I definitely appreciate the fact that you do strategies in one take and don’t redo videos for a specific result. Can’t redo rolls in a casino just because it wasn’t the outcome you hoped for. I love all the different strategies and information you and your fans share. Its really opened my eyes to the intricacies of the game.
@Mathias moll you must be a big fan, with all your comments on my channel. Thx. It’s a gambling game. Nothing to lie about. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. It’s a game of chance, most adults understand this.
Man i appreciate your honesty and "NOT" doing multiple takes until you get a successful one. Any one else would've did multiple takes until they got a good one and then posted it.
While you lost your bankroll quickly, I REALLY appreciate you showing the video as the rolls came, and didn't re-shoot the video until you won. Everyone looks for a quick way to beat the house, but it's a good reminder that whatever strategy you use the house always has the odds. Always set a budget and consider it cost for entertainment (like buying tickets to a show)... and if you come up then it's just gravy on top.
I saw a guy win $15,000 in the field playing a $1,000 a roll. He hit 12 twice & a few 2’s. Just a heads up fa the ones calling the video dumb it’s actually a good strategy. Imagine hitting a 12 w/the last $315? That’s $945 plus your $315. I play place bets though but the field can heat up
First time commenting on a video, at least in awhile. I found out about this channel through a craps group. I love the content, the assorted strategies and the unedited/unfiltered live rolls. No doctoring of the results to intentionally show good/bad results. Even an impartial look at any strategy and the realistic assessment that every strategy is going to have its strengths and weaknesses. That being said, I took the $300/hr teaser title with a grain of salt. Yeah it's a field martingale, a full one at that. I often like to jokingly take a cue from Tropic Thunder, 'you just went full Martingale. Never go full Martingale.' Haha. But in all fairness, one attractive feature of the field is that 2 or 12 hitting, be it double or triple. That one hits at the right time, maybe after the Martingale builds up, you hit your goal much faster. The strategy draws its strength from that. But yeah the field can also be a hyped up prop bet, the losing numbers are the ones that have the most probability of hitting. I wanna say like 5% house edge. And yeah that can easily make for an early and fatal field slump. My touch up might be a line bet instead, be it pass or don't pass, both if possible. Pass/DP is a thing and has been in a previous video. Better house edge though you give up that 2:1 of the 2 or 12. And you still have to watch for streaks/slumps. They do still come, be it comeout craps and PSOs for the pass, or comeout 7s/Yos and repeated point hits for the DP. Again the dangers of Martingale. Anyway, thanks and keep up the good work.
The only 2 'tweaks' for this is to let that winning hand run until non-field shows. then restart; the idea being you get a hot shooter giving you 4 & 9 with a 10-12 chaser, you lose valuable profit. Also go 2-3 units out on the come out roll. You had 2 field numbers not utilized due to the wait and as the video turned out, it may have saved you. other than that this is a beautiful Martingale Stratedgy
Thank you so much for being so honest, and not trying to frame them in a negative or positive light with editing and multiple takes. Really appreciate. Even though you lost money, this still looks like a fun strategy that I’ll try sometime! Thanks for sharing
I appreciate that you don't publish a pie-in-the-sky scenario and that this video shows the very real risk of a martingale strategy. For everyone's sake, keep in mind the odds of rolling either a 5, 6, 7 or 8 is 5 out of 12 times. Practically seems like a coin flip in your favor, but anytime the house has an edge then there's the potential for those martingales to get away from you. The house edge when the field pays 3:1 on the 12 is 2.78%, and when the field only pays 2:1 on the 12 the house edge doubles to 5.56%. Thanks for the vid! :-)
Why does everyone on youtube seem to suck at math. With 2 dice, there are 36 possible rolls every single roll. 20 of these 36 rolls are a 5,6,7, or 8... leaving only 16 of the 36 possible rolls that hit the field bet. I've no idea how you got the odds of rolling a 5,6,7, or 8 to be 5 out of 12.... as it's clearly between 6 & 7 out of 12.
@@Sweethands4 Yeah yeah, typo. Ooops. I didn't proofread. Obviously should have been 5:9. (How the heck did I come up with 12??) Thanks for catching that! ;-)
Martingale on the Field bet has made me tons of wins. I limit the bet to 6 losses. Bet every time without any waiting. Once you get to the 6th loss - back down the bet to level 3 and work back up again. Lets say: Your 1st bet is $25. At the 6th loss = $800. Go back to your 3rd loss = $100 when you feel a Field will roll again. This worked for me in Canada when I won $1200 in 8 hours hitting Fields and Big Red. The most fun is when I got scared at the $400 Field bet and won - won back my $25 and banked that.
There is a little flaw in this strategy, and that's waiting for a non-field number before placing your bet. The dice have no "memory" of what's been rolled before so you are no more likely to roll a field number immediately following a non-field number. They're all independent events. You might as well bet all the time and speed things up. One aspect of this approach that I kind of like is the "plus one unit". I've tried the double-bet strategy but if you finally get a win, you will only be up ONE unit (after risking potentially hundreds). Doubling PLUS one unit is a nice twist. I don't think I want to mess with martingale progression anymore though :) I tried it and I lost.
@@snakepliskin1185 No! They are not linked! Free your mind from this disease this Christmas. Let's say you roll a single die right now. Now imagine you don't roll it again until 4 months from now. Or pretend you roll, leave a casino, go home, come back and roll again. Don't you think those are an independent rolls? There is absolutely NO difference between rolls a CENTURY apart or rolls just seconds apart at a craps table in a casino - all independent of each other. Don't let it fool you. There is NO link.
I made most of my money on the field but keep pressing every time after a lost is a sure fire way to lose. I would wait for a non-field roll to hit twice in a row. Then I bet 1unit. If I hit, I continue to bet 1u but I stop after the 3rd hit in a row. Then wait again for a 2-3 non field roll. Then if I am still up, up my bet to 2unit and repeat the process. Eventually you get to a $500 bet range and $1000 per bet range and you limit the number bets you make. But the field typically hits once every 2-4 rolls. Not a sure fire way. But I win more often then I lose. I would either lose $300-$400 but when I win, i rake $10-15,000K
Yep, it works if you wait for the 2-3 non-fields and then don't chase a loss unless you'e ahead and never chase a bet more than 2-3 times. I don't parlay it, but some do well that way. Patience is req'd.
I like to wait for it to show before (reverse) chasing with a simple progression... Makes for a long and interesting day if you wander enough. Good exercise 🙂
Thank you for playing strategy. I love to watch what happens without spending real money . I can see how this strategy would work...but oh so scary when it gets into the big money lays.
It will take much longer time wise but you have got to go 3 or 4 straight non field numbers before attempting to martingale the field. Even then it's a fools betting system. Thanks for taking time to make video!
I do this system, but I start with $500 and bet in $25 dollar increments. I wait until 3 non-field numbers are rolled first then I start betting with $25. If I lose I bet $50, If I lose I bet $100. If I lose I walk. If I win I wait until 3 more consecutive non-field numbers are rolled then I restart the progression.
This is known as a closed progression. It is a valid strategy if you are comfortable with the amount at risk and, if it wins more than loses. But it still suffers the major flaw of the large loss relative to small wins.
So the odds of rolling a 5, 6, 7, or 8 is roughly 55%. The chances of rolling 7 in a row (and therefore busting this system) is roughly 1.5%. By waiting until after a non-field roll to start the betting sequence you require 8 consecutive non-field rolls to bust, and the chances of that are .8%. Obviously, as the video shows, that can and does happen. But for those wondering why the system calls to wait until after a non-field roll, thats the math behind it.
