Laurece Scot is the Best


I had in my house the VB Book of L.S about a month.

i had read the half once and i had understood things wrong

But the last 3 days i dedicated to this book and i read it all 3 times.

so i now have understood everything pretty clear.(exept the 2x and 1x crossover patterns,which for me is nothing impotant and no reason to understand,couse with all the other knowlege and knowing when the right revolution is coming this paterns are no reason to master)

So the next thing was to find spins and play in order to test it.

i found a lot of spins (about 1 hour)and i did all the things that he says.

and the resaults was awsom!

i was winning on average 1-5 by betting 5-7 nums.
a lot of times i was hitting the exact num or the 1rst neibour.
the reason i was betting sometimes 7 nums was couse this weel had 2 DDs and the obvservation point of the 2nd DD was just 2 hours(oclock)distance from the 1st DD
and this caouse to win a lot of times with 2 2 dds.

but if i had prefared to play just with the 1st DD,i would have won pretty good bettinf just 3-5 nums.
All the system had so much logic,that i knew in every spin why i was winning and why not!

i suggest every bigginer to read this book
thanks i wanted to help thought my expirience.

my 2nd step is to find a lot of other roulette spins in order to see how it will go there.
but i have no doubts that its gona be fine.

i just need a lot of practice.
and after that i will play in a casino with real money


i also need to tell that being in that forum and reading Foresters posts i can see that Forester is a very sirious VB player too.

he is the 1 that gave me motive to read this book by just telling me that this system is good.

and i also want to tell that if i ill want to byr a RC ,FF-a would be my only choise


Yes, Scott method is good, and works in reasonable conditions. No doubt is a good method, but i think that in today wheels is obsolet, you can get advantage and win money sure, but will be very hard.
I tested scotts methods, except acoustic and was ok, but for me is much much better Forester VB2 and much more easy.

VB systems are ok, there are many and all work (VB2, jaffco, scott, uwe, basieux) but nothing to do with ff. Of course FF is the best solution.

I have about 7 videos, 2-3 are tilted, i can pass you material if you want, but probably you have that videos that i have


my friend i would appriciate SSSSSSSSSSSOOOOO much if u could sent me these videos…

its the only thing that i need right now.

thank u so much for ur offer!!!

if u want contact me at

I suggest that you don’t post your email address to public next time send a PM. Fatgambler


I suggest him to get his book and to read it.
It is different if someone explains you a method or if you read all theory of prediction and understand it.

More you understand, more you need FF. ;D ;D ;D



how can I get this books ?



Not sure he maybe not selling it any more especially volume 2. Maybe at forum someone has it and may help you.


someone can get photo from book , and share or sale to interest players like me .


Thank you so much Mike , that’s kind of you .


I want to show you something about physics and crossover patterns
When you use Laurance Scott and American wheel, the two zeros has to match and correlate with the ball to give you a crossover pattern
That pattern is static and predetermined depending on ball and rotor speed combination
The main issue I have with this is that the zeros have fixed places on the number ring and force ball and rotor speed to match during the estimation process

Now if you would look at this with new light and I take European wheel as an example where you would use zero and number five to get two fixed opposite numbers like the situation with American wheel
But assume you could use any numbers on the wheel to match the crossover pattern
Then you would catch the crossover more early and the estimation would correlate before it does with does fixed numbers on the wheel as the correlation would unfold before they match

Now you have small, medium and wide crossover patterns that give different results, would be no existing predicting crossover patterns with not static or fixated numbers
For example, I develop a way to memorize the wheel into the sector of three numbers each and give each of them an index number
So each time the ball, for example, pass 12 a clock vertical deflector you get an index number that belongs to a sector
The opposite sector with each index number is very easy to learn and you can read the wheel during each rotation and see how the gaps between the sectors get larger during the ball deceleration pattern
At one moment you will have two opposite sectors on the number ring and they will match in the same way as Laurance Scott crossover pattern
But you will be predicting more early into the spin deceleration pattern then the ordinary crossover pattern using static and fixated number on the number ring

If someone is interested in this kind of physics solutions I can explain more in detail how it is done using my way memorize the wheel that takes only one to two weeks