# Something new for roulette dealers signature, control timer

#1

Lets’ hit more this subject with something every roulette dealer signature player should understand.

I will not discuss here is it worth or not to play DS, how good or bad it could be but more about if you do it how to do it in a better way.

Rule No.1

There is no DS without strongly tilted roulette wheel with dominant 1 or 2 ball drop point. If there are different condition on the wheel just forget it.

Today I had a nice chat with someone who for longer time played DS. There were wins loses, but the final score is something that mostly cunts. Total score; he lost over 100k euros. And as in usual “I might be OK only if……”. Tired, lost patience, strange behaviour on the wheel, maybe even casinos cheat …etc.

My comet and believe, the most significant problem with DS is a not enough information about changes in DS. Say dealer spins mostly 15 ball rotations; it is 37x15=555 pockets. The rotor may make three rotations it would be additional 3x 37 = 111. In total the ball will cross 555+111=666 pockets.

Let’s say 666 is an average how they spin. But what if it changes to 675. It is only 1.3% change in pockets. It is 9 pockets difference and it is created because of rotor speed change. If we take in consideration tilted wheel, then changes ad 666+37 where additional 37 pockets are created from the additional ball rotation even if it is 37 pockets change is actually smaller change. It is because on a tilted wheel we assume ball drop point is the same so all it matters is a difference I full ball rotations converted to time and multiplied with rotor speed. Say the ball made 16 rotations where the additional first rotation is 0.5s long. If the rotor moves 8 pockets /s it would be 0.5x8=4 pockets.

If rotor for example from 5s/r changes mostly to 4.7, it will cause such change. Ordinary player hardly can notice such difference. He will also struggle to know for example in last ten spins did the dealer mostly spin 14 or 15 or 16, ball rotations.

Every dealer signature player should understand that such changes even so small compared to total umber of pockets the ball pass, may turn a game with some advantage to a negative game.

Often on line I see omen people selling roulette dealer signature. I have problem understanding what is there really to sell when what they sell is common sense and available for free. There is no explanation as it will be explained here.

I never spent much time with DS and looked for better options.
Interesting article at this forum is Evolution of roulettes advantage play, where from primary dealer’s signature are explained better steps.

If there are better steps, then why to use roulette dealer signature?
The only answer to that question is because there is no enough time. If there is not enough time and you still want to play then at least do it in the best way with what you have.

While we have had a nice chat, I come to an exciting idea to eliminate the most significant problem with the roulette dealers signature play.

A simple timer that can be adjusted or that it can measure the spin length and use the estimated time to compare following spins.
Say your dealer spins 15 ball rotations, you start time measurement and click on the end. It is 15 seconds. Form then each spin when the dealer spins you start timer. After 15s the timer signals you. At that moment you see if the ball dropped earlier or later. If it is reasonably constant you can play. If after some time or with different dealer the ball mostly drops say 2s later. You can simply add 2x rotor pockets per second and still play with an advantage.

It would be the first control. It will always detect and help the player to identify differences in ball spinning.
That’s where our conversation on the subject ended.

I decided to write on the forum about such solution and start thinking more about it.
Understanding the problem, I know that rotor speed is more important. So what if the dealer mostly instead of as previously 5s rotor now spins 4.7s or 4.5 rotors. If the player is not aware of it, it will kill his advantage.

Let’s add additional control. We need to understand here that such controls do not predict but only inform the player on the end of spin about the changes.

It can be done in 2 ways.
One would be measure and rotor, have time saved then after elapsed time for the ball the timer continues with rotor time signals.

It would look like this ;

Click to start, 15s later beep to indicate when the ball is due to drop based no previous spins.
Then beep every 5s for rotor time, where the player checks if the rotor speed is still mostly the same.

If need a simple solution a second timers intervals can be eve constantly 4s long, then the player looks how may pockets each spin the rotor makes in 4s. If it is still constant he can continue playing, if it is not he can readjust based on the differences.
While solutions with clocked times, memorised and used would require a more complicated solution, involving device as the FF with a microcontroller. Even a simple adjustable timer would do the job.

Say, set it to close amount of ball travelling time as 15,16,17… s then compare differences what the ball mostly makes. Even if you set it to 15s and the ball goes 2s logger, it would be ok as long as you checking if it is mostly 2s longer.
I believe such breakthrough solution may give the most reliable boost to simplest way of playing as the roulette dealers signature.

When I find the time I may add such timer to the FF roulette computer.

It could go even further if the process is ore computerised.
The player has no time to clock ball, and rotor before prediction however he has time to clock spin length, and rotor after the prediction. Say he does it few times, data can be recorded, the computer compares it uses some averages ad defines times by it self. It ca even tell the player where to bet next spin as a distance from number at DD which dealer releases the ball.
For example; the system may have recorded.
15.1
16,3
15,4
15.5
16,6
14.7
For spin length, It can analyse data and find out the average ad most common would be to use 15.5.
For rotor clocking after spin it may have,
4,
4.6
5
4.5
4.5
5.2
4.4
It may find 4.5s as the best value which is 15.5/4.5=3.4 rotations for rotor. It means the ball will drop 0.4*37 pockets from dominate diamond DD. For every spins it can be monitored for the past x amount of spins and the system can define new values.

With two stage timer solution it doesn’t matter which dealer spins or how he spins. It would only would matter that he spins with reasonable consistency.

#2

Ff is simply not applicable for ds. To play it properly, player needs first to understand dinamics of tilt on the wheel, then define posible overlaps between timings of the spin and posible rotor speeds. Need to track dealers. … it’s mostly tracking job with ocasional windows of opportunity to place Betts. You need consistent spinner and ability to filter spins by its additional rotation ( back/forward/side…). Only consistency of spin trial to trial and good rotor speeds will make it profitable.
If there is any possibility to at least measure rotor to some degree during the spin, it becomes better. Dealer with short spins may be a good opportunity. … however these short spins should be relatively constant. Simple spreadsheet may be created to explore overlaps between timings of spin/ drop point/ rotor speeds, but in general you need slow rotors…
Ff as a calculating device for ds…hm… timer is always a good idea.

#3

Forester, if you remember , long time ago i sugested you one way of play - after determing averidge durattion of spin we sett timer on say 1/3 or on 1/4 of that time and start when spin begins. Say averidge time is 20 sec. And here say we start on 1/4 so on 5 sec. We also look to starting number and look to number in starting place after, so we after that reference time see second number say initial number was 0 and after 5 sec we see 4 so 4 pockets diference 4*4=16 and from initial point 0 it is 8. That is our reference point which is very similar to VB2 reference point.

I know one guy, who played this method and probably play till now. He played with stable 3 sec reference time and had made some paper card, with one moving circle, which show him all soluttions - (starting point- point in zap moment - final number). Really he started measuring rotor even before spin and he done bet about in ball starting moment maybe few sec after.

#4

Ff is simply not applicable for ds. To play it properly, player needs first to understand dinamics of tilt on the wheel, then define posible overlaps between timings of the spin and posible rotor speeds. Need to track dealers. … it’s mostly tracking job with ocasional windows of opportunity to place Betts. You need consistent spinner and ability to filter spins by its additional rotation ( back/forward/side…). Only consistency of spin trial to trial and good rotor speeds will make it profitable.
If there is any possibility to at least measure rotor to some degree during the spin, it becomes better. Dealer with short spins may be a good opportunity. … however these short spins should be relatively constant. Simple spreadsheet may be created to explore overlaps between timings of spin/ drop point/ rotor speeds, but in general you need slow rotors…
Ff as a calculating device for ds…hm… timer is always a good idea.

I think you missed the point.
“ FF is simply not applicable for ds.”
The process I explained is very applicable, and the FF can do anything.
“Need to track dealers. … it’s mostly tracking job with ocasional windows of opportunity to place Betts. You need consistent spinner and ability to filter spins by its additional rotation ( back/forward/side…). Only consistency of spin trial to trial and good rotor speeds will make it profitable.
It is more a story for little kids want to play to be a roulette players. I just explained process where all of that is eliminated. When you playing , overlaps will happen regardless you are aware of them or not, you anyway do not have any influence to detect them.
“ If there is any possibility to at least measure rotor to some degree during the spin, it becomes better.”
Yes.
The point of my explanation is to have a control.
The biggest problem with DS is that mostly it will look as chasing pattern for which you don’t know when it will stop. If you don’t constantly check times as I described it is a pattern, if you do then it is not because you clearly can see if there is a change. Basically you may play and after some time results simply do not match. When results start deviating around + 9 or -9 pockets from earlier spins it is hard to detect because the results strongly deviate anyway, but with a timer you can clearly see spin is longer or rotor has different speed.

#5

[quote=“bebediktus, post:3, topic:1229”]Forester, if you remember , long time ago i sugested you one way of play - after determing averidge durattion of spin we sett timer on say 1/3 or on 1/4 of that time and start when spin begins. Say averidge time is 20 sec. And here say we start on 1/4 so on 5 sec. We also look to starting number and look to number in starting place after, so we after that reference time see second number say initial number was 0 and after 5 sec we see 4 so 4 pockets diference 4*4=16 and from initial point 0 it is 8. That is our reference point which is very similar to VB2 reference point.

I know one guy, who played this method and probably play till now. He played with stable 3 sec reference time and had made some paper card, with one moving circle, which show him all soluttions - (starting point- point in zap moment - final number). Really he started measuring rotor even before spin and he done bet about in ball starting moment maybe few sec after.[/quote]

It is not as VB2 but it is E2 with x4 multiplication.
There are many ways to play. I believe for DS rotor is more important, so if can use some time it might be better to clock it.
Put it this way.
FF can clock rotor at any position, it can even clock ¼ or ½ of rotation. That is why it can get the earliest possible predictions.
Dealer spins rotor before then he spins the ball. If you clock ¼ rotor you may complete it before then he spins the ball. Clock 2 ball rotations get prediction ,it may take 2-3s. I believe this would be the best way if there is some time.
Process I explained for DS is when you don’t have any time. Basically you do everything after the spin it is just a control that informs you that what was before doesn’t apply any more.

#6
It is not as VB2 but it is E2 with x4 multiplication. There are many ways to play. I believe for DS rotor is more important, so if can use some time it might be better to clock it.
No here is like VB2, because we not look to ball at all. We look only to wheel.
Dealer spins rotor before then he spins the ball. If you clock ¼ rotor you may complete it before then he spins the ball. Clock 2 ball rotations get prediction ,it may take 2-3s. I believe this would be the best way if there is some time.

Maybe this is better but are some peoples for whom clocking ball is dangerous - at all 4 clicks is too much
So with that mine way are at all 1 click and vibro in some moment… I tested sometimes after 2 sec i know result. But that is kind of DS play with timer , not need to compare with RC.

#7

[quote=“bebediktus, post:6, topic:1229”]

It is not as VB2 but it is E2 with x4 multiplication.
There are many ways to play. I believe for DS rotor is more important, so if can use some time it might be better to clock it.

No here is like VB2, because we not look to ball at all. We look only to wheel.[/quote]
But VB2 looks the ball.

So he only times the rotor same as I do with VB2.
I mostly use same reference time for for ball and rotor.
If the time is 2 s, then for rotor I multiply by 5-6. Sometimes my use 2 time intervals then it would be 2.5-3.

When I talk about DS I mean on a real DS where we make bets as soon as dealer spins. Described timer is not to predict but to check if dealer’s signature really exists does it shifts and how much it shifts.

#8
But VB2 looks the ball.
but only to know wheel possition in end of spin, so here is the same. Here esence is that we not need measure wheel but aproksimately know wheel possition in the end.

Ok here is no matter how to name. At all dealer signature looks for me not good name. I simply talk about method which is super simply and still have relationship with final point and not need many clockings . Say VB2 still needs some wheel clocking then applying ref time - here is only one - applying ref time, then look to card or memorise and know where to bet.

#9

I don’t know why someone would want to play DS when with a little more effort they can get a real edge playing vb

#10

When there is not enough time and other conditions are good.

#11

Forester how come every solution has to look at bias pattern to emerge?
Why not just change the parameters and turnaround and do the other way around!

But not sure if advantage can be gain that way?

For example i use any known method to key the ball/rotor combination without device.
Then when get same ball/rotor combination and speed for the second time, there is only one random element left.
Level wheel or 3 to 2 vertical deflectors hits.
Random factor vs. bias element.

So what is the probability that the wheel that has same ball/rotor combination (position) and speed will hit the same vertical deflector and make the same ball jumps.
It become a element of play vs. light VB

So the reason would not to aim to hit same sector or number sequence over and over again - you would bet against that the bias sector would emerge.

Cheers

#12

If you will do colection of spins duering evening - you will find , that are three sorts of spin - averidge , shorter and longer. Then when you will mark all in order you will find, that here is no system which spin go one after other…

So in concrete next spin can be any of sort and that is main with what fight player…
So that you will find the same combinattion still not means , that you will hit because spin simply can be other…

Maybe all have Gordons video on them are very easy to notice that, simply can select spins diferent type and look how they are predicted in your way…

#13

DS without strong tilt doesn’t exist.

“Then when get same ball/rotor combination”

Doesnt exist end here is why;

Even if you can with accuracy of 2s judge moment during the spin
you may have ball ms;

900,
920,
960
980
1000,
1020
1040,
1060
1080
1100
1120
1150
1160…

with anything in between.
But say it is main 13 ball speeds you may detect, then with each one you need same rotor.
Even if play that way then is better detect ball speed then whatever the rotor is compensate for it instead of waiting ~20 spins to have one qualified spin.

#14

DS can exsist only when is very stable durattion of spin and when place where ball stops in pocket is very stable. But even in such situattion we still need to measure wheel speed - without that - we nothing can do.

If we measure wheel - then that is not DS but VB, because to measure ball takes less time than measure wheel, so no reason not do that.
That is from one side. From other side - measuring ball not gives for player much profit on nowdays wheels - we still can be very easy wrong in remaining time +/- 0.5-0.7 sec even if we detect ball speed perfect.
So we come again to the same - if we have good rest zone - we can win , if not - are problems…

Such sittuattion is for us, but looks that in the world are few, who, maybe solved this problem. I saw several guys, who not only bet very easy, but also very exact. If to look to place where ball hit DD maybe looks that not very exact, but if look to place where ball stops - that is super exact.

I even tryed to calculate chance, that all what i see is simply random of course was not enough data. But still mine calculattions gives around 5 STD on about 35-40 spins and cover around 15 pockets. If to think that the same % of hits will be always so say in 370 spins , then result is around 15 STD, so if that will be easy to understand how exact can be their betting…

#15

I have a good PDF document about this subject - if you want a copy you can send me PM

Cheers

#16

You see me every day in skype , so why PM ?

#17

Why would you not send personal message - i almost never on skype - you don’t use DS so no need for document - you play RC and VB - … Cheers

#18

I not understand you … if you want you can send me on skype, or by PM, if you want here.

Why you want that i will write you ? I am not girl…

Of course i not use DS, because it cant work, or you name DS something other.
I play VB and bias combinattion and for me always strange why others spent time on many different things , but why not learn some simply VB way, especially when they can use some computer to do that VB even more easy in training…

#19

Exactly you play VB and use RC so no need to send you document about DS.
I don’t want you to write me as there is a waste of time sending you document you don’t need, because you play VB and use RC.

But other members who use or want to learn more about principal Forester talk about in this topic would like this document about same principal. And is only about DS so you don’t need to worry as you play different.

And why would i use skype to send you document that is not about VB or RC.
I don’t care what you think about DS.

#20

Not foregeth - you started that to send / not to send.

All what i need i have

Roulete game is not any mystic - are few rules or laws , if all the condition is fulfilled - player wins, otherwise - he have or very small, or at all no chances and that is no matter which way you play.

Are few exeptions on bias play, because this method is like something oposite to VB. And are very often situations when bad wheel for VB will be good wheel for bias and oposite.

So main is not DS VB or bias , but theese few laws. Something similar is like to find data of Easter day

But if you have good winnings with DS and not worry in these laws - I can only be happy for you …

So simply post that document here - where is problem ?