Topic: UWE Roulette VB Method (Read 3074 times)

Bago · « **on:** February 04, 2009, 08:20:05 PM »

For those interested, it is unfortunately in german.

http://www.fileshost.com/download.php?id=043BFA001

Regards.

Forester · « **Reply #1 on:** February 04, 2009, 11:47:05 PM »

Well I did translate it, but translation is not clear.
However, I think long time ago someone did send me something as that.
Do you mind explaining what he exactly is doing?

bebediktus · « **Reply #2 on:** February 05, 2009, 05:01:30 AM »

How to download it ?

Forester · « **Reply #3 on:** February 05, 2009, 05:12:45 AM »

switch on FF, select 4 switch it off

, go to web page type in 3 digits number , click submit at new page click "download"

bebediktus · « **Reply #4 on:** February 05, 2009, 05:43:58 AM »

Thanks, but not easy understand germany. Something about handle ?? Wait for translation in short.

Forester · « **Reply #5 on:** February 05, 2009, 06:30:37 AM »

check email

Kelly · « **Reply #6 on:** February 05, 2009, 02:54:44 PM »

Ask Bago i already explained it to him some 2 - 3 years ago.

Forester · « **Reply #7 on:** February 05, 2009, 03:46:22 PM »

Maybe a year ago.

Or I did not understand it well or I did not find it useful.

Anyway i asked him to explainit better.

Forester · « **Reply #8 on:** February 05, 2009, 03:47:31 PM »

This is translation

Once summary:

There are 3 Reference rhombuses BALL observed until a HANDLE and a diamond one
Line. This must be based on the same diamond once confirmed.

There may be more to this hash to a line coming, but it may also cancel after 2 times,
someday meet the ball with a handle no longer at this diamond, it is something out.
This is the handle we BERG name now is just the opposite handle (WO - Handle)
observed.
If the ball is now even a full e revolution and is now back to the WHERE - Handle meets
is our Ablesepunkt the digit, we must remember the diamond, or
between 2 diamonds.
The ball now creates another round of e vol and comes back to the digit which we noticed
have. If they participated in the e position is on the disc just below the point
off and this number and the number compared with 2 neighbors (ie a total of 10)
Numbers.
It's not exactly that a number exactly, they will notice that they
with more practice is always better.

Attached are examples of set techniques.

One can forecast the number with its two neighbors, and the opposite with neighbors
set

You can also the forecast range as shown on the leaves and always
the same place if the same situation is, then you do not exactly
keep up, but is not quite so often meet.

Finally, you can also use sectors forecast to whole dozens, Kol regions, etc.
setting, it is also demonstrated.

How you ultimately decide is probably one's own taste to judge the gazers
Method works, however, if sufficient exercise is very good.
The numbers you should know by heart, as well as the neighbors and the opposite numbers,
then success is likely to only depend on training.

The author claims to have never been more than 5 times in a row to have lost and the Spielbank
always a profit to leave. If the incentive is not ...

Bago · « **Reply #9 on:** February 05, 2009, 08:22:22 PM »

It is similar to Scott vb but with Uwe , you are using the crossbar's arms to detect key revolution.
For this, you use front diamonds which are vertical diamond at 12 o'clock and the other closer vertical diamonds at the left and the right.
See the video i posted on youtube: L,M,R.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zf0ev4h-zfk

There are a lot of patterns you can use with those crossbars to find your key revolution. This is done by observing the ball-vertical diamond-crossbar alignment.
I would like to give some concrete examples but i would reveal mainly how i play VB and most importantly which pattern i look for. It's not the place and anybody who wants to win must work hard.

Forester · « **Reply #10 on:** February 06, 2009, 12:05:54 AM »

That is what I thought so, at least it doesn’t need fast rotor as LS cross patterns which probably gives you better ball scatter.

However problem with that method is that bars are moving, ball is moving and you need to inline it with diamond, you will never be able to do it 100%. Same applies after one rotation. The difference from ball rotations in pattern is only one pocket, When everything is moving it is hard to spot one pocket difference. One pocket mistake reflects as amount of pockets that rotor makes during one ball rotation at observed time. Most likely you will always float in between few rotations ending up with + and – 15 pockets of error.
In addition rotor speed could be slightly different which may cause pattern to develop at different rotation.

Kelly · « **Reply #11 on:** February 06, 2009, 08:36:19 AM »

I know a few people who attended Uwes seminars in the casinos back then. I think its some 6 - 7 years ago now. They reported back that Uwe was actually winning at those seminars. I don`t remember any of the people mentioning rotor speed and the file don`t mention it either but its not the original script either, so that could be a mistake but i dn`t think so.

Apart from that if we asume that spins with only 1 wheel speed is played, and we have found a tilt and scatter that matches the fixed reading point, its not THAT hard to see the patterns. And compared to try to watch crossover patterns with zero and 5/10 it is a LOT easyer than that. I don`t know how you think you can end up with 15 pockets difference if you can predict the correct ball revoloution at the same wheel speed if we look away from the odd scatter lenght.

The file as it is, has too many loose ends to just walk in the casino and start playing, but if the conditions is right it can be done.

Kelly · « **Reply #12 on:** February 06, 2009, 08:51:11 AM »

The betting sector was 2 x 5 numbers direct across from each other Basieux style, (Uwe is an old Basieux student) he claims to have never lost 5 bets in a row and has never left the casino with a loss.

The last part is higly doubtfull but whatever.

Forester · « **Reply #13 on:** February 06, 2009, 09:48:22 AM »

I tell you how.

Lets say that the difference in between ball rotations is is 160 ms (on that particular wheel it is probably less), player is observing ball for 3/4 of ball rotation, so the difference is only 120 ms. That is about 10 % of change from targeted ball revolution. It means that if rotor is 10 pockets per sec in next observation it will make only 1 pocket difference.

There is no way that player can visually inline 3 positions (handle diamond ball) at 2 places with accuracy of one pocket. When handle comes to middle diamond the ball may be off 1-2 pockets, where maximum starting point may be + or – 5 pockets (rotor movement), same is happening at exit point, to get exact match is imposable, to have perfect observation when exactly everything is inline and to get same at another point is imposable. One pocket mistake represents wrong rotation and in this particular explanation 10 pockets error, same can happen to the other side -10 pockets (maybe 9 since rotation is faster).

That is if the rotor is perfectly constant. I would say that player would make errors and up to + or – 2 pockets especially because handles are distanced from the ball. Better approach would be observing change from diamond to diamond, ball , zero; it would slightly reduce errors since diamonds are closer to the ball therefore observation may be more accurate then in lining handles.

Even handles are making same rpm as rotor and zero they are traveling slower in distance because they are smaller in diameter. Therefore thinking that handle is inline gives more illusion then actually trying to inline pocket with particular diamond.

This is only estimation what the player may get.
40% ok prediction
20% one rotation early
20% one rotation late
10% two rotation early
10% two rotation late

From 40% he will get 10% spinners, 10% bad diamond hit, so he has only 20 % of spins to gain him advantage. If scatter is close to zero if rotor is constant why not

So about one pocket error in observation creates error how much the rotor moves per wrongly predicted rotation. If you remember E2 system one pocket error creates 3 pockets error to final prediction and I always expect 2-3 pockets error.

Also there is no way that player can avoid spin where the ball will not hit DD,
Rotor adjustment is complicated because rotor speed change, also interferes when pattern will be found.

And that is why only 1 in thousand may win with such approaches.

Quote

The betting sector was 2 x 5 numbers direct across from each other Basieux style, (Uwe is an old Basieux student) he claims to have never lost 5 bets in a row and has never left the casino with a loss.

That is sick, due to scatter I lost not only ones but many times 10 spins in a row even the prediction and hit to rotor was spot on.

Quote

He has never left casino with loss.

Yea right I know many as him.

Wondering do you believe it?

P.S.
Actually
40% ok prediction
20% one rotation early

This may be more as 60 % close to equally distributed in between 2 rotations since the player has no clue where is braking point in between 2 rotations.
Only ¼ of pocket would indicate difference, but that ¼ doesn’t have to be on the edge when the pocket is inline.

Kelly · « **Reply #14 on:** February 06, 2009, 02:38:18 PM »

Listen forester, i think you somehow misinterpret the pattern detection. You define a certain ball speed with the pattern. Thats all. When you see a full pattern, you have a certain ball revolution pin pointed, the ball then travels one revoloution and you read the number below the handle when they pass and that usually happens in the area discrebed by Uwe. But not spot on, but close. The talk about secret patterns with the Uwe method is crap, i don`t know how that came up.

We asume same wheel speed from spin to spin and we asume we know where the ball drops. Lets say at this point the ball has to travel another 9 secs. You will the depending on the conditions of the track and the ball have maybe an average of 8 out 10 spins where the average will be between 8.8 and 9.1 secs. There will then be the odd spin that takes maybe 10 secs.

The wheel speeds you play with the Uwe method will be fairly slow, lets take a round number like 9 pockets pr second. In the odd spin that lasts 10 secs, the maximum the rotor will have moved out of the ordinary is 1 sec = 9 pockets. The rest will be precise enough to take the random part of the game totálly out.

Wether a player can differentiate between between 4.0 and 4.05 sec pr rev, well trust me on that one, some can. Easyli actually. For those who can only identify 1 speed, we asume they skip the rest. A seasoned player can easyli adapt small rotor speed differences though, after all when you know the average ball travel time is 9 secs. from detection its easy to calculate how much one should adjust the prediction, its usually only 2 - 4 pockets depending on how much the wheel speed differs from the norm play.

It might sound complicated with handles and diamonds and stuff, but its actually the easyest VB play i have ever come across if you don`t count Scotts advanced method which is even easyer once its learned, you only have to cast a glance at the wheel 2 - 3 times during the spin.

Forester · « **Reply #15 on:** February 06, 2009, 04:07:28 PM »

Kelly,
If we have all in line at 12 o clock then after 1000ms again everything is inline at 9 o.’clock we can say we have pattern. Because rotor moved 9 pockets in that same time of 1000ms.

If we repeat spin but this time with ball speed that would match next rotation, then
It will take ball 1120 ms to come from 12 to 9 o’clock (the ball is slower)
Since it is slower rotor will have more time to move. It will make 10 pockets.
9x1.120=10.08
So we have only one pocket of difference in between rotations.
It means if we miss by one pocket we are by one ball rotation wrong and it will give us 10 pocket error in prediction.
Same could happen if we did mistake in one rotation earlier.

What I am saying is that even if rotor is 100% constant with speed we will float about 3 pockets with observation which will result in about 18 pockets errors. Because this method uses bars in middle of rotor as one observation point it is even worst, as I explained earlier.

If I was predicting same spin with same conditions, I would predict it within 5-6 pockets of accuracy if I use timer it will be 1-2 pockets error. And all I need to do is to observe 2 ball rotations.

Kelly · « **Reply #16 on:** February 06, 2009, 05:02:18 PM »

He uses vis a vis betting (180 degree) because if the wheel is 4 secs and the last ball rrev is approx 2 secs, the opposit part of the wheel will receive the drop. So if the average is 14 ball revs, then you must receive ball revs above 15 or below 13 to be wrong with your bet placement.

Forester · « **Reply #17 on:** February 07, 2009, 01:36:55 AM »

It is not very correct way of looking results.
If player because of observation mistakes predicting in one of 3 rotations where the average ball time is 1000ms then error for rotor calculation is 3 sec .
You can not look and say the ball went for another rotation and length of that last rotation is 2.5 sec or something to it. Real error was in rotation where he was predicting.
He actually predicted one rotation earlier.

“He uses vis a vis betting (180 degree) because if the wheel is 4 secs and the last ball rrev is approx 2 secs,”

I do not understand how someone can say prediction will be there or 180 from there. It looks he will be always right. Result will be always there or opposite or close to one of that. We still do not talk about ball scatter.
There is only one correct prediction, and that is to predict where the ball will hit.

I do not say such way of prediction is scam or is imposable to work. It is possible, but it has lot of opportunity to predict it wrongly that is why slower rotor is always better. I do believe that simple change to observing rotor numbers crossed is better and more accurate way then observing rotor handle.

Kelly · « **Reply #18 on:** February 07, 2009, 07:14:02 AM »

No, the real problem is in the tilt and the scatter.

Both Scott and Basieux has made several measurement experiments, Basieux with stroboscope lights and cameras, Scott when developing a program for a computer team, and as Basieux once put it: "The player was right but the ball was wrong." Meaning the players measures was perfect but because of a tiny fraction of extra speed, the ball managed to pass the uphill at the tilt high point and as it then had a downhill slope in front of it, it could gather enough momentum to travel the extra revoloution.

There is nothing wrong with placing a safe bet for such an occasion, besides, there are scatter histograms that has 2 peaks where the second is placed 180 degrees away, so even when the correct revoloution is predicted, the ball ends up 180 degrees as to where its supposed to end. Usually its not as big a peak as the main one, still, its much larger than the negative peaks between those 2 peaks.

As a seasoned player you simply cover all the high probability areas. I guess with the computer you only get 1 prediction for the highest probability and i think thats a weakness, since there are several high probaility areas in a single spin when both tilt and scatter is taken in consideration.

Besides, we are talking about what you can do with your eyes and the action you can take to take the full gain to beat the wheel, not computer measurements. If you are about to call a winning bet, a losing one because the ball took an extra revoloution even though the player was prepared for it, then i don`t know where this stops.

Kelly · « **Reply #19 on:** February 07, 2009, 09:02:17 AM »

Apparently bago don`t wanna explain the script he posted. I wonder why.

You will be watching the diamonds and the handle bars. From now on called bars. You will be watching the point in the bowl where the ball and the handle is passing each other and only in the top 1/3 of the bowl.

In the beginning of the spin where the ball is relatively fast you will see the bars pass the ball something like

Rev 1. 9 o c`lock
Rev 2. 10 o`clock

At some point you will see the ball and the bar pass each other in the 12 o`clock area twice or even 3 times at the same place.
1. Rev. ball and bar passes at 12 o`clock. (approximately)
2. Rev. ball and bar passes again at 12 o`clock.
3. Rev. ball and bar passes again at 12 o`clock. (at most wheels this will already be the deviation rev.)
4. Rev. ball and bar passes at 11 o`clock . Deviation ! This is now our deviation bar. (same point that is detected with Scotts 2X pattern, on faster wheels)
5. Rev. Skipped, nothing to notice
6. Rev. ball and bar passes at 13 o`clock area. Thats the "Where to look" bar which is the other end of the "deviation bar". The point where ball and bar passes each other must be noticed and watched carefully. It will be in the 13 o`clock area but might not be spot on.
7. Rev. The ball passes the point we noticed in the last round and we read the number below the ball when the ball passes the "where to look" point we defined in 6th rev. Thats the number we place our bets on. middle number + 2 neighbours to each side. Called x-2-2 and on the opposit side we place another x-2-2 bet all together 10 units.

Thats the interpretation of the script.

In real life, there is no way one can define a VB method that specific. The where to look area might be somewhere else depending on the scatter. Also, you cannot just dump all wheel speeds in the same category and play them all with the same method. You will surely see the same pattern but the underlying basis is different with a different wheel speed. So if you wanna try this out, try it on a DVD first, and try to predict only 1 wheel speed and see how the outcomes relates to the "where to look" bar. And adjust. Try picking only slower wheel speeds like 3.5 - 4.5 secs.

Forester · « **Reply #20 on:** February 07, 2009, 03:17:34 PM »

"The player was right but the ball was wrong."

It may sound interesting but it’s not correct.

Meaning the players measures was perfect but because of a tiny fraction of extra speed, the ball managed to pass the uphill.

It means that players measurement wasn’t good enough.

We could say the player was right but the ball was wrong only if the ball speed was same speed with same ball deceleration at particular point ends differently. But if instead lets say 1100 ms the ball is 20 ms per rotation faster (1080ms) which causes ball to go for additional rotation is not really that ball went for additional rotation but that player made mistake and did not have prediction in particular targeted ball rotation.

For analyses lets say 1100ms ball makes perfect pattern for prediction right in middle of number, and everyting is fine. But if next spin the ball is 1080 the player will still identify it as a pattern because he will still see same (20ms difference doesn’t make any noticeable difference to rotor movement), however until the ball drops there is one extra ball rotation which will cause errors in prediction.

Have a look video where I was explaining tilt2 set up.
http://rouletteplace.com/index.php/topic,456.0.html

If you look more carefully you will notice that system doesn’t predict in same rotation every time but if it is different rotation the system simply know how many pockets to add or subtract to still have accurate prediction. It is because it can define ball parameters within few ms. of accuracy.

