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

87% win rate based on all 6,210 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. When version X looses it usally feels like a crime because you have to loose 6 times in row 2 times and 7 times in row 2 times while playing which feels like lady luck is mad at you. There is a version of this system with step 7 and step 14 and step 21 being a waiting for a win which is version H which has a win rate of 85% at 1,000 runs.

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 28 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, and version D. 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 → set bank_needed_to_reset = current bank + 90, then Step 8. ( net win at this step is $4 )
7️⃣(Removed in Version B. It only increased Stage‑1 probability by ~2%, but added a heavy 45‑unit cost. Cutting it keeps the system simpler, faster, and far less volatile. We still have a ~5% chance of hitting this loss, but the ladder easily recovers it.)
STAGE 2:
8️⃣ Bet $10 on two dozens. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → repeat Step 8. Lose → Step 9. ( net win at this step is $10 )
9️⃣ Bet $16 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 8. Lose → Step 10. ( net win at this step is $12 )
🔟 Bet $24 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 8. Lose → Step 11. ( net win at this step is $12 )
1️⃣1️⃣ Bet $36 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 8. Lose → Step 12. ( net win at this step is $12 )
1️⃣2️⃣ Bet $54 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 8. Lose → Step 13. ( net win at this step is $12 )
1️⃣3️⃣ Bet $81 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 8. Lose → set bank_needed_to_reset = current bank + 300, then Step 15. ( net win at this step is $12 )
1️⃣4️⃣ (Removed in Version C. It only increased Stage‑2 probability by ~2%, but added a heavy 122‑unit cost.
STAGE 3:
1️⃣5️⃣ Bet $25 on two dozens. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → repeat Step 15. Lose → Step 16.
1️⃣6️⃣ Bet $40 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 15. Lose → Step 17.
1️⃣7️⃣ Bet $60 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 15. Lose → Step 18.
1️⃣8️⃣ Bet $90 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 15. Lose → Step 19.
1️⃣9️⃣ Bet $130 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 15. Lose → Step 20.
2️⃣0️⃣ Bet $190 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 15. Lose → Step 21.
2️⃣1️⃣ Bet $250 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 15. Lose → set bank_needed_to_reset = 1550, then Step 22.
STAGE 4:
2️⃣2️⃣ Bet $50 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → repeat Step 22. Lose → Step 23.
2️⃣3️⃣ Bet $75 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 22. Lose → Step 24.
2️⃣4️⃣ Bet $100 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 22. Lose → Step 25.
2️⃣5️⃣ Bet $125 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 22. Lose → Step 26.
2️⃣6️⃣ Bet $150 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 22. Lose → Step 27.
2️⃣7️⃣ Bet $200 on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 22. Lose → Step 28.
2️⃣8️⃣ Bet $250 (max bet) on the first dozen. Win & bank > bank_needed_to_reset → reset. Win but bank ≤ bank_needed_to_reset → Step 22. Lose → Step 22.

