Australian
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 242 comments are related to the topic:
I will prove Martingale System's work
I will prove Martingale System's work
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 242
|
By:
No. Martingale is where your bet size is based on always winning your original bet goal. You may claim I am a pissant, but I don't need to get personal to consider myself right.
|
|
By:
You have so many contradictions in your posts it is laughable. The reality here is you don't even know what an odds on pop is. Yet you are trying to talk yourself up? Really?
Ignorance must really be bliss.... |
|
By:
Martin Gale--Benny Gale's long lost brother
   |
|
By:
SecondComing • September 27, 2012 1:16 PM BST
straight from wikipedia: A martingale is any of a class of betting strategies that originated from and were popular in 18th century France. The simplest of these strategies was designed for a game in which the gambler wins his stake if a coin comes up heads and loses it if the coin comes up tails. The strategy had the gambler double his bet after every loss, so that the first win would recover all previous losses plus win a profit equal to the original stake. Do like your quote though. In what way exactly does a bet of 10 dollars on the 3rd bet represent recovering all losses plus the original stake? HMMMMMMMMMM... Some people are just too stupid to even realise the point they are trying to make and if they are proving others right or themselves. Confusion must be a bitch? |
|
By:
perhaps the reason you've all failed at martingale is because you've all been so stupid to use the exact same bet size over and over again
Not sure any of us have failed. Don't think any have tried. Next time a bucks/birthday party ends up at Crown I will try the traditional martingale on roulette and report back. For the record I as well don't see this as martingale, the key element here is your selections. The staking plan doesn't hold much relevance as far as I am aware - might be wrong but you need to include stakes/odds of every bet to prove the theory. |
|
By:
I need a fly swatter, whiskers my long lost tipping friend, get me a fly swatter
 |
|
By:
i'll give you the run down, i'm trying to win 0.5% of my bank with each bet plus any losses incurred in any one run of losses
is that not martingale? |
|
By:
Fly Swatter
--I swapped my fly-swatter for some magic beans |
|
By:
Spoke with Benny Gale.. He says --yes--it was exactly how his brother Martin bet... Lasted 2 meetings.Never had a bet since..
 |
|
By:
I think its actually Chris Gale's brother whiskers?
|
|
By:
Chris Gale...
|
|
By:
chris gayle highest bat for WI in the upcoming t20 game
get on |
|
By:
|
|
By:
Dont watch 20/20--worst game invented...Completely devoid of skill...May as well call it tattscricket
 |
|
By:
SecondComing • September 27, 2012 1:40 PM BST
i'll give you the run down, i'm trying to win 0.5% of my bank with each bet plus any losses incurred in any one run of losses is that not martingale? Ok, so your example, assuming the 95 profit so far, being dollars as you have stated, with 500 starting bank, as you have stated. .5% of 500+ 100 (giving you 3.50 for free)..... is 3 dollars. So your stakes. 1 @ 4.10 **** it, copy paste job....... Now if we suggest that at 4.10, his opening goal for this sequence is to win 3 units. On the second bet, he now has 1 + 3 units as the goal so the bet would be 2.35. Then he needs to make up 6.35 units on the 3rd bet. 3rd bet would have been 3.74 So how the ****, do you get 10 dollar bet on your 3rd bet, using all of what you have said? Did you get a squirrel to make your spreadsheet? |
|
By:
if I say yes will you **** off?
I know what i'm doing, I couldn't care less what you're trying to prove |
|
By:
Are you forgetting who it is trying to prove something here? Certainly isn't me.
I WILL PROVE MARTINGALE SYSTEM'S WORK Good luck with that, and when will you start trying to prove it? |
|
By:
$100 to the good says i'm proving it
|
|
By:
No. It says perhaps you are 100 bucks in front on the punt.
Are you really as slow as you portray yourself? |
|
By:
Show us the maths in your "Martingale" system, or you are proving nothing. There is no maths that backs up your claims, anywhere, ever....
|
|
By:
Ok, so your example, assuming the 95 profit so far, being dollars as you have stated, with 500 starting bank, as you have stated.
