Kelly you can’t have and claim 1:15 hit rate if you have hits to rotor only 1:28. We all know that ball doesn’t stop instantly and regardless with which accuracy we predict on which number the ball will drop, that same ball will still make jumps which are partly unpredictable. We can only find out by how many pockets the ball will jump most of the time.
I claim with FFA something as 1:12 hits to rotor and 1:24-1:28 as final result. It is logical since scatter on his wheel takes a bit more then 50%.
To have 1:15 hit rate we need that the ball hits rotor with accuracy of 1:6 according to prediction. When I look his red graph, I simply don’t know where would I place bets.
Even if that slight advantage is generated from his mobile phone roulette computer it is not enough for real casino play, where parameters may change and where with such poor prediction we wouldn’t be able to detect it. Success in real game is not linear by defined accuracy of hits, but it goes to exponential curve. It is because when we are more accurate with prediction we can observe things better.
For example exclude ball jumps, if you play and the ball hits 80 , within 6 pockets from predicted number it is more then 3 times better then if the ball hitting 80, within18 pockets. It is because if something happened so the ball starts traveling longer with 6 pockets accuracy we can instantly spot the change, but with 18 pockets it is harder, since we do not know is it coincidence or real change.
For roulette computer to know if it works well or not you do not need many spins.
If you see most of spins hitting rotor as predicted within few pockets of accuracy 100 spins is plenty. Remaining you know that it is scatter law. If Stefano Hourmouzis wants to claim that his computer knows will the ball jump 5, 10, 15, 30,50…etc. pocket by some voodoo magic that is a different story. By physics it doesn’t work, or performance is extremely poor. It is his DVD, Bago only analyzed it so he shouldn’t be upset with him.
Bago is pain in the a… as we all know, but if one day he decides to show FF’s results Stefano can only sh… himself. Regardless is it skipping video as Stefano claimed that he used. But at least he will understand what real roulette computer is.
I did not look Marks video much, from brief look it did show some consistency, but it was assembled from few blocks.
It is same reason why I do not look recent spins which Stefano published. It is because I know that he wouldn’t be so stupid to make same mistake with so poor DVD as he use to supply with his computer, for past 2 years. At that time people did not know what to look for, but now they do, if thy understand 10% of what was writtn.
So what did you find with Mark Howe’s roulette spins?