Fixed sequences: 1–3–2–6 and 1–3–2–4
A compact sequence is a rule for exposure, not a prediction model.
What it describes
Named fixed sequences organise the amounts associated with a run of outcomes. Variants such as 1–3–2–6 and 1–3–2–4 differ in their exposure profile and termination conventions. Online descriptions are not always consistent.
Formula & principle
Win → next of 1–3–2–6; loss → reset to 1
The illustrated variant uses a $10 unit and resets after a loss or completion. The 1–3–2–4 variant has the same $10 amounts on this all-loss path.
B(n) is one stake. On the left, the counter sums all losing stakes with a minus sign and freezes after round 25. On the right, all 25 results are watched without a stake. One $10 stake is then placed for round 26. Its payout follows the selected target: for an even-money bet, $20 returned means $10 stake plus $10 profit. Other targets use their own payout rules.
Same pattern. Different starting points.
A deliberately constructed series: 25 × No Black, then a matching result at 26. The end is known in this demo only.
Two different snapshots: the left freezes accumulated losses after 25 stakes, before the break. The right skips all 25 rounds, places one $10 stake before round 26, and shows its winning payout, including the returned stake. Net profit is shown separately. This is a selected winning example with a predetermined break, not an equal-length profit comparison.
Without Winnary
Starts at round 1
Waiting for this track
With Winnary
Starts at round 26
Waiting for this track
Model: A sequence that resets after a loss stays at its initial unit on this path. The left follows the strategy throughout the losing series. “With Winnary” shows only one initial $10 stake after 25 observed results; there is no earlier loss or stake progression in that column. It is not a measured product result. The Legendary label is illustrative, not a calculated rarity.
Fewer stakes mean less accumulated exposure in this selected sequence. A stake placed after round 25 has no better next-spin odds, and the pattern could continue beyond 26. This model assumes unlimited funds and no table limits. The break is observed after settlement; it cannot cancel a stake already placed. Winnary cannot enforce a loss limit at an external table. Every losing stake is added to the running loss. In the single-stake example, payout includes the returned stake; net profit subtracts that stake. Coverage payouts also account for losing parts of a split allocation. If the round-1 track continued through the same break at round 26, its net would be -$240; that final stake would be $10. The later start does not improve next-spin odds.
Demo ready. Both examples use the same predetermined results.
What the mathematics says
Before comparing any results, a researcher must specify the exact variant. Two implementations can share a name while producing different distributions because they reset or stop differently. A name alone is not a reproducible specification.
How to read the evidence
Even a precisely specified sequence does not reveal the next independent spin. Its legitimate use in an educational simulation is to examine variance and the effects of stopping rules, with no claim that the sequence improves the wheel’s probabilities.
Fixed sequences: 1–3–2–6 and 1–3–2–4: without and with Winnary
This compares the information available, not measured winnings or losses.
| Without Winnary | With Winnary |
|---|---|
| A familiar sequence name can imply precision even when its rules or evidence are unclear. | Check whether a claim refers to an actual observed pattern, then examine the sequence’s assumptions separately. |
What does not change. A precise exposure rule still does not predict the next independent result.
Roulette predictor claims: what evidence matters? ↗Where Winnary fits
Winnary is a roulette analyser that organises observations. Rarity labels and rankings are descriptive. They are not a prediction of the next spin, evidence of a profitable system or a recommendation to act.
Read about the analyser ↗