THS WORST ROULETTE SYSTEM IS NOT THE MARTINGALE

Because it's the most deceptive, and convinces a lot of people that it can work until they blow everything chasing it. With it being progressive (or regressive, I forget which is which) you win small amounts for long periods, so when the hammer falls people think they should reload and try again.

Well in theory it does work but won't work properly in real life because either the person doesn't have enough money to carry on doubling or the limit is reached before the small profit can be made

and def should not be tried online, only in a casino

?

You know you can beat roulette

But not rng roulette,remember it's a computer programme fooling you in to thinking that you are actually playing roulette

You will loose everytime by doubling up on the same roulette wheel or machine.  The only way to get round this is to walk away after your first bet looses, and double up on the next roulete and so on.

Its the worst because it can require exponentially large bets exposing more to the house edge when compared with most other betting systems. Hence expected losses are greater.

Assuming   a 50%  cance  of  red or black...


Bet each time on black, n double  if you loose.

NOW,
Calculate  the loss   of  40 Reds  in a row

finally try  41 losses in a row.  (OUCH !!)

?

it aint quite 50%, take into account the zero and in some cases the zero zero

VIZZBUCKS your on the ball mate

Martingale players are a real cashcow..... for the casinos. Think about it: you ever and always win only the amount of your 1st wager. If you would start with 10 pounds and be forced to put around a million on the table and finally win, you would win only 10 pounds. Casinos know that martingale would be unbeatable, why else are they setting limits? The easiest way for them to make money.

Why don't you try it the other way round and play with the bank's money: Play "Paroli". Put 10 on a color. It it wins, either take your tenner away or leave the 20 as bet. If win: 40. and so on. People are not shy to put 500 pounds on the table to win 10. But most do not have the balls to let a winner run 5 times. (10), 20, 40, 80, 160, 320 with BANK money. Thus, one winner would eliminate 32 losing bets (or to whatever you want to drive it).

If you want to chase losses, you are much better off with a progression on dozens or columns. 1 winner eliminates 2 losers. Play the favorite dozen of the last 12 spins. Example: 1-, 1-, 2-,2-,3-,3-,4+,3-,4-,4+, 3+: result +3 with 8 losers and 3 winners.

Rules: increase by 1 unit after 2 losses. If the 1st increased bet wins, go back one step, if win, one step back until in profit. If the 2nd increased bet wins, go back one step. If that bet loses, go up again.
Case 1: 1-, 1-, 2-, 2-, 3-, 3-,   4+, 3-,    3-, 4+, 3+, 2+.
Case 2: 1-, 1-, 2-, 2-, 3-, 3-,   4-, 4+, 3-, 4-,    4+, 3+, 2-, 2-, 3+.
Tried to show the difference in the bets with the bigger distances (4+, 3- and 4-,4+,3-,4-).

12 numbers move in waves, like everything else in roulette. 1 dozen leads for a while, then another one catches up. What I am doing is taking the favorite of the last 12 spins (strike out the 13th from bottom) and play that dozen or column. This works with any combination of 12 numbers. However, I prefer doz. and col. for their simplicity to place the wager.

This works for me since many years in real casinos like Bade-Baden or Stuttgart (I am German) and also in online casinos, but there, I am using only sites with real dealer, e.g. in celtic c..., no RNGs.

A similar system can be applied in Blackjack: play with BANK money. No card counting necessary, no indices and complicated maths to do in your head.

We try to catch a winning streak by betting after a win: 1x (already won), 1x, 1.5x, 1.5x, 2x, 2x, 3x, 3x, 5x, 5x, 7x, 7x, 10x, 10x. We start winning after bet 3. If we win a BJ or double or split bet, we omit one step in order to get faster to the higher wagers (remember: all BANK's money (until you might lose it. But we keep at least some)). There is also a modified basic strategy available. Look out for a book entitled "Progression Blackjack" by Donald Dahl.

Good luck

is {qet} on to somehing here or not.?

yeh but it is still not the worst system. only as bad as all the others.
surely the wizzard knows what hes on about

Food for thought @qet, I appreciate it.

Martingale is terrible. I mostly use a Fibonacci progression and chase the last 'even money' result to rake in some extra dosh every month. Preferably in real casinos but online with live dealers works too if you keep the session short

layton they are both as good or as bad as each other.

see