Roulette Wolfie Ladder version W - Last updated: October 4, 2026

86% win rate based on all 4,482 runs ( SEE results for more details )


I have made about 18 different versions of the Wolfie Ladder and have them all competing to see which is the best version. See the results page to see which is doing the best. When you go to lupopedia.com/wolfie_ladder/ the current winner is shown.

Go to the results page to see which version is doing the best. This is me trying to play out the sequence in units 3 to max 250 which is the min and max bet on a electronic roulette wheel. and increeasing the progression to 7 bets instead of 6.

People keep misunderstanding what I actually built, so here is the truth in plain English: I am not a gambler — I am a programmer. I did not sit there playing 10,000 roulette games like some guy with a lucky rabbit foot. I wrote a program that runs the entire Wolfie Ladder — all 4 stages, all 31 steps — across 50 to 300 simultaneous games on a single page, and then I repeated that whole batch 10,000 times. That is how you get a real statistical picture. That is how you reach a ~90% win rate. Not vibes. Not superstition. Not “progressions” like Fibonacci that blow up the moment variance sneezes. The Wolfie Ladder is engineered to survive streaks, recover losses, and beat the distribution curve — and I tested it by running 10,000+ full sequences in under 30 minutes, not by hand playing one spin at a time. If people think I sat there clicking red/black like a zombie, they really do not understand who they are talking to. When i first made this system luck i guess was on my side because the first few hundred times i was playing it i was winning at a rate of 91% of the time but as i kept running it more and more times the win rate started to drop and now it is between ~83% and ~90% . And here’s the part people really don’t understand: the Wolfie Ladder wins even when the game‑level win rate is losing. For example — in one of the sequences, the system played 92 total games. Out of those:
38 wins
54 losses
Including a brutal streak where it lost every single bet from #52 through #67
That’s 16 consecutive losses in the middle of the run.
And despite that? Despite losing more games than it won? Despite eating a variance spike that would vaporize Fibonacci, Martingale, or any “pro gambler” strategy?
It still finished the sequence up +$100.
That’s the point. The Ladder doesn’t care about “win more than you lose.” It cares about sequence structure, distribution recovery, and controlled escalation. It’s engineered to survive streaks, absorb damage, and still exit the sequence profitable — even when the raw win/loss ratio looks terrible.
This is why the system works. This is why the win rate stabilizes around ~86.2%+ across 10,000 full trials. Not because it wins every spin — but because it wins the sequence. Other winning version of the wolfie ladder are version A, version B, version C, version D, and version X. version D has a win rate of 86.2% at 10,000 runs. version X has a win rate of 88.2% at 300 runs. ( it is new)


update 10/01/2026: removed the waiting for a win for stage 1.5 and stage 2.5 seemed to make no notibale difference in the win rate. also added database to save the runs and display the win rate on the results page. Also removed step 7 to keep the system simple and fast we have a 5% chance of hitting this but we will recover it. see version A for having that step included back in.

update 10/02/2026: removed step 14 to keep the system simple and fast we have a 5% chance of hitting this but we will recover it. see version B for having that step included back in. removed step 22 ( see version C for having that step included back in) if loosing step 21 and not bankrupt reset the ladder and start over on stage 3 . Reason being that step 22 had a 31% chance of winning but the chances of winning the stages in the ladder 10 times is 68% . you have a better chance of getting the money back doing the ladder.

update 10/04/2026: added stage 4 to the ladder see version D for having stage 3 repeated which what it was doing before AND it has a better win rate than version X so far with a win rate of 86.2%


THE WOLFIE LADDER SYSTEM (Step-by-Step) CLICK HERE IF YOU WANT TO KNOW THE REASONING BEHIND THESE STEPS
STAGE 1:
1️⃣ Bet on two dozens, $4 each. If win → reset ladder, back to Step 1. If lose → Step 2. ( net win at this step is $4 )
2️⃣ Bet $6 on the first dozen. Win → reset. Lose → Step 3. ( net win at this step is $4 )
3️⃣ Bet $9 on the first dozen. Win → reset. Lose → Step 4. ( net win at this step is $4 )
4️⃣ Bet $13 on the first dozen. Win → reset. Lose → Step 5. ( net win at this step is $3 )
5️⃣ Bet $20 on the first dozen. Win → reset. Lose → Step 6. ( net win at this step is $4 )
6️⃣ Bet $30 on the first dozen. Win → reset. Lose → Step 7. ( net win at this step is $4 )
7️⃣ Bet $40 on the first dozen. Win → reset. Lose → set bank_needed_to_reset = current bank + 120, then Step 8. ( net at this step is −$6 )
8️⃣ Bet $0 on the first dozen and wait for a hit. This is a sequence reset, not a progression bet. Win → Step 9. A miss stays on Step 8.
STAGE 2:
9️⃣ Bet $10 on two dozens. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → repeat Step 9. Lose → Step 10. ( net win at this step is $10 )
🔟 Bet $16 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 9. Lose → Step 11. ( net win at this step is $12 )
1️⃣1️⃣ Bet $24 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 9. Lose → Step 12. ( net win at this step is $12 )
1️⃣2️⃣ Bet $36 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 9. Lose → Step 13. ( net win at this step is $12 )
1️⃣3️⃣ Bet $54 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 9. Lose → Step 14. ( net win at this step is $12 )
1️⃣4️⃣ Bet $81 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 9. Lose → Step 15. ( net win at this step is $12 )
1️⃣5️⃣ Bet $92 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 9. Lose → set bank_needed_to_reset = current bank + 400, then Step 16. ( net at this step is −$47 )
1️⃣6️⃣ Bet $0 on the first dozen and wait for a hit. This is a sequence reset, not a progression bet. Win → Step 17. A miss stays on Step 16.
STAGE 3:
1️⃣7️⃣ Bet $25 on two dozens. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → repeat Step 17. Lose → Step 18.
1️⃣8️⃣ Bet $40 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 17. Lose → Step 19.
1️⃣9️⃣ Bet $60 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 17. Lose → Step 20.
2️⃣0️⃣ Bet $90 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 17. Lose → Step 21.
2️⃣1️⃣ Bet $130 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 17. Lose → Step 22.
2️⃣2️⃣ Bet $190 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 17. Lose → Step 23.
2️⃣3️⃣ Bet $250 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 17. Lose → set bank_needed_to_reset = 1550, then Step 24.
2️⃣4️⃣ Bet $0 on the first dozen and wait for a hit. This is a sequence reset, not a progression bet. Win → Step 25. A miss stays on Step 24.
STAGE 4:
2️⃣5️⃣ Bet $50 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → repeat Step 25. Lose → Step 26.
2️⃣6️⃣ Bet $75 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 25. Lose → Step 27.
2️⃣7️⃣ Bet $100 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 25. Lose → Step 28.
2️⃣8️⃣ Bet $125 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 25. Lose → Step 29.
2️⃣9️⃣ Bet $150 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 25. Lose → Step 30.
3️⃣0️⃣ Bet $200 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 25. Lose → Step 31.
3️⃣1️⃣ Bet $250 (max bet) on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 25. Lose → set bank_needed_to_reset = 1500, then Step 25.

Roulette wheel
This system was build using 80 diffent ai agents across 8 LLM models to test the best possible system for roulette using lupopedia AI platform.
The programmer captain wolfie (Eric) was too board playing just one game at a time so programmed this to play up to 500 games all at once, that way can play thousands of times a minute and find the best stratagy that holds up . .
Want the full story? Check out the Patreon post for the complete dialog between Captain Wolfie, Grok, and the mischievous Lilith!

Why my versions are A, B, C instead of major.minor.patch Because the traditional versioning system — major.minor.patch — is meaningless for what I’m doing here. I’m not shipping software releases. I’m iterating behavioral variants of a probability engine. Each version (A, B, C… all the way to ZZ if I want) represents a distinct ladder logic, a distinct recovery pattern, a distinct volatility profile, and a distinct mathematical personality. These aren’t “patches.” These aren’t “minor updates.” These are forks of logic. Version A behaves one way. Version B behaves another way. Version C might remove a step, add a step, rebalance a stage, or change the volatility curve entirely. Using semantic versioning (4.0.96, 4.0.97, etc.) would imply these are incremental changes to the same system — but they’re not. They’re parallel universes. So I use lettered versions because: They’re simple They’re human-readable They reflect behavior, not “patch level” They let me branch logic infinitely (A → B → C → … → Z → AA → AB → … → ZZ) They match how I actually think about the system In other words: Version A is a creature. Version B is a different creature. Version C is another creature. Letters make more sense for creatures than numbers.

Probability Reality Check

Steps 8, 16, and 24 bet $0 and wait for the first dozen to hit. Those steps reset the sequence. The ladder is a bet on sequences: the next run of bets will not lose 7 or more times in a row. That bet only exists after a reset, so the ladder waits for a hit with nothing on the table, then starts the next stage. A real dozen bet in that spot hits 12 of 38 numbers, about 31.58% of the time, and loses about 68.42% of the time. The seven bets before each wait are one two-dozen bet and six one-dozen bets. That sequence fails about 3.78% of the time, so it survives about 96.22% of the time. One more dozen bet would move survival to about 97.41%. That is only about 1 percentage point better than the sequence you already have, and the stake would be much larger. The wait skips that bet and starts a new sequence instead. The house edge is still there. This is controlled exposure, not a guaranteed profit.

500-Round Simulation (American Wheel Model)

MySQL connected to collab52_salessyntax on localhost. This run was saved to wolfie_ladder_runs.

Every time this page loads it simulates 500 games using the WOLFIE Ladder exactly as defined here or stops if you win $100+ How did you do? If the run ended in the cliff, click here to try again and generate a fresh 500-game sequence. Saved runs are listed on wolfie_ladder_results.php.

Final Bank
152.00
Net Units
-1,348.00
Wins / Losses
48 / 116
Max Step Reached
31
Run Status
Bank Depleted or Game Over
Table Limit Hit
No
Bank Depleted
Yes

Below is one 500-bet run. Each roll uses the real American wheel odds (12/38 for single dozen). Every time a win hits, we reset or loop based on rules.

# Bet Wheel Result Bank Next Step Mode
1 4 each on two dozens 2 Win 1,504.00 1 Step 1
2 4 each on two dozens 3 Win 1,508.00 1 Step 1
3 4 each on two dozens 8 Win 1,512.00 1 Step 1
4 4 each on two dozens 14 Win 1,516.00 1 Step 1
5 4 each on two dozens 27 Loss 1,508.00 2 Step 1
6 6 on first dozen 7 Win 1,520.00 1 Step 2
7 4 each on two dozens 36 Loss 1,512.00 2 Step 1
8 6 on first dozen 11 Win 1,524.00 1 Step 2
9 4 each on two dozens 12 Win 1,528.00 1 Step 1
10 4 each on two dozens 25 Loss 1,520.00 2 Step 1
11 6 on first dozen 31 Loss 1,514.00 3 Step 2
12 9 on first dozen 25 Loss 1,505.00 4 Step 3
13 13 on first dozen 34 Loss 1,492.00 5 Step 4
14 20 on first dozen 23 Loss 1,472.00 6 Step 5
15 30 on first dozen 17 Loss 1,442.00 7 Step 6
16 40 on first dozen 14 Loss 1,402.00 8 Step 7
17 0 on first dozen 23 Loss 1,402.00 8 Step 8
18 0 on first dozen 12 Win 1,402.00 9 Step 8
19 10 each on two dozens 16 Win 1,412.00 9 Step 9
20 10 each on two dozens 35 Loss 1,392.00 10 Step 9
21 16 on first dozen 12 Win 1,424.00 9 Step 10
22 10 each on two dozens 33 Loss 1,404.00 10 Step 9
23 16 on first dozen 2 Win 1,436.00 9 Step 10
24 10 each on two dozens 27 Loss 1,416.00 10 Step 9
25 16 on first dozen 18 Loss 1,400.00 11 Step 10
26 24 on first dozen 7 Win 1,448.00 9 Step 11
27 10 each on two dozens 30 Loss 1,428.00 10 Step 9
28 16 on first dozen 34 Loss 1,412.00 11 Step 10
29 24 on first dozen 2 Win 1,460.00 9 Step 11
30 10 each on two dozens 23 Win 1,470.00 9 Step 9
31 10 each on two dozens 9 Win 1,480.00 9 Step 9
32 10 each on two dozens 31 Loss 1,460.00 10 Step 9
33 16 on first dozen 00 Loss 1,444.00 11 Step 10
34 24 on first dozen 36 Loss 1,420.00 12 Step 11
35 36 on first dozen 25 Loss 1,384.00 13 Step 12
36 54 on first dozen 0 Loss 1,330.00 14 Step 13
37 81 on first dozen 19 Loss 1,249.00 15 Step 14
38 92 on first dozen 13 Loss 1,157.00 16 Step 15
39 0 on first dozen 0 Loss 1,157.00 16 Step 16
40 0 on first dozen 26 Loss 1,157.00 16 Step 16
41 0 on first dozen 13 Loss 1,157.00 16 Step 16
42 0 on first dozen 26 Loss 1,157.00 16 Step 16
43 0 on first dozen 24 Loss 1,157.00 16 Step 16
44 0 on first dozen 22 Loss 1,157.00 16 Step 16
45 0 on first dozen 21 Loss 1,157.00 16 Step 16
46 0 on first dozen 1 Win 1,157.00 17 Step 16
47 25 each on two dozens 18 Win 1,182.00 17 Step 17
48 25 each on two dozens 26 Loss 1,132.00 18 Step 17
49 40 on first dozen 4 Win 1,212.00 17 Step 18
50 25 each on two dozens 20 Win 1,237.00 17 Step 17
51 25 each on two dozens 26 Loss 1,187.00 18 Step 17
52 40 on first dozen 17 Loss 1,147.00 19 Step 18
53 60 on first dozen 16 Loss 1,087.00 20 Step 19
54 90 on first dozen 00 Loss 997.00 21 Step 20
55 130 on first dozen 33 Loss 867.00 22 Step 21
56 190 on first dozen 15 Loss 677.00 23 Step 22
57 250 on first dozen 36 Loss 427.00 24 Step 23
58 0 on first dozen 3 Win 427.00 25 Step 24
59 50 on first dozen 25 Loss 377.00 26 Step 25
60 75 on first dozen 28 Loss 302.00 27 Step 26
61 100 on first dozen 9 Win 502.00 25 Step 27
62 50 on first dozen 9 Win 602.00 25 Step 25
63 50 on first dozen 24 Loss 552.00 26 Step 25
64 75 on first dozen 6 Win 702.00 25 Step 26
65 50 on first dozen 4 Win 802.00 25 Step 25
66 50 on first dozen 31 Loss 752.00 26 Step 25
67 75 on first dozen 7 Win 902.00 25 Step 26
68 50 on first dozen 18 Loss 852.00 26 Step 25
69 75 on first dozen 0 Loss 777.00 27 Step 26
70 100 on first dozen 14 Loss 677.00 28 Step 27
71 125 on first dozen 23 Loss 552.00 29 Step 28
72 150 on first dozen 4 Win 852.00 25 Step 29
73 50 on first dozen 22 Loss 802.00 26 Step 25
74 75 on first dozen 16 Loss 727.00 27 Step 26
75 100 on first dozen 7 Win 927.00 25 Step 27
76 50 on first dozen 24 Loss 877.00 26 Step 25
77 75 on first dozen 31 Loss 802.00 27 Step 26
78 100 on first dozen 2 Win 1,002.00 25 Step 27
79 50 on first dozen 34 Loss 952.00 26 Step 25
80 75 on first dozen 8 Win 1,102.00 25 Step 26
81 50 on first dozen 35 Loss 1,052.00 26 Step 25
82 75 on first dozen 29 Loss 977.00 27 Step 26
