Fibonacci Betting System

I love Fibonacci numbers as well as Pascal's triangle. It is amazing how many patterns you see. This isn't just an esoteric math exercise, but applications can be found in nature as well.



However, this post is not directly about that. In my continued look at popular betting systems (ugh!), my next examination will be on the Fibonacci. The gist of it is similar to the Labouchere, that the player needs to win only 1/3 of even money bets to have a winning session. Oh, and not run out of money trying as well.

Here is my understanding of how the Fibonacci works:

1. Write your winning goal on a piece of paper.
2. Bet that amount on any even money bet.
3. If the result from step 2 is a win, walk away.
4. If the result from step 2 is a loss, then write the amount you just bet to the right of the winning goal on your piece of paper.
5. Bet the sum of the right two numbers on your piece of paper. If there is just one number, then bet that.
6. If you win, then cross off the right two numbers. If you lose, then add the amount bet as a new element on the list to the right side
7. Go back to step 5, until you cross off all numbers or run out of money

Is this right? What if the player is not satisfied to win just one unit? Does he tend to keep repeating this process?

This will all eventually end up in both a new page and video on the Fibonacci Betting System, so I welcome input.

The question for the poll is what do you think of the Fibonacci?

Keep losing 10 in a row without putting 2 wins together in 60 hands.

I thought the Fibonacci was a way to raise bets without doing a straight martingale. There should be no need to write numbers down like with a labouchere.

The way I understood it you tried to have 2 successful wagers in a row. So if you lost ten straight following the string and won just 2x it results in a profit and significantly more than a martingale.

The sequence of the last two numbers will always result in the same string.

1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55etc. Therefore you don't have to add numbers or cross off. Just keep the Fibonacci string memorized.

So let's take lose eight times, win two.

You lose 1+1+2+3+5+8+13+21 = 54 units lost.

Winning two straight then is 34 + 55 = 89 units won

Profit 35 units. Notice the profit if successful is the amount of the next to last wager made plus one.

There may be more than one Fibonacci method but since the number string is always the same writing numbers down should not be necessary

EDIT: I seem to recall a variation that did require writing it down. It went like this and was meant to deal with a win/lose scenario.

You write down the sequence and try to win two in a row which ends the sequence wherever you are

If you lose all the wagers (bankroll or you hit table max) that ends the sequence.

And if you win one then lose the next you cross off the two previous wagers that added up.

From the above example, if you wagered 34 units and won, then 55 and lost, you would cross off the 13 and 21 (which added up to the 34 units wager) and go ahead with the 89 units wager (34+55=89)

The purpose of that was to effect a win with a bouncy table as well. Eventually you would still wind up with all the numbers crossed off. Unless you hit another lose lose streak

These kinds of things are all over stocks. Guess enough believe in it for it to be true or it is. Other times just bad data, wall street sales pitch, stonks always go up. Fibanacci probably best idea which isn't gambler's fallacy. I'm really overdo to take notes.

Quote: onenickelmiracle

I'm really overdo to take notes.

Yeah. That's why I think this video series is a good idea (although I'm not sure the Wizard does). To me the positives are:

• Betting systems can increase the fun factor for some games, especially the this/that, player/banker, black/red type.
• If you wish to be a well rounded and knowledgeable player, you should at least know the basics of the more common systems. That way you'll recognize them when you see them.
• It's hard to tell people that their system doesn't work if you have to confess that you don't know how their system works.
• Sometimes studying a betting system will spark an idea for a more legitimate pursuit.

I'm really only familiar with the Martingale and D'Alembert systems so I'm enjoying this.

Quote: ChumpChange

Keep losing 10 in a row without putting 2 wins together in 60 hands.

Why would you play a game
where you can lose 10 in a row,
Know a game before you play
it or don't play.

If I can win 10 in a row, I can lose 10 in a row. But I've had much worse luck.

Quote: Gialmere

Yeah. That's why I think this video series is a good idea (although I'm not sure the Wizard does). To me the positives are:

• Betting systems can increase the fun factor for some games, especially the this/that, player/banker, black/red type.
• If you wish to be a well rounded and knowledgeable player, you should at least know the basics of the more common systems. That way you'll recognize them when you see them.
• It's hard to tell people that their system doesn't work if you have to confess that you don't know how their system works.
• Sometimes studying a betting system will spark an idea for a more legitimate pursuit.

I'm really only familiar with the Martingale and D'Alembert systems so I'm enjoying this.

I meant about what would be stupid money in gambling is wise in investing. You don't need a system if you're neg EV gambling, just gambling is the system trying to stay in denial. Worst system is I the knew I should have done that, best system is I knew I should have done that.

Let me post some Fibonacci examples. Assume a bet unit is $1.

Example 1:

Bet #1: $1, loss, balance = -$1.
Bet #2: $1, win, balance = $0.

Are you done at this point? Sources I read say "move two numbers down the sequence after a win. That would bring you off the list.

Example 2:

Bet #1: $1, loss, balance = -$1.
Bet #2: $1, loss, balance = $-1.
Bet #3: $2, loss, balance = $-4.
Bet #4: $3, win, balance = $-1.
Bet #5: $1, win, balance = $0.

I could ask the same question, are you done at this point, breaking even?

Example 3:

Bet #1: $1, loss, balance = -$1.
Bet #2: $1, loss, balance = $-2.
Bet #3: $2, loss, balance = $-4.
Bet #4: $3, loss, balance = $-7.
Bet #5: $5, win, balance = $-2.
Bet #6: $2, win, balance = $0.
Bet #7: $1, win, balance = $1.

It seems to me that if your last winning bet is from the first 1, then you profit a unit. If it's from the second 1, then you break even only.

Do I have this right?

Quote: Wizard

Let me post some Fibonacci examples. Assume a bet unit is $1.

Example 1:

Bet #1: $1, loss, balance = -$1.
Bet #2: $1, win, balance = $0.

Are you done at this point? Sources I read say "move two numbers down the sequence after a win. That would bring you off the list.

Example 2:

Bet #1: $1, loss, balance = -$1.
Bet #2: $1, loss, balance = $-1.
Bet #3: $2, loss, balance = $-4.
Bet #4: $3, win, balance = $-1.
Bet #5: $1, win, balance = $0.

I could ask the same question, are you done at this point, breaking even?

Example 3:

Bet #1: $1, loss, balance = -$1.
Bet #2: $1, loss, balance = $-2.
Bet #3: $2, loss, balance = $-4.
Bet #4: $3, loss, balance = $-7.
Bet #5: $5, win, balance = $-2.
Bet #6: $2, win, balance = $0.
Bet #7: $1, win, balance = $1.

It seems to me that if your last winning bet is from the first 1, then you profit a unit. If it's from the second 1, then you break even only.

Do I have this right?

But then it's just a martingale with only profit of one unit per session

By making the second win the next number in the Fibonacci sequence you can lose many in a row, just win twice and secure a decent profit (not that it overcomes house edge but at least the profit potential is higher if you go for it