HERB'S REAL DS

[LanceManyon]

A post that Herb made earlier this year, 2009, in roulette physics section.   There was also a copy in 2008.
This year, I don't know of a better post than this in the history of this forum.

I'm going to keep it super simple at first.

DS does not work because the dealer is super human or extremely skilled.   It happens because the wheel enables it to happen and the dealer is basically lazy.


There is actually quite a bit of confusion about Dealers signature.  It's not so much that a dealer even really has a particular skill, but that the wheel is ideal for it.  The wheel speed and a dominant drop is what makes it look as though the dealer is "super" skilled.  It has more to do with matching up the "frames" or sections of the wheel that are most likely to pass under the dominant drop when the ball is present.


For example: Let's say the dealer "shoots" the ball and that the ball makes 17,18,19,20,21 revolutions over a series of different spins.  At a certain wheel speed, the dealer may have the same chance of hitting a specific "frame" or section of the wheel on more than one ball pass.  In some instances, the dealer may have as many as three chances at a section of the wheel, if it is traveling at the ideal speed.  

(This is a very rough explanation)

At wheel speed X the dealer may have the opportunity to hit the same section of the wheel from the ball release number on ball rotation 17,18, and 21

At wheel speed Y the dealer may have the opportunity to hit the same section of the wheel only on ball rotation 17, and 19.

At wheel speed Z the dealer may have only one opportunity to hit the same section as the previous spin, if the ball drops on ball rotation 19 only.  Understand?


That's why I use to call it "framing"- (looking for the best wheel speeds for the largest number of opportunities of a sectional hit).  The above example is ONLY an example.  It leaves out so much information.  There are actually more variations to it.  If you want to really grasp the concept, you need to film a wheel.  The above example is really to illustrate how a dealer may hit the same section of the wheel, even if the ball makes an additional rotation.

I have already tested this method to several thousands of spins.   Would you like to see some of the real test results?-See below.  I did not segregate by wheel speed.  I did not want to curve fit the trials.  I also wanted to measure the raw effect over more than one dealer.  The biggest difference the dealers made, were spinning their wheels at a less than optimal speeds.  The advantage of the method still emerged even in the raw trials.  

When I tested this method on wheels that had completely random drops the edge evaporated.

The two steps that you MUST include in your test for it to work is:

1.  Compare only the change in travel yardage between every two spins of the dealer.  Compare only spin 1 travel yardage to spin 2 travel yardage etc. ,. . .  The reason is that the dealers will continually fine tune each spin and the wheel speed continually drifts throughout a session.  The signature is therefore perishable.  
This also removes any doubt that the test results were some how "peak picked" or "curve fit".  

2.  A wheel with dominant drops.  



If I would have cut and pasted the Excel program it would have looked all screwed up, so I have posted only the totals and the test results.  I tested this years ago on Mark4,5 Huxleys, and Paul-sons.  The chi square and the standard deviation results were impressive.  

These numbers represent the change in the dealers travel yardage between consecutive spins only.  

For example: spin 1 the dealer releases the ball from a specific number and the ball lands 10 pockets from the release number.  The travel yardage for spin one is 10 pockets.  

Spin 2 the dealer releases the ball from a specific number and the ball lands 12 pockets from the ball release number.  The travel yardage for spin two is 12 pockets.  

Now this is how you determine how accurate the dealer is:

Measure the change in travel yardage between every two sets of spins.  In the above example the change in travel yardage is Spin 2 - Spin 1 = change in yardage of +2 pockets.  Understand?
Spin 2 is 12 pockets.  - Spin 1 is 10 pockets = a change of yardage of +2 pockets.  

Here is how the plot looked on Wheel 1 (only 623 spins).  I actually have tracked and recorded just over 7800 spins on a few different Mark4's and 5's to test dealers on these wheel designs with dominant drops.  I will post those as I find them.  This plot is actually 4 different dealers over the course of a few days.  The relative positions that we are most interested in are of course, for relative positions -1,0,+1.  
This three number sector was already over 4. 28 st dev.  at only 623 spins.  
The chance of randomness for the twelve pocket sector was 2. 078 followed by 9 zeros.  
While the standard deviation could be considered random given the small trial, what makes it significant is that it is where we would predict it to be.  Understand?
The scatter out to the left and right of relative position 0 is also interesting considering the location of the ball deflectors.  

When the sum of the neighbor 5 and 10 are examined the signature is quite obvious.   There is also other frequencies that should be tested.   I have software that does the work for me.


relative position

-18-7 hits
-17-15
-16-15
-15-11
-14-16
-13-17
-12-12
-11-21
-10-23
-9-12
-8-11
-7-20
-6-13
-5-23
-4-16
-3-13
-2-15
-1-28
0-26
+1-24
+2-13
+3-13
+4-22
+5-15
+6-19
+7-25
+8-15
+9-20
+10-12
+11-14
+12-16
+13-12
+14-17
+15-13
+16-16
+17-11
+18-17
+19-15

(Sorry, I don't know how to post my program graphs on this website. )


While this method is interesting and does provide you with a real edge, there are better ways to play using real VB.  

When testing your results, collect statistically relevant sample sizes.   Start by collecting at least 1000 spins for your tests.   (Measuring just 10 or 20 spins is meaningless).

[Marven]

That Hybrid Dealer Signature method he posted is the only publicly available DS method I know that has any merit. On the right wheel it's a winner.

[lucky_strike]

Hi LanceManyon.

Yes that is an real true dealer signature.

LS

[I have cookies]

My 2 cents ...

If we assume some one would use old traditional release point from dealer to get yardage or distance from A to B then its position doing so matters.
One common error or false positive during this is that some believe that you can use any position as long it is the same and constant to get a dealers release to achieve correct data and yardage from A to B.

I claim it is a false positive as the wheel is rounded and the vertical deflectors indicate 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 and pass that an hole new extra or less turnaround will be a fact ...
To get a accurate release some one has to observe and determine the dead area which the wheel will indicate depending of what kind of degree of tilt.

If we assume worst case scenario with a semi tilted wheel then the active deflector next to the one that is at sleep/dead will be the position from where you read release number after the dealer launch the ball and to get precise and accurate release you can wait for one full turnaround before you make your read ( as a 2 pin game is realistic and 1 pin game is past history ) ...
For obvious reasons this take effect and involves when two opposite deflectors hit more frequent and witch will give a nice effect with certain rotor speeds.

/.\

[Steve]

The more you segregate, the greater your capacity for analysis, and ultimately accuracy of predictions. Segregated data, when used correctly, will tell you what is or isnt predictable. You'll find just about everything is predictable, but to varying degrees of accuracy and practicality.

Absolutely rotor "sweet speeds" enhances predictions, and is sometimes critical. In theory, there are unlimited outcomes of a roulette spin. I dont mean the winning number - I mean how the ball falls, what it does etc. But you dont need to calculate unlimited - only most likely, and for that there are a reasonable and manageable number of outcomes. Herb does appear to understand this, but he omits a lot and he appears aware he's omitting a lot. So what he really knows, who knows. But it is at least clear he specialises in bias analysis, which is generally very rarely used by professional players because there are many much better ways to beat roulette.

For really advanced methods, realistically you need software - I'm referring more to bets before ball release. I've developed many different types of software, and soon another chunk of it will be available to my players.

Dealer signature is just one piece of the puzzle. It is just one variable. There is no singular method suitable for all wheels and all conditions.

In all, still the most important thing is selection of the most suitable wheel.

[I have cookies]

For really advanced methods, realistically you need software - I'm referring more to bets before ball release. I've developed many different types of software, and soon another chunk of it will be available to my players.

I apologies but to be honest i don't believe you can key any significant signature with out a release with or with out some kind of cross over to verify a certain degree of accuracy - also with out any degree of scatter overlaps as 1 pin game is out the window.
I can imagine some kind of bias can calibrate and find correlation using some alternatives/reference points to measuring the rotor and distance towards something - but taking the step saying its is done before the ball is spun is for me fiction.
Do i know some succeed using distance from outcome to outcome is weird as it should be random and its more bias anylaze then a pure traditional dealer signature.

I have all the tools and could verify any playing model if i get my hands on the collected data with instructions.
I can also verify if a bias is a false positive or due to random fluctuation - that is a level of knowledge most don't have or master.

I do understand your position Steve as you run a business - but as long some one cant verify your claims i will just regard it as pure fiction.
As you just allow your customers - as i understand it - just send you collected data and get response to know how to play - then they learn nothing - my 2 cents.

[toby]

To understand the method we'd better had yardages from 0 to 36 in the wheel direction. Repetion is 0, both neighbors are 1 and 36, 2 and 35, we go clockwise.

I have tested several signatures the way Herb states and other ways, very hard to reach 3SD.

[I have cookies]

To understand the method we'd better had yardages from 0 to 36 in the wheel direction. Repetion is 0, both neighbors are 1 and 36, 2 and 35, we go clockwise.

I have tested several signatures the way Herb states and other ways, very hard to reach 3SD.

Some one could argue that a playing modell that reach a 3 std would never succeed using a traditional release point.
Herbs way sure did work in the past when 1 pin game exist and now it does not and are public.
It exist dealer signatures with very good hit ratio - but does key the knee point rather then using a release point witch make it a different ball game.
Light VB contra DS = Hybrid Signature.

[toby]

The signature often goes to a small sector of the wheels so we need several thounsend of trial to confirm a result.

Over 3SD  is a nice start

[Steve]

Cookies, you based what you said without knowledge of what my system is about and where it gets edge. Is ball release point considered with bias analysis? not typically, but it can be. Such inclusion is part of what I call "custom variants".

As for release points: in normal circumstances, is there anything predictable about ball release points? Sure there is. Now how about if the dealer spun the wheel a bit first. Yes, there are, but not as predictable.

Any wheel design can be beaten. Not any condition can be beaten.

As for my players, to start they get the primordials doc, which is all the traditional ap, or more an intro to them. Then from there they focus on specific approaches, and are taught 1 on 1. They receive use of software, with varying levels of access depending on how trusted the player is. It needs to be done this way to protect secrets. Keeping things low key is very important.

My latest system player software will do much more with much less effort for players. but the players are almost never privy to inner workings. They dont need to know it all - only what is needed to benefit. That keeps everything from casinos and wheel designers. There is no other way I can offer it to people and keep it protected.

[insidebet]

Very interesting post by Herb a few years ago.

Trying to understand the method I came up with this question:  since we should always clockwise spins separately from counterclockones, how do we interpret what he means by "spin one and spin two"?

Say pins 1,3 and 5 are clock, and,  of course, 2,4 and 6 counterclock,  how do we add the relative yardage?

Say the pins are, on a single 0 wheel:

10
20  +6
36 -11  (-5???)
4   -9    (-4???)     0r  -3  (spin 4 minus spin 2)
31 -15 (-6???)      and -4 (spin5 minus spin 3)
35 +8 (-7??)         and -1 (spin 6 minus spin 4)

Hope my question makes sense...

Herb s seems logical.  Does anyone have similar data as the ones he posted?


Insidebet

[insidebet]

also...

In Herb s example, spin one is +10 and spin 2 is +12.  So, net yardage is +2 (spin 2 minus spin 1).  Right. That s easy enough.

What if spin 1 is +10 and spin 2 is -10.  Is net yardage 0?  Once you compile all the data, you don t know if zero means (in this example) +10 followed by another +10, or +10 followed by -10.  See the problem?  Or did I get all of this all wrong?

Insidebet

[I have cookies]

You can forget about this way of play - it might work out in the 70s or 80s - but not with today's wheels.

There exist much more clever solutions with today's wheels.

[I have cookies]

-