KTF

[Still]

That's absurd.  You don't use a computer to see if a wheel is tilted.  You just look and collect 50 spins worth of deflector smacks.  Pretty simple stuff.   

Wow.  That reveals alot about you.   Whether or not it's absurd, that's what they were doing.  Just a fact.  He had software that looked at the distribution around the wheel.  Why is that absurd?  What you do today does not change what they did back then.

[Steve]

The world is named dream world.

The dream world is repeaters, cold numbers, sleepers, hot numbers, progression, the trot, law of a third, and so on: the kind of approaches casino staff laugh at.

The real world is advantage play, which are methods that attack vulnerabilities of the device that determines winning numbers: the kind of approaches casinos often hire consultants to advise them about, because they are the real threat.

It's no more my opinion than the solution to a basic mathematical equation. It just is what it is.

[Steve]

Why is that absurd?

Because:

1. Dominant diamonds are caused by both ball track imperfections and tilt.

2. Without precise measurements from the ball track, you cannot realistically determine degree of tilt. And even then there is some degree of error.

3. Observing dominant diamonds is really easy. Just watch the spins. you don't need equipment for it.

Using electronic equipment to determine dominant diamonds is like using sophisticated equipment to know if it's raining. Alternatively, just look up.

[Joe]

There are other methods which are also effective, which allow you to bet BEFORE ball release.

Steve, such as? I thought the only two methods of AP were visual ballistics and bias. I've looked for dominant diamonds before, never found one. I just don't believe AP is a viable proposition any more. Like you say, this stuff concerns the casinos and so they take steps, just like they did with blackjack when card-counting was invented, but bias and VB have been around a lot longer. Sure if you want to travel the world and live out of suitcase you might do well. It's not for me, and I'm not lazy.

[Steve]

Steve, such as? I thought the only two methods of AP were visual ballistics and bias.

Besides computers, the method I prefer is "cross referencing". There are a few ways to do it. One is model the relationships between variables and spin outcomes, use permutations, and check for statistical anomalies. The problem with that is there are billions of calculations for around 300 spins. A quicker and more efficient response is narrowing down your checks for anomalies by considering the likely anomalies, considering wheel physics.

I've looked for dominant diamonds before, never found one

I've never seen a wheel without them, or at the very least a wheel where the ball doesn't at least tend to avoid falling at a specific region of the ball track. A strong dominant diamond shows itself usually within 10 or so spins. But on some wheels it can take 30+ spins to be clear.

I just don't believe AP is a viable proposition any more

Almost every wheel can be beaten one way or another. Start by looking at ball scatter. Based on scatter alone, over 70+ spins for each direction, you'll find peaks in the scatter chart in one or more area. Usually this alone will give an edge of 20% or more. All that's left is knowing rotor orientation when the ball has X revolutions to go.

Show me a wheel with completely unpredictable scatter, and no dominant diamond, and that's a difficult, if not impossible, wheel. I've never seen it. What i have seen are other considerations that make winning on a wheel impractical. Beating a wheel is not difficult. Beating a wheel in casino conditions is different, because we have other variables like frequency of spins that can make play impractical.

But so far as getting an edge, the house edge is only small. You need only slight accuracy to overcome it. It's not difficult.

[Steve]

Like you say, this stuff concerns the casinos and so they take steps, just like they did with blackjack when card-counting was invented, but bias and VB have been around a lot longer.

Blackjack is a very different game. Roulette is far more vulnerable, with lots of things that make spins predictable - even if only slightly, which is all that's needed.

Sure if you want to travel the world and live out of suitcase you might do well. It's not for me, and I'm not lazy.

Most players dont travel. Most play locally and just carefully scout, or wait for suitable conditions. Travelling requires higher stakes play, or your expenses erode your profit too much.

[Turner]

if you keep coming back too often to the same casino, eventually you'll be noticed.

The whole MO is similar to a Burglar

[The General]

I've looked for dominant diamonds before, never found one

Joe,

No you haven't.  You've never tried, probably because you didn't know how.

You should probably just stick with slots or the trot.

[The General]

Wow.  That reveals alot about you.   Whether or not it's absurd, that's what they were doing.  Just a fact.  He had software that looked at the distribution around the wheel.  Why is that absurd?  What you do today does not change what they did back then.

You're facts are muddy, confused, and or just poorly reported.  I'm sure it's not all your fault.  People often misreport what they don't understand when writing a story.

[Joe]

General, yes I have. It's easy, just record which diamond the ball strikes before leaving the track. They should each  hit the same number of times on average. In the short term of course one or two can hit more often than the others, just as a number can hit more often than others, but this wouldn't be statistically significant.

And please take a day off from being a troll.

[The General]

General, yes I have. It's easy, just record which diamond the ball strikes before leaving the track. They should each  hit the same number of times on average. In the short term of course one or two can hit more often than the others, just as a number can hit more often than others, but this wouldn't be statistically significant.

And please take a day off from being a troll.

Joe,

I'm sure your anxious to look now, but before today you were clueless.  I can spot BS a mile away.

[Joe]

I'm sure your anxious to look now, but before today you were clueless.

No, I wasn't, although I may have given you that impression. There is a lot of misinformation in the gambling world, and it suits me to present an appearance of being a newbie. I don't have a problem being seen as one because I don't have vested interests or a big ego to maintain.

I'm no expert in AP but I do know about the basic techniques. This stuff has been on the web for years, most serious roulette players know about it.

[Joe]

The whole MO is similar to a Burglar

Yes that's one thing which bothers me about AP methods, there's something shady and underhand about them.

[Steve]

The whole MO is similar to a Burglar

A burglar hides because he steals.

An AP hides because casinos hate to lose, whether fair and square or not.

Theres this bullshit notion that needing to avoid detection makes a system bad. In fact any method that consistently loses the casino is frowned upon by the casino.

The reason you wont get banned for playing crap like repeaters is because it doesnt work. Working does not mean the occasional win, which can and does happen even with random bets.

[Joe]

Besides computers, the method I prefer is "cross referencing". There are a few ways to do it. One is model the relationships between variables and spin outcomes, use permutations, and check for statistical anomalies. The problem with that is there are billions of calculations for around 300 spins. A quicker and more efficient response is narrowing down your checks for anomalies by considering the likely anomalies, considering wheel physics.

This kind of thing is what interests me more than anything else. I'm surprised that AI and machine learning techniques haven't been explored more on this forum because they offer a lot in the way of heuristics. I don't believe simple systems could ever work.