I have test wheel mapping


#1

I test wheel mapping and i might get two to three patterns to match during 20 trails.
But i many times not get a fully and complete match.

Releas number and secound crossover might match, but not the third crossover number.
This means that ball duration or rotor drift make the missmatch.

Does time i have got a complete pattern match, so had the ball not made the same amount of turnarounds to end/drop.

So i don’t understand how some one can claim they have succes using that method.

Cheers


#2
So i don't understand how some one can claim they have succes using that method.
I not know really players which play like you name wheel mapping, but i know somebody who play abit similar.. with using special taimer/methronom which do zaps in some special order and he know what he must see in zaps moment that he will know where ball will land :)

#3

[quote=“lucky_strike, post:1, topic:1136”]I test wheel mapping and i might get two to three patterns to match during 20 trails.
But i many times not get a fully and complete match.

Releas number and secound crossover might match, but not the third crossover number.
This means that ball duration or rotor drift make the missmatch.

Does time i have got a complete pattern match, so had the ball not made the same amount of turnarounds to end/drop.

So i don’t understand how some one can claim they have succes using that method.

Cheers[/quote]Sometimes, ammount of revolutions do change. It depends on pressure. Cleaning sycles affect as well. Wheel maping as you describe, will be nice tool in exact atm. Pressures. You still have to look for consistency of conditions for approach like that would be valid. Come on skype tomorrow, lll show you something.


#4

[quote=“sergiy, post:3, topic:1136”][quote=“lucky_strike, post:1, topic:1136”]I test wheel mapping and i might get two to three patterns to match during 20 trails.
But i many times not get a fully and complete match.

Releas number and secound crossover might match, but not the third crossover number.
This means that ball duration or rotor drift make the missmatch.

Does time i have got a complete pattern match, so had the ball not made the same amount of turnarounds to end/drop.

So i don’t understand how some one can claim they have succes using that method.

Cheers[/quote]Sometimes, ammount of revolutions do change. It depends on pressure. Cleaning sycles affect as well. Wheel maping as you describe, will be nice tool in exact atm. Pressures. You still have to look for consistency of conditions for approach like that would be valid. Come on skype tomorrow, lll show you something.[/quote]

My impression is that you predict ball to early when you predict the first 4 laps in the beginning of spin.
Then ball is chaotic and speed is erratic, so even if you get the same spin or pattern, the spin will not behave in the same way for example the next 18 laps/turnarounds.

Cheers


#5

Its too much laps left to predict properly. I make preliminary prediction on first non caotick revolution and then confirm on knee point. There are different types of spin and them should be filtered .


#6
Its too much laps left to predict properly.

True, but i see it as a challange.
I have one method that predict the correct amounts of turnarounds/laps from beginning to end of spin.
But rotor speed drift or are a littel different when i get pattern match.
Bebediktus told me about that and it was true, so now i try to rap my mind around a solution.

I think it is pretty amazing that you can predict the correct amounts of turnarounds from beginning of spin.

Cheers


#7

Ammount of revolutions do not garanty expected number under diamond as the diamond itself. If you can predict earlier, good, use posterior laps to see ball decceleration pattern. This permitts to filter wampy, funny , back spin, forward spin…ets. Yes, rotor should be checked, sometimes gives surprises. Infact, wheel maping should be considered as a reliable system only with pritty similar rotor speeds, starting with early rev identification and using at least 4 posterior revolutions to the deviation analisys. Better even if you can hear the spins sound, so you have complete sett of variables on your side to choose best spins to bett.
Some deallers are just shitty, they make to much variable spin patterns to be able to make money on them. These you better to skip, or if you can, filter spins by decceleration pattern. This is the key to play any dealler.


#8

[quote=“sergiy, post:7, topic:1136”]Ammount of revolutions do not garanty expected number under diamond as the diamond itself. If you can predict earlier, good, use posterior laps to see ball decceleration pattern. This permitts to filter wampy, funny , back spin, forward spin…ets. Yes, rotor should be checked, sometimes gives surprises. Infact, wheel maping should be considered as a reliable system only with pritty similar rotor speeds, starting with early rev identification and using at least 4 posterior revolutions to the deviation analisys. Better even if you can hear the spins sound, so you have complete sett of variables on your side to choose best spins to bett.
Some deallers are just shitty, they make to much variable spin patterns to be able to make money on them. These you better to skip, or if you can, filter spins by decceleration pattern. This is the key to play any dealler.[/quote]

Stable rotor speeds are not so important as this is more VB in my opinion then wheel mapping, nice post though!

Lucky, why are you not posting in the members section?


#9

For me personaly, rotor speeds l play are important. I desisted to measure ball speed separately of rotor for varios reasons. Moust reasonable of wich is visibility. Wheel maping as l understand it, its taking numbers under diamond when ball pass… expected distanses between these are more easy to interpret in similar rotor speeds, egein for me personaly.
I think as well that topic should be mooved to development section.


#10

I mentioned it as more like VB as you suggested using ball decelleration to seperate spins, but in the post above mention not measuring the ball speed seperately. I think in this way trying to incorporate ball decelleration is more complex then it needs to be and using the method above timing the ball is better being more constant.

Not that anything that quantifies the wheels above random is wrong of course, winning justifies the actions ;).


#11

Well, Develish, you are absolutely right . The thing is that methhod as valid approach itself was qwestioned. So l mentioned how to make it pay the rent .


#12

[quote=“lucky_strike, post:1, topic:1136”]I test wheel mapping and i might get two to three patterns to match during 20 trails.
But i many times not get a fully and complete match.

Releas number and secound crossover might match, but not the third crossover number.
This means that ball duration or rotor drift make the missmatch.[/quote]

Valid approach or not, it would be a struggle for most to play the wheel if not getting an identicle match, then not knowing why or if it can be adjusted and improved. It maybe a struggle for sure which seems to be more of a problem then validity here. Honestly, lucky does not explain his technique here so I was commenting on what was read and suggested more then replying to your post alone.


#13

I see wheel maping as a way to asses spin development, not the exact technique to follow. I still make final prediction on later revolution, but befor, l already predicted trice at least, filtering all spins that do not mach expected pattern. As a general rool, l have small adge on other side of my normall prediction, following imperfect pattern. So l either cansel my betts or put additional bett depending on spin development, observation number taken later…ets.


#14

It looks that you simply like names - wheel mapping sounds like some mistical and very sure, but really all that not gives benefit, benefit give totally other things…


#15

There is two methods that i test …
I do this as you don’t need any kind of device using them.

1)Wheel mapping might work if you predict ball and rotor later during spin and not at the beginning.

2)Vendetta works partly predicting from beginning.


#16

Intressted in predicting early … PM me …


#17

Wheel mapping …

Someone have sent me kind of roulette strategy he thinks it may be good.
This strategy is one I like to call “wheel mapping”. It is an advantage play method in the same family as wheel clocking, but a little more basic.

This method is very effective in determining where the ball will land after it is spun. Once you have determined this, all you need to do is bet the “target zone”, where you believe the ball will land, and your odds over the house have just went up drastically. Heres how it works in a nutshell

First, you will need to pick a point on the wheel to use as a reference point. Anytime the words reference point are referred to in this lesson, this is the point you will look at. This point should be one of the vertical deflectors beneath the ball track. The deflectors are the metal barbs which the ball falls onto when it falls out of the track, before it lands in the wheel face. Each time the ball passes your reference point, you must notice which number is passing directly beneath it on the wheel. You must be able to read this clearly, which will require you to have a good, unobstructed view of the wheel.

Wait for the spin, then count 3 spins, the first, the third, and the fith. On the first revolution, notice the number under the ball as it passes the reference point, completing one complete revolution. Remember this number. Now, watch the 3rd next spin, as the ball passes the reference point, and remember this number. Do the same for the 5th.

You now have three numbers memorized, the 1st, 3rd, and 5th spins under your reference point, now you must wait for the ball to land. When the ball hits, remember the number it lands in, now simply write these numbers down. On a peice of paper, you should have three colums of numbers, one for spin 1, and one for 3, and one for spin 5, then a column with the result from the spin. Lets say, as an example, that your paper reads #1- 0, #3- 18, #3-2 =36. Or, 0+18+2=36.

Now, in order for this series of events to happen in this paticular order, waiting for the 1st, 3rd, and 5th revolutions, then tracking the numbers from a certain point for each of these spins using a common reference point, a certain set of variables had to exist that would affect the outcome of the spin in this manner. The wheel had to be traveling at a certain speed, and the ball at a certain speed, and the ball would had to have been spun from a certain point on the wheel. Also, the ball would have had to have hit a paticular deflector, and so on and so forth. Anytime a series of events as specific as the one we have created happens, it can only happed one way. Now, on to the point:

Whether or not you understand the physics of this experiment or not, all you need to understand to make money using this system is that if your numbers read 0+18+2, then the ball lands 36...then the next time you see 0+18+2, on the 1st, 3rd, and 5th revolutions, then the ball is going to land in, or very near to the 36... it has no choice! Every single condition which has affected this spin, would have to be met again in order for the results to read the same. 

If you try, you can wrap your brain around it, if not, then just take my word for it…youll see for yourself when you play. It took me a long time to realize this powerful truth, but here it is…and it is never wrong! All you have to do is read the number accurately as they pass your reference point, and record them accurately, and you will literelly have a blue print, or “map”, which can be followed to find the landing point of the ball. Its literally like predicting the future!


#18

I show this to another expert.

Your method is valid, but you do need help from the wheel.
If either the scatter or the drop point is truly random (or, near random), you won’t be able to realize an edge.

I operated timing computers for many years, and there were cases where the exact same early ball times just didn’t map to the final drop point.
So, you will always need to see if there is a correlation between your readings and the outcome.
It is wise to map to the outcome rather than the drop point because the drop points may compensate given specific wheel speeds.

A refinement you will want to consider is to segregate out your readings by wheel speed if this is practical.
What you will find is that there will be a “sweet” speed where drop points compensate and the edge manifests.

If the speed varies too much from this sweet speed, then the edge will go away.
Unless you have a very dominate drop point (7 out of 10), you will need to be sensitive to wheel speed.

Another refinement would be to keep track of offsets, not the actual numbers themselves. For example, the offset between spin 1 and spin 3 might be five pockets. Then, the offset between spin 3 and spin 5 might be 10 pockets. Then, record the outcome as the offset between your observation on spin 5 and the final outcome.
This way, you won’t have to look up specific numbers in your table.


#19

Nice interesting posts, Lucky. On such an endeavour, I would pay alot of attention to maintaining a stable entry point for the spins you collect data on for analysis.


#20

Lucky,

Mine sugestttion for you - simply go to casino and try to apply such method, one time will be enough to understand how is hard to play this way.

And efectivness is very low.

Not right way…