Here’s a neat trick for you to track Mike.
I’m assuming that you still have all of your data.
Track how many times each number has hit 3 times or more within 20 spins. The hits don’t have to be back to back.
Plot the results on a graph.
Compare that to the long term data on your wheel.
When I played only single number maximum table limit and I win 3 spins in a row that is expected.
But when in 10 spins 5 times the ball stops where I did not place chip 3 times one or two pockets from my sector , once right in middle but dealer called NMB to early and once where I placed the smallest amount. That is unexpected and it is bad.
Forester
No that is just the “Sh*t happens” factor! ;D ;D ;D
Snowman
That is similar to my own modified RWD strategy which I play regardless of everything else even the FFA prediction, it is always my first bet.
I have been the greatest fan of this strategy since the first year it was released.
Mike.
Roy Ward Dickson said a playable hot number is…
a. One that has not come up for at least thirty consecutive spins. ie. 30 spins or more never less.
b. One that after such an “establishing period of absence” finally came up.
c. And which did so twice more during the next 19 spins or less, subject to the special exceptions below.
That is three shows in 20 spins or less after an absence of 30 spins or more.
SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS.
A number is NOT playable if it comes up three times in a row.
A number is NOT playable if the DIFFERENCE in the ‘gap’ between the first-and-second appearance and the ‘gap’ between the second-and-third appearances consists of more than six.
Say the qualifying numbers’ initial two shows were on the first and seventh spins, that is a ‘gap’ of 6 and the third qualifying show came up on the 19th spin, that is a ‘gap’ of 12 spins, then the DIFFERENCE in the ‘gaps’ of 6 & 12 = 6. The number is playable!
Again, suppose the initial two shows are on the first and third spins, that is a ‘gap’ of 2 and the third show is on the twelveth spin, that is a ‘gap’ of 9, so the DIFFERENCE in the’gaps’ of 2 & 9 = 7. The number is unplayable!
Another example, suppose the initial two shows are on the first and tenth spins, that is a ‘gap’ of 9 and the third show is on the twentieth spin, that is a ‘gap’ of 10, so the DIFFERENCE in the’gaps’ of 9 & 10 = 1. Playable!
BETTING STRATEGY.
Back a playable qualifying number for UP TO 9 spins NOT counting spins where zero shows.
Of course zero itself can qualify to be playable.
Bet one unit on the first to the sixth playable spin and two units on the seventh to the ninth playable spin.
If the string of nine bets all fail to achieve a win stop betting that number immediately.
Stop backing that number immediately a bet wins, that is the hot number shows for the fourth time.
As soon as one such playable hot number bet has won stop that playing session at that wheel, even if it was your first bet. No more bets that day at that wheel.
Should three successive playable strings each of nine bets all lose stop that playing session at that wheel.
If you have lost two strings of nine bets and are playing a third when a second number qualifies as playable DON’T commence betting on it. Either you win your currently active string and walk or you walk away after losing three consecutive strings of nine anyway.
[b]How could bias player have idea where the ball will hit, to know will it go upwards or downwards?
[/b]
He wont have to know when and where it hits. The ball has no trouble running downwards but it always meets resistence when running upwards, which means that some numbers wont receive as many hits as others and that imbalance triggers a positive and a negative bias.
[quote=“Kelly, post:44, topic:236”][b]How could bias player have idea where the ball will hit, to know will it go upwards or downwards?
[/b]
He wont have to know when and where it hits. The ball has no trouble running downwards but it always meets resistence when running upwards, which means that some numbers wont receive as many hits as others and that imbalance triggers a positive and a negative bias.[/quote]
Interesting point kelly.
At times it appears that the way a ball scatters might even leave clues as to what type of rotor bias we are dealing with. For example, on certain wheels based on certain wheel speeds, I notice the ball tends to jump when it hits a particular number at a particular angle. As a result - - - AFTER THE BALL ITS THIS PARTICULAR NUMBER, the ball will either go forward within +8 pockets - - - or the ball will bounce backwards within a -8 pockets OF THIS PARTUCULAR NUMBER ALMOST EVERY SINGLE TIME. IF THIS IS A TRUE THEORY WHICH I AM STILL TESTING, THAN WE HAVE A 17 NUMBER HOT SPOT THAN CAN GO UNDER THE RADAR, SINCE IT’S DEALER DEPENDENT BASED ON CERTAIN WHEEL SPEEDS, AND ONLY HAPPENS WHEN IT HITS A CERTAIN POCKET AT A CERTAIN ANGLE. " WHICH MEANS THAT WHEN THE CASINO TESTS THE WHEEL THIS TYPE OF BIAS WOULD GO UNDETECTED.
Kelly is this something similiar to what you were referring to, when you mentioned in an earlier statement that you FIRST notice the bias with your eyes? Than you later confirm it with the wheel tracking?
DEAR KELLY… Could you please answer that question, ASAP - - so I can delete this post considered I probably said too much all ready - - and don’t want to blow anyones cover… :-X
THANKS A MILLION 
Dr Spoke,
Take all spins from tilted wheel, measure scatter on left and right from center where is tilt
It is definitely more up hill and down hill then wobbled rotor .
If small wobble produces few SD then tilt should produce huge difference in between 2 results.
Compare results
myrulet,
You raise a good point. based on my Studies, I see that many different defects, or a combination of events, could cause biased-wheel sectors and/or pockets.
SUCH AS:
It can get very cumbersome trying to keep track of all the potential variables that may influence the data and the conditions surrounding these variables. BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS, It’s possible one wheel can be influenced by several of these factors listed above in such a way that such a biased wheel can go undetected for months, even years.
Me personally, I would never sit through 10 thousand or not even 5 thousand spins. I THINK IT’S TOTALLY REDICULOUS TO JUST RANDOMLY PICK A WHEEL AND SPEND 2 MONTHS TESTING IT FOR 10 THOUSAND SPINS,
I NEED EVIDENCE FIRST.
I believe in the main theory "that the way a certain ball scatters on a certain wheel - - based on a certain wheel speed- - hitting the rotor at a certain angle - --will leave behind certain clues - - -. Not only that, but a possible bias that can be narrowed down from 1 to 3 numbers on that subject wheel.
The reason why 5 thousand to 10 thousand spins are needed for a biased wheel attacker is because they have to test all 37 or 38 numbers. Me on the other hand, If I have all ready limited my target area to 1 or 2 nuumbers - - LETS SAY 1 NUMBER FOR THIS ARGUMENT- - than I will finish my testing 37 times faster, since I do not have to test the other 36 numbers. WHICH MEANS MY BIASED WHEEL TESTING WILL BE ON THE AVERAGE OF 37 TIME FASTER THAN THE ATTACKER THAT HAS TO COLLECT A STUDY OF 5000 SPINS
5000 DEVIDED BY 37 NUMBERS = 135 SPINS NEEDED IN MY STUDY TESTING JUST 1 NUMBER.
so the formula is
(1 number being tested) times (135 spins)= 135 spins needed
however if I had to test all 37 numbers, we use this formula
(37 numbers) times ( 135 spins) = 4995 spins needed to properly test for a biased wheel with all 37 numbers.
Since 80 to 85% of all biased are tied directly to the rotor, it would make a lot of since to first pinpoint a possible problem area on the rotor, than run a biased wheel test for that particular section or number. that way, you could be all done the biased test in a fast as 135 spins, INSTEAD OF HAVING TO SIT OR STAND THROUGH 5000 SPINS.
PERSONALLY, I JUST THINK IT’S VERY STUPID TO JUST WALK UP TO A WHEEL AND RANDOMLY START TESTING ALL 37 NUMBER WITH NO PRIOR KNOWLEDGE OR EVIDENCE. that would take atleast 250 hours, or just over 1 month to complete working at it 8 hours a day.
It wouldn’t work in a real casino environment, since the wheel maintenance crew would have changes the dynamics on that wheel, once they are done rotating the wheel. However, the way I 'm talking about, if someone is good enough to locate a possible wheel biased to a certain pocket, AND JUST NEED TO TEST IF TO SEE IF THEY ARE RIGHT OR WRONG - - -than only 135 rolls are needed for the entire study for just that 1 pocket- - - too see if the tests hold up.
I know that those will argue with me, that its impossible to test 1 single for number for bias in only 135 spins. the fact is, if one gets effIcient enough to just become a scatter expert, and just watch the same wheel to locate a single pocket bias, IT’S POSSIBLE THEY BECOME SO EFFICIENT AT IT THAT THEY DO NOT EVEN NEED TO PROCEED TO STEP 2- - - WHICH IS TEST THAT SINGLE NUMBER FOR BIAS - - BECAUSE IF WE ALL READY KNOW THE BALL WILL GO either +8 OR -8 POCKETS FORM THAT TARGET NUMBER after it bounces from that particular angle, WE WOULD JUST PLAY ALL 17 NUMBERS BASED ON A CERTAIN WHEEL SPEED ONLY - - and just be a spectator if the wheel speed is to fast or to slow which would alter the way the ball bounces in that particular angle we are looking for.