I tried this strategy but instead of waiting for a single non-field number I would wait until 3 came out in a row - THEN I started the Martingale. I consistently made $ doing this until the night when the shooter threw 12 non-field numbers in a row. I ran out of $ after 10 tosses. Toss #13 was 12-12 and I was sick!
Every bet on the table has a negative expectation for the bettor. If you try to make more bets, to cover all eventual chances of losing, you will succeed in eliminating any chance of winning. :)
Martingale is a huge risk in any way you wager, and I understand the fallacy behind it. I've used a system of alternating between Pass and DP (1.41% vig vs. the Field's 2.78%), using 5-15-25-50-100-200. 5 sessions, earning $500. Great success, but it's way too scary... I'd never depend on it for financial independence!
I played this strategy before covid with mixed results. The first time I played it, I bought in for $400 and won $14,450 over two days. The second time, I made the mistake of rebuying and doubled to table max and lost $2,700. Because of that day, I never rebuy.
Ever notice that no one teaches anyone the martingale? It's the first thing gamblers "discover" on our own when we first start to think about the numbers more seriously. Anyone else remember a day in their youth then they had this particular stroke of genius?
Definitely a gambooooler's strategy, to be sure! Might get yourself a nice comp out of the deal, but man putting those last levels out there is terrifying.
i have done this strategy in oposite way..you need to wait for field number .2.3.4.9.10.11.12. and then start beting on field number to roll secont time in a row. if you roll field number you bet 5$ roll again and its 5.6.8 or 7 you lose 5$.Do not martingale straight away .Roll again till you get field number and then martingale to 15$ . works way more better
After loosing in progression and say you lose the $155 bet, consider you are now down a total of $285 on that series. So to put another $315 down.........outside of hitting a 2 or 12 - the best case scenario you get is ‘up $30.’ The choice is ‘’leave w/ $-285 or go again for $-600 or +30.” That just seems like too much risk for me if my pot is only $600.
As a follow up, bringing 635$ to the casino, every time you play this strategy you have a 98.367% chance of winning 5$ you also have a 1.633% chance of losing all your money.
These premiers are evil....I dont want to wait! Lol love the content. Looking for a good strategy to use at the MGM when I go to Vegas later this year.
thespooneytube Spooney exactly. Martingale was ALWAYS a stupid way to gamble. That guy never won shit....lol. Idk if this guy has won this way but it seems like a waste of money and no hedging of bets...
That betting method looks a lot like the Professor Al Kaufman's it actually works better on the pass and don't pass. I love the way you produce your vids. Also the table lay out.
I want you to know that yesterday I was able to play craps for the first time. I want to let u know that by watch ur vids and a few others on RU-vid I was able to make $996 with a $ 716 profit in an 1-1/2 hrs. The only thing I did was watch vids and follows some strategies. So THANK YOU for putting in the work on filming the great vids. Keep up the good job, and we win when we COLOR UP.
Big Mige congrats on coloring up! Unfortunately it won’t always work out that way, you can’t win every time, but glad you had a great first experience!
@@yomamaso100 After 7 non-field rolls, the dice are no more likely to hit a field number. They're all independent events. Any thinking contrary to this is just superstition. Of course the non-field streak is bound to break sometime because so many back-to-back non-field rolls like that are really AGAINST the odds. But remember, the dice have no "memory" of what's been rolled before. After the 7 non-field rolls, pretend the 8th roll is the 1st roll. Anything can happen still.
I bet the same idea with roulette. I waited for 6 red then started in. I lost 7 straight and stopped. It went 15 red. It was my first bet of my weekend and the fun stack was gone lol
Color Up, thanks for letting everyone share their betting strategies. Not sure his purpose of waiting for a non-field roll. It doesn’t change odds on the rolls. From previous comments and videos, I’m thinking you and I probably have close to the same betting and bankroll. Even with longer time between rolls, the Martingale isn’t something I would try on a single roll bet like the Field. Maybe on a Pass/Don’t bet. Just seems to me that the bankroll wouldn’t last long enough for me to enjoy the table. Your bankroll will last you through 7 losing rolls in a row. I’ve seen that plenty of times.
