Funny theoretical question.

[I have cookies]

Lets assume we take a release point from dealer.
After first turnaround of the spin we observe our reference deflector when ball is over it and notice release number.
Then the ball makes a certain amount or revolutions, lets assume 19 before it smack into vertical deflector 4.
Now forget about rotor position and speed and dominant drop zone.

Funny theoretical question.

If the same spin would repeat if self for the next spin - would then the "time" from the previous spin be the same as the next spin from release number until the ball smack into vertical deflector 4 with 19 revolutions.

O_o

[I have cookies]

I assume the answer is yes to this question.

O_o

[Kelly]

If you mean the "ball run time" from release to smack, its not the same, even if you have the same amount of ball revoloutions.  Even in the last 6 revoloutions the time can differ up to 1 sec on an old wheel even more. 

[Jean-Claud]

If the rotor is slow u will be accurate...but if the rotor is preety fast then Kelly is right and ur prediction will be far away.

[I have cookies]

If you mean the "ball run time" from release to smack, its not the same, even if you have the same amount of ball revoloutions.  Even in the last 6 revoloutions the time can differ up to 1 sec on an old wheel even more. 

But we all know even if we can key a rev and know that ball will strike deflector with a early or late 9 secounds the ball can cheat and go one extra - exampel.
So key the rev at 8 out of 10 is not bad.

So I assume you say a realese is not as accurate - and what is that based upon - that with a realese you did not do the home work of lap-times and split-times ...

You are saying that a realesa is not accurate as a fix point A to B if you compare two different spins that did the same amount or rev and hit the same deflector - you mention it can be a difference of up to one secound.

But what are we talking about here 1 or 2 times out of 10 ...

You mention old wheel then i ask what about modern wheels ?

[I have cookies]

If the rotor is slow u will be accurate...but if the rotor is preety fast then Kelly is right and ur prediction will be far away.

LOL this has nothing to do with me as AP or VB - I just ask a question about A to B repeat it self then if the amount of time will be the same.
It has nothing to do with rotor i just want to know and will find out if A to B has a small difference or not - it is not difficult to measuring ...

Being the same would be early or late some thing ?.00 or ?.55 ms ...

This is intressted for other reasons wish I would never post here hehehe .... 

[I have cookies]

Well it is fun so tonight i will run some old dvd spins with one level wheel 300 trails and collect and group does spins with realese and that hit the same deflector and making the same amount of rev - so i can measuring the difference.

Then i just list the time like this.

?.00
?.00
?.00
?.00
?.00

That will be fun 

[Kelly]

If i for instance make a prediction at a point where the ball has a specific amount of ball revs left, the ball run time until smack might look like this over 10 different spins:

8,56
8,44
8,53
8,23
8,48
9,34 !!!!!!
8,51
8,54
8,46
8,37

The majority will be within a workable area, but there might total freaks in between.

If you measure ball run time over 19 ball revoloutions the spread will be much wider.

[Jakkalsdraai]

When I started getting interested in AP, no one really wanted to help me in anyway with techniques so I tried to devise my own methods. I think Forester was the first to actually help whether you believe in his methods or not, he shared freely.  Now there are others that also share freely, thanks to them.

Of course back then rotor speed had no meaning to me and I also did not worry about it. I purely tried to work on the distance that the ball will travel each time. I also worked on the presumption that the ball will be released at the same point on the wheel each time. After the ball is released I would headcount to 4 sec and look where the ball was. Let's say after 4 sec the ball was at 9 O clock. I would mark 9 O clock on my card. I would then effectively wait for the ball to hit the rotor and record that writing it next to the mark at 9 O clock. So if the ball hit the rotor at 6 O clock I would say right when the next ball is spun and it traveled to my mark on exactly 4 sec. I would no where to look on the rotor to make my decision. For every different speed ball spin i would make a new mark and a new place to look for the prediction. Are you looking for same distances?

Of course we have to have a constant rotor speed.

Cheers
Jackal

[Kelly]

Well, its one way of doing it and its certainly better than no physichs implemented.  Critics will say that  a small error/difference in rotor speed or ball speed can lead to 9 pockets errors. True, but DS is meant to be viewed in a larger picture rather than a spin to spin view like VB.  If one collects a 50 spin sample with a tight rotor speed margin around 3.0 sec pr rev with maybe 15 spins at 2.9, 15 spins at 3.0 and 15 spins at 3.1  and ball revoloutions in the area of 13 - 15,  the correlations and the outcomes will show that  with reference to just the ball release point you will be able to select better betting areas and leave out the low hit areas.  You will pretty often be totally off, but say you hit 6 times in 37 instead of 5 times betting 5 chips, you already have an advantage. 

The hardware must be on your side though, a slight tilt and a managable bounce + a dealer that don`t throw too many spins where the rotor is out of speed range. In reality you must be extremely patient to make that game work because of dealer shifts, tracking  etc. 

If you can seperate a 3.0 and a 3.1 sec. rotor speed, which in VB circles is generally accepted to be relatively easy,  you might consider trying to make a category for each rotor speed so you, as in systems like Scotts, adjust your reading point according to the rotor speed to get a little more spcific dealers signature.

[I have cookies]

If I for instance make a prediction at a point where the ball has a specific amount of ball revs left, the ball run time until smack might look like this over 10 different spins:

8,56
8,44
8,53
8,23
8,48
9,34 !!!!!!
8,51
8,54
8,46
8,37

The majority will be within a workable area, but there might total freaks in between.

If you measure ball run time over 19 ball revoloutions the spread will be much wider.

Kelly how would does values look like if you make the read more early into spin development by half around 0.5 as I assume it still would be usefull but with larger marginal for error.
I try once but it go so fast for me to get a visual read or feel wish I can master or maybe is just me being lazy and being safe to do the read later wish is more accurate as does values you post ...
If i might guess does is based upon 1.1 as i find 1.0 give early or late 9

O_o

[Kelly]

The error margin is growing proportional with the amount of time you add to the prediction point.  When you get to 1st or second ball rev. you are almost facing a 1/37 probability.  Depending on the quality of the hardware you are playing at.

[telden]

how can ball travel time be different by 1 second if the number of ball turns is the same to the same pin? it should be almost exactly the same

[I have cookies]

The wheel can cheat on us with one extra rev - even with the method Kelly refers to above - some argue there is no explanation toward why.
It can also go one extra rev during other traditional visual ballistic reads also.
The best observation regarding this is taking split/lap times to get a deeper understanding about the spindevelopments movement - my opinion is that one misstake is to use the DD or any other deflector as reference pin to get acc data as when you study and observe it ... there is a more clear view what happens if some one use the dead area as reference pin.
But again it all depends on what some one is searching or looking for.

Maybe I should shut up - but at least I could mention that as some methods key the physical area where there actually spot for a certain time interval appears - witch lead to the spin to cheat on you less then if you would compare it to some traditional visual ballistic reads and reverse I assume that if you use the first active deflector next to the dead area and make traditional read you will have the ball to pass 0.75 to get a new full rev as for the ball cheat on you (notice with head count that you are more precise to key the rev from that position - dead area)  - but I refer to humans errors here regarding rotor timings and visual patterns using a  good head count or even with tumper - as it is a heavy duty to master and know every number that pass the pin and see all patterns emerge - also be acc with only one pocket difference during observations.

PS
telden why do you believe miro is a scam - you have ffz and I know others that have ffz and succeed - so how come you are so angry? and its not ok in my book to provide does links - no matter who it is about - even i see bago post some pictures and its not ok even if i don't believe Steve is genuine.

[I have cookies]

-