Throwing the dice too hard.
March 6th, 2013 at 8:41:28 PM
permalink
I'm talking about the guys who aren't happy unless they whip the dice so hard against the wall that they bounce back in front of them. I know logically it shouldn't have any impact on the game, but has anyone ever seen one of these assclowns luck their way into more than two points and a couple box numbers? I stopped betting on them completely and make a tidy profit off the don't pass whenever one's at the table.
March 6th, 2013 at 10:25:02 PM
permalink
Throwing the dice so hard that travel all the way up and then back down the table guarantees a random game. Hence you are guaranteed to lose money "fading" them by playing the don't pass.
March 7th, 2013 at 1:31:54 AM
permalink
Makes no difference whatsoever.
March 7th, 2013 at 3:50:40 AM
permalink
Quote: GiorgioFromYumaI stopped betting on them completely and make a tidy profit off the don't pass whenever one's at the table.
So Giorgio has found the secret to beating craps! Throw the dice really hard and bet the don't for a sure win! Thanks!
March 7th, 2013 at 3:51:18 AM
permalink
I can see how it would be irritating if they are knocking chips around or you're afraid they might bounce into your eye.
I am a robot.
March 7th, 2013 at 6:31:26 AM
permalink
It's just another form of dice influencing. This one has a reverse spin.
March 7th, 2013 at 6:52:55 AM
permalink
... I have seen TWO 6 point Fire Bets won on the Strip in Las Vegas for several $Ten-thousands by using a hard throw of the dice on tables known to use biased dice from time to time (namely Caesars and Paris)
It only makes no difference in theory-land on the internet where fair dice is assumed ... in reality of Las Vegas, when unbalanced dice are used, sometimes the only long rolls are the result of hard throws that counter Mother Nature and the effects of gravity that can take over and control a soft "controlled' toss ..... throw it hard and you will not fall victim to the imbalance so often
Quote: AussieMakes no difference whatsoever.
It only makes no difference in theory-land on the internet where fair dice is assumed ... in reality of Las Vegas, when unbalanced dice are used, sometimes the only long rolls are the result of hard throws that counter Mother Nature and the effects of gravity that can take over and control a soft "controlled' toss ..... throw it hard and you will not fall victim to the imbalance so often
.... that is simply my opinion ....
Ciao,
Harley ...
Link = http://crapsadvantageplayers.blogspot.com/
March 7th, 2013 at 7:08:47 AM
permalink
Quote: AussieMakes no difference whatsoever.
Yes it does.
Oh, not in the game or the odds, but in the way the attitude concerning meaningless ritual drives the collapse of table games into electronic, individualized versions thereof.
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
March 7th, 2013 at 7:44:41 AM
permalink
I had an interesting idea wondering if the dice could compress, like a hit baseball, when it hits the wall, if you throw them fast enough.
I am a robot.
March 7th, 2013 at 7:57:22 AM
permalink
I was at a table where the shooter was throwing the dice very hard. They would bounce all the way back to where he was shooting from.
The stickman asked "WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TRYING TO DO, KNOCK THE SPOTS OFF!!!"
The stickman asked "WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TRYING TO DO, KNOCK THE SPOTS OFF!!!"
March 7th, 2013 at 8:36:47 AM
permalink
LoL, personally when I'm betting the DP, once I'm behind the number, I enjoy to throw a $100 bill down on the felt between a roll, to get change, it really breaks up the mojo of the game and seems like it causes a 7-out probably 80% of the time.
Gambling calls to me...like this ~> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Nap37mNSmQ
March 7th, 2013 at 9:38:25 AM
permalink
It's bad luck to be superstitious.
But the more energy that is put into throwing the dice, the more random the throw.
This is obvious in as much as a die being dropped 1/8th of an inch onto the felt is absolutely not random.
And a (fair) dice that bounces one hundred times is very likely to be 99% random or higher in my opinion (I just made this number up, but let's just use it).
As a generalization, the more energy imparted into the die, the more random the result, up until the point that the die is 100% perfectly random, assuming such is possible. If you also make that assumption, there is an energy required to get perfectly random results on any given table and/or set of playing conditions, under which something less random is possible.
But the more energy that is put into throwing the dice, the more random the throw.
This is obvious in as much as a die being dropped 1/8th of an inch onto the felt is absolutely not random.
And a (fair) dice that bounces one hundred times is very likely to be 99% random or higher in my opinion (I just made this number up, but let's just use it).
As a generalization, the more energy imparted into the die, the more random the result, up until the point that the die is 100% perfectly random, assuming such is possible. If you also make that assumption, there is an energy required to get perfectly random results on any given table and/or set of playing conditions, under which something less random is possible.
aahigh.com
March 7th, 2013 at 9:43:31 AM
permalink
Quote: Harley... I have seen TWO 6 point Fire Bets won on the Strip in Las Vegas for several $Ten-thousands by using a hard throw of the dice on tables known to use biased dice from time to time (namely Caesars and Paris)
It only makes no difference in theory-land on the internet where fair dice is assumed ... in reality of Las Vegas, when unbalanced dice are used, sometimes the only long rolls are the result of hard throws that counter Mother Nature and the effects of gravity that can take over and control a soft "controlled' toss ..... throw it hard and you will not fall victim to the imbalance so often
LOL Now Ceasars and Paris use biased dice? And you acuse the internet of being "theory-land"? A hard roll will counter mother nature and biased dice? You are sounding more and more like the dice in your head are off balance every day. C'mon Harley... you have absolutely no proof of any of this and yet you continue to slander Casinos and thier fairness. Don't be surprised if you receive some contact from an Attorney from one of these location. You're treading on thin ice.
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.
March 7th, 2013 at 2:40:01 PM
permalink
I'm going to go on record here as saying the more random the throw, the more any theoretical bias of the cubes matters, whether it's from weight, burned corners, edges, shaved dice, you name it! The more random the throw, the more the details of the (composition of the) dice matter in determining the outcome.
So to restate, I disagree with Harley that a more random throw can overcome any dice's bias.
As far as Harley treading on thin ice, I disagree. Gaming regulation is there for a reason, and it's not to allow the casinos to do whatever they feel like in order to make more money.
Until a casino, ANY CASINO, provides more information regarding the dice that they are putting into play and when, this is an open issue.
As it is, the best a player can do to hope to get good fair dice is fondle the dice and look for all the corners to be razor sharp, re-position the dice to non-hardway sets and feel for any ridges that might result from varying lengths among various axes of the dice, and just hope for the best. I don't even think the casino would let you spin a die in between your thumb and index finger like the box often do since you can only use one hand with the dice.
If there were 100% transparency with fairness as a goal, each die would have a unique serial number (and possibly even color) and each die would be tracked for outcomes independently with real-time chi-squared analysis for each die from the first roll to ensure even distribution of outcomes and the results displayed in real-time.
Half of the game is guessing which die is more favorable than the other when you pick them out, because they are in fact ALL DIFFERENT FROM ONE ANOTHER. It's the absolute truth!
None of this matters in the short term, but in the long term, and on the grind, it all matters a lot! And the grind and the long term is all the casino cares about.
So to restate, I disagree with Harley that a more random throw can overcome any dice's bias.
As far as Harley treading on thin ice, I disagree. Gaming regulation is there for a reason, and it's not to allow the casinos to do whatever they feel like in order to make more money.
Until a casino, ANY CASINO, provides more information regarding the dice that they are putting into play and when, this is an open issue.
As it is, the best a player can do to hope to get good fair dice is fondle the dice and look for all the corners to be razor sharp, re-position the dice to non-hardway sets and feel for any ridges that might result from varying lengths among various axes of the dice, and just hope for the best. I don't even think the casino would let you spin a die in between your thumb and index finger like the box often do since you can only use one hand with the dice.
If there were 100% transparency with fairness as a goal, each die would have a unique serial number (and possibly even color) and each die would be tracked for outcomes independently with real-time chi-squared analysis for each die from the first roll to ensure even distribution of outcomes and the results displayed in real-time.
Half of the game is guessing which die is more favorable than the other when you pick them out, because they are in fact ALL DIFFERENT FROM ONE ANOTHER. It's the absolute truth!
None of this matters in the short term, but in the long term, and on the grind, it all matters a lot! And the grind and the long term is all the casino cares about.
aahigh.com
March 7th, 2013 at 2:49:13 PM
permalink
That's not the way slander cases go. The Casino does not have to prove anything except they have procedures they follow and NGB reviews they pass. They can slap a lawsuit on someone for slander and then the defendant is the one that is going to have to prove their way out of the situation. The Casino has on staff Attorneys that have nothing better to do. Trust me, Harley doesn't want to have to deal with that. If I were him I would stop mentioning Casino names unless he has rock solid proof they are cheating their customers.
ZCore13
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.
March 7th, 2013 at 3:00:38 PM
permalink
So far, Harley hasn't been able to offer a shred of proof in the form of actual data. He goes as far as to name casinos, as far as stating which numbers on the dice are bias and at which specific tables as well as the time of day that they are usually bias. However, posting any actual data is to risky? Go figure.
March 7th, 2013 at 3:39:22 PM
permalink
I think others should collect and post data. It's easy to do. It's just work.
When you realize that 100 rolls per hour and everybody wants you to publish 700 rolls, that's like a whole day's worth of work!
I don't fault him for wanting to keep his data to himself.
When you realize that 100 rolls per hour and everybody wants you to publish 700 rolls, that's like a whole day's worth of work!
