Advanced theory

To be able to use the Forester's E2 system the user needs to understand system limits.To obtain the best results he needs to know where, how and why the system is accurate. The E2 system works in very different way compared to any other system known to me.

Some methods try to take samples of the ball and the wheel speeds, add to those additional parameters such as: atmospheric pressure, humidity, temperature, hand cream on the Croupier's hands and who knows what else? With all of that they are trying to calculate how long the ball will run in the track and in what position will the wheel be at the moment the ball strikes it? From my work that is a very difficult method. Even with accurate algorithms the errors can be so high that prediction would be almost random. I have information from all parts of the world and from people that own that kind of computing device and I do not know of a single person that is happy with that kind of solution alone.

The main problem is with the data input. We as humans have a reflex response time. And that time is not always the same, so pressing a switch manually at time intervals of 0.5 secs and with the required accuracy of 10 milliseconds is impossible. Don't take my word for it, perform the test yourself. Take a stopwatch, start it, then try to stop it at example 1.000 sec, so you will see how inaccurate you would be and how much your response time changes. There are additional options to overcome that such as to use a number of clicks and to take the average but it is still inaccurate. An error of only 3 milliseconds when timing the ball would produce about one number change in the prediction.

The E2 system is a combination of electronics and visual observation. The human eye is very fast and with no response time. The E2 system uses our basic theory. As we have said€¦

Every roulette ball at some point of its travel is a particular way away from the final winning number. We are not talking distance away but time away from the final number. So we find out by time sampling how far in distance we are from that particular time moment. Then it's easy to find how far we are from the winning number by distance.

At the same time we need to relate the position of the ball to the position of the wheel and specifically to the position of the numbers on the wheel and apply a formula to the changing speed of the wheel as it slows down. The perfect algorithm must also take into account the fact that both and especially the ball can slow down at different rates at different times and speeds and positions on the ball track. Sounds complicated? The perfect algorithm is, more on this later.

Simple explanation for that is that for example exactly 10seconds before the end the ball is so far from the winning number. Maybe it is not 100% true because the ball can be affected by some additional factors, but it is true for most of the time. So why calculate every time if function is the same. I am using already known function in form of previous results. If we have device that can tell us 100% with some particular speed it would not be hard to notice what number is at that moment under the ball and compare it with previous spin. (Assuming same wheel speed)

Without device as that one we need to apply process that I am going to explain here. If we unroll one spin backwards excluding ball bouncing, (which is really part of our offset) we can display it as following graph. The ref. points are places in time intervals when the ball meets winning number - bouncing. So let's say that winning number was zero. Here we can see that during this spin ball crossed winning number 27 times.

Blue points are representing positions when the ball is crossing winning number. When we start playing any of my systems we do not know all that information because the spin is still going. We enter at one point and we do not know where it is in relationship to our ref. points. So my system is designed to tell us in numbers or angles, how far from our observed number (which is usually zero) is winning number. That distance is in proportional relationship with our entry time, current speed of the ball and the wheel, and the closest Ref. point. All this is hard to explain and I assume that might be hard to understand. So lets look one simple example.

One spin the ball is over number zero at Ref. points and zero is winning number. We apply system and we are out of the closest Ref. point by 0.2 sec. That time will reflect as (zero / ball) angle change within our time frame and will guide and tell us that 0.2 sec before then we start measurement number zero was in Ref. position. And of course that it is our winning number.

If we are taking our time sample from 100 numbers per second to 50 numbers /s it means that at start when we start, compared to the end everything is happening with double speed. Lets say that we start 10 numbers late from our 100 numbers per/s ref. point. When we exit time sampling it will show us only as 5 numbers difference because everything is 50% slower. Now that 5 numbers we multiply with 2 and we get how much late did we start.

If looking that on the wheel it would be 10 numbers from zero, it is number 9. And 5 numbers from zero is number 28. So now from number nine to number 28 is angle of about 50°. We add another 50° and it will indicate again to zero which is winning number for this example. We can look at that as time too. Example; if we start 0.4 sec after 80 numbers / s. It means that for that time period the ball makes 0.4 x 80 = 32 numbers. On the wheel it points to number 28 meaning that we released switch at number 28. The end of time sample we will be 0.4 sec late from 40 numbers / s, so it would show as 0.4 x 40 = 16. That would point to number 8. We notice angle from number 28 to number 8. Add on top of that same angle and again it tell us that winning number is zero. Those 32 numbers really means that we are late by so much from ref. point. It really does not matter do we start 20 sec or 15 sec before the end or which number we use for observation.

Here we are coming to very important part for all users of my system. This knowledge is important for the accuracy of the system. Next graph displays amount of numbers that ball pass during each spin. We can accurately use only part of those 20 spins as displayed on graph above. The reason for that is that ball is slowing down faster then the rotor. Until ball makes 360° full rotation the wheel also do some traveling. With higher speeds the function is still linear (or close to linear) but as we can see that last 8 spins the function significantly changes. If we want to observe change of the ball in relationship to the wheel we would not be able to notice it properly within these requirements.
Take note here that last 5 spins is about 10 seconds. So when we apply system we need to exit before that time or errors will start to show. That is why the best time to enter is 19-14 sec before the end. That is great and leave us with lot of time to place bets. But for that we need very accurate device. Time accuracy of my device is 0.000001 seconds, and it is very stable. Human delay errors are almost none.

We are trying to release switch at zero and many time we will miss it, but that is not problem at all because we see it, and if we released switch at number 19 instead of zero we use number 19 as our observing number. It means that we can use any number and system will accurately show how much that number is shifted from winning number. I use zero or numbers around zero because they are easier to notice. The system is very applicable and accurate during measurements.



How is change of the wheel speed included in all of that? The answer is very simple. It is positioning and balancing of the system. With visual system we can not see that because it will show only as a ball position change but multiplying factor is the same so it really does not matter did the ball or the wheel made that change, Change of wheel speed with visual system placing it out of balance faster. Visual system can not handle well a significant wheel speed change but electronics one can. Because it is used reference time as reference to compare. I explained that process in details on CD with presentation.
Win or lose

If casino has only 2.7% advantage over players how come that people lose so much money at roulette table? If there are equal chances I think that casino would still win most of the time. The reason for that is that casino if compared to player has unlimited time and unlimited money. Player will never know when he is at pick of his winnings or when circle of bad luck will stop. Here I will display approximate graph of one standard play.

Yellow color represent winnings from each spin, red color is amount of chips played and
blue is total balance , amount of chips that player has after each spin.

The most important point here is when blue line touches zero. It means that player lost all 100 chips. And that he is out of game. On this graph if he had just few more chips he would start winning and he would get his money back. But in real game player will never know that. He will come next time and maybe he will be luckier. It means that he will start playing when graph is going positive direction. When we play system that give us advantage over casino lets say 10% we still can lose because of previously described process. We can start playing and from start we can always miss by number or 2. I would call it bad luck. That is why balancing of our total chips and amount of chips that we play is very important until we come to safe zone. That is meaning if we start with 200 chips, we play 5 chips per spin. We should not significantly increase it until we come to comfort zone of about 500 chips. Then we can start playing about 15-20 (not 15-20 numbers) chips per spin and try to go for more.

If system has 10% advantage it really does not meter do we play sector of lets say 9 numbers or if we play only one number. Theoretically it is true but I am not happy