The Eggleston Betting System

[olinet]

FIRST TEST

97 SPINS ->+19 UNITS FLAT BETTING

[olinet]

i have made 3 others test

+3 -3 +12
it looks good

others results?

[warrior]

  L         R
-2        +1
-6         +2
-4         +3
-12       +4
-8         +7
-23      
-7
+1
+2
+0
+1
+2
+3  PROFIT +10 PROGRESSION 1 2 4 8 16 32 64

[olinet]

warrior do you think that it can win in long term?
i have made 10 test of 100 spins and i have in flat betting an average of 10 units /session.
and you with progression?

[warrior]

Warrior do you think that it can win in long term?
i have made 10 test of 100 spins and I have in flat betting an average of 10 units /session.
and you with progression?

i think if there is some one who can test on a higher scale of spins much faster way we could see the out come .

[XXVV]

With respect I think this method can be managed to produce a long term profit, but much care and careful timing and self management is essential. I would only flat bet this and accept a lower return at lower risk.

By progressing there will be a mathematically certain catastrophic collapse at some stage, when you are least expecting it.

I doubt the mathematical argument put forward that attempts to persuade us that the house advantage is overcome by moving left and right, as opposed to tracking on.

Now I believe there are faster and better ways to achieve consistent profit, although , as outside bets go, the dozen/ column combinations can be very attractive when they maintain an ability to quickly square off a loss. With progressions it can all get out of hand under duress.

I like the ability to capitalise on repeats and I prefer a head on approach to capture ALL opportunities, as long as you are quick on the trigger and the toes to get out fast if things turn hostile. I am very grateful to Colby for publishing this material. But take care! XX V V

[GLC]

Hey, anyone out there?

Is anyone still playing this system?

Did anyone try it and have a negative series with it?

I got side tracked by other systems and kind of forgot this one.

I was hoping someone was still working with it with good results?

G

[albertojonas]

Hey, anyone out there?

Is anyone still playing this system?

Did anyone try it and have a negative series with it?

I got side tracked by other systems and kind of forgot this one.

I was hoping someone was still working with it with good results?

G

just tried it

i am impressed. will follow with tests on other "less dangerous progressions" than that crazy martingale

[albertojonas]

 
very hard
i will post my test
i feel there is something i am not getting wright. the progression? the bet selection? separate banks?

plz look at my test & comment.

[Colbster]

I am still working with the basic premise, although this version was replaced by 2.0 on this website.  Just search "Eggleston" to find it.  I am even more convinced now of the mathematical advantage that I described, although I am struggling to find the right balance.  I think that 3.0 will eventually leave the progression world entirely and focus on flat betting.  The bet selection is not optimum yet, and I have to admit to having gotten interested in some of the other systems lately, especially those based on matrices.  I am toying around with the Eggleston system being applied to a matrix, as well as some really basic concepts I have come up with, such as always bet to the right, with a move right as a win, a move left as a loss, and repeat as just that.  I spent a lot of time working through some variations with Sam/Birdhands, but never made any improvements over the 2.0 methodology.  I had taken my real-money bankroll from 40 euros to just under 240, which thrilled me.  I then screwed up and played 50 euros instead of .50 euros and lost my entire BR on a bad spin.  After losing my BR and not having the money to replenish it, I got bored with testing.  All that said, there is definitely merit here.  Not the HG yet, but very strong fundamentally.  Just need to find that trigger to make it more consistent.

[XXVV]

Hi Colbster

I am glad to hear of your steps. I admire your statement wrt departure from progression to flat staking - if you can find the right triggers.

Like a stuck record I keep saying the same thing. Short cycles, small edge - this is the way to play roulette. You can add a lot of the results of these short dips in the water together, and you will genuinely advance. As JL has phrased it, three steps forward and one back sometimes. I could add sometimes two steps forward and three back sometimes as well.

However there are numerous pathways, and they all will lead forward eventually given a wise approach and understanding of roulette.

What really interested me in your statement also was the interest in matrices, and overlaying of techniques.

Given a cool head and a plan it will be possible to strike targets with great accuracy, inside as well as outside of the table. I visualise looking down on the table overlaying partially transparent planes of glass. Sometimes through the cloud and mists, a number or small group come clear!

Recent matrix implications of D+C can highlight 16 numbers and then with EC overlays the target scope can be reduced to a handful, occasionally. It is that waiting for the right opportunity and characteristics that is our power over the casino. They cant wait.

I personally will be taking a fresh look at your methodology soon in the workshop, as well as
some other material from US colleagues including a mysterious procedure which was intriguing me using an exponential curve guide as to outcomes from KWTQ. You may be aware of it but the writer goes into periodic hibernation. Maybe he is an astronaut.

Cheers.

[albertojonas]

who are you talking about mate?

i find myself sharing your opinion on small risk but consistent small profits...flat betting or small progressions..
any thoughts?

[XXVV]

I am working with Scooby Doo at the moment on his Divide and Conquer method, one of a family of matrix bets, some of which JohnLegend has developed, and some of which CommonSense and XXVV have developed, and are developing.

Know WhenTo Quit has written on VLS on his exponential curve method.

Trying at the moment to identify triggers so as to break sequences into short passages of play and take advantage of the Ecart short term small edge deviations there with flat staking.

Its work in progress but very exciting. Hope that answers your query.
Cheers XXVV

[frost]

My stopping is based on statistical evidence that doubles are about 3 times as likely as triples which are about 3 times as likely as quads to hit.  In the long run, that means you will win an additional unit 1 time, but lose 2 units on the 3rd spin twice

if thats the case wouldnt it make more sense to have your stop and continue the other way round?

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.   

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.......However, as long as the 2nd dozen might continue to repeat (R), we will duplicate our bet exactly.

[Colbster]

You are very possibly correct about the reversing course after the double being a better play.  This was my old methodology, which was replaced in another thread.  I am currently looking for improvements, including switching to flat betting and playing the next-to-last as a better selection.  I will update with any findings that contribute to the discussion.