Want to see if anyone uses this?
can it be used with roulette evolution air ball types of roulette?
I see that you input the past 50 spins then it tells you what to bet on that particular wheel?
Steve should be of help, he promotes the site. I cannot afford 2,500 but im looking into it
Thanks
from site:
"The system works the same on automated wheels where the ball is automatically released, and at live online casinos where a real wheel is used. There are approximately 20 suitable online casinos.
Want More Proof? Click Here For The Full List"
does anyone use JAA??
register for a free course there if you didn't yet. some info he gives for free. You will get it in your email
cool thanks
Players are bound to non disclosure agreements so none are likely to respond. Although there are many members here who have access, but almost all are not active posters here anymore.
I can answer any questions you like but it's best in private. Most members don't want to hear about anything for sale, my forum or not. Can still answer any question here if you prefer. I've always welcomed public scrutiny. Theres nothing to hide.
ok steve
i figured that much since the forum over there is private
any other posts on topic ill send in PM to u
RouletteGhost
The core about physics is to find wheels with bias/tilt.
It is the core to get advantage.
Today it does not exist 1 pin games - that means that only one deflector hit 7 times out of 10.
It is more complex today and your expectation at best would be a 2 pin game.
Most of times you will face 3 pin games.
All this we can explain on open forum - even at this topic.
Because i have every existing visual ballistic method you can buy for money and i don't want you to make the same misstakes i did.
This means i don't think it is ok to take 400 Euro to tell some one how to estimate the ball and how degree of tilt is working.
And does who selling this can not copyright there material as i am free to discuss my knowledge where ever i like with my own words.
Mastersroulette is one site that is selling a visual ballistic method for around 400 Euro.
The bad thing about the method is the way how they teach how to estimate ball deceleration - it exist much better methods and are posted at open forums.
The good thing is the way they describe using multi drop zone - playing games where you have 2 or 3 dominant deflectors hitting.
They describe the methodology very clear and good.
Same with Jafco that offer hes complete package for around 400 Euro but does not show any good way to estimate the ball speed.
That is the bad part
The good part is that Jafco also have a solution for games using more then 1 pin game - he describe a method for multi drop zone - games where you have 2 or 3 deflectors hitting.
But is not same methodology as Mastersroulette.
This is the difference.
Mastersroulette and Pierre Basieux mention same method that is based upon scatter overlaps where ball jumps donate towards same high probability area.
Jafco method is about rotor positions that create same possibilitys to strike same area - is more complex then what i mention here.
So you have two method that you can buy online for around 400 Euro - no one of the methods show a good way to estimate the ball.
But explain how to beat 2 and 3 pin games.
That is the core.
Laurance Scott volume 2 is a great buy as it give you a simulation software where you can simulate your games and see how your edge manifest.
He also mention multi drop game at page 9 - but not with so much detail as the other two i mention above.
Ask questions and i will help you to understand physics and you don't need to visit any secret forum.
Ego, do you really think I couldnt possibly have something a lot better than vb? vb is mostly a waste of time. I have all the material you mentioned and more. For vb to do what it needs on modern wheels, it gets unreasonably difficult and realistically only roulette computers can do that. Most computers dont though, they are just digital vb. None of the systems you mentioned do it either.
And I dont mean the traditional algorithm like explained in laurences book. Even laurence said that algorithm, used by 90% of computers, isnt good enough today. He agreed that my approach is more appropriate when we discussed each of our computers
Traditional vb considers the variables to be static. And when one thing changes, everything else changes and you end avoiding winning sectors instead of hitting them. Some vb tries to keep up but is always a step behind. Modern wheels are much more sensitive to variations, so the adaptations must be more precise.
My jaa system, the uber and hybrid computers all use a dynamic model, so when one thing changes, the predictive algorithms adjust. Ive never known any computer or other system to do the same thing. My basic and lite computers use the traditional algorithms.
With the exception of the basic and lite computers, Not even the players know how it works because they dont have the source codes. Players beat '1 pin' with comparable edge as 2 or 3 pin. Scatter is most important, not dominant diamonds. For example, if the hybrid computer had a 120% edge on a 1 pin wheel, you could expect about an 80% edge on a 3 pin wheel, unless you targeted to 1 diamond then it could still get 120%. You cannot target diamonds with the traditional algorithm, its impossible unless you get predictions in last revolution.
These kind of results above are typical. With jaa, the difference will be from 15% to about 8%.
Unless the method is dynamic, you cant achieve these results unless you test only a few spins, before significant changes, but then the data is too limited for accurate statistical relevance. I understand you know more than average players but theres a lot more you dont know.
The wheels patterns and parameters are a moving target. The best way to explain jaa is it is a dynamic model to adjust predictions when variables change. Or consideration of variables amd other variables, and how they affect each other. Earlier versions looked at 9 types of patterns, but now they are more integrated into fewer algorithms as the relationship between each is better modelled.
Hey Steve. Have a question. I'm from Ireland and most of our casinos use automated roulette where there is no dealer. The ball spins itself but the wheel and dynamics are real. Can these wheels be exploited. Once the ball starts spinning no more bets are allowed so that would rule out your computers. Any advice please sick of losing on roulette. Cheers.
You cant use computers on such a wheel. And for using systems, you need to assess whether or not the wheel is applying countermeasures like different balls. You can still beat many of them, but they are a bit trickier. But then again, some models are significantly easier to beat than live dealer wheels.
I have a question. Nowhere is the basis of the JAA system explained. There is one diagram in the FAQ which looks at low points in the rotor when the wheel may be tilted and thus likely settling zones for balls.
The only explanation given for the system is send in spins ac and cw with ball come off and resting positions and the "software" will tell you if the wheel is viable to play. It will then tell you what numbers to bet.
As the prediction is made before ball release it must be trying to exploit some kind of bias in the rotor or maybe rotor and stator combined. However modern rotors are very accurately made. The one I have is a solid machined block of aluminium made to very fine tolerances. It's a work of art.
I can see nothing is perfect, but I doubt imperfections could give an edge of more than fractions of 1%. Not enough to overcome the house edge of several %.
So how does the JAA system exploit the wheels and if it is based on a physical bias, how is it better than collecting data as to what numbers occur most on different direction spins and betting on those.
It has nothing to do with bias, although one version still uses it if present. It is an analysis method rather than a system. It considers known variables and data about past spins, and uses cross referencing to build a predictive model for new spins as variables and conditions change.
The analysis determines if statistical anomalies are relevant for an edge. But as conditions change, a static model would make it look like patterns changed when they havent. But the model is dynamic so models and predicts with changes.
You cant beat all wheels of course. Conditions need to be right. The closest typical technique is dealer signature but its a few steps past that.
Thats about all im willing to disclose.
In about 98% of cases, bias is not a consideration. We would only bother if there were signs from observation. Wheel defects are not required.
Although, if statistical anomaly is present, that would surely be reflected in some numbers winning more frequently than others for various spin directions. A fact which could be exploited simply by examining the data and seeing how many SDs outside expected certain results were for the available number of spins. And we could make that dynamic by continuing to collect data as we played.
Although I can see the advantage of having that done for you, as it would be a long grind manually. You'd still have to collect the data either way though.
Also, is it possible to explain what you mean by cross referencing.
If for example 15 wins more than an expected number of times outside cetain limits then that may be an example of bias. But if 15 wins a normal number of times, but is preceded by a win of 24 an abnormal number of times for a certain spin direction, then that may be an example of something else.
Quote from: Firefox on Jan 30, 06:11 PM 2019Although, if statistical anomaly is present, that would surely be reflected in some numbers winning more frequently than others for various spin directions.
No that would be bias. But we still segregate directions, which isn't essential, but combining directions can nullify patterns/accuracy.
Quote from: Firefox on Jan 30, 06:11 PM 2019SDs outside expected certain results were for the available number of spins. And we could make that dynamic by continuing to collect data as we played.
We could use SD but we don't. We use something similar. Yes data is continually collected. There's a phone version that does that covertly at the table, and a web version where data is taken outside the casino, entered into the software, then betting charts taken back in.
Quote from: Firefox on Jan 30, 06:11 PM 2019Although I can see the advantage of having that done for you, as it would be a long grind manually. You'd still have to collect the data either way though.
Most players don't have the patience or stamina for data collection. If the wheel is suitable, an edge usually starts very early and peaks at about 300 spins per direction. But still it isnt smart to start betting until you have 50+ spins at least.
Conditions are optimal only with particular wheels and conditions. You cant beat every wheel in all conditions. And like with other AP, if you make mistakes you can get a negative expectation stronger than the HE (double-edge sword).
Quote from: Firefox on Jan 30, 06:30 PM 2019Also, is it possible to explain what you mean by cross referencing.
It basically means comparing dynamic variables to others, and modelling the relationships. Some data that doesn't fit the model is discarded, because it doesn't represent typical data. It is applied in various areas of science to predict the outcome when variables change. It is modelling cause and effect. I dont want to give specific examples of how it is applied in roulette. It is just one way of beating roulette, but not the most direct.
Thanks for the explanations.
