Only you and your aliases.
If you think it is easy to turn 200€ into +2000€ against online casinos, feel free to provide this easy proof like i’ve done.
Easier to CRITICIZE than actually DOING it. You are a child.
Forester, everything you at some point has told Bago will end up on a message board. Now or later, but be asured, it will come out.
I understand that if you have never practised that kind of VB play, it is hard to understand. I`ll try one more time.
-
The point where the handles align up at for example 12 o
clock 2 maybe 3 revoloutins after one another as described is in the text, is not nessecary spot on and they dont have to be. -
The ball revoloution we are looking for is the “deviation revoloution” that comes right AFTER the “line up” at 12 o`clock and lasts 2 maybe 3 revoloutions. That revoloution is the signal revoloution that we are looking for.
-
If you practise you will find that you can pin point the exact same ball revoloutin some 8 out of 10 spins by using this tecknicke.
The line up at 12 o`clock might look like this if we say the line up lasts 3 revoloutions.
–!------------- 9 oclock approaching........ -----!---------- 10 oclock approaching…
--------!------- 11 oclock approaching........ -----------!---- 12 oclock
----------!----- 12 oclock approx or pretty close to 12 -----------!---- 12 oclock
------!--------- 11 o`clock DEVIATION REVOLOUTION we now know that we got lets say 5 revs. left before drop
NOTE: You notice that the line up comes from left moving to the right, then stops, then moves backwards from right against left. Vice versa when the wheel is spun in the opposit direction.
Now, if you have practised the method for a while, you will be able to use the info from how far the deviation actually were from 12. Sometimes it will be 11 o`clock sometimes 10:30 or something in between. The jump lenght from 12 to 11 (or whatever) relates to ball and wheel speed and when you make your prediction in the following rounds you will use this info and relate it into the prediction.
Laurance refers to this as:
“wide pattern”
“normal pattern”
“tight pattern”
Each pattern might relate to a drop just before the diamond or just after the diamond because the ball speed is build into this pattern. And you will adjust accordingly.
There are no rules of thump which pattern gives a specific event, but when you track a wheel you will make a note in a coloumn where you note. “tight”, “tight”, wide normal, normal, normal, tight etc.
After a while you get your predictions tuned in, and find that each pattern relates to a particular reading spot on the wheel.
Uwe leaves these details out, but also points out that the method is a flexible thing that should not be played strictly as the standard description but adapt to the conditions.
As you see, there are no need for absoloutely millimeter precise observations of the handles, but of course, the more precise, the better for the play.
PS: There are also the “awkward pattern” which is a pattern that coud mean that you are in the wrong revoloution and you wont place any bets because you dont know whats going on. Also, you might find that either the wide or tight pattern are unplayable, so that would signal that you simply jump such a spin.
The main beginner problem with the handle system, is that you confuse the handles in the heat of the fight and end up 1/4 of a wheel wrong. Practice practice practice…
Ok someone few days ago sent me a similar approach where he was looking ball cross number then move observation point to 0.8 of rotation to look for same number crossing.
I thought this system would do similar but observe handle after ¾ of revolution.
After you explained ,the player can observe full ball rotation, which improves things by 25% . Also observing handle at single position might be easier.
Anyway I still do not believe that observation of 3 points where two objects are moving can be within single pocket of accuracy. I hope that you understand, single pocket in this case represents full ball rotation and creates error of rotor movement during that particular rotation. Single pocket also could mean that the ball is within last half of sixth rotation, or not hitting DD, or first half of fifth rotation, where half’s can be any percentage and not hitting DD can be at any position.
Using rotor as reference assuming it is constant may create huge errors.
Clocking it even with reasonable accuracy, if time of clocking is not known and in relationship to revolution we want to define will mean that rotor speed will not be as clocked, but less by amount related to time difference and rotor deceleration.
I do not believe that player can predict 8 out of 10 spins correctly even if he has single pocket accuracy. It could be 9 out of 10, then after 5 min it could be 1:10. I mean he will always deviate in between 2 rotations and he will have 40% of spins with worst then house advantage if 60% of spins are hitting DD. If rotor is slow 9 p/s it means he will deviate within 18 pockets with 2 pick points distanced by 9 pockets. It is not bad.
But there is another question, can he really observe within one pockets of accuracy; I can only estimate that he will mostly float within 3 rotations with some percentage of spins even more. And that is if adjustments for rotor speed change are perfect.
It ends up on a message board when people are becoming abusive. You Kelly the so called super expert that in fact use a thumper to make his timings, crying like a pussy because i exposed this real fact and now Forester crying because i exposed how much he earns per year.
As always i speak the truth and you people blame me for revealing the facts that are embarassing.
I never stabbed honest and genuine people in my life, and unfortunately on the internet they are rare. Actually Caleb is the only one friendly, genuine and knowledgeable man. He is not cocky at all, very humble.
He is with 100% certainty the one who made the most at the Roulette tables, by FAR, and you never see him talking about it.
Contrary to some no-life who write having won tens of thousands whereas reality have proven otherwise, only few hundreds won.
If Forester didn’t have said bullshit about me, i would have kept his earnings for myself.
If Stefano didn’t have said i needed support for his ineffective computer when i requested right away a refund, nothing would have been said about him and his scam.
Lying and being dishonest in life only brings trouble, and some like Stefano are actually making their situation even worser. He gets pratically no traffics at his websites now big proofs of his life style (thx Kylie) and what his system really is are costing him a lot.
You are so funny; I only told you same as I say to everybody because it is the truth and you thought you discovered America. What did you think? Maybe that I say to people hey buy FF roulette computer and make millions as I do.
Do you want me to tell you another secret?
I play more VB then FF.
Nothing can compare to FF’s accuracy but I still play more VB.
Who knows, maybe it is just another b/s from me since it doesn’t make any logic to you.
Why are you using VB instead of FF if the last is better? Are you afraid using it in the Casino?.
I already told you why VB is superior to any device based on clocking full revolutions, in my honest opinion.
Revolutions with exact same timings can lead the ball to travel extra 1/4 revolution, minus 1/4, +1/2 rev on level wheels. AND slightly different revolution timings can lead the ball to strike the same diamond. You told me it is not very important since when the ball hits the spot sooner than expected (minus 1/4) then the ball scatter lenght will be higher. Later (+1/4), the ball scatter lenght will be shorter, and as expected the ball scatter lenght is between both.
You will easily understand that if with VB you can PREDICT THAT (that the ball will either hit a diamond sooner or later), you will have a better accuracy than any mechanical device.
Only ball sound can achieve this, and with a lot of training and other things, you can spot the exact moment when the ball is descending from the rim, which occurs at DIFFERENT PLACES.
Stefano claims to achieve this with his nokia phone which is of course impossible with clocking ball revolutions alone, and anyone with some VB experience knows he is lying just to look genuine. Not only does he claim being able to know which diamond the ball will hit but also the part of it. Really a joke, when his repeating spin prediction process shows a sector of around 9 numbers and also a prediction completely outside, and with his diamond 1 setting (tilted mode).
You get along with Caleb for 2 reasons:
- He is a gentleman who don`t get involved as long as you could have been a potential scout for him.
- You haven`t been able to lure his book out of him.
I started using the thumper at a time where we were on a friendly basis, i used it in the casinos for 3 months but dont use it anymore except for 1 hour before i enter the casino sometimes not even then. Posting the pick i send you in confidence was a thing that breached not only my confidence but also every other thumper user. You just dont act so idiotic just to harm 1 person. I was not the only one who was let down, a lot of other people were too, not to mention Laurance and Caleb. Obviously i was put on freeze for having contact with you.
Somehow you dont understand that it is not embarresing to use a thumper, but the fact that they can bar you from entering the casino if they catch you with one is the issue. That makes you a saboteur in the AP world in line with Mike Barnett, and i can only advise every serious player to keep a distance to you. You have already shown on this board that you dont have a clou about VB.
What does Basieux say about your secret patterns ?
I leave that to your imagination.
I already told you why VB is superior to any device based on clocking full revolutions, in my honest opinion.
Everybody is entitled to have his opinion and some people are more right then the others.
Revolutions with exact same timings can lead the ball to travel extra 1/4 revolution, minus 1/4, +1/2 rev on level wheels. AND slightly different revolution timings can lead the ball to strike the same diamond. You told me it is not very important since when the ball hits the spot sooner than expected (minus 1/4) then the ball scatter lenght will be higher. Later (+1/4), the ball scatter lenght will be shorter, and as expected the ball scatter lenght is between both.
Yes I told you that but you missed the point that only FF can do it because it has precised measurement of ball speed. You are mixing two things. One is when prediction is in wrong rotation and it results that ball hits same diamond at same spot but with 9 pocket difference on rotor. The other one is when the ball did not hit top of one diamond but went to the other one and hit it at bottom.
Not sure why you even mention leveled wheel prediction with visual ballistic.
You will easily understand that if with VB you can PREDICT THAT (that the ball will either hit a diamond sooner or later), you will have a better accuracy than any mechanical device.
FF is not a mechanical device but precised measuring instrument with algorithms to predict by wheel parameters. It will know when the ball will hit and which number will be there. It will also know will the ball hit dominant diamond.
Only ball sound can achieve this, and with a lot of training and other things, you can spot the exact moment when the ball is descending from the rim, which occurs at DIFFERENT PLACES.
It is possible but still it can’t be better then FF computer by accuracy.
Most of the time just by watching the ball I can define when the ball is within 100ms of speed. That still is not better then FF because FF knows it within few ms of accuracy and it knows where is braking point in between rotations. Also if rotor speed is different the FF can precisely calculate for rotor change to the end of spin.
Stefano claims to achieve this with his nokia phone.
I think I do not have a problem to agree with you that he is a scammer, and if you try to understand that Nokia mobile phone is not suitable for timing applications then you can put full stop on it.
Why do you write as if you know what you are saying. You are very funny. You DO NOT KNOW what Caleb shared with me, so why are you opening your big mouth. Because as usual you want to give the impression that you know everything on everybody, like Kaisan’sVB, whereas you DO NOT KNOW the whole thing.
Thumpers are old hat, and shows that you are not the expert that you claim to be, the one who can make head counts with 0,1sec accuracy. We understand why you earn 400€ playing Roulette when you travel.
Concerning VB, people can testify i’ve corrected you many times at gambler’s glen, particularly concerning vis- -vis which is wheel speed dependant but you didn’t and probably do not understand this today.
You thought it was 180° effect or triangular whereas it is much more than that, vis vis can also be crossed, and you never mentionned it.
So, if for you someone who is correcting you on VB does not know anything on the subject, then you are the big asshole i’ve always thought you are.
My patterns are not secrets for Basieux, only for some dickheads like you who think knowing everything.
GET A LIFE.
Quote on vis a vis page 39 in Roulette Hardcore and Software.
Der gegen ¼ber effekt (auch vis a vis effekt) ist kein eigentlicher effekt - deshalb hab ich den begriff in anf ¼hrungszeichen gesetzt. Genau genommen ist er meistens eine folge des prinzipiellen roll-chaotischen effekts der sich nicht selten dadurcg ¤ussert, dass die kugel ziemlich genau gegen ¼ber der ersten prognose im kessel landet - und das auch noch im mittel. Aber eben nicht immer “ziehmlich genau gegen ¼ber” landet die kugel oft wenn:
-
der kessel einen Tilt hat, und wenn
-
die scheibe halb so schnell ist wie die kugel in ihrem letzten umlauf.
The page also describes “3 teilung”, “achse”, " œberkreuz" which are the 3 and 4 directed deviations from the 180 degree vis a vis. Bago, 3 of Pierres books describes vis a vis in all aspects. I got them, you obviously havent since you dont mention the tilt that Pierre does in #1.
Go back and find the link from GG and tell me where i have EVER said that vis a vis was only 180 degrees.
I know he haven`t shared his book with you, no matter how much you wanted to pay for it. And i understand it.
Kelly Posted: 11-Sep-07 00:39
Delete Edit
Mail Profile
bago you might wanna read something on vis a vis before you start talking like an “expert”.
You don`t predict vis a vis from anything. Its an effect caused by on some wheel speeds when you are 1 ball revoloution wrong in your exit prediction, then the opposit sector is becoming the main sector. Or if the scatter has bi modal peaks which means that vis a vis is not nessecaryly a 180 degree but can also be a triangular phenomen.
You don`t predict from the drawings cross over patterns, where the secondary or third sector is located or when it occurs as you imply. That is probably the daftest thing i have ever heard.
And the cross over pattern are NOT nessecary, he can predict just as well without them. You might wanna buy his the book to see what he writes about the drawings.
I was not gonna come back, but when you make such a fool of your self i can`t help it. Keep going, this IS funny mr expert.
Where have you written that the vis- -vis can also be crossed? Nowhere Mr i know it all.
I never asked Snowman about his book, he gently sent me the most importants things on bias subject, and all the discussions we had. I probably know equal if not more than you on bias.
[b]And for your information Mr I know it all, triangular vis- -vis and crossed vis- -vis are not bi modal peaks. Only the 180° vis- -vis is bi modal peaks since there are two major peaks that emerge in the scatter graph. When dealing with a triangular vis- -vis 3 peaks are emerging and crossed vis- -vis 4 peaks are emerging.
Sorry to correct you again Mr I know it all.[/b]
LOL, is something i havent written now wrong ? There are a lot more things i still havent written, are they also wrong because they are not written ? Do you expect me to quote the entire chapters everytime vis a vis is mentioned ?
I asked you specificly: where i have EVER said that vis a vis was only 180 degrees ?
As for the triangular peaks, they are a deviation from the “normal” 180 degrees vis a vis and is combination of several things where one of the things CAN be 3 poled scatter blocks but is also likely to a abnormality from the 180 degree vis a vis. Based on a slight difference in wheel speed so that the rotor does not come all the way round to 180 or basis in a slightly different drop zone than expected. Buy the books its a longer story.
As for info on Kaisans VB: what i know on his VB is also available to all german paroli readers.
I dont care what you and snow share, im sure snow has control over what he wanna share, all i have to do is read your posts to know that he at least havent shared his book but why should he, you already know MORE than is in his book.
Sorry i had to correct you on your correction
It’s not about being wrong the problem, it is the fact you claim being a VB expert and i know nothing about it.
Contradiction is when you wrote about vis- -vis and said that it can be either 180° or triangular.
Which is incomplete since it can also be crossed and you didn’t mention it, you who claim knowing a lot more than me on the subject, i find that amazing and i’m sure the others too.
You also wrote that triangular vis- -vis is bipolar distribution which is incorrect, i don’t need to read books to know that. Bipolar is two peaks, and that’s what a 180° vis- -vis is developping, a triangular vis- -vis is developping 3 authentic peaks. Ask Basieux and he will correct you also.
“where i have EVER said that vis a vis was only 180 degrees ?”
I showed your post you wrote on gambler’s glen so why do you ask again. You wrote in it that vis- -vis is 180° and also bipolar which is a nonsense since 180° is bipolar.
Your are showing dishonesty and cannot accept being wrong, and then you are shocked some people didn’t respect you when you show arrogance and unrespect in the first place.
You say i have never mentioned that vis a vis can also mean crossed. Well how many times have i posted this pick on GG and in here, from Pierres “Die Z ¤hmung des Zufalls”. With Pierres okay by the way. Look at the “Vierteilung”. 
Don`t you think it looks like that there are a cross there ? Should i also have mentioned that there are possibly also higher than 4 peaks possible ?
And i didn`t write bipolar but bimodal which is a quote from Pierre, if thats a wrong phrase then so be it. I think people got the message. I have never disrespected any of the people i mentioned and they never me, but they were shocked that i had that much trust in your confidence.
Showing a picture and explaining what’s happening on it are two different things.
The only time you wrote about vis- -vis, you mentionned it was 180° and triangular.
Accept it or not, it is on gambler’s glen archives, in a thread where you wanted to correct me on VB.
Me, who is supposed to know nothing about VB like you wrote, added that the vis- -vis is also crossed.
Yes, Basieux writes 180° vis vis is bimodal, bipolar since they’re two major areas opposite to each others.
But where you are wrong is the fact you said triangular vis vis is bimodal whereas three peaks are developping. You should have said tripolar, trimodal.
Crossed vis vis is quad-modal since there are four peaks, actually two 180° vis vis crossed. Like splits 1/4 and 11/12= 4 peaks.
So before quoting wrongly Basieux to look genuine, you should understand what he is writing in the first place not to look stupid when you want to correct people.
Using bimodal in combination with a triangle is of course wrong, that is accepted it has been in another discussion with Pierre. My mistake.
I asked you to do an explanation of Uwes VB, you didnt. Because it would reveal your secret VB pattern. I dont need to dig further. You did not know what was in the document because all translations came out as a mess.
You can ask any expert you wish if there are a secret pattern which is better than others. All patterns has a function under specific conditions.
If i made a mistake in not mentioning the ¼berkreuz then how many mistakes have you made in not explaining Uwe. Grow up kid.
I gave brief explanation of Uwe method and made no mistake at all.
Contrary to you about vis- -vis stating that triangular vis- -vis is bimodal.
Yes, that’s a big mistake for someone like you who wants to let us believe you are one of the top VB players in the world.
You are always criticizing, want to have the final word and cannot accept being wrong. Sorry but you do not look like a clever person, far from it.
I’ve given a system for free trying to help others and the only thing you do is criticizing. What a fucking conman you are.
You are just crazy i’ve shut your mouth about vis- -vis, you who claimed i got no clue on the subject.
You are the one who can teach how to look very stupid and red faced in less than 5 minutes.
Thumpers are old hat, and shows that you are not the expert that you claim
to be, the one who can make head counts with 0,1sec accuracy.
Well 0.1 is not enough if you targeting particular revolution.
Why to play with 0.1s if it can be 0.000001s.
Head count can be lost, so timer can be used to refresh players accuracy.
We understand why you earn 400€ playing Roulette when you travel.
STOP IT, it was only one Kellys experience which he was prepared to share. Do no be Mark Howe. For using inappropriate word from someone you got another negative Karma.
Do not blame me for following consequences in near future.
Bad karma is the correct term. If i had made 1000 it would still not be 2000 and if i made 2000 it would still not be 3000. I don`t have a habit of taking pictures of my winnings to use as “evidence” on a message board, thats something my kid would have done when he was 8 years old. Even as a 9 year old, he would have outgrown that habit.
I didnt mention the cross vis a vis, so im wrong and dishonest. Bago didnt mention the tilt factor but claims that vis a vis is only wheel speed dependent, what does that maake him then… If there is no tilt, we can mix whatever speed we want, vis a vis is not likely to happen. Tilt is a nessecary factor. Besides, the cross vis a vis should be treated extremely carefully as well as the triangular version. Usually one should stick to the prime prediction and leave the triangle or cross out, unless the peaks are just as evident as the prime prediction.
Never mind, im done here. Hopefully someone could use the explanation i gave of the Uwe method. Explaining vis a vis is also done in detail here, but has nothing to do with VB prediction. Its just a side effect one can use in the betting pattern to obtain maximum growth of the capital, if the wheel shows this tendency.