Is Dice Control Real? Can It Be Tested?

Quote: FrankScoblete

Getting the dice to stay on-axis a large percentage of the time, even for 500 rolls, is an extremely difficult feat.

The SRR does take thousands of rolls to establish an edge. On-axis doesn't take that many --- usually the shooter fails at least one of the three SmartCraps tests and that is that.

Getting the dice to stay on-axis at all is an extremely difficult feat, but the dice don't need to stay on-axis a large percentage of the time in order to generate a meaningful player edge. Even a small percentage is sufficient to tilt the edge in the player's favor under the right conditions.

But testing thousands of rolls after the fact to evaluate one's SRR doesn't tell you anything about the future. Assuming that SRR remains constant, without any other reason to believe that the dice are behaving non-uniformly, is an example of the post-hoc fallacy (post hoc ergo propter hoc).

I'll ask again: what is the mechanism by which a shooter can expect to change their SRR without establishing some influence over at least one axis of at least one die?

Quote: FrankScoblete

My longest roll to date is 89 but I did do six 50+ rolls in one year (all witnessed).

In case anybody is interested the probability of making it to 89 rolls (or more) is 1 in 372,319.

The probability of making it to 50 rolls (or more) is 1 in 1,161.

Quote: Wizard

In case anybody is interested the probability of making it to 89 rolls (or more) is 1 in 372,319.

The probability of making it to 50 rolls (or more) is 1 in 1,161.

That is for a random roller.
FrankS must have had at least a 6.3 SRR during that year. So his probabilities would be even lower.
added: I forgot, Smart Craps kind of did this already.
Their sim results for a random roller are could be closer. Oh well.
http://www.goldentouchcraps.com/CrappyMath/math0004.shtml
For Frank hands
http://www.goldentouchcraps.com/CrappyMath/math0005.shtml
"With his data, the chance of having a single 50+ monster roll is 0.44%" or about 1 in 228

Thanks for the reminder.
https://wizardofodds.com/ask-the-wizard/81/

is linked to on many web pages about the Grandma in AC and her 154 roll hand and your solution.
here is one from BruceZ
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/25/probability/154-rolls-craps-494244/index2.html

That solution at WoO and another page disappeared from the net after the BIG upgrade WoO had awhile back.

I posted a link to my copy of the length of a shooters hand table by the Wizard here
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/questions-and-answers/gambling/1886-world-records-in-craps/4/

here it is again
http://www.pulcinientertainment.com/info/Craps%20Q&A-Ask%20the%20Wizard.htm

I would highly suggest finding the missing pages and update the WoO site.
many still search that event (154 roll hand!)
to this day and your WoO site is very quiet on it

Wow. What's the longest series of non sevens on a recorded performance ... Ie substantiated beyond just a witness?

I've done over sixty with no seven at all and witnessed and recorded, but no video so to me it doesn't mean much.

For those that do not know, the Wizard has a page on DI at WoO
Expectations for the Dice Setter
https://wizardofodds.com/games/craps/appendix/4/

Quote: Ahigh

Wow. What's the longest series of non sevens on a recorded performance ... Ie substantiated beyond just a witness?

I've done over sixty with no seven at all and witnessed and recorded, but no video so to me it doesn't mean much.

Unfortunately, that stat probably won't be as accurately tracked since 7 isn't always a bad number in the passline game. For a random thrower, 60 in a row with no 7s has a probability of about 1 in 56,347. 100 in a row would be about 1 in 82.8M.

Quote: Ahigh

Wow. What's the longest series of non sevens on a recorded performance ... Ie substantiated beyond just a witness?

I've done over sixty with no seven at all and witnessed and recorded, but no video so to me it doesn't mean much.

I saw this on the internet:

"World Champion: Jerry 'Stickman'

January, 2008, Las Vegas

77 Straight numbers before a seven showed."

see ... no brag, just fact

Oh, never mind: you wanted something beyond an unsubstantiated declaration.

Show me don't tell me. Right....

I continue to be amused.

Quote: Ahigh

Wow. What's the longest series of non sevens on a recorded performance ... Ie substantiated beyond just a witness?

I've done over sixty with no seven at all and witnessed and recorded, but no video so to me it doesn't mean much.

Could just be a big story based from memory only recall and we know how good most humans are when we trust only our memory to recall all the details from a past event.

