Eggleston Betting System 2.0

[colbster]

I have fielded many questions concerning my original system for play based on the Eggleston Betting Method, and I have come to the realization that my previous method for implementing the mathematical advantage created by my staking system was flawed.  The problem that I have isolated is that, by only playing on new triggers, it fails to capitalize on the streaky nature of roulette.  When a choppy pattern emerged, numerous false triggers ate up a bankroll, especially during flat-betting, creating a hole that could not be overcome by the wins because I had set up a rule that only let you bet one trigger in a direction.  Many players brought this up to me, and so I have changed the system to incorporate the benefits of constant playing with my new system.  This created a problem where the program could be a loser with either chops (R-L-R-L-R-L) or the deadly doubles (R-R-L-L-R-R) when flat-betting.  Thus, my new system does not allow for flat-betting, but requires a progression.  For anyone who is not familiar with the concepts of my system, it is imperative that you familiarize yourself with the information I presented in the first posts of my previous thread, "The Eggleston Betting Method".

Rules for the new system:
•   At the beginning of  a session, or following a zero, you begin by tracking the first spin(s) until a direction is indicated in the dozens, the columns, or both.  A move from 1st to 2nd, 2nd to 3rd, or 3rd to 1st are "Right" movements.  A move from 3rd to 2nd, 2nd to 1st, or 1st to 3rd are "Left" movements.  We bet 1 unit on the last dozen spun and the next dozen in the direction of the previous movement.  For instance, if the dozens move from 3rd to 2nd, a Left move, we bet on 2nd (the last spun) and 1st (the next dozen to the left).
•   If we get a repeat of the 2nd dozen, we pocket the profits and leave the bets on the table exactly as they were before.  We do this as long as the 2nd dozen continues to appear (or whatever the "repeat" dozen happens to be).
•   If we get a win by a spin result in the 1st dozen, have a trigger for a new bet of 1 unit on the 1st dozen (last spun) and the 3rd (the next dozen to the left).  We continue making these adjustments as long as we continue to win.  If we have moved up the progression to a level higher than the 1st, we reset to the lowest level of our progression after the 1st win.  Every bet while we continue winning will be at the lowest level of the progression.
•   If we lose by a spin result in the 3rd dozen, we have a new movement to the right.  This triggers a new bet of 3rd dozen (last spun) and 1st dozen (the next dozen to the right).  The loss moves up our progression one level as explained below in the section on the progression.  The results of this spin follow the rules as explained in the preceding bullet points.

Progression rules:
•   We use a 1-2-4-8-16-32-64 progression.  We bet the same amount on both dozens played at all times.  After any win, we reset to level 1.  I play a no-zero roulette board online, so this progression is adequate.  If you play a board with 0 or 0/00, I suggest adding a lower level bet to the progression: .5-1-2-4-8-16-32-64 to compensate for the elevated risk of a loss, although this is not absolutely necessary.  Doing so will slow down the speed at which you get your wins.
•   We use separate progressions for both left and right movements.  They are absolutely separate and totally independent of one another.  If you track both dozens and columns, you will have a total of 4 progressions at a time.  I keep a sheet of paper next to my computer with 4 rows, 7 columns, marked with the bet amounts.   I use a penny on each row to keep track of where I am in the progressions.
•   Any win resets the bets FOR THAT DIRECTION ONLY.  Any loss will automatically move the bet level up to the next level for that direction.  This happens even if you have had 15 consecutive wins in that direction before the loss.  Every new direction trigger will always start at the 2nd level of the progression.  That is the reason why I have included the .5 unit bet as an option for more conservative play.
•   When you lose on a bet, the progression moves up for the direction you were betting.  However, your loss triggers a new bet in the other direction, using the amount indicated by the new directions progression.  For instance, if your left progression is at 2 units, and your right progression is at 4 units, and you are betting to the right, a loss will move the right progression up to 8 units but your next bet will be 2 units to the left.  You only use the 8 units upon your next trigger to the right.
Notes on the progression:
I am fully aware that the typical martingale progression for 2-dozen betting is 1-3-9-27-81-243-729.  Those stakes rise too quickly to be practical, causing great damage to a bankroll and hitting the table limits too quickly to be of any real use.  I use the 50/50 progression, 1-2-4-8-16-32-64, just to stay in the game long enough to get my wins.  I know that this progression does not fully cover losses accumulated during a batch of chops.  However, it still allows for great gains based on the fact that repeats frequently happen at all levels of the progression.  With several repeats at the higher levels, you can end up with positive units, even after a total bust.  On the other hand, there will be times when you get a win at the higher levels without a single repeat along the way that will result in you losing units, even with a win.  If you have a repeat at the 8-unit level, this covers all the losses accrued up to that point, plus 1.  If you lose at 16 but win at 32, you would only lose 15 units (the 16 loss from the repeat columns minus the 1 extra from your repeat).  These 2 extreme circumstances cancel themselves out nicely over the long run.  Since we bet every spin, the losses are largely covered by the accumulation of 2-unit wins on every spin during stable stretches during our session (if we are playing both dozens and columns).  Some of my wins come from slow, methodical wins at the lower levels, and some come from the wins and repeats at the higher levels.  The progression keeps me in the game long enough for this to happen in most cases, although there will be sessions where you bust out at the 64-unit level.  The win-to-loss ratio is more than sufficient to weather these losses.  The fact that we run 2 separate progressions in different directions does a wonderful job of slowing down the loss of chips during bad sessions.  For instance, a very rough stretch of 15 chops would be necessary to bust out the progression.  By spreading this among the 2 directional progressions, we lose at 64 units on one line and 32 units on the next.  In a single-martingale progression, we would be at a loss of 32,768 on both lines (2^15).  Not only is this unacceptably high, we would not have a chance of finding a table to allow this sort of wager.  With the 2-dozen progression of 3x the last bet, the loss at that level would be ridiculous.  My wager system keeps losses slow and low, allowing a chance for recovery from drawdowns.
Please familiarize yourself with the benefits and drawbacks of my progression.  If you do not agree with the progression, feel free to use one of your own liking.  I have spent a lot of time on my progression, and I will not be defending the progression on the forum.  I know that this is not the usual 2-dozen progression and that it does not fully cover the potential losses statistically.  Please do not contact me concerning this progression, as I will not be responding to comments about the progression.

