The Fitzroy System Applied to Roulette

When we talk about systems for Roulette, it’s always good to start the conversation by pointing out that there really is no guaranteed way to beat the banker.

The Fitzroy system is no exception, but it can be a useful method for those seeking effective stake and conservative budget control.

HOW THE FITZROY SYSTEM WAS BORN

Like many other Roulette methods, the Fitzroy system was born out of a mathematical desire for players to gain control. Predicting a pattern of numbers and managing bets in a way to reduce the bank’s advantage is at the heart of the Fitzroy system. The method was significantly more cautious to other systems, such as the Martingale which asked players to commit more capital. 

Back in the middle of the 19^th century, the Earl of Rosslyn and his brother (who’s middle name was Fitzroy), attempted to demonstrate the validity of their new method in the European casinos of the era. However, in truth it was a failed experiment and the brothers lost all their possessions.

WHAT IS THE FITZROY SYSTEM?

From a practical point of view, the Fitzroy system is extremely easy to play and practice. Players start with a single stake unit (depending on the budget available and the table limits of course), and then progress according to the outcome of the bet.

We are obviously talking about a system dedicated only to basic bets with even odds, i.e., the classic red/black, odd/even and high/low. So, if we win our first bet, we will bet one more unit in the next one. If we lose instead, we will bet two.

This is not a question of the Martingale-style progression, but only an increase of a single unit. So, if the second bet also loses, in that case, the next stake will be 3 units. On the other hand, if we win, we will go back to playing only one unit.

PROS AND CONS OF THE FITZROY SYSTEM

When compared to other systems for online Roulette, the maximum stake we will be playing is certainly smaller and more useful for managing our gaming budget during a session. Like all Roulette methods, the main con is that the bank maintains the advantage. Players should play on Roulette tables which only have one zero, otherwise the losing margin doubles.

There remains the possibility of exploiting those segments of positive variance where we will win, but in the long term we are still exposed to a certain loss (although relatively small given the conservative staking format). Players should also be aware that by adding only one unit at a time, even if we win, we are still not taking back all the money we had previously placed, but only “containing” the losses. For example, if after five rounds of betting we are betting six units and winning another six, our total account is 12 units won, but to get there we had to bet 1+2+3+4+5(15), so basically we are still three units down.

A POSSIBLE VARIATION

To avoid this kind of situation, a possible variation has been created that changes the approach to the method: from adding one stake unit at a time after losing bets, to simply considering having at least one unit during our winning lap.

This way, after we have lost the first bet of 1 unit, in the second bet we will have to target 3 units to make a profit of at least one unit. If you lose that too, the third bet will have to be 4 units. If we win that, we’ll be on par with the total bet, so the next stake will also have to be 4 units.

At this point, winning will result in a profit of +4 units for which you can return to play with only one unit, otherwise in the next one we will have to increase again to 6 (to achieve our minimum profit of 1 unit). However, a variation like this is comparable to the classic Martingale system, forcing us to invest significantly more (especially in a particularly unfavorable series).