83 100 on first dozen 20 Loss 877.00 28 Step 27
84 125 on first dozen 8 Win 1,127.00 25 Step 28
85 50 on first dozen 35 Loss 1,077.00 26 Step 25
86 75 on first dozen 22 Loss 1,002.00 27 Step 26
87 100 on first dozen 33 Loss 902.00 28 Step 27
88 125 on first dozen 35 Loss 777.00 29 Step 28
89 150 on first dozen 00 Loss 627.00 30 Step 29
90 200 on first dozen 6 Win 1,027.00 25 Step 30
91 50 on first dozen 22 Loss 977.00 26 Step 25
92 75 on first dozen 22 Loss 902.00 27 Step 26
93 100 on first dozen 15 Loss 802.00 28 Step 27
94 125 on first dozen 22 Loss 677.00 29 Step 28
95 150 on first dozen 2 Win 977.00 25 Step 29
96 50 on first dozen 18 Loss 927.00 26 Step 25
97 75 on first dozen 23 Loss 852.00 27 Step 26
98 100 on first dozen 29 Loss 752.00 28 Step 27
99 125 on first dozen 19 Loss 627.00 29 Step 28
100 150 on first dozen 36 Loss 477.00 30 Step 29
101 200 on first dozen 7 Win 877.00 25 Step 30
102 50 on first dozen 8 Win 977.00 25 Step 25
103 50 on first dozen 23 Loss 927.00 26 Step 25
104 75 on first dozen 25 Loss 852.00 27 Step 26
105 100 on first dozen 14 Loss 752.00 28 Step 27
106 125 on first dozen 22 Loss 627.00 29 Step 28
107 150 on first dozen 21 Loss 477.00 30 Step 29
108 200 on first dozen 32 Loss 277.00 31 Step 30
109 250 on first dozen 11 Win 777.00 25 Step 31
110 50 on first dozen 9 Win 877.00 25 Step 25
111 50 on first dozen 10 Win 977.00 25 Step 25
112 50 on first dozen 26 Loss 927.00 26 Step 25
113 75 on first dozen 22 Loss 852.00 27 Step 26
114 100 on first dozen 24 Loss 752.00 28 Step 27
115 125 on first dozen 28 Loss 627.00 29 Step 28
116 150 on first dozen 14 Loss 477.00 30 Step 29
117 200 on first dozen 13 Loss 277.00 31 Step 30
118 250 on first dozen 4 Win 777.00 25 Step 31
119 50 on first dozen 20 Loss 727.00 26 Step 25
120 75 on first dozen 30 Loss 652.00 27 Step 26
121 100 on first dozen 5 Win 852.00 25 Step 27
122 50 on first dozen 24 Loss 802.00 26 Step 25
123 75 on first dozen 17 Loss 727.00 27 Step 26
124 100 on first dozen 21 Loss 627.00 28 Step 27
125 125 on first dozen 00 Loss 502.00 29 Step 28
126 150 on first dozen 8 Win 802.00 25 Step 29
127 50 on first dozen 29 Loss 752.00 26 Step 25
128 75 on first dozen 33 Loss 677.00 27 Step 26
129 100 on first dozen 0 Loss 577.00 28 Step 27
130 125 on first dozen 24 Loss 452.00 29 Step 28
131 150 on first dozen 16 Loss 302.00 30 Step 29
132 200 on first dozen 1 Win 702.00 25 Step 30
133 50 on first dozen 34 Loss 652.00 26 Step 25
134 75 on first dozen 13 Loss 577.00 27 Step 26
135 100 on first dozen 35 Loss 477.00 28 Step 27
136 125 on first dozen 11 Win 727.00 25 Step 28
137 50 on first dozen 29 Loss 677.00 26 Step 25
138 75 on first dozen 32 Loss 602.00 27 Step 26
139 100 on first dozen 29 Loss 502.00 28 Step 27
140 125 on first dozen 11 Win 752.00 25 Step 28
141 50 on first dozen 28 Loss 702.00 26 Step 25
142 75 on first dozen 24 Loss 627.00 27 Step 26
143 100 on first dozen 16 Loss 527.00 28 Step 27
144 125 on first dozen 22 Loss 402.00 29 Step 28
145 150 on first dozen 26 Loss 252.00 30 Step 29
146 200 on first dozen 1 Win 652.00 25 Step 30
147 50 on first dozen 1 Win 752.00 25 Step 25
148 50 on first dozen 0 Loss 702.00 26 Step 25
149 75 on first dozen 27 Loss 627.00 27 Step 26
150 100 on first dozen 30 Loss 527.00 28 Step 27
151 125 on first dozen 21 Loss 402.00 29 Step 28
152 150 on first dozen 10 Win 702.00 25 Step 29
153 50 on first dozen 15 Loss 652.00 26 Step 25
154 75 on first dozen 00 Loss 577.00 27 Step 26
155 100 on first dozen 5 Win 777.00 25 Step 27
156 50 on first dozen 28 Loss 727.00 26 Step 25
157 75 on first dozen 14 Loss 652.00 27 Step 26
158 100 on first dozen 11 Win 852.00 25 Step 27
159 50 on first dozen 28 Loss 802.00 26 Step 25
160 75 on first dozen 30 Loss 727.00 27 Step 26
161 100 on first dozen 13 Loss 627.00 28 Step 27
162 125 on first dozen 26 Loss 502.00 29 Step 28
163 150 on first dozen 21 Loss 352.00 30 Step 29
164 200 on first dozen 22 Loss 152.00 31 Step 30

