Thread Rating:

AlanMendelson
AlanMendelson
Joined: Oct 5, 2011
  • Threads: 102
  • Posts: 3613
March 17th, 2013 at 9:36:06 AM permalink
Quote: Ahigh


The crew at the Gold Coast STILL absolutely love me. They were just doing their job.



they love you and they banned you for 24 hours? Okay.
Ahigh
Ahigh
Joined: May 19, 2010
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 5139
March 17th, 2013 at 9:40:10 AM permalink
Quote: AlanMendelson

Come on Ahigh, I'm serious here. Do you think the casinos have now marked you as a problem? You announce that you are doing your research. You even call the WYNN in advance and announce what you will be doing. You discuss bias and setting and your superior shooting with the table crews. They start writing you comps seemingly to get you away from the table. Now a casino talks about banning you!

Are you a marked man? Please, let us know.



The response wasn't about me. It was about how to tell when influence starts. The topic of the thread. This is one way to tell. If you want to talk about the possibility of me being a marked man, that's maybe another subject for another thread. But short answer: "ABSOLUTELY NOT!" Everywhere I go my play is welcome and everywhere I go they absolutely love me.

Yesterday was an exception, not the rule. Again, I await TeddyS's unbiased opinion. Maybe he will add his two cents.

When they gave me troubles at LVH, they didn't like HOW I was throwing the dice (IE: consistently and a little more slowly) more than anything else. I still shoot very fast. Look at the you tube video for the Wizard's Challenge on the Ahigh show. That's how fast I shoot. They were picking nits because about all I hit were 6 and 8 and I turned $25 into $150 in just a few rolls and then neutralized my come bets. It was after I neutralized my come bets that they complained about the pace, and it probably had more to do with me knowing how to win without taking huge risks that they didn't like.

If I bet $180 across to win $125 in 8 throws, it would have been no big whoop.

They don't like big percentage wins real quick unless you are exposed properly. I was parlaying come bets with no odds. They didn't like how I shot and they didn't like how I bet.

But each place is different. As it relates to the thread though, both these instances were feedback of what one would expect when you are influencing the dice. And to be clear again, I'm not saying this is confirmation, just what you should EXPECT if you are able to accomplish it.
Ahigh
Ahigh
Joined: May 19, 2010
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 5139
March 17th, 2013 at 9:42:06 AM permalink
Quote: AlanMendelson

they love you and they banned you for 24 hours? Okay.



What part did you not understand? But yes. They love me, AND they banned me for 24 hours. That is right. You got it. A-OK.

Wenda is her name. She works for the Gold Coast. Go and ask her and confirm. But both statement I believe are 100% accurate.

None of this was personal in the slightest. She apologized for having to do it. I told her before she did it that I wouldn't take it personally and I did not.

Teddy was witness to the entire event. I'm pretty sure he will tell you the same thing.

And let us go back to the topic of the thread. This isn't about me, this is about what to expect when you have influence. What it's like when you are being successful at influencing the dice. No matter what the dollar amount is, they are going to take notice whether it's a short roll or not. Influence is influence, and you can expect some attention for it.

I have two short rolls for a hard 8 on video on the Ahigh show. Those were influenced short rolls from the perspective of any casino in Vegas that I know of. I'm pretty sure that any casino would take the dice away from you if you took $10 to $1000 in those two throws. Even a nice place like the Wynn. That is influence even from the view of the casino. But they would pay you, they just wouldn't be happy about it (unless you were still losing and they weren't sweating it maybe.)

Start watching at 14:15 on this link:

http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/29765719

There two short hard-eight back-to-back there. Those are rolls that any casino would not generally allow to continue no matter who was shooting and how much evidence of control there was.

But you can get paid from that kind of bias. And it will put a target on your back if you make enough money doing it.

I don't do this. But that's the sort of thing that would qualify as "when does influence start." It's just that it's not tolerated at all.
thecesspit
thecesspit
Joined: Apr 19, 2010
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 5936
March 17th, 2013 at 9:45:09 AM permalink
Quote: TheWolf713

Exactly....

Each roll is independent so a DI's mindset would be something like this...



Maybe, I'm not a DI. But either every roll is influenced, or it's not.

It may be some rolls have 0 actual influence, and some are influenced. It doesn't matter, you can only look at all the data to make any statement about the influence that could have happened. Pick and Choose is a terrible way to make any assesment (confirmation bias, say).
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
AlanMendelson
AlanMendelson
Joined: Oct 5, 2011
  • Threads: 102
  • Posts: 3613
March 17th, 2013 at 9:45:16 AM permalink
But do you think the pressure is mounting on you? Do you think there is a cumulative effect and at some point the casinos will bar you? Do you think they've got yoru number, so to speak?
Ibeatyouraces
Ibeatyouraces
Joined: Jan 12, 2010
  • Threads: 68
  • Posts: 11933
March 17th, 2013 at 9:45:52 AM permalink
deleted
DUHHIIIIIIIII HEARD THAT!
AlanMendelson
AlanMendelson
Joined: Oct 5, 2011
  • Threads: 102
  • Posts: 3613
March 17th, 2013 at 9:48:24 AM permalink
Quote: Ahigh

What part did you not understand? But yes. They love me, AND they banned me for 24 hours.