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

American wheel dozen loss probability stays the same on every spin: about 68.42% to lose, 31.58% to hit your dozen. Even after 10 or 15 losses in a row, the next spin is still roughly 1/3 to win, 2/3 to lose. This ladder doesn't pretend the odds improve—it only adjusts stake size so that, when you do finally win, you aim to recover with the progression. The house edge is still there; this is about controlled exposure, not 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
125.00
Net Units
-1,375.00
Wins / Losses
68 / 114
Max Step Reached
28
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 27 Loss 1,492.00 2 Step 1
2 6 on first dozen 20 Loss 1,486.00 3 Step 2
3 9 on first dozen 20 Loss 1,477.00 4 Step 3
4 13 on first dozen 15 Loss 1,464.00 5 Step 4
5 20 on first dozen 11 Win 1,504.00 1 Step 5
6 4 each on two dozens 24 Win 1,508.00 1 Step 1
7 4 each on two dozens 21 Win 1,512.00 1 Step 1
8 4 each on two dozens 17 Win 1,516.00 1 Step 1
9 4 each on two dozens 15 Win 1,520.00 1 Step 1
10 4 each on two dozens 32 Loss 1,512.00 2 Step 1
11 6 on first dozen 3 Win 1,524.00 1 Step 2
12 4 each on two dozens 36 Loss 1,516.00 2 Step 1
13 6 on first dozen 7 Win 1,528.00 1 Step 2
14 4 each on two dozens 10 Win 1,532.00 1 Step 1
15 4 each on two dozens 34 Loss 1,524.00 2 Step 1
16 6 on first dozen 27 Loss 1,518.00 3 Step 2
17 9 on first dozen 28 Loss 1,509.00 4 Step 3
18 13 on first dozen 25 Loss 1,496.00 5 Step 4
19 20 on first dozen 32 Loss 1,476.00 6 Step 5
20 30 on first dozen 24 Loss 1,446.00 8 Step 6
21 10 each on two dozens 8 Win 1,456.00 8 Step 8
22 10 each on two dozens 21 Win 1,466.00 8 Step 8
23 10 each on two dozens 12 Win 1,476.00 8 Step 8
24 10 each on two dozens 31 Loss 1,456.00 9 Step 8
25 16 on first dozen 10 Win 1,488.00 8 Step 9
26 10 each on two dozens 22 Win 1,498.00 8 Step 8
27 10 each on two dozens 2 Win 1,508.00 8 Step 8
28 10 each on two dozens 1 Win 1,518.00 8 Step 8
29 10 each on two dozens 29 Loss 1,498.00 9 Step 8
30 16 on first dozen 19 Loss 1,482.00 10 Step 9
31 24 on first dozen 6 Win 1,530.00 8 Step 10
32 10 each on two dozens 21 Win 1,540.00 1 Step 8
33 4 each on two dozens 30 Loss 1,532.00 2 Step 1
34 6 on first dozen 4 Win 1,544.00 1 Step 2
35 4 each on two dozens 19 Win 1,548.00 1 Step 1
36 4 each on two dozens 26 Loss 1,540.00 2 Step 1
37 6 on first dozen 0 Loss 1,534.00 3 Step 2
38 9 on first dozen 35 Loss 1,525.00 4 Step 3
39 13 on first dozen 23 Loss 1,512.00 5 Step 4
40 20 on first dozen 29 Loss 1,492.00 6 Step 5
41 30 on first dozen 16 Loss 1,462.00 8 Step 6
42 10 each on two dozens 1 Win 1,472.00 8 Step 8
43 10 each on two dozens 18 Win 1,482.00 8 Step 8
44 10 each on two dozens 1 Win 1,492.00 8 Step 8
45 10 each on two dozens 33 Loss 1,472.00 9 Step 8
46 16 on first dozen 7 Win 1,504.00 8 Step 9
47 10 each on two dozens 15 Win 1,514.00 8 Step 8
48 10 each on two dozens 4 Win 1,524.00 8 Step 8
49 10 each on two dozens 22 Win 1,534.00 8 Step 8
50 10 each on two dozens 12 Win 1,544.00 8 Step 8
51 10 each on two dozens 3 Win 1,554.00 1 Step 8
52 4 each on two dozens 8 Win 1,558.00 1 Step 1
53 4 each on two dozens 30 Loss 1,550.00 2 Step 1
