What jafco is explaining in his videos is that his methods and computer can perform well under 1,2,3 and 4 diamond bias (His visual works under 1,2 and 3 diamond bias)
Which visual doesn’t?
“My roulette playing method has produced a long term winning margin for more than two decades. The experience gained over this time has enabled me to update frequently, probably creating the most practical and modern winning Visual Roulette System available anywhere.”
Honestly this is an assault to my intelligence and to any visual prediction I know.
I personally feel manipulated by Jafco.
Reading advertisements I believed he may have something new.
My disappointment come when I found out that all he does is estimate ball speed at particular moment in spin to take reference number. That’s basically what any VB does, some do a bit more then estimation.
New is
Dimond = pin
Sector play = 2 or 3 pin play
Switch = button
Changing names doesn’t make a system.
Further disappointment come when I read his explanation about what he calls two pin games.
Nothing new you still do the same traditional VB, but he says
“The Vibe method stand out
as unique as very few systems in the world are able to play this two pin game.”
Then again,
“The more dominant
of the two pins is nearly always the pin that the ball will reach first, or, put
another way, is the only pin out of the two that has two quiet pins just before it
where the ball should hardly ever land. It is this pin that we call our main pin
and is the one we always set our aim to in the two pin game. We set up the
aim in exactly the same way as we did in the one pin game. Never aim at
what we call the ‘fall-out’ pin or 2nd pin - you will win plenty from both pins but
the main aim pin is the better one and we must always set the aim to this one.
The reasons for this will become clearer the longer you play.”
(It never become clear, since it’s irrelevant which one we use)
Obviously he couldn’t see that you really do not have to choose first pin.
Same as in front of first pin we have 2 not active pins, we can look at it as after second pin we have 2 inactive pin. It doesn’t make any difference. Player will be better off, if second pin is getting more hits take it as a main target. It is wrong explanation and understanding that if you do it you will not be taking advantage of both pins.
This wasn’t a typing mistake, it was a mistake in lack of understanding.
“You will often observe that the 2nd pin or fall-out pin will go through phases of
strong dominance and it can become very tempting to set your aim to this pin.
I have said, categorically, that this is not a good idea unless you have only
just discovered the wheel and are beginning to view it more as a single pin
wheel rather than a two pin wheel. If, however, it is just a phase that occurs
frequently then keep your aim to the main pin, the one that has two dead pins
before it.”
If Jafco could understand it then he wouldn’t explain 3 pin game as he did. He even wouldn’t call it 3 pin game.
For 3 pin game he requires fast rotor speed, about 2.4s / rotation.
He explains long time explained scenario when ball most of the time is exiting on one of 2 opposite pins. It is happening on every wheel, because rotor speed and ball speed in last rotation are close in value, until ball makes half rotation and rotor will make same distance therefore they meet on opposite side again. How this relates to that only his system can do it, I really can’t understand. He calls it 3 pin game because of overlap he was explaining when rotor is slow. With fast rotor on third pin player would be wrong by 16 pockets. I assume it looks better than 26.
If we look slow rotor where he is explaining effect of 2 pin game the best results will be where rotor moves 6 pockets per sec. Based on that if we prediction much earlier if we are wrong by one rotation we would be wrong by 6 pockets, or even if we are wrong by 2 rotations we would be wrong by 12. If 16 pockets error can be tolerated and occasional 12 pockets is ok. Same principles of 2 pin games still apply. So what is the point?
Based on his explanation he could include and 4th pin.
If ball hits ¼ rotation earlier we would be wrong 9+ whatever rotor makes in about 0.55s(1/4 of last rotation), it could be 9+4=13 so we get even better then 16. According to Jafco it looks as no matter where the ball drops if rotor is 2.4s we always play with an advantage.
"Next, you need to determine how you will set up your aim to the dominant pin
- you must consider two main issues at this time: firstly, where the dominant
pin is in relation to the reference pin and, secondly, at what point you want to
make your bet, which can be anything between 2 revolutions and about 4
revolutions from landing."
I do not have problem understanding that if he predicts 2-4 revolutions before then ball drops on a wheel of 330ms deceleration, he can be more accurate. Within 330ms you have more space. But what with a real wheel, today in casino deceleration of ball 2-4 rotations before drop is only 100ms. And his system should be a system for modern times??? Someone prediction 2-4 ball rotations before ball drop and only estimating, with which right can call it superior system for modern times. I asume it is only marketing B/S to take an advantage over competitors . He is not the only one, I’ve seen worst, he only does it politely 
Because of mistakes in explanation, because of misleading selected videos, because of intensive advertising, and because of assault to my intelligence I can understand Jafco only as someone learning same as we all do.
Will I recommend his vibe? I will, nice explanation of tilted wheel, but do not expect to take it as it is and to win. (Maybe if you are one in 100)
About his PDA roulette computer,
I do not like any PDA, because of timing accuracy issue, also I do not like required induction wires around neck or earpiece in my ear. If I am after PDA I would better go after Barnetts one. It is only one PDA officially tested, proven to work, adjustable to any time window, and it’s much cheaper.
http://www.survtech.co.uk/Site/Survtech_Devices.html
