The Eggleston Betting system

[colbster]

I have put together a means of betting that overcomes the house advantage (even on American Roulette, but I don't see why you would give up the extra profits) in a very understandable way.    It can be explained in a way that will please the math guys, can be played flat or with a progression, and will work with many different methods of playing dozens.    It has some elements that will appeal to believers in the gambler's fallacy, but it is based squarely in the notion that wheels have no memory, and that spins are, therefore, completely random. 

I will not be explaining the actual bet selection method I use because it is nothing but noise that distracts from the elegance of making bets that have a positive expectancy.    I have discussed this betting mechanism with several contributors whom you would all recognize, with almost universal interest (the only dissenter can be explained away by mentioning a language barrier - it also lead to my decision to ignore the actual bet selection I use because this individual couldn't get past the simplistic method I have been using). 

Right here, I need to take a second to give full credit to two individuals - Richard, of Signum fame, and ommanipadmihum who made a brilliant leap in applying Signum to the dozens.    Both of their postings eventually directed me to where I am happy to find myself in my evolution as a winning roulette player. 

For any new readers who might not be familiar with the Signum system, it is a very clever way of interpreting short-term trends to help predict the next spin result on an EC bet.    Ommanipadmihum realized that the system could work on the dozens by turning the dozens bets into an EC bet, expecting movement among dozens from the last spin to the next as being either to the left or to the right.    Numerous postings documented the great results that came from applying EC methods but gaining 2-1 rewards.    The trip up came when the dozens didn't move to the left or to the right, but repeated.    Some suggested the best way was to start putting a unit on the repeating dozen after a series of repeats. 

Following is my improvement on the staking method that was discussed, as well as a brief mathematical explanation of how this betting method beats the house advantage over the long term:

Note:  I will not expound on what methodology you should use to determine expected L-R values.    You can use a follow-the-last, opposite-of-last, Signum, Lww, or whatever other system you choose to determine if your expectation is for the dozen to move left or right.    For the sake of this example, I have determined that the last spin fell in the 2nd dozen and I expect the next spin will move to the left into the 1st dozen. 

Since I expect the next bet to be in the 1st dozen, I place one unit there.    I place another unit on the 2nd dozen as the last dozen to have spun.    In the past, we have assumed that the house advantage would rule in such a bet because 13/37 would be (-2) and 24/37 would be (+1), resulting in -2 units per every 37 spins on average.    If we were to leave the bets on these two dozens, that is exactly what would occur.    This is where my betting method diverges from the rest.    This system minimizes losses, locks in profits, and allows the winning to run on all at the same time. 

If the spin gives us a result in the 1st dozen, we would count this as a win (W) and take our money off of the table.    If the spin gives us a result in the 3rd dozen, we would count this as a loss (L) and our money would be taken off the table anyway.    However, as long as the 2nd dozen might continue to repeat (R), we will duplicate our bet exactly.    This is the entirety of the Eggleston Betting system.    Stop with a win, stop with a loss, keep winning with repeats.    Then wait for whatever your next trigger is and begin again. 

Why does this work?  If we get a win from the 1st dozen, we are (+1), meaning (+12) out of 37 spins on average.    With a spin of 0 or the 3rd dozen, we are (-2), meaning (-26) out of 37 spins on average.    Excluding the 2nd dozen results, we are currently (-14) in 37 spins.    That means we would need the results from the 2nd dozen to average (+1.  1667) per spin to overcome the house advantage (-14 offset over 12 spins out of 37 where we expect 2nd dozen). 

What can we expect from typical returns from the 2nd dozen?  Since we won (+1) unit already with a repeat in the 2nd dozen, our next totally random spin has 1/12/12/12 out of 37 spins likelihood of hitting each position on the table again.    Ignoring the 0 here (just for the sake of easing the calculations), rather than the +1/+1/-2 results we would expect from covering 2 dozens, our new expectations are +2/+2/-1, or a grand total of +3.    Divided by the three possible outcomes, the average spin at this level is +1, exactly matching our usual expectations of the +1/+1/-2 2-dozen bet payouts.   

However, of these spins, roughly one third will result in yet another spin of the 2nd dozen, taking the same considerations as above to a new expected +3/+3/0, or +2 average.    Already, at this point, we are into positive expectancy territory.    Of the 12/37 spins that take us to the 2nd layer of payout expectations, approximately 4 spins (1/3 of 12) will go to a 3rd layer of payouts.    Another 1+ (4/3) will go to the 4th layer of payouts, +4/+4/+1, or +3 average.    Extrapolated out to these higher layers, the 12 spins in the 2nd dozen will pay approximately (8x+1, 3x+2, and 1x+3, or a total of 17).    Remember that we only needed to overcome -14 from the other 25 spins, giving us an expectation of +3 every 37 spins, more than +.  08 units on every spin on average.    Don't lose sight that over long periods, repeats can extend into higher level of payouts on those incredibly fun streaks that we have all seen where we hit 6, 7, 8, or more in the same dozen. 

The benefit to this system only comes when we follow the rules which require we stop betting after a win or a loss until a new trigger begins a new bet begins. 

Some advantages of this system:

• It can be played with a flat bet or with a progression
  It stays out of the way of prolonged series of results in one direction or the other
  Even when our anticipated direction of movement is wrong, we may still end up being winners
  It features advantages of both EC and 2-1 bets
  It overcomes the house advantage

I am anxious to hear your reactions to this system.    What I have received so far has been very supportive, but if you see somewhere that it can be improved, by all means let me know.    I am also keen to hear how people may apply this to different systems they already play, just with the improved odds of profiting. 

[darrynf]

anychance you could explain again in a shorter version?

i kind of got lost, i think i understand but would like to see examples, though it sounds good

[colbster]

I have attached a 40-spin series that ends with a net of +3 units, just slightly off my expected winnings of +3. xxx in 37 spins.   It was hurt in the middle by the brutal 2-3-2 chops but recovered.   Had I been playing my system, the net would have been +10, although I do use a negative progression.   Playing same as last is obviously a wildly simplistic betting method, but this should demonstrate the methodology and thoughts behind the system.

[col1879]

Hi colbster, I understand the idea and will start my own testing on 'fun play' online. Do you anticipate it to work equally well with online live wheels, RNG and land based casinos?

As a personal choice, I would like to cover the Zero on the wheel, do you think this would have a negative or positive impact on things. For example, instead of 1 unit on 1st dozen and 1 unit on 2nd dozen, how about 1 on Zero and 3 on 1st dozen and 3 on 2nd dozen? Thanks for sharing the system.

[colbster]

Bets on 0 have a truly negative expectation that will eventually harm your profitability.   This betting system overcomes the house advantage, negating the need to cover the 0.   Basically, I see the 0 spins (when they occur while you are actively betting - often they pass without any harm to you during periods where you are not betting) as a tax on your winnings.   I have already figured the 0 into my calculations, but have an expectation of over +3 units during a 37-spin cycle.

Since you are covering 24 numbers on this bet, you have a good chance of hitting the winners.   I lose occasionally, but I more than cover with the wins.   As I mentioned in my previous post, I use a progression that will ultimately hit the wall and fail.   I play RNG almost exclusively because we have no live casinos anywhere near where I am.   Recently, I did have the opportunity to play on a casino boat and faired well, winning 48 units in just under 2 hours.   Unfortunately, because of the low table limits and my progression, I was forced to play for $1 chips, but it was cool to see that it performed just as well on a live wheel as online casinos.   I recently made the switch from play testing to low-stakes real money testing, and the system has held up admirably.

[col1879]

Ok I'll test it and see how it goes. What do you expect the win/lose ratio to be? You admitted you sometimes lose with this way of playing, but what has your experience been so far? For everytime you lose how many do you usually win?

[colbster]

Therein lies the problem with my explaining the system.   I want to focus on the odds aspect of the bet without tainting it with results that come from my personal betting choices.   Just based on the strict math considerations, you should win better than 3 units on a perfect 1-12-12-12 breakdown from a 37 spin cycle.   That is over +. 08 units per spin.   In terms of win/loss, 13 out of 37 will lose, 12 out of 37 will win, and 12 out of 37 will repeat at least once.

The reason I am so hesitant to give my actual methodology is because my betting relies heavily on both the gamblers fallacy and a modified martingale progression.   Because both concepts get so many people fired up, I am afraid that my discovery will be overshadowed by the back-and-forth bickering.

