Something new for roulette dealers signature, control timer


So simply post that document here - where is problem ?

There is no problem - why you think there is problem - i decide what to with this document.
Some things i share in public and some things i don’t share in public, is up to me to decide.

If you think different i don’t care.
But if you need a reason i can give you two.

We have a rat in the forum and i don’t want that rat to read my material, that is one reason i don’t share this document in public.
One more reason is that some material is given among AP only and never see daylight among other.


Ok I think I know about what you here :slight_smile: .
But you must understand that any materials usually not help in such level that looser will become - winner.
Here is main .

And i very support here Snowman. Better most simple Vb than super highlevel DS.

But I remember one case when one player/gambler was going to casino trip and he asked teach him something super easy in half hour, what will help him to win. So i Created something like DS at least i named that as DS , but really that was super simple Vb. And after maybe year i found that material in some forum named as super HG :slight_smile:
So after that i not very hurry to explain something to other especially in forums…


We looked many spins and simply there is nothing that can be
measured and that can indicate it.

Perhaps someone may claim sound change, even if it is zzzzzzzz
or zzrrzzrzzz, same as DS can change it based on sound RC can even better at
least ball and rotor would be correct so the change would be on something known
while with DS it is on something that already deviate in both directions.


How about hybrids that use some visual ballistic elements - still not VB and not DS
So something between.

Then you can measuring ball/rotor with pattern recognition without device.
For example wheel mapping - you say in topic that from person you get method that he thinks its good.
Is that opinion or based upon real play?

In theory hybrid also can be done using metronome as you explain in this topic if we add more visual ballistic elements into the calculation. Can be something between E2 and DS Hybrid.

Reason i reply is that you some time mention some one travelling using your computer and making large sum of money where others battle to win some money - all boils down to knowledge.

And quote Snowman means nothing - because hes opinion is based upon that edge is to small playing DS and thinks is not worth it and better to play VB - but there is a way between both and maybe can be solution for many



Quote about Snowman is essential. But every can play as he wants, if you want no edge when possible have some - why not ? That is your choose.
If will be normal edge with DS of course will be many player this way and many winners , but them are no. I think that this say something…


When opportunity comes use the best method for it. In other post whera I mentioned using rc and ds forgot to say since I played long even hot numbers on the board stayed same so why not to play. As early bets or when in that sector ds or rc prediction load them with more chips.


Good point, as long as it works- it’s valid.
There are cases when ds is not really ds, but bias.
Let’s say there are 2 zones that collect hits right opposite each other… most frequent distances will be 0 and 18. It could be perceived as ds, but in reality it isn’t. … however player playing ds will not stop to profit on it because of its being " fake ds".
On other hand, vb player in such situations will be out of game complitely, or partually. … if numbers under diamond are not random either .
Most of the time it’s not a method that is winning, but player able to make reasonable decisions may capitalise on his understanding.


I here not understand how Vb player can lost but DS player who takes to account only starting number can win. Both such players must play accordingly data base and database of VB player is in much higer level - so much more secury, - so not understand how it can have worse results. In few spins can be all but not in long way…


2 zones collecting hits … biased. For explanation purposes let’s focus on one ( pretend only one zone of bias exist)… so you get 5 predicted, result 0… get 7 predicted - result 0… get 34 predicted… result still 0.
It may very well mess up your prediction- outcome chart. Now imagine there are 2 zones… well.


But in such situattion also DS player will be in problem…
VB player maybe even not will be in problems because he will see that fall mostly 0 and 5 so every normal player will adapt to that easy…
Main, that in such situation will be problems for these, who not pay atention to bias.
But if talk really bias is very rare so strong , as you described…


Where are those normal players? You are one… how many are there? My hand is enough to count them all?
If normal players would be able, they would play bias instead, right?


Not sure , all depend on concrete situation…but i think all will try to do, the best.
Here talk is about something like that some something see but VB by unknown reasons not see or cant see … And no arguments why for DS or bias player are more easy in such situattion ??? That VB player not look to bias is nonsence…


Good player will look everything, be it bias , vb, ds … player that focus on one method only, sooner or later will get in trouble.


I test a old school visual ballistic pattern or cross over with Donna Amon Cammegh Wheel.
This is not VB and more a signature or a fuzzy deceleration pattern.
The main idea is to use little physics with out getting into advance predictions.

Main idea was inspired from Laruance Scott two cross over patterns, but not as pure visual ballistic solution.
Main idea was to see if there is a signature or pattern during the deceleration of the ball that can be used to get distance from visual read to drop being constant.

Now this does not work if you pick any vertical deflector as your reference deflector.
You need to watch Donna Amon wheel and determine the dominant drop zone to decide what will be the main reference deflector.

First i have to tell you how i memorize the wheel into sectors of three numbers.
I list each sector with a key number that help me to categorize the numbers distance.

For example sector 0 is 26 0 32 15 and sector 1 is 19 4 21 and so on.

