UWE Roulette VB Method

[Bago]

Kelly   Posted: 11-Sep-07 00:39   
   Delete           Edit
    
   Mail          Profile   
bago you might wanna read something on vis a vis before you start talking like an "expert".

You don`t predict vis a vis from anything. Its an effect caused by on some wheel speeds when you are 1 ball revoloution wrong in your exit prediction, then the opposit sector is becoming the main sector. Or if the scatter has bi modal peaks which means that vis a vis is not nessecaryly a 180 degree but can also be a triangular phenomen.

You don`t predict from the drawings cross over patterns, where the secondary or third sector is located or when it occurs as you imply. That is probably the daftest thing i have ever heard.

And the cross over pattern are NOT nessecary, he can predict just as well without them. You might wanna buy his the book to see what he writes about the drawings.

I was not gonna come back, but when you make such a fool of your self i can`t help it. Keep going, this IS funny mr expert.


Where have you written that the vis-à-vis can also be crossed? Nowhere Mr i know it all.

I never asked Snowman about his book, he gently sent me the most importants things on bias subject, and all the discussions we had. I probably know equal if not more than you on bias.

[Bago]

And for your information Mr I know it all, triangular vis-à-vis and crossed vis-à-vis are not bi modal peaks. Only the 180° vis-à-vis is bi modal peaks since there are two major peaks that emerge in the scatter graph. When dealing with a triangular vis-à-vis 3 peaks are emerging and crossed vis-à-vis 4 peaks are emerging.

Sorry to correct you again Mr I know it all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bimodal.png

[Kelly]

LOL, is something i haven`t written now wrong ? There are a lot more things i still haven`t written, are they also wrong because they are not written ? Do you expect me to quote the entire chapters everytime vis a vis is mentioned ?

I asked you specificly:  where i have EVER said that vis a vis was only 180 degrees ? 

As for the triangular peaks, they are a deviation from the "normal" 180 degrees vis a vis and is combination of several things where one of the things CAN be  3 poled  scatter  blocks but is also likely to a abnormality from the 180 degree vis a vis. Based on a slight difference in wheel speed so that the rotor does not come all the way round to 180 or basis in a slightly different drop zone than expected.   Buy the books its a longer story.

As for info on Kaisans VB: what i know on his VB is also available to all german paroli readers.

I don`t care what you and snow share, im sure snow has control over what he wanna share,  all i have to do is read your posts to know that he at least haven`t shared his book but why should he, you already know MORE than is in his book.

Sorry i had to correct you on your correction

[Bago]

It's not about being wrong the problem, it is the fact you claim being a VB expert and i know nothing about it.
Contradiction is when you wrote about vis-à-vis and said that it can be either 180° or triangular.
Which is incomplete since it can also be crossed and you didn't mention it, you who claim knowing a lot more than me on the subject, i find that amazing and i'm sure the others too.

You also wrote that triangular vis-à-vis is bipolar distribution which is incorrect, i don't need to read books to know that. Bipolar is two peaks, and that's what a 180° vis-à-vis is developping, a triangular vis-à-vis is developping 3 authentic peaks. Ask Basieux and he will correct you also.

"where i have EVER said that vis a vis was only 180 degrees ?"

I showed your post you wrote on gambler's glen so why do you ask again. You wrote in it that vis-à-vis is 180° and also bipolar which is a nonsense since 180° is bipolar.

Your are showing dishonesty and cannot accept being wrong, and then you are shocked some people didn't respect you when you show arrogance and unrespect in the first place.

[Kelly]

You say i have never mentioned that vis a vis can also mean crossed. Well how many times have i posted this pick on GG and in here, from Pierres "Die Zähmung des Zufalls". With Pierres okay by the way.  Look at the "Vierteilung".

Don`t you think it looks like that there are a cross there ? Should i also have mentioned that there are possibly also higher than 4 peaks possible ?



And i didn`t write bipolar but bimodal which is a quote from Pierre, if thats a wrong phrase then so be it. I think people got the message.  I have never disrespected any of the people i mentioned and they never me, but they were shocked that i had that much trust in your confidence.

[Bago]

Showing a picture and explaining what's happening on it are two different things.

The only time you wrote about vis-à-vis, you mentionned it was 180° and triangular.
Accept it or not, it is on gambler's glen archives, in a thread where you wanted to correct me on VB.

Me, who is supposed to know nothing about VB like you wrote, added that the vis-à-vis is also crossed.

Yes, Basieux writes 180° vis à vis is bimodal, bipolar since they're two major areas opposite to each others.
But where you are wrong is the fact you said triangular vis à vis is bimodal whereas three peaks are developping. You should have said tripolar, trimodal.
Crossed vis à vis is quad-modal since there are four peaks, actually two 180° vis à vis crossed. Like splits 1/4 and 11/12= 4 peaks.

So before quoting wrongly Basieux to look genuine, you should understand what he is writing in the first place not to look stupid when you want to correct people.

[Kelly]

Using bimodal in combination with a triangle is of course wrong, that is accepted it has been in another discussion with Pierre. My mistake.

