If you have read about betting systems before, you will quickly recognize the similarities between the D’ Alembert and the Martingale strategies.
These roulette systems are designed to help players boost their winnings and give them a systematic plan to win back their losses by using only Even-Money bets.
There is, however, one very important distinction between these two, which is perhaps one reason why some casino players prefer using the D’ Alembert system.
The main drawback of the Martingale method is that you would need to play at roulette tables with no betting limits and have unlimited funds. This is because the strategy requires players to double the bet size following a losing bet.
The effect of doubling up every time you lose is that the stake size required to win back the money from a losing bet will grow exponentially with every losing bet.
This is where the D’ Alembert system is much more attractive.
In this betting system, whenever you lose a bet, you only need to increase your next bet by one unit, not twice a much. Plus every time there’ s a win, you will lower the next bet amount by one unit to lower the amount of money needed to recover should you lose the upcoming bet.
Let’ s use another example to compare these two betting systems. Let’ s assume we use $5 as our base bet (Martingale) or middle number of our sequence (D’ Alembert) with a total bankroll of $100.
Now, let’ s imagine that we lose four bets in a row. If we were using the Martingale strategy, we would have spent ¾ of our total bankroll by now ($75) and we would not be able to place the next wager because we have reached our bankroll limit of $100.
Using the D’ Alembert system, we would have spent only $26 of a total of $100 bankroll and we could afford to lose up to 8 bets in a row before hitting our bankroll limit.
This is what makes this system so attractive, but it comes at a cost.
The Problem with the D’ Alembert System
Despite what we have mentioned before, you must bear in mind that the D’ Alembert strategy is not perfect either. It’ s very important to mention that this strategy is based on a gambler’ s fallacy.
The problem with this strategy is that it assumes that players are more likely to win after losing a bet and they’ re more likely to lose after winning.
The problem with this is obvious; each spin has exactly the same odds of being red or black despite the result of the previous spin(s).
Regardless of this shortcoming, many players claim this method provides them with a systematic gambling system that allows them to achieve good results.
In conclusion, the D’ Alembert method represents an excellent opportunity to limit the risk of going bankrupt while allowing casino players to secure good profits.
