# Roulette computers compared FFA vs FFZ

This is something I always wanted to do.
99 same roulette spins from leveled wheel, predicted with two roulette computers.

Prediction was about 9 sec before then the ball drops.

[attach=1]

The graph represents computers capability to predict point where the ball will hit on rotor on leveled roulette wheel.
I consider it the most accurate way of comparing computers. If results were mixed with randomness of scatter then the test would need hundreds of spins.

By my opinion and this graph it looks that FFZ have slightly better result, but it wouldn’t change final result by much.
Both systems have about 90% of spins predicted within 18 pockets of accuracy but FFZ has narrower results and higher pick point.

Based on 5 pockets wide picks FFZ predicts rotor hit with 1:12 accuracy
FFA with 1:15
As final result across 5 pockets FFZ gave 1:22 hits and FFA 1:24
Randomness of ball bouncing reduces advantage almost by half.

Prediction of spins was 100%

Tilt 2 system for tilted wheel prediction is amazing.
I did not run many spins but after predicted 40 spins this is more then enough to understand with which kind of precision the system predicts. (Prediction rotor hit)

-18 -17 -16 -15 -14 -13 -12 -11 x -10 xx -9 xxxxxxxxx -8 xxxxx -7 xxxxxx -6 xxxx -5 xx -4 xxxx -3 xx -2 xx -1 0 1 2 x 3 4 5 x 6 x 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
There are only 3 spins wrongly predicted at position 2, 5,6, the ball turned in to spinner because it did just touch top of diamond. All remaining spins ended up in between 10 pockets of accuracy. Since it was only ½ rotor clocking, if full rotor clocking was used results will be even more concentrated and maximal hit to position -9 would be as 1 in 4. Such accurate prediction will provide advantage close to as ball scatter law let us to have.

In addition there was another 18 spins which system did not predict.
16 of them shouldn’t be predicted because they turned in to spinner and the ball did not hit dominant diamond. Two spins were not predicted but the ball did hit DD.

Protecting placing bets for 16 spins where player has much higher chance to lose is unique TILT 2 systems feature. Because measured parameters are very accurate and system makes right decision which spins to avoid it helps player to keep advantage to maximum possible level. For better understanding if player in average makes profit of \$100 per spin, after 40 spins he will have \$4000, but if he played additional 16 spins where in average he would lose \$100 per spin then his total wins would be only \$2400.
It saves 40% of profit.

System “point set” was used only once at start.

All of this indicates that prediction of where the ball will drop on tilted wheel is more then double accurate if compared to prediction on leveled wheel.

Well forester, excellent results.
What acc did you use to do this test? What was your remaining time? How much tilted was the wheel?

First one was acc3= 9 sec tilt was acc4=6 sec.
I do not know how much it was tilted.

Anyway, it is only prediction to rotor hit point, you should be able to get similar result.

FFZ New tilted wheel and chip, the dvd that you sent me.

I did not do all the spins. In the end the dvd player started to skip, i dont know it was mine or dvd disc itself. (First time i played this spins)

ACC4 ½rotor. Let system run 7 spins after a spin that did not hit DD, i did point set. Then i started to do the test.
23 spins just 2 of them are off. I don’t know about -2 to +5 why there are prediction there. I will test it tomorrow to if i can get better result.
Anyway here is the result.

-2 to +5 is a problem it shouldn’t be there

Is that hits to rotor?

Yes, rotor prediction.

Did ball hit DD ?
You could do another PS

Yes ball hit DD.
What is PS?

Point set

Reset the system, ACC4 ½rotor. PS where done two times. Those spins that hit around prediction point simply changed after the second PS. (moved 180 degrees) I don’t know it was luck. Forester what do you think?
[attach=1]

You can’t complain much about such results, 90% of hits across 8 pockets are good.

It can happen that with point set offset changes. It is not much likely to happen.
If you set it on odd spin, then it may not have clear knowledge about differences in between 2 rotations. Small percentage of spins may be predicted as wrong rotation. It shouldn’t take long much to notice it.
With FFA I add to the system to tell us value of PS. If we are readjusting it and if system from value 24 changes to 4, we should be careful. If it changes around 24 (previous value) then is ok.