  1. 26 0 32 15
  2. 19 4 21
  3. 2 25 17
  4. 34 6 27
  5. 13 36 11
  6. 30 8 23
  7. 10 5 24
  8. 16 33 1
  9. 20 14 31
  10. 9 22 18
  11. 29 7 28
  12. 12 35 3

Everyone memorize wheel and know number order on number ring different - this is my way.
So when i see number 19 below deflector when ball is over it i know i have sector 1.
And if there is beginning of spin i know next number below deflector on next lap will be sector 4 or 5.
Where one of the numbers 13 36 11 or 30 8 23 will be below deflector when ball is over it for next round.

I assume you start getting the picture, so each time a the ball is over the deflector and there is a new lap/round with a new number i get a sector into my head and can follow the deceleration of the ball using sectors with three numbers and see the distance of numbers between each deceleration round/lap.

Now when two sectors are oppisite of each other on the wheel the ball made one full rotation and rotor made one half rotation, in a perfect world we would see such patterns, as Laurance Scott cross over pattern.
But hes pattern has a range between tight pattern, medium pattern and wide pattern.

So when i test this idea i could see two oppiste patterns emerge, but not in exact oppiste of each other.
Sometimes a direct match and other times missing with one sector or two or three numbers.
Reason can be ball speed duration on the ball track or that ball end up between two sectors and you don¨’t know how to read number before or after.

But this does not matter because deceleration pattern before ball/rotor reach a state where they cross you have larger gaps and distance between sectors.
So when two sectors emerge being oppisite of each other i count the remaining laps to drop to see if i get constant distance.
I got 9 laps to end with most samples and some missing with one lap.

So the deceleration laps is sectors of three numbers - not time.
I write two dots where the first indication of a oppisite pattern match
First sample is sectors 4 and 9 this is not a perfect match as the perfect match would be 3 and 9 with the number 34 6 27 - 9 22 18

4 "
9 "

If you count the left deceleration patterns so are they nine laps to drop

Next sample has sectors 5 and 10 and is not a perfect match and a prefect match would be 4 and 10 with the numbers 13 36 11 - 29 7 28

5 "
10 "

This sample also has nine laps to end

My point is that if you can predict and tell left distance with nine laps using old and fuzzy cross over patterns then it should exist many more advance ways to tell distance from A to B using wheel signature or light VB



Nice stuff, Lucky! Thank you.

It looks very complicated and needs to be practiced.
I keep your method in mind, for bad times :wink:



Luckystrike ım also using the gap between rotations for measuring the ball speed but instead of you ı didnt spilt into 3 number sectors, ı memorized the pocket differences between numbers. f.e wheel cw ball acw: from reference point 0 and the second round 9… it means 10 pockets. so ıf ı measured the wheel speed 10 pockets/s ı know the ball speed is now 1 sc/rot. if you split into sectors you might miss the ball speed exactly because between rounds the ball may be seen at 0 sector but at 15 number and then 9 sector number 9…that means 12 pockets. another scenario: again 0 sector but now below 0 sector number 26 and then again 9 sector but below number is 18… it makes 8 pockets… so ıf you take ınto account sectors your ball speed would be floating between 250 ms in a 3 sc/rot wheel…


I understand and this is how results and distance look like using sectors with a similar method.
The first number is the reference number during the estimation process.
The second number 6/7 is the amount of sector traveling during the estimation process.
The third number is the actual sector result, outcome.
The fourth number is the distance using sectors from 0 to 11.

0 6 1 	6/7	10	Distance 9
1 7 2  	6/7	10	Distance 8 
9 3 10	6/7	1	Distance 3 
5 11 6      6/7	9	Distance 3 
6 0 7	6/7	10	Distance 3 
6 0 7	6/7	10	Distance 3 
6 0 7	6/7	7	Distance 0 
2 8 3	6/7	7	Distance 4 
4 10 5	6/7	5	Distance 0 
1 7 2	6/7	10	Distance 8 
4 10 5	6/7	3	Distance 10

This is 54 spins in one direction and only 10 results of the same visual read pattern.
It takes a lot of time collecting a large sample, but I am working on it.
Clearly, there is two dominant zone 8, 9, 10 and 0, 3, 4.

This is the reason I want to know how to identify the same wheel using light reflections and marks on the wheel.
So next time I enter the casino I know I am tracking and charting the same setup and same wheel.
I reckon a 1000 sample in one direction will emerge a predictable bias pattern to play.

About your method, I know a very good solution to spot both pocket distance and offset, Laurance Scott, mention the method at the end of his book without details about the particular method. People in Las Vegas have been using the method with success. I had email contact with Laurance and he explains the method for me.

The thing is when you use three visual reads and get the same pattern and gaps between each pattern you have the same rotor speed and the same ball estimation for each spin.

Physics, the wheel/ball/Dealer combination create differently spins and when you track and chart the behavior using the right parameters you can find the sweet speed or sweet spot or the NORM of that wheel/ball/dealer combination for that particular wheel.

We can find one state or one level or one norm that outperform all other combinations.
When that is done collecting data in the right way using the right parameters we can rape a wheel.