Four Diamonds Roulette Computer Test

In this article I’ll explain how to test my roulette computer but same test could be applied to any roulette prediction device, computer or system. For this test you would need at least one roulette video spin and DVD player. If you can play video spin on DVD player, it would be better then using computers DVD, because computer may create time delays in video picture, which could make test harder or inaccurate. I am using DVD player with built in hard drive where I have stored roulette spins. DVD player is handy with option to repeat single spin continuously and that is what we need for this particular test.
Four diamonds roulette computer test is a test to define how accurate the tested computer can predict according to measured known constant roulette wheel parameters.

If tested computer is smart device as the FF roulette computer; that learns wheel parameters from spins we clock, it is good practice firstly to predict few different spins from same roulette wheel ,so the system can learn from it and to get tuned for particular wheel. If we have only a single spin then is good practice; first few spins to clock the ball each time at different place. It's good to give system a chance to learn how the ball decelerates at various points during the spin before then we start with the test.

• With the FF roulette computer first 4 valid spins is fast adjustment and probably after first spin or two you will be set close enough to have prediction within few numbers of accuracy. With each spin the system settings are closer to mach parameters of particular wheel. After four spins the system is definitely within working range and starts looking and defining differences in between one single rotation to get the best accuracy when predicting. Also system starts various controls so already learned data can not be easy disturbed by accidental bad clocking. For each additional spin system is fine tuning and monitoring what is going on with the wheel then adjusting according to it.

Roulete computer four diamonds test

Run one spin and try to predict it 40 times.

Each 10 times use different diamond for clocking. 

Clocking at diamond 1

Spin... Predicted number

1. 18 this is first spin and system learns, prediction is number 18

2....12

3...26 here system is close to adjusted

4....26

5....32 stable prediction

6....32 it stays mostly within 3 numbers of accuracy

7....26

8....35

9....26

10....0

Clocking at diamond 2

Spin...Predicted number

11....12 It is same here, system is seated with first 4 spins

12.....35; but here is fine tuning for ball speeds at that range.

13..... 0

14....26

15....26

16.....32

17.....32

18....15

19....35

20....26

We can continue to test it at any other diamond or position on the wheel.

Good computer should detect ball speed correctly, eliminate human errors in clocking and predict according to measured ball speed. Narrower difference in between results means that computer is more accurate. In this test I actually used real data from testing FFZ's IQE6 program.

Video spins move pictures in time frames of 40ms therefore at some positions error may slightly increase. Clocking at real wheel should be more accurate, but we need video spins so we can have constant input parameters and we can compare output results. Ideally all predicted spins would generate same outcome.

At Rouletteplace.com we have few members who did this test on some other roulette computers available on the market, none of computers could produce reasonable results thast would be worth spending anny additional time for further testing.

Myrulet Four Diamonds Roulette Computer Test created debate all over internet and bulletin boards. Firstly some people tried to deny it and to call it invalid. Of course such claims do not have even basic grounds since the test is very simple and logical. If we repeat same spin, trying to predict it with roulette computer it is obvious that if computer is accurate that it should produce same or closes to same results. The test is designed to help user to get idea about quality of device they have and to not be manipulated. However there is some misunderstanding or perhaps deliberate manipulations of the test. The FFZ is very specific roulette computer. For prediction it doesn’t need to know rotor position but it predicts from point where the last ball rotation was clocked therefore this test is enough for such device.

• It has been two years since this test has been published and no other computer seller could design proper algorithms for leveled roulette wheel prediction therefore no further tests were required. Recently some are trying to sell roulette computers with tilted wheel algorithms claiming that it can predict and leveled roulette wheel. Following is update of the test. 

Roulette computers that have voice output (pronouncing numbers) from moment we clock the rotor, has to calculate rotor movement all the way from that point. To be able to predict particular number the computer has to know rotor position at the time of prediction moment. Software can be manipulated so the computer actually can pass this test. So simple algorithms of tilted wheel prediction can be used with preset wide time limit for the ball measurements and device may look as it can pass the test. Especially if rotor speed on video spin we use is slow.

If such tested computer passes four diamonds test further testing to define if computer is working with tilted wheel algorithms or if it is capable of predicting and leveled wheel. For this part of test we continue with same roulette video spin.
 
Tilted wheel algorithms explained

We clock rotor at 12  o’clock.  Rotor moves (computer has to calculate movement). At moment when we get particular ball speed rotor moved lets say one rotation. So the system predicts lets say number zero.

If we move same test to 3 o’clock diamond. We do same, clock rotor, rotor moves, this time we going to get prediction 1/4 of rotation later. For that time rotor moves only few pockets extra and system still predicts same number because with tilted wheel approach the system only calculates rotor movement which is not hard to calculate. Therefore the computer still may produce same result.

Test if computer works with tilted or leveled wheel algorithms

To differentiate if the computer, predicts as tilted or leveled wheel we need to do a bit more of testing.

After DIAMOND 1 test we still clock rotor at 12 o ‘clock but now we clock the ball at 6 o’clock position, the system has to predict opposite result. If the computer predicts same or close to same the computer works with tilted wheel algorithms. (Tilted wheel prediction groups wide range of ball speeds and produces same result. For example clocked ball time of 1000 ms per rotation may produce same result as clocked 1200 ms/r.)
Computer needs to predict opposite because rotor is clocked at same position, but we know that entered ball speed to computer is by ½ rotations different. So if the computer is designed for leveled wheel and if it is accurate it must detect change in ball speed, therefore it needs to predict differently.  (Until now only the FF roulette computer has such accuracy in ball timing to be able to do it)

Some roulette computer sellers claim that computer they sell calculates function for all moments during roulette spin. In such case previously explained tests should produce same results in any targeted ball rotation we decide to predict (for example (4,5,6,7,8,9 … rotations before then ball drops). If tested computer can’t do it then of course you are entitled for refund. Testing in different ball rotations should be done even if computer works on tilted wheel principles.