Another slick maneuver is to just walk around a casino and find a rotor with unusual scratch marks ON THE ROTOR - - the question is how did those scratch marks get there? It could be from several reasons. remember, it takes a lot of force to put a scratch a piece of metal. A force great enough to cause a possible Bias worth looking into. The wheel could have been tampered with, dropped, or just a sign that it’s getting worn out based on the scratch marks. You never know until you run a preliminary test, or do like me - - see if the ball reacts a certain way during the scatter process, whenever it comes or bounces near the scratch marks on the rotor.
The kind of SH_ _ I’m telling you, you won’t find in a biased wheel book anywhere on the market - - because I believe those books just have general stuff in it you can find anywhere online. I ALSO BELIEVE THAT NO EXPERT ACTUALLY TELLS YOU EVERYTHING THEY KNOW. NOT EVERYTHING… THEY TEND TO KEEP THEIR BEST WORK AND SECRETS TO THEMSELVES.
Yes rotor wobble can cause some bias, depending on the wheel model and degree of wobble.
However, most biases are not caused by rotor wobble, or scratches.
Roulette balls don’t cause bias, just noise.
Worn ball tracks don’t cause number bias, just dominant drops.
I guess you could argue that a worn ball track causes a drop location bias.
As snow points out, the wobble is only 1 possible bias and maybe not the most common on some wheels, on the other hand on other wheel types there are only 2 - 3 possibly bias types and the wobble is one of them.
When you put it all together, objective of any prediction is to get results as accordion, at some places more stretched then at one very compressed.
I am getting soon 100 vibrating motors; I need a small adjustable timer that can be adjusted in 0.1 sec steps.
[glow=red,2,300]So guys on the end what would cause highest bias?[/glow]
Thanks for letting us know. Can you share some more information? Would be glad to learn more
Hi Kelly and co
Thanks for this post, I have a question about Chi square and standard deviation.
I have manually recorded spins on a wheel that seemed suspicious at a local casino, It seems according to RX that I may be correct… My only worry is that 284 spins is not enough… The dealers here are SOOO slow… and idd be lucky to record 30 spins a hour. :’(
Ive been flat betting single units on the numbers that have a standard deviation greater than 3 only.
I guess im up a little bit, about 10 units per hour at this rate,
Should I be more aggressive?
Kind Regards
/L
[quote=“Kelly, post:31, topic:236”]Forester i can`t blame you for having your opinion, because it is identic with a lot of peoples opinions. I can prove that you are wrong on the edge topic and also on the rotor tilt/deformation topic but i would breach my confidence code and maybe put a red flag up that could cost “someone” i know a lot of money in lost opportunitys. And its not pocket money lost. Its the money that pays the mortgage.
Obviously, a rotor wobble is more effective when the ball is having action on the rotor. An old french Caro wheel with a bounce of 5 pockets is probably only good for a pocket bias. If there is a rotor wobble, it will interfere in every 6th spin approx. also on The Old Caro, and it might be good enough to beat the house, because you will still have a donator and a receiver sector.
To understand the power in a rotor wobble, you need to see how it works and why the math is actually giving you a helping hand along with the physics. Would +12 SD in 4400 spins tracked the correct way convince you ? If the casino did it the same way, the manager would shut the wheel down, only…, they don`t…They can counter such a wheel with a slow wheel speed like 6 - 9 sec. pr. rev, because for the wobble to be effective the ball needs travel lenght on the rotor or the number ring. On a 3 sec rotor speed and a normal bouncing nylon ball and normal low fret wheel, there will be action in the danger zone in at least 50% of all spins. Either in the actual zone or in one of the marginal zones.
Bias versus VB is actually a more sensitive subject than expected, because if you ask yourself: Will the bias overpower the VB prediction ? On a biased wheel it is not as if the next door neighbour to the biased number is never hit, because it IS, just not as often.
Here is a sample of a, i think, long gone wheel. 18.000 spins.
488 hits (+0.47 SD)
539 hits (+2.84 SD)
604 hits (+5.85 SD)
564 hits (+4.00 SD)
592 hits (+5.30 SD)
557 hits (+3.67 SD)
453 hits (-1.15 SD)
For safety i have left the actual biased numbers out, but imagine that a VB prediction gave you a prediction of the number that has a -1.15 SD value (for simplicity here we imagine that you only bet 1 number). Would you bet the neighbour number next or next next to it with the high positive SD values ? It is not as if the negative biased number is never hit, its just not as often, but will the VB overpower the bias or vice versa ?
There is a way to get round this little problem but it is more complicated than you at first sight would think, and its not for public display just yet. Maybe never.[/quote]