Quote:
Originally Posted by bass3p
dfgjdfglkjlkj **** why do i always resort to martingale **** ive gotten ****ed over atleast 4 times by martingale sdigsjdogijsdgiosjgosjgoisjdog ft needs to have a restrict option on f'ing superturbos and certain stakes for sngs sodgjsdiogjsdg
The martingale system is a trainwreck of an idea for HU Razz SNGs.
Let's assume you start with the $14 super turbos. And let's assume for simplicity that you will win 50% of your SNGs. If you lose the first, you play the $28, then the $55, the $110, $220 and balance the $330s with $550s to come up with an average buyin ~$440 for the final one. Since these are the only options available to us, this set of buy-in options closes the martingale game for us at $550. So, what would be our expectancy using this strategy? This is actually fairly simple to calculate.
We will win the martingale game (1-(0.5)^5)% of the time. Another way of putting it is that we will lose all 5 games 3.125% of the time. This means we will win 96.875% of the time. However, the key is knowing what a win and loss imply. A win is worth ~$14 (because even if we win at the $440 level, our losses getting there dictate that we win at the margin of our initial bet), while a loss is worth ~$867 (14+28+55+110+220+440). Note that this is the end of the game for us. We cannot continue to raise the stakes. We must now choose to either just play 550s or start a new game. So... our long term expectancy is easy to solve for each game.
It is the % of the time we win the martingale game multiplied by the amount we gain by a win minus the % of the time we lose the martingale game multiplied by the amount we lose in a loss.
or... = (0.96875)*($14) - (0.03125)*($867) = -$13.53 each time we implement this strategy.