# New Book from Pierre Basieux. Special interest for the forum

I doesn`t say specificly how many learn spins the computer needs. But a few parameters that we use for VB is also mentioned for quality test of the learn modus.

If we sets the computer program “average bounce” as zero, you will then get the number which is below the diamond in the split second the ball collides with the diamond.

That will give you an idea about how good the algorithm for the decelleration off the ball and rotor is.

His computer works in 2 steps:

1. The deterministic part from ball release to diamond collision.

2. The chaotic part, from collision to final number.

Also as i understand it, it takes into account the normal compensation effects when hitting a diamond before and has more force (longer bounce) and hitting a diamond after the predicted diamond with less force (shorter bounce) and incorporates this into the programme.

I am not sure have you seen this diagram and can you follow it up.

i think you make a little wild claim here ;)New Book from Pierre Basieux. Special interest for the forum Â« Reply #13 on: November 23, 2006, 09:45:16 AM Â»  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------  Mike, and i do not have any.That does not bother me to be confident to say that I have higher advantage then Ritz team. Wooo surprise lol. Well do math by yourself. If I play \$5 units and make in 2 hr \$5000. What would be if I played 1000 pounds units and play for 2 days. 1000x1000 = 1M then multiply it by 2x 2 hr per day. Total 4M pounds.The only difference is that after that winning, someone would find me with a hook on the bottom of river Thames. Or I would be shot dead with backpack on my back. After that 4M would disappear and tax payers would pay for additional security around South Bank. Report to moderator    Logged

If you had advantage like you claim, you would be able to afford a roulette wheel and demonstrate your device to your audience, this would increase your sales and give you credit.With reference to BasiuxBasiux writes books for profit, this is his only motive. Most of his knowledge and assessments are from many years ago, systems change and are modified, improved, he is a little out of touch with what the casino industry is doing and some of the people he talks about.

[sup]Basiux writes books for profit, this is his only motive. Most of his knowledge and assessments are from many years ago, systems change and are modified, improved, he is a little out of touch with what the casino industry is doing and some of the people he talks about.[/sup]

He probably write for profits, but i also happens to know that you don`t make much money on books. I would say that it is more likely that he attracts people to future projects. What comes out in the books is what is no more considered secrets or will smash up a project. He happens to have ongoing projects all the time. If you know so much then:

1. What is his 2007 project ? (and what were the 2004-5-6)

2. How many participants ?

3. How is the level of happines of the participants, regarding the project ?

4. Will the last new discovereys in the last project EVER be released to the public ?

Did you also know that most projects involve real casino play ?

No you probably didn`t know.

You mean to do video spins as Stefano.

That is for fags. Nothing more then marketing rubbish.

You can follow him I will not. If i record it i would take sample where i have hit rate of 1 :8

I still do not understand why my forum data base linked your nick name user IP addresses with Mark Howe’s. I can’t believe that it reads similarity of post objectives and links them together, so it must be something else.

May calculation is only explaining that they did not have such high advantage considering time played and size of bet per spin.
If for you sounds unrealistic to win \$1000-\$2000 within one hour there is not much I can do for you. I recently did it few times with VB but I still have to improve it for harder conditions.

I would like to read Basiux’s book but there is none in English

Kelly is Basieux VB based as Bago’s explanation on GG forum?
If it is then it is worth nothing.

No its not. The only part is the vis a vis explanation. That is also described in the book here in this thread and the bets North/South - NorthEast/SouthWest etc are explained for the first time at page 69 in Die Z ¤hmung der Schwankungen.

Its not all possibilitys, there are plenty more, described from page 58 throughout to page 71. Vis a vis is far more flexible than what he descibes, besides that, it is only a bet selection. Not a system. Its created to save the forced tip the europeans have to live with on a single number hit and at the same time cover 2, 3 or even 4 main areas in a split second instead of 2, 3 or 4 call bets on the neighbours.

The method of counting the revoloutions from the front from revoloution 3 is not from Basieux, it looks more like an alternative that “Karl” from a german board posted a long time ago. Bago says, bet only on 14 revoloution spins. How the hell do you know that, at revoloution 3 ? The speed at revoloution 3 can generate 15 as well as 13 ball revs as well as it would not work without a tilt. If the conditions he describes is present, a simple release number would be almost just as effective. Same wheel speed, same ball revs. same drop zone. Hell, if you knew the release number, which you do, you could just place the bet as soon as the last bet is paid and go to the bar, and go back and pick up your winnings.

The closest thing that Basieux has is the “Vereinfachte Kesselgucker methode” shown in “Die Z ¤hmung des Zufalls” at page 260 - 267 and again in “Fazination Roulette” at page 99 - 108. But its pretty far from what Bago describes. To be honest, i don`t know where it comes from and i got all Basieux`s books.(and then some…)

But im not gonna mess up the thread, we all know how it ends and honestly i don`t care. How am i gonna argue a method with someone who obviously has none of Basieux`s books ?

Just had a look at “Fazination Roulette”, on page 99 Pierre writes “for each direction, note a few cross over numbers and relate them to the outcome numbers”. But thats just the front runner page for the rest of the system which emphazises on finding relations between some of the cross over numbers like the ref number at rev 1 and the ref number at rev 4 and the outcome number.

Secondly, its not Pierres real wheelwatching but a sort of advanced dealers signature with basis in the release points. He has a more precise method that could go as wheelwatching.

Bago says: Look for the enter point when the ball leaves the rim. He probably means when the ball goes from 2 to 1 touchpoints and not when the ball leaves the rim, because that is way too late. What he describes is actually the exit point, the entry point is a few revoloutions before that.

Ok, thanks for the explanation.

What confused me was your and snowman’s sympathies response.

Now I understand and for same reason I simply didn’t say anything, it saved me a lot of time. Maybe he has the book but for some reasons he simply doesn’t understand, same as he couldn’t understand some previous discussions.

His method looks more as Bob Gordon’s scam. It will never produce needed advantage.

If you do not have accurate prediction Vis Vis would be useless.
Anyway by my understanding it isn’t something I that I would prefer.

Did you ever consider writing short script of the book in English?

Yeah well, i got too little time on my hands for a daily verbal war with someone who haven`t got the books being discussed.

I don`t know what method he uses if he has one, but he refers to Kaisan doing it "this way". There are only 3 - 4 people who knows how Kaisan plays and i don`t think Bago is one of them. Manny K ¼hl was one of them. He just died last week. “Icecold Gustav” (Eisener Gustav) is another one. You can still watch him play on a daily basis in Hamburg at the age of 78.

Vis a vis is a great way if you have multiple main areas in the prediction sheet, because as said, you cover both areas and you save the forced tip. Tips is usually taking 20 - 25% of the actual edge when you calculate it it.

A typical session could look like this:
10 hits on a 5 number sector,
+50 units,

• 10 times 1 unit for the dealer, makes profits to 50 - 10 = +40

And you have just cut off 20% of the profits to the dealer. That won`t happen on the split bets.

If you never have multiple clumping or if they are awkward located, there is no need for using the vis a vis. The Cammegh Connosieurs i have played much, doesn`t show this behaviour. Just the other day, i hit a Starburst, and the vis a vis was back, and that in such a manner that 18 out of 20 tracking spins could be covered withing a 18 number sector, having 9 numbers on one side and 9 numbers 180 degrees from those. If vis a vis was not played on that wheel, you could wawe bye bye to ~ 50% of all hits.

No im not gonna explain more from his books than i already have, he has a better way of describing things and can use illustrations that says more than a 1000 words. I would have to ask permission everytime.

Besides, why should i ?

Because, the book is in German.

Anyway I believe only in what I make by myself.

It would make it a lot easyer for me, if the people that wants to read his books would learn german. I got nothing to gain by translating his books except a copyright breach court order.

here’s how to get around the Pierre Bsieux book written in german.

first, just buy the book.

second, scan the book page by page to your computer.

third, copy and paste each page through a free german to american translator site.

fourth, copy and paste those pages your word document.

fifth, save your work, now you have a newly created American version of Pierre Bsieux’s book.

that’s exactly what I plan on doing. 8)

The only problem is the translation part. Some of the writing is in pretty complicated technical roulette terms that most translation machines does not reckognize correct. There is a great danger that you will end up with something unreadable. For example when Pierre mentions the “Global” effect on the theme roulette computers and dealers signature, it can have more than 1 meaning where you only get the right meaning if you understand what he is talking about. For instance:

“Das fluss diagramm und die globale Programm-struktur”

and

"Bei diskrete werten und bei allgemeinen, speziell auch mehrgipfliegen Verteilungen d ¼rfen nicht ohne weiteres Mittelwerte gebildet werden ! Zumindesst nicht Global, dh innerhalb…"

But good luck with it anyway.

[quote=“Dr.Spock, post:33, topic:93”]here’s how to get around the Pierre Bsieux book written in german.

first, just buy the book.

second, scan the book page by page to your computer.

third, copy and paste each page through a free german to american translator site.

fourth, copy and paste those pages your word document.

fifth, save your work, now you have a newly created American version of Pierre Bsieux’s book. ;)[/quote]

Yes that is the idea

Kelly has a point - but overall u get the hints wish lead to common sense to grasp the main idea - based upon what some one already know about the game.

Example

1. River the diagram and the global program structure

2. With discrete worth and with general, particularly also mehrgipfliegen distributions may not be formed so easily average values! Zumindesst not global, dh within

The point is that i have in the past translation of Nine Roulette and UWE and understand it all and the main purpose with does.

At the moment i work with hes latest book.
There is also a book from Chriss wish i will translate.

Both quotes is from his latest book.

1. Flow chart and global program structure. (his computer program structure for the predictions presented as a flow chart)

2. …? Suggestions ? Its on page 31. (PS I have my version of the translation and its not exactly as it comes out of the freetanslation.)

Some posts here look as gone.
Same happened at some other older threads
I’ll fix it one day.

Fixed,
Some time ago I converted database,
Old posts that have strange characters as(â€˜~^,eurosign…etc) didn’t show properly.