The FFA roulette computer with IQE6 algorithms is the only one computer designed to work on wheels without any dominant ball drop point. It all goes back to time when some roulette computer sellers created war in between each other arguing who has bigger head. Actually none of them did it properly, simply because they couldn’t. They do not use right hardware capable of doing accurate time measurements. PDA’s and mobile phones programmed in Java are not timing devices.

Question someone may ask could be, but can such computer based on tilted wheel calculation predict and roulette leveled wheel or semi tilted wheel?

My answer is Yes; it can at least theoretically, if the computer is set on very tight limits for the ball timing and if computer has reasonable algorithms for rotor calculation. In such case computer may predict only abut 15% of spins. However such computer will not be able to predict in any time during the spin but it will predict only when the ball happens to be within narrow ball speed limit. For example computer may be set to predict only if the ball is 1200 ms/r to 1230 ms/r (30ms time frame). It means that operator will need to clock the ball until it comes to that particular speed range. In such case many spins will not be predicted. In usual time difference in between rotations is about 200ms, therefore 30 ms preset time frame we will get only 30/200, 15% of spins predicted.
For spins that we get predicted we know that the ball is within very narrow speed range and most likely it will hit same diamond which may produce advantage.
With such approach even if the ball is clocked with double errors we still may get similar results, but of course that is far from reality and needed accuracy for proper roulette leveled wheel prediction. Narrowing limits like that and getting 15 out of 100 spins predicted and claiming that computer is capable of predicting each time when the ball will hit selected diamond is pointless. Especially when the test is done on semi tilted wheel where particular diamond getting more hits (meaning even 100ms wide ball speed range may still hit it). However if the computer can do it accurately, and predict at any time during the spins that may be something. For example we clock the balls 3-4 rotations and run 100 spins. We get accurately predicted 15 spins then we repeat the same test (without any adjustments) but this time we clock balls 3-4 rotations earlier in spin and still get same results and same spins predicted. Until now nobody could demonstrate it.

In addition with such approach player also needs to experiment with time limits.
For example time window of 1200 ms/r to 1230 ms/r may on particular wheel catch ball speeds where the ball may be hitting high positions on diamond and some even pass it and go for another diamond. In such case the time limit must be blindly readjusted and player needs to repeat same process again.
 
Main problem with such approach is that from 100 played spins we get only 15 spins predicted. It may take us 5 hours to get hundred spins, if we need to readjust the time frame it may take additional 5 hours just to see if it is adjusted properly.
If parameters on the wheel change (as in usual) then it may take us additional 5 hours just to find out that we do not get accurate predictions.

(Here I would like to highlight that manually adjusting time frame even for tilted wheel prediction is not very practical solution. The FF roulette computer with TILT2 algorithms uses automated time frame set up based on measured parameters. It saves a lot of time and predictions are more accurate.)

From everything explained above it is clear that such design of roulette computer and claim that it can predict and leveled wheel is more theoretical approach, an unpractical solution from someone who has no clue how to design proper algorithms for leveled wheel prediction. The FF roulette computer with IQE6 algorithms predicts every reasonable clocked spin, because it has hardware for proper time measurements and the program is designed for leveled wheel prediction.

The test how good computer can eliminate errors in clocking

For this test alternate clocking position, first rotation clock the ball at diamond and next rotation do it 1-2 cm distanced. If you do it with single click it will produce error of about 9 numbers. But error correction should reduce it. Compare results with previous data and check if there is difference and how much. IQE 6 is getting almost same data during this test. But also important it that if entered errors are to large the computer will protect player from wrong prediction and it will call clocking error.

Rotor calculation tests.

Still we can use same video spin. Up to now you already should know what predicted outcome is. Next is to check how much that prediction will change by giving to system different rotor time. So repeat spin clocking but when clocking rotor start when ball is at clocking diamond but stop it 5 -10 cm earlier or later. You give to computer data that rotor is faster / slower. Of course prediction should move according to different rotor speed clocked.

If your last click is earlier then system should predict further in ball direction. This is only approximate test but change should be close enough.

FFZ uses detected ball and rotor speed when displaying result; therefore it will not show 100% accurate result. Simulation that wheel is faster will show a bit less then real rotor change and for slower wheel it would show more.

With  tests explained we can have general idea about system ability to define failing point of the ball. Of course that is not final prediction.

How accurate is this failing point in relationship to final result it depends of many additional factors such as:

How far in time are we from point when the ball hits rotor.

Imperfections on wheel, deformations on ball track, slight tilt may have various effects on ball traveling time, kind of ball, number of diamonds etc. With later prediction we are more accurate but we have less time to place chips.

IQE6 tested on different spins with high accuracy setting have all results within same or close to same distance from prediction.

Ball bouncing

This part is really individual for every wheel / ball combination.

Because of that no matter how good we predict the game is still partly random.

Sometimes it works for us sometimes against and we should look for an average.

Task of every advanced player is to have good way of prediction but also to search where that advantage may be the highest.

For the end, if you have opportunity to look computer in action as sellers demonstration. Never look final result it could be coincidence or video editing.

Simply compare distances from predicted number to number where the ball hits rotor.

Example

If computer is good, and prediction is zero then ball hits rotor at number 18.

Next spin, whatever prediction is the ball should hit same distance from that number as it did from zero to number 18. Sure few spins could be out of that but most of them should have same distance.