Roulette Physics - Wheel Signature - Development state ...

NoName

Member
I can not write about certain things as does are sensetive information and some material need premmision to share.
But i am free to post and write about my own development with visual ballistic solutions.

NOTE: The following information is not complete solution or complete playing modell.
Its only development to try to solve different parameters to make some accurate estimation with out using any kind of device. So if some one try this, you do so on your own risk. I have nothing to do with your action based upon this material.

Wheel Singnature

The idea is to estimate ball speed and rotor speed in the same time and get a visual read or reference number.

First we need to take the dealers release number and to do that we have to have a reference deflector.
That particular reference deflector is based upon what kind of dominant drop zone you have, where ball jumps should donate into same high probability area, that is how you determine which deflector is going to be your reference deflector.

Now we wait for the dealer to grab the ball and release it or spin it.
Then we wait for the ball to pass our reference deflector once and make one more full lap.
Now we read the dealers release number when the ball is over the reference deflector.

You memorize this number and follow it moving until the rotor has done one full rotation.
In the same time you count have many rounds the ball does, ball laps.

Now the rotor has made one full rotation and the number is below the reference deflector.
But the ball has made three rounds/laps and are on its fourth round/lap.

Your dealer release number you memorize was number 26 and it does now pass your reference deflector with three pockets and the ball is now over your referenc deflector.
Now during the next milliseconds the ball will be over your reference number 26 and its six pockets from your reference deflector.

This is what happend.
Ball made four laps and six pocket when it match (ball was over your reference number). Now if you enconter a new spin later on where the ball pass your reference deflector four times/laps and match your reference number with six pocket difference - then you have the same spin with the same charistics/pattern.

1) The ball speed had the same or similiar ball speed
2) Rotor travel with the same or similiar speed

So some spins make a gap with 123456789 pockets and four ball rounds/laps.
But is different for different ball speeds.

a) Fast spin can make ball 3 rounds/laps with 12345678 pocket gaps/patterns
b) Medium spin can make ball 4 rounds/laps with 123456789 pocket gaps/patterns
c) Slow spin can make ball 5 rounds/laps with 123456789 pocket gaps/patterns

So there exist different states which we can find the Wheel signature with.
Dealer spin and ball combination.

The gap with pockets key the particular ball speed and rotor combination for that particular spin.
When it repeats your expectation is to find the ball end up with the same distance/offset.

So the release number is important to as Visual read to get distance to outcome based upon the particular ball lap pattern with pocket gap pattern category.
My assumption is that you can rape a Wheel long term based upon wheel signatures with Visual ballistic parameters.

When you take Laurance Scott crossover to esitmate ball speed he categorize the esitmation with similaritys to key the same optimal speed.
He has a wide gap wich get fuzzy estimation, middle gap which give good estimation and tight get to early estimation.

Does are 1) To slow 2) Medium 2) To fast

This deceleration patterns is common and that is the gap with pockets i describe above.
So we have to track and charting Wheel to find the optimal bias or optimal gap with round/lap combination to explore a wheels weakness.

So even if not every spin with a match make the same result each time, so should our expectation be that a bias pattern/offset should emerge.

This can easy be test with video software and video spins to count the timmings for sever differen spins with the same category.
For example you have 10 samples or spins with 4 rounds/laps and 6 pocket gaps.
Then the 4 rounds/laps with 6 pocket gaps should have the same timmings - timeframe.

That is how you validate a method of visual ballistics.
What i am missing with this method or are afraid of is how much the difference drift when you take a sample of 10 spins with for example 4 rounds/laps and six pockets.

Deceleration pattern can be difficult taking timmings at beginning of spin when ball is at chaotic state.
So one idea might be tracking and charting later during spin.

For example if you have a Wheel that at average make 28 rounds/laps you might encounter to much duration and chatter to get accurate prediction or estimation.
But if you skip the first 8 to 10 rounds/laps you might find accurate results.
 

dicesetter

Member
Thanks Noname this is really interesting. What would you say is the edge you get?

My beef with these kind of techniques is isnt it obvious to the dealers what you are doing? What do you do to avoid suspicions?
 

NoName

Member
I read about other players who use Wheel Mapping method with succés, edge unknown.

Thinking about mapping wheel to find the wheel weak spot or the NORM.
Pierre Basieux R.I.P mention that there is a NORM where you can find the spot with good conditions.
Laurance Scott mention it as the "sweet speed".

So there is a hidden state or combination that is optimal, why you mapping Wheel to find such state to explore.

Now i been thinking to use Metronom/Thumper with this methodology and try to rap my mind around a solution.
One old deceleration method estimate ball when it slows down and Watch for the gap to get wider and then make the Visual read.
So when ball is faster and pass reference deflector you will see small gaps with pocket change/distance and as the ball slow down the gap gets wider and where you get a distinct gap that is different then all others you have reach the knee Point and make your Visual read and have key the ball around 5 laps Before drop.

I mention this to make you aware about pockets and gaps as deceleration patterns as i mention with above method.
A German guy use the number zero on the wheel and encounter gaps when ball pass zero.

So my idea is to use a Thumper and set it to 0.5 sec and watch ball over zero.
Then with 0.25 millisecounds in accarucy or less i will notice different angles/gaps.

Why 0.25 milliseconds or less in accuracy, because i will use the space between vibrations or the vibration it self when counting using eye observation. Then you set same parameters above with fast, medium or slow which would become less, average or more vibration during caculation observing the gap/angle during the mapping procedur.

The tricky part is how to solve using a static observing Point, reference deflector, to get the right observation with laps contra timmings, when zero can be at any Place with rotor movment.
So how does that effect the mapping procedur?

Thinking about a solution for that.
Maybe the solution is to use any number as the original.


Cheers
 

NoName

Member
It might look like this:
Using esitmation with laps, reference number, gap with pockets.
For example 4, 26, 5

With Thumper/Metronome.
Then we would have reference number and how many vibration we encounter.
For example 0, 32

And suggestions?
 

chips

Member
Hi noname thanks for this info but I find it a bit hard to follow. Do you have any diagrams to explain what you mean better?

A bit about me, I have dabbled with vb before but find it to hard to be accurate very easily in the spin. If theres a wheel with late betting it is not a problem because rotor errors are small and being right about the ball rotation is easier.

Will your approach better deal with these problems? Thanks again.
 

cerebral

Member
Allow me to chime in here. You mentioned Laurence & Pierre. Laurence is a pioneer and one of the greats. As I recall the summary of his books come down to an acoustic method to pinpoint the key revolution. It isn't possible on most wheels even in a quiet environment, let alone a noisy casino environment. He has his cross over method but it is not suitable sometimes.

There is also masters roulette, pierre, myrulet, jafco to name a few. Each of the approaches has something to offer. All are english except Pierre

Noname I think it's great you are willing to share your methods but you don't know who else is watching here. At least the great thing about VB is the methods arent necessarily the big secret because VB is a skill to learn, not just a technique or system. Maybe I can offer some advice.

Can you better explain what part of the spin you are using metronome for?
 

NoName

Member
Yes there is some information some one can buy for money and some that been sharing among the AP Community.
I want to mention that this method above is my own creation or solution.

There exist three known methods which only use reference numbers patterns or sequense number strategy to key the ball speed and rotor speed without device.
They all have there good and less good solutions for the way they estimate.

Out of this i come to my own conclusion with a combination where you can choose to use no device and with device like Thumper/Metronome.
But as every playing model has to have valid conclusions and not just assumptions.
So even if some of us has a great deal of knowledge about physics and visual ballistics so do we need to test and simulate a solution before real play and tracking and charting.
The easy way is to have your own wheel ( i have ) but is collecting dust at the moment as i not had time to repear the ball track on the wheel.
That leave us to use video spins and i have Bob Gordons Wheel and Cammegh Classic Wheel.
So there is work to be done.

How to use metronome with the method above.
Well the main idea is we would measuring the ball speed and rotor speed without device.
But is the timmings would be erratic we could use same solution with Thumper/Metronome - that is the reason why i mention it.

Summary:
We Watch the ball pass our reference deflector and at the beginning of spin we take dealers release number.
So assume we have release number 24 and now we rotor to make one full rotation so we again can read our reference number 24 below our reference deflector.
During that time the ball will make some rounds/laps passing our reference deflector, for example four times.
And at the fourth round/lap the reference number with rotor movment does not have to be in postion below our reference deflctor, it might have pass our reference deflector.
Then you Watch for when ball is over your reference number 24 and notice how many pocket from your reference deflector this happens, maybe it is six pockets.
Then you have a deceleration pattern or gaps with pockets that indentify the lenght rotor movment travell and how fast and how much ball travel.
They create measuring Points as amount of laps/rounds passing your reference deflector and how much rotor move and where they meet after does parameters are complete and you get a third parameter, gaps with pockets.
So assume the pattern look like this 24, 4, 6, reference number, lap/round number, gap pocket distance.
Next time you encounter Another release number, for example 34, 4, 6 you have the same conditions and charistics as the previos spin and your expectation and assumptions is that the ball speed and rotor speed is same.
So it does not matter that they are difference release numbers or reference numbers as distance or offset between A and B is same or similiar, Visual read and outcome and the distance between them.

Now you can do the same with thumper/metronome where for example rounds/laps and gap in pockets count as amount of vibrations.
So assume reference number is 34 and ball make 4 laps and a gap with six pockets, then that would be reference number 34 and 36 vibrations.
So next time you ger a release number and 36 vibrations the ball speed and rotor speed is same as the previos spin.
The pattern would look like this 34, 36

What happens is that you fixating the ball speed and rotor speed into a static state with same behavior as previos spins when the number sequense or reference points match.
And then you expectaion is to having the same spin with same charastics.
Ball and rotor speed travel the same lenght during measurment.
And Visual read (A) to outcome (B) will create the distance where bias will emerge or that the ball will end up in the same sector/area.

Let me put some more light on this method.
Assume you take a dealers release number 1 and wait two round/laps and again take dealers crossover number 2 and again wait two laps and again take dealers crossover number 3.
Then you measuring four ball round/laps and rotor movment with great length.
Now if you make a list each time the Wheel spin and get 10 patterns to repeat with the number comination 123.
You will have 10 spins with same rotor position same ball speed same rotor speed.

Timmings with metronome, you can have 0.25 millisecounds accuracy.
You can Count the silent gap between vibrations or you can Count the vibration it self if you set the metronme/thumper at 0,5 sec.
Reason is because you have to match vibration or silent gap with observation moment and 0.25 creates small errors and give entering point so match obeservation skills with metronome/thumper.
If 0.5 is to fast for you skills you can use 0.7 or 0.8 but then your marginal for error get larger.

Cheers
 

cyph

Trusted Member
On the right wheel and in the right conditions, vb can get a huge edge. It is best to avoid using a rotor for timings. Definitely good idea to use metronome. You can install it on any phone and there's no casino that would argue you used it. There are no cables and its a very passive device. I think you are on the right path.

This is the kind of thing you could use even where roulette computers are illegal because a criminal case could not possible be built on the fact you had metronome installed on your phone.
 

NoName

Member
1) I search for metronome for my phone, but could not find any good metronome with working conditions.
What you want is a silent metronome that allow you to turn of the sound and only get vibration.
Have not see any free metronome with that function.

This would be very good solution and free or buy.

Searching google play for my Samsung Note 3 phone - Android ...

2) I buy soundbrenner that is a metronome watch that musical pepole use.
100 EUR and you can get it to use silent vibrations, but its settings and working options are instable and fuzzy.
So i would not recommend it.
Also feel it sound to much from vibration duration.

qs5zyx.png


3) Also Yamaha metronome watch, dont remember the price.
It also working with silent vibrations, but stop vibrating after certain time to save battery, so you need to start it again.
Also feel it sound to much from vibration duration.

10ygcj8.jpg


4) Another option would be a Mac Watch - search and could see they have metronome to install.
Expensive solution and i don't know if the vibration duration sound much or if its truly silent.
 
NoName said:
Then with 0.25 millisecounds in accarucy or less i will notice different angles/gaps.
Not sure what you mean with that, but 0.25 miliseconds you even not imagine how small gap of time is.
There are no man in the world which can operate with such small time.. Most what man can notice is say in 1 sec ball diference in about 1 pocket , but even that is not so easy.

So 1000/37=27 ms - that is maybe smallest time, which player can recognise.

You talk about 100 times less.....Simply not serious.

In theese devices which photo you posted vibrattion have durattion of about 80 ms or even 100ms much time passed from time when i used them... so again not space for any 0.25 ms.
NoName said:
There is also masters roulette, pierre, myrulet, jafco to name a few. Each of the approaches has something to offer. All are english except Pierre
Masters roulette not play, Pierre Basiux died almoust half year before, jafco also not play. As i know abith play Myrulet, but he play with computer.
If you use methronome , then is better to use some computer variant, they can give much more and more exact informattion....
 

NoName

Member
Yes you correct that 0.25 ms has nothing to do with angles and gaps during estimation, that would be 0.5 sec settings. Wrong writing.

This is how i mean at the entering view where you start to observe.

First we take a dealer release number below reference deflector when ball is over it.
Then our Thumper or Metronome vibrate with 0.5 secound settings.

So if the ball is over reference deflector when i take dealers release number at the moment the thumper/metronome is silent with no vibration, then i use the silent gaps between vibrations as my Count - which would also be 0.5 sec.
Then the timming is the same with 0.5 sec between the silent gap between vibrations as if i would use vibration as it self vibrating at 0.5 sec.

This way i can get a silent gap or a vibration with 0.25 ms accuraccy when observing ball at the right moment over the reference deflector when reading reference number or dealers release number.
That is important as thumper/metronome is static, so we can get release number to match with thumper/metronome each time i take release number if we only would use the vibration it self as vibe, but using both silent gap between and the vibration between as 0.5 sec settings the time intervall moment gets to be so short that you can encounter any relase number to match when ball is over reference deflector.
 
NoName said:
Then the timming is the same with 0.5 sec between the silent gap between vibrations as if i would use vibration as it self vibrating at 0.5 sec.

This way i can get a silent gap or a vibration with 0.25 ms accuraccy when observing ball at the right moment over the reference deflector when reading reference number or dealers release number.
You again about the same.
Write sound recording of your vibrattions, then look how acurate you can find start or end of vibrattion on grafical chart with huge increasing chart and you will see how far you are even on chart from theese 0.25 ms.

In practice you will have jumping in detecting something in all durattion of individual vibrattion so in about 80 ms. With long trainings you will come maybe till 25 ms, but also not with vibrattions with gaps 500 ms.

If your vibrattions goes such that every next start is 500 ms after previous - all goes about this way vibrattion 100 ms -400ms silent -vibrattion100 ms -400ms silent and so on . On such big density of vibrattions is very hard to notice something.
I even can say that theese methronoms give very not sharp vibrattions - they are simply made not for that aim for which you want to use and because of that they have very low efectivness....
NoName said:
That is important as thumper/metronome is static, so we can get release number to match with thumper/metronome each time i take release number if we only would use the vibration it self as vibe, but using both silent gap between and the vibration between as 0.5 sec settings the time intervall moment gets to be so short that you can encounter any relase number to match when ball is over reference deflector.
Looks that practically you never used what you write.....because if you will use - you automaticly will find that possible to do something other, with biger efectivness...
 

NoName

Member
Cant copy my own material as its my Creation and i don't care if you like or not.
If no one want discussion with what i mention above, then no need to reply.

You know the solution and why i wrote suggestion as you mention it in the past when i show you less advance method based upon similiar principals - then you say there is such solution with thumper/metronome.

But i don't blaim if you don't want to disusse or mention in public.
You say there is such solution with thumper/metronome when i mention similiar method less advance - my opition.

Let me make with frech mind so you remember our discussion with out mention details.
You observe release number and amount of laps and then if there is a match with same number with same round/laps you would have estimate same ball/rotor speed.

That method is not mine and i would not talk shit about it as i find it intressting even if you say is no working method.
But exist as solution with thumper/metronome.

So no help from you that is one succésfull player within the AP Community.
And others like you not intressted as you only use roulette computer solutions.

Cheers
 
Not understand what you want to say , but i always will fight against such writings which can do damage for starters and not only for them.
If you not understand that your writing about 0.25 ms acuracy is total shit - that is your problems. When you write about methronomes , but you never used them in reality - that is also shit. Not write such things as methods when you are not sure if they work or not if you not want look childish in roulette.

Firstly, try to use methods which you offer himself and only if you will see them practical suggest for using to others.
In internet are too much who can only talk in forums, but nothing can do practically.... not be one of them.
 

NoName

Member
Don't understand what you talking about.

No need to worry about beginners, they can PM me and see for them self if method i share is nonsense.
Same as you say that X from Germany, AP are shit as i base my method on same principal but better version - my opinion.
Same saying other AP unknown are shit writing about wheel mapping method and i belive my method is better version - my opinion.

You not only say i am shit you say all other AP with the basic principal based upon this method is shit.
Does who develop method on same principals.

I will not waste my time in real casino with real charting and tracking with this method as it is assumptions of improvment of development based upon other AP material.
I test thumper/metronome with video spins and simulate to see fact from fiction.
If working then ok if not then skip.

So need to worry about beginners with your nonsense, as they should also test with video spins to confirm or skip method.
You can come with details and argue with validation to destroy method based upon physics facts.

But no you don't you just waste you time with shit talking.
Why not explain why method does not work and what details and assumptions based upon physics are wrong.

I don't share complete solution to other to play - i start discussion with assumptions and development parameters.
Don't recommend any one to play or use mehtod withou validating own data.
 
NoName said:
will not waste my time in real casino with real charting and tracking with this method as it is assumptions of improvment of development based upon other AP material.
I test thumper/metronome with video spins and simulate to see fact from fiction.
If working then ok if not then skip.
Man , better go back to your progressions tests and not try here to represent roulette guru when you really not understand how to get edge.
You are very brave in internet, but remember always can be situattion when we will be face to face , then think in such situattion you will be able to show in real casino, what you write here ?

Not so hard to understand that all what you write is copy paste, but understand you what you post or not is big questtion. I had some small chance that all was only typing mistake , but now is clear that no.

If i am not right about you , and you can easy beat wheels - so i can give you chance to show that.

You want a deal ?
 

NoName

Member
I know you challange VB players with deals to prove there skills with large amount of money, competition.
And i am not intressted.

Cheers
 
Top