As long as you use an EC strategy to predict direction of movement between dozens, take your money off the table after wins and losses (leaving it on just during repeats), and wait for a new trigger, this system will work for you.

Best of luck!

[col1879]

Do you always play for a certain amount of time or spins? Do you play 37 spins then stop. Do you have a win or loss stop? Thanks

p.s. I didn't bicker lol Others may perhaps do but I don't

[colbster]

My sessions typically last about 100-150 spins.   With my betting method, I use a win goal and a stop loss.   My progression has a built in mechanism that forces me to evaluate my situation frequently.   I find that a perfect 1-12-12-12 cycle never occurs, so spreading it out for longer periods has allowed the laws of statistics to work to my advantage.

[col1879]

So to make sure I am betting right, if you win you stop, if you lose you stop, and if you repeat you keep on going?

And you are always betting on two dozens, the one that has just hit and one to the left or right?

I take it if you use progression you have to apply the progression to both dozens equally? You cannot add a higher progression to one dozen than the other?

I played briefly using flat betting and very quickly got up to +10 profit with one pound chips, but then yo yo'd up and down between +2 and +8 for quite a while. Was always in profit though 

I can see what you mean about it being contained. Would have to have a run of very bad luck to be deep in the negative. Does a win target of 20% and stop loss of 25% seem reasonable for a BR of 40?

[colbster]

You have a great handle on all of this.   Yes, win and loss=stop, repeats=keep going.   You always play 2 dozens: the last spun and either the left or right based on your expectations.   Apply progressions evenly to the 2 dozens (Note: with progression, you have the possiblity of a win that ends with you losing chips.   This happens after several chops followed by a win without a single repeat spin).   My personal system uses a BR of 300 with win target of 50+, stop loss at 100 (or sooner depending on what my progression notes tell me).   I have only ever lost 3 sessions, all under 100 chips.   I have won 60+ sessions, averaging 50-55 chips.   So far, my system has been wildly profitable, but I'm not sure that it is cleaned up enough to share my methodology.   My real emphasis was sharing the bet math, which I consider a totally revolutionary arrangement in roulette.

[col1879]

Well it seems promising and even although maths is not my strong point it kind of makes sense to me and there is a strong possibility, in my opinion, that you could be on to a long term winner.

Only further testing will tell but I think it makes sense. Hopefully regular posters on the forum will contribute as well and give their opinion. No system is ever a hg because every time one sits down at a roulette table there is never a guaranteed win, but if a strategy produces much more profit than loss long term then in my eyes it is as good as a hg. Thanks for sharing and hopefully lots of testing by many will show this to be a winner.

Thanks

[col1879]

What progression do you use? I have been playing using flat betting and have reached my target everytime, but it can be slow going eg win 3 in a row (+3), then lose 1(-2), then win 2 (+2) then lose 1(-2) then win 4(+4) then lose 1(-2) etc.

What is your progression for an BR of 300 and would you use a different progression for a BR of 40? I assume the progression doesn't always finish with a profit.

I wont question the progression or say whether I think it will work or not, I'll just use it 'as is' and see how I do with it. Thanks.

[birdhands]

Thanks for your posts Colbster.  I have to say I don't understand why betting a left/right trend to continue should work, although maybe that part is arbitrary and it's the sticking with repeats that beats the house edge.  In any case, I understand what you're doing and I'll test it out on some live spins I've got.  I'm really only looking for something to be able to bet every 5 spins to keep me logged on to the live wheel that I play while I wait for my (very rare) trigger; this looks better than betting on red/black/0/00, which gets expensive pretty fast.  Thanks again.

Sam

[colbster]

You are correct that the bet selection is very arbitrary to this system.    That is why I chose not to mention it at all in the beginning.   Any EC system should give you playable spins that have the same chances of winning.   There actually is one advantage of my system of playing new directions to repeat.   If you consider a 1->2 shift, a move to the right, we would bet a repeat to the right.   This would result in a bet on 2nd and 3rd dozens (last spun and next dozen to the right).   Notice that these are the hottest and coldest dozens on the table right now.   I buy the random theory of spins, but hottest and longest sleeping figure prominently in MANY systems.   If I am wrong about the randomness, this system has both methods already taken care of for me.   

[colbster]

-