Simple System, Low bankroll, One bet selection.

[Normy2000]

@ Nimo,
Here is my Rx very short version.

[reveal]
system "Nimo Dozen System"
// Coded by: nOrMy2o0o

method "main"
begin
    while starting a new session
    begin
        put 0 to Record "Highest Bankroll" Data
        put 1 to Record "progression" Data
        put 0 to Record "lost count" Data
        Copy List[2nd dozen] Record "doz" Layout
        put 100% of Record "progression" data to Record "doz" Layout list
    end

    while on each spin
    begin
        if any dozen bet won each
        begin
            if Bankroll > Record "Highest Bankroll" Data
            begin
                clear Record "Highest Bankroll" Data
                put 100% Bankroll to Record "Highest Bankroll" Data
                put 1 on Record "progression" Data
            end
            put 0 to Record "lost count" Data
        end
       
        if any dozen bet lost each
        begin
            add 1 to Record "lost count" Data
        end

        if Record "lost count" Data  >= 4 each
        begin
            add 1 on Record "progression" Data
            put 0 on Record "lost count" Data
        end
        put 100% of Record "progression" data to Record "doz" Layout list
    end
END
[/reveal]

[Joe]

Bet 1 unit on any dozen or column. I usually just play the middle dozen continuously   If you lose four times in a row, increase the bet by 1 unit.  Stay at that unit level until at new high or four losses.  If four losses add one unti, stay at that level until new high or four losses.... and goes on and on .  RS was up to 18 units, and the RS real money went to 8 units.  If you don't get four losses in a row, do not increase the unit bet, You may get a win on the fourth bet but not be at a new high, you would stay on that unit bet and only increase it once you had four losses in a row.

You could extend the basic idea to other bets, but the delay (losses in a row) before increasing by 1 unit would have to be adjusted  proportionally depending on how many numbers you bet. For a dozen/column the number of losses is a "cycle" (3 spins) + one third of a cycle (1 spin). i.e. number of losses before increase = cycle length + 1/3 * cycle length.

Now using that formula you can find the number of losses before an increase for a double street, quad, street, split and single.



All the rules stay the same. For instance if you're betting on a street you wait until 16 losses in a row (no less) and then increase the stake on the street by 1 unit. Stay at that level (2 units) until either a new high or another 16 losses in a row.

[Normy2000]

With Zero and BV No Zero, both RNG 

[Barona]

I know I'm new here but I have considerably tested many permutations of negative progression leverage type betting such as this system, mostly on baccarat so thought I'd throw in my 2 cents.

I tested the OP's system, admittedly on one of those free roulette softwares.  First I just did it straight up the way he outlined it..then I instituted a 100 unit stop loss  from any unit high point. The results were pretty much the same as all the permutations of Stetson Bailey's leverage systems I have tried on baccarat.

In those cases I often got ahead (sometimes they would tank early on but not usually).. but eventually the house edge catches up to you and the systems all failed...usually in between the  +500 and +900 units range. Playing the OP's system straight up I was up +525 units before it crashed and burned...with the 100 unit stop loss I made it to +632 units before the same happened (in the 2nd case I stopped when it went from +632 to below even). The good news is had I stopped when I was ahead both times and had been playing with real money, betting $10 a shot I would have banked some really nice coin.

Of course the above is not overly scientific but the results seem pretty consistent. My personal opinion is the house edge will always get you in the long run but used with some caution these things can make you some pretty good money if you know when to stop. I do like the nature of his progression as it does not overly escalate the bets too quickly and I think I will give it a go on baccarat where ostensibly it should work as well or better given the extra 1.5% or so you pick up against the house... so thank you for posting your system

[luckyfella]

In addition to what I posted above, there is the frequency distribution of the 1st repeat. You may want to explore that - there is a popular thread on this forum that discussed this in it's own unique way.