54 6 on first dozen 00 Loss 1,544.00 3 Step 2
55 9 on first dozen 16 Loss 1,535.00 4 Step 3
56 13 on first dozen 20 Loss 1,522.00 5 Step 4
57 20 on first dozen 10 Win 1,562.00 1 Step 5
58 4 each on two dozens 23 Win 1,566.00 1 Step 1
59 4 each on two dozens 19 Win 1,570.00 1 Step 1
60 4 each on two dozens 35 Loss 1,562.00 2 Step 1
61 6 on first dozen 35 Loss 1,556.00 3 Step 2
62 9 on first dozen 25 Loss 1,547.00 4 Step 3
63 13 on first dozen 34 Loss 1,534.00 5 Step 4
64 20 on first dozen 36 Loss 1,514.00 6 Step 5
65 30 on first dozen 7 Win 1,574.00 1 Step 6
66 4 each on two dozens 25 Loss 1,566.00 2 Step 1
67 6 on first dozen 18 Loss 1,560.00 3 Step 2
68 9 on first dozen 10 Win 1,578.00 1 Step 3
69 4 each on two dozens 00 Loss 1,570.00 2 Step 1
70 6 on first dozen 7 Win 1,582.00 1 Step 2
71 4 each on two dozens 25 Loss 1,574.00 2 Step 1
72 6 on first dozen 30 Loss 1,568.00 3 Step 2
73 9 on first dozen 29 Loss 1,559.00 4 Step 3
74 13 on first dozen 32 Loss 1,546.00 5 Step 4
75 20 on first dozen 31 Loss 1,526.00 6 Step 5
76 30 on first dozen 23 Loss 1,496.00 8 Step 6
77 10 each on two dozens 6 Win 1,506.00 8 Step 8
78 10 each on two dozens 1 Win 1,516.00 8 Step 8
79 10 each on two dozens 36 Loss 1,496.00 9 Step 8
80 16 on first dozen 17 Loss 1,480.00 10 Step 9
81 24 on first dozen 33 Loss 1,456.00 11 Step 10
82 36 on first dozen 36 Loss 1,420.00 12 Step 11
83 54 on first dozen 19 Loss 1,366.00 13 Step 12
84 81 on first dozen 21 Loss 1,285.00 15 Step 13
85 25 each on two dozens 4 Win 1,310.00 15 Step 15
86 25 each on two dozens 16 Win 1,335.00 15 Step 15
87 25 each on two dozens 6 Win 1,360.00 15 Step 15
88 25 each on two dozens 32 Loss 1,310.00 16 Step 15
89 40 on first dozen 25 Loss 1,270.00 17 Step 16
90 60 on first dozen 00 Loss 1,210.00 18 Step 17
91 90 on first dozen 13 Loss 1,120.00 19 Step 18
92 130 on first dozen 32 Loss 990.00 20 Step 19
93 190 on first dozen 35 Loss 800.00 21 Step 20
94 250 on first dozen 16 Loss 550.00 22 Step 21
95 50 on first dozen 34 Loss 500.00 23 Step 22
96 75 on first dozen 9 Win 650.00 22 Step 23
97 50 on first dozen 11 Win 750.00 22 Step 22
98 50 on first dozen 26 Loss 700.00 23 Step 22
99 75 on first dozen 8 Win 850.00 22 Step 23
100 50 on first dozen 30 Loss 800.00 23 Step 22
101 75 on first dozen 21 Loss 725.00 24 Step 23
102 100 on first dozen 9 Win 925.00 22 Step 24
103 50 on first dozen 0 Loss 875.00 23 Step 22
104 75 on first dozen 6 Win 1,025.00 22 Step 23
105 50 on first dozen 14 Loss 975.00 23 Step 22
106 75 on first dozen 7 Win 1,125.00 22 Step 23
107 50 on first dozen 34 Loss 1,075.00 23 Step 22
108 75 on first dozen 3 Win 1,225.00 22 Step 23
109 50 on first dozen 17 Loss 1,175.00 23 Step 22
110 75 on first dozen 20 Loss 1,100.00 24 Step 23
111 100 on first dozen 4 Win 1,300.00 22 Step 24
112 50 on first dozen 27 Loss 1,250.00 23 Step 22
113 75 on first dozen 25 Loss 1,175.00 24 Step 23
114 100 on first dozen 18 Loss 1,075.00 25 Step 24
115 125 on first dozen 31 Loss 950.00 26 Step 25
116 150 on first dozen 2 Win 1,250.00 22 Step 26
117 50 on first dozen 26 Loss 1,200.00 23 Step 22
118 75 on first dozen 28 Loss 1,125.00 24 Step 23
