this post was submitted on 09 Apr 2025
581 points (99.2% liked)

World News

45654 readers
2479 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 132 points 4 days ago (19 children)

Like a really bad gambler, double downing every hand in blackjack.

[–] [email protected] 63 points 4 days ago (4 children)

Not on topic but that is actually a valid strategy for blackjack. It is the reason that table limits exist. Otherwise doubling down every loss will eventually net you a positive.

For global politics is still next level stupid.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 4 days ago (2 children)

It's sort of a crazy strategy in Blackjack too. Lose 7-8 times in a row and you're already betting 100x your starting bet.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

If you've lost 8 times in a row, you're actually now betting 256x your original bet.

It's NOT a good strategy. Statistically it doesn't by any means whatsoever ensure you'll end up net positive.

It's called "Oscar's Grind" and there is a plethora of mathematics that show it is does not beat the house.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 4 days ago (1 children)

It is called the Martingale system.

Oscars grind works in a completely different fashion, and you do not raise your bet when you lose.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 days ago

Thank you for this. I knew how the strategy plays but not the name.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

It’s actually the strategy with the best return of any strategy, including card counting. In any blackjack strategy you need a large bankroll to take advantage of the law of large numbers.

Seriously, this works so well and is the reason for table limits.

Because you will never find a no limit blackjack table you cannot actually apply this strategy in the real world. But it is mathematically sound.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 4 days ago (1 children)

It's not sound actually because it trivially ends up in nonsensical amounts of money and any sufficiently long series of rolls will have an increasing chance of having a sufficiently long series of losses such that no reasonable person can possibly recover from it. For instance who that can afford to bet 1024x 100 or $100,000 on a single game of chance is excited by betting $100?

It's nonsense.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

It’s mathematically sound because you do guarantee a net positive with enough of a bankroll. As I have mentioned in other comments here this is not a strategy that can be used in the real world.

You even admit it would work with absurd amounts of money… The math works.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 days ago

The math doesn't work because given enough rolls you literally always go bankrupt no matter what bankroll you start with. Take the simplest option a fair coin where you win on tails and lose on heads. Real actual random flips will contains runs of heads. Let N be the number of rolls required to bankrupt you for any value of N. The more you roll the more the probability of such a run increases towards 1.

You could end up bankrupting a billion dollar bank starting with 10 dollar bets. It's only sound if you have a literally infinite bank. For any finite bank you just have to play longer to lose but you always end up losing.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

A valid losing strategy, sure.

But doubling down can only be done during play, not at the start of a hand.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 4 days ago (2 children)

You misunderstood. A person doubles the bet on the next hand after a losing hand. This is different than doubling down on a 9, 10, or 11 during play.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Ahh yes, the "thank God I have infinite money, I literally can't lose" approach.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago

We call it the Musky Bezos.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago

Yeah, martingale

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Well if you keep digging, eventually you'll end up in China on the positive side.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago

You just have to overflow your casino balance back into the positive

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago

If you can’t win at blackjack, you are doing it wrong.

load more comments (14 replies)