I don't fault him for wanting to keep his data to himself.
aahigh.com
March 7th, 2013 at 4:00:07 PM
permalink
Quote: Zcore13LOL Now Ceasars and Paris use biased dice? And you acuse the internet of being "theory-land"? A hard roll will counter mother nature and biased dice? You are sounding more and more like the dice in your head are off balance every day. C'mon Harley... you have absolutely no proof of any of this and yet you continue to slander Casinos and thier fairness. Don't be surprised if you receive some contact from an Attorney from one of these location. You're treading on thin ice.
ZCore13
ZCore13 - we have actual proof ... actual casino dice from live play that are unbalanced from Caesar's, we have shown them to the NGC and the Texas Attorney General's office .... we have the charting to prove what Paris uses --- both fair dice and unbalanced dice based on color and serial numbers (and no, I am not going to post it here ... you can go chart it yourself or get some live casino dice yourself if you don't believe me)
If you want to see the proof, look at the Koganinja's video proof of Caesar's unbalanced dice -- he has some Caesar's unbalanced dice on his videos ... see Links here and elsewhere on his YouTube channel:
http://crapsadvantageplayers.blogspot.com/search/label/Koganinja
We dare Nevada to take us to court, but they will not because they do not want the publicity from the mountains of evidence that would expose their fraud .... it's more likely we will be 86ed in the desert than in court
I do not wholeheartedly agree with Pearson's chi-square for 1 die because you have to exponentially compound the effects for 2 dice since Craps is based on outcome of 2 dice, however here are the results for Caesar's die Serial # 2124
Quote: Pearson's chi-square"Pearson's chi-square" hypothesis testing procedure.
Testing a d6: Roll it 30 times.
Keep a tally of how many times each face comes up, from 1 to 6.
(Note that we expect the number of appearances from each face
to be about 5; 30/6 = 5). At the end, go through the counts and subtract 5
from each, square them all, and then add them all up.
For a fair die, the total at the end should be no more than 55.
Chicken Feed Random Roll from Straight out on 12 foot table:
Face ... Total ... Less 5 ... Squared
.. 1 ........ 9 ........ 4 ........... 16
.. 2 ........ 2 ........ -3 ........... 9
.. 3 ........ 3 ........ -2 ........... 4
.. 4 ........ 4 ........ -1 ........... 1
.. 5 ........ 10 ....... 5 ........... 25
.. 6 ........ 2 ........ -3 ........... 9
Totals .... 30 ........ ........... 64
If you want a list of other casinos we have proof of unbalanced dice, see this link for List:
http://crapsadvantageplayers.blogspot.com/p/cheating-casinos.html
Bring it on Corporate lawyers and or Nevada Gaming Commission (who is shunning their fiduciary duty) !!
.... that is simply my opinion ....
Ciao,
Harley ...
Link = http://crapsadvantageplayers.blogspot.com/
March 7th, 2013 at 4:15:19 PM
permalink
Again, do you have any real proof? Any real data? You're already naming casinos, times, tables, numbers biased, etc... So how about some actual data? You don't have to name the source of the data.
I see that you're big on conspiracy, but falling quite short when it comes to any kind of proof.
Most of your claims are pretty far out there. But regarding Caesars Palace - nothing they do would ever surprise me after having read of the curious case of Terrance Watanabe, gaming investigations during 2010, and what casinos hosts have said.
I see that you're big on conspiracy, but falling quite short when it comes to any kind of proof.
Most of your claims are pretty far out there. But regarding Caesars Palace - nothing they do would ever surprise me after having read of the curious case of Terrance Watanabe, gaming investigations during 2010, and what casinos hosts have said.
March 7th, 2013 at 4:29:54 PM
permalink
Quote: AhighI think others should collect and post data. It's easy to do. It's just work.
When you realize that 100 rolls per hour and everybody wants you to publish 700 rolls, that's like a whole day's worth of work!
I don't fault him for wanting to keep his data to himself.
Thank you AHigh ... well said !! ..... I make money from my data ... if you were to find gold in the desert, you would be a fool to publish the coordinates of where you found it ... better if you don't believe my so called "conspiracy theories" and just blindly go into the casino and play craps
Keyser aka Snowman .... I talked to you at length a few years ago and offered to meet with you ... I agree with your older "chipped or worn" dice theory .... I was intrigued by your dice Lab and work with dice and their logos and I think there is definitely some merit to your work. However, our Dice Research Team concluded that your drop test does not duplicate the centrifugal force and gravity effects of a 12 or 14 foot table
.... that is simply my opinion ....
Ciao,
Harley ...
Link = http://crapsadvantageplayers.blogspot.com/
March 7th, 2013 at 4:33:52 PM
permalink
Hey guys, I'll be the FIRST to agree that Harley's stuff (especially and including the Koga Ninja videos) come across as conspiracy stuff.
I have said this for over a year, and it's this fact that led me to create the balance I have.
But at the same time, there is some support to the claims that Harley makes. That's about all as far as I am concerned.