For VB player to notice such change when he observing it would be only like 1/10 of single pocket difference, and he will not know where exactly it is. Therefore even if he has skill to perfectly inline all needed within one pocket he will still have some amount of spins not hitting DD, and remaining distributed in between 2 rotations. Distribution always can change due to even small rotor speed changes. That is probably reason why uchimata claims offset changes if he uses similar aproach.

In your explanation you showed 3 rotations at 12 o’clock, and you will always have few because the difference which we observe is only the difference that rotor makes because of change in ball speed per rotation. That really is not much and it causes only about 1 pocket difference in rotor movement. Player will never be able to choose right one all the time, also his observation and in-lining of everything will never be perfect.

If system is designed for slower rotors as you explained then most of errors will be + or – 9 pockets, so why to play opposite sides to compensate to it?

You guys are wrong if believing that last rotation is one extra rotation of in usual 2.x seconds. No it is not it is one that is wrongly taken when player thought he has everything inline.

Kelly · « **Reply #21 on:** February 07, 2009, 04:00:22 PM »

I give up forester, you either will not cannot understand it. I seriously doubt you have played any kind of real VB.
The VB player does not predict at different times as a computer. An extra or one less ball rotation does not make a faulty prediction because the player has placed his bets accordingly. Even if you are 1 or 2 pockets wrong you can still estimate the correct ball revoloution. I could go on. Do yourself a favour and look at Laurances instruction video where he explains and waves his hands as first the 2X appears and then the deviation rotation just after. After 1/2 hour you can do it too, even though the numberring on the video are practically a blur except for the zeros. Uwes 4X is a lot easyer than that, but its still the same.

In the beginning you might occasionally be 1/4 of a rotor wrong but thats because you confuse the ball rotations with each other.

The underlying physics in the system is the same that earned Kaisan 4.000.000 and Manny Kühl and Kowacs some 2.000.000. Were they all lucky ? You don`t have to answer that, but you might wanna remove the engineer cap because i think it blocks your eyesight. Respectfully.

Forester · « **Reply #22 on:** February 07, 2009, 06:20:50 PM »

Kelly, I know that VB with which most people trying to make money doesn’t predict in different rotations but is trying to define when the ball is in particular rotation.

If you have problem with something that I explained then point to it so we can discuss it, but I think it clearly explains why only 1 in thousand have success.

Quote

Even if you are 1 or 2 pockets wrong you can still estimate the correct ball revolution.

You can if you know by how much you are wrong, but if not 2 pockets represent error that will be as much as rotor moves in 2 ball rotations.

In explanation I shoved you that you can be wrong in defining ball rotation by one rotation even if the ball is only as 20 ms different in time per rotation.
Let me see how much that reflects on rotor that player will see.

If once ball is 1.100 seconds and next spin the ball time is 1.080s and if rotor is 9 pockets per sec.
1.1x9=9.9
1.08x9=9.72

9.9-9.72=0.18 pockets
Nobody can visually notice when everything is moving difference of 0.18 in pocket position and nobody can know where exactly is that braking point.

I do not believe that any of them made money playing on that way, but if you say so let it be. Maybe they played 20 years ago 90% tilted wheel with lowest scatter.

For some others who won more I know that story is different.

I did have Laurance book, I respect his work as a theory, but prediction where rotor is 1.5 sec to 2 sec per rotation is more fantasy. I think my ceiling fan works on that speed.

I thought you know how much ball scatter is widening by increasing rotor speed.

Bago · « **Reply #23 on:** February 13, 2009, 07:49:51 PM »

Kelly is talking as if he knows everything on the subject. It is far from the case, and like everyone he had to be taught. Ask Snowman and he will tell you that he taught him 100% biasplay.

Kelly is always cocky in his answers, that's why i can't bear this man.
He said that his wins was impressive when he played at Nice in the south east of France years ago at gambler's glen, but acknowledged not long time ago that he was down 500€ and then up 400€.
If 400€ is big money for him, this is ok, but it is not for me.

Forester · « **Reply #24 on:** February 13, 2009, 09:50:29 PM »

All, I was doing is pointing to problems with this system.

Someone who is observing full ball rotation and observing rotor pockets instead of handles is better of. I do not believe rotor should be used as a reference.

All I got as an answer is “I seriously doubt you have played any kind of real VB”

And statement. “Player was right but the ball was wrong”.

Author Topic: UWE Roulette VB Method (Read 3074 times)