Why is the D'Alembert strategy not profitable in roulette?

[Julio88]

The D'Alembert strategy is not considered to be profitable in roulette because it relies on the idea of steady increases in wagers after losses and decreases in wagers after wins. This approach, however, does not take into account the house edge which is inherent in the game of roulette. As a result, the strategy is not able to effectively counter the house edge, which leads to a steady decrease in the amount of money that the player will be able to win over time.

 

[swift]

I feel strategy assumes that there is an equal chance of winning or losing on each spin of the roulette wheel. However, in reality, the odds of winning or losing are always slightly in the favor of the casino.

 

[Lazza]

The D'Alembert strategy's long-term profitability may be constrained, notwithstanding its safety and risk-management features. If there are as many wins as losses, the strategy may not produce a sizable overall profit. The strategy's efficacy is dependent on winning more bets than losing.

 

[swift]

The D'Alembert strategy's long-term profitability may be constrained, notwithstanding its safety and risk-management features. If there are as many wins as losses, the strategy may not produce a sizable overall profit. The strategy's efficacy is dependent on winning more bets than losing.

I feel efficacy of the strategy is dependent on winning more bets than losing. If there are as many wins as losses, the D'Alembert strategy may not produce a sizable overall profit. Also, if a player has long losing streaks, the strategy may require them to bet increasingly large amounts, leading to potentially significant losses