Controlled Dice Shooting is BS!
Quote: goatcabinDepends on how you define "significant". Even at the 99% level of confidence, the odds are only 99-1 against an outcome occurring by chance. But if you're looking for "six sigma", you need a hell of a lot of rolls or a degree of efficacy that even the "controlled shooting" crowd don't claim.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA
I think the question of significance and "eliminating luck" are the same. You just need to run as many trials as needed to demonstrate that the shooter's results weren't simply luck. 95% is probably fine. The number of trials will depend on exactly how the shooter operates.
Quote: MathExtremistI think the question of significance and "eliminating luck" are the same. You just need to run as many trials as needed to demonstrate that the shooter's results weren't simply luck. 95% is probably fine. The number of trials will depend on exactly how the shooter operates.
Yes, they are the same, but 95% is not nearly good enough, in my view, to demonstrate skill over randomness. Every 20th experiment would be expected to show misleading results.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA
With that though, really, I prefer Goat's methodology over Superrick's or the wizard's. The experiment should be about whether dice control works or not and the concepts around dice control should be tested rather than the results themselves. That is, if the requirement for dice control is that the dice remain on axis through the throw, then the success should be about getting one of the desired results WITH the controlled axis in place with all others being a failure.
The person with the longest throw was not a controlled shooter. It was a first timer at the Borgata in AC.
I would like to think that controlled shooting is possible, and indeed, I think it is, but the money to be won using this methodology is limited because I don't think (1) you can prove, long term, with real results, that your throwing method produces a winning result beyond random distribution and (2) there are too many randomizing elements on the craps table to make the advantage significant enough. There are just too many mechanics at play, mainly the back wall and the bounce.
Quote: boymimbo
I would like to think that controlled shooting is possible, and indeed, I think it is, but the money to be won using this methodology is limited because I don't think (1) you can prove, long term, with real results, that your throwing method produces a winning result beyond random distribution and
Well, if you get good results, you don't really care whether they "prove" anything or not; if you keep playing and keep winning, eventually you will convince yourself, if no one else, and what do you care whether anyone else believes? In any case, it doesn't take much of a change in the probabilities to create a player advantage. With 10% on-axis efficacy, WinCraps came up with a .72% player advantage, using one set for the comeout, one for points of 4/10 and another for the other points. With 15% efficacy, the player advantage was 1.73% and 2.47% with 20% efficacy. Of course, those are not high enough to guarantee winning, but if I believed somebody could actually do that, I would be more inclined to invest in him/her than with 98 Steps' modified D'Alembert/Gambler's Fallacy method. Note the use of the subjunctive, indicating "condition contrary to fact".
Quote: boymimbo(2) there are too many randomizing elements on the craps table to make the advantage significant enough. There are just too many mechanics at play, mainly the back wall and the bounce.
Exactly, so why do you say, "I think it is"? Or do you mean, "I think it would be, if the casinos didn't insist on the dice hitting the back wall"?
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA
Quote: boymimboThe experiment should be about whether dice control works or not and the concepts around dice control should be tested rather than the results themselves. That is, if the requirement for dice control is that the dice remain on axis through the throw, then the success should be about getting one of the desired results WITH the controlled axis in place with all others being a failure.
Sorry to tell you this but not all DI'S use an on axis shot, so your bit with the dice staying on axis would not work. What you are looking for is the outcome. Even with an on axis shot the dice do not stay on axis, they might end up that way! Just take a slow-mo camera and do a video and you will see what happens when the dice lands!
Most of the great DI's I know do not use an on axis shot for that very reason. You all have it wrong when you think anything about a DI, You think you are going to see a god like figure that can walk on water, because some of our great fiction writers have portrayed some of these shooters as such.
After all if you have read some of these books on the subject, the shooters are always getting on big roll's back to back, when most of the guys I know are laughing like hell when we read some of this bull these guys are writing. I must admit it does sell books, gee I can make $300,00 to $400,00 a year just playing craps and drive around in every supercar there is, and stay in the best casinos around the world. Sounds like the life style for me how much is that book? Gee only $29.95 sounds like a good deal to me I will take one of those books, do you have anymore on craps shooting!
The truth is more like a guy that spends countless hours practicing what he is doing, then going into the casinos when the tables are empty, hitting them for not that much money and walking out the doors.
They do not want to get banned from the casinos they are playing in, if they are locals, so they are not looking for the big wins. Would you take a few hundred any time you went into a casino, sure you had the risk of losing, and there are days that you never should have gotten out of bed let alone walk into a casino.
Most of you guys would never even know that a DI was playing at the table with you, because you will never admit there is anybody that can beat the math of the game, to you it's all about the math, and without it you would be lost. The only thing you can see is that pass-line bet that you haven't got paid on, because the guy that has the dice has not made one pass-line win yet, but he did make 6 fives that he got paid on before he did seven out!
I see it all the time the dealer calls out the point is 8 and the shooter is making 4's back to back and everybody on the table is crying ten rolls into the roll for the 8, he has gotten paid on all his bets that he made, and the rest of the players are still screaming for the point of 8 to be made.
The guy could care less if he ever makes the point, all he wants is to keep making the 4's and what ever else he has a bet on.
Than again you just might be he guy that tells him you don't have any money on the 6 aren't you going to bet the 6 ? The answer would be no, I don't need to bet on it, because I will not be hitting that point, so why bet on it?
Just because the guy established the 8 on the come-out roll does not mean that he want's to make the point, all that is in his mind is that he what's to keep making the 4's.! Damn that guy couldn't shoot , he never did make the 8, what a waste I would never bet on him again! To bad the morons on the table didn't bet the 9 fours he just made before he did seven out, but then again, was it trains, or brains they wanted when they were born?
...
Quote: superrickboymimbo
Sorry to tell you this but not all DI'S use an on axis shot, so your bit with the dice staying on axis would not work. What you are looking for is the outcome. Even with an on axis shot the dice do not stay on axis, they might end up that way! Just take a slow-mo camera and do a video and you will see what happens when the dice lands!
OK, so how do they alter the probability distribution? That's exactly my point about the slo-mo camera -- you'll see what happens the the dice land -- and the result will be random.
Quote: superrickMost of the great DI's I know do not use an on axis shot for that very reason.
So, how many "great" DIs do you know? How do they alter the probability distribution?
Quote: superrickMost of you guys would never even know that a DI was playing at the table with you, because you will never admit there is anybody that can beat the math of the game, to you it's all about the math, and without it you would be lost. The only thing you can see is that pass-line bet that you haven't got paid on, because the guy that has the dice has not made one pass-line win yet, but he did make 6 fives that he got paid on before he did seven out!
I see it all the time the dealer calls out the point is 8 and the shooter is making 4's back to back and everybody on the table is crying ten rolls into the roll for the 8, he has gotten paid on all his bets that he made, and the rest of the players are still screaming for the point of 8 to be made.
The guy could care less if he ever makes the point, all he wants is to keep making the 4's and what ever else he has a bet on.
Than again you just might be he guy that tells him you don't have any money on the 6 aren't you going to bet the 6 ? The answer would be no, I don't need to bet on it, because I will not be hitting that point, so why bet on it?
Just because the guy established the 8 on the come-out roll does not mean that he want's to make the point, all that is in his mind is that he what's to keep making the 4's.! Damn that guy couldn't shoot , he never did make the 8, what a waste I would never bet on him again! To bad the morons on the table didn't bet the 9 fours he just made before he did seven out, but then again, was it trains, or brains they wanted when they were born?
...
Duh, everybody understands that, if a shooter really could avoid the seven, it would make sense to spread your money across. Actually, it's the math that tells you that, just not the same math that describes random shooting. However, I would like for you to explain how else besides using an on-axis throw a shooter can alter the probability distribution.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA
Quote: goatcabinHowever, I would like for you to explain how else besides using an on-axis throw a shooter can alter the probability distribution.
That part's easy. There are several dice control techniques that have been used, with varying success, over the years:
a) Sliding. The dice are thrown with a flat trajectory such that the one die basically does not tumble but slides across the table. If done properly, the probability of one of the faces of the bottom die will be 100%, the others 0%. The top die is random. Many casinos have installed bumps (look for them) bordering the prop box to prevent sliding from being effective. See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1Zbbr9JgKU at about 0:32
b) The whip or Greek shot. The dice are thrown with extremely rapid rotation around the vertical axis. The name is derived from the whiplike action of the hand as the dice are released: hold them stacked in your fist, cock your arm outward, and then bring your arm quickly across your body and release the dice as if you were throwing a baseball side-arm, whipping your hand. This is sliding's big brother - both dice slide across the table and do not tumble at all. When executed properly, the whip shot can hit a called number every time. I have not seen it, but I believe Steve Forte's videos show a demonstration of him throwing multiple 12s in a row on demand.
c) The "hammer". The dice are thrown stacked together such that when the dice land, the bottom die transfers the kinetic energy of the top die directly to the table and then back to the top die, sending it flying. Sort of like the Newton's Cradle toy, the kinetic energy passes through the bottom die and it stays put as it landed. This has the same probability distribution as sliding.
I can't execute any of these, but I'm not pretending to be a dice mechanic.
Well Alan you are wrong on this.
Quote: goatcabin
Duh, everybody understands that, if a shooter really could avoid the seven, it would make sense to spread your money across. .
You wouldn't want to bet across, you would only want to bet on the points you are going to make!
Why would you bet on any points you are not going to be making? You would start out betting only the points you are going to be making the most, if you are using a shot that will produce the 4's and 5's that would be the only bets you would have, till you got your money off the table, then bet the 9 if that was what you were also hitting. I argue this point all the time don't bet on numbers that you are not making, going across is just stupid.
Even a DI knows that the seven is coming at some point in his roll, they can not stop it. Nobody is perfect! You don't want to put anymore at risk then what you need to make money.
Quote: goatcabinI would like for you to explain how else besides using an on-axis throw a shooter can alter the probability distribution.
There are plenty of shots that are not on axis, The dice do not have to be on axis to make points, but you have to be able to do the same thing time after time with the dice.
I ask you once before if you ever did get to Vegas, well do you? The next time you do come into town PM me, and I will get someone to show you how its done! Then you can report back that it can be done!
I am here about 49 weeks out of the year, and play in the early morning hours!
I do get a kick out of you guys with your math, and how you think that it's to only why to win at craps is bet what the math of the game tells you to bet. It's way to funny to see someone never get paid on the one bet they have on the table, and bitch about the shooter not making the point! The shooter made is money by betting only what he was hitting, and could have cared less about the point he established!
Everybody needs to know the math of the game, and for that I thank you guys, but you also need to have your eyes open when on the table, and most players never do! They can't see what is right in front of them when it's happening!
….
Quote: MathExtremistThat part's easy. There are several dice control techniques that have been used, with varying success, over the years:
a) Sliding. The dice are thrown with a flat trajectory such that the one die basically does not tumble but slides across the table. If done properly, the probability of one of the faces of the bottom die will be 100%, the others 0%. The top die is random. Many casinos have installed bumps (look for them) bordering the prop box to prevent sliding from being effective. See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1Zbbr9JgKU at about 0:32
b) The whip or Greek shot. The dice are thrown with extremely rapid rotation around the vertical axis. The name is derived from the whiplike action of the hand as the dice are released: hold them stacked in your fist, cock your arm outward, and then bring your arm quickly across your body and release the dice as if you were throwing a baseball side-arm, whipping your hand. This is sliding's big brother - both dice slide across the table and do not tumble at all. When executed properly, the whip shot can hit a called number every time. I have not seen it, but I believe Steve Forte's videos show a demonstration of him throwing multiple 12s in a row on demand.
c) The "hammer". The dice are thrown stacked together such that when the dice land, the bottom die transfers the kinetic energy of the top die directly to the table and then back to the top die, sending it flying. Sort of like the Newton's Cradle toy, the kinetic energy passes through the bottom die and it stays put as it landed. This has the same probability distribution as sliding.
I can't execute any of these, but I'm not pretending to be a dice mechanic.
I don't believe any of these techniques can be used in a casino, however. We are talking about throwing the dice according to the rules the casinos enforce.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA
Quote: superrickAlan
Well Alan you are wrong on this.
You wouldn't want to bet across, you would only want to bet on the points you are going to make!
Why would you bet on any points you are not going to be making? You would start out betting only the points you are going to be making the most, if you are using a shot that will produce the 4's and 5's that would be the only bets you would have, till you got your money off the table, then bet the 9 if that was what you were also hitting. I argue this point all the time don't bet on numbers that you are not making, going across is just stupid.
OK, so how do you throw the dice to produce 4s and 5s?