Money management rules:
•   I play until I have gained 50 units.  Sometimes, you will slowly cover the 50-unit goal with 1- or 2-unit wins.  Sometimes, you will get repeats at the higher bet levels, sending you shooting past 50 to up to 100+ unit wins.  While I walk away at that time, you have the option of continuing to play until the bet is resolved with a win or a loss.  That is entirely up to you and your tolerance for risk.
•   I stop playing at a bust at the 64-unit level, regardless of the condition of my bankroll.
•   In those instances where you have sustained losses, despite wins, due to not having repeats along the progression, I stop playing at a loss of 100 units.
•   My session bankroll is 300 units.
•   My lifetime bankroll is 1,200 units.

[olinet]

HELLO COLBSTER

can YOU MAKE AN EXAMPLE TO SHOW THE DIFFERENCE YOU HAVE INTRODUCED BETWEEN THE OLD AND NEW VERSION
thanks a lot for all your works.

[colbster]

I have attached close to a 200-spin session to illustrate the differences between my two systems.  These were real spins taken from the real spin section on this board, using a single 0 table to demonstrate.  I chose this session because it dealt with a fairly severe drawdown early in the session, but both methods recovered to a decent positive.  In both cases, I would expect that I would have ended this session +50 units quite earlier than the 200 spins as I play both dozens and columns simultaneously.  Had the columns had a bad session, you can see how well insulated we would be because the dozens performed as they should with this system.  I would describe this session as a "grind" session, much less attractive than most sessions I have experienced, although we still ended comfortably up playing either method.  In case it isn't clear, the L2 and R8 comments under Trigger/Bet are direction and amount based on my progression.  The W=Win, the R=Repeat, and the L=Loss under results.

Just a couple of notes:
By playing the original method, we bet less, drawdown less, reach a lower level on the progression, and avoid several of the losses to the dreaded zero, since we were not bet every time that the zero showed.

By playing the newer method, we bet nearly every spin, have a little more excitement, don't have the disappointment of watching numerous great streaks pass us by, and ultimately end up a little bit more at the end of the session.

I vastly prefer the new system myself.  Both are totally mechanical systems, with simple tracking. 

Hope this helps, Olinet.  Shoot me a PM if you need further clarification.

[rick_gene]

I have been testing this system using RNG. . after 2000 spins , using 0. 5, 1,2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256 bankroll 1000, I'm up 200 units.
I always bet on 0 from progression 4 onward ( just the mental thing and sometime I did hit the zero! feeling nice!)
I'm using the same progression on left or right.  just continue the progression without separating to 2 progression for L and R
if you look at my progression the top progression is 256 BUT after 2000 spins the max was 32.  so those higher progression is just in case but I'm sure I will not go past 64. . honestly even you lost few spins the profit can cover those lost and will catch up the lost quite soon as well.
I will keep testing until 10,000 spins and see how. . maybe I need another week.
i advise to start low. . as low as 0. 5 and always bet on zero when the progression reach 4th steps.
since I'm using the new egglestone system. . then you will come accross quite a lot of zero! because you are going to play always every spins.  except after zero and at the beginning of the session.

good luck

[rick_gene]

-