tupp
tupp
Joined: Feb 9, 2012
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 519
March 19th, 2013 at 2:08:05 PM permalink
Quote: Face

For the record, I donít think DI is impossible.


Nor do I.


Quote: Face

If you could somehow eliminate all of the above variables, you should be able to punch 5 rounds through the same hole at 300yds. Physics says you must.


There are a lot of variables to consider, but even if you punch only one round through the hole at 300 yards, you have still influenced the results.


Quote: Face

I find DI to be the exact same concept.


I think we agree, but maybe not on the matter of degree.


Quote: Face

The big question is ďhow many variables need be overcome?Ē Oil, spilled beer, etc covering the dice by contact are one. The deformation of the felt upon contact is another. The deformation of the pyramids, the deformation of the die themselves, the change in the properties of the air, itís a big list.


The variables inherent in the shooter's performance (trajectory, spin, force/speed, set, uniformity, consistency) are fewer and are given in all environments.

In regards to the environmental variables (table length, "bounciness" of the felt, pyramid height, pyramid "bounciness," stacks of chips near the landing area, etc.), the shooter decides whether or not the table is worth playing. One of the two self-admitted DIs on this forum has verified that if the table doesn't "feel right," he doesn't play.


Quote: Face

Knowing how these variables affect the die, as far as I know, isnít known yet. I havenít even read anything that supposes how much or how little it matters. We know it affects things, we know it must, but we have no idea to what degree.


I think that we know that consistency and uniformity help a great deal, as does a compact trajectory and landing very close to the back wall. We also know that bouncy felts are to be avoided.


Quote: Face

We know humans can do surprising things with muscle memory, just look at professional sports and competitive games. But again, to what level such skill needs to be is not known. To make an analogy, do you need the accuracy to hit a bulls-eye, or just somewhere in a strike zone?


You need to avoid one 7 in about 50 throws.


Quote: Face

[snip]
... but there are those in both the Yay and Nay camps who already declare they are the ones who are right with not much scientific evidence to support it.


Oh, there are more camps than just "Yay" and "Nay," but the "Nay" camp is rigidly absolute and assumes that the situation it is a very simple dichotomy.


Quote: Face

And for those of us still with an open mind, we only have anecdotes, conjecture, and a test that was both short, as well as wishy-washy (I think Wong convinced himself to DI, then retracted that belief).


Uhm, the page that I linked actually described two dice trials (in which the shooters prevailed). Wizard lost about $2000 betting against the shooters on one of those "wishy-washy" events.

Actually, in both events, the shooters' goals were clear and were sanctioned by both sides in advance -- there was nothing wishy-washy about the trials.

Furthermore, the forum just completed five dice trials, in three of them the shooter prevailed, one was a push and in two the shooter lost. In one of the trials lost by the shooter lost on an obviously random toss, so I'm not sure if that trial should count. Anyway, the current trial score is:
DI possible 5
DI impossible 2
Pushes 1

Also, a couple of members have been recording their rolls. Those records along with the results of all of the dice trials can be combined to give a more confident idea of whether or not there is something to the idea of dice influencing.

Of course, the "Nay" camp discourages and ridicules such experiments at every opportunity.


Quote: Face

I think there are many of us here that donít have a stake way or the other, but weíre interested in the science.


You are actually describing most of those who are considered to be "Yay" by the "Naysayers"


Quote: Face

A lot of the arguing from the Nays seems to be the pointing out that X doesnít necessarily mean something,...


Yes. That is an obvious point that has been acknowledged repeatedly by just about everyone who is considered to be "Yay." However, such repeated acknowledgements do not stop the "broken record" that is the "Nay" camp.

In addition, many in the "Nay" camp have reasoned that dice influencing is absolutely impossible, because they just know that it is impossible.


Quote: Face

... which I had hoped would result in the Yays to bring some solid evidence to the table. But ever since Ahigh started with his videos (which began the process of providing evidence), the idea has seemed to come off the rails, with people trying to instead argue their way into truth. ďArguing into truthĒ isnít possible when the evidence is there and is obtainable. Someone just has to get it.


See above mention of dice trials and roll records. Some are slowly getting it, in spite of all the ridicule and insults. It's hard work, and it takes a lot of time.


Quote: Face

If DIs just want to argue, thatís fine.


Who are these DIs of whom you speak? I count only two on the forum, and only one of them wants to argue.


Quote: Face

But if they want to be taken seriously, if they want to make a discovery, if they want to produce a treasure of knowledge, they need to produce facts and evidence.


First of all, please speak for yourself and do not declare what anyone must do to be "taken seriously."

Secondly, please refer once again to the above mention of dice trials and roll recording, and please review their actual reports scattered throughout this forum.

Work has been done. Hopefully, more will be done, but it's not easy, especially when others are constantly throwing rocks from the peanut gallery (and declaring what one must do).


Quote: Face

Without, every one of these craps threads are going to decay into little more than pissing contests, a place many already seem to be headed.


Certainly, that scenario is ongoing in one of the camps.


Quote: Face

Tl;dr Ė Prove it.


Again, speak for yourself and don't demand. If you want proof, no one is stopping you from trying your own experiments.
tupp
tupp
Joined: Feb 9, 2012
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 519
March 19th, 2013 at 2:10:17 PM permalink
Quote: MathExtremist

I don't think anyone's making that argument.


I am not so sure about that...
tupp
tupp
Joined: Feb 9, 2012
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 519
March 19th, 2013 at 2:13:51 PM permalink
Quote: Ibeatyouraces

Three Card Poker is a -EV game but there IS a way to beat it thats been PROVEN. Until DI is proven, and it may well be one day, it is a negative EV game for all.


So, the world was flat until Columbus proved that it was round?

Either dice influencing is possible or it's absolutely impossible -- "proof" only verifies the situation one way or another.

By the way, how can Three Card Poker be a -EV game if there is a way to beat it?
Buzzard
Buzzard
Joined: Oct 28, 2012
  • Threads: 90
  • Posts: 6814
March 19th, 2013 at 2:15:11 PM permalink
" In one of the trials lost by the shooter lost on an obviously random toss, so I'm not sure if that trial should count. "

I hereby nominate this as the most asinine post yet on a dice setting thread. Anyone care to second my nomination ?
Shed not for her the bitter tear Nor give the heart to vain regret Tis but the casket that lies here, The gem that filled it Sparkles yet
tupp
tupp
Joined: Feb 9, 2012
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 519
March 19th, 2013 at 2:18:38 PM permalink
Quote: Buzzard

" In one of the trials lost by the shooter lost on an obviously random toss, so I'm not sure if that trial should count. "
I hereby nominate this as the most asinine post yet on a dice setting thread. Anyone care to second my nomination ?


Again with the venomous insults and personal attacks? Do you have any idea to what I am referring?

By the way, what is your answer on the bet that has no monetary risk for you?
Buzzard
Buzzard
Joined: Oct 28, 2012
  • Threads: 90
  • Posts: 6814
March 19th, 2013 at 2:24:46 PM permalink
Care to explain what an obviously random toss is , and how that differs from a non-random toss ?


foolish, unintelligent, or silly; stupid: It is surprising that supposedly intelligent people can make such asinine statements

Note intelligent people in the definition. I do not consider than to be insulting.
Shed not for her the bitter tear Nor give the heart to vain regret Tis but the casket that lies here, The gem that filled it Sparkles yet
Ahigh
Ahigh
Joined: May 19, 2010
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 5139
March 19th, 2013 at 2:27:01 PM permalink
Quote: teddys

Here's a story: at the Plaza last night, two newbs were playing next to me, betting red chips exclusively. They started aping my bets, and betting come bets every roll (no odds). A guy went on an absolute heater, and the newbs cleaned up. One of them said, "This is way better than slots!" Sure, the game will take your money over time (especially not betting odds), but the slots would have taken their $20 even quicker, with no chance to parlay it into $50 or $60 like they did. That's why craps is a great game.



Yeah, that guy sucked and was just lucky.
tupp
tupp
Joined: Feb 9, 2012
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 519
March 19th, 2013 at 2:37:37 PM permalink
Quote: Buzzard

Care to explain what an obviously random toss is , and how that differs from a non-random toss ?


Go here. Scroll the video to 08:29.

Ahigh jokingly shook the dice and threw, and rolled a seven.


Quote: Buzzard

foolish, unintelligent, or silly; stupid: It is surprising that supposedly intelligent people can make such asinine statements


Well, in that regard, I have to confess that I am finally starting to believe in Big Foot, because a big foot is what someone on this forum continually puts into his mouth.
AlanMendelson
AlanMendelson
Joined: Oct 5, 2011
  • Threads: 102
  • Posts: 3613
March 20th, 2013 at 12:40:58 AM permalink
I think dice influencing and dice control are both possible just as I know that hitting a three-pointer from mid-court is possible.

We know that it is possible to sink a basketball from mid court. It happens all the time, and some lucky person wins $10,000 or a new car or gets a college scholarship when it happens --- but we don't think that anyone can do it consistently.

The same is true with dice influencing. We know that some people sometimes can have a perfectly executed throw so that the dice remain on axis, hit the back wall softly and come to rest on a desired number -- even a number that pays a hop bet. But we haven't seen anyone do it consistently.
AlanMendelson
AlanMendelson
Joined: Oct 5, 2011
  • Threads: 102
  • Posts: 3613
March 20th, 2013 at 2:26:23 AM permalink
Quote: tupp

Ahigh jokingly shook the dice and threw, and rolled a seven.



I watched that live, and I wonder what would have been said if it hadn't been a 7 ?? There was only a one out of six chance of throwing a seven, you know. Even if he set the dice and had a magnificent controlled throw, he still would have had only a one out of six chance of throwing a seven.

  • Jump to: