I have followed a couple of them, and ones I have seen all seem to work. But a couple things
1. You really need a good bankroll. Alot of the chases win but you need to be able to double/triple sometime 5 times your bet to win it. Plus with ML's involved the bets get larger faster.
2. you cant pick and choose you have to be all in for them, everyday. You miss days you miss earnings
3. Bankroll management...You have to set a unit system and stick to it. You deviate even the slightest you can throw off any long term profits.
Good Stuff Ryan - agree with all of that....I'll never forget the time I chased the Rays to win - they lost something like 12 in a row and blew up my bankroll bad....been very leery since then - you have to assume that some are going to lose along the way and factor that in....
This is alittle late but here is a good article on chase systems why/why not to use them
The Problem with Chase, Martingale and Progressive Betting Systems and how to Remove the Risk and Keep the Profit
Chase systems are often very attractive to people because of their high winning percentage. This is despite the fact that you may have to risk over 15 units to win 1 on the 4th game of the series and can lose over 26 units when it fails. That being said, if a chase system can turn a profit with a progressive betting style, it can often be tweaked to eliminate the risk and still produce a positive expectation.
Let us look at a system I found as an example:
1. We are only concerned with a team’s games where they are home favorites of -110 or more.
2. If a team has lost 3 consecutive home games as at least-110 favorites, we play the next game when they are home as -110 favorites or more.
3. We progressively (always risk to win 1u on the series, see the example below if confused) play these games up to four times and stop the series as soon as our team wins a game.
Before I continue, please note that I do not think the sample size I have obtained is enough to start investing in this system. This system is based on an excellent concept that home teams do not lose many games in a row (they don’t get swept 80% of the time in a three game series), especially as favorites. If you are interested in this system, please test it further or simply use it as another filter for making good bets.
I decided to test this system with three teams over the 2011 MLB season. For those interested in using the system, I chose two strong home teams and one mediocre. The two strong teams completed the system going 16-0, with the third going 7-1. Let’s see how devastating the loss really was:
Game 1(-134): Risk 1.34u to win 1u. Result: -1.34u on the series
Game 2(-127): Risk 2.97u to win 2.34u. Result: -4.31u on the series
Game 3(-124): Risk 6.59u to win 5.31u. Result: -10.9u on the series
Game 4(-130): Risk 15.47u to win 11.9u. Result: -26.37u on the series
As you can see, you would have lost 26.37 units on this series chasing to win one unit. A bet of 15.47 units to win 1u on the series has to win 94% of the time to breakeven. Overall, going 23-1 (a win rate of 96%) yielded a loss of 3.4 units. Just an interesting tidbit, if you changed this system to a 3 game chase instead of a 4 game chase, this system would have yielded a 12.1 unit profit.
Now as I said before, it is possible to tweak this system so that it is much less risky and for it to still yield a profit. I kept track of an interesting stat while testing this system. This system yielded a win on game 1 of the series 17 times out of 24 (71% of the time). If you bet every game to win 1u and removed the chase aspect, you would go 23-11 (67.6%) and show a profit of 7.12 units. This may not be as profitable as the 3 game chase system described above, but it is also far less risky.
If you are currently using a progressive betting system, try to find out how often the system earns its 1 unit profit on game one of the series as they often do. This will minimize risk, bankroll requirement, and remove the stress of risking a large amount of money to win one unit.
The other problem with using a progressive betting system is you need a large bankroll to handle the downswings that can come with it. Imagine you started 0-3 on a 3 game chase system. You would be down around 30 units and would have to go at least 30-0 over the next 30 series just to break even. Starting 0-3 on a 4 game chase system would lead you to start down almost 80 units!
There is nothing wrong with a martingale system as long as you have the bankroll and patience to handle the potential massive downswings. If you are interested in a progressive system but want to minimize the risk, try to figure out how often the system closes out on game one of a series. I have converted multiple systems by simply removing the chase aspect and still they produce a profit at a much lower risk.
Awesome stuff Mush! Thanks for posting it.....going to be trying something with totals but working on where to cut it off - 2nd or 3rd game....