I think Harley and a lot of the stuff he publishes actually does hurt the casino's image; and I think that this is unfortunate.
But I also think that casinos could do a better job assuring people that the dice are fair, too.
So that's about it.
I have said this for over a year, and it's this fact that led me to create the balance I have.
But at the same time, there is some support to the claims that Harley makes. That's about all as far as I am concerned.
I think Harley and a lot of the stuff he publishes actually does hurt the casino's image; and I think that this is unfortunate.
But I also think that casinos could do a better job assuring people that the dice are fair, too.
So that's about it.
aahigh.com
March 7th, 2013 at 5:27:35 PM
permalink
"But I also think that casinos could do a better job assuring people that the dice are fair, too. "
99.9% already assume the dice are fair, so why should a casino waste their time and money ?
99.9% already assume the dice are fair, so why should a casino waste their time and money ?
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
March 7th, 2013 at 5:46:04 PM
permalink
Quote: Harley
Chicken Feed Random Roll from Straight out on 12 foot table:
Face ... Total ... Less 5 ... Squared
.. 1 ........ 9 ........ 4 ........... 16
.. 2 ........ 2 ........ -3 ........... 9
.. 3 ........ 3 ........ -2 ........... 4
.. 4 ........ 4 ........ -1 ........... 1
.. 5 ........ 10 ....... 5 ........... 25
.. 6 ........ 2 ........ -3 ........... 9
Totals .... 30 ........ ........... 64
I am nothing close to a math person or statistics expert, but 30 rolls? I can't imagine 30 rolls is proof of anything. In card simulations we're usually talking about 1,000,000 hands or more. I think I could roll a perfectly crafted, world championship balanced die 30 times and come up with the numbers you show above. That's a horrible sample size.
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.
March 7th, 2013 at 6:30:52 PM
permalink
Quote: FatGeezusI was at a table where the shooter was throwing the dice very hard. They would bounce all the way back to where he was shooting from.
The stickman asked "WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TRYING TO DO, KNOCK THE SPOTS OFF!!!"
No, he's trying to win the bonus award. Don't you know about the bonus award?
Quote: New Jersey Casino Control Commission Regulations, Chapter 19:47-1.8 Throw of the diceUpon selection of the dice, the shooter shall make a Pass or Don't Pass Bet after which he shall throw the two selected dice so that they leave his hand simultaneously and in a manner calculated to cause them to strike the end of the table farthest from him. If the dice, having been thrown in such a manner, return to the shooter's hand without first touching the layout, the shooter's Pass or Don't Pass Bet shall be paid at odds of 25 to 1.
http://www.state.nj.us/casinos/actreg/reg/docs_chapter47/c47s01.pdf
... Yes, I'm kidding about that last part. But imagine what the dice pit would be like if that were an actual rule...
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice."
-- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
March 7th, 2013 at 6:31:40 PM
permalink
Only 2.5% of the time would your squared differences be the same or worse than those shown.Quote: Zcore13Quote: Harley
Chicken Feed Random Roll from Straight out on 12 foot table:
Face ... Total ... Less 5 ... Squared
.. 1 ........ 9 ........ 4 ........... 16
.. 2 ........ 2 ........ -3 ........... 9
.. 3 ........ 3 ........ -2 ........... 4
.. 4 ........ 4 ........ -1 ........... 1
.. 5 ........ 10 ....... 5 ........... 25
.. 6 ........ 2 ........ -3 ........... 9
Totals .... 30 ........ ........... 64
I am nothing close to a math person or statistics expert, but 30 rolls?
I can't imagine 30 rolls is proof of anything.
In card simulations we're usually talking about 1,000,000 hands or more.
I think I could roll a perfectly crafted, world championship balanced die 30 times
and come up with the numbers you show above. That's a horrible sample size.
ZCore13
30 rolls is fine (the minimum) for the chi-squared test with the minimum expected values all at 5
60 rolls would be finer, but that takes way more work to accomplish.
His 64/5 = a 12.8 critical value and it does FAIL at the 5% level. 1 in 20
FAILS at 1 in 20!
CNN Headline news
Not the 2.5% level.
The p-value = 2.53% or about 1 in 40
30 roll samples of a perfectly fair die would return
the same results or worse from observed values to expected values.
Harley is convinced that the data he has shown here,
and more data kept secret so not to reveal the combo to the bank vault,
IS the proof needed to at least a 99% significance level. (he stated that in a different post)
Excellent.
Beyond a reasonable doubt
at 1 in 40
What does it look like on a chart?
To the right of the red line is all it is.
Not that rare of an event.
1 in 40 is the same as 25,000 out of 1 million.
Those that want to see something NOT from Excel
The casinos that are knowingly using biased dice at their Craps tables better run and hide those dice.
Their day of reckoning is at hand
winsome johnny (not Win some johnny)
March 7th, 2013 at 7:05:25 PM
permalink
The Chi Square (Chance of Randomness) testing is a waste of time on such small trials.
