literally made more money gambling on yobit dice than I did in

aaaand I just lost it all

Looool

File: 1491863254013.jpg (288KB, 748x748px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 748x748px

>>2505645
>be me
>new trader loses money in shitcoins
>need some way to break even
>turns .03 btc to .20 on the dice game
>need more gainz
>loses all of it

I'm sure noobs have lost more on here. Pulled everything out of yobit and never going back.

>>2505679
rip

negative progression starting from less than 1% of your stack is decent free gainz.

>>2505806
could u please explain kind anon

Same here. I got 0.01 to fucking 0.16 then had an 8 loss streak.

Yobit is fucking rigged/not provably fair. Fuck that site and fuck its rigged ass dice.

I might give it a shot at the dice, how much of a minimum would you recommend?

>>2506107
don't. this fuckin thread just made me waste like 20 bucks.

>>2505645
Etheroll. Don't mess with YoBit.

>>2506208
I'm about to gamble another 80 bucks to try to make up for all my losses. Any recommended strategy?

>>2506123
Sorry bout that anon. I made 260 bucks in like 10 minutes but then lost it all in 2 minutes.

>>2506235
it's all good man, i shouldn't have done it. this is why i don't go to casinos but glad i only had a tiny bit of btc on yobit.

learn to daytrade, fags

t might appear strange but in many cases it turns out mathematics and casino games are closely related. Come to think about it, this shouldn’t come off as such a surprise – math permeates every aspect of life and gambling is by no means an exception. There, too, are rules to follow.

It’s hardly a secret for anyone the house always has an advantage over the players. Fortunately, there are always ways to decrease the percentage of the casino’s edge, meanwhile increasing one’s chances of winning. Many players resort to applying different betting strategies which allow them to neutralize, at least partially, the house’s edge and thus accumulate more winnings by simply complying with the system of choice they’re following.


The Fibonacci’s is a cumulative progression which means in a sequence of numbers each number that follows is equal to the total of the two numbers which precede it. It always starts with 0 and 1 but when the strategy is applied in gambling, the zero is always ignored. An example of such a sequence would be (0,) 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55 – and it can actually continue in the same manner for ever. The idea being, if one increases their bets continually, sooner or later there will come a time when their winnings will overcome the losses.


Betting strategies can be subdivided into two basic types. There are those based on positive progressions for instance. What does this mean? To put it shortly, if one is using a system, based on a positive progression, they’re required to increase the amount of their bet in case they win and lower it whenever they lose. In this case it’s advisable to slowly increase your bets after each win and decrease the amount of money to the absolute minimum, that’s allowed, whenever you lose. This type of system is quite popular among players, especially in card games like blackjack, dice games like craps, as well as in different roulette variations.
learn bankroll management yall wtf?

>>2506257
Once I save up 30k bucks, I'm just gonna margin trade 4:1 and live off 0.5 percent daily returns.

>>2506276
All that matters is the expected value, the Martingale System is a fallacy

>>2506276
you recommended negative progression in your first post and positive in your second. so which one is it, anon? positive progression seems more rational to me. fibonacci just seems like a meme.

>>2506446
It's a meme, please ignore this guy

Literally no betting schemes work, period. The only people who fall for this stuff are those who don't understand basic probability

In games with fixed odds like roulette and these bitcoin dice games, there is NO such thing as a betting method which improves your odds. It's not how math works, please go ahead and try it though - casino owners need profits too

>>2506626
b-but i made 260 bucks.

also, seems like the martingale system would have better odds than just betting a fixed amount each time.

>just won 1,000,000 LDOGE
W-E-W. I got angry looking at how much I've lost on this shit coin so I gambled 400K and then 600K more. If it drops any further I'll probably just say fuck it and go all or nothing.

>>2506697
Eh, I'd take out half and gamble that.

>>2506697
You can gamble with shitcoins? I though it was only bitcoin

>>2506770
Anything you have in your wallet. You can also gamble USD if you have that in there. I just discovered this when I saw the post. NEAT

>>2506663
No, it's not better odds. It's literally not, because you will eventually be cleaned

Eventually you will have a lose-streak that is log_2(BANK_SIZE) long and you will lose everything

>mfw I just drew people into a dangerous addiction by making this post.
Oh well. Guys, the martingale system seems legit. If you having a small enough starting amount, your chances of losing everything are minuscule, and you can gradually expand your starting amount and it snowballs from there.

yeah its not a longterm gambling strategy and it actually has negative value. but it will make you feel more structured and you if you have discipline can get lucky and walk with your gainz.

>>2506829
>>2506829
With a small enough starting amount (proportional to your bank size), the odds of that happening can be made extremely small (under 1 percent).

>>2506854
Anon...

Your profits from this are so small, at most your initial bet worth because all bets above the initial bet are simply trying to recoup your losses again

So you're risking a ton, a 1% chance of losing everything, for a small chance of profiting a tiny tiny bit each try

You're just wrong, I'm done arguing here

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martingale_(betting_system)

>>2506881
Look here, anon. If you wanted to make 100 bucks per day, you'd only need 25k or so to minimize your risk of losing to .4%. That's pretty fucking good. I'd say that's comparable to just regular ol' daytrading or shitcoin trading.

File: yobitdice.jpg (216KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

216KB, 1280x720px

The martingale strategy fails even with unbounded stopping time, as long as there is a limit on earnings or on the bets (which is also true in practice).[1] It is only with unbounded wealth, bets and time that it could be argued that the martingale becomes a winning strategy.

>>2506921
Really depends on what kind of risk you're willing to accept. The more wealth you have and the smaller your initial bet is, the smaller the loss will be. At some point, I'd equate the chances of losing everything gambling to losing everything when your shitcoin/stock crashes.

>>2506913
If you have like 100BTC and martengaling at 1 sat.. maybe. Ive actually run a statistical test on it. It's very possible to hit a losing streak of 27 in a row, it's very hard to go above that. So if you have enough to double your initial 30 times, then... go for it at your own risk.

>>2506977
>It's very possible to hit a losing streak of 27 in a row
0.5^27 = 0.000000745%

what did he mean by this?

>>2507005
>I don't know math

What did he mean by this?

>The fundamental reason why all martingale-type betting systems fail is that no amount of information about the results of past bets can be used to predict the results of a future bet with accuracy better than chance. In mathematical terminology, this corresponds to the assumption that the win-loss outcomes of each bet are independent and identically distributed random variables, an assumption which is valid in many realistic situations. It follows from this assumption that the expected value of a series of bets is equal to the sum, over all bets that could potentially occur in the series, of the expected value of a potential bet times the probability that the player will make that bet. 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 is also true in practice).[1] It is only with unbounded wealth, bets and time that it could be argued that the martingale becomes a winning strategy.

> It is only with unbounded wealth, bets and time that it could be argued that the martingale becomes a winning strategy.
> It is only with unbounded wealth, bets and time that it could be argued that the martingale becomes a winning strategy.
> It is only with unbounded wealth, bets and time that it could be argued that the martingale becomes a winning strategy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martingale_(betting_system)

>>2507047
>the only winning strategy is the one in which there is zero (0) risk
everything in life involves risk anon

>>2507090

true but martingale strategies increase your risk with each loss until a win.

>>2507090
You're not fucking getting it lmfao

Go bet your house on black and you might double it! Hurr, no risk no reward!

Idiot, you're supposed to take risks that are mathematically worth it, where the expected value is greater than 1.0. Not just risks for no good reason

No casino risks are mathematically worth it, that's why casinos ALWAYS make money in the longterm, period.