All the Math and Lilith and Wolfie Arguing About the System (Updated Canon)

American roulette: 38 numbers. Dozens pay 2:1. Sequence win chance per ladder is 96.22%. Sequence-failure (7-loss bust) is 3.78%.

Stage 1 (correct probabilities)

Step 1

Bet: two dozens, $4 each (total $8). Lose if the ball lands in the non-covered dozen or 0/00 → 14 losing numbers.

Probability of losing Step 1:

P(L1) ≈ 36.84%

Win → net +$4, reset. Lose → go to Step 2.

Step 2

Bet: $6 on the first dozen. Lose if the ball is not in that dozen → 26 losing numbers.

Probability of losing Step 2 (given you are here):

P(L2) = 68.42%

Probability of losing Steps 1 and 2 in a row:

P(L1 ∩ L2) = 25.21%

Win → net +$4, reset. Lose → Step 3.

Step 3

Same loss probability as Step 2.

Probability of losing Steps 1–3 in a row:

P(L1 ∩ L2 ∩ L3) = 17.25%

Win → net +$4, reset. Lose → Step 4.

Step 4

Same loss probability again.

Probability of losing Steps 1–4 in a row:

P(L1…L4) = 11.80%

Win → net +$3, reset. Lose → Step 5.

Step 5

Probability of losing Steps 1–5 in a row:

P(L1…L5) = 8.07%

Win → net +$4, reset. Lose → Step 6.

Step 6

Probability of losing Steps 1–6 in a row:

P(L1…L6) = 5.52%

Win → net +$4, reset. Lose → Step 7.

Step 7

Probability of losing Steps 1–7 in a row (full sequence bust):

P(L1…L7) = 3.78%

This is the true sequence-failure probability.

P(sequence wins at least once) = 1 − 0.0378 ≈ 0.9622

So the chance of winning the sequence once is 96.22%.

We stop at Step 7 because going to Step 8 would only reduce the sequence-failure probability from about 3.78% to roughly 2.6% — small gain, big extra risk in bet size.

You are now down a total of $131 across the whole ladder (4+4+6+9+13+20+30+45 = 131). Stage 2 is only designed to recover $100, not the full $131, on purpose. By capping the recovery target at $100, the system only needs 10 successful sequences instead of extending the ladder to 13 sequences, which would chase the full $131.

Mathematically, the chance of winning all 10 recovery sequences is:

P(10 wins) = (0.9622)10 ≈ 0.684 (68.4%)

If you tried to recover the entire $131 and needed 13 sequences:

P(13 wins) = (0.9622)13 ≈ 0.609 (60.9%)

The recovery target stays at $100 so the ladder is not stretched to 13 steps. A 68.4% chance over 10 sequences is better than a 60.9% chance over 13.