@ColorUp ok genius, if you wait for 3 non fields in a row, your odds of landing a field is higher, especially on the 7th or 8th turn after you waited 3 turns, that's 10th or 11th non field in a row. Yes each roll is independent for landing field or non field but the real catch is how many non fields show up in a row for how long.
@@nityapatel6558 It doesn't matter how many non-field or field rolls are rolled in a row. As you admitted, each roll is indpendent. The "odds" of a number being rolled does not change. online210.psych.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/PSY-210_Unit_Materials/PSY-210_Unit06_Materials/Effectivology_GamblersFallacy_NoDate.pdf
A lot of comments about how this system doesn't seem to work. I tried this system on a simulation but added 2 rules. First rule - only play "after 2 non field numbers are rolled consecutively instead of 1" and Second Rule...get out once you are ahead by a hundred dollars. This seems to have great success at least in simulation. I just saw this the other day and haven't had a chance to go to a casino to test this IRL.
This is not a wining strategy because there are too many fails which lose big relative to the small wins. Its a matter of probabilities: for consecutive rolls of 5, 6, 7 or 8 : 2 is 0.31, 3 is 0.17, 4 is 0.095, 5 is 0.053, 6 is 0.0294, 7 is 0.016, 8 is 0.009, 9 is 0.005. For example, if you choose to wait until you see 2 consecutive rolls (5,6,7, or 8), you would then have to roll 7 more in a row (9 consecutively) to fail, which is a probability of only 0.005. But even that low probability implies a fail every 1.8 hours at a rate of 113 rolls/hour. I tested this with actual table roll data for 21 sessions totaling 18.5 hours at the 113 roll/hour rate available in the book "Craps Wagering Strategies Using Actual Las Vegas Roll Data", Eric Cybulski. Over the 21 sessions (18.5 hours) the system failed 9 times which worked out to a fail every 2.1 hours, fairly close to theoretical 1.8 hours. Total loss was ($2050) for a loss rate of ($111/hr). How people get enticed by these system is that over short trials, it is possible for it to work well. Out of those 21 sessions, there were many winning sessions, e.g.: 137 min for +$425, 24 min for +$45, 17 min for +$65, 32 min for +$135, 34 min for +$175, 31 min for +$125, 63 min for +$200, 69 min for +525. But the losses are just killers: one 71 min session had 2 fails! And one session started with an immediate loss! There is a reason that Martingale systems are universally shunned.
@Ernest Mayberry Thanks totally agree. After trying it a couple more times on my own too. Guess I just had a couple of lucky win streaks on my craps app. Luckily I didn't take this strategy to the casino.
@@scoops8597 You might be interested to consider the No Pass strategy suggested by Chris Wiseman below. It shows a lot more promise with no losses over the same actual table data. I am sure it will lose at some point, but it shows more likelihood of the winners exceeding the losses. I am still considering whether to risk money on something like this. I did the test and it worked for the 21 sessions (18.5 hours). Rules: 1. Wait for a shooter to make a point, 2. Begin 8 level progression (I used 5, 15, 35, 75, 150, 300, 600, 1200), 3. Once a progression started, if win on 2 or 3 on come out, only bet on same shooter if he made point & starting at level 1 again. Might be safer to wait for new shooter. One shooter I did this on went on to level 7. Rule 1 saved him from being a loss. Adding rule take your winning come out bet & payoff & wait for new shooter is probably a good idea, i.e., one win per shooter. Results: Total win $1,080. Win rate $58/hr. 118 total decisions. Only 6.4 avg decisions per hour. Average level was 2.1 There were 0 - Lvl 8, 1 - Lvl 7, 3 - Lvl 6, 6 - Lvl 5, & 5 - Lvl 4.