March 7th, 2013 at 7:15:15 PM
permalink
Dammit! That was a secret!!!Quote: SOOPOOSo Giorgio has found the secret to beating craps! Throw the dice really hard and bet the don't for a sure win! Thanks!
Someday, joor goin' to see the name of Googie Gomez in lights and joor goin' to say to joorself, "Was that her?" and then joor goin' to answer to joorself, "That was her!" But you know somethin' mister? I was always her yuss nobody knows it! - Googie Gomez
March 7th, 2013 at 7:17:40 PM
permalink
Quote: MathExtremist
... Yes, I'm kidding about that last part. But imagine what the dice pit would be like if that were an actual rule...
That was well and truly hilarious!
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
March 7th, 2013 at 7:36:27 PM
permalink
If the dice are routinely biased toward 6-1 and 5-2, why aren't all you guys playing the dark side with heavy odds and cleaning the casinos out? Seems like it would be a real advantage play.
March 7th, 2013 at 7:45:43 PM
permalink
Not by the standards of Harley.Quote: KeyserThe Chi Square (Chance of Randomness) testing is a waste of time on such small trials.
Harley is just one of the experts from a team of experts.
he says throwing the dice hard produces more random rolls.
"throw it hard and you will not fall victim to the imbalance so often"
His provided an excellent sample of 30 dice rolls and his chi-squared test.
I can also point out he did not follow all the normal 4 conditions that others do (he did not follow #2)
The chi-square goodness of fit test is appropriate when the following conditions are met:
- The sampling method is simple random sampling.
- The population is at least 10 times as large as the sample.
- The variable under study is categorical.
- The expected value of the number of sample observations in each level of the variable is at least 5.
Back to throwing those dice hard and fast
(not slow and wimpy)
winsome johnny (not Win some johnny)
March 7th, 2013 at 7:49:06 PM
permalink
You get killed trying to establish points with too may 7s.Quote: skrbornevryminIf the dice are routinely biased toward 6-1 and 5-2, why aren't all you guys playing the dark side with heavy odds and cleaning the casinos out? Seems like it would be a real advantage play.
This has already been proven with a few simulations.
Even betting the 6,1 hop, you would get killed because the casino knows
you know they are using biased dice, so they will just change them dice out
to a set of different biased dice so you do not know what the casino knows until you find out how the new dice are biased, or not.
winsome johnny (not Win some johnny)
March 7th, 2013 at 7:53:06 PM
permalink
Quote: skrbornevryminIf the dice are routinely biased toward 6-1 and 5-2, why aren't all you guys playing the dark side with heavy odds and cleaning the casinos out? Seems like it would be a real advantage play.
This question comes up pretty often. There is a theoretical bias where the extra advantage to the casino only provides additional exposure on the free lay odds bets. That exposure is still hidden behind volatility in the short term. In other words, just having an edge doesn't mean you automatically win easily. You have to stick with it enough events for the edge to matter. And when volatility is between you and that edge, you have to play as long to be sure to win as you would normally play long enough to be sure to lose (when the house has the edge instead).
Cleaning the casinos out would require a lot of stamina. This isn't about a gigantic wide open hole for anyone to exploit.
This is the long term edge being complemented on the passline by an extra 20% to 150%, while the edge on the don't pass is reduced by 5% to 50%, and when things are really out of wack, a player edge forms in the field.
The field represents the bigger exposure to the casino because the volatility is not as high as the lay odds bet. In addition, the field bets goes faster making the grind much easier when the player has an advantage.
I had all these same questions before I modelled the theoretical dice in my simulator to see that such dice could in fact exist. But for those theoretical dice, the casino is counting on much more money being placed on the pass line with odds than in the field. If the dice are really far out of whack (IE: if you try to triple the long term gains for the casino on the passline) the field will dump hard.
As far as I am concerned, this is all strictly theory. But the math does hold out at faceweights of (9,8,8,8,8,9) for faces 1 though 6. You should read up on the other threads and I provide some graphs showing what the low volatility bets that carry an edge do with those face weights over 100,000 samples.
aahigh.com
March 7th, 2013 at 7:53:42 PM
permalink
Yeah, gotta get the right biased dice in, that's for sure. ROFLMAO !
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
March 7th, 2013 at 8:14:20 PM
permalink
All good stuff.Quote: AhighI had all these same questions before I modeled the theoretical dice in my simulator to see that such dice could in fact exist.
But for those theoretical dice, the casino is counting on much more money being placed on the pass line with odds than in the field.
If the dice are really far out of whack (IE: if you try to triple the long term gains for the casino on the passline) the field will dump hard.
As far as I am concerned, this is all strictly theory.
But the math does hold out at faceweights of (9,8,8,8,8,9) for faces 1 though 6.