Quote: superrickThere are plenty of shots that are not on axis, The dice do not have to be on axis to make points, but you have to be able to do the same thing time after time with the dice.
Do what? Please explain how to set the dice and throw them in order to produce more than 19.4% 4s and 5s.
Quote: superrickI ask you once before if you ever did get to Vegas, well do you? The next time you do come into town PM me, and I will get someone to show you how its done! Then you can report back that it can be done!
I am here about 49 weeks out of the year, and play in the early morning hours!
I haven't been to Vegas since 2006. I was in Reno recently for three days, playing three of four sessions/day in five different casinos. I saw a few people setting the dice carefully, then slinging them down the table. I did not see anybody who appeared to be throwing the dice in any controlled way.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA
Quote: goatcabinPlease explain how to set the dice and throw them in order to produce more than 19.4% 4s and 5s.
Did you see my page on Craps Appendix 6 — Expectations for the Dice Setter? Briefly, it says you avoid sevens (and thus get more fours and fives) with certain sets (pictured in my page) and keeping the dice on axis, and hopefully unpitched, with greater than random probability.
Quote: WizardDid you see my page on Craps Appendix 6 — Expectations for the Dice Setter? Briefly, it says you avoid sevens (and thus get more fours and fives) with certain sets (pictured in my page) and keeping the dice on axis, and hopefully unpitched, with greater than random probability.
Did you read superricks's post? He is saying specifically that he is NOT talking about on-axis throwing. I understand completely the math of on-axis throwing and have done many simulations in WinCraps, using different sets and different degrees of efficacy. I have also tried to do it myself, but when I went to Reno and tried it, I realized that the table and the pyramids were adequate to ensure randomness.
Superrick alleges that "Most of the great DI's I know do not use an on axis shot for that very reason.", so I'm asking him to describe a technique, other than on-axis, that will alter the probabilities in the way he describes -- not just seven avoidance, but specifically to produce certain point numbers.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA
Here is a quote from the Wizard's Appendix 6:
"...but he can keep them on axis more than the expected 44.44% of the time of a random shooter."
The random shooter does not "keep them on axis" at all. I have never seen a throw where the dice stayed on axis.
I don't see how one can alter the 44.4% expectation without some throws that STAY on axis.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA
Another quote from Appendix 6:"I've observed some skillful shooters using the Hard Way set on a come out roll, even with no come bets."
What led you to believe they were "skillful"?
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA
Quote: goatcabinDid you read superricks's post? He is saying specifically that he is NOT talking about on-axis throwing.
I just did. I know there are other angles besides axis shooting. However, most of the literature is about axis shooting, so that is what I wrote about too.
Quote: goatcabinAnother quote from Appendix 6:"I've observed some skillful shooters using the Hard Way set on a come out roll, even with no come bets."
What led you to believe they were "skillful"?
Good point! I should have preceded that with "so called." I've said many times that I think that most, if not all, craps players who think they can influence the dice, can't.
You spend more time on a computer playing the game on Win Craps , so you can spit out every chart there is as to why you should lose playing craps, after all it is a negative expectation game and everybody that plays should lose!
Just ask your self one question, how many hour do you spend a day in a real casino playing craps. Then please respond with your answer! Do you spend 8 hours a year in a real casino or is it less playing craps?
Sorry guys just trying to make a point, most of you will fall below even that mark, but you can tell me every thing there is about the math of the game, and that is one reason I come to this site, we do need guys like you for your math skills.
I do not have a PHD in math and rely on what I am seeing happening on the tables, I can tell you that the player at SL5 gets on big roll's just about every time he gets the dice and he is not a DI, but that does no matter,. Also that this is not the casino that he normally playes at, he plays in the north end of the city. The same thing goes for the guy at SR7 he is a local and gets on good rolls, so I would bet on the guy. Move around the table to SR2 the guy is a DI, I don't know him, but he is asking me question about the guy that was shooting in SR1 as he left the table to use the rest room, or maybe just to walk away from the table so he didn't have to bet on anybody else!
He bought in when a DI was shooting, and right away started to ask question trying to find out what the guy was doing how long had he been on a roll for, and what points was he hitting the most. He look to see what the guy was betting on and then place his bets, like the shooter.
The point was 8 the shooter didn't even have the point bet, all he had was a pass-line bet, and money on the 4, 5, and 9. The rest of the players were calling out for the 8 to be made, and the shooter kept hitting the bets he had made. When he did 7 out every other player on the table was saying what a piece of crap shooter this guy was the all lost money on him, he held the dice for one stick change, but they would never bet the points he was betting on, because they read in a book that they were bad bets!
We all know the best bets on the table is the 6 and 8 right? Isn't that what all the books tell you to bet on? Well I have seen more players lose money on the craps table because they read that in a book, they will still bet them when nobody on the table is rolling them and go right down with a sinking ship!
The dice goes to the guy that is standing at SR2, when he picks up the dice he had them set for a come out 7 roll, and goes on to rolls 4 sevens before he makes the point of 6.The guy changes his dice set and comes right back with the 6 he had full odds on his point. When the dice comes back to him he changes his set again and starts to make craps numbers and sevens till he sets the point again.This time it's a 9 and he does not take odds, but places the 6 & 8, that are the points he starts to make, he does not bet anything else.
Sure the 7 finally does come, but he made money, he didn't waste any money on bets he was not going to get paid off on, he know that he could not stop the 7 from coming, and when it did happen, to him it was no big deal, the guy made money.
Now the dice goes to the DI that is at SR1 everybody on the table is saying oh no this guy can't shoot.
He does the same thing makes a bunch of crap number and 7's to the point of players complaining when is this guy going to make a point.
When he does it's the 6, he does the same thing he did the last time he had the dice, and bets the 4, 5, and 9. In his mind he is not going to make the 6 and could care less about it and does not take odds on the point. The same thing happens again he make his money on the points he bet, and everybody on the table is calling him a piece crap shooter again when he does 7 out.
Did you just see a DI in action, the next time your at a table and you think this piece of crap shooter is doing some stupid things the way he is betting, you just might want to wake-up and bet the same way he is betting!
Now it time for me to head to the casino, and meet one of them DI'S, so where are you going to, the computer, so you can prove there is no such thing s a DI?
LOL
superrick
But I'd sure prefer to rely on the math than on trying to copy the play of some of the idiots I see around a crap table.
I have noted several times in this forum that I do indeed set the dice on each throw, that I attempt to toss them the same way each time, and that I am ahead at craps for the 53 sessions of that game I have played so far year to date. I even posted about a gentleman at the Gold Strike in Tunica watching my rather-successful rolls and asking later whether I was a dice controller.
But I have also reported that I am not so totally foolish as to believe that my setting and my tosses have any discernible positive influence on the final resting position of the dice. It's just something I do for fun. And while I don't personally believe that anyone else really has that ability in a casino, if there are indeed such people, then I seriously doubt that you could distinguish them from the wannabees without watching them for a few million rolls. I won't waste my time or effort looking around the table and guessing who is going to have the next hot roll. What a crock.
Quote: superrick
You spend more time on a computer playing the game on Win Craps , so you can spit out every chart there is as to why you should lose playing craps, after all it is a negative expectation game and everybody that plays should lose!
Actually, I have been arguing with weaselman and mkl that NOT everybody that plays should lose, and based on the math, too. People like you constantly put words in the mouths of "math guys" that they never uttered.
(snip long story about different DIs rolling different numbers)
Quote: superrickDid you just see a DI in action, the next time your at a table and you think this piece of crap shooter is doing some stupid things the way he is betting, you just might want to wake-up and bet the same way he is betting!
Now it time for me to head to the casino, and meet one of them DI'S, so where are you going to, the computer, so you can prove there is no such thing s a DI?
No, it's time for me to, once again, ask you how these "great DIs" roll particular numbers without using on-axis shooting. So far, you've just spewed out stories.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA
Quote: superrickJust ask your self one question, how many hour do you spend a day in a real casino playing craps. Then please respond with your answer! Do you spend 8 hours a year in a real casino or is it less playing craps?
Just ask your self one question,...sounds like Dirty Harry.
Well do ya punk!
You dice setters, controllers, DIs are all the same.
All talk.
you have an excuse for every fast 7out. "Oh, I threw them too hard", or "I threw them too soft"
You take credit for every good winning roll. "It was I that won you money, because of my skill at controlling the dice"
You have convinced yourselves that you control the dice outcomes sometimes. Believe what you want it is a free country...And there is nothing wrong in believing that the world is flat.
Chicken feeders and all other random rollers, they can also control the dice because they throw them to the other end of the table.
I was a dice dealer for over 30 years in Vegas.
and I have seen it all at a Craps table...Well, never a baby being born on the table, but came close a few times.
Quote: superrickDid you just see a DI in action, the next time your at a table and you think this piece of crap shooter is doing some stupid things the way he is betting, you just might want to wake-up and bet the same way he is betting!
No, probably not. If someone has two decent hands in a row, that doesn't imply they're capable of influencing the dice. It takes a lot more than two hands' worth of rolls to know whether the dice are being influenced or if he just got lucky.
That said, it turns out it's not going to matter much to how you play. This is the really interesting part of the whole debate over whether dice control exists or is even remotely effective: If you think you can control the dice but you're wrong, you're not going to do any worse than anyone else. It's not like you can make the dice *worse* than random -- because that'd also be dice control! So either your level of control is zero, which is most likely, or it's some positive influence. The trick is knowing how to bet based on that influence, if you can achieve it at all. But if you'd bet that way anyway, there's really no harm in thinking you can control the dice when you can't.
Quote: MathExtremistthere's really no harm in thinking you can control the dice when you can't.
I disagree. If someone believes they can control the dice, and thus change craps into a positive EV game, then they are likely to bet far more than they would have, expecting to win over the long run. Any short term losses would be attributed to 'bad luck' and the 'player would expect to 'turn it around' soon, probably risking more money than they would have if they just accepted the fact that craps is anegative EV game.
Quote: MathExtremistNo, probably not. If someone has two decent hands in a row, that doesn't imply they're capable of influencing the dice. It takes a lot more than two hands' worth of rolls to know whether the dice are being influenced or if he just got lucky.
That said, it turns out it's not going to matter much to how you play. This is the really interesting part of the whole debate over whether dice control exists or is even remotely effective: If you think you can control the dice but you're wrong, you're not going to do any worse than anyone else. It's not like you can make the dice *worse* than random -- because that'd also be dice control! So either your level of control is zero, which is most likely, or it's some positive influence. The trick is knowing how to bet based on that influence, if you can achieve it at all. But if you'd bet that way anyway, there's really no harm in thinking you can control the dice when you can't.
I've posted that I've had very limited, very modest success with severe axis-spin dice control, and that my results, while favorable, were not mathematically significant. For saying that, I've been called names that would make JerryLogan blush.
The real question--the ONLY question--is that whatever method of "control" is used, are the randomizing elements of the impact with the table surface, then the back wall, enough to essentially negate that control? Note that I said "essentially"--such a kinetic vector could not be ELIMINATED by those impacts, whether it was axis-spin or something else. But if the relative magnitude of the force vector given to the dice by the thrower was small enough, the influence of that vector would dissolve into "background noise", much as a distant radio signal loses cohesion.
So this is essentially a physics problem. It seems manifest to me that there is a certain point where the force vector applied to the dice is large enough to persist through the insertion of the randomizing elements (impacts). That might, however, be something like a hundred thousand revolutions about the y-axis per second. So rather than flinging stink-bombs back and forth across the divide, someone needs to actually calculate the weight of the dice, the speed of impact, the nature of the randomizing element, and the effects of various amounts of on-axis and off-axis spin.
I suspect this is a far from trivial exercise, and it's frankly well beyond my level of expertise to make such a series of calculations, so I'd be intrigued if someone does want to tackle it.
Quote: mkl654321I've posted that I've had very limited, very modest success with severe axis-spin dice control, and that my results, while favorable, were not mathematically significant. For saying that, I've been called names that would make JerryLogan blush.
The real question--the ONLY question--is that whatever method of "control" is used, are the randomizing elements of the impact with the table surface, then the back wall, enough to essentially negate that control? Note that I said "essentially"--such a kinetic vector could not be ELIMINATED by those impacts, whether it was axis-spin or something else. But if the relative magnitude of the force vector given to the dice by the thrower was small enough, the influence of that vector would dissolve into "background noise", much as a distant radio signal loses cohesion.
So this is essentially a physics problem. It seems manifest to me that there is a certain point where the force vector applied to the dice is large enough to persist through the insertion of the randomizing elements (impacts). That might, however, be something like a hundred thousand revolutions about the y-axis per second. So rather than flinging stink-bombs back and forth across the divide, someone needs to actually calculate the weight of the dice, the speed of impact, the nature of the randomizing element, and the effects of various amounts of on-axis and off-axis spin.
I suspect this is a far from trivial exercise, and it's frankly well beyond my level of expertise to make such a series of calculations, so I'd be intrigued if someone does want to tackle it.
Ultimately, if it's physics-based, then it's possible. If someone can repeatedly hit 180 on a dartboard, shoot a bullet through a playing card at 100m, or (perhaps more apropos) routinely hit rollouts in racquetball, then it's also physically possible to to throw the dice in such a way that they behave in a particular way after bouncing off the wall. I have personally executed one "kill shot" as a dice shooter -- I'd never be able to do it again, but one time I just threw the dice and they both stuck the landing exactly at the corner of the table and wall, not bouncing at all. But I did it once, so it's possible.
However, possible isn't sufficient. It has to be done often enough, and with sufficient understanding of *how* the dice distribution changes, to allow profitable betting. Worse, if it involves not bouncing the dice off the back wall -- such as the kill shot I described above, or any number of short-throw methods -- it's well within the casino's right to say "throw harder, sir" or "the dice must bounce back two feet". As Alan pointed out, in response to the video I posted of someone executing a slide throw, if it can't be done regularly in a casino then it's just an academic exercise.
So while I believe that dice control is very possible, I'm not convinced that any manner of dice control attempt can be profitable in a casino. But like I said before, if you're not changing how you bet anyway, there's no harm in trying.
Quote: MathExtremistIf you think you can control the dice but you're wrong, you're not going to do any worse than anyone else. It's not like you can make the dice *worse* than random -- because that'd also be dice control!
If we buy dice control, then your statement could be false. The shooter could be doing something wrong, causing the dice to land in an unintended way.
Several years ago I tagged along as Stanford Wong shot dice downtown. He used a set I was not expecting, I think the hard ways set, but rotating one die 180 degrees along the axis. When we were away from the table I asked him why. As I recall, he said that he had been double-pitching lately, and was correcting for it. If he was right, and didn't make the correction, they he would have had worse than random results.
This article takes the cake.
Frank Scoblete is a dice God. We now have to bow to him for sharing this great knowledge.
Quotes:
"Cutting Edge Craps ($16.95, Triumph Books.) For a select few dice controllers, Scoblete and the Dominator explain, it is possible to gain a larger edge on high-risk, high-reward wagers"
"It's a secret Scoblete has stewed over for years, one he says he is worried about making public. "
"Cutting Edge Craps presents a chart that shows a swing to a 3.59 percent player edge if the shooter can depress 7s to once per 6.5 rolls."
"Cutting Edge Craps goes a giant step beyond simply rolling fewer sevens, to those truly elite dice controllers who can keep the dice
"on axis" to the extent they raise the frequency of specific numbers,
making some odd bets profitable. "
Enough....all B.S.
The Wizard and Mr Bluejay should challenge this guy and his loonies to roll and track and see who wins.
They would only have to beat random dice rollers.
Random dice rollers can expect: No fancy software needed. Excel does it real fast.
SRR the famous: sevens to rolls ratio
| rolls | expected 7s | #7s or less | #7s or less% | S.R.R |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 36 | 6 | 5 | 0.4308756 | 7.2 |
| 72 | 12 | 11 | 0.4510275 | 6.545 |
| 108 | 18 | 16 | 0.3586012 | 6.750 |
| 216 | 36 | 33 | 0.3299484 | 6.545 |
| 600 | 100 | 92 | 0.2067754 | 6.522 |
| 1200 | 200 | 184 | 0.1141594 | 6.522 |
| 4800 | 800 | 738 | 0.0081349 | 6.504 |
| 9600 | 1600 | 1477 | 0.0003531 | 6.500 |
Random craps shooters already have a 6.5 or higher SRR 43% of the time or more in less than 72 rolls of the dice. That is about 9 hands per shooter.
Anything to sell books.
Why isn't this goon and his loons wealthy from their great skills and knowledge at a Craps table?
Because they sell the information only, it makes for good reading and just like 98steps, someone will pay $$$ for it.
Quote: 7winnerEnough....all B.S.
The Wizard and Mr Bluejay should challenge this guy and his loonies to roll and track and see who wins.
Mr. Bluejay seems very interested in this topic, based on personal conversations. He has an open mind, and seems to want to give it an honest chance. I expect you'll hear something from him about this eventually. I hope he does indeed look into it.
Quote: 7winner"Cutting Edge Craps ($16.95, Triumph Books.) For a select few dice controllers, Scoblete and the Dominator explain, it is possible to gain a larger edge on high-risk, high-reward wagers"
"It's a secret Scoblete has stewed over for years, one he says he is worried about making public. "
"Cutting Edge Craps presents a chart that shows a swing to a 3.59 percent player edge if the shooter can depress 7s to once per 6.5 rolls."
"Cutting Edge Craps goes a giant step beyond simply rolling fewer sevens, to those truly elite dice controllers who can keep the dice
"on axis" to the extent they raise the frequency of specific numbers,
making some odd bets profitable. "
Anything to sell books.
Why isn't this goon and his loons wealthy from their great skills and knowledge at a Craps table?
Because they sell the information only, it makes for good reading and just like 98steps, someone will pay $$$ for it.
Question for the group: Do these books sell well? I mean, how many books is Scoblete actually going through from this effort?
And honestly, decreasing the probability of a 7 to 1 in 6.5 means you're taking the frequency from 0.16667 to 0.15384. That doesn't sound like a lot, but the best you can do is 1/8 or 0.125. Look at it this way: when you keep the dice on-axis, p(7) is 0.125 assuming the dice otherwise rotate freely around the axis. When you don't, it's 0.1667. So what percentage of the time do you need to keep the dice on-axis to get 0.15384?
0.15384 = 0.125*x + 0.1667*(1-x)
0.15384 = 0.125*x - 0.1667*x + 0.1667
-0.01282 = -0.04167*x
x = 30.77%.
So they think someone can keep the dice on-axis over 30% of the time without the casino noticing. Does that sound plausible to you?
Quote: MathExtremistQuestion for the group: Do these books sell well? I mean, how many books is Scoblete actually going through from this effort?
Scoblete writes a lot of books. I do not think he sells many.
He does have dice control classes thru http://www.goldentouchcraps.com/
His website is, Buy this, Buy this, Buy this.
Golden Primer Package cost: $1995
Silver Primer Package cost: $1495
Refresher Class Cost: $1295
just to show a few.
I have to go sign up for a class. This guy is the best.
Only $2000 and they treat you like a King!
And while I'm at that, I just got another email that I won $15,000,000 US in an email lottery.
WOW!!!
It IS my lucky day!
HI HO HI HO IT's off to work I go!
Honey, our dog now can have that operation to remove the mail man from his mouth!
There are all kind of shots that you can use besides the on axis shot, there is the underhand shot, stack shot, whip shot, blanket shot, this is just a few of the different shots players can use, there are many more and they are not on axis shots. You might have read one book on dice setting and shooting, and believe that there is only one way for a DI to shoot the dice. “Wrong”
What everybody believes is that a DI needs to get on big roll's to win money and this is far from the truth, what the need to do is make the points they are betting on , and avoid the seven as long as possibly. There is no way that the guy is going to get on a good roll every time he has the dice in his hands. So if someone is writing that they have big hands every time they get the dice I will be the first one to tell you they are writing fiction, don't believe it for one moment!
Playing craps is not always about the math of the game, but you do need to know it if you ever thought about winning! There are table trends and there are shooters that do not roll 6's and 8's, just ask any dealer that has been around the tables, and knows what they are doing, and you just might be in for a big surprise when they tell you that he have seen more players lose more money betting on the 6 & 8 then any other number that is not a prop bet.
Could it be that when nobody is rolling those two numbers, and that they will stick to betting only them to the bitter end!
There are some great shooters, and then you have everybody else that sets the dice, and yes it does help some of these guys, if they went to a school, they might get past the average expectation for a roll! They might roll 9 or ten numbers when everything is going right for them!
When they went to a school, they might have been taught how to shoot, but when they get into a casino, the revert back to what they were doing before they took the course. Then they only learned one shot, that might not work on any given table.
Are there real DI'S? “Yes” but there only a few that can beat the math of the game consistently. Are they the guys that are writing the book, I don't think so, I have seen some of them shoot, and only a few of them can really do what they are writing about! Charles C Westcott is one of the writers that can shoot and tells it like it is, with no BS! Are there authors that are writing fiction? I think so and a lot of players have bought into what a few of these authors are writing, hook line and sinker!
They never saw some of these writers shoot, and yet they have put them up on a pedestal, and talk about them as they are gods, to the dice setting players of the world.
Some of these guys say they make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year playing craps, and players believe this crap they are writing about. They want to live in a fantasy world, and you will never convince them that it's fiction. When you have one of these authors writing that they spent all day playing craps, then went on to play all night getting two hours of sleep, before they were woke up by their buddies. Then the next morning, went on to win all their money back, sorry buddy I think I can read between the lines on that little story and say BS, how gullible are all your readers?
I still say read some of these blogs our writers are writing, and think about what they wrote.
Then ask your self have you ever seen anybody do anything like that on a craps table?
There is one funny thing that happens in Vegas, when you read some of these trip reports that some of these guys write, and they are not the same as you remember them to be when you saw one of these guys shooting, or when one of your buddies calls you up to laugh like hell about how bad some of these writers were shooting and losing their butts, then you read their trip report, what just happened, they lost, and now all of a sudden they are writing the had a great night playing and won!
Well I guess it does sell books, and it does make you god like in some players eyes, but how do they sleep at night? Yes I know that they might have been having a bad day, but they sure didn't write about the way it happened!
Put a time line to some of these stories, and you can figure it out for your self, it didn't happen!
No DI will win every time they go to the tables, they do lose just like everybody else, when they are having a bad day, but they will cut their loses and leave the table, before they go down in flames!
There are other schools besides goldentouch, I don't know what they charge, I have never taking one of these classes, but I do know that some of them do a good job with most of their students! As I have played with some of the better shooters that have come out of one or more of these schools! I do know one guy that took the goldentouch class and he can shoot!
LOL from superrick, and keep the math of the game coming!
....
Quote: superrickthere are shooters that do not roll 6's and 8's
I do know one guy that took the goldentouch class and he can shoot!
Rick- do you actually believe either of these 2 statements?
Where is mkl when we need him?
When you say 'and he can shoot', do you mean he will consistently and reliably beat the casino?
I want this challenge more than any system challenge.
If anyone knows- how 'good' does a dice controller claim to be able to be?
If they are trying to hit a non 7, can they increase to 31/36 over 30/36?
Or is it even more than that?
....
DI, as you call it, is something that everyone possesses. If I go to the casino and throw the dice (which is exactly what I am doing in about an hour), I am influencing the dice, as they are in my hands. The trick of controlled shooting of course is to minimize the randomness due to the back wall and the bouncing. Once the dice hit the pyramids of the dice and the table and other objects they are subject to randomness. A whip or any fast throw will not accomplish anything except randomize the result. I've seen people employ all methods.
Most people look for patterns in life. That's how they learn. Without knowing the math, or the physics, one can make an observation like, 'when I hold the dice like this, and throw them exactly like this, it seems I get results like this'. Indeed, it is in our nature to make connections like that and it is natural through our learning to employ the empirical method to try to logically explain the results.
But it's a fallacy. It's the same false conclusion someone makes from observations such as "when I stand on 14 against a dealer 10, I tend to win more than lose". You can prove that one wrong with simple math, but try to tell that to someone who has a winning record playing that way due to positive variance. So we go to a dice control class, spend our $2,000, come out of it, and have a few good rolls, and say "it was worth it". Someone else in the same class has a few bad rolls, and says, "What a waste of money". Or, we go to the craps table and see the regulars there and you observe that the old man in the corner seems to have a bad throw everytime, then he comes out and surprises you with a 10 point roll which you miss because you weren't betting on him.
Superrick, I attribute most of what you call DI to positive variance, or good luck. There may be a few people out there who truly possess the skill, but I still pertain that to possess the skill, you have to remove as many elements of randomness as possible. To do that, you have to throw the dice in the same pattern every time and to minimize the randomness by avoiding the infleunce of the table or the back wall or make the influence the same by throwing your dice to the same target everytime.
The record for the longest throw is held by a random shooter. When I see the story verifying that a dice influencer broke the record, I might think differently, but for now, the theory that dice influencing or control work does not correlate with any observed, verifiable results that I've seen.
Quote: MathExtremistQuestion for the group: Do these books sell well? I mean, how many books is Scoblete actually going through from this effort?
