Progressive Bet Roulette Strategy
The Reverse Martingale roulette strategy is great in many respects. It has great expected value which makes it a great way to play roulette if maximizing efficiency is your number one priority. It’s not perfect, however, which is why I decided to modify it slightly to create a strategy I refer to as the Progressive Bet Strategy, which could be more suitable for certain players.
This strategy is derived from the Reverse Martingale strategy, which functions by wagering the entire amount won after each win, until a predetermined target value is reached. In the Progressive Bet strategy, bets are also increased after each win, but not by that much. Players don’t wager the entire amount that they won during the previous round, but only a portion of that amount.
Keep reading this article and find out:
- why this strategy could be more suitable for certain players than the Reverse Martingale strategy;
- how it works in action (supported by simulations);
- the best factors (bet type, basic bet size and multiplication factor) for maximizing your chances of winning big;
- the possibility of turning $100 into more than $5,000 using this strategy.
Table of contents:
- How the Reverse Martingale strategy works
- Simulations
- Results of simulations explained plus recommendations
- Conclusion
How the Progressive Bet strategy works
This strategy is a bit more complicated than the other strategies I have presented in this series, but it’s still quite manageable even for less experienced players after they have put in a short study session. You should be able to use this strategy without any issues after you’ve read this article, should you choose to use it.
Let’s find out how it works. Players always start off with a pre-determined bankroll, and then have to make three choices. Here are the parameters that the player has to choose right from the beginning:
- The type of bets they are going place;
- The percentage of their initial bankroll they will use as their basic bet;
- The percentage (or ratio) of the amount just won, wagered in the following round, after that win.
Whenever a player wins they then calculate the size of the proceeding bet, and then place it. Whenever a player loses, they go back to placing a basic bet and continue from there. Check out the example below to get a better idea of how the Progressive Bet strategy actually works.
EXAMPLE
Imagine a player who starts with a bankroll of $100 and places a $4 Corner Bet in each round. This is their basic bet. If they win one of their $4 Corner bets, they get $36 back from the dealer (including their original $4 bet). In the following game round, the player places an $18 Corner Bet (half of $36). If they win again, they receive $162 back from the dealer, followed by placing an $81 Corner Bet, and so on. Whenever the player loses, they go back to the $4 basic bet they started with.
In the scenario above, the player used the following parameters:
- Bet type: Corner Bet
- Basic bet size: $4
- Multiplication factor (percentage of wins wagered in the following round after a win): 50% (or 1/2)
The game could statistically play out a lot differently, however, if the player decides to use different bet sizes. This is why I have used simulations to demonstrate how the expected results vary depending on the three parameters mentioned above.
Adding a target value
When coming up with this strategy, I initially thought about adding a target value (or a desired win) which would seem like a satisfactory amount to the player. After achieving this amount, the player would then choose whether tostop increasing their bet size, or to stop playing altogether. Let me explain why I decided not use this method in my strategy.
A target value, or a bet size ceiling, would absolutely make sense for this strategy. If the player wins a couple of rounds in a row, the calculated bet size for the following roulette spin might become too big. A target value solves this issue very effectively.
On the other hand, a target value would make a strategy that already is quite difficult to follow even more complicated. That’s why I decided not to use a target value for these simulations. It would require the testing of so many more options in comparison to my chosen setup.
Progressive Bet strategy simulations
Players who have already taken a look at my other strategies will appreciate how my simulations demonstrate the manner in which betting systems function when put into real use. Thanks to these simulations, I have been able to test out different values in terms of the aforementioned parameters and subjectively discover the best way to use this strategy in a casino.
Methodology and used variables
I think it’s important to let you know how the simulations were conducted, so that everything is completely clear to you, including the best way to interpret the results.
The simulations were created using my own simulation software in a single zero roulette scenario, but without any special rules such as La Partage or En Prison. The odds and probabilities are identical to a typical game of European roulette.
As already mentioned, there are three parameters that influence the way this strategy is used. Here are the values used in my simulations:
- Bet type: Column (12 numbers), Six Line (6 numbers), Corner (4 numbers)
- Basic bet size: 2%, 4% or 8% of the initial bankroll ($2, $4 or $8 in my simulations)
- Multiplication factor: 1/3, 1/2 or 2/3
The simulated players all started with $100, and followed the strategy until they either lost everything or reached the milestone of 100 game rounds. This enabled each player to participate in a maximum of 100 game rounds, after which time the game simply stopped, with the results being evaluated.
This structure created 27 possible combinations. For each of them I have simulated a total of 1,000,000 runs. This sample size should be big enough to make the results statistically reliable, although there is still a possibility of some statistical deviations. That being said, the results of my simulations should be reliable enough to give you a solid idea of how the parameters influence the expected results.
Column Bet simulations
Let’s start with the least volatile betting option out of the three chosen for these simulations; the Column Bet that covers 12 individual numbers on a roulette table layout and awards the player with 3x the wagered amount after they have won a round. Here are the results from the simulations.
| Basic bet and multipl. factor | % of winners | Winners leaving with $100-200 | Winners leaving with $200-500 | Winners leaving with $500-1k | Winners leaving with $1k-5k | Winners leaving with >$5k | Average cost |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| $2, 1/3 | 40.5% | 40.5% | 0.02% | 0 | 0 | 0 | $5.4 |
| $2, 1/2 | 37.6% | 35.9% | 1.6% | 0.03% | 0.003% | ~0% | $7.06 |
| $2, 2/3 | 27% | 22% | 4.2% | 0.56% | 0.25% | 0.008% | $10.3 |
| $4, 1/3 | 40.5% | 37.7% | 2.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | $10.5 |
| $4, 1/2 | 37.1% | 29.3% | 7.6% | 0.2% | 0.02% | ~0% | $13.4 |
| $4, 2/3 | 25% | 15% | 8.1% | 1.35% | 0.6% | 0.02% | $17.6 |
| $8, 1/3 | 37.4% | 23.8% | 13.6% | 0.02% | 0 | 0 | $16.9 |
| $8, 1/2 | 30.3% | 14.7% | 14.1% | 1.3% | 0.12% | ~0% | $19.6 |
| $8, 2/3 | 17% | 6.1% | 7.6% | 2.3% | 1% | 0.05% | $23 |
| Basic bet and multipl. factor | Players losing everything before finishing 30 spins | Players losing everything before finishing 50 spins | Players losing everything before finishing 75 spins | Players losing everything before finishing 100 spins |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $2, 1/3 | 0 | 0 | 0.002% | 0.03% |
| $2, 1/2 | 0 | 0 | 0.007% | 0.18% |
| $2, 2/3 | 0 | 0 | 0.06% | 1.7% |
| $4, 1/3 | 0.025% | 1.19% | 4.75% | 9.4% |
| $4, 1/2 | 0.03% | 2.5% | 10.5% | 19.5% |
| $4, 2/3 | 0.12% | 8.3% | 27.6% | 42.7% |
| $8, 1/3 | 9.7% | 23.2% | 34.7% | 43.1% |
| $8, 1/2 | 15.9% | 34.2% | 48.2% | 57% |
| $8, 2/3 | 27.5% | 53.4% | 68.1% | 75.6% |
The tables above nicely demonstrate how this strategy performs when put into active use. First of all, let’s take a look at the average cost. With higher initial bets and higher multiplication factors, the players simply wager more money during the 100 (or fewer) spins they play. In roulette, players statistically lose a certain percentage of their bets, which is equal to the house edge (approx. 2.7% in European roulette). The increasing average cost therefore makes sense.
Firstly, let’s focus on the basic bet size. Higher basic bets increase the average cost, of course, as already mentioned. Higher bets also decrease the percentage of winners. Players who place bigger bets are more likely to run out of money, which increases the likelihood of ending up with less money than they started with. On the other hand, higher basic bets also mean that players are more likely to win big.
Secondly, let’s take a look at each basic bet size and their various multiplication factors. As already mentioned, the 1/3 multiplication factor doesn’t make sense when placing the Column Bet, so I will focus on 1/2 and 2/3 only. When comparing these bets, it is evident that the higher multiplication factor is connected to a higher average cost, and a lower chance of ending up with a profit, but it also increases the possibility of winning big.
The best basic bet size and multiplication factor to use
This strategy does not provide a single best option for everyone, but here is my opinion on which parameters are the best to use when placing the Column Bet. The main parameter to consider is the multiplication factor. If you want to maximize your chances of winning big, the 2/3 multiplication factor will be better for you. The chance of winning is lower in comparison to the 1/2 multiplication factor options, but there is, however, a chance of winning more than $1,000, or even $5,000. The chance of winning is quite miniscule, but still much higher than with the 1/2 option.
If you’re looking to make a profit and don’t really need to win big, stick with the 1/2 multiplication factor. You’ll have a higher overall chance of making a profit, lower risk of losing everything, and a lower average cost. Please bear in mind, however, that you are sacrificing the possibility of winning big.
In terms of the basic bet size, I think the $2 options are all pretty dull, so I would definitely rule those out. Both the $4 and $8 options are interesting, with your choice really depending on your attitude towards risk. Bear in mind that the percentage of players who could lose everything before the 100-spin-mark is quite high when using the $8 options, although their chance of winning is pretty decent.
Six Line bet simulations
The Six Line bet is a more volatile option when compared to the Column bet. This involves betting on six different numbers located in two adjoining rows on the roulette table. Expect there to be more big wins due to the higher degree of volatility, but also expect more players to lose their entire bankrolls quickly. Let’s take a look at the results to check whether this is true or not.
| Basic bet and multipl. factor | % of winners | Winners leaving with $100-200 | Winners leaving with $200-500 | Winners leaving with $500-1k | Winners leaving with $1k-5k | Winners leaving with >$5k | Average cost |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| $2, 1/3 | 38.5% | 33.3% | 5% | 0.13% | 0.02% | ~0% | $6.66 |
| $2, 1/2 | 29.3% | 21.3% | 7% | 0.82% | 0.16% | 0.02% | $8.6 |
| $2, 2/3 | 19% | 12.3% | 5.6% | 0.3% | 0.72% | 0.14% | $11.9 |
| $4, 1/3 | 35.7% | 21.5% | 13.4% | 0.77% | 0.11% | ~0% | $11.2 |
| $4, 1/2 | 24.5% | 12.4% | 9.15% | 2.2% | 0.72% | 0.02% | $13.2 |
| $4, 2/3 | 13.7% | 6.4% | 3.8% | 2.8% | 0.6% | 0.1% | $17.5 |
| $8, 1/3 | 24.5% | 7.5% | 13.2% | 3.4% | 0.46% | 0.002% | $14.8 |
| $8, 1/2 | 15% | 3.9% | 6.8% | 2.9% | 1.4% | 0.07% | $16.2 |
| $8, 2/3 | 7.5% | 1.9% | 2.9% | 0.9% | 1.5% | 0.32% | $19.7 |
| Basic bet and multipl. factor | Players losing everything before finishing 30 spins | Players losing everything before finishing 50 spins | Players losing everything before finishing 75 spins | Players losing everything before finishing 100 spins |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $2, 1/3 | 0 | 0 | 0.8% | 4.2% |
| $2, 1/2 | 0 | 0 | 2.8% | 10.9% |
| $2, 2/3 | 0 | 0 | 8.8% | 29.4% |
| $4, 1/3 | 1.2% | 13.8% | 29.2% | 39.4% |
| $4, 1/2 | 4.1% | 25.4% | 44.3% | 56.7% |
| $4, 2/3 | 4.6% | 43.4% | 66.5% | 75.9% |
| $8, 1/3 | 36.2% | 52.8% | 63.4% | 69.6% |
| $8, 1/2 | 47.8% | 65.7% | 75.7% | 80.9% |
| $8, 2/3 | 61.3% | 80.8% | 87.3% | 90.3% |
Something is clearly visible right from the start. The average costs are very similar to those in the Column Bet simulations. This is because the average cost depends on the total wagered amount, which is not influenced by the bet type that much.
The basic bets have the same stake in each respective basic bet and multiplication factor combination, so their contribution to the average cost is the same, regardless of the bet type. The bet sizes of the increased bets (after wins) have a higher value through the Six Line bet type, but the player is less likely to reach such values in comparison to the Column Bet type. These two factors cancel each other out, and the average cost doesn’t change that much in relation to bet type either.
The higher volatility of the Six Line bet is noticeable at first glance, simply by the percentage of players losing their entire bankroll before finishing 30, 50, 75 and 100 spins. A much higher percentage of players didn’t make it through the entire 100 spins, which was caused by the fact that this bet type is simply more volatile and therefore riskier. On the other hand, the chances of winning big are also higher, which makes it more suitable for players who don’t shy away from increasing risk in exchange for a greater potential of winning big.
The best basic bet size and multiplication factor to use
Just like in the first example, there is no single option that is best for everybody. The option with $4 basic bet and 1/3 multiplication factor is quite interesting. It has one of the highest percentages of winners (only beaten by a $2 and the 1/3 combination, which I find a bit too dull), while also maintaining a decent chance of winning big. That being said, the vast majority of winners don’t finish with very big profits.
A version using a slightly higher multiplication factor ($4, 1/2) has a lower percentage of overall winners, but the chance of winning more than five times the initial bankroll is much higher.
The $8 and 1/3 option is very similar to the $4 and 1/2 option, essentially with the same percentage of winners and average cost. The difference between the two is that the first option achieves more wins in the medium range (players leaving with 2-10 times their initial bankroll), while the second option has more winners in the 1-2 times category and the 10+ category.
I advise players to choose one of the three options mentioned above, depending on their preferences and which one of the starting bet combinations and multiplication factors they find the most suitable.
Corner Bet simulations
The Corner Bet covers four individual numbers that share a common corner. This is the most volatile option that I decided to test out this strategy, having a 4/37 chance of winning in each game, and wins being 9x the wagered amount. Let’s take a look at the results.
| Basic bet and multipl. factor | % of winners | Winners leaving with $100-200 | Winners leaving with $200-500 | Winners leaving with $500-1k | Winners leaving with $1k-5k | Winners leaving with >$5k | Average cost |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| $2, 1/3 | 36% | 26.8% | 8.2% | 0.9% | 0.12% | 0.0016% | $7 |
| $2, 1/2 | 24.3% | 13.8% | 9.2% | 0.26% | 1.1% | 0.02% | $9.2 |
| $2, 2/3 | 13.8% | 4.4% | 8% | 0.4% | 0.9% | 0.11% | $12 |
| $4, 1/3 | 30.2% | 15.2% | 12.9% | 1.55% | 0.58% | 0.01% | $10.6 |
| $4, 1/2 | 18.5% | 8.1% | 7% | 2.6% | 0.8% | 0.08% | $12.2 |
| $4, 2/3 | 9% | 2.7% | 3.7% | 1.8% | 0.7% | 0.08% | $18.7 |
| $8, 1/3 | 18.4% | 4.4% | 8.5% | 4.3% | 1% | 0.06% | $12.8 |
| $8, 1/2 | 10.5% | 2.1% | 3.9% | 2.8% | 1.5% | 0.08% | $14.7 |
| $8, 2/3 | 4.7% | 0.8% | 0.9% | 1.9% | 0.8% | 0.34% | $19.8 |
| Basic bet and multipl. factor | Players losing everything before finishing 30 spins | Players losing everything before finishing 50 spins | Players losing everything before finishing 75 spins | Players losing everything before finishing 100 spins |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $2, 1/3 | 0 | 0 | 4.7% | 14.2% |
| $2, 1/2 | 0 | 0 | 9.6% | 24.6% |
| $2, 2/3 | 0 | 0 | 24.3% | 47% |
| $4, 1/3 | 5.7% | 27.7% | 45.3% | 53.4% |
| $4, 1/2 | 5.7% | 40.7% | 58.8% | 68.8% |
| $4, 2/3 | 16.7% | 60% | 75.9% | 84.7% |
| $8, 1/3 | 49.8% | 65.3% | 73.6% | 78.3% |
| $8, 1/2 | 63.8% | 74.8% | 83% | 87% |
| $8, 2/3 | 75.5% | 85% | 91.6% | 94.3% |
As in the previous two bet types, the Corner Bet simulations resulted in a very similar average cost. They are very close to Column Bet and Six Line Bet average costs, which helps to prove the previously mentioned fact.
Also, the higher volatility of the Corner Bet was clearly manifested in the results of the simulations. Generally speaking, the winnings tend to be bigger but less frequent, with a higher percentage of players losing their entire bankrolls before reaching their 100th spin. These effects are a direct consequence of higher volatility, and are to be expected.
If you prefer bigger wins and don’t mind the higher possibility of losing everything, this bet type might be the best for you out of the ones I have tested.
The best basic bet size and multiplication factor to use
Again, picking the best basic bet size and multiplication factor can’t be done in an objective manner, as this is influenced by the preferences of every individual player. The $4 and $8 basic bet options with the highest multiplication factor (2/3) are just too volatile, as well as having the two highest average costs. They do offer a respectable chance of winning really big, but I personally think it’s just not worth the high possibility of losing everything quite quickly.
The $2 and 2/3 option seems very interesting. The player gets to play at least 50 games even if they don’t win a single one of them, while also having a decent chance of winning big. This option has the second highest chance of winning more than 50-times the initial bankroll, only beaten by the $8 and 2/3 option I ruled out because of being too volatile.
The $4 and 1/2 option is also reasonably volatile, but has a higher percentage of winners, and only a slightly higher average cost in comparison to the aforementioned option. Using this specific strategy, players have a better chance of making a profit, but also a higher chance of losing everything quickly because of the higher basic bet.
If you are not looking for such a big win, and a smaller profit is satisfactory to you, the $4 basic bet and 1/3 multiplication factor could be ideal for you. This option has a very high overall percentage of winners (more than 30%), as well as being a thrill to play, while keeping your chances of winning big at least somewhat alive.
Results of simulations explained plus recommendations
I have done my best to provide thorough explanations of the results of each simulation above, in addition to selecting the options I consider to be the most interesting. I have put all of these results in a single table in order to compare the individual ‘champions’ and to ultimately select the best one.
Here they are.
| Bet type, basic bet and multipl. factor | % of winners | Winners leaving with $100-200 | Winners leaving with $200-500 | Winners leaving with $500-1k | Winners leaving with $1k-5k | Winners leaving with >$5k | Average cost |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Column, $4, 1/2 | 37.1% | 29.3% | 7.6% | 0.2% | 0.02% | ~0% | $13.4 |
| Column, $4, 2/3 | 25% | 15% | 8.1% | 1.35% | 0.6% | 0.02% | $17.6 |
| Column, $8, 1/2 | 30.3% | 14.7% | 14.1% | 1.3% | 0.12% | ~0% | $19.6 |
| Column, $8, 2/3 | 17% | 6.1% | 7.6% | 2.3% | 1% | 0.05% | $23 |
| Six Line, $4, 1/3 | 35.7% | 21.5% | 13.4% | 0.77% | 0.11% | ~0% | $11.2 |
| Six Line, $4, 1/2 | 24.5% | 12.4% | 9.15% | 2.2% | 0.72% | 0.02% | $13.2 |
| Six Line, $8, 1/3 | 24.5% | 7.5% | 13.2% | 3.4% | 0.46% | 0.002% | $14.8 |
| Corner, $2, 2/3 | 13.8% | 4.4% | 8% | 0.4% | 0.9% | 0.11% | $12 |
| Corner, $4, 1/3 | 30.2% | 15.2% | 12.9% | 1.55% | 0.58% | 0.01% | $10.6 |
| Corner, $4, 1/2 | 18.5% | 8.1% | 7% | 2.6% | 0.8% | 0.08% | $12.2 |
| Bet type, basic bet and multipl. factor | Players losing everything before finishing 30 spins | Players losing everything before finishing 50 spins | Players losing everything before finishing 75 spins | Players losing everything before finishing 100 spins |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Column, $4, 1/2 | 0.03% | 2.5% | 10.5% | 19.5% |
| Column, $4, 2/3 | 0.12% | 8.3% | 27.6% | 42.7% |
| Column, $8, 1/2 | 15.9% | 34.2% | 48.2% | 57% |
| Column, $8, 2/3 | 27.5% | 53.4% | 68.1% | 75.6% |
| Six Line, $4, 1/3 | 1.2% | 13.8% | 29.2% | 39.4% |
| Six Line, $4, 1/2 | 4.1% | 25.4% | 44.3% | 56.7% |
| Six Line, $8, 1/3 | 36.2% | 52.8% | 63.4% | 69.6% |
| Corner, $2, 2/3 | 0 | 0 | 24.3% | 47% |
| Corner, $4, 1/3 | 5.7% | 27.7% | 45.3% | 53.4% |
| Corner, $4, 1/2 | 5.7% | 40.7% | 58.8% | 68.8% |
Eliminated options
After examining these options thoroughly, I decided to eliminate the following options:
- Column, $4, 1/2 - The percentage of winners is the highest, but the wins are too small to recommend this option to anyone. The Six Line, $4, 1/3 option is much better in my opinion. It has a slightly lower total percentage of winners, but the players at least have a chance of getting decent wins, in addition to the average cost being lower.
