Martingale (betting system)
Originally, martingale referred to a class of betting strategies 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. Since a gambler with infinite wealth will, with probability 1, eventually flip heads, the Martingale betting strategy was seen as a sure thing by those who advocated it. Of course, none of the gamblers in fact possessed infinite wealth, and the exponential growth of the bets would eventually bankrupt those who chose to use the Martingale. It is widely believed that casinos instituted betting limits specifically to stop Martingale players, but in reality the assumptions behind the strategy are unsound. Players using the Martingale system do not have any long-term mathematical advantage over any other betting system or even randomly placed bets.
Effect of varianceAs with any betting system, it sometimes happens that one achieves a better result than the expected negative return, by temporarily avoiding a losing streak. Furthermore, a straight string of losses is the only sequence of outcomes that results in a loss of money, so even when a player has lost the majority of his bets, he can still be ahead overall, since he always wins 1 unit when a bet wins, regardless of how many previous lossesIntuitive analysisWhen the expected value of the stopping time is finite (which is true in practice), the following argument explains why the betting system fails: Since expectation is linear, the expected value of a series of bets is just the sum of the expected value of each bet. Since in such games of chance the bets are independent, the expectation of each bet does not depend on whether you previously won or lost. In most casino games, the expected value of any individual bet is negative, so the sum of lots of negative numbers is also always going to be negative.
The martingale strategy fails even with unbounded stopping time, as long as there is a limit on earnings or on the bets (which are also true in practice)It is only with unbounded wealth, bets and time that the martingale strategy can succeed.
In plain English, this means that a player will either exceed the house betting limit after only a small series of losses; run out of money after a small series of losses; or will eventually have to leave the casino.
Mathematical analysisOne round of the idealized martingale without time or credit constraints can be formulated mathematically as follows. Let the coin tosses be represented by a sequence of independent random variables, each of which is equal to H with probability p, and T with probability q = 1 − p. Let N be time of appearance of the first H; in other words, , and XN = H. If the coin never shows H, we write . N is itself a random variable because it depends on the random outcomes of the coin tosses.
In the first N-1 coin tosses, the player following the martingale strategy loses 1,2,...,2N − 1 units, accumulating a total loss of 2N − 1. On the Nth toss, there is a win of 2N units, resulting in a net gain of 1 unit over the first N tosses. For example, suppose the first four coin tosses are T, T, T, H, making N=3. The bettor loses 1, 2, and 4 units on the first three tosses, for a total loss of 7 units, then wins 8 units on the fourth toss (X3), for a net gain of 1 unit. As long as the coin eventually shows heads, the betting player realizes a gain.
What is the probability that , i.e., that the coin never shows heads? Clearly it can be no greater than the probability that the first k tosses are all T; this probability is qk. Unless q = 1, the only nonnegative number less than or equal to qk for all values of k is zero. It follows that N is finite with probability 1; therefore with probability 1, the coin will eventually show heads and the bettor will realize a net gain of 1 unit.
This property of the idealized version of the martingale accounts for the attraction of the idea. In practice, the idealized version can only be approximated, for two reasons. Unlimited credit to finance possibly astronomical losses during long runs of tails is not available, and there is a limit to the number of coin tosses that can be performed in any finite period of time, precluding the possibility of playing long enough to observe very long runs of tails.
As an example, consider a bettor with an available fortune, or credit, of 243 (approximately 9 trillion) units, roughly the size of the current US national debt in dollars. With this very large fortune, the player can afford to lose on the first 42 tosses, but a loss on the 43rd cannot be covered. The probability of losing on the first 42 tosses is q42, which will be a very small number unless tails are nearly certain on each toss. In the fair case where q = 1 / 2, we could expect to wait something on the order of 242 tosses before seeing 42 consecutive tails; tossing coins at the rate of one toss per second, this would require approximately 279,000 years.
This version of the game is likely to be unattractive to both players. The player with the fortune can expect to see a head and gain one unit on average every two tosses, or two seconds, corresponding to an annual income of about 31.6 million units until disaster (42 tails) occurs. This is only a 0.0036 percent return on the fortune at risk. The other player can look forward to steady losses of 31.6 million units per year until hitting an incredibly large jackpot, probably in something like 279,000 years, a period far longer than any currency has yet existed. If q > 1 / 2, this version of the game is also unfavorable to the first player in the sense that it would have negative expected winnings.
The impossibility of winning over the long run, given a limit of the size of bets or a limit in the size of one's bankroll or line of credit, is proven by the optional stopping theorem
Betting systems constitute one of the oldest delusions of gambling history. Betting systems votaries are spiritually akin to the proponents
The history of parimutuel betting goes back quite a few years. Pierre set up his wagering system in the racing parks and by 1887 parimutuel wagering
We created and own The ULTIMATE MLB Betting System in history! The ULTIMATE MLB Betting System results for the last 6 months: April: - 18.9%
Labels: bettingsitese, loganssportsbooke, nflsportsbooke, sportsbettingpickse, sportsbooklinese, sportsbookpickse, sportsbookspreade
#
posted by sportsbook bettingsites : 2:37 PM