RK's Red/Black Equilibrium System..

[RouletteKnight]

Simple system that works!

Firstly bet 1 unit on the colour of your choice. Say Red.

Once you choose a colour, you do not change the colour bet on. The only
variable is the bet amount.

If Red wins, continue on 1 unit for Red.
(Any time we have a new high or a previous high we reset to 1 unit)

If Black wins, we add 1 unit to Red. (Total 2 in this case)
If Black wins again, we add another 1 unit to Red. (Total 3 in this case)
(Any time black wins we add 1 unit to Red)

Anytime Red wins, we see look at bankroll balance, if it doesn't reach at a previous high or new high we continue betting same unit on Red, if it reaches previous or new high we reset to 1.

So the game flow goes like this.

Bet 1 unit on Red
Spin appears Red.
Bankroll Balance is 1.

Bet 1 unit on Red
Spin appears Red
Balance is 2

Bet 1 unit on Red
Spin appears Red
Balance is 3

Bet 1 unit on Red
Spin appears Black
Balance is 2

Bet 2 units on Red (Remember add 1 unit to Red if Black appears)
Spin appears Black
Balance is 0

Bet 3 units on Red
Spin appears Black
Balance is -3

Bet 4 units on Red
Spins appears Red
Balance is 1   (Did not reach previous high or new high, so we continue betting same unit)

Bet 4 units on Red
Spin appears Black
Balance is -5

Bet 5 units on Red
Spins appears Red
Balance is 0

Bet 5 units on Red
Spins appears Red
Balance is 5 (Reached new high, so we reset to 1 unit)

Bet 1 unit on Red
Spins appears Red
Balance is 6...

There you go, simple and effective system...enjoy..

[Skakus]

Thanks RK.

[ausguy]

RK - How would you handle (if betting on Red) 10 Blacks in a row then a long series after that of double Blacks single Reds & then a mix of Reds & Blacks ?

[RouletteKnight]

RK - How would you handle (if betting on Red) 10 Blacks in a row then a long series after that of double Blacks single Reds & then a mix of Reds & Blacks ?

You can always reset (and keep whatever profits) if you feel its going too out of hand. But this system recovers very well most of the time.
Tell me how is it going with your testing...thanks..

[ozon]

such systems can help, but only  casinos 

[ausguy]

RK - I'll start testing when you get 5 + winning in profit sessions of 100 plus bets each. Any losing sessions would have to be in the minority = winning more often than losing.

Preferably the bets would have to be on non RNG live dealer wheels.

[jarabo002]

Its a simple negative progression. The inverse of Oscar Grind. No better than anothers.

[muggins]

You can always reset (and keep whatever profits) if you feel its going too out of hand. But this system recovers very well most of the time.
Tell me how is it going with your testing...thanks..

Interesting, here is a little trial I ran for 400 spins.  As you can see it fell in a big hole around 350 spins.

[Tamino]

To put it bluntly:

You  can  serve    only ONE  master. Can`t burn  the candle at both  ends .

[ausguy]

Muggins - So with a decent Bank Roll it may be viable ? As your graph clearly shows it dipped significantly & recovered over about 50 spins.

While there is a dip in the red moving average line the blue up ramp (extrapolated) from 0 - 400 is nearly constant. Granted it's only 1 x 400 spin session. It may work even better with a stop loss at say - 100 & only do virtual no money bets until the trend shows more wins than losses ?

The chart you show, is that RX ? Whatever pgm. it is can it handle a stop loss plan in its calcs. ?

[GLC]

RK,  How is this different that D'Alembert as explained as the Well's system in The Monte Carlo Anecdotes?

link:s://archive.org/stream/montecarloanecdo00bethiala#page/68/mode/1up


It's nothing more than a convoluted martingale and will eventually fall into the same hole all marty's do.

It's only viable with a really large stop loss and hope you are lucky enough to never hit your stop loss.  Or at least not until you've won enough to be close to even when it hits.  Muggins' graph depicts this perfectly.  God forbid you should have two of the draw downs in a row and right after you begin playing the system.

Don't get me wrong.  I'm not knocking the system.  It meets my criteria for a system to play when you go to the casino with a few hundred bucks to play with that you don't mind losing if it turns out that way.  Playing this system is much better than throwing your money away in a slot machine or playing Keno.  But that stop loss is a rock solid must!

Since I've thought of and tested almost every possible way to play the even chance bets on roulette, (just kidding... kind of) I offer a tweak.  Why not skip the requirement of continuing with the progression until you reach a new profit if the old profit was, shall we say, +10 or more.  I have notice when playing this way that often my big draw down will happen between zero and +10.  In other words when I've been +10 and then have a really bad run, if I get back to zero or more, I reset back to +1.  Granted it throws away the 10 units I was up, sometimes.  Other times it saves me money.  What I do is set a +20 target.  I use the +1-1 progression until I get to a new high bank as long as I don't go below -10.  If I go below -10, I only stay with that progression until I get back to zero.  When I get back to zero, I reset my progression.  What his means is that I can only reach my win target of +20 if I never go below -10 in the process.  I very often do reach +20 without going below -10.

The above numbers aren't cast in stone.  You may like others.  It's the concept that I'm sharing.

Cheers,

GLC

[muggins]

After running the test of 400 spins I looked at the results and thought that the drawdown would have been much smaller if the progression was capped at a reasonable number, but the recovery would have been much much slower and it may not have recovered fully after the big drawdown at 350 spins.  If memory serves me right the progression got to 50+ unit bets at one point there. 

What also may not have noticed is that there was a significant drawdown at 50 spins as well, which only recovered with the progression hitting 10+ unit bets.  As GC stated 2 bad hits and there would be no BR of you would really need a large BR to start with.

[ausguy]

You won't get large drawdowns if you have a stop loss in your plays. For example at around your moving average level. Many stock market investors use stop loss triggers all the time.

As has often been the case with my discussions since joining CC, a lot of forum members choose never answer this valid stop loss question ?

[GLC]

You won't get large drawdowns if you have a stop loss in your plays. For example at around your moving average level. Many stock market investors use stop loss triggers all the time.

As has often been the case with my discussions since joining CC, a lot of forum members choose never answer this valid stop loss question ?

This is an important point.  I never gamble without a definite stop loss.  I've tested too many systems to ignore them.  Also, we've had many forum members report losing way more than they could afford because they either didn't have a stop loss or they ignored their stop loss.  If you can't honor your stop loss, stop gambling!  

My brother almost ruined his marriage and our business by not using a stop loss.  Fortunately, he had an unwritten stop loss which was when his bank account was empty.  At least he didn't go over the cliff. 

The argument against a stop loss is that since it's a random game, there's nothing to say you won't hit your stop loss multiple times in a row.  But I think that's less likely than that you'll eventually encounter the streak from hell.  Also, you have time to reassess between stop losses whereas when you're in a heavy draw down, you get trapped.

Just my two cents worth,

GLC