Yep. I also have the pair of new dice I used (#1002) and rolled 83 times before a 7. (not in a casino)
My friend saw about half of the rolls. I could not believe it really could happen.
I have no other proof. Could just be a big story.

as the story of Frank and the captain's BIG 147 roll hand in AC.
It was probably more like 100 or less IMO. Still a nice hand.
That is based on my stay in New England in 2007 and 2008
and multiple visits to AC and every casino there, not one Box or Dealer even knew of the so-called 147 roll hand.
I was so disappointed in AC - a dump IMO,
I played a $5 slot machine at Mohegun Sun Casino in CT and hit a $1800 jackpot.
I still have the w2g from that one.

Oh, but the world knows of the Grandma with her 154 roll hand in AC.
Would be nice if the casino make even a small video for that event.

Yeah if it's not on video it's just a good story. Even when it is on video, people claim my nine hard ways in ten throws was fiction, but I have proof. The whole live show was in part to document the truth instead of what's convenient. Even the wizard is sometimes more interested in the story of what happened than the truth.

Personally I think documenting reality is the only way to know the truth. And even when writing stuff down you make mistakes as evidenced by video even when money is on the line mistakes are made and the convenient story is what people think is more important than the truth.

Quote: Ahigh

Yeah if it's not on video it's just a good story. Even when it is on video, people claim my nine hard ways in ten throws was fiction, but I have proof. The whole live show was in part to document the truth instead of what's convenient. Even the wizard is sometimes more interested in the story of what happened than the truth.

"Still, a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest."

From
http://www.goldentouchcraps.com/CrappyMath/math0005.shtml
Initially, Frank e-mailed me the innocent question,
"Here are six hand lengths: 50, 52, 55, 57, 60 and 89.
Would this shooter be the same as a random shooter with these hands?"

Then DP does a statistical analysis on just those 6 hands from a data set of 948

Wow. Such small probabilities to work with. And outliers.
No wonder Franks' #s were about a 1000 times better than random shooter.
Comparing just a very small part of the total data. Sad.
This is crap I would do because I do not care.
A simple chi-squared test on that data would also be nice to see.

Back to topic
"A claim of dice influence by passing a Pro Test in 200 to 500 rolls is easy to test and very plausible.
The subject can be re-tested in a reasonable amount of time, effecting a trustworthy experiment."

When Pat DeMauro rolled her hand in AC it was all over the news
When the Captain rolled 147 there was not a peep out of anyone: Dealers, Floor, Casino or news media.
Conclusion: the first happened the second is the figment of a writers imagination.

I just got back in town. I stopped at South Point before heading home and BOY WAS I LUCKY!!!

Quote: DeMango

When the Captain rolled 147 there was not a peep out of anyone: Dealers, Floor, Casino or news media.
Conclusion: the first happened the second is the figment of a writers imagination.

It may have been just 47 rolls that felt like 147.
Or could have been 87 rolls too. Who knows??

The same story telling has gone on for years from these guys.
They go by feel, experience and selective memory to sell their wares.

FrankS even hooked a math guy, Don Catlin, to do some math on the famous 5 count and all that goes with it.

The first sim had a DI with a 7 SRR. OK.
Mr. Catlin saw nothing wrong with that.
I do. I ain't no fool! I ain't afraid of no ghost!!

The chance of ANY shooter having a 7 SRR (or higher) over 5k rolls is simply 1 in 466,282 random shooters would do this on average
over 10k rolls (Remember FrankS says it takes many 5k rolls to establish a SRR)
"You have to do thousands of rolls – maybe divided into 5,000 roll segments – to see whether you really are influencing the game"
about a 1 in 28,074,473,547 (is that 28 Billion??)
So if you can show (prove) you have a 7 SRR after 10k rolls, you are the greatest Craps God come to life IMO.

But it gets better
http://www.goldentouchcraps.com/WeeklyArticles/45.shtml
FrankS told Mr. Catlin that there are a few DIs that have around (?) up to 8 SRR.
"What would happen to a 5-Counter who found himself at the tables
with such controlled shooters as Sharpshooter or Dominator or others in the Golden Touch™
crew sporting SRR of close to/or at 1 to 8?"

I would first ask "How many rolls was that over again??"
Mr. Catlin did not ask. He just did the sim.

I would have to break out the central limit theorem on that one to see how many SDs they are talking about.
Not worth my effort. (about 11 standard deviations or more - crap! 7sd is about 1 in 400 Billion)

This is beyond Craps God control close to an 8 SRR over 10k to 30K dice rolls
Of course it is about a 1 in 6,600 shot at 1k rolls.

