@Forester regarding prediction value of ball rev time

Advanced roulette play
21

forester, i think we should leave Scotts system out. Neither you or Mark has shown a correct modus operandi for applying the system. I think you need to see the tutorial video to fully understand how it works.

You have different cross over patterns such as “wide”, “tight”, “leg” pattern. All patterns has a meaning regarding the moment of prediction.

On top of that, you have the marching pattern. You can`t just use the cross over patterns as prediction.

Besides, Scott is the only one who has ever used rotor patterns for predicting a specific revoloution. European wheel watchers has done the same for years but without the patterns.

As does also Scott in his advanced method.

22

@Rollo
I only brought up the topic on Neural Nets because it seemed that gkd’s post regarding a hardware solution to measuiring wheel/ball timings without manual intervention might employ something along those lines. I agree that regression techniques can produce the required prediction equations. Microsoft excel can derive linear, logarithmic, and polynomial equations. Using a video program to study ball spins one can precisely time ball revolutions. When plotted with excel, very accurate prediction equations can be obtained. We are still left, however, with the fundamental problem of acquiring precise ball revolution timings during actual play.

anam

23
We are still left, however, with the fundamental problem of acquiring precise ball revolution timings during actual play.
Yeah! That's the rub! Lucky thing there is cheap small hitech available today. Remember that "laser-gang" in London Ritz who won a million British pounds in an evening? That's all about measuring technology.
24

I have serious doubt that there were any laser scanners present at the Ritz. Look what Mike from Survtech wrote:

survtech survtech is offline
Registered User

Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 194
Lasers shmazers
I examined all the evidence, including several mobile phones, held at Scotland Yard by the Specialist & Economic Crime Directorate.

I spoke with the arresting officers, members of the Club Squad.

I spoke with gaming staff that were present on the nights in question.

I spoke with the surveillance team who monitored and analyzed the action.

I watched surveillance video tape footage of the action.

I listened to recorded audio of the action.

I examined the running sheets of all bets made.

There was no evidence whatsoever of device use.

The Ritz Club is small and exclusive; any suggestion that players could get away with filming a roulette wheel are not only ludicrous, it is also an insult to the professionalism of the Ritz Club staff.

Claims that no charges were pursued because device use is not an illegal act are totally without foundation.

I am not claiming that device use IS an illegal act; I am stating that, in this case, it was not an issue.

There is strong evidence that conditions on the nights in question were conducive to prediction techniques.

The betting patterns, execution and timing of wagers was professional and in line with known prediction techniques.
There were insufficient wagers placed to rule out normal fluctuation, results were within acceptable statistical confidence levels.

MB

http://www.gamingfloor.biz/forum/showthread.php?t=1590&highlight=mike+barnett

http://www.gamingfloor.biz/forum/showthread.php?t=1941&highlight=mike+barnett

25

I wasn’t there, so I don’t know for sure. But there is nothing to this story which seems incredible, other than the ruthless mistakes of the “scammers”.

Who “Mike” met and what he did not find, seems uninteresting.

The Ritz Club is small and exclusive; any suggestion that players could get away with filming a roulette wheel are not only ludicrous, it is also an insult to the professionalism of the Ritz Club staff.
I don't know Ritz, but in principle I don't see how it would be difficult to use hiden hitech like laser to forecast of roulette. That Ritz club, do they force all client to strip naked?
Claims that no charges were pursued because device use is not an illegal act are totally without foundation.
Well, it seems obvious that it would not be fraud according to normal western laws, because prediction is in no way interfering with the actual causality of events. The creation of information for personal use does not misleading anyone. I heard that in Nevada they have a special casino law against such devices. Lacking such specific legislation, I do not see how any prediction device could be criminal.
26

Well a strip search if the casino suspects somthing, is done without hesitation. They did it to Laslo Kowacs after he took a couple of 100.000s of an Australian Casino. They found a so called speaking stop watch.

They did it to Christian Kaisan after they found a foot operated device on him in Austria. He met up in my home town (Vejle, Denmark) casino and they made him take of his shoes before they let him in. He then took 600.000 Dkr (100.000 $) of them and that was the last time they wanted to see him again. Now he can`t play anywhere in the Casino Austria group. The last times was without device.

The Ritz called in Barnett because he is THE one to ask among Surveillance and Security companys in table games, regarding electronic equipment. There was a lot of money at stake, so his fees is not important.

He also spoke to Scotland Yard and the gaming board.

They played large sums on a very large sector, so with an edge and maybe a positive fluctation and maximum bet size, it obviously payed off.

Mikes background is electronics and he has consructed Roulette computers, Baccarat shuffle tracking computer device, Black Jack computers. The works.

If you check different gaming gatherings and seminars, you will most likely see Barnett as one of the speakers along with Forbe etc.

27

Same wheel 1.
kind of ball, system learns wheel /ball and predicts according to it.
Same wheel 2.
kind of ball, system learns wheel /ball and predicts according to I,t but predicted number does not have to match final number in same distance as with example with ball 1.

It can be done but there is no need for it, because it can cause more problems than benefits. I refer to level wheel prediction with different deceleration. On your next question I do not have answer, I do have smart solution but it is not artificial intelligence. Maybe it could help more, or maybe it can just complicate it more. I think Rollo is right with his explanation, I would say it is to complicated way and small change on the wheel would disturb data.

With new system of mine i need only few spins to start playing- keep it simple. Yes there are many more things with Scott’s system. All that I said, is it isn’t for me. Even to apply basics it is too much.

However if there was no Mark and Scott I maybe never would put attention on tilted wheel. To be able to take maximum advantage on tilted wheel, position where ball hits diamond must be predicted. My system splits positions in 3 parts. Very top part where there I snot much advantage, or there is none. Middle of top part, where scatter is very predictable, and about middle of diamond which may be also very predictable. So if 60%of spin will hit diamond then only 2/3 of that can produce high advantage. Barnett’s computer uses very selected spins where is the highest chance. If wheel is strongly tilted good timer can do the job. I think one of my friends is using 1.2 sec pulses that my device produces on the start, in his prediction.

I did not experiment with short times. He uses some combination of Scott’s prediction. My opinion is that it will never produce result as measured ball by accurate device. Of course if we do it manually that we may load system with incorrect data. It is not easy to create correction where few parameters are changing at same time, but I think I did it reasonably well. Easier solution would be something as anam suggesting but it would take many spins to set it up, then we may lose it all if conditions change. I think Mark is doing something that way, at least that is what I could see from his DVD. I use very different way.

28

Just one question:

How many seconds from ball drop/kollision do you make your prediction ?

29

More then 9 sec.
Under that time deceleration loses I would call it linearity.
DIFFERNEMCE IN BETWEEN SPINS
X
XX
XXX
XXXX
XXXXX
XXX / START OF CHANGE
XXXX
XXXXX
XXXXXX
XXXXXXX
I AM USING TOP PART, IN YOUR PREDICTION YOU ARE USING BOTTOM PART
Part in between is not very good for prediction.
Even my E2 system must exit before that part or prediction start shifting.
It does slowly shift even if played properly, how much it depends on which wheel is applied and how much system is balanced for that wheel.
Prediction is still within 10 numbers.
My E5 system can do it within 3 numbers and wheel speed does not have any change. However E5 it is designed for particular wheel. If applied on slightly different wheel prediction may start shifting. To limit it the system uses only particular ball timings where even if there is shifting it is limited and if time would cause to much of shifting spin would be invalid. Same if system thinks that timing of ball is incorrect.
IQE5 Is same as E5 but it has some intelligence, it takes few spins to tune itself for wheel where it is applied. It will not predict only if detects serious problem in ball timing based on few ball times and defined deceleration for particular times.
In computer prediction it is not only important what to do with recorded data but how do you take data.
I program in assembler and I know exactly how long each instruction takes.
If you time ball in milliseconds that process is done in subroutines and each line in program takes time to be executed. Now if you time 1 sec. the time of each instruction is multiplied by 1000. So the real time may be longer then 1 sec.
If switch is pressed to start clocking after 1 ms it will still be pressed so we need delay, while counting is still done. Part with delay and part where closed switch would mean end of clocked time, must be same number of software lines. Many more things that need to be taken care how they are calculated. It is takes months of work.
I have received additional DVD for leveled wheel from Bob Gordon. http://www.roulettespins.com . He is selling 8 DVDs for price of one bet on table.
And if you are nice to him he sends you even some extra spins based on your needs.

When I find more time I will publish results of scatter analyzes on Bobs wheel and results of my prediction applied on his wheel.

30

I guess my question was kind of faulty, because i meant with your visual method. Which “E” is which i have kind of lost track of.

9 secs out is roughly 5,5 ball revs before ball drop.

I will keep my opinion to myself because i won`t start an argument, but i will say that you will get no known AP players to belive that you can predict on a level wheel 5-6 revoloutions before drop. If you are very accurate you will start to see something between 3 and 4th last. Even there, you have no really safe indication on the kollision diamond.

I know that in theory you may be able to make a linear line from prediction to kollision. Problem is, that one speed at the 5th last round can lead to a drop on the “North” diamond but also at the “South” diamond. Or 2 different speeds at 5th last leads to same kollision diamond. So the problem is to step at the correct point in the linear line knowing that it actually IS the correct point. The
predictability increases very fast from the 4th and forward but is still extremely diffycult.

I dont fancy the training dvds much anymore because they rarely resembles the wheels i meet in the casino and im past the so called training stage where you still can improve your tecknik.

31

Yes, Kelly it could happen but not often.
If speed is taken accurately same speed taken at same spot would lead to same drop point if the wheel is without defects. I did so many tests on video spins and in real life.
With prediction on leveled wheel I do not look where the ball hits diamond but where it hits rotor.
If one spin I predict zero and ball hits rotor at 34. Another spin if prediction is 18 the ball hits rotor at zero. (About same distance prediction –rotor, within few numbers). Of course there is possibility of different results caused by various factors such as when the ball hits very top of diamond or just pass it and hits next one. Very small difference in speed can cause it. But it will create and different position on position where the ball will hit diamond. The distance from diamond to rotor will be different and average traveling across the wheel therefore it will almost compensate for difference which diamond was involved.
In some occasions it may not be the case. Very top hit on diamond can cause more differences.
In case of slightly tilt or damaged track prediction may be inaccurate and error will be proportional to error on the wheel. Bobs Gordon’s video spins for leveled wheel are not on perfectly leveled wheel. There is slight tilt or deformation. If the ball hits top right diamond the ball will stop by 9 numbers earlier, if it is bottom right diamond it will be 4 numbers difference.
For the end, all of this comes under simple question.
If you can define accurate ball time (speed) with device, laser, or whatever. Can you relate it to final result? (With this I mean really accurate speed)
My answer is yes, it is based on many tests and real play experiments. Theoretical calculation and result expectation match real play results.
You are right at 3 or for revolutions before the end measured speed can have more accurate relationship with final result.

32

Forester said:

More then 9 sec.
Under that time deceleration loses I would call it linearity.
DIFFERNEMCE IN BETWEEN SPINS
X
XX
XXX
XXXX
XXXXX
XXX / START OF CHANGE
XXXX
XXXXX
XXXXXX
XXXXXXX

So, you are saying that the change in ball velocity has two distinct phases in a roulette spin and that the first phase (farthest out from the ball drop) is the phase you use to make your prediction. Therefore, your prediction is based on change in ball velocity. Am I correct?

Also, you are measuring ball velocity with respect to a fixed point on the wheel rim and not a specific wheel slot (eg the 0). Am I correct here too?

regards,

anam[/b]

33

Anam that is change on differences in between 2 spins.
Wheel 1. One ball rotation 1 sec next one 1.2 sec.
Wheel 2 one ball rotation 1 sec next one 1.160 sec.
Now the ball clocked time of 1.1 sec would not be the same on wheel 1 as on wheel 2.
Wheel 1. Ball clocked time of 800 ms is not one full rotation from 1 sec rotation. But it is more then that. How much it is defined by change of time changes from rotation to rotation on particular wheel. Defining difference of differences is complicated process considering possibilities of errors created by our change in clocking response time.
Process of defining accurate time of ball rotation is linked with that results, same as interpretation what does it mean to final result.
Yes that is how I do measure it, with E5 wheel is calculated separately.
E2 observes in known time, change of the ball in relationship to the any number on the wheel. Time needs to be adjusted to length where the ball would slow down by 1/3 of speed at start of observation. Therefore when change on the end is multiplied by 3 it gives result how far the ball was from reference point when we started. Observation is in relationship to number therefore wheel speed change is included up to the limits.

34

Well the most precise opportunity of clocking i have ever had is on a 600 spin dvd where a stop clock is running in the front.

If you run it real slow and freeze the picture at the exact spot, you can simply read the stop watch at that time. Move it 3 slots and freeze again and read the stop watch and you can calculate the speed.

In real life i wouldn`t be able to anything like that. Its purely for experimenting. There are already known prediction tecknikes that works visually and the lack of edge, compared to a laser device, is fully compensated for by using split bets (no forced tip as on hit on single numbers in europe) and Kelly money management to catapult the actual money winnings upwards.

You can easyli swap a 25% edge with a 10% edge and make more money with the 10% edge than the 25 if you use a full Kelly compared to a flat bet 25.

My point is, go out and get some dough if you have an edge instead of trying to squeeze the edge to ridicoulous hights, where the winning amount of units is crawling sky high in Standard Deviation and is raising eyebrows in the pit immeadeately.

You may also win a large amount with Kelly, but your hit rate is still smaller (with a smaller edge) and may be in line with deviations although they are a result of an edge.

35

That is very correct. Betting only 1 number in pick area should be the most profitable, but it is not the most practical way. No matter what is our advantage we can still lose?

The highest ever hit rate that I have had was in 33 spins that 30 spins ball end up in predicted sector of 6 numbers.

But that was the edge created by prediction and luck.
Sometimes it can be opposite. Every spin spot on predicted, ball can bounce unpredictably and every spin slightly off predicted ball stops as predicted.
On top of that we can add wrongly placed bets therefore it is sure that final result is not only based on system advantage. Recently from 20 spins 4 times I have had wrong chip placement. 6 units on numbers 7 and 6 on 12 and only 1 spit 28-29. The ball stopped at 28 right in middle of 7 and 12. The difference in winning something as 1:12. Few spins later missed to place chips on number 22 even it was centre of prediction…etc.

36
My point is, go out and get some dough if you have an edge instead of trying to squeeze the edge to ridicoulous hights,
It all depends on how the scatter distrubution looks like, which I have little or no knowledge about. But as an example, if the peak is at 4%, closest surrounding numbers fall to 3.5% and then to 3%, then to bet on all of them reduces the edge to an average of about 3.5% (1/28.5), compared to betting only the peak of 4% (1/25). I suspect that one could reduce the profit per game with half by betting say 8 numbers instead of ony the most likely one.

There is an optimum out there somewhere. If the most likely number has the probability of 1/30 to come up, one makes on average 20% profit on the bets in the (very) long run. But there is about 3.5% probability that all the first 100 bets will loose! THe price for betting only the most likely number is that one must bet a lower fraction of ones budget at a time. Betting only 1% of the budget at a time, still will go bankrupt once a month on average (if you play 30 days a week, 100 times per day)! [the true solution is to get better odds than 1/30).

where the winning amount of units is crawling sky high in Standard Deviation and is raising eyebrows in the pit immeadeately.
But, isn't it more suspicious to bet numbers which lie next to each other on the wheel?
37

xx
Xxxx
Xxxxx
Xxxxxxx
Xxxxx
Xxx
Xx

Same spins could be in this format

Xxxxx
Xxxxx
Xxx
X
Xxxxx
Xxxxxxxx
Xxx

as you said if we play 1 number, we can badly lose.
In usual I play 7 numbers trying to cover them in this format
X
Xx
Xxx
Xxxx
Xxx
Xx
X
It can reduce advantage by half but produces stability in winnings.
That is in average 15 units.
To place 15 units at only 1 number is very risky even with good prediction on 50 spins we maybe do not get single hit. I think 5-7 numbers would be optimized play.
Kelly is one that made me think that way, before I use to cover 12-15 umbers

38
In usual I play 7 numbers trying to cover them in this format X Xx Xxx Xxxx Xxx Xx X
So you bet more on the number in the center of the prediction and less on the numbers next to it? Yeah, that's a good hedge. High probability to at least double the money there.

But isn’t it obvious to everyone that you are not betting to be lucky, but that you are trying to exploit a prognosis, when you bet on numbers which lie next to each other on the wheel? Doesn’t that attract the attention of security personel, expelling you as soon as you are winning?

39

Its been my experience that any time you are winning big you are likely to draw some heat from the casino staff, even if you are winning through blind luck alone. With that in mind, if you do have an effective prediction system, its best to optimize your chances with a bet spread and leave before you draw too much scrutiny due to your winning. Just my thoughts.

anam

40

Rollo, I do not make thousands every time on roulette, I am not professional player.
Most of dealers and pit bosses think that I lose more then what I win. Maybe I do :slight_smile: .
Sometimes dealer stops me by calling NMB earlier.
In usual I stay cool but sometimes I tease dealer and encourage other players to place late bets pointing to ball that still is spinning and spinning. If on table there are people that start placing bets when dealer spins the ball, I am lucky specially if they doing it until I start placing.
It is really interesting to watch how many kind of people work as dealers.
Some do not care and they just spin the ball.
Some acting as you taking money from them trying to stop you.
If because of the others they really cannot call NMB too early they think that by changing wheel / ball speed they can achieve something.
Some are very smart and they know what they doing, I think they even know what I am doing. Not once that I was asked why do I play as I play.
Of course I do it because I think casino can switch on magnets but if I place late bets they cannot do it :shock: . Or when wheel makes one rotation where is the ball that is the winning number. Do i care, if someone thinks that I am stupid but lucky.
If you go in casino sometimes you will see some area loaded with chips and everybody winning. Many people are playing dealers signature, and sometimes they do well. This is first hand information, casino do have specially trained dealers to break that pattern or to even set up people encourage them to play that way, and then manipulate game. After that players lose fast, because they highly increased bids.
Dealers signature is my first way of playing 20 years ago, and I still place my earlier bets based on that. I cannot say that I win by playing it. Actually on one tilted wheel it was very successful.