You should read up on the other threads and I provide some graphs showing what the low volatility bets that carry an edge do with those face weights over 100,000 samples.
At the 9,8,8,8,8,9 (18% vs 16%)
The don't pass edge drops from -1.4% to -.38%
The don't odds enjoy a 1.04% edge, but you got to set a point first. Too many 7s can kill that edge.
The Field: .76%
2 and 12: .44%
6,1 Hop: 3.68% but that has a ~3.9 standard deviation so you need many bets to make sure you can show a profit from betting this bet.
added: Better to find biased dice like 8,7,7,7,7,8 (only.182% more than 9,8,8,8,8,9)
The don't pass edge drops from -1.4% to -.23%
The don't odds enjoy a 1.2% edge, but you still got to set a point first. Too many 7s can still kill that edge in a short session.
The Field: 1.24%
2 and 12: 2.48%
6,1 Hop: 5.78%
And the casino knows, again, what you know about their dice, so they change the dice to have different bias.
That is why we NEED dice standards in Nevada so they can be followed to make Craps a more fair game.
or just start slamming those dice to the wall and get more random rolls that way.
You still have a choice
winsome johnny (not Win some johnny)
March 7th, 2013 at 8:14:41 PM
permalink
Quote: MathExtremistNo, he's trying to win the bonus award. Don't you know about the bonus award?
http://www.state.nj.us/casinos/actreg/reg/docs_chapter47/c47s01.pdf
... Yes, I'm kidding about that last part. But imagine what the dice pit would be like if that were an actual rule...
Just for future referencing: "Chapter 47, Rules of the Games, was repealed by R.2012 d.061, effective March 19, 2012. See: 43 N.J.R. 2842(a), 44 N.J.R. 780(a)."
March 7th, 2013 at 8:32:35 PM
permalink
I'm looking forward to someone else doing face counts and hitting the field.
Winning on a grind in the field is just simply hilarious. You're not supposed to be able to do that. If the casino sees people start to do this, maybe that will get their attention.
Santa Ana star has a free field bet. If they happen to get bad dice, grinding that field will bring twice as much money (as much as $0.25 per roll on $5 with wacky dice).
The irony is that you have to keep same-betting that field on EVERY roll, just what you're normally NOT supposed to do.
Enough stories start circulating about field grinders on the weekend, I imagine casino employees will be up here reading and commenting on these threads and asking how to make sure their dice are fair all of a sudden.
To me the more likely scenario if bad dice are out there is just that casino employees are the victims of being penny wise and pound foolish trying to save money by using less expensive dice.
Also, I haven't modelled the all-tall-small with these theoretically biased dice, but I assume that bet might also have some issues with the hi-lo being easier to hit.
Winning on a grind in the field is just simply hilarious. You're not supposed to be able to do that. If the casino sees people start to do this, maybe that will get their attention.
Santa Ana star has a free field bet. If they happen to get bad dice, grinding that field will bring twice as much money (as much as $0.25 per roll on $5 with wacky dice).
The irony is that you have to keep same-betting that field on EVERY roll, just what you're normally NOT supposed to do.
Enough stories start circulating about field grinders on the weekend, I imagine casino employees will be up here reading and commenting on these threads and asking how to make sure their dice are fair all of a sudden.
To me the more likely scenario if bad dice are out there is just that casino employees are the victims of being penny wise and pound foolish trying to save money by using less expensive dice.
Also, I haven't modelled the all-tall-small with these theoretically biased dice, but I assume that bet might also have some issues with the hi-lo being easier to hit.
aahigh.com
March 7th, 2013 at 8:35:40 PM
permalink
You're not going to get enough of an edge to beat the house edge on the field bets. The best edge will likely come from laying odds.
March 7th, 2013 at 8:36:46 PM
permalink
Quote: 7crapsThe don't odds enjoy a 1.04% edge, but you got to set a point first. Too many 7s can kill that edge.
Not anything a decent lay bet couldn't hedge quite well.
March 7th, 2013 at 8:42:12 PM
permalink
7craps and AHigh --- Excellent points and posts !!!
.... that is simply my opinion ....
Ciao,
Harley ...
Link = http://crapsadvantageplayers.blogspot.com/
March 7th, 2013 at 8:43:38 PM
permalink
Now I feel left out. Yet my post was the only one that made any sense.
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
March 7th, 2013 at 9:05:04 PM
permalink
It will be fun if we can get to a point where people are posting serial numbers, time, location, etc, here on the board for a big field betting party.
9,8,8,8,8,9 is the tipping point where there is a long term edge in the field.
11,10,10,10,10,11 is about the break-even point for a zero edge field.
Ideally you want to see 20% higher ace faces and six faces to get a great result in the field. But 10% higher just makes it a free bet effectively.
