gordonm888
gordonm888
Joined: Feb 18, 2015
  • Threads: 20
  • Posts: 522
May 21st, 2017 at 9:34:36 PM permalink
Quote: gamerfreak

Thank you! Best reply so far. I imagined humidity would be the largest source of variation in the machine and throwing surface. My early prototype designs use MDF as a mounting surface, and any type of wood can expand or contract significantly under different humidity conditions. I will measure the humidity of the room when I attempt to produce workable data.


Excellent. This has the potential to be interesting.

Quote: gamerfreak


In terms of the other variables you mentioned, they may still come into play, but what I will say is that my device does not use a robotic arm as people have suggested, or any other type of electric motor/servo for that matter. The mechanism is entirely different.

The device design and any data collected will not be secret, I just have some more work to do before I want to post any photos/video.



No electric motor/servo? Very mysterious. I wonder if you're using a simple electromagnet acting on a mechanical system with a fulcrum (like a see-saw.) I guess we'll just have to be patient and wait to learn more.
Ahigh
Ahigh
Joined: May 19, 2010
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 5041
Thanks for this post from:
AxelWolf
May 26th, 2017 at 10:21:02 AM permalink
I have no idea where this topic has gotten to in my absence, but let me reiterate my positions related to this subject quickly.

1) Dice control is possible -- this is a fact. Those arguing this fact simply don't realize that the only argument is what the parameters have to be in order for dice control to be possible. For example, if I drop a die from a robot one millimeter to the surface, I can completely control the dice. The argument is about what the parameters are for achieving dice control

2) Machines throwing dice more precisely is a red herring IMO. Even if you prove that it can be controlled over a long distance compared to a single person, you have not proven that the best robot can beat the best person. Certainly the best person can beat the worst robot, because I've built some shitty robots. But generally, they are ALL competitors, and there is no way to know if humans will be better than robots. Some people assume that robots are better because they haven't tried to build a robot that is better than they are. I believe that I have a better chance of performing DI than any robot that I have ever created. Still doesn't mean someone else can't build a better robot. And even if they did, that doesn't mean that a better person can't do better than that particular robot.

In order to make progress, you have to move on from the discussion of possible/impossible and begin the discussion on the effects of entropy at the release on entropy of the bounce. Until you get into that discussion, you're spinning your wheels. The correct way to proceed is by using natural intelligence and machine learning and computer vision along with 3d captures of dice bouncing and doing a ton of reverse CNN network learning with massive loads of data.

But the things that I have said in the past still apply. This is too much work for too little return because one thing remains a constant: any casino getting hit will change the rules to reduce their exposure. And that's the end.

ANYONE would be better off just taking chances at the Cromwell. Plus it's more fun.

If you want to man up bet bigger odds and spend less time arguing about stupid crap.

The end.
rxwine
rxwine
Joined: Feb 28, 2010
  • Threads: 151
  • Posts: 6367
May 26th, 2017 at 11:16:38 AM permalink
I would suggest anyone attacking the machine angle, by first making your machine throws 100% consistent from SOME distance even if it's only a foot.

Once you find where this point is, then work from there
prisoner of gravity
rxwine
rxwine
Joined: Feb 28, 2010
  • Threads: 151
  • Posts: 6367
May 26th, 2017 at 11:20:22 AM permalink
...speaking of machines, anyone following the "Go" vs Deep Mind. O/T (don't reply, humans pros getting crushed though)
prisoner of gravity
gamerfreak
gamerfreak
Joined: Dec 28, 2014
  • Threads: 28
  • Posts: 1016
May 26th, 2017 at 11:57:28 AM permalink
Quote: gordonm888

No electric motor/servo? Very mysterious. I wonder if you're using a simple electromagnet acting on a mechanical system with a fulcrum (like a see-saw.) I guess we'll just have to be patient and wait to learn more.


Super close. I'm still waiting on some parts, and since Ahigh chimed in, I'll reveal the mechanism I'm using and hear out any more constructive criticism.

The mechanism is powered by a pinball coil to launch the dice off a short ramp, similar to this:



In my experience with pinball machines, these solenoid coils can exert a very consistent force over thousands times firing.

I'll also repeat that I have 0 expectation on using results from this experiment to profit in an actual craps game. Which I know sounds like a waste of time to the half of you, but not me.
genenjj
genenjj
Joined: Jun 4, 2017
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 2
June 4th, 2017 at 11:34:10 PM permalink
I understand wanting to know more about how the dice roll. I liken it to any other sport I play where I have to be precise in my delivery to achieve the best "Average". When I bowl, I "TRY" to deliver the ball to the same spot on the lane with the same velocity every time. Same with my golf swing or throwing darts and same thing with my dice throwing. When I'm playing craps I try to throw the dice in a particular set, with the same velocity and trying to land them on the same part of the table, hitting the same part of the back wall as little as I can every time. I understand this is less about craps and more about dice control in general, but when you take out the central component of the equation, which is the way a particular person throws the dice, I'm not sure the data can be used in real environment. I try to throw the dice with minimal rotation. Others put backspin on the dice like they are shooting a foul shot (between the legs) and some throw them so hard they bounce all the way back across the table.

  • Jump to: