Is Myrulet E2 roulette visual prediction still good to play?

Just a quick look back to E2 method of predicting roulette levelled wheel.

E2 is where it all started, it is the only one roulette visual system that can predict levelled roulette wheel. It is the system I discovered and used for years when my knowledge was limited and I wasn’t aware of tilted wheels.
It is a bit complicated to apply but it includes and rotor adjustment for smaller rotor speed changes.
It takes only 4-5s to apply it. It requires spins at least 12-15 seconds long or longer.
With all respect to traditional VB, or myrulet VB2 predictions on wheels with dominant ball drop point (tilted wheel) E2 system might be something we should analyse more.

So how come after so many years I am writing about it?

Of course in each casino it may be different but what I have noticed is that simply is harder to find roulette tilted wheels with enough tilt for a good visual prediction. With only slight tilt advantage players “luck” is hanging in the air.

Think about this. If you walk to casino and have few hours to play what is the highest chance that you will play levelled or tilted wheel? Is slight tilt better to predict as tilt or levelled wheel?

If you have enough knowledge and experience playing slight tiled wheel you would be aware that often even if you predict correctly ball drop point ball jumps may be against you. Of course Jumps are always against you but often you would experience correct prediction but the ball jumps differently, and wrong prediction the ball jumps correctly. I am not going to explain reasons because we analysed it many times. The point I want to say here is that E2 because of linear increase in prediction based on ball speed is more resistant to such negative effect.
Traditional VB is predicting particular ball rotation and diamond hit, E2 is predicting ball drop point.
Traditional VB may predict 0 the ball may hit dominant diamond at any position and jump differently, also #0 may be in different position.

E2 may predict 0 the ball may hit diamond even 10-15 pockets earlier but in such case most likely it will hit top of the diamond where the ball may fly longer until hits the rotor also in average jumps longer.

Some E2 bad points. It is less accurate. It is harder for player to notice where the advantage is. If using it need to observe partly ball drops which often may not be as expected but and final results. Combination of both is the only indicator that the player is doing right thing.

Let’s round it up

No roulette computer, no timer, no idea if there is any tilted wheel, wide scatter, few hours of time and idea let’s try E2. With no timer I meant a timer as FF has where the time can be started at any moment. However good side of E2 is that it can use mobile phones vibrating metronome because the time can be started at any ball position. I remember E2 needs time of about 4-5s. (not on all wheels !!!) So I set vibration to ~50 bits per minute. When counting from first vibration 5 it would give me 4.8s. Because spins were similar I could start time counting after 2-3 vibrations from moment the dealer spins.

Using “reference number” as a prediction placing small bets was actually made me lost ~60 units. As I already pointed out with E2 is a bit hard to define where the advantage is. It looked more it is on opposite side. Instead of changing prediction I modified time to 45b/m (~5.3s). It doesn’t matter much that I disturbed reference time since anyway I didn’t know want is the best time to use and my start point was in similar moments. That drastically changed things, later on I also shifted prediction to about 6 pockets earlier as a fine tune. In remaining 2-3 hours recover loss and gained 200 units. Say 100 spins x ~10 units is 1000 units. That makes 26% advantage.

Of course on only 100 spins it could be just a coincidence but I really enjoyed playing it even I noticed that I am missing a lot skill as I use to have when playing it more than 15 years ago.

I believe we should look deeper in to E2. Define way how to more precisely set the time and who knows what else together we can find. Instead using FF to look data and define needed time it wouldn’t be hard with a metronome. For example vibration;

1 -0
2- x
3- 23
7-y >>5

At first number 0 is starting number
On 5th it is 15 which is 2 pockets away.
But if we noticed number 19 on third vibration it means on 7th it needs to be 2 pockets away from #23. If instead of #5 it is 24,16,33… or 10,23,8,30 it has meaning to extend or reduce the time.

A quick reminder how myrulet E2 predicts

Point A #4 is first number, point B #17 is second one. Apply from A, 3 times that difference. In such case it is 4 pockets but we don’t count pockets. Instead we apply the angle. So it comes to point 2 , then 3 and number 8 would be the reference number for prediction.
If point B is in position as b1 it is a large angle. We don’t apply such large but use some geometrical laws. Instead of number 4 use opposite number (1-33) and apply same principle. (it makes it much easier). It brings us to number 31 as a reference for prediction.

That sounds very good but…
Aren’t you dependent on the wheel speed, while playing that way?

E2 is good idea, but if look to it like to some simply way of play it must be played in some different way .

Main minus of E2 is multiplicator - when we see angle, how much times we must add angle - to get the same reference point as wide as possible.

And usually that multiplicator is not like 2 or 3 what can be done easy visually , but it is something like 1.8 or 2.3 or 2.7 what apply good is not so easy.

But idea itself is very good, if all that we put to some program, where program can find not only best value for multiplicator, but also calculate multiplication what is not always so easy…

A bit but not much.
It is because of the systems balance, making relationship in between ball and rotor.

Say you using 5s reference time.
You adjust prediction and trying to start time about 15s to the end.
If rotor is faster by 6 pockets in 5s, you see it as 6 pockets shift of B point. When multiplied by 3 it is 18 pockets.
And that is exactly how much more rotor will make in remaining 10s.

(It is important to notice that E2 uses ball and rotor numbers and not the wheel frame. So if rotor moves faster the point in between point A and B will be greater. )

Of course you can not start always at 15s but if you start at 17 or 14, it doesn’t make much difference, especially if rotor doesn’t change much.

Yes with multiplication we loose a lot. especially if the ball is on opposite side. We don’t always know what is exactly opposite. I would say prediction is always inaccurate say ± 5 pockets.

If looking form the FF point. It is nothing more then basic setting without corrections, with only manual offset set.
With FF at least you can see if there is change on the wheel, with E2 you can’t.

1 Like

Just to clerify a bit more rootor speed change.
If instead of 15s you start at 17, E2 still locks ball reference number for that spin.
If rotor is different say from 6p/s to 8p/s then for time difference od 2s (17-15) you have only 2s x (6-8)= -4 pockets mistake.

1 Like

Must remember, that can be oposite so (15-17) and +4 pockets mistake, so totally we have 8 pockets disperssion . And 2 seconds is really small diference in starting moment - really we start wider than in 2 sec.

If look to pockets we start somewhere between maybe 200 pockets - that really too much, to be compensated enough good. In play is very important have starting point as stable as possible…


2s to one side is 4s window. Sure we can start sometimes differently but maybe rotor doesn’t have much change.
It is not very accurate prediciton as on easy tilted roulette wheel it can be done.
Still theoretically may end up with hits as on the picture. With theoretical I mean no constant shifting of parameters on the wheel. Point is that hits for example at -10 position may still create advantage because of different jumps.

Main mine conception is try not to make mistakes which possible to avoid. Say if we detect ball speed as 1000 ms and expect that ball will travel 12 sec but it travel 13 or 11 sec - that of course is mistake, but if we not know how to avoid it - we nothing can do.

But if we have mistake simply because we started not in right time because we even not tried to start better - then is totally other case.

When we use multiplicator 2, when we must use 2.3 and that is possible to calculate - again is that other case…

By the way, always are minimum two ways - we can start time frame and see distance which ball made in that time - so have stable time frame.

But we can always clock the same distance. If we compare these two ways, we can understand what is wrong in each of them…

Very interesting. How to do it practically? Time fixed amount of ball laps? Please, populate

What is not understandable ? I not have time explain, how to clock always the same distance…You name himself as a good player , but ask strange things - all is good with you ?


Sometimes obvious things are not obvious for others… lm trying to follow your idea and need help to do so effectively. I’m all right, thanks.

Sorry there a bunch of things I would like to understand better.
Have you elaborated on E2 elsewhere in more detail?

for ex this part:
1 -0
2- x
3- 23
7-y >>5

are you measuring rotor speed and read the number or ball speed ?
also we re talking about a euro wheel single zero layout?

The first moment is strange, why you do not understand that - if somebody something will be discovered - no way will say it openly in a forum.
Are players who win and are players who do not win, maybe firsts know something more than others :slight_smile: . You think these firsts say something to these others? :smile:
You himself must understand that there is no reason to say…
The same is with your start question - who cant win can tell you much :slight_smile: but question how much benefit you will have from that :slight_smile:
The main in the forum is to give something that somebody does not knows and get something that you do not know…:slight_smile:

I`m all for keeping things to yourself. However I didnt start the discussion on E2, but Forester mentioned it himself and I just asked a clearification on stuff he already wrote by his own choice.
As well there is always the possibility that he wrote a book or a course which is purchasable.

I dont mind someone not wanting to share stuff, especially publicly, but if sth is already posted somewhere then i might reinvent the wheel , despite the answer being out there already.

i start to ask myself what you get out of responding to posts since you seem to not want to answer any question anyway?

Yes, that is a good question - at least natural and logical :slight_smile:
Nothing I get, simply safe time… But that is also not so small…
When you will find a way how to win you all will understand… and you will start behave the same :slight_smile:

It is hard even with RC and strong tilted wheel. It is because of bouncy balls. If you find good conditions, any decent system is OK.

I guess so. Nonetheless I try to know as many possibilities I can to find what works best for me.
2x crossover is a way to do it , but VB2 is also a way to do it and they are quite different and personally I prefer VB2. Just as an example.

But nonetheless you should only share what you want to share. Sometimes it’s better to not make good things to public.
Obviously anyone can also PM me if they wish info to not be public.

My question was more aimed at “is there a post on the forum where E2 was discussed in more detail”

Thank you