I asked you to do an explanation of Uwes VB, you didn`t.  Because it would reveal your secret VB pattern.  I don`t need to dig further. You did not know what was in the document because all translations came out as a mess.

 You can ask any expert you wish if there are a secret pattern which is better than others. All patterns has a function under specific conditions.

If i made a mistake in not mentioning the überkreuz then how many mistakes have you made in not explaining Uwe.  Grow up kid.

 

[Bago]

I gave brief explanation of Uwe method and made no mistake at all.
Contrary to you about vis-à-vis stating that triangular vis-à-vis is bimodal.
Yes, that's a big mistake for someone like you who wants to let us believe you are one of the top VB players in the world.

You are always criticizing, want to have the final word and cannot accept being wrong. Sorry but you do not look like a clever person, far from it.

I've given a system for free trying to help others and the only thing you do is criticizing. What a fucking conman you are.

You are just crazy i've shut your mouth about vis-à-vis, you who claimed i got no clue on the subject.
You are the one who can teach how to look very stupid and red faced in less than 5 minutes.

[Forester]

Thumpers are old hat, and shows that you are not the expert that you claim

to be, the one who can make head counts with 0,1sec accuracy.

Well 0.1 is not enough if you targeting particular revolution.
Why to play with 0.1s if it can be 0.000001s.
Head count can be lost, so timer can be used to refresh players accuracy.

We understand why you earn 400€ playing Roulette when you travel.

STOP IT, it was only one Kellys experience which he was prepared to share. Do no be Mark Howe. For using inappropriate word from someone you got another negative Karma.
Do not blame me for following consequences in near future.
 

[Kelly]

Bad karma is the correct term. If i had made 1000 it would still not be 2000 and if i made 2000 it would still not be 3000. I don`t have a habit of taking pictures of my winnings to use as "evidence" on a message board, thats something my kid would have done when he was 8 years old. Even as a 9 year old, he would have outgrown that habit.

 I didn`t mention the cross vis a vis, so im wrong and dishonest. Bago didn`t mention the tilt factor but claims that vis a vis is only wheel speed dependent, what does that maake him then..... If there is no tilt, we can mix whatever speed we want, vis a vis is not likely to happen. Tilt is a nessecary factor.  Besides, the cross vis a vis should be treated extremely carefully as well as the triangular version. Usually one should stick to the prime prediction and leave the triangle or cross out, unless the peaks are just as evident as the prime prediction.

Never mind, im done here. Hopefully someone could use the explanation i gave  of the Uwe method.  Explaining vis a vis is also done in detail here, but has nothing to do with VB prediction. Its just a side effect one can use in the betting pattern to obtain maximum growth of the capital, if  the wheel shows this tendency.

[Bago]

Another embarrassment for our super VB expert Kelly the fucking liar:

What i wrote on gambler's glen:

"Oh God you are fabricating my claims, i will stop to talk with you, you do not understand what i say, it's pathetic i have the illusion to talk with a 10 years old child:"

Kelly: "On a 3 sec wheel....... you already know it is a 3 sec wheel, so why
on earth would you start tracking crossover numbers, to confirm it is
a 3 sec wheel (on top of that, your cross over pattern you look for is
already based on it being a 3 sec. wheel) at a point where you are ju
dging ball speed and is about to place your bets ? At that point you w
anna confirm the rotor speed with crossover numbers ?"

Me:  "Again: By having made your drawing showing the deceleration of the ball on a 3 sec wheel rotor (yes you do several drawings with "different wheel speeds), you realize with the Vis à Vis caused by the slight tilt of the wheel, even if the ball misses the diamond collision, you are still ON THE RIGHT SECTOR by betting on the opposite sectors separated by 180° when the ball is entering in his 5 last revolutions (EXAMPLE)."


HAHAHAHA! I was the first one in the thread to talk about the tilt of the wheel.
Now, because i shut your mouth in the first place, you continue to lie trying to get your point, but again SPLASH, your lies to discredit me are easily exposed.

I am waiting for your apologies now little Kelly. Just admit you were wrong about vis-à-vis and that you have been lying about me (that i am a noob etc...).
After that, i will respect you and accept your apologies. Be an adult who recognize his faults.

[Forester]

Bago you sound funny,

Anyway with your vis- Vis (whoever start using such exotic name) and presented system, you will end up with where the prediction was or 180 from there or with 9 pockets from prediction or additional 180 from there. When you put it all together it means that the ball will stop at 0, or 90, or 180 or 270 from predicted number and of course anywhere in between.

Did you ever think to have correct prediction and forget of betting on opposite side just in case if ball decides to stop there? I believe in only one place to place the chips.

[Bago]

There are a lot of situations on semi-tilted wheels where betting 180° vis-à-vis brings a higher edge than going for one unique sector.
And it is not your 0,0000001ms accuracy that will beat that, particularly when your super precise measurement is done with manual clicking, and when very similar ball revolution timings lead the ball to travel less or more distance.

So you should do your homework Forester.

[Forester]

There are a lot of situations on semi-tilted wheels where betting 180° vis-à-

vis brings a higher edge than going for one unique sector.

I would really like you to explain us how.
Also I would like to see a graph that would show such case.

You are funny about roulette computers.
Even Barnetts basic formula will be more accurate then VB.
It will take him long time to adjust for particular time window but after that until parameters on the wheel change he will be more accurate then VB player.
He will be able to define ball speed at least within 40 ms. And he will not estimate rotor change but have more précised calculation.

Long time ago Kelly explained to me that he can do almost same with some additional processes on top of his VB prediction. It is logical but it requires a lot of skill and it compromises on remaining time for placing bets. But I can't argue on it since it is possible.

One is for sure. Nothing can be more accurate and easier to adjust then FF tilt 2.
Did you watch video, and if you did do you think I edit it as your ex friend.

[Bago]

If you have never observed on semi-tilted wheels that the ball often misses the expected striked diamond to hit the diamond opposite, i cannot do anything for you.

It either means that you rarely visits Casinos.
Or
You just show ignorance to increase sells of your device.

[Forester]

I thought that I asked you something to explain.

that the ball often misses the expected striked diamond to hit the diamond opposite

With what you have wrote something is wrong.
If the ball hits opposite diamond then opposite number will not be there because while the ball makes extra ½ or rotation and rotor moved.

Even if it was who says that if ball doesn't hit diamond where you expect advantage that it will hit on opposite side. The ball could hit any of diamonds, and by my experience opposite one will be with the lowest hits.

Bago you can read and read and chase people to explain to you.

But your understanding is very limited and often you misunderstand material.

Instead of explaining, you start attacking me for no reason.

If you want open another thread and write which kind of A/H I am or anything you have said about me inpatst 2 years when you were helping Stefano. I do not care.

But if you discussing something try to focus on the subject.
Even if i have the worst roulette computer it has  nothing to do with your explanatio to be more right.


I think you should buy again Stefano's computer, didn't you read it does everything automatically. So theoretically even idiot can operate it.

[Bago]

It is already all explained but you seem not to understand anything. 180° vis à vis is wheel dependant and to actually be right into the spot, no matter if the wheel hits predicted diamond or opposite 180°, you will be right by betting split bets as 5/8 23/26 0/3.
180° vis à vis betting works with a rotor speed around 3sec.

So now, if you claim that your "unique sector betting" is more accurate when facing those standard conditions, you are more silly than i thought.

With vis à vis betting you are actually covering two areas that have peak points in the scatter, so it is mathematically impossible to achieve a better edge by covering only one sector like you precognize, since both sectors have equal chances to hit.

I don't attack you but you are quite boring because we are talking about basic things and you don't understand.
But like you are saying, it is not you the problem, it is the others. We are all silly.

I just told you that your computer cannot achieve a better edge on semi-tilted wheels by betting only one sector whereas in the scatter graph, there is not only 1 large strike area but severals.

If you still do not understand, do not ask me. Email Basieux and he might take the time to explain it to you, it is him who is the precursor of this. He has a maths and physics degree, therefore if vis-à-vis was not usefull, do you really think he would have explained this in a lot of his books and using it himself at the table winning large amounts of money.

Be more respectful of what people has to say. You are like Kelly who always wants to be right and as you've seen i've embarrassed him and exposed his lies.

Why are you talking again about roulette computers when i have said many many times that i didn't want and i'm not interested in using one for playing in the real world?.
You are just getting crazy because i've proven my point with people wanting to sell your cheap device, and i got it for peanuts. But contrary to Stefano, i won't have to ask you for a refund, it is so cheap.

[Forester]

No, I will not ask you for more be sure.

First you say that you place opposite bets because ball hits on opposite diamond forgetting about rotor movement.

It is very hard to define what semi tilted wheel is since all of them really are tilted up to the point and none 100%. Stefano calls maximum leveled wheel semi tilted.


Did you ever ask yourself why do you have 2 or more pick points and why I always have one?

Playing 2 pick points if they are same in size doesn't increase advantage but consistency of hits.

If you play 2 points and split $50 on them, someone will have same result simply by placing $50 on one of them. And I will have the highest advantage because all picks will be at one point higher I size.

Only excuse for 2 or more pick points is if ball scatter is formatted that way. If it is not then the only reason is your bad prediction.
If you have small 4 pick points as a result of predictiong what I will call a leveled wheel with tilted wheel approach, it will be very low points, it will not be stable and hardly that any advantage can be gained from it even if the player has perfect feeling for rotor adjustments.

Yes you proved your point it must be that hundreds of people rushing to sell you ff , so I will end up with you here. When you grow up and decide to be an honest contributor let me know. Just do not make it to be to soon because from your levele of respect and responsibility it will be imposiable to improve.

And if someone is interested here is your prove.
http://rouletteplace.com/index.php/topic,533.0.html

Bago karma come to -10 points he is banned from posting his comments.

[lucky11]

hi forester are you awake?

[Forester]

good replay to this post c