Ah, their rolls must not have both dice hitting the table then the back wall before coming to a rest.
Got it!
No, then they must not be counting all their rolls...
Damn, even over 3k rolls (Ahigh recorded that many to date, maybe more)
a 7 SRR is about 1 in 5,574, yeah I feel much better now...
8 SRR is about 1 in 7,784,225,213 (or close to it)


I think FrankS remembers this
"Help me Mr. Wizard"

"Twizzle, twazzle, twozzle, twome; time for this one to come home."

No Luck at all needed

7craps you are the pacomartin of craps. Ahigh, how lucky were you? BTW, is it me , or have you mellowed on your craps thread posts in recent weeks? What are your thoughts on this thread?

Quote: 7craps

Good Luck in getting an answer from FrankS.
IMO, he is more into writing and selling books and more books and telling stories.

Ah, the true test of fire for Mr. Scoblete is warming up. Can he take it? Tough criticism will test anyone.

Quote: 7craps

For those that do not know, the Wizard has a page on DI at WoO
Expectations for the Dice Setter
https://wizardofodds.com/games/craps/appendix/4/

Perhaps if Scoblete got a little more mathematical? And I don't mean anything advanced necessarily. At my unimpressive level of math savvy, I can still read a chart. And at that wizard page there is a chart that says that if you have an SSR of 6.207 [correction], at a common 3x4x5x table just playing the line with full odds you have an advantage of over 1%. For AP's that's supposedly the level where you want to be, where the proof is in the pudding. Where you shouldn't have to go through quite so many of those periods where negative variance makes you look like, well, like you can't influence the dice.

As far as I'm concerned, even if a good dice setter can just cut back on the HE, he's got something to brag about, so don't get me wrong. But much more is being claimed. Can Scoblete answer this?

Quote: FrankScoblete

Maybe in awhile I will give some of the incidents that help to prove (at least to me) that casinos are very much aware of dice control even if they say they aren't.

You don't have to prove anything about this, Frank. MGM Grand, NYNY and Bellagio all threw me out because they said I was a dice controller... and I'm not. And never was. I just threw the dice so they looked good and I got lucky.

Hi Odiousgambit,

I have the percentages in my latest two craps books (my wife the Beautiful A.P. made me promise I wouldn't always reference the titles of the books in every post I make) --- percentages for on-axis throws and for SRR's. I also know that performance in a casino is usually different (meaning worse) than performance at home so I make the necessary at-home percentages needed before you go into a casino higher than the Wizard does.

Reading the comments by everyone --- and they are quite good (other than the sarcasm) --- I realize that the issue of dice control probably can't be resolved in conversations such as we're having. I thought the use of the SRR and the SmartCraps program's tests would settle the issue but obviously those tests are being frowned upon by the critics. I don't know how many critics have bought SmartCraps (remember I have no financial interest in this product) so I am not sure if the criticism is of the product itself or the way the web site is promoting it.

I am not quite sure of the math of a dynamic game such as craps. Alan made an excellent comment that the statistics of blackjack are different than the statistics of a controlled throw. I again fall back on a baseball analogy. (I know analogies are just analogies and don't fit the situation perfectly --- otherwise they would be the situation.) Mickey Mantle ended his career with a 298 batting average. Was he a 300 hitter? Obviously he wasn't.

But looked at another way, when he was having his season where he won the Triple Crown and you had to bet whether he got a hit or not in a given situation, do you use his lifetime average or the average he was hitting that season to determine whether to bet or not? (Obviously I am using a backwards analogy here.) Just the season statistic based on (I'm guessing here) 600 at-bats is a lot less than his lifetime (kind of long-run) statistics. Which do you use to create your position on the matter? You can do this also for the years when Mantle was horrendous, a sad husk of the great player he had once been; would he get a hit if for the last season or two the guy was batting in the low 200's?

I am thinking that some of the math of the game of craps in relation to dice control might be in that nebulous area. I know that SRR and SmartCraps do what I say they do. If you can show an SRR sufficient to get an edge and you can do that in the casino as well, you have an edge. (The casino loses money to you over time. That's the casino affirmation of your skill.) If you pass the SmartCraps tests, then you have the on-axis skills. You do this in a casino and you win money, etc. (Assuming the bets are proper.)

I don't doubt that --- as with Mickey Mantle --- some dice controllers fall off; lack of practice is probably a cause as is age. The greatest dice controller I ever saw was "The Arm," a woman who was uncanny. I played for over 10 years with her and the Captain. But at the end, she had to quit. Her arthritis and age just shut her down; much as Mantle's injuries and age shut him down. In figuring her throw, how do I do the math? If I am with her those first five years (not knowing the future) is she a controlled shooter? Sure. What if in the last two years of her career she really tailed off? Say her statistics plummeted as Mantle's did towards the end? What if at the end of it all, she batted under 300? Was she a controlled shooter or not?

Actually my above ranting (is that ranting?) relates to the math questions being asked. If you are a dice controller with a good SRR or a strong on-axis performance by passing SmartCraps are you really a dice controller with a good SRR or on-axis performance if such can diminish?

Blackjack math is rather stagnant. You know the rules; the number of decks; the penetration or whatever else you need and you can accurately lay out the math. I am not quite so sure such a thing is as easy with a dynamic skill. I buy into (I fully buy into) the legitimacy of the SRR and the SmartCraps tests as being real gauges of a real skill. I think they tell you to bet on Mantle during his Triple Crown season and to forego bets when he could barely swing the bat.

Yeah, but hindsight is 20-20, Frank.

The SRR and SmartCraps has to be subject to the same statistical scrutiny as anything else. Mickey Mantle *was* a .298 hitter. The only time you could have known with certainty that he was not going to be a lifetime .300 hitter is by looking at the current at bats he had, the number of at bats left, and the number of hits required to get to .300 would be impossible (you can't go 1 for 0). To put it simpler, if I have a sample size of 100 rolls, and have rolled 17 sevens through 80 rolls, there is no way that I am going to have an SRR > 6 through 100 rolls.

So, at what degree of certainty does SmartCraps "know" you are going to be successful at a real life casino, and how many rolls does it take for SmartCraps to realize that you have an edge? We can put a mantra around "SmartCraps" being smarter than all of us, but it should be subject to the same statistical scrutiny as anything else.

The only thing that SmartCraps knows is its inputs (the set you used) and the outputs (the results). It also knows the relationship between the dice faces as well. As a result, it can statistically build you a set to use to have the best results based on a certain betting pattern. Brilliant really.

However, it is only brilliant if SmartCraps tells you the statistical probability of being successful and the certainty (all calculable) in its results.

The only way you are going to get statistical certainty is through increasing the sample size. And then at what point do we say we're an "influencer"? When the certainty of being so is 90%? 95%, 99%, 99.9%? And really all that matters is the result we get at the casino based on our rolls. At what point does SmartCraps make that determination.

And there has to be something else to it which lays in the mechanics, consistency, and delivery of your throw. That's where practice makes "perfect", but is advantage really achievable beyond a statistical doubt. That's what I would like to see.

Yes, SmartCraps will give you the figures you want.

The practice will make "imperfect" but that will be enough to beat the house --- check out SmartCraps and see. You might even want to give a report here. (I must say, the discussions here on dice control are some of the best I have seen, whether people agree with me or not.)

PS: I know I was doing a backwards analogy. As you say, hindsight is 20-20.

Here is my personal experience.

Dice control is possible, for very fleeting moments. If you employ the Golden Touch methodology and practice, you can keep dice on axis AT TIMES, and for a fraction of those throws the dice will react as you seek upon striking the table and then the back wall. And the fractional number of such events can serve to slightly tilt the odds in your favor. But you must bet properly. And you must hold off on the random rollers and bad bets. Standing at a craps table without placing a bet on each shooter has always been difficult for me... it feels rude. Moreover, I am a sucker for several 'bad' bets such as the Fire bet, horns, etc.

My weaknesses make craps a most difficult game for me. But I still love the game itself.

The only way Frank Scamblete can make money from craps is to sell books to stupid gamblers or hold more Golden Shower seminars.

Quote: FrankScoblete

check out SmartCraps and see

Maybe Ahigh can tell us if that is the software he sometimes uses

After watching Ahighs slo mo video (great music), how can anyone not believe that those dice were not randomized after at least 3 collisions (sometimes 4,5 or even 6) with the table, the wall, and the table again. It might be the prettiest looking set and throw we have ever seen,( BUT). I dont know if that is Ahigh shooting in the video or if it would even matter who is shucking those dice down the table. I cant get past this evidence as I see it.

Quote: odiousgambit

Maybe Ahigh can tell us if that is the software he sometimes uses

I think Ahigh uses his own, He is a computer guy.

This has been talked about in a dicesitter thread here:
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/craps/12868-dice-testing/

Smart Craps is just another tool to use.
It is shareware just like WinCraps and anyone that has a Windows based pc can use it.
I used the Excel sheet it provided when I first used it.
Some just have a hammer and a screwdriver in their tool box. For many that is all the tools needed.
Hell, I have set up 411 posi-gears in $100,000 classic cars using just a