Compounding sequences

Compounding sequences means multiplying the probability of success across repeated independent attempts. Since the chance of winning a single sequence is 96.22%, the chance of winning it multiple times is (0.9622)n.

That is why Stage 1 succeeds only about 38% of the time: a high per-sequence win rate drops sharply when compounded many times.

Stage 1: 25 sequences to win $100

Probability all 25 sequences succeed (no 7-loss bust):

P(Stage 1 success) = p25 ≈ 0.962225 ≈ 0.38 (38%)

About a 38% chance to clear Stage 1 cleanly, not 48%.

Stage 2 (10 sequences)

The system has three stages because even though a single sequence wins 96.22% of the time, stacking many sequences makes a failure streak likely. Stage 1 assumes that somewhere inside those 25 attempts you might hit the 3.78% disaster run, so there is a more aggressive recovery layer.

Stage 2 is designed to win back the $100 loss in 10 successful sequences:

(0.9622)10 = 0.6840

Stage 2 has about a 68% chance of recovering the loss and letting the ladder continue. In play: you win about $50–$60 during normal operation, then eventually hit the rare failure streak and drop $100, then Stage 2 steps in with higher aggression and a shorter climb. Stage 1 succeeds about 38% of the time over 25 sequences; Stage 2 succeeds about 68% of the time over 10 sequences.

Stage 2 uses the same ladder structure as Stage 1 — one two-dozen entry followed by six single-dozen climbs — but the goal is recovery, not profit. Per-sequence success is still p ≈ 0.9622:

P(Stage 2 success) = (0.9622)10 ≈ 0.684

The odds of losing both Stage 1 and Stage 2 are based on two independent exposures to the same 7-loss bust pattern:

Independence means you multiply. It does not prevent multiplication.

P(lose both) = P(Stage 1 fails) × P(Stage 2 fails)

P(lose both) = 0.619 × 0.316 ≈ 0.195

About a 19.5% chance of losing both Stage 1 and Stage 2. About an 80.5% chance of recovering and continuing.

Stage 3 (22 sequences)

Stage 3 is the deep-recovery layer — the nuclear option after both Stage 1 and Stage 2 fail. At this point you are down about $550, and Stage 3 uses the same ladder structure, but now you need 22 successful sequences to fully recover and reset.

Per-sequence success rate:

p = 0.9622

Probability all 22 sequences succeed:

P(Stage 3 success) = (0.9622)22 ≈ 0.41

Stage 3 success ≈ 41%. About a 41% chance of recovering the remaining loss and allowing the system to continue even after both earlier stages have failed.

Updated combined probability tree (Stage 3 = 22 sequences)

Stage 1 tries to win outright. If it fails, Stage 2 attempts recovery. If that fails, Stage 3 is the final recovery attempt.

Overall survival probability. The system survives (recovers and continues) if any stage succeeds:

P(overall success) = S1 + F1 · S2 + F1 · F2 · S3

= 0.381 + (0.619 · 0.684) + (0.619 · 0.316 · 0.41)

= 0.381 + 0.423 + 0.080 ≈ 0.884

Updated overall survival ≈ 88.4%.

Total collapse only happens if all three stages fail:

P(total collapse) = F1 · F2 · F3 = 0.619 · 0.316 · 0.59 ≈ 0.115

Updated collapse rate ≈ 11.5%.

Given the corrected math, the full three-stage ladder should survive about 88.4% of the time. That is the theoretical probability when Stage 1, Stage 2, and the corrected 22-sequence Stage 3 are treated as one recovery tree. In large-scale simulations — 10,000 full attempts — the real results fall between 78% on the low end and 91% on the high end. That spread is normal: the theoretical survival rate is ~88%, but variance over thousands of trials will always produce fluctuations, especially because each collapse is rare but extremely impactful. The math describes the long-run expectation; the simulator shows the real-world distribution, which consistently lands between 78% and 91%, exactly what you would expect from a system with a theoretical success rate in the high 80s and occasional deep failures that pull the average down.