2026-09-30

Players who find martingale too steep often look at D'Alembert and Fibonacci. Like martingale, both raise the bet after a loss. What differs is how fast. We ran all four on the same real shoes from Evolution live baccarat at the Stake (stake.com) casino.
Flat always 1
Martingale 6 double after a loss: 1 2 4 8 16 32, back to 1 after six losses
D'Alembert +1 after a loss, -1 after a win (never below 1)
Fibonacci one step up the sequence after a loss: 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 ...,
two steps back after a win
D'Alembert undoes one loss with one win, so the stake moves slowly. Fibonacci starts slowly but, on a long losing run, grows almost as fast as martingale.
Across 10,405 clean shoes, each shoe started fresh at 1 and bet banker on every hand except ties.
Wagered/shoe Shoes in profit Worst shoe Result vs wagered Flat 59 45.8% -32 -1.29% Martingale 6 171 65.0% -239 -1.04% D'Alembert 258 63.9% -490 -1.22% Fibonacci 181 80.3% -7,034 -1.31%
Fibonacci was capped at 610 (the 15th number), yet one shoe with a long losing run still reached -7,034.
The last column is around -1% for all four. Banker commission applies to every system alike, and moving the stake around does not change that rate. What changes is the shape. Fibonacci wins the most shoes but also has the biggest worst shoe. D'Alembert simply puts more money in play, so the same rate costs more in total.
Not "which one wins" but "which shape can my bankroll survive". Look at the worst-shoe column first and keep only the systems whose number you could absorb.
All four about -1.0% to -1.3% of money wagered Shoes in profit Fibonacci > martingale ≈ D'Alembert > flat Worst shoe Fibonacci > D'Alembert > martingale > flat
Hiddenpick is a Windows program that runs Evolution live baccarat on Stake (stake.com) for you, following the rules you set. The amount needed at each step can be checked in the martingale calculator.