Statistics and physics

[kingmaq]

Hi Geeks,

everyone know that physics can defeat roulette, although using a computer to predict the outcome isnt always possible.
but what if we employ a workaround which should provide us same result?

lets say that we collect so much data/ spins from one wheel and and then we try to use some analytical functions to predict the next outcome... example what is the next number after 12 and 24 have been spun ...

will something work?

[Steve]

 You are on the right track. Put more variables into the equation.

[kingmaq]

Alright, so what are these more variables ?
Speed of the wheel and ball ?

I can't detect them without a computer !
So what now ?

Does that mean statistics itself is a losing approach here ?

[ego]

 Well there is methods where you can track and charting a wheel weakness without using any kind of device and i created such a method.

Assume you can narrow down the ball speed and the rotor speed at the same time using indication numbers on the wheel and look at the gap distance pockets do after certain amount of movement with the help of the vertical deflectors - so when ball is over a certain deflector you have a certain number below it ...

With such method you are not as acc as VB but still much better then a simple wheel signature - so is some kind of hybrid where you use both parameters and they key element is in the bias where you find the wheels weak spot or sweet speed.

For each ball spin and rotor combination there is a pattern and some patterns will become better then others predicting the exact outcome - is  working like you have distance from A to B. Here you divide the wheel into three large sectors and look at wish one the strongest patterns or hit ratio emerge from. Let me try to explain that again - you get a pattern wish key a specific ball and rotor speed combination and also a reference number - from that reference number that is different for each spin/rotor combination patterns will the the key for how the sector will be divided for each sequence - so the distance remain the same but the sectors and numbers are different each time.

Other names for this metods that are less advance and acc is wheel mapping ...
You need to solve the dominant drop zone and adapt as it change - then change reference deflector ...

Cheers

[kingmaq]

Interesting!

Please be kind to correct me, do you consider the metal reflector as a reference for ever spin combination ( ball and rotor speed )?

The main issue is sometimes the ball falls (loses its gravity) without hitting any metal deflector, so what reference then do you consider ?

I have another approach which can be useful, if one can find a dealer who throws the ball with consistent speed, for that short time where the rotor speed is stable (for the sake of roulette we do consider it stable !!!)  considering these conditions and with a clever formula we can turn over the game.

If you want we can get in touch privately.

Cheers

[Steve]

Good post ego. Close to my cross reference system. But it needs a dynamic model with permutations to fill in the data gaps, and adapt to change. Otherwise you keep flipping between strong positive edge to strong negative edge. The double edge sword.

[Steve]

Kingmaq, i doubt anyone will give you the complete secrets. There are actually a few valid ways to win, but likely still undiscovered ways.

I suggest take the basics and build from there. The system must adapt to your casino conditions. A good start is visual ballistics, but there's still lots you can do before ball release.

Overall take the major variables and model the correlation. That's basically what all professional systems do. Just some are more thorough.

[Steve]

 If anyone wants the hg, here's the closest i know (besides roulette computers) Its how i developed my system...

Use software that tests any amount of data, with whatever variables you can conceive of, and check for statistical anomalies. Check enough data and you will see. Then design a model to predict spin outcomes based on the anomalies.

That's it. The closest i know of to the hg. At the very least it improves player edge on 100% of wheels. However, often the data needed and other factors make wheels unplayable. All things considered you can beat around 30% of wheels, but around 20% have more worthwhile edge. Not the hg, but you don't need to beat every wheel every day.

[kingmaq]

Steve, thx for your valued  thoughts.
I am a software engineer and have good experience in handling big data and data modelling.

I have also my own system which works fine,  it achieves with pre-defined dealers a decent success rate, the only thing that for the rest of dealers especially those who spin the ball with multiple speed the success rate drops down sometimes to circa 4 consecutive losses.

Bye

[Steve]

4 consecutive losses is nothing. You can't think in such short term.

[ego]

Good post ego. Close to my cross reference system. But it needs a dynamic model with permutations to fill in the data gaps, and adapt to change. Otherwise you keep flipping between strong positive edge to strong negative edge. The double edge sword.

Steve how come i never find a page where you are teaching or selling visual ballistic methods - i would like to learn more about your cross reference system among other things - the only thing i find when browsing the web is roulette computers ...

Cheers

[Steve]

Steve how come i never find a page where you are teaching or selling visual ballistic methods - i would like to learn more about your cross reference system among other things - the only thing i find when browsing the web is roulette computers ...

Cheers

my site has a free basic vb technique / roulettephysics.com , but i use it more as a proof of concept. I dont particularly like vb because computers do a much better job. Unless it isnt made well, in which case good vb is more versatile. it doesnt make sense for me to use vb. if im goung to bet after ball release then computers are an easy choice,

[kingmaq]

my site has a free basic vb technique / roulettephysics.com , but i use it more as a proof of concept. I dont particularly like vb because computers do a much better job. Unless it isnt made well, in which case good vb is more versatile. it doesnt make sense for me to use vb. if im goung to bet after ball release then computers are an easy choice,

Steve, you are a computer pro then.
How is it going with you ? Do you play progressions ? How many numbers do you bet on ?

[kingmaq]

Well there is methods where you can track and charting a wheel weakness without using any kind of device and i created such a method.

Assume you can narrow down the ball speed and the rotor speed at the same time using indication numbers on the wheel and look at the gap distance pockets do after certain amount of movement with the help of the vertical deflectors - so when ball is over a certain deflector you have a certain number below it ...

With such method you are not as acc as VB but still much better then a simple wheel signature - so is some kind of hybrid where you use both parameters and they key element is in the bias where you find the wheels weak spot or sweet speed.

For each ball spin and rotor combination there is a pattern and some patterns will become better then others predicting the exact outcome - is  working like you have distance from A to B. Here you divide the wheel into three large sectors and look at wish one the strongest patterns or hit ratio emerge from. Let me try to explain that again - you get a pattern wish key a specific ball and rotor speed combination and also a reference number - from that reference number that is different for each spin/rotor combination patterns will the the key for how the sector will be divided for each sequence - so the distance remain the same but the sectors and numbers are different each time.

Other names for this metods that are less advance and acc is wheel mapping ...
You need to solve the dominant drop zone and adapt as it change - then change reference deflector ...

Cheers

[cht]

Hi Geeks,

everyone know that physics can defeat roulette, although using a computer to predict the outcome isnt always possible.
but what if we employ a workaround which should provide us same result?

lets say that we collect so much data/ spins from one wheel and and then we try to use some analytical functions to predict the next outcome... example what is the next number after 12 and 24 have been spun ...

will something work?

From the little time I worked with VB or whatever you call this style of play, it actually does not involve complex calculations or exhaustive data mining.

IMHO, and I remind you that's speaking from 2days of practical experience, what is required for it to work the 1. choice of wheel and 2. the right conditionS must prevail.

I can't comment about claims that ALL wheels can be beaten but up to now I can't see that possible with the shallow knowledge I have now.

Once you have both of that bolded stuff above, then the rest is not difficult. I don't bring along my computer phone, it's not necessary instead I make notes with pen and paper supplied by the casino. It's all about what you SEE with your eyes.

Beat the easy beatable wheels not try to beat ALL wheels. We are not academics trying to proof some theory but shrewd businessman out to make good money.

There're not many easy beatable wheels at the casino, I'm now working on 3wheels from 100+ wheels available with great results.

Today after done the testing I was confident enough to place bets and from <30spins, played 8spins 1fail 7correct done under 30-35mins. My hands were trembling, my heart was beating hard and fast - I don't want it to fail. Yay it did not fail! although the first bet loss that increased the pressure.

Just to share my experience, discussing VB from theorectical point is one thing doing for real with bets on, the practical side gave me a very strange feeling. I'm sure other VBers feel the same.