And honestly, decreasing the probability of a 7 to 1 in 6.5 means you're taking the frequency from 0.16667 to 0.15384. That doesn't sound like a lot, but the best you can do is 1/8 or 0.125. Look at it this way: when you keep the dice on-axis, p(7) is 0.125 assuming the dice otherwise rotate freely around the axis. When you don't, it's 0.1667. So what percentage of the time do you need to keep the dice on-axis to get 0.15384?
0.15384 = 0.125*x + 0.1667*(1-x)
0.15384 = 0.125*x - 0.1667*x + 0.1667
-0.01282 = -0.04167*x
x = 30.77%.
But that calculation assumes that both dice either stay on axis or don't, which is probably not going to be the case. In WinCraps, you can alter the probabilties for each die separately, which I think better reflects what would happen. Here's one example:
Using what I call the "no 6/1, no 5/2" set, so one die rotates around the 6/1 axis and the other around the 5/2, if each die stays on axis 10% of the time, you get:
die #1, rolls out of 36: 1 - 5.4 2 - 6.3 3 - 6.3 4 - 6.3 5 - 6.3 6 - 5.4
die #2, rolls out of 36: 1 - 6.3 2 - 5.4 3 - 6.3 4 - 6.3 5 - 5.4 6 - 6.3
When you put these together, you get a 7 percentage of 16.626, or 5.985 out of 36.
For 20% on-axis, it comes out to 16.499% or 5.94 out of 36.
For 30% on-axis, it comes out to 16.292% or 5.865 out of 36.
So, you need even better than 30% success per die to achieve 1 in 6.5.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA
Quote: superrick
There are all kind of shots that you can use besides the on axis shot, there is the underhand shot, stack shot, whip shot, blanket shot, this is just a few of the different shots players can use, there are many more and they are not on axis shots. You might have read one book on dice setting and shooting, and believe that there is only one way for a DI to shoot the dice. “Wrong”
Underhand shot: How does throwing the dice underhand de-randomize them?
Whip shot: this is not a legal throw, is it?
Blanket shot: not sure what this is, but it sounds familiar, like s.t. that could be used on street craps, not in a casino
I'm still trying to get you to describe HOW these non-on-axis throws alter the distribution of outcomes.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA
Well I am not the one that is selling books or schools, if you read to posts, I tell it like it is.
There are some great fiction writers that have their blogs and books that say they can walk on water when the dice are in their hands.
Some of these guys have never been seen in a casino by anybody, they do have one or two posters that came out and said the have seen the author in a casino, but I can be anybody I want to be when I am on the internet! So can I believe what the one guy is saying, I don't think so, not that I an calling him a liar, but just question why nobody else has every seen this author!
Quote: boymimboSuperrick, you are full of crap, but you are entitled to your opinion, as am I. I've been playing craps a few times a month for about 6 years now. I've had a short term subscription to the Golden Touch newsletter (Scoblete answered one of my questions on CCT), and I've seen the blather posted there. I also have a university degree in Physics.
I didn't say that everybody that reads one of these books or goes to one of these schools will become a DI, and have said many times that they won't, there are very few guys that I will ever go to a casino with because they can shoot, and I do consider them a DI.
I have said repeatedly that even a DI will not get on rolls every time they pick up the dice and if the are writing on a forum or blog that they are they are writing fiction!
Quote: boymimbo
Superrick, I attribute most of what you call DI to positive variance, or good luck. There may be a few people out there who truly possess the skill, but I still pertain that to possess the skill, you have to remove as many elements of randomness as possible. To do that, you have to throw the dice in the same pattern every time and to minimize the randomness by avoiding the infleunce of the table or the back wall or make the influence the same by throwing your dice to the same target every-time.
Well I attribute it to the fact that there are a few guys that spend countless hours practicing what they do and can land the dice right where they want to just about every-time, same speed, same spot where they land, and they can adjust to what is happening on the table on the fly.
There also is a big difference between the guy that is practicing at home then can't do a thing in a real casino, with chips in their way, players doing every stupid thing they can to stop a roll!
Most of the guys I know have real tables at home or access to one. They are the guy that put in the time practicing, because they enjoy it, to them it's a way to relax, you just might want to call them the Tiger Woods of the craps tables. They will not win every time they go to the tables, just like he doesn't win every time he plays. Would I bet on him or the guy that has been playing for one year, my bet is on him!
Quote: boymimbo
The record for the longest throw is held by a random shooter. When I see the story verifying that a dice influencer broke the record, I might think differently, but for now, the theory that dice influencing or control work does not correlate with any observed, verifiable results that I've seen.
That statement is very true, I happened to be on a table with her here in Vegas and yes she just picks up the dice and slings them down the table. When she was shooting the dice were hitting chips flying all over the place and she had a 44 roll! Her dice were not set, they didn't land in the same spot every time and she did have a good roll, two days later she had a 5 roll on the same table, and left right away. Luck yes, skill no, every dog has it's day, what can I say!
My post are more about saving you money, just because you read it in a book don't believe it, till you see the guy that is writing it, in a casino doing what he says he can do! When you see someone setting the dice it does not mean that they are going to get on a roll and you should bet on them, everybody now sets the dice!
This thread is about the question is there players that do control the dice some what! “Yes” would be my answer. Can I make a hole in one on the golf course? Hell no, I am lucky if I could even hit the golf ball. But then again I don't practice the game, just like everybody that is on a craps table they are there to get lucky and have some fun, hell stick a cigar in their mouth just like in the movies, and they don't mind losing their money, they hit the big time when the dice are in their hands, win or lose!
Just because you can't do something does not mean it can not be done, if you think that you spend a lot of time in the casino because you play a few times a month, I got news for you, it will never mount up to the time these guys spend throwing the dice, they do it just about everyday!
Most of these guys will never play on a crowded table, they are not at a casino to make every fool on the table money, they just want to make their money and get off the table, so you may never see one if you only play on the weekends or you are always playing on full tables!
I must say that I was full of crap 1/2 hour ago but I took care of that when I used the rest room!
LOL
superrick
....
Quote: boymimboA whip or any fast throw will not accomplish anything except randomize the result. I've seen people employ all methods.
Point of clarification: the "whip shot" is one in which the hand makes a whipping motion and imparts rapid rotation around the vertical axis to both dice. The dice do not tumble, but skid across the table and carom off the baseboard. When executed properly, the whip shot leads to a 100% determined result since the chosen faces always remain face-up from when they leave the hand to when they come to rest. I mentioned previously that, while I have not seen it, I believe Steve Forte's game protection videos have a clip of him throwing a long series of 12s on demand using the whip shot. See "Scarne on Dice", ch. 14 for more on the whip shot and other dice moves.
Quote: goatcabinSo, you need even better than 30% success per die to achieve 1 in 6.5.
Fair enough, but that only strengthens my point - does anyone really think they can have a greater than 30% chance of influencing the dice without the casino spotting it and saying "just throw them against the back wall, sir"?
A.) Define Constraints:
I.) controlled shooting is based on the physics of minimizing axial rotation to reduce the outcome of a 7.
II a.) practice is suppose to allow you to throw the dice with ~ the same speed, force, velocity, and spin.
II b.) practice is suppose to allow you to also aim at the same spot over and over and over again.
III.) repeated trials under a pseudo-environment should result in statistically significant results.
B.) Hypothesis: It works or doesn't.
C.) Testing
I.) you have to create a control blind environment otherwise you'll be unable to account for variables in A. II What this means is you can't use a human being throwing the dice (you're going to counter then what's the point....i'll get to it).
II.) build a mechanical arm that holds the dice and can throw the dice with the same speed, force, velocity, and direction. I suggest using a natural swinging motion like a pendulum and a constant like gravity to achieve consistent force and velocity. Anchor the arm in place to get the direction constant. Set the dice to be exactly the same pattern every time. Tie a string to the arm, and let go. When the string is released, gravity pulls the arm down and forward releasing the dice.
D.) Record results and use a Wizard to analyze.
E.) Defend Results: Look, the whole point of practice is to minimize variance. Variance is a function of speed, force, velocity, and aim. How are you suppose to minimize those? You must create a controlled environment. This is the basic scientific method people!!!!!!! Remember high school science class? If you run a trial just using your own arm, you will constantly be using differing speeds, force, velocity, and aims. Your results will be infinitely flawed and biased as a result of this. You are not a robot or a machine. Hence these con-artists keep telling you to practice practice practice.
I am absolutely right on this. Here's a better biomechanical analogy. In bowling, manufacturers test their products using several methods, but EVERYONE uses this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lag6viA7rnc
Why? Because it reduces external variables. "Oh I slipped. Oh I threw it too hard. Oh I had a poor grip!" Sound familiar? PLEASE People!! You can't test a system with so much human error. You absolutely need to create a mechanical arm to see if your theory of controlled shooting is even possible. If it is, then practice practice practice.
Quote: superrickWell I attribute it to the fact that there are a few guys that spend countless hours practicing what they do and can land the dice right where they want to just about every-time, same speed, same spot where they land, and they can adjust to what is happening on the table on the fly.
Since superrick is just like all the other dice controllers out there, ALL TALK, he still refuses to answer a simple question from goatcabin.
"I'm still trying to get you to describe HOW these non-on-axis throws alter the distribution of outcomes.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA"
superrick now tells the secret:
"...can land the dice right where they want to just about every-time,
same speed,
same spot where they land"
the secret is now out. It is where the dice land!
I'm back to the Craps table. I knew I was missing something.
Quote: AsswhoopermcdaddyYou all are taking the whole concept of controlled shooting out of context. In bowling, manufacturers test their products using several methods,
bowling is NOT random.
rolling dice at a craps table produces random rolls.
rolling dice in a casino at a real craps table still produces random dice rolls.
No one can change that.
remember it is still OK to think the earth is flat.
Quote: 7winnerbowling is NOT random.
rolling dice at a craps table produces random rolls.
rolling dice in a casino at a real craps table still produces random dice rolls.
No one can change that.
remember it is still OK to think the earth is flat.
Bowling and dice shooting are the same concept here.
1.) Throwing ball, throwing dice
2.) Aiming ball, aiming dice
3.) Spin of ball, spin of dice
4.) Speed of ball, spin of dice
and so on and so forth.
You must be from the school of thought that dice shooting is completely bogus. Well you have said nothing here to prove it. In fact, no one here has designed any controlled experiment to prove it to be so. Until you test the theory, no human application of that theory will ever be valid.
Quote: AsswhoopermcdaddyBowling and dice shooting are the same concept here.
1.) Throwing ball, throwing dice
2.) Aiming ball, aiming dice
3.) Spin of ball, spin of dice
4.) Speed of ball, spin of dice
and so on and so forth.
You have left out the bounciness of the craps table and the pyramids on the walls, put there specifically to ensure random results, along with the rules the casinos enforce on shooting. So, ultimately, bowling and craps are very, very different.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA
Quote: 7winnerbowling is NOT random.
rolling dice at a craps table produces random rolls.
To my knowledge, nobody has tested whether a dice throwing machine can influence the dice distribution on a craps table. That'd be a fun robotics experiment, though.
I haven't bowled in years. I think I always had the feeling that the lanes were designed to disrupt the accurate roll of my ball. Maybe there were hidden pyramids.Quote: goatcabinYou have left out the bounciness of the craps table and the pyramids on the walls, put there specifically to ensure random results, along with the rules the casinos enforce on shooting. So, ultimately, bowling and craps are very, very different.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/7569802/Martin-Gardner-A-Die-of-Another-Color
I equate dice control to bowling yes; In bowling there are VERY few people who can bowl 900 series (Three perfect games in a row). The same can be said for craps...there are VERY few people who can influence the dice enough to overcome the HA...
However, on the converse, there are a LOT of people who can bowl a 300 game...the same can be said for craps; there are a LOT of people who can AFFECT the HA (however, the degree of affect is debatable)
Quote: goatcabinYou have left out the bounciness of the craps table and the pyramids on the walls, put there specifically to ensure random results, along with the rules the casinos enforce on shooting. So, ultimately, bowling and craps are very, very different.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA
Quote: MathExtremistDice control book by Martin Gardner:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/7569802/Martin-Gardner-A-Die-of-Another-Color
I didn't read the whole thing, but I think it's all about barroom dice games with a cup, and involves cheating by palming one or more dice.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA
Quote: AsswhoopermcdaddyMkl654321 our resident physicist......what do you think of applying the scientific method to determining the truth and fallacy to controlled dice shooting?
I ain't no physicist, which is why I wish some actual physicist who was interested in this problem would do a rigorously controlled scientific experiment to determine once and for all whether it was possible (as in, a practical possibility).
