THE TWOCAT POOP ON DEALER SIGNATURE

[TwoCatSam]

Since I became interested in roulette, I have read about the dealer signature polemic both pro and con.  Some say it is vital and they make money from it; some say it does not exist.  About a year ago I began to formulate a methodology that would determine, once and for all, if there is a dealer signature.  I feel I am ready to present that thesis for your perusal.

I have been bothered by the idea of dealer signature without regard to which direction the wheel is spinning or from where the ball was picked up.  If there is a trackable dealer signature, we should be able to reverse the steps used to get to---a sector---for example, and find a repeating pattern that brought us there.  Otherwise we are saying, tacitly, that even though the last four spins landed with five pockets of each other, there were no actions in common with each other that led to that event.  To me, this is an illogical conclusion drawn on a total lack of evidence. 

So I seek to find the evidence of dealer signature or lack of dealer signature using the numbers chart and results sheet I have developed.  For the time being, let us only concern ourselves with counter or anti-clockwise direction.  Also, we will use the term "farther" to describe the movement of the ball.  "This spin the ball went 4 pockets farther than it did last time."  I have given hours of study to this idea.  It makes no difference if you say the ball went farther or fell shorter of the mark as long as you do it consistently.  It's just easier to count when you move forward than it is to subtract and move backwards.

Get yourself a picture of a single 0 wheel if you do not have it memorized.  We shall use the 0 as a starting point as it's easy to find.  Let's say that on the last spin the dealer picked the ball up from the 0 pocket and spun the wheel CCW.  The ball landed in pocket 30.  Using the numbered chart, we learn the ball went 15 pockets farther.  Let's let the wheel spin CW while I explain the chart.

The vertical numbers on the left side are the numbered pocket from which the ball was picked up before it was spun.  The top numbers are where the ball landed this spin.  Using a tool much like a carpenter's square---only white and made from construction paper---I am able to quickly square up what was with what happened and see the number 15 in the square's corner.  OK, we're spinning CCW now.

The clockwise spin landed on pocket 33 and he picks it up and spins.  He lands on 0, oddly enough.  Using the chart and square we learn that he moved the ball 15 pockets.  Let's review. 

0 to 30 = 15 pockets farther.
33 to 0 = 15 pockets farther.

Now look at your wheel.  Pocket 30 and pocket 0 are almost 180 degrees apart.  Let's say that happens four more times and the ball is at least 14 pockets from its last hit.  Since there is always a CW spin in there, that can easily happen.  Let's also assume that each time the dealer spun, he advanced the ball 14 to 16 pockets farther.  So looking at the pockets on the wheel, we see there is no clustering of numbers as one would expect if there was a dealer signature.  Yet when we look at what the dealer actually did in relation to pockets, we find that every time he spun the wheel he went 15 pockets farther than last time, approximately.  Wouldn't you be temped to count 15 pockets forward from where the ball landed on the CW spin just to see if he could do it again?  Sure you would!

I advanced this theory in small form about a year ago but Maltazean, who is a dealer, convinced me I was wrong.  I don't think I am.

Now let's look at the following chart:



The ball was picked up from...

8 and landed on 15
19.................19
31.................4
2..................21

If you look at the landing positions, 15, 19, 4 and 21 you will find them in a sector of six.  Some would maintain the dealer is hitting sector one.  But is he?  Look at the distance farther relationship of the numbers.  They are all over the wheel.  This is where you may get a little confused as we are breaking new ground here.  The numbers along the top of the results chart are not the number hit; they are the distance farther the ball traveled.  The ball traveled 0 pockets, 19 pockets, 23 pockets and 36 pockets in those four spins.  This is what the dealer actually did.

Please consider this fully.  The numbers 15, 19, 4 and 21 fall within sector 1 and some would say the dealer is showing his signature.  I ask you, is it possible, not probable, but possible that four different dealers threw those four spins?  Possible?  Yes, it is.  What would you say then?  Is there a dealer signature?

Now let's look at the second set of numbers:

7.........36
27........22
25........9
2.........21

If you were to look at those on the wheel they do not fall within a six-sector grouping of pockets.  Two do on one side of the wheel and two do on the other.  No one would look at those four numbers and think the dealer was repeating.  But look at the actual distances of the throws:  He advances the ball 19 pockets each time.  In reality, he is doing exactly the same thing each time.

Say four people met for lunch at TwoCat Café.  Say each traveled some distance to get there.  The waitress learns one flew 500 miles, one rode a Harley 6 miles, one drove 23 miles and one walked cause he lived two blocks away.  The end result (a group—people or numbers) in one place physically in the universe.  But how they got there....ah, there's the rub. 

Well, this is my point of view.  I think some things are as fixed as gravity on the planet and others may be up for debate.  I actually welcome anyone who can point out a mistake.  I don't want to bet money under a false assumption.  I'd rather take my lumps here where the cost is relatively small.  But, please, if you choose to disagree or debate, be civil about it.  There is one person on this forum who is a trouble maker.  I won't take his post down myself, even though I could, but I will ask another moderator to do so. 

TwoCat

[Herb]

Twocat,

I actually know a great deal about DS.  Would you like some help?

[TwoCatSam]

I'd love it!!

I'm all ears!

Sam

[Kon-Fu-Sed]

Hi TCS, and all,

You count pockets from the last hitting number (quote: "the numbered pocket from which the ball was picked up before it was spun") to the next...

In my book, if you're looking for a DS, that way is ONLY valid if the dealer every time releases the ball AT the last winning number.
I think the consensus is that DS is measured from RELEASE-point/number to the winning number.


Regards,
KFS

[TwoCatSam]

Thanks, Kon

The point is, you can't force the dealer to wait until the last hit number falls under his hand.  You can be assured he will pick the ball up from "some" pocket.

Sam

[Kon-Fu-Sed]

TCS,

You can always count from the release-point.

Check your official mail.


Regards,
KFS

[Herb]

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).

[winkel]

Dear Sirs,

if you would use the only true kind to measure you will find that there is also the Law of Third in distances thrown.

Think about and you will find out why!

br
winkel

[TwoCatSam]

Herb,

I will have to print that out and study it thoroughly as I don't understand it.

Kon

Thank you so much for the little program.  I can't wait to input some numbers and see what I get.

Sam

[WannaWin]

Dear Sirs,

if you would use the only true kind to measure you will find that there is also the Law of Third in distances thrown.

Think about and you will find out why!

br
winkel

Perhaps it will be because the launching and landing of the ball always are random? to dealer or a RNG.

Random in the disc and random in the board all obey the same randomness laws and averages in the end.

It would be necessary to study the random laws to overcome so much to the disc as to the board then.

WannaWin

[TwoCatSam]

wanna

My premise is this:  There can be a known starting point for the ball.  Say it's in zero pocket and the dealer spins the wheel clockwise and releases the ball.  Due to muscle memory, the dealer will release the ball at approximately the same distance from any number that he/she did from zero.  Say she picks it up from zero and by the time she spins it, the wheel has moved 180 degrees.  Say the next time it lands on 5 and when she picks it up to spin the wheel travels another 180 degrees.  She is spinning the ball from a known point although the point changes with each spin.

It can actually be charted or graphed.

Sam

[TwoCatSam]

-