HomeSystems › Fibonacci

Fibonacci: bet the Fibonacci number, back two on a win — tested to destruction

ELEGANT MATH, IDENTICAL PRICE⚙ computed
We ran 200,000 sessions of Fibonacci ($5 base on red, $500 bankroll, $500 table max, 100 spins, European wheel). Result: 17.2% of sessions busted, the median player finished at $575, and the realized house edge was 2.73% — statistically identical to the wheel’s 2.70%. A negative progression: it reshapes how you lose, never how much on average.

The distribution — what 200,000 bankrolls did

MetricValueRead it as
Bust rate17.2%sessions that hit $0 within 100 spins
Hit the table max0.0%the cap the system pretends doesn’t exist
Median finish$575the typical session — a small win (the hook)
10th / 90th percentile$0 / $625the bad night vs the good night
Mean finish$468the average — always below $500, by exactly the edge
Avg max drawdown$214the hole you sit in along the way
Avg spin of ruin#55when busts happen, this is when
Realized edge2.73%vs the wheel’s 2.70% — the punchline

Change the conditions — the price stays

VariationBust rateMedian
Standard (above)17.2%$575
Double bankroll ($1,000)9.6%$1075
Short session (50 spins)7.8%$535
Long session (200 spins)32.2%$630

First 12 spins, played by the book

#BetResultBankroll
1$50$495
2$5R$500
3$5B$495
4$5R$500
5$5B$495
6$5B$490
7$10R$500
8$5R$505
9$5B$500
10$5R$505
11$5R$510
12$5B$505

▶ Run Fibonacci yourself — autopilot in the free simulator

Other systems

Flat bettingMartingaleGrand MartingaleParoli (Reverse Martingale)all 14 →

Frequently asked

Does the Fibonacci system work?
Not against the edge. Over 200,000 sessions it paid the wheel 2.73% of all money wagered — the same price as betting randomly. It changes the shape of results — moderate bust risk, same average cost.
What bankroll does Fibonacci need?
Doubling the bankroll to $1,000 moved the bust rate from 17.2% to 9.6% in our runs — a real reduction in bust risk, purchased with more money at the same percentage price.
Is Fibonacci good for short sessions?
At 50 spins the bust rate was 7.8% (vs 17.2% at 100). Shorter exposure means fewer disasters and less edge paid — which is true of every system, because time on the felt is the only variable that matters.