tupp
tupp
Joined: Feb 9, 2012
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 519
March 20th, 2013 at 12:33:44 PM permalink
Quote: AlanMendelson

I think dice influencing and dice control are both possible just as I know that hitting a three-pointer from mid-court is possible.


Agreed.


Quote: AlanMendelson

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.


This notion probably takes the concept of dice influencing a lot farther than most expect.

Dice influencing doesn't need to be as difficult as rolling a desired number "consistently." It is much easier to avoid one 7 in 50 rolls, which is about all one needs to overcome the house edge.
tupp
tupp
Joined: Feb 9, 2012
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 519
March 20th, 2013 at 12:42:14 PM permalink
Quote: AlanMendelson

I watched that live, and I wonder what would have been said if it hadn't been a 7 ??


Really?

I watched and wonder what would have been said if Ahigh had attempted a controlled shot and avoided a 7.


Quote: AlanMendelson

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.


No. An actual controlled throw would have reduced the possibility of rolling a seven to somewhere below the 1-in-6 conventional math expectations.

Likewise, saying that "craps is a negative EV game, doesn't apply to a dice influencing. Conventional probability doesn't take into account the effects of dice influencing.
Zcore13
Zcore13
Joined: Nov 30, 2009
  • Threads: 39
  • Posts: 3633
March 20th, 2013 at 12:52:08 PM permalink
But since dice influencing only applies in a fantasy world, conventional probablity is what we have to go by in the real world. Dice sliding, maybe. Dice influencing, no different than Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny.

ZCore13
I am an employee of a Casino. Former Table Games Director,, current Pit Supervisor. All the personal opinions I post are my own and do not represent the opinions of the Casino or Tribe that I work for.
tupp
tupp
Joined: Feb 9, 2012
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 519
March 20th, 2013 at 12:59:14 PM permalink
Quote: Zcore13

But since dice influencing only applies in a fantasy world, conventional probablity is what we have to go by in the real world. Dice sliding, maybe. Dice influencing, no different than Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny.


Wow! That is an entirely new, unique point, and the joke is so clever and original!
Ibeatyouraces
Ibeatyouraces
Joined: Jan 12, 2010
  • Threads: 68
  • Posts: 11933
March 20th, 2013 at 1:06:32 PM permalink
deleted
DUHHIIIIIIIII HEARD THAT!
tupp
tupp
Joined: Feb 9, 2012
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 519
March 20th, 2013 at 1:18:21 PM permalink
Quote: Ibeatyouraces

But is so true.


I guess the question is: How do you know that it is so true? What is your proof?


Quote: Ibeatyouraces

That why they're on here arguing about it instead of utilizing it by making money.


Is that your argument for why dice influencing is impossible?
Zcore13
Zcore13
Joined: Nov 30, 2009
  • Threads: 39
  • Posts: 3633
March 20th, 2013 at 1:41:34 PM permalink
Something isn't until it's proven it is. That's the way life works. The burden of proof would be on the dice setters to prove it does work. That has never been proven. Also not proven is that U.S. Casinos are knowingly switching in and out biased dice to cheat the customers. Now that the masked man is gone, that areguement may be over though.

ZCore13
I am an employee of a Casino. Former Table Games Director,, current Pit Supervisor. All the personal opinions I post are my own and do not represent the opinions of the Casino or Tribe that I work for.
Buzzard
Buzzard
Joined: Oct 28, 2012
  • Threads: 90
  • Posts: 6814
March 20th, 2013 at 1:43:44 PM permalink
" Now that the masked man is gone, that areguement may be over though."

Rushing to say I doubt it, before someone proves I am right!
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
Doc
Doc
Joined: Feb 27, 2010
  • Threads: 45
  • Posts: 7071
March 20th, 2013 at 1:45:33 PM permalink
If I knew that dice influencing/control were possible and I had the skill/ability to do it, I certainly would not be on this forum discussing it, just as I would not have written a book about card counting if I were one of the first people to figure out how to gain a definite advantage over a casino with that technique. It would be like taking a shotgun after the golden goose.

If I had no skills whatsoever at dice influencing/control but didn't mind scamming the gullible suckers, I might offer seminars and videos on the subject.

If I were highly skeptical that dice influencing/control could be performed with a consistency that would provide a reliable advantage over a casino, I certainly would not consider it my responsibility to prove my position in any debate -- I would consider that I have the default position (null hypothesis) and would expect anyone who disagrees to prove their position.
AlanMendelson
AlanMendelson
Joined: Oct 5, 2011
  • Threads: 102
  • Posts: 3613
March 20th, 2013 at 1:48:08 PM permalink
Quote: tupp



No. An actual controlled throw would have reduced the possibility of rolling a seven to somewhere below the 1-in-6 conventional math expectations.



Yes, that's true if you think Ahigh can somehow influence the dice.

  • Jump to: