### Author Topic: Compensational ways to determine prediction  (Read 911 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

#### MrPerfect.

• Moderator
• Hero Member
• Posts: 1158
• Thanked: 658 times
##### Compensational ways to determine prediction
« on: July 22, 2016, 11:13:12 PM »
Some people do find older ways to determine " revolution"  kind of cucumbersome... and it really is!!!! I admit it, it's not easy without skill developed to high level. All this consept of determining revolution is very obscure indid. Whatever you used to identify moment ego, can become other revolution ( ball starts to go one more or less).
Best guy l sou doing it was John Jafco himself.
So what to do if you ,same like me and many others , do have problems with revolution identification,  especially if knee point moment is right after or during nmb signal?
In early stages of the spin ball deceleration is very  stable. It could be expressed as a " loss of distance " that ball pass during fixed time interval.
Like for example, when ball launched, we start timer let's say with 1.66 seconds time interval on our reference point( my favorite time for compensation systems on old type Haxey wheels) and when time elapses we look number wich in the moment is under the ball. Let's say it's number 10. If we qweakly restart the time at our reference point and look under the ball when time elapses , chances are we gonna see same number.
Warning:
1. Timings to be upplied are in relationship with the wheel speed. Try it on consistent dealer.
2. Watching same number under the ball means almost nothing ( only that this time in particular is OK for this rotor speed).
3. If you are to use for serious play any kind of compensation system , do not forget to ADJUST for rotor speed and posible CHANGE of conditions( ball timings).
DO NOT TAKE WARNING 3 LIGHTLY, if not, what supposed to be AP method may become gambling or WORST. Why do l say worst? Using kind of prediction system based on AP methods does disrupt odds. You will have higher then random probability to win if you correct, if something change ( conditions), you will have higher then random probability to loose due to disrupted odds balance.
OK.  Enough warnings... why compensation systems do work and why they called compensation systems? It's due to the fact that rotor moviment is nearly linear ( same amount of pokets per time interval, ball deceleration is linear as well on early stages of the spin. This " loss of distance" that the ball does can compensate for rotor moviment . Every rotor speed do have specific time interval wich is more favorable .
Example of such a system would be VB2 from " fantasy land" ( rouletteplace.com). You may find really boring explanation of it on YouTube.  Search something like " roulette VB2" and you will find it. I personally do not advise to use of this system the way it's described,  it's very unstable and presents no means to play significantly  different rotor speeds or adjust for conditions changes.
Students of my vb course will get very high degree of understanding of such systems and methods of control wich should be upplied in order to make them usable in real play.

« Last Edit: July 22, 2016, 11:49:26 PM by MrPerfect. »

The following users thanked this post: kav, december, BlueAngel

#### MrPerfect.

• Moderator
• Hero Member
• Posts: 1158
• Thanked: 658 times
##### Re: Compensational ways to determine prediction
« Reply #1 on: July 23, 2016, 12:32:27 AM »
All compensation systems do have series of problems in their aplicability ( besides my vb3.).
These problems are :
1. Need to find good time to upply.
2. Offsets may change not only because of rotor speed changes but observation delay as well ( observation of numbers in different speeds of rotor produce delay ... )
3. Need to be balanced manually or with the help of software ( this some of simplest vb3 forms do need as well).
4. Observation mistakes. Ball needs to be in direct view when upplied time elapses.
5. For higher reability do need a specialised timer with ability of metronome.
6. In most cases it's not really understandable if ball has higher or lower deceleration in present spin.
7. Need aditional points of control to be able to adjust for conditions changes.
..... It looks like such a systems is very complicated . Yes , they are if you do not know how to stabilise them and adjust for timings changes. About stabilisation l will speak to my students only, please rest of you forgive me for it.
I will give for my readers very little but powerful hint. In general, if you predict very early into the spin ( to have time to place bets before early nmb), predict one more time on other moment . My favourite moment for it is knee point.
« Last Edit: July 23, 2016, 12:35:15 AM by MrPerfect. »

The following users thanked this post: kav, december

#### BlueAngel

• I always express my opinion
• Hero Member
• Posts: 1570
• Thanked: 239 times
• Gender:
• Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
##### Re: Compensational ways to determine prediction
« Reply #2 on: July 23, 2016, 10:10:28 AM »
Quote
Best guy l sou doing it was John Jafco himself.

And the best roulette devices, "Pred7"

The following users thanked this post: MrPerfect.

#### MrPerfect.

• Moderator
• Hero Member
• Posts: 1158
• Thanked: 658 times
##### Re: Compensational ways to determine prediction
« Reply #3 on: July 23, 2016, 01:07:19 PM »
Quote
Best guy l sou doing it was John Jafco himself.

And the best roulette devices, "Pred7"
l went to see John in person. He invited me, l didn't payed for his lessons and my reason to come to speak with him was a bit other. He contacted me becouse he wanted to do simple device with metronome ability to replace need for his playing charts. I already had developed my timer and it was his primary interest to create program he needed on my device hardware ( more easy to adapt something then create from very beginning ). l had a chance to use his roulette computer and lm the first one to confirm IT DOES WORK!!! l had a chance to use ff roulette computer from rouletteplace.com. That one does not work.
What l can say about John device? John himself set it for me ( there was no time to learn how to do it). I was heavily criticised by John for my click precision. ... his computer WAS PREDICTING WELL in my hands even with my "click errors".
If l would want for myself a tool to predict situable wheels, l would buy his computer myself.
... Our project resulted in nothing but friendship. We looked things very differently, and couldn't agree on details.  I wanted something compatible with my visual method, he wanted something more complex wich require more hardware power and user compitentness. At the end we went separate directions in creating our devices. Mine is already done and it does what l wanted from it. There is a high probability that he gonna work together on creating his device as well.
I'm not sure wich of his devices l used, was it pred7 or any other, he just mentioned that it was final version.
So wich device better? Lol. If you want to learn how to use device for longer and train yourself for accurate clicking, his device is a very good option( probably VERY BEST).
If you want something that does not rely on click ability heavily and able to perform with accuracy of visual observation , my device would beat any on the market.

« Last Edit: July 23, 2016, 01:14:28 PM by MrPerfect. »

The following users thanked this post: december

#### BlueAngel

• I always express my opinion
• Hero Member
• Posts: 1570
• Thanked: 239 times
• Gender:
• Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
##### Re: Compensational ways to determine prediction
« Reply #4 on: July 23, 2016, 01:56:11 PM »
Roulette computers/devices are nothing more than an automation of a VB method/technique.

Therefore are as good as the method(s) which are representing, calculation mistakes could happen both with manual and automatic application (wrong timings, obsolete profiles...etc).

Data is a dynamic value which is changing constantly, thus if you cannot update these data values continuously you would be left behind and become runner instead of leader.

The following users thanked this post: MrPerfect.

#### MrPerfect.

• Moderator
• Hero Member
• Posts: 1158
• Thanked: 658 times
##### Re: Compensational ways to determine prediction
« Reply #5 on: July 23, 2016, 03:10:23 PM »
Roulette computers/devices are nothing more than an automation of a VB method/technique.

Therefore are as good as the method(s) which are representing, calculation mistakes could happen both with manual and automatic application (wrong timings, obsolete profiles...etc).

Data is a dynamic value which is changing constantly, thus if you cannot update these data values continuously you would be left behind and become runner instead of leader.
super good point. But even this problem of fluid data properties my rc and his do address differently.
Mine tells me timings that ball takes from moment of my prediction till drop. So l can correct offset manually ( on the paper ) or just change timing wich l use as a sample( l prefer this one).
John's rc changes moment ( kind of frame between speeds" window") where to predict.
Both ways are equally good and do represent same process.
What l like about vb, it's the fact that it's unlimited in posibilities. It's a very personal skill and can be used differently then other people doing it.
For me personally is more important to predict same ball speed, so l know timings that ball takes in different conditions ... and it's assosited with ball bahavior. I can perform studies with data collected this way , so l can use it later when similar conditions happen. Or alternatively l can find semilarities between conditions and choose manually for wich changes to adjust and wich to ignore. Sometimes no need to adjust even if timings of ball bahavior is different, sometimes need to adjust even if everything looks right.
BTW,  my device you can use with many methods. I made it method independent so it could serve for John's method as well.

« Last Edit: July 23, 2016, 03:13:35 PM by MrPerfect. »

#### MrPerfect.

• Moderator
• Hero Member
• Posts: 1158
• Thanked: 658 times
##### Re: Compensational ways to determine prediction
« Reply #6 on: July 23, 2016, 03:57:28 PM »
I desided to populate a bit how my rc works.
My rc is a very simple device. In its core there is metronome ( wich can be set to desired value) and stopwatch , plus simple timings calculator.
It does everything different then any other rc.
They say " dog is similar to its owner" , that's true for my rc as well. If owner does everything " differently" why his rc wouldn't?
To begin with, it doesn't predict anything, his user does make a prediction and inform rc about exact moment when prediction is efectuated. Rc does inform the user of timings variables and helps to adjust for rotor speed changes.
If user see some changes in timings that rc informs, it's a responcability of user to deside if he wants to update timings or adjust manually.
I belive that rc shouldn't predict at all, it has no eyes, no ears .... on the other hand, rc do better job with rotor adjustment and timings control.
So it's kind of simbiotic relationship between human and electronic in the best android traditions .
My rc can be used as user wants. If user wanna ignore metronome and look revolutions himself, no problem. Need metronome to determine revolution? You are welcome.  Wanna ignore revolutions and look ball speed instead?
Whatever makes you happy!!!! I didn't wanted to be tide by one method only, so l see no reason do do it with my rc users.
The only limitation is a fact that dealer signature program needs a device on its own. Probably, later , l will find a way to squize both programs together. ..

The following users thanked this post: december

#### MrPerfect.

• Moderator
• Hero Member
• Posts: 1158
• Thanked: 658 times
##### Re: Compensational ways to determine prediction
« Reply #7 on: July 23, 2016, 10:40:10 PM »
I made a qweak demo of simplest compensation system.