|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Take it from someone who lives in Nevada you can not beat the house period
if you could the game would no longer be in the casinos. No money management
scheme can beat the tables. The table limit and Minium bet is what defeats
the martingale system.
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Glen Wallace
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 7:02 PM
To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Naz 100 futures buy and hold system
Macromnt:
I have little doubt that gamblers have succeeded in breaking the bank
from time to time, but as long as the house has the advantage, the
house will ultimately always win. Always. No matter what money
management technique gamblers use. I would love to see the
statistical proof of the roulette system you describe.
> I am sorry to disagree. As a matter of fact to take the same example of
> roulette it has been done. About 25 years ago a group of Englishmen went
> around the casinos of Europe and won playing with a money management
system
> that was exacly the opposite of the classical martingal: each time they
were
> losing they were reducing there bets but were letting their profits run up
to
> the casino limit when they had a winning strike. I don't remember the
details
> but very quickly they were not allowed to step in any casino. They were
> putting the casinos in the position of the beginner gambler who plays a
> martingale. But we agree on this : this is your anti-martingale. For me an
> anti martingale is money management.
|