Ahhh... I got it now. Tough love.
Ahigh
Ahigh
Joined: May 19, 2010
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 5139
March 17th, 2013 at 9:56:57 AM permalink
Quote: thecesspit

Maybe, I'm not a DI. But either every roll is influenced, or it's not.

It may be some rolls have 0 actual influence, and some are influenced. It doesn't matter, you can only look at all the data to make any statement about the influence that could have happened. Pick and Choose is a terrible way to make any assesment (confirmation bias, say).



I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here. But just to understand my perspective: I attempt to achieve better results on each roll. Some rolls I fail. My failed rolls are random. Even if they are not 100% random, I expect them to be.

If you're saying that random rolling one or more times means every roll is random, that doesn't make sense to me.

More than HALF of my rolls are more than likely 100% random in what I expect from them. When I fail to accomplish my goals in my shot, that is what I consider a random roll. I fail a lot. *I* would be happy to have a two digit percentage of my rolls not be 100% random. But for those specific rolls, I hope to achieve the least amount of randomness possible.

Having random rolls mixed in with controlled throws and having them look exactly the same to the untrained eye is a huge benefit.

You want to look random, and I have had no problems with people saying my shots look random. I think comments on this forum are clear evidence of that!
thecesspit
thecesspit
Joined: Apr 19, 2010
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 5936
March 17th, 2013 at 10:05:53 AM permalink
I'm saying if 90% of your rolls are "random" and 10% are "influenced", you have to take all the rolls if you are claiming to "influence the dice".

You CAN'T pick and choose which are influence when deciding if the dice are influenced at all, as that adds confirmation bias and data mining. If 90% of your rolls are random, and 10% have a (say) a 10% less chance of rolling a 7, you are still influencing the dice (with an overall 1% less chance of rolling a 7). Observing that data, you ignore what the DI says is a 'good' roll or 'bad' roll, and just take the data set as the complete data set.

I'm saying DI doesn't start at some point in the roll. Either you are doing it, or you aren't.

(Caveat, I guess if you said -right, from this roll, I am DI-ing, then fine).
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
Ahigh
Ahigh
Joined: May 19, 2010
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 5139
March 17th, 2013 at 10:13:37 AM permalink
Quote: thecesspit

I'm saying if 90% of your rolls are "random" and 10% are "influenced", you have to take all the rolls if you are claiming to "influence the dice".

You CAN'T pick and choose which are influence when deciding if the dice are influenced at all, as that adds confirmation bias and data mining. If 90% of your rolls are random, and 10% have a (say) a 10% less chance of rolling a 7, you are still influencing the dice (with an overall 1% less chance of rolling a 7). Observing that data, you ignore what the DI says is a 'good' roll or 'bad' roll, and just take the data set as the complete data set.

I'm saying DI doesn't start at some point in the roll. Either you are doing it, or you aren't.

(Caveat, I guess if you said -right, from this roll, I am DI-ing, then fine).



I guess that's a valid perspective, and frankly I don't know for sure or not if it's valid.

But go up and look at that Ustream video and tell me I had a ton of sevens, but two of those short rolls that were both hard eights back to back (the heaviest outcome from my theoretically biased throw) and tell me that there's not more influence on those two rolls than the other rolls in that video.

I generally disagree. I like to bet with zero to no wagers most of my rolls and light it up when I am feeling confident.

Consider it like doing counts and betting when the cards favor you.

I bet bigger when I am ready and feeling good. Sometimes I still get bitch slapped and that's to be expected.

But hopefully I have a better chance of getting what I want when I am having better results delivering the dice the way that I am feeling confident about.

And don't take this as a claim of what I can do, just a mental model for how I think about it.

I understand what you're saying, and effectively your position is that I should always flat bet and seek out the grind and make money from minimum edges and maximum flat bets over the long haul.

I find that boring. I disagree with this perspective on "how to do things" with the Wizard and many other people who think that "if you can have an SRR of X, just bet more odds bets and win."

Very interesting simplification of things, but not the way I think about things myself.

In summary, I don't know if you're wrong, but I disagree with your mental model for how a person who is attempting control should approach bets.

IE: I believe my ability to influence the dice is MUCH MUCH MUCH stronger on some rolls and is COMPLETELY ABSENT on others -- and certainly when considering known influenced rolls such as short rolls shown in the video above. Legal influenced throws are not even known to be possible, so let's just talk about the shorties. I bet accordingly and I think other smart players who are attempting to influence the dice should do the same. ABSOLUTELY! Regardless of what the Wizard and others say on this forum, I think they're wrong about long-hauling it and always betting and trying. Confidence goes up and down and bets should follow!!!

A good pit manager will tell you that if they are losing money, they will start sniffing for any short rolls that are pulling money. Short rolls are known exploits!

  • Jump to: