Ahigh
Ahigh
Joined: May 19, 2010
  • Threads: 87
  • Posts: 5144
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!
Zcore13
Zcore13
Joined: Nov 30, 2009
  • Threads: 39
  • Posts: 3646
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
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.
Keyser
Keyser
Joined: Apr 16, 2010
  • Threads: 35
  • Posts: 2051
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.
Ahigh
Ahigh
Joined: May 19, 2010
  • Threads: 87
  • Posts: 5144
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!)
Keyser
Keyser
Joined: Apr 16, 2010
  • Threads: 35
  • Posts: 2051
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.
Ahigh
Ahigh
Joined: May 19, 2010
  • Threads: 87
  • Posts: 5144
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.

http://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.
7craps
7craps
Joined: Jan 23, 2010
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 1977
March 8th, 2013 at 10:14:08 AM permalink
Quote: Keyser

So far, I haven't seen any data that comes even close to overcoming the house edge on the field bet.

Field bet edge will be positive for the player with the right bias.
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)
Ahigh
Ahigh
Joined: May 19, 2010
  • Threads: 87
  • Posts: 5144
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.
Keyser
Keyser
Joined: Apr 16, 2010
  • Threads: 35
  • Posts: 2051
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%
Buzzard
Buzzard
Joined: Oct 28, 2012
  • Threads: 90
  • Posts: 6814
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

  • Jump to: