  Parrondo's paradox refers to the counter-intuitive situation where a winning
strategy results from a suitable combination of losing ones. Simple stochastic
games exhibiting this paradox have been introduced around the turn of the
millennium. The common setting of these Parrondo games is that two rules, $A$
and $B$, are played at discrete time steps, following either a periodic pattern
or an aperiodic one, be it deterministic or random. These games can be mapped
onto 1D random walks. In capital-dependent games, the probabilities of moving
right or left depend on the walker's position modulo some integer $K$. In
history-dependent games, each step is correlated with the $Q$ previous ones. In
both cases the gain identifies with the velocity of the walker's ballistic
motion, which depends non-linearly on model parameters, allowing for the
possibility of Parrondo's paradox. Calculating the gain involves products of
non-commuting Markov matrices, which are somehow analogous to the transfer
matrices used in the physics of 1D disordered systems. Elaborating upon this
analogy, we study a paradigmatic Parrondo game of each class in the neutral
situation where each rule, when played alone, is fair. The main emphasis of
this systematic approach is on the dependence of the gain on the remaining
parameters and, above all, on the game, i.e., the rule pattern, be it periodic
or aperiodic, deterministic or random. One of the most original sides of this
work is the identification of weak-contrast regimes for capital-dependent and
history-dependent Parrondo games, and a detailed quantitative investigation of
the gain in the latter scaling regimes.