12,10,10,10,10,12 weights give you a 2.4% player edge per roll
11,10,10,10,10,11 weights give you a free bet
9,8,8,8,8,9 weights give you a 0.7% player edge per roll
Happy hunting for bad dice and field betting!
Also, don't be afraid to do some big bets on the boxcars if you get to 9,8,8,8,8,9 as that's a free bet with those weights!
9,8,8,8,8,9 is the tipping point where there is a long term edge in the field.
11,10,10,10,10,11 is about the break-even point for a zero edge field.
Ideally you want to see 20% higher ace faces and six faces to get a great result in the field. But 10% higher just makes it a free bet effectively.
12,10,10,10,10,12 weights give you a 2.4% player edge per roll
11,10,10,10,10,11 weights give you a free bet
9,8,8,8,8,9 weights give you a 0.7% player edge per roll
Happy hunting for bad dice and field betting!
Also, don't be afraid to do some big bets on the boxcars if you get to 9,8,8,8,8,9 as that's a free bet with those weights!
aahigh.com
March 8th, 2013 at 9:01:16 AM
permalink
I just tried the new biased dice beating theory last night after reviewing all the posts in this thread again. I threw the shit out of the dice every time. On one throw I threw them so hard one bounced up and gave a guy on the other end a bloody nose. I ended up winning a little more than I usually do, so I think we are on to something with this super duper hard roll thing. I'll be back in Laughlin in 8 days to test this further.
ZCore13
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.
March 8th, 2013 at 9:20:06 AM
permalink
Ahigh,
The house edge on the field is too large. If a bias existed, the best bet would likely be laying odds.
The house edge on the field is too large. If a bias existed, the best bet would likely be laying odds.
March 8th, 2013 at 9:26:53 AM
permalink
If you get reads high enough, the house edge is eclipsed by the theoretically biased dice. You may want to establish a stop loss of just a few units. And you absolutely want to do counts for hundreds of rolls before you dive in!!
Betting the field every roll makes you look really stupid and gullible though. And that can be a feature if you're trying to slip under the radar as being lucky.
Getting the counts beforehand without appearing suspicious (or having someone else do it for you) is the smart way to go.
If you lay the 6 or 8 for $6, the commission is up front. So it's a $7 bet that wins 5. The edge being 1/12 = 8.3%. Edge per roll is 2.5% almost as high as the field. You get similar results on other numbers. So in general, you're right, once you are trying to win $20 or more instead of winning only one unit.
Edge on laying the four to win $5 is 1/16 = 6.25% edge per roll is 1.56% ... but you want to watch out for the four and ten because those have 6's and 1's in them!
If you want to buy lay's, laying the 6 and 8 for $30 each ($31 including the vig) is the lowest edge at 1.78% (1/56) with an edge per roll of 0.5456%. But your units are going to need to be $31 or $62 instead of just $5 (or $3 at Fiesta Rancho!)
Betting the field every roll makes you look really stupid and gullible though. And that can be a feature if you're trying to slip under the radar as being lucky.
Getting the counts beforehand without appearing suspicious (or having someone else do it for you) is the smart way to go.
If you lay the 6 or 8 for $6, the commission is up front. So it's a $7 bet that wins 5. The edge being 1/12 = 8.3%. Edge per roll is 2.5% almost as high as the field. You get similar results on other numbers. So in general, you're right, once you are trying to win $20 or more instead of winning only one unit.
Edge on laying the four to win $5 is 1/16 = 6.25% edge per roll is 1.56% ... but you want to watch out for the four and ten because those have 6's and 1's in them!
If you want to buy lay's, laying the 6 and 8 for $30 each ($31 including the vig) is the lowest edge at 1.78% (1/56) with an edge per roll of 0.5456%. But your units are going to need to be $31 or $62 instead of just $5 (or $3 at Fiesta Rancho!)
aahigh.com
March 8th, 2013 at 9:30:24 AM
permalink
So far, I haven't seen any data that comes even close to overcoming the house edge on the field bet.
March 8th, 2013 at 9:34:13 AM
permalink
Run a simulator for 100,000 events with the faceweights 9,8,8,8,8,9 or higher ratio on the ace and six faces. That's what I did. That is data (biased face outcome data) that overcomes the 2.78% edge per roll in the field.
The "BIASED DICE: the saga CONTINUES" thread .. in the original post .. is where the real-world data originated from the counting of 375 rolls.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/craps/13148-bad-dice-the-saga-continues/#post222337
Here is a photo I took after collecting the data. It is real data.
Now you have seen the data that overcomes the advantage in the field for those 375 rolls.
It's a tiny sample, and you should run a chi-squared test on the face weights and use your best judgement before proceeding, but it is data.
The "BIASED DICE: the saga CONTINUES" thread .. in the original post .. is where the real-world data originated from the counting of 375 rolls.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/craps/13148-bad-dice-the-saga-continues/#post222337
Here is a photo I took after collecting the data. It is real data.
