Starters question

[timebase]

I am one of those persons that have been testing the play on e.g. red with 1 euro and dubbel everytime you loose.

Anyway, with the testing in fun play I have to say that was OK. Once in a while it reached the 128 limit but not higher. (If I am clear)

Let's say you commit yourself to dubbel till 128 adn not higher.

Is this a kind a system which does have a change or is this doomed to fail?  I understand that after a loose you will have to play several times with a win to break even.

[Jeromin]

Hi timebase and welcome to the forum.

I think the basic martingale is the first system anybody tries on roulette: it's simple, intuitive and most times wins since most runs on any even chance ( EC ) bet tend to be short. Voila! instant genius. What was the big deal about beating roulette, right? Unfortunately, it is not that simple. Long losing runs and speacially, really long losing runs are more common that the casual gambler would initially believe ( those stories about 20+ blacks in a row are true ). And to handle the gamblers with bigger funds, casinos implement table limits.

Some wil argue that there's nothing wrong with that system, since they all fail eventually anyway, and it has the advantage of it's simplicity. Mathematics and logic are on their side. and any patterns that seem to defy randomness are likely creations of our order seeking minds, mere illusions.

But if you hope that there's a system out there that can consistently win more than it loses in the long run, through clever bet selection and careful money management, i.e. if you believe randomness not to be quite so random,  you will want to stay well clear of seeking the limit of a EC bet with the basic martingale, specially on a table with 1 -128 spread. Any 8+ in a row EC sequence is really very common.

Have a look at the money management section, there are contributors like GLC who will open your mind to clever, well though out progressions. And don't be fooled by short term play mode wins. The true test of a progression in with real, hard earned cash, when you gamble 128 units just to recover one. On paper a win that seemed "due" ( a dangerous belief in roulette ) will appear less likely after successive and increasing lossess; likely you will give up before playing it in full.

Ideally you want to go for short, possibly multi stage progressions, or better, possitive progressions ( win red once? double and get out, win or lose, for example ).

Hope it helps,

Jeromin

[timebase]

Thank you. In the mean time I was getting this kind of a conclusion already, not as well discribed as you do.