# I have test wheel mapping

#21

[quote=“bebediktus, post:20, topic:1136”]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…[/quote]

BB, whilst agreeing with you 100%. Lucky has been around along time so I guess he has his reasons for looking at such ways of play. Maybe you can suggest to him a few ways to improve his methods, even if just by a little bit?

#22

bebediktus mention same method as Vendetta - but with different approch using thumper - he know some one play that way
if i remember it correct

but i don’t agree fully with bebediktus - i am pretty sure that there is a method that works - with out using any kind of device
i just have to rap my mind around this and make some tweaks

#23
-

Wheel mapping …

this method a lot of reminds us of the way that acrobat3-URC works!
but what about if you see the same offset the next time like the offset between 0+18+2(offsets: 29+14) , for example numbers 20+8+29(again here the offsets are: 29+14), the question is if here we have to predict the ofsset between the last observed number and the winning number, in first case between 2 and 36 offset is 7, then in the second case the predicted number has to be with offset 7 from the number 29, means 0, isn’t it?

#24

If you do not have same number you say then you do not know what is faster the rotor or the ball.
How exact combination makes it better? You still can have faster rotor and faster ball making you same combination.

#25

If you do not have same number you say then you do not know what is faster the rotor or the ball.
How exact combination makes it better? You still can have faster rotor and faster ball making you same combination.[/quote]absolutely valid point. Thats why l use my modification to such a method. I do infact measure rotor speed, using timer forester made. Then l look for a padron of spin development. If l see something like ball making 6 revolutions to complete a sycle ( similar vendeta), then 4 rev to complete same sycle, l know l have perfect spin development that l should bett higher. If l see something different, l moove the point of prediction further in the spin ( till knee point). In any case, knee point and ammount of diviation in pokets that its produces becomes additional predictor.
This way l filter easily back and forvard aditional rotations spins, betting higher on " almoust garanted" good spins.
If ball has aditional rotation, but looses its effects during spin development ( happens sometimes) l have a higher chance to still catching this spin predicting later. I already know wich distances l should expect between my predictions in virtually up to 6 different rotations. This permitts much higher accuracy in revolution identification and opens possibility for diamond hunting.
@ Bebedictus, yes l do like term " wheel maping" , although l do it differently, in essence its the same thing. I just do not use it for a prediction, but for identification of spin development padron, like lourence does with his marshing padron, but without hunting ball and numbers all over the wheel.

#26

[quote=“lucky_strike, post:22, topic:1136”]bebediktus mention same method as Vendetta - but with different approch using thumper - he know some one play that way
if i remember it correct

but i don’t agree fully with bebediktus - i am pretty sure that there is a method that works - with out using any kind of device
i just have to rap my mind around this and make some tweaks[/quote]

I agree with him that it will be hard to play but can work, however you need to know a variable in my mind, rotor or ball speed. I would use ball speed for a very simple reason and would not need a thumper to do this.

Why are you so against using a thumper lucky, is your casino that paranoid? I did not like using the FF in the casino because the tech guy told me about the new specs of the cameras he was installing at the time, casinos do not like AP’ers much :o.

#27

devilish i just see it as a challange
i have my vb and yes i use thumper

but i like physics and discussion about what can and what can not be done
it would be pretty amazing if you can play with out any kind of device using pen and paper only

my opinion

#28
BB, whilst agreeing with you 100%. Lucky has been around along time so I guess he has his reasons for looking at such ways of play. Maybe you can suggest to him a few ways to improve his methods, even if just by a little bit?

First moment, no matter which way we play - something we must know for sure. When now he simply marks numbers without knowing time, without knowing wheel speeed - all that really is worthless.
Easiest way is to know ball speed, for that we can use methronome, can use something other - without diference, but we must know something for sure - say now is such ball speed that ball must travel 5,0 rounds and fall if we see that ball traveled 5,25 or 4,75 - that means that we detected ball speed wrong.

it would be pretty amazing if you can play with out any kind of device using pen and paper only
We all can do that - and name of method is bias :)

#29

Hi L_S,

You asked me to not share that vendetta file that i wrote for you and you publish it in public section. i don’t really understand… anyway…

If you do not have same number you say then you do not know what is faster the rotor or the ball. How exact combination makes it better? You still can have faster rotor and faster ball making you same combination.

Yes Forester basically there is more than 450 possibilities during a spin (if we use a common range of rotor and ball 's speed) /37 = around 12 combinations (rotor/ball 's speed) that will bring the same result.

By the way, i thought to add a last crossover (directly after or later) and mark the place on the wheel where that cross has been done. In germany some of them said it was valid, when i’ve tested it sometimes results seems to concentrated in one column only. (that could be randomness of course). I think there 's other parameters during the spin that avoid those very early predictions.

#30

I was thinking that we show it to others and get some discussion about the subject.
And this is a hidden section.

Cheers