QuoteAs the prediction is made before ball release it must be trying to exploit some kind of bias in the rotor or maybe rotor and stator combined. However modern rotors are very accurately made. The one I have is a solid machined block of aluminium made to very fine tolerances. It's a work of art.
JAA isn't really related to bias, but you touched on the subject above. Many wheels aren't well made. Where they run into problems is with the assembly of the components. For example the pocket compartment, pocket inserts, the fret ring and in some cases when frets are individually seated. The machining tolerance maybe high, but the assembly is sometimes piss poor. Something that I've exploited countless times are pocket compartments that aren't evenly seated, that rise and fall and that aren't always in full contact with the rotor floor. Sometimes it creates a loose energy absorbing section or number on the wheel. Loose inserts are golden as well. Casinos can be responsible for the loose lobes on the wheel when they attempt to rotate pocket compartments and do a poor job of resetting the component.
In order to really grasp the causes of bias and the weakness of various wheel designs you need to take them apart and research them.
Almost every used wheel I've inspected has loose plastic pocket inserts. These are wheels that were in this condition in the casino, and they had obviously been like that for some time before being replaced. You can hear when the ball hits the plastic there's a pop instead of ping sound.
Of course wheels get replaced when they're "totally screwed", but they are still on the floor "screwed" for some time before they're "totally screwed". The wheel I have is used but was nearly new when I got it. The only reason I got it in good condition was because of outside scratches.
Anyone who says biased wheels dont exist really doesnt have any idea. But still bias is not my preferred method.
I've always been into both VB and Bias.
With bias, I don't have to be the player and can remain discrete.
With VB, I have to be the player.
Quote from: The General on Jan 30, 11:38 PM 2019
In order to really grasp the causes of bias and the weakness of various wheel designs you need to take them apart and research them.
On my wheel there are no pocket floors or frets. It can't be taken apart. Everything is machined out of solid aluminium. Very little to go wrong. The numbers ring I think can be rotated if you take the turret off and have the right tool. I'll post some photos sometime.
I can see a little more about JAA now when only a minimum of 50 spins are needed to assess, that wouldn't be enough to assess on the basis of bias (I believe 300 to 500 are preferred).
But if software makes a prediction, it has to be either on the grounds of frequency or association with some anomaly. For example 15 comes up most, or if it doesn't come up most it comes up more after some numbers than others eg 24.
Quote from: Firefox on Jan 31, 01:52 AM 2019Everything is machined out of solid aluminium. Very little to go wrong.
Yes that's a much better design.
Quote from: Firefox on Jan 31, 01:52 AM 2019minimum of 50 spins are needed to assess, that wouldn't be enough to assess on the basis of bias (I believe 300 to 500 are preferred).
Correct its not enough to assess bias. But we dont bother with bias. Frequency of numbers is not a consideration unless the player has enough data for bias, and wants to look at that too.
In fact mine is similar to the one below, but I will post some photos and videos of mine when I get the time.
It's a very low maintenance design and quite random. Still beatable if you know what to look for. A vast improvement for the casino from the wheels of old though.
I got mine from ebay when a casino folded. Cost about £900. I think new they were about £7000 though that was hearsay. Probably worth £1500 or more at today's 2nd hand prices. It will spin for 25+mins with a good push so rotor slow down during a spin is negligable.
Most players don't have the patience or stamina for data collection. If the wheel is suitable, an edge usually starts very early and peaks at about 300 spins per direction. But still it isnt smart to start betting until you have 50+ spins at least.-Steve H
I do not see how it is feasable to collect data
for wheel bias with the close management scrutiny.
Quote from: Proofreaders2000 on Jan 31, 02:45 AM 2019
I do not see how it is feasable to collect data
for wheel bias with the close management scrutiny.
It's not too hard. Just act like a normal player. I think Barnhart recommends a minimum of about 300 spins in his book Beating the Wheel.
You can mark off with little dots on the wheel card the casino supply to system players. Later transfer data to book or spreadsheet. If they have a marquee board it's even easier, you can move around between tables. Make random minimum bets on red or black every now and again it hardly costs anything. You can do it over two or three evenings.
Unfortunately, most of the ones I have done show little bias, or 1% or less. And if they move the numbers ring, and you can't spot it then back to square one.
We have a limited choice of casinos in the UK and they tend to be well maintained with modern wheels.
Data collection isnt a problem. It just takes time, and you do it at optimal times of day.
Beating most wheels one way or another isnt a problem either.
The biggest problem by far is avoiding detection during the profitable period. Its not difficult even for larger amounts, but its not something you can do at the same casino, day after day.
Steve
You make us laugh at you!
The guys here are struggling to beat the game, so far without success !
And you say that beating the game one way or the other!
I don’t speak about myself but I think many members find this a show off.
Anyway, let’s be positive, I was thinking of something that can make a boom ! And here it’s, has anybody thought or developed a a software or a system that consists of many subsystems, the subsystems evaluates many many systems in the background and the system on the top detects how the each sub system is performing and take relevant action by attacking the game .
Quote from: Roulettebeater on Jan 31, 03:22 AM 2019The guys here are struggling to beat the game, so far without success !
Imagine trying to run on water. Then someone whispers to you, "hey, that wont work. Youll just sink. Try on land".
You dont listen, then try something you think is different: hopping. The result is the same.
The person gradually speaks louder, and you just try a different version, with the same result. Maybe try walking backwards on water.
Eventually the person trying to help becomes hated. Maybe even accused of a hidden agenda. Thats the position experienced members are in.
Once you understand what does and doesnt work, and why, you can try land. Its really not hard to overcome a small house edge. But you wont do it with an approach thats the same old repackaged shit.
Quote from: Roulettebeater on Jan 31, 03:22 AM 2019has anybody thought or developed a a software or a system that consists of many subsystems, the subsystems evaluates many many systems in the background and the system on the top detects how the each sub system is performing and take relevant action by attacking the game .
Sounds like an AI type approach. Thats how i found statistical anomalies in roulette, and its what i now do in stocks and crypto with a bot now.
But if you do backtesting like that, you also need to understand the cause and effect, or you'll just end up curve fitting.
Curve fitting is basically designing a system to do well on set spins. Without modeling cause and effect, the system wont do well on different spins.
Quote from: Steve on Jan 31, 03:35 AM 2019
Sounds like an AI type approach. Thats how i found statistical anomalies in roulette, and its what i now do in stocks and crypto with a bot now.
Yeah, that’s a very interesting approach, I like to call it an algorithm!
The important thing is that a very standard system lose over the long run because it works as a static system against a dynamic game, an example of this is, system that bets on red lose because blacks at some point are more than than reds, let’s extend this logic to the whole game, if you built a dynamic system with many subsystems and attack the game, for example when one sybsystem is winning in streak then you can enjoy and accumulate lots of profits
What many players should have is software that tests a theory to see if the odds of winning change. I already published free software that does part of it.
For example, see if the odds of any number change if it won last or within a timeframe. The result is clearly NO. Not only i have tested this, so have many others. And it's clear proof concepts like repeaters and turbos theories dont work. 1 in 37 for next spin. And the next. And the next etc.
Gaming mathematicians do extensive tests and know what does and doesn't work. They do miss some things, mainly because its the wheel designers domain, but the typical fallacies are well tested. It only takes a bit of googling to understand most players are trying to reinvent the broken wheel.
While im at it... i get that people like to tinker and learn for themselves. I was there once too. But later i understood by looking at the wrong thing and playing fallacies, i was the perfect little casino owner's bitch. Dumb and running in circles. And i don't like being the casino owner's bitch. Id rather be their nightmare. But the reality is any AP is just a blip in the casino's hundreds of millions in profit. Even all APs barely dint a casino's revenue. Still the revenue is significant, which is why they have game protection and countermeasures.
I get that people like to tinker and learn for themselves-Steve H
I realize there is no 'shortcut' learning to play effectively. Every aspect must be
evaluated (which takes time) to know the difference bt the good-and bad information.
Quote from: Proofreaders2000 on Jan 31, 04:24 AM 2019I realize there is no 'shortcut' learning to play effectively.
There is a huge shortcut: read and learn what others have found. Like school, in a few years you learn what generations have learned. Or like reading a book, you can have the knowledge from another life.
Some things have to be learned for yourself. Other things can easily be learned from basic reading and understanding, like basic probability. So theres no excuse for not progressing quickly.
I think it took me about 5 years to get my head out my ass. That was from stubbornness. Once i got over that, and put truth before anything, i progressed very quickly - as would any reasonably intelligent person who did the same.
I think it took me about 5 years to get my head out my ass.-Steve H
Kudos to being honest.
There is also the possibility that gambling in general is
not for everyone. There is no shame in walking away.
I dont see it as "gambling". I never did.
For me it started as a way to fund energy research and earn a living. Now it is part hobby, part long time obsession, part business.
It is definitely not for everyone. Most people dont have the right mindset.
If the conditions are right, its one of the easiest ways to make money. But if conditions are hard, best to just not play. Overall there are much better ways of making money. Many different ways but its not just about the amount you earn. Once you own your primary residence, and have multiple secure income streams what esle can you need? But you cant do that easily with a 9-5 job. You can achieve the financial freedom many ways without needing the hg. If you want Lamborghinis etc then thats a different road. Be more modest. Its a car. Youll get over it.
In the end you find youre chasing time to do what you want, not money. The only reason you need money is because of your own decisions.
Quote from: Steve on Jan 31, 03:33 AM 2019
Imagine trying to run on water. Then someone whispers to you, "hey, that wont work. Youll just sink. Try on land".
You dont listen, then try something you think is different: hopping. The result is the same.
That's exactly it. People are trying to beat the game with maths. Eg Different staking systems. Or a misapplication of maths. Waiting a few spins for something to happen and thinking this will influence the next few spins in some way.
The only way you can beat the game is using physics.
Quote from: Firefox on Jan 31, 09:48 AM 2019
That's exactly it. People are trying to beat the game with maths. Eg Different staking systems. Or a misapplication of maths. Waiting a few spins for something to happen and thinking this will influence the next few spins in some way.
The only way you can beat the game is using physics.
Mr Firefox
Consider that the majority of players have to bet before ball release, how the hell are you going to use physics then ?
Quote from: Firefox on Jan 31, 01:52 AM 2019
On my wheel there are no pocket floors or frets. It can't be taken apart. Everything is machined out of solid aluminium. Very little to go wrong. The numbers ring I think can be rotated if you take the turret off and have the right tool. I'll post some photos sometime.
You need to take the rotor out of the bowl. Flip it upside down and you'll find the security plate. There will likely be 37 bolts holding the pocket compartment in the rotor. When these pocket compartments are rotated, the bolts aren't always evenly tightened. This will cause some parts of the compartment to rise and fall and lose direct contact with the floor of the rotor. Sometimes these pocket compartments will breathe as well.
On your wheel you should experiment with loosening some of bolts on a semicircle of the rotor and measure the effects. As I recall the metal thickness of the Cammegh is thicker than the Huxley Starburst ring and does a decent job of keeping the ball bounce consistent even if there's a loose lobe. (Coefficient of restitution.) A loose area of the wheel should remove some energy from the bouncing ball. Taking the wheels apart and putting them back together is very easy.
Also measure the smoothness of the number tape by placing your finger nail on the number plaques as the wheel as the wheel spins.
Many thanks for your insights. I have had the rotor out and the turret off. The construction may be different to what you describe though.
I think the best thing is if I disassemble it and post some photos in another thread. I have collected data on these types of wheels in real casinos, but hats off to Cammegh, the machining seems to be very precise. As I said, it will spin for nearly half an hour on its own, and that would not happen if there was variation causing imbalance and friction.
What I was hoping for was slight imbalance in some pocket sizes but say a fraction of a % like 0.7. So this means The house has just 2% edge on that pocket. But combined with VB prediction, If I have a choice, I'd bet preferred numbers.
I'll send you some photos.
The spinning / balance has little relevance with bias though. Saying a wheel is balanced is kind of a jargon like term. Most bias has nothing to do with the balancing and has more to do with assemble defects.
Quote from: Roulettebeater on Jan 31, 10:59 AM 2019
Mr Firefox
Consider that the majority of players have to bet before ball release, how the hell are you going to use physics then ?
Only then in methods like wheel defects, blind dealers signature play, or Steve's mysterious JAA system.
They are all physical methods. I can't really comment on the last as I don't know enough about the actual mechanics, but the first two are very marginal, and also very transitory, meaning the window for exploitation is small, and the time spent finding those opportunities could well outweigh the benefits.
Quote from: The General on Jan 31, 12:45 PM 2019
I'll send you some photos.
The spinning / balance has little relevance with bias though. Saying a wheel is balanced is kind of a jargon like term. Most bias has nothing to do with the balancing and has more to do with assemble defects.
My wheel is machined out of a solid block including pockets. There is a top and bottom bearing. If there is even a slight imbalance, for example some pockets being machined deeper by a fractoion of a millimetre, then will result in bias and it will result in a couple on the two bearings. Since F=(mu)R and the couple is continuous, this increases bearing friction. The rotor will only slow down due to air friction or bearing friction, so possible machining defect could result in slightly increased rotor deceleration which in turn is related to slight bias. That's where I'm coming from on this aspect.
Having said that I'm sure these type of rotors are carefully checked before dispatch , and I haven't found anything exploitable. Will def do some photos though and you can have a look.
But your comments on things such as the numbers ring are interesting with respect to my wheel, and may have an outcome on spinners which I generally have regarded as random with respect to VB fall off and landing prediction.