You better off betting all action on the crap table.. and plus bet constantly on the 7 in case the dice rolls a 7 any given time for your backup bet.. you can’t go wrong when you bet the 6,7,8 strategy on a constant rolls .. cause the dice have more higher odds of the 6,7.8 coming on most of the average rolls
The first time I played craps an old dealer on a slow night told me never bet the hard ways or the field. Pass line with max odds and two come bets with max odds. I have won 1000’s in less than an hour and more often lost it all in less then 20 minutes.
Correct me if I am wrong if you dont hit on the first roll: 2 to hit- bet $15 to net -5 3 to hit-bet $35 to net $5 4 to hit- bet $75 to net $10 5 to hit bet $155 to net $15? am I wrong here, but that doesnt seem like a great risk to profit strategy
The Professor, Al Kauphman, says you gotta go to 8 levels. It requires $2380 bank roll. Statistically, it busts every 8 hrs. Ya just gotta change games. Variety is the spice.
Why wait for a non-field number? At any time, you can get a non-field or field number- just bet the field, quit shooting yourself in the foot by over complicating the increases- just double your bet if it loses- keep it simple!
So doing the math on this. There was a 2.94% chance of what just happened, happening. Each roll is a 55.56% chance of losing time 6 times. That is where this strategy comes in to play. Would have been nice to see you roll 2 more times. Bet would have been $1275 I believe and it would have been less than a 1% chance of loss happening.
worldsbestfun yes each roll individually is 55.56% but collectively it is not. It’s math, you can’t argue with that. The truth is, if you had unlimited bank, it’s almost impossible using this method barring there is no limit on the table or you never hit the max limit which for many tables is that less than 1% chance
Hey man, first off great channel, keep it up! As for this strategy...I've witnessed a similiar strategy like this before, the person who used it waited for 2 consecutive non-field rolls instead. $300 per hour is a lofty goal...each roll takes up to 1-2 minutes (craps and 11 rolls are pretty quick...about 30 seconds). Google says the rule of thumb is 102 rolls per hour. Also not comfortable with the risk of consecitive misses, could get $$$...all for a $5 payout if you hit! i'd wager that you get $100 / hour (100 rolls). I want to like it, but it is not my style.
Other things to consider: max bet $5000, you can miss the field only 10x ($5115 bankroll) max bet $2000, you can miss 9x ($2555 bankroll) max bet $1000 you can miss 8x ($1275 bankroll)
Nothing new here. The Martingale system was invented 250 years ago in the 18th century. When it goes bad, like it did here, your betting $350 to make a $5 profit. Talk about lousy odds!
Gah I hate the suspense I get a notification on phone thinking you posted a new video...nope one of those premier things so I’m like ok 👌 I’ll see it later tonight...nope it was like 4 days away!! Geeze from now on please set premiers to like one day in advance 4 days is toooo long just makes me sad and well I won’t forget about it but some people might
I had seen some cats do this in Dodge City, KS. They could not loose.....until they did. They were up way more than 300 bucks though, pretty sure they should have left. They stuck around after being up 1K each and then lost it all in about 10 minutes. It was sick to see.
5 minute night at the MGM. I play the field, but that strategy is reckless... plus minimum is $25, unless you retired and can hang around ‘til damn near sun rise for the $15 tables.
This "strategy" is totally against the probability theory. All roll results are independent, one shall never bet on that a big win is due. The best game strategy is to stay with a fair bet with consistent amount money, if you are lucky and win fast, take your money and leave when you have won the most likely money you'd win (the expected value).
Been to a casino that paid 3 times on a 12. Watched a guy hit that twice with a decent amount on there and then proceed to lose his ass for the next hour chasing that rabbit. I couldn't see how much but I assume it was at least over 300, three black chips and he did it several times so like what a couple thousand. Dude should have stopped at the 20 minutes. He did not and probably cried himself to sleep that night. Biggest Casino lesson. Don't chase the rabbit, don't chase the loss just leave or bet small and build back up.
So two main thoughts here.. 1 any time you want to try a martingale strategy you should be taking a bet that is as close to 50/50 as possible. The field bet even if it pays triple for 12 or 2 is far worse than just trying martingale on the pass or dont pass line. 2. Why double and AND add a chip after a loss?Simply doubling the previous bet is better. The reason is you get more chances to recoup your losses. For example, a standard martingale your betting progression on losing bets would be 5, 10, 20, 40, 80, 160, 320. At any point if you win you profit $5. The added 5 is worse because it goes 5, 15, 35, 75, 155, 315, 635. It gets to the table limit or your loss limit at least one bet sooner. The extra $5 profit from a win isnt even close to offsetting this extra chance.
Thats true, but the 6 unit win is insignificant when compared to the extra chance, at least in my opinion. Winning 6 units when you have a bet of 63 units out there isnt that great. The only way it really works well is if you happen to have a big bet out on the field and happen to roll a double or triple paying number (2 or 12)
try this, 2 non field rolls then bet 1 unit. if you loose next roll wait till 2 non field rolls come out again then bet 2 units. if you win go down 1 unit or loose go up 1 unit each time.
If you are using this gambler's fallacy method your logic is basically "I have to win eventually" so you keep doubling your losses so for 1. You need a bit of luck 2. You need a BIG bankroll to play with and 3. Watch out for table bet limits that will straight fuck you up if your not lucky
Hey Keith, Thanks for submitting it. No way i thought it would end like that...what are the chances I go bust while filming....oh well. Just some advice, Don't listen to negative comments, no strategy is perfect yet most people will tell you how you play wrong and only there method is good hahah
@@ColorUp lol on the condescending keyboard warriors they make for entertaining reading. Armchair quarterbacking would have been getting new dice after 7 out. but then had it worked, you wouldn't get as many comments on the vlog. I can't say enough on how well you present the game
Might as well do iron cross instead of this strategy and make $5+ per roll of the dice (except 7) saves so much money, and stays in the action. Way less bankroll at risk.
Prefer this type of Martingale using 8 levels maximum bankroll on the Don’t Pass line AFTER a shooter has made his first point AND they are a chicken feeder roller. Field edge is over 5% but DP is only about 1.4%. Percentage of losing 8 levels in a row against the shooter is 0.04% and it’s rare a shooter will make 7 or 8 passes alone much less after making 1 point to begin with. Same type of system but my trigger is the 1st pass and my base bet is on a lower house edge bet. Thanks Color Up
I read about that on that dice setter website for choppy tables. What levels do you run? They recommended 1, 3, 7, 15 + 1 unit. Also I always wondered if you even get to bet if the shooter just keeps hitting PSOs. ;)
@@masterslacker If the shooter PSOs then no, I'm not even getting to bet on that shooter [but who would want to on the right side?]. If he makes his 1st point, I'm on the DP with whatever is the minimum bet, typically 5, 10, or even 15 depending on your casino offerings. Obviously I would prefer to play it with $5 tables. I will simply work it up to 8 levels then until a win (or hopefully not a full 8 level loss). Personally I have never had an 8-level loss (knock on wood). Never had a shooter I was betting against using this method yet to hit 9 passes (1st pass I'm not on, followed by 8 more passes in the come out or the point-cycle) - remember, I qualified the shooter as a chicken-feeder tosser, not someone that is taking any care with their set or their toss.
Chris Wiseman it’s not about how often it happens (it’s obviously rare). It’s that your losses when it does happen are so large that the “system” takes forever to recoup them. There’s a guy at my local that buys in for 20-40k and does a similar strategy. I’ve seen him go bust twice. When he wins he walks away up $400-500. Takes a long time to recoup that $60-80k in losses that way.
The reason why the martingale is THE WORST strategy is because your putting your ENTIRE bankroll on a series of negative expectancy bets hoping that a "rare event" in this case doesn't happen but ppl fail to realize that it's no longer rare when you play over and over again. It becomes a common event. Another way to think about it is imagine if you had $10,000 and we're betting $5 on the Field and never bet more than that. Then no matter how bad things get it's almost impossible to lose your entire bankroll because your only losing the percentage of that bet and rare events don't wipe your Bankroll out. Moral of the story is the more you risk where you have a disadvantage the more you will lose, simple as that. And the Martingale advises to risk the MOST.
It relies on the fallacy that the previous roll influences the likelihood of next roll which is the first fallacy gamblers have to get over if they don't want to lose all their $$. (Unfortunately, they rarely do, it's a beloved myth it seems ... just look at the pointless roulette 'board' of previous numbers.)
you would still lose your entire $10,000 bankroll eventually because of the house advantage. It just wouldnt happen in 5 minutes like is possible with any martingale strategy. Even then though, I don't know of any tables that take a minimum bet of $5 where the upper limit is more than $2,000. usually the upper limit is about 100 times the minimum bet, to protect the casinos from people getting lucky in one or 2 big bets.
John Smith the place I play has $5 tables and $10,000 max bets. And I’ve seen 5 people lose $20,000 bankrolls doing field martingale just like this. I want to feel bad for them but when I hear them bragging to other players how they “can’t lose”, I lose my ability to be sympathetic.
@@MyopiaMovie where is this $5 table with a 10k max bet? I'd be very interested. Still no interest in martingale because I think its incredibly stupid to risk a massively large bet to win one chip.
The martingale would work if not for table limits and limited bankrolls. The field like all bets on the craps table, the casino holds an edge, some more than others.
ikr? I shudder to think of all the thousands lost by fools trying these 'strategies'. There's literally only one 'strategy' that you should be playing and it's the one that offers the lowest house edge (see my videos), everything else is snake-oil and hogwash!
@@ericboyles7208 It is, but by a very fractional amount and isn't much fun. Pass Line with Odds is just as good, epecially if you get 100x odds (which most casinos don't allow anymore as the house edge then goes into the zero/negative range.)
Ingrid Matthews Your math is incorrect. Odds bets are always a zero house edge. Either you make the number or you dont. The only bets on a craps table that have negative house odds are the Lay bets. However the casino knows this, which is why a lay bet pays 1:2 plus they charge a 5% commission (vig). (100$ bet pays $45 after the vig) See this for follow up: wizardofodds.com/games/craps/appendix/1/
You'd probably see better results with this strategy if doing a 4 count of non field numbers prior to betting. But a straight D'alembert on the field would most likely beat both options.
I had a system same kind of martingale on the 7 I have a craps table at home and practiced throwing for hours a day and I would win $50 and be done but it was just bringing so much negative attention at table for me ...
This strategy has it backwards….These bets should be made after one field number shows up….NOT 5-6-8….And make two consecutive bets of the same amount so you have two separate sets of bets….But even so,the martingale will destroy your bankroll and any previous profits…..
I have won a bit of money playing a triple martingale field strategy, but when it goes wrong, it hurts. When you hit the table max ,or your bankroll max, it is time to go cry in a Bourbon. The funny thing about me playing the Martingale in the field is that I know I am behind on the edge in the field, I am not a superstitious person, I understand the gamblers fallacy intellectually, but all that seems to go out the window when my monkey brain kicks in, and there has not been a field in the last 4-5 rolls. I go $25 in the field thinking, "come on, it has to revert to the mean!",) I loose, I go $75...nope, $225.... nope, $675...nope ("Come on, it has to revert to the mean.... we are totally skewed one way....). "OK, one last attempt to get back to where I started.... I hear myself say, "$1300 plays in the field, we are at 8-9 no fields rolls in a row! It has to revert!" Well, no it does not.... 7-out.... Damn it! (It's crying time again....) PS. side note, the three times I went bust, the damn field came the very next roll on all three. Arrggg, the poker gods!
