Im an expert on it.
I agree with Peter though and you might be in the category of wanting to make a profit when "you know the value of money" . Unfortunately
I personally am unable to put any major value on Money. There is something in our genetic makeup that makes us somewhat careful or frivolous with money. I can build quickly and lose quicker when Im gambling. When you know the value of money your less likely to gamble.
As regards Martingale for anybody who doubts it consider this. If you back say 2 selections in a race then you increase your win/loss
ratio, which in turn can reduce your sequence of losses making Martingale a little bit more viable. Of course you wont be making any money backing 1/5 shots so thats a factor. Also If back by Book % your using a single stake allowing you to provide a limit on that single stake.
There are questions that have been occupying my mind for some time and actually they are totally relevant to a winning strategy
(unless were delusional about that)
(1) If you have a winning strategy should you ever disclose it .- Shooting yourself in the foot maybe.
(2) Should you go for the jugular when you have a winning strategy - Make as much money as you can- Winning stategies may have unlimited capacity particularly preplay betting.
(3) What is Betfair;s view on big winners. Are they "Persona Non Grata" , not welcome and have the potential to be purged.
(4) If you independently find a strategy and somebody else uses it can Betfair claim colloaboration or pooling of accounts.
I cannot think of anything worse than being banned after having finally found a winning strategy.

What happened to the spreadsheet/proof of how Martingale can work that you promised?

The overwhelming consensus from all the experienced and profitable traders on here is that you're wasting your time with the Martingale. Until you give that up you can forget all about finding a winning strategy. Backing two horses in a race reduces your losing runs but increases your stakes and therefore accelerates the money you lose. The answers to your questions:

(1) You should never disclose an objective winning strategy. If it's the framework of your thinking and requires skill in executing then it's no problem - it's like a grandmaster explaining in detail his thinking behind a move to a position that may never arise again.

(2) You should maximise any winning strategy but you can only trade what the market will take. That might involve £20 on low liquid markets.

(3) Betfair is not a bookie but an exchange, matching you with other customers. So they welcome big winners because they get more commission and premium charges.

(4) It's a possibility but extremely unlikely that somebody will independently find the same strategy that places exactly the same bets unless it's an obvious lay the field at 1.3 or something that dozens of people will be executing.

[firlandsfarm]

After about ten years of trading on Betfair I came to the conclusion people didn't want to profit, they wanted to win.

Winning is very different from profiting in the long term.

Agreed, the casual punter gets a kick out of a winning bet more than being just profitable long-term.

[Derek27]

After about ten years of trading on Betfair I came to the conclusion people didn't want to profit, they wanted to win.

Winning is very different from profiting in the long term.

Agreed, the casual punter gets a kick out of a winning bet more than being just profitable long-term.

There's nothing wrong with the casual punter having a bet on his team for a bit of excitement. The problem is when casual punters decide to take betting or trading seriously and has difficulty changing their attitude and approach to winning and profiting.

[Dr Ginhog]

I will be providing a spreadsheet er that replaces the original replacing it with a losing strategy . While I have not finished it because as you will see the formulas for the martingale part are ridiculously complicated and transforming it is more difficult than I expected and my other work overtook me. Its looking like maybe you can only prove it definitely works by showing it working using a winning strategy anyway. Will revert later.

[firlandsfarm]

Something I can't see has been mentioned so far is that 'pure Martingale' assumes odds of evens and that doesn't apply with the odds on most events so an adjustment needs to be made to the recovery portion of the stake (recovery amount/odds). If you start going odds-on the recovery stake grows exponentially but not just to a power of 2 but 3 or 4 and dutching can easily put you in an effective odds-on position. The thing is the more frequent a strategy wins then generally the lower the odds will be and the higher the recovery stake following a loss. If a strategy has a success rate well in excess of the probability implied by the odds then whoopie, why muck around with it and risk a bad martingale, just go for it and make some hay.

[Dr Ginhog]

Hi Firlandsfarm.
The question arises as follows If say you you back the fav in every race. Afaik you break even over the year. I think I tested and confirmed that before. Does that make your bet system equivalent to an alternate win and loss at evs for every race. As far as outcome it does.
Of course if you use martingale on an alterate win at ev loss at ev are you toast as you would be at varied wins/losses at varied odds. I
am sure if you back the fav in every race normally your losing races exceed you winning races by a great margin but you still break even.
I am not sure if my hypotetical means anything except that I agree that Martingale is wrongly conceived sometimes on the basis you outline
Not every race is backed at EV and it certainly does not not have alternate win/lose and its the sequential losses (if you allow them) that can break the bank. Not sure if all that makes sense.?