.5% of 500+ 100 (giving you 3.50 for free)..... is 3 dollars. So your stakes. 1 @ 4.10 **** it, copy paste job....... Now if we suggest that at 4.10, his opening goal for this sequence is to win 3 units. On the second bet, he now has 1 + 3 units as the goal so the bet would be 2.35. Then he needs to make up 6.35 units on the 3rd bet. 3rd bet would have been 3.74 Start, and end if you like, showing how this isn't exactly what you have claimed is your goal, and show how you end with a 10 dollar bet on your 3rd bet. There is no martingale, you are betting at random. Old mate Secret Squirrel did your programming, and you are just claiming rubbish and putting numbers on the screen. You are no better than any other scammer out there. Save us all the headache and show us the link to your ebook. We all know it is coming. |
|
By:
hahaha ebook, I wouldn't know how to write one
i've stopped taking you seriously, I know what I am doing is martingale, what you think has became irrelevant to me, you were out to get me the second I made this thread, nothing has changed |
|
By:
i like his passion if anything else, can't deny his passion for racing , and excitment of a punting strategy,
obviously i'm only a new member can't and no punt against memmbers that long here, but arn't we over reacting a bit wit arguing about all this dude simply posted he wants to prove a system ? if he proves it kewl along the way no need for arguments? its the passion for racing that must respect, as the greatest sport in the world ever and always will be horse racing his passion is obviously horse racing , put point forward obviously no merit on my part as new member but i see no need for an argument of course always constructive of a guy that is simply passionate about horse racing and beleives and wants to prove a system lets not bring him down give him a go , |
|
By:
Stopped taking me seriously is simply a statement to show that you have no answers to the obvious questions.
Very simple question really in anybodies book, ebook or not. How, if what you are doing is betting to return .5% of your bank, and then all losses, can you possibly bet 10 dollars on your 3rd bet when the odds of your selections are 4.1, 2.7, 2.7? Just look up Secret Squirrels Spreadsheet, and the answer should be there. Either way, the answer you give will be wrong, simple as that. You can know whatever you like, but that doesn't make it correct in any way, shape, or form.... |
|
By:
You cannot prove a system that nobody knows what it is. Simple really? All he is doing is posting random numbers on a forum and making false claims. Where is the proof of anything?
I have more proof that Secret Squirrel will be moving into writing eBooks for his spreadsheets, than he has proving that Martingale is a legitimate system, let alone that he is even using that system.... |
|
By:
my god your head would look good coming out the right end of a meat mincer
|
|
By:
Way to prove your point? Or mine..... Hmmmm
|
|
By:
eBook coming soon to an email address near you.......
|
|
By:
why would I give you the time of day, your agenda is obvious, even if I proved anything to you you'd still question my integrity
|
|
By:
Simple question that you cannot answer......
|
|
By:
End of the day, you made a thread claiming you were going to prove something. I am simply asking you to do it. Surely not much to ask since that was your whole goal?
Don't worry about it though, it is expected on forums that morons come on and try to claim their manhood basing everything on bigger morons simply accepting it. Problem comes when somebody has the ability to not simply buy into bullshit. |
|
By:
it's a complicated piece of math but I will do my best here
with each losing bet the 0.5% adds into itself, so after 1 losing bets it's 1%, after 2 it's 1.5% then there is the carry over total which is the total of the combined stakes involved during a losing bet sequence, for example let's say there was 3 losing bets all of which 3.00 was staked in each one (would never happen just for an example though), then the carry over would be $9.00 you then add the 2 totals togethor and divide it by your next bet approx div (which has it's own chart to simplify things) -1, you round that total up and you get the stake for each bet so it's 0.5% bank + carry over stakes / approx div - 1 = stake for this $10 stake you can't find yourself to believe it's simple approx divs were 3.5, 2.5, 2.5 0.5 x 3 = 1.5% of bank which at that stage was 539.45 = 8.09 carry over stakes = 1.5 + 5 = 6.5 sum of 0.5% which adds into itself with each loss + carry over stakes = 8.09 + 6.5 = 14.59 so then it's 14.59 / approx div of 3rd bet which was 2.5 - 1 14.59 / 2.5 - 1 (1.50) = 9.72, then simply round it up and there's your magical figure |
|
By:
I do this not because I feel the need to explain myself to you but because I wish for others to see that my integrity is that of someone with good intentions, nothing scammy going on here, I post my tips, it's hard to post my stake because the odds fluctuate too much
|
|
By:
Exactly. Not Martingale at all.
|
|
By:
what happend right , is i posted on my thread my tips starting martingale thend second suggested a better way started a thread and your hammering him for it
to be honest he really didn't just decid going to get hammered for it i started it on my thread martingale |
|
By:
so give him a bit of a break in his defence he didnt just well he did but , well , i did say in my thread oh wat about martingale i think he got excited about it
and dont deserve to be hammered about it its racing lets all love it :) |
|
By:
|
|
By:
**** you, I explained myself, you can't even acknowledge the effort I made to make it perfectly understandable for you and many others
it is martingale by the way, the staking plan is far more complicated but the end is the still the same, betting to a percentage of your bank to gain profit with your stakes increasing after every loss |
|
By:
How can it be martingale but more complicated at the same time? It either is or isn't.
|
|
By:
It is a progressive staking system. No more, no less.
|