What can I say about Survtechs review?
Maybe it is better if I first explain what I was expecting from him.
I expected that he will do the test on various wheels and conditions.
Due to wide spectrum of wheels and balls used in the test I would expect results such as
FF under this conditions can produce this, under this that and under this it couldn’t produce any advantage or it couldn’t give enough predictions.
And what do we get?
First we get his frustration. I can understand that as it looks that he does have a problem compared to people who talked with him and who told him that they do not have problems at all. So I take it as good sign that he doesn’t feel well writing negative report. But there is something that bothers me.
On question will he publish results of test Mike answered “only if Forester wants it”
Well I was never asked, but regardless what is his review I wouldn’t mind.
What puzzles me is that he runs in to writing report and publishing it but at same time having problems during the test for which he completely ignored my suggestions. When he was claiming 30% predictions and when few members told him own results, Survtech posted that in settings 3 prediction improved. I thought he will be ok. But then he sent me an email claiming that it went up from 30 to 40% in setting 2 but (then next day back to 30%), in setting 3 it is only 20%. I still did not get from him any other feedback that I asked about, so I can identify cause of the problem.
Anyway it is as it is and I can only make few comments on his review.
"Stage 1: Test on wheel with drop-zone
I carried out this test personally.
The device performed well. When used against a wheel with a drop-zone and manageable scatter this device presents a significant threat in the hands of an experienced operator. "
The difference in between IQE 6 and Tilt 2 system is calculation.
Ball clocking, error correction, timing control is same. The question is€¦
How he could get enough predictions with tilt wheel system and not with IQE6?
"While the device produces a satisfactory percentage of predictions when applied against digital video footage of wheels which have been retired from casino service, the percentage of predictions against live wheels was consistently disappointing."
I would say the device predicts wheels which are within systems specification. What he calls “retired from casino service” is not right because majority of wheels in casinos will come within system specification. Wheels out of that are not so important because prediction will not be so accurate or on very old wheels the ball is dropping to fast so remaining time from where the ball speed can be measured to the end is to short.
Why is that?
The systems specification is that it will predict spins where the difference in between timed rotations is 100-255ms.
To get clear picture, for example most common wheel used in casinos is about 200ms. On that wheel ball of 1 sec per rotation may travel about 10 sec to the end.
On wheel with 100ms that traveling time may be 15+ sec, that is good but systems accuracy significantly drops because any error multiplies by double.
And on wheel for more then 255ms the ball may travel only 5 sec to the end. Which is not enough to take advantage of that. So we would need to clock the ball with higher speed and that brings additional problems.
So from all wheels I played I come across only one where system gives me about 40% prediction. After extracting data from system I found out that difference in between rotations is 130 ms. well that is within system limits and I am puzzled why I do not get more. I can think only about 2 things.
- It increases my clocking errors.
- Because previous system specification was 128-255, later on I change it to 100-255 but maybe there is somewhere in program still some control for 128, which I did missed to change because I never have had problem before.
128 may look as odd number but it was easy for me when programming because it requires only single bit check.
I would suggest to Survtech instead testing it on odd wheels that he calls modern, goes to Melbourne, Canberra, Gold coast, Brisbane and do the test. (There is no need to name places in other countries.) If in those casinos he can’t get enough predictions and positive results then he has issue.
I do not know of anyone, including the manufacturer, who claims to use this device to gain an advantage away from the kitchen table.
What's this suppose to mean?
I claim to use device to gain advantage in real environment and he knows that.
So I can only assume that he claims how he doesn't know anybody personally.
But that then doesn't have any meaning. Why he should know any FF user personally.