Would this Staking Strategy work?

[Dopamine]

Let's say you have 100m to stake on a maxed account. You go to the duel arena and stake in only boxing matches which are roughly 50-50 chance of you winning.

• you start by staking 1m. If you win the stake, you will continue staking only 1m
• when you lose, you will now double your bet (losing once means you will bet 2m on the next stake, if you lose again you will bet 4m on the next stake then 8m, 16m and so on)
• when you win a stake, you revert back to betting 1m per stake

Since you continue to double you stakes when you lose, it means the minute you win a stake you will win back all of your past losses + some profit.

If you are doing this with 100m with a starting bid of 1m like in this example, you would need to lose 6 times in a row (at this point you would not have enough to double your previous stake). There is a 1 in 64 chance that this will actually happen.

The odds of getting cleaned will of course decrease if you start with more than 100m or if you start with a bet smaller than 1m.

Is there something I am not getting here as to why this wouldn't work? In this example you would have a 63/64 or a 98.4% chance of increasing your money incrementally.

Yes it would probably take a while, but you could be looking at over 1m profit per hour.

If you have 1b, you could start off with like a 10m bid and have the same odds

 

[rstrader1471]

It's a well known method on Sythe. It does work, I implement this method daily and have never been cleaned. Never will.

 

[KerokeroCola]

It won't work. There is no way to beat the system other than the known methods of guaranteeing how to get a hit first and stance flipping. If you utilize these two, your chance of a win MIGHT be like 53-55%. ANY gambling with 50% odds will never ever gain you profit in the long run, no matter your scheme of betting.

Why won't it work? The law of independent trials. See this as to what I mean: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_(probability_theory). Your numbers are making the wrong assumption that each trial is related to the next.

 

[Kabal]

Seriously this should be sticky'd for the amount of times people bring it up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martingale_(probability_theory)

 

[EpicGoldShop]

it's a good bet, also i see you kerokerocola viewing thread noob

 

[Why Fall Down]

wanna know a easy way to get rich, stake your bank, lose you get cleaned, win you be rich!

 

[Zerk Perk]

everyone uses this method but some people go on losing steaks and get cleaned

 

[Violent J]

It won't work. There is no way to beat the system other than the known methods of guaranteeing how to get a hit first and stance flipping. If you utilize these two, your chance of a win MIGHT be like 53-55%. ANY gambling with 50% odds will never ever gain you profit in the long run, no matter your scheme of betting.

Why won't it work? The law of independent trials. See this as to what I mean: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_(probability_theory). Your numbers are making the wrong assumption that each trial is related to the next.

Theres always a chance you can end with a profit, I don't care what the law states.

 

[iWoodKart]

You clearly never heard of independent events, you might as well stake the 100m in one go and save yourself the time.

 

[mill3n]

You clearly never heard of independent events, you might as well stake the 100m in one go and save yourself the time.

FALSE.

Say when staking you have a 50% chance of winning. Even with independent rolls, this would mean that out of 10 stakes of for example 10M, you would win +- 5 and lose +- 5. Staking it in 1 go would mean you'd have a 50% chance of losing, but you would be instantly cleaned in this scenario.

Spread your stakes, and leave as soon as you have profit.
Your technique is used by stakers to build a bank, and it works extremely well. No one loses 10x in a row, or they're really unlucky.

 

[Keanu Reeves]

No it doesn't work. Staking isnt 50/50 thus the method is flawed. The variable of first hit is what generally throws this method off.

 

[Manpons unite]

It won't work. There is no way to beat the system other than the known methods of guaranteeing how to get a hit first and stance flipping. If you utilize these two, your chance of a win MIGHT be like 53-55%. ANY gambling with 50% odds will never ever gain you profit in the long run, no matter your scheme of betting.

Why won't it work? The law of independent trials. See this as to what I mean: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_(probability_theory). Your numbers are making the wrong assumption that each trial is related to the next.

Yeah, just because you loose one, doesent mean your chances ofwinning the next one are greater trust me, i have used tried this method many times, and it ends up in you staking half your bank and loosing.

 

[Manpons unite]

Theres always a chance you can end with a profit, I don't care what the law states.

this is also correct, if your smart about it, and quit wile your ahead, then you will ALWAYS make profit, but the trick is getting yourself to stop staking.

 

[Lord LaLa]

I dont think thats best in the long run, in my position id vertually do the opposite.

Say u have 100M to stake and you start off with 1M stakes.

Stake 1M and loose, stay at 1M

Stake 1M and win, then stake say 2M, if you win say stake 4M then 8M e.t.c.

Once you loose go back to 1M, in my opinion that is a better way of managing the gold as it generally works out more efficient and less likely to get cleaned although bare in mind, there is ALWAYS the possibility to loose all your gold.

 

[euro-case]

You cant be sure you wont lose 6 or more fight in a row. I had 200m, and was doing the same thing. And guess what? I lost 2m, then 4, 8, 16, 32, 64 and i couldnt double anymore. Finally I got cleaned.