- Column, $4, 2/3 - This option is too mediocre and doesn’t excel in anything and, depending on your preferences, you’ll very likely be able to find a better option.
- Column, $8, 1/2 - The wins are also quite small in this option, but the biggest reason for not recommending it is the average cost, which is quite high. Additionally, the chance of running out of bankroll before playing through 100 game rounds is high.
- Column, $8, 2/3 - Everything mentioned in the previous option also applies here, but the negatives (cost, chance of losing everything quickly) are even more prevalent.
- Six line, $8, 1/3 - The percentage of players losing everything before reaching 30, 50, 75 or 100 spins are just too high.
My best picks for this strategy
I eliminated all Column Bets and one of the Six Line options. This leaves us with five possible combinations, so which of these do I recommend? I think the best parameters to use for this strategy (out of the ones tested in my simulations) are the following:
- Six Line, $4, 1/3 - This is the best option for risk-averse players, in my opinion. The chances of making a profit are 35.7%, and there is even a small chance of winning more than ten times the initial bankroll. 39.4% of players will not get to play the full 100 game rounds, which might seem a lot, but it’s actually the second smallest percentage out of the nine selected options in the table above.
- Corner, $2, 2/3 - If you like risk and are willing to try your luck and go for a big win, this strategy is the best way to do it. Only 13.8% of players end up with more money than they started with, but there is a 1.01% chance of winning more than ten times the initial bankroll, and even a 0.11% chance of ending up with more than fifty times the initial bankroll. That means there is a reasonable chance of winning really big, at an average cost of only 12% of the initial bankroll. This option is mathematically great for players seeking high risk and somewhat reliable play time, but might be a little too boring for some players because of the low basic bet. If you also feel this way, I advise you to check out the Corner, $4, 1/2 option described below.
Other options to consider
Assuming you went through all of the options carefully, you will have noticed that I didn’t mention these three options:
- Six Line, $4, 1/2 - This option has a reasonable percentage of winners in all respects, and even quite a high chance of winning more than ten times the initial bankroll. It doesn’t excel in any regard though, so I therefore haven’t included it in my recommendations.
- Corner, $4, 1/3 - This option has the lowest average cost and a high chance of making a profit, but the profits tend to be quite small. This would be a great strategy for risk-averse players, but the possibility of running out of money before reaching 100 spins is a bit too high for this category of players.
- Corner, $4, 1/2 - This option is a great alternative to the Corner, $2, 2/3 option mentioned previously due to its higher percentage of winners, but with a lower possibility of winning really big. Mathematically it’s slightly worse, but it might be preferable for players looking for higher levels of excitement and willing to use a slightly inferior strategy to have more fun.
These options are not bad at all, but not as good as the two options mentioned above, at least in my opinion. They fall somewhere in between the two best combinations of parameters to use. Depending on your preferences, you might choose these options over the two I picked earlier, so make sure to check them all out.
Conclusion
As you can see from the results brought about by the selected options, the Progressive Bet strategy can yield some really interesting results. If you’re looking for a strategy with a good balance of risk and a chance of winning big, consider using this strategy as a go-to method of playing roulette.
I would like to emphasize that all of the selected options and recommendations were based on my personal preferences, although you may prefer something else. I tend to go for best performance as a sacrifice for a bit of excitement, but I know that there are many players who prefer it the other way around.
I hope this roulette strategy guide was useful for you and helped you find your preferred way of playing this game.