119 100 on first dozen 32 Loss 1,025.00 25 Step 24
120 125 on first dozen 21 Loss 900.00 26 Step 25
121 150 on first dozen 34 Loss 750.00 27 Step 26
122 200 on first dozen 32 Loss 550.00 28 Step 27
123 250 on first dozen 18 Loss 300.00 22 Step 28
124 50 on first dozen 32 Loss 250.00 23 Step 22
125 75 on first dozen 9 Win 400.00 22 Step 23
126 50 on first dozen 22 Loss 350.00 23 Step 22
127 75 on first dozen 1 Win 500.00 22 Step 23
128 50 on first dozen 0 Loss 450.00 23 Step 22
129 75 on first dozen 9 Win 600.00 22 Step 23
130 50 on first dozen 31 Loss 550.00 23 Step 22
131 75 on first dozen 20 Loss 475.00 24 Step 23
132 100 on first dozen 12 Win 675.00 22 Step 24
133 50 on first dozen 13 Loss 625.00 23 Step 22
134 75 on first dozen 3 Win 775.00 22 Step 23
135 50 on first dozen 33 Loss 725.00 23 Step 22
136 75 on first dozen 21 Loss 650.00 24 Step 23
137 100 on first dozen 6 Win 850.00 22 Step 24
138 50 on first dozen 0 Loss 800.00 23 Step 22
139 75 on first dozen 18 Loss 725.00 24 Step 23
140 100 on first dozen 15 Loss 625.00 25 Step 24
141 125 on first dozen 8 Win 875.00 22 Step 25
142 50 on first dozen 25 Loss 825.00 23 Step 22
143 75 on first dozen 35 Loss 750.00 24 Step 23
144 100 on first dozen 24 Loss 650.00 25 Step 24
145 125 on first dozen 13 Loss 525.00 26 Step 25
146 150 on first dozen 8 Win 825.00 22 Step 26
147 50 on first dozen 10 Win 925.00 22 Step 22
148 50 on first dozen 25 Loss 875.00 23 Step 22
149 75 on first dozen 31 Loss 800.00 24 Step 23
150 100 on first dozen 1 Win 1,000.00 22 Step 24
151 50 on first dozen 1 Win 1,100.00 22 Step 22
152 50 on first dozen 4 Win 1,200.00 22 Step 22
153 50 on first dozen 35 Loss 1,150.00 23 Step 22
154 75 on first dozen 27 Loss 1,075.00 24 Step 23
155 100 on first dozen 14 Loss 975.00 25 Step 24
156 125 on first dozen 30 Loss 850.00 26 Step 25
157 150 on first dozen 8 Win 1,150.00 22 Step 26
158 50 on first dozen 9 Win 1,250.00 22 Step 22
159 50 on first dozen 6 Win 1,350.00 22 Step 22
160 50 on first dozen 30 Loss 1,300.00 23 Step 22
161 75 on first dozen 27 Loss 1,225.00 24 Step 23
162 100 on first dozen 8 Win 1,425.00 22 Step 24
163 50 on first dozen 24 Loss 1,375.00 23 Step 22
164 75 on first dozen 35 Loss 1,300.00 24 Step 23
165 100 on first dozen 26 Loss 1,200.00 25 Step 24
166 125 on first dozen 23 Loss 1,075.00 26 Step 25
167 150 on first dozen 8 Win 1,375.00 22 Step 26
168 50 on first dozen 33 Loss 1,325.00 23 Step 22
169 75 on first dozen 12 Win 1,475.00 22 Step 23
170 50 on first dozen 28 Loss 1,425.00 23 Step 22
171 75 on first dozen 27 Loss 1,350.00 24 Step 23
172 100 on first dozen 20 Loss 1,250.00 25 Step 24
173 125 on first dozen 16 Loss 1,125.00 26 Step 25
174 150 on first dozen 19 Loss 975.00 27 Step 26
175 200 on first dozen 34 Loss 775.00 28 Step 27
176 250 on first dozen 24 Loss 525.00 22 Step 28
177 50 on first dozen 12 Win 625.00 22 Step 22
178 50 on first dozen 18 Loss 575.00 23 Step 22
179 75 on first dozen 29 Loss 500.00 24 Step 23
180 100 on first dozen 20 Loss 400.00 25 Step 24
181 125 on first dozen 35 Loss 275.00 26 Step 25
182 150 on first dozen 00 Loss 125.00 27 Step 26

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.