Now you have seen the data that overcomes the advantage in the field for those 375 rolls.
It's a tiny sample, and you should run a chi-squared test on the face weights and use your best judgement before proceeding, but it is data.
aahigh.com
March 8th, 2013 at 10:14:08 AM
permalink
Field bet edge will be positive for the player with the right bias.Quote: KeyserSo far, I haven't seen any data that comes even close to overcoming the house edge on the field bet.
But not the Lay bets... even with vig paid on a win
For a 9,8,8,8,8,9 bias the math is easy.
Even higher if one can find bias at 8,7,7,7,7,8 (data after photos)
At the 9,8,8,8,8,9 (18% vs 16%)
The don't pass edge drops from -1.4% to -.38%
The don't odds enjoy a 1.04% edge, but you got to set a point first. Too many 7s can kill that edge.
The Field: .76%
2 and 12: .44%
6,1 Hop: 3.68% but that has a ~3.9 standard deviation so you need many bets to make sure you can show a profit from betting this bet.
snaps from WinCraps
Note the edge went even higher for the Fire Bet
Better to find biased dice like 8,7,7,7,7,8 (only.182% more than 9,8,8,8,8,9)
The don't pass edge drops from -1.4% to -.23%
The don't odds enjoy a 1.2% edge, but you still got to set a point first. Too many 7s can still kill that edge in a short session.
The Field: 1.24%
2 and 12: 2.48%
6,1 Hop: 5.78%
Harley claims to have knowledge on where and when to find bias like this at a casino
Ahigh may also have that info
winsome johnny (not Win some johnny)
March 8th, 2013 at 10:29:30 AM
permalink
I want to add to this, since some are confused: I am not accusing the casinos of doing this intentionally or unintentionally.
My addition to this is that there is data supporting the theory of Harley's and that the math works out that it could in fact be reality.
This is in response to my gut reaction of "if it were true there would be massive exposure and it could be exploited."
I am not accusing anyone of doing anything at all. This is just research into the POSSIBILITY of these theoretical dice even existing and being of any benefit to the casino.
In that light, it is POSSIBLE. That is my assertion. That it is POSSIBLE, and that there is data to support the POSSIBILITY that it is happening.
I am making NO ACCUSATIONS and NO CONCLUSIONS and it continues to be something that I highly doubt as real no matter how possible it may be and no matter how many times I profile face counts with them returning a more favorable p value for theoretically biased dice than fair dice.
My addition to this is that there is data supporting the theory of Harley's and that the math works out that it could in fact be reality.
This is in response to my gut reaction of "if it were true there would be massive exposure and it could be exploited."
I am not accusing anyone of doing anything at all. This is just research into the POSSIBILITY of these theoretical dice even existing and being of any benefit to the casino.
In that light, it is POSSIBLE. That is my assertion. That it is POSSIBLE, and that there is data to support the POSSIBILITY that it is happening.
I am making NO ACCUSATIONS and NO CONCLUSIONS and it continues to be something that I highly doubt as real no matter how possible it may be and no matter how many times I profile face counts with them returning a more favorable p value for theoretically biased dice than fair dice.
aahigh.com
March 9th, 2013 at 11:47:08 AM
permalink
Ahigh,
Your data set isn't significant in size. You merely simulated a larger sample from only 375 or so tosses. You guys seriously need to stop posting the combined totals of both dice. It serves no purpose other than to curve fit your samples.
One moment, and I'll post a real sample
Here's a look at your sample's real values.
Total Ratio St. dev.
130 5.76 0.51
125 5.99 0.02
108 6.94 -1.65
125 5.99 0.02
119 6.29 -0.57
142 5.27 1.68
Chance of randomness is roughly only 1 in 2.4
Now here's what the bets look like for the theoretical if we let the computer recombine the dice.
edge on
casino
on lay
odds bet
4__2.28%
5__1.92%
6__2.51%
8__0.72%
9__1.31%
10_-1.97%
Now here's the field bet.
-2.6%
Your data set isn't significant in size. You merely simulated a larger sample from only 375 or so tosses. You guys seriously need to stop posting the combined totals of both dice. It serves no purpose other than to curve fit your samples.
One moment, and I'll post a real sample
Here's a look at your sample's real values.
Total Ratio St. dev.
130 5.76 0.51
125 5.99 0.02
108 6.94 -1.65
125 5.99 0.02
119 6.29 -0.57
142 5.27 1.68
Chance of randomness is roughly only 1 in 2.4
Now here's what the bets look like for the theoretical if we let the computer recombine the dice.
edge on
casino
on lay
odds bet
4__2.28%
5__1.92%
6__2.51%
8__0.72%
9__1.31%
10_-1.97%
Now here's the field bet.
-2.6%
March 9th, 2013 at 12:04:14 PM
permalink
Ahigh may be on to sometimes. I saw a guy roll back to back 6-1, There was proof enough for me.
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
