My response as always, it depends on the System and the Trader.

If you're playing a game of "flip-coin" where you won whatever-you-bet for head; and lost whatever-you-bet for tails. How much should you risk/bet? Ans=Nothing.

If you're playing a game of get "blue gum-ball out the machine of 2-gum-balls (red & blue). How much should you risk on the first try? Ans=The Minimum.<--(I'm not sure about the math on that :)). How much should you risk on the second try? Ans=Everything.

If you're playing a game of "flip-coin" where you won 1/2-of-whatever-you-bet for head; and lost whatever-you-bet for tails. How much should you risk/bet? Ans=Run Away. Money-Management Cannot help you here. If the situation was flipped, then you should bet 50% of Everything you have. Again- (I'm not sure about the math on that).

In the Gum-ball example Martingale is Under-Betting.

In the Run-Away Example, Martingale will Kill you faster than Flat-Betting the Minimum.

In the Advantage Coin Example, Martingale or some form of Progression would be Just about Right.

Using the Gum-Ball Betting in the Advantageous Coin Example will Ruin you before you get to Profit.

And Finally, In the First Coin Flip Example 50:50 Martingale could Kill or Make you depending on how Big the Bank is.

So the answer to if Martingale is good or bad Depends on your Edge. IMO.

-Ps- whats with the interest in Martingale lately? Edges to justify martingale don't exist in Forex AFAIC. I don't even Know if Forex really have an Edge that can be Mathematically Guaranteed.

Does anyone here use martingale ea, or martingle-based strategy in their ea? What is the survival rate like, or how long have you use them?

It seems like it is mathematically NOT impossible to implement this successfully -- hope to hear your take on this.

This idea is derived from the St.Petersburg Paradox --> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Petersburg_paradox

which concludes that the traders (or players) always wins the house (market)... what do you think?