# A message from SNOWMAN!

There is actually quite a bit of confusion about Dealers signature. It’s not so much that a dealer even really has a particular skill, but that the wheel is ideal for it. The wheel speed and a dominant drop is what makes it look as though the dealer is “super” skilled. It has more to do with matching up the “frames” or sections of the wheel that are most likely to pass under the dominant drop when the ball is present.

For example: Let’s say the dealer “shoots” the ball and that the ball makes 17,18,19,20,21 revolutions over a series of different spins. At a certain wheel speed, the dealer may have the same chance of hitting a specific “frame” or section of the wheel on more than one ball pass. In some instances, the dealer may have as many as three chances at a section of the wheel, if it is traveling at the ideal speed.

(This is a very rough explanation)

At wheel speed X the dealer may have the opportunity to hit the same section of the wheel from the ball release number on ball rotation 17,18, and 21

At wheel speed Y the dealer may have the opportunity to hit the same section of the wheel only on ball rotation 17, and 19.

At wheel speed Z the dealer may have only one opportunity to hit the same section as the previous spin, if the ball drops on ball rotation 19 only. Understand?

)

That’s why I use to call it “framing”- (looking for the best wheel speeds for the largest number of opportunities of a sectional hit). The above example is ONLY an example. It leaves out so much information. There are actually more variations to it. If you want to really grasp the concept, you need to film a wheel. The above example is really to illustrate how a dealer may hit the same section of the wheel even if the ball makes an additional rotation.

I really shouldn’t post this late at night

I have already tested this method. Would you like to see real test results?-See below. I did not segregate by wheel speed. I did not want to curve fit the trials. I also wanted to measure the raw effect over more than one dealer. The biggest difference the dealers made, were spinning their wheels at a less than an optimal speeds. The advantage of the method still emerged even in the raw trials.

When I tested this method on wheels that had completely random drops the edge evaporated.

The two steps that you MUST include in your test for it to work is:

1. Compare only the change in travel yardage between every two spins of the dealer. Compare only spin 1 travel yardage to spin 2 travel yardage etc.,… The reason is that the dealers will continually fine tune each spin and the wheel speed continually drifts throughout a session. The signature is therefore perishable.
This also removes any doubt that the test results were some how “peak picked” or “curve fit”.

2. A wheel with dominant drops.

If I would have cut and pasted the Excel program it would have looked all screwed up, so I have posted only the totals and the test results. I tested this years ago on Mark4,5 Huxleys, and Paul-sons. The chi square and the standard deviation results were impressive.

These numbers represent the change in the dealers travel yardage between consecutive spins only.

For example: spin 1 the dealer releases the ball from a specific number and the ball lands 10 pockets from the release number. The travel yardage for spin one is 10 pockets.

Spin 2 the dealer releases the ball from a specific number and the ball lands 12 pockets from the ball release number. The travel yardage for spin two is 12 pockets.

Now this is how you determine how accurate the dealer is:

Measure the change in travel yardage between every two sets of spins. In the above example the change in travel yardage is Spin 2 - Spin 1 = change in yardage of +2 pockets. Understand?
Spin 2 is 12 pockets. - Spin 1 is 10 pockets = a change of yardage of +2 pockets.

Here is how the plot looked on Wheel 1 (only 623 spins). I actually have tracked and recorded just over 7800 spins on a few different Mark4’s and 5’s to test dealers on these wheel designs with dominant drops. I will post those as I find them. This plot is actually 4 different dealers over the course of a few days. The relative positions that we are most interested in are of course, for relative positions -1,0,+1.
This three number sector was already over 4.28 st dev. at only 623 spins.
The chance of randomness for the twelve pocket sector was 2.078 followed by 9 zeros.
While the standard deviation could be considered random given the small trial, what makes it significant is that it is where we would predict it to be. Understand?
The scatter out to the left and right of relative position 0 is also interesting considering the location of the ball deflectors.

When the sum of the neighbor 5 and 10 are examined the signature is quite obvious.

relative position -18-7 hits
-17-15

-16-15
-15-11
-14-16
-13-17
-12-12
-11-21
-10-23
-9-12
-8-11
-7-20
-6-13
-5-23
-4-16
-3-13
-2-15
-1-28
0-26
+1-24
+2-13
+3-13
+4-22
+5-15
+6-19
+7-25
+8-15
+9-20
+10-12
+11-14
+12-16
+13-12
+14-17
+15-13
+16-16
+17-11
+18-17
+19-15

While this method is interesting, there are better ways for VB.

CHEERS

DR. SPOCK

EuroRoul,

It’s really not that hard to find wheels with dominant drops.

I know this sounds nuts, but I actually find more wheels with dominant drops now, than I did 10-15 years ago. I cut and pasted a previous post that I made a few weeks ago below explaining why.

It really doesn’t take long to find an ideal wheel.

1. Find a wheel where the ball is striking the same deflector on the apron more frequently than other deflectors. 7/10 times would be a nice start. A wheel where the ball migrates from one deflector to another, subtlyover a session is acceptable as well, as long as you can get enough clusters of the same deflector smack before the migration occurs. (Remember, your only going to be comparing one spin’s yardage to the next spin’s yardage.)

2. Don’t let the ball scatter at the wheel head discourage you. What impressed me was the fact that even a low profile Paul-son wheel produced the effect when we tested it. The ball also rarely bounces backwards on this wheel design. The only change was that the best section was spread over a larger area around relative position 0. I would still avoid trying it though on a Starburst or a Saturn wheel.

3. On a card simply record the numbers from 1 to 38 and track the change in yardage between each spin that the dealer makes. (Remember Yardage of spin 2- Yardage of spin 1 = the distance that you will count from the dealers ball release number to predict the best sector).
Place a bet no wider than 5 numbers for your target sector.

The reason you don’t want to bet wider than 5 numbers is that on some wheels the ball may be exiting into the cone too frequently. When this happens, either the ball is likely to land within the target area or it is likely to exit through the cone where it will, on average, travel 7-10 pockets away from the center target. If you lay a sector 10 numbers wide, 5 of your numbers could become negative expectation numbers due to the cone exits. This would greatly reduce any edge. Understand? Keep it simple for now. Just stick with 3-5 numbers.

1. Of course memorize the wheel backwards and forwards before you try this. Next memorize the wheel so that you know what number is exactly 5, and 10 pockets from any number on the wheel. What I find useful is to think of the wheel as being a clock. What number is 5 minutes from a number, what number is 20 minutes from another.

Below is that previous post to which I was referring.

Interestingly enough, people are beginning to believe that the dominant drop is a thing of the past.

Well that is not entirely true.

Just this past week we have tracked the ball drop and orbit decay of another ultra low profile Paul-Son roulette wheel. Out of well over 400 spins, the ball only missed the same exact vertical deflector three times. The ball struck the same vertical deflector 435 times out of 438 trials.

When I returned a few days later, the ball was still striking the same vertical deflector.

The cause was the ball apron. Although the ball did not leave the upper ball track in the exact same place each spin, the wood warping within the ball apron of the wheel still guided the ball towards the same exact deflector each spin. The actual deflectors are located lower down on the apron of the wheel on this brand.

Conclusion: The ball track is now a much larger area on the flatter wheels. Any subtle defects in the lower apron can affect the final orbit of the spinning ball and create a dominant drop. Dominant drops are more difficult to find in the actual track, however the apron more than makes up for it with it’s large surface area that is prone to warping from the overhead vents. Debris is also more likely to collect on the surface now that the wheel is flatter.

This is not the first Paul-Son wheel that we have found with a strong
dominant drop. We have actual noticed several, but even more in recent years. When comparing dominant drops and deflector smacks, our observations are showing that the Paul-Sons are actually producing more dominant diamond smacks than the Huxleys currently are. This contradicts what I would have believed to be true even a few years ago.

Visual ballistic players and bias players take note. Some players are beating the heck out of these flat Paul-Son wheels.

-Snow

CHEERS

DR. SPOCK

Yes there are many wheels with dominant drop zone that we can take advantage. I am not sure if with reasonable sctter just by DS advantage can be recognisable. 18 rotation doesnt have to mean same ball time traveling.

Watch also both ball directions, because dominant drop may be caused by deformations on the ball track. So you may find wheel where CW ball is 60% dropping at 12 o’clock and in ACW it could be at 6 o’clock.