🚀 go-pugleaf

I have a few questions on some of the finer points of using the
Centigram Quad X5 Matrix for roulette. I have been using the basic
system for about 3 months with quite alot of success. I have managed
to increase my bankroll from 200 to over 5000 units in about 45 hours
of play. Since I started applying the drift corrrection I think I am
doing even better. This system has given me more enjoyment (and
profit) than anything else I have seen in rec.gambling.

For the CQX5M experts a few questions:

Would it improve the base quadrant selection if you could collect all 190
numbers from consecutive rolls? I know that Brankowski claims that it
dosen't matter as long as you start and end collecting modulus 5 spins
but it seems to me that you could get drift during the collection
sequence if you do not determine the base quadrant from consecutive
spins. Has anyone done analysis of a real spin sequence (obviously a
generated sequence is useless and I do not have _real_ roulette wheel
data available) to see if this really matters.

Does anyone use simplified CQX5M to determine Red/Black? If so how do
you drift correct? Do you just restart from a new quadrant?

Anyone had any lick using simplified drift correction (38 spins). I don't
really understand how this can work since 38 is not divisible by 5. But I
haven't really looked into the math.

Also, I don't find it simpler to hang around for 38 spins just to save
a little simple multiplication. Does anyone _really_ do the simplified
drift correction?

Speaking of that, does anyone have any info about the math underlying
CQX5M? I understand the general principle but stuff like simplified
drift correction leaves me in the dark.

I find that when the casino changes the wheel operator I can
completely establish a new base quadrant just as fast as I can correct
for the _drift_ induced by this - Choi's comments indicate that this
should not be the case for _simple_ (impetus based) drift. Is he just
lucky, full of shit or am I making some type of mistake.

I have heard that Rabinowitz (sp?) Sub Sampling Method is basically
CQX5M drift correction that is applied to a moving baseline! I have no
idea what this really means - can anyone enlighten me? I have also
heard rumors that one of the _big name_ rec.gamblers is working on a
RSSM CQX5M synthesis that eliminates the tedium of base quadrant
establishment. How about it guys? Comments? I would _REALLY_ like to
be able to just do corrections (I can raise 5 small numbers to the various
powers much easier than I can collect 190 numbers).

How do you avoid heat when establishing a base quadrant? I feel pretty
bizarre just watching the wheel spin for so long. It is nice that I
can go away and come back to the same wheel later and _still_ correct
the base. I find that after about 3 days the wheels usually settle to
a new base and I must recompute. Does this happen catastrophically or
through drift? If it drifts how come I cannot correct for it in a few
spins?

Finally, has anyone found a wheel where CQX5M does not work? I have
seen that phemomenon twice. Is this because the wheels bearings and
balance are perfect or because the wheel is _very_ unstable and is
behaving chaotically?

Well that's enough for now - loking forward to reading of your
opinions and successes using CQX5M.

-Tom