assume we have a wheel with %100 dominant drop point(leets say 12 o clock DD).in spite of this wheel with a common drop point we should know remaining time from knee zone till drop.whether with vb2 or traditional vb or crossover to define particular ball rotation is there any clue to get exact rem. time apart fr just observing wheel for a few spins and take avarage time?if no; to get exact remaining time how do you find?if with x2 x3 x4 crossover.how?
why ı ask this because even if we fınd the correct rev with traditional vb or vb2 or with crossover method we need to have at least +/- 0.5 sec remaining time guess.
thanx for replies sorry for my english ı hope ı clarified my question properly
why ı ask this because even if we fınd the correct rev with traditional vb or vb2 or with crossover method we need to have at least +/- 0.5 sec remaining time guess.
+/-0.5 is not aim - aim is +/-0.2 maybe, and that is quite easy. Problem is to detect right time in spin - you do mistake not in determing time, but when determine point from which to count that time.
assume we have a wheel with %100 dominant drop point(leets say 12 o clock DD).in spite of this wheel with a common drop point we should know remaining time from knee zone till drop.whether with vb2 or traditional vb or crossover to define particular ball rotation is there any clue to get exact rem. time apart fr just observing wheel for a few spins and take avarage time?if no; to get exact remaining time how do you find?if with x2 x3 x4 crossover.how?
why ı ask this because even if we fınd the correct rev with traditional vb or vb2 or with crossover method we need to have at least +/- 0.5 sec remaining time guess.
thanx for replies sorry for my english ı hope ı clarified my question properly
cheers[/quote]ln the particular case that you are described, assuming you actually can identify revolution. Use relative distance between observation number in given revolution and your target. When you take your number, start timer or cadence trained previosly to measure time interval from prediction till end of the spin ( ball hitting your target.). Don’t mix traditional vb, crossovers and vb2. They are different methods that require different ways to adjust( different offsets). Brouse forum a bit, you will find your qwestions, if any arrise, already answered. Good luck.
ln the particular case that you are described, assuming you actually can identify revolution. Use relative distance between observation number in given revolution and your target.
This distance and even time is not super important. It is only indicator how good we determine some point. If we determine only revoluttion then can be left say 5.0 or can be left 5.75 that will be hudge diference in left time. And that can confuse us.
Better focus on diferences what we see before prediction. So how ball come to prediction point. Say if we use for prediction some time and look to distance which do ball in that time, say our aim is in some time two ball rounds - we cant always get it exact - we usually get longer or shorter distance so some delta and we must look for delta in the end and find relationship between two deltas in prediction and in the final moment.
That is much more important - to know how diference in prediction area influence to diference in final point.
In my experience, I have found that the remaining time on the same wheel with the same ball is quite consistent. If you can consistently identify the correct revolution, then the timing mistakes you make are much more easily forgiven. For example, if you were slightly off on your cadence by a pocket or two from the true reference number, it is far less catastrophic than if you missed a rev completely. We’re talking a difference of 0.1 or 0.2 seconds vs 1.1+ seconds assuming the knee point takes place at a 1 second revolution. 0.1 or 0.2 seconds of error should still get you on the right side of the wheel (rotor speed depending) and even a hit with some good scatter. A whole second off puts you way into the darkside.
[quote=“Davey-Jones, post:6, topic:1149”]In my experience, I have found that the remaining time on the same wheel with the same ball is quite consistent. If you can consistently identify the correct revolution, then the timing mistakes you make are much more easily forgiven. For example, if you were slightly off on your cadence by a pocket or two from the true reference number, it is far less catastrophic than if you missed a rev completely. We’re talking a difference of 0.1 or 0.2 seconds vs 1.1+ seconds assuming the knee point takes place at a 1 second revolution. 0.1 or 0.2 seconds of error should still get you on the right side of the wheel (rotor speed depending) and even a hit with some good scatter. A whole second off puts you way into the darkside.[/quote]even with revolution identification there are stupid errors and pro errors. If you predict one revolution late, its more forgiving due to overlaps
Keep in mind, that will vary from wheel to wheel. Some wheels require a greater degree of precision than others. However, as I said earlier, my data suggests that missing a rev is far more devastating then being off slightly with your cadence. What I am saying is that if you are one or two pockets off of your correct wheel speed number, you should still end up on the right half of the wheel depending on the wheel. If you miss the rev, you will be 0.9 or 1.1/1.2 seconds of wheel travel time off. On a faster wheel like they are out here (2.5 seconds) that error puts you on the opposite side of the wheel. Both errors are bad and should be avoided, but the missing your cadence vs missing the rev is a little more forgiving.
Generally, cadences are pretty damn accurate anyway.
After reading the OP’s post again, I am wondering if he is asking about when we should make our prediction in the spin so we have enough time to place bets. If that is his question, then my answer is you should predict as early in the spin as you can provided the ball has stabilized. This of course will vary from wheel to wheel based on the track condition.
However, if he is asking how to determine the time from prediction to strike, I would just use a stop watch to time it and go with the most consistent time. But if you were to average 5 tracked spins, then I would subtract the highest and lowest values and average the other 3. That’s just an idea how to get you close. The more quality data you can collect, the better.
[quote=“Davey-Jones, post:10, topic:1149”]It also depends on the strike. On a direct deflector strike, the ball will drop straight in and may only travel a few pockets, even on fast wheels.[/quote]Do you look back spins? These could do effect you deskribe, espesially if " strike zone" is right. Downside that it can jamp back… Thats what l wanted to see if you have any data left from qweak rotor.
assume we have a wheel with %100 dominant drop point(leets say 12 o clock DD).in spite of this wheel with a common drop point we should know remaining time from knee zone till drop.whether with vb2 or traditional vb or crossover to define particular ball rotation is there any clue to get exact rem. time apart fr just observing wheel for a few spins and take avarage time?if no; to get exact remaining time how do you find?if with x2 x3 x4 crossover.how?
why ı ask this because even if we fınd the correct rev with traditional vb or vb2 or with crossover method we need to have at least +/- 0.5 sec remaining time guess.
thanx for replies sorry for my english ı hope ı clarified my question properly
cheers[/quote]ln the particular case that you are described, assuming you actually can identify revolution. Use relative distance between observation number in given revolution and your target. When you take your number, start timer or cadence trained previosly to measure time interval from prediction till end of the spin ( ball hitting your target.). Don’t mix traditional vb, crossovers and vb2. They are different methods that require different ways to adjust( different offsets). Brouse forum a bit, you will find your qwestions, if any arrise, already answered. Good luck.[/quote]
With vb2 you do not need to know exact knee point. You have several rotations which will give you same result. Wait +/- until the ball take 1 sec per rotation. Then apply vb2.
With vb2 you do not need to know exact knee point. You have several rotations which will give you same result. Wait +/- until the ball take 1 sec per rotation. Then apply vb2.
guys you must understand one thing - that you in Vb2 you see the same number is result of some compensattion between ball decelerattion and diferent starting point. But point which you see is not related with outcome as it is in other VB.
I can give you simple example say ball in time when you apply VB2 Time will be 1 sec so we start at 12 DD and end on 12 Dd. Now lets say that after that is left 10 sec till dropp and ball drops at 12 DD.
Now say we start always when in 12 DD is number 0. Now lets say in one spin is wheel speed 4 sec in other spin is 5 sec. In first spin outcome is 22 in second outcome is 17 I think you understand why ?
Now look what we see after Vb2 time .
In first spin we see 0+0.2537= 34.
In second spin we see0+0.237=25/17.
So we in bouth spins see about the same place, but outcomes are diferent by 18 pockets because diferent wheel speed.
So the only way avoid that is to measure wheel speed initially then choose starting point acordingly that as we that do in normal vb. But with this we not have so wide starting possibility. Maybe 1-2 rounds are aceptable but later or earlier we can see not what we need.
Are other way what is related with programing - so measure wheel speed then acordingly it calculate reference time. But this way is very risky because it lost that compensattion phenomen and when we miss round we also have mistake in prediction.
If you start ref time at +/- same time every spin and using same ref time to simplify things, you will see creepng back or forward or it stays the same. So we can compensate for this.
If you start ref time at +/- same time every spin and using same ref time to simplify things, you will see creepng back or forward or it stays the same. So we can compensate for this.
No mater when we start we must know wheel speed - without it we simply cant play.
If you start ref time at +/- same time every spin and using same ref time to simplify things, you will see creepng back or forward or it stays the same. So we can compensate for this.
No mater when we start we must know wheel speed - without it we simply cant play.[/quote]At this case Toxic winns. Toxic 1:0 Bebedictus. If you don’t belive egein me or Toxic-bro, think what gonna happen, if wheel is more slow, wich gap it gonna produce. If more qweak, same thing. Its same as we set vb2 for known rotor speed to identify time needed to upply. Or same as your hds signature, that you clamed to be yours( probably you invented it, l don’t know for shure). Or same as my " cycle system" to see deviation from padron of distances between number under each diamond and passing ball.
[quote=“bebediktus, post:17, topic:1149”]Guys you are really crasy
I not have what to say - i give up - good luck guys. You are genius, but you always will be without bancroll :)[/quote]First liars, after crasy. Every time l hear about complicated methods and bankroll requirements, l suspect something is wrong. … People play to much systems and miss a lot to need all that money to play…
Ill tell more, its a universal method of adjustment used in vb2, hds, jafco charting, masterroulette…ets. Only Lourence Scott reccomends to play each speed different, thats why his forum is dead. People tend overcomplicate things.
Today 400 ;). 2 hours, start bank 20. Tomorrow same bankroll 20! Lol.
Its not the bank, but prediction accuracy, not ammount of spins played, but best spins filtered. No point to bett on spins that are not good. Its gambling and should be avoided.
