I Tested 10 Roulette Systems with $200 Each — Here Are the Results

I spent 2 months testing every popular roulette system with $200 each on European roulette. No theory — just raw data.

System 1: Martingale

Double after every loss on red/black. Starting bet $2. - Sessions before bust: 8 - Max streak lost: 8 (needed $512 bet, table max was $500) - Final balance: $0 - Verdict: Works until it doesn't. Then you lose everything.

System 2: D'Alembert

Increase bet by $1 after loss, decrease by $1 after win. - Sessions: 30 - Final balance: $182 - Loss: -$18 - Verdict: Slow bleed. Better than Martingale but still negative.

System 3: Fibonacci

Bet following Fibonacci sequence (1,1,2,3,5,8,13...) on losses. - Sessions: 20 - Final balance: $170 - Loss: -$30 - Verdict: Gentler than Martingale, same eventual result.

System 4: Labouchere

Write a sequence, bet sum of first+last number. - Sessions: 18 - Final balance: $208 - Profit: +$8 - Verdict: Got lucky. Over more sessions it would be negative.

System 5: James Bond

Bet $14 on 19-36, $5 on 13-18, $1 on zero. - Sessions: 15 - Final balance: $156 - Loss: -$44 - Verdict: Looks fancy, loses fast.

Systems 6-10 (Paroli, 1-3-2-6, Oscar's Grind, Reverse Martingale, Flat Betting)

All ended between $170-$210. None consistently profitable.

The Conclusion

Flat betting on European roulette was the most predictable. I lost exactly 2.6% — almost perfectly matching the theoretical house edge of 2.7%. No system beats math.

But if you must use a system, D'Alembert is the safest because it doesn't escalate bets as aggressively.

Total spent on this experiment: $2,000. Total learned: priceless. Save yourself the money and just read this article.