Extremes of the Grand Martingale!

[gingermolloy]

I thought I would share some of the progressions I have thought up over the years and see if any of them have the potential of being the one that can beat the house!

I love the idea of the Grand Martingale progression because it offers the chance of winning 1 unit for every spin within the given progression. The reason I like the idea of this is because as long as the progression is winning I feel like I never lose a spin, even though I do.

I suppose you could say I treat it like betting on a series of spins rather than a single spin.

Lets take the simple Grand Martingale progression on an evens bet.

It looks like this, 1, 3, 7, 15.

I will leave my progressions to 4 spins for now just for ease, but I always have a cut off when I take the loss and start again from scratch.

If we consider the probability of losing on this, the chance of losing 1 spin is 19/37 = 0.5135135. the chances of losing 2 consecutive spins is (19/37)2 = 0.2637. and so on.

So the chances of losing 4 spins is (19/37)4 = 0.0695. i.e. a 6.95% chance.

So, we can run a Grand Martingale progression on any evens bet with a cut off point of 4 spins and win 93.05% of progressions.

I got to thinking about this, and I came up with the idea of reducing the chance of losing. Now the most obvious way of doing this is to increase the cut off point to 5 or 6 spins, but I thought of an alternative to this. Why not reduce the chances of losing on each individual spin. So we need a bet with a better chance of success.

The bet that sprung immediately to mind was to bet on 2 dozens, i.e. bet 1 unit on [1-12] and 1 unit on [13-24]. If the bet comes in then I still win 1 unit as before, but the chances of losing this bet are less (i.e. 13/37 = 0.35135135.)

For the progression to be still considered a Grand Martingale the next bet must win us 2 units plus the units wagered thus far.

The bet is therefore 4 units on both dozens, giving a payout of 12 units (2 units for 2 spins + 8 units wagered)

Next bet, 13 units on both dozens, giving a payout of 39 units (3 units for 3 spins + 36 units wagered)

Next bet, 40 units on both dozens, giving a payout of 120 units (4 units for 4 spins + 116 units wagered)

So the progression would look like this:

1   1
4   4
13  13
40  40

We have a bigger bankroll here but the chances of us losing a progression are now (13/37)4 = 0.01524. i.e a 1.524% chance of losing.

This strategy can then be taken to its extreme. Instead of applying this to 3 dozens, we could apply it to 6 double streets. i.e bet on [1-6] [7-12] [13-18] [19-24] and [25-30].

The progression for this would be:

1    1    1    1    1
7    7    7    7    7
43  43  43  43  43
259 259 259 259 259

Even more extreme, single streets of 3, and then the most extreme of all, 35 out of 37 numbers.

The most extreme form of the grand martingale progression for winning 1 unit a spin would be this, so the first bet would be 1 unit on 35 numbers, leaving only 2 numbers that kill us, the next, if we lose, would be 37 units on each of the 35 numbers.

The progression would look like this, with each number being the amount bet on all 35 numbers each time:

1, 37, 1333, 47989.

This is obviously unrealistic to put into practice because the bankroll would be stupid.

It would be (35 x (1+37+1333+47989)) = 1727600 units

Saying this the chance of us losing on this progression are 0.0008537%, or 1 in 117135.

So as our chances of losing reduce, our bankroll increases. So we need to balance this if we are to play this type of bet. If I use it I always use the 2 dozens approach with a bankroll of 116 units and a 1.524% chance of a loss.

There is another way however!

We could take the grand martingale to its other extreme.

Ill elaborate on the other extreme later as it is more difficult to get across, but for now I would invite comments on the progressions I have mentioned so far.

[gingermolloy]

The other extreme would be to make each individual bet have a higher chance of losing, for example a bet on 1 dozen. i.e. 1 unit on [1-12].

The big change here is that the number of units won is different; a win would pay 2 units.

To make the progression here a true Grand Martingale we must therefore win 2 units per spin. Therefore the next bet would have to cover the 1 unit lost and win 4 units, i.e. 5 units. This requires a bet of 2.5 units on the dozen (as it pays 2/1)

The next bet would have to win 6 units plus the 3.5 won so far i.e. 9.5 units.  This requires a bet of 4.75 units.

And so on, gives a 4 spin progression as follows:

1,   2.5,   4.75,   8.125.

This is of course, I hear you say, stupid. Who can bet 0.125 units.

We have to multiply the progression up until we have whole numbers. i.e.

8, 20, 38, 65.

Aggressive! I hear you call out. But we do not have to stick to the maths rigidly. We could make this 4, 10, 19, 32 for example. And each unit doesn't have to be £1 or $1. It could be £0.20 which would give a progression of £0.80, £2.00, £3.80, £6.40. This progression has a 79.2% chance of winning.

One could apply this theory to a bet that is even more unlikely to come in, but the chances of failure becomes quiet high, meaning the number of spins required to give good chance of success becomes higher.

The most extreme form would be to apply this to a bet on a single number. This gives a progression as follows:

0.2
0.6
1
1.8
2.8
4.2
6.6
10
15.2
23

This would have only a 24% of winning.

[VLSroulette]

The other extreme would be to make each individual bet have a higher chance of losing, for example a bet on 1 dozen. i.e. 1 unit on [1-12].

Ginger, please check the 36-unit parachute ( nolinks://vlsroulette.com/money-management/36-unit-parachute/ ). Can you make it the "Grand MartinChute" or something like that?

Geez, MartinChute [smiley=lolk.gif]

Regards.

[gingermolloy]

Ginger, please check the 36-unit parachute ( nolinks://vlsroulette.com/money-management/36-unit-parachute/ ). Can you make it the "Grand MartinChute" or something like that?

Geez, MartinChute [smiley=lolk.gif]

Regards.

I believe I can!

Working on it!

Should I post it here or start a new thread?

ginger

[VLSroulette]

Hey Ginger, glad to hear you are willing to create that Money Management scheme! 

I guess a new thread is the way to go in order to let it spawn discussion on its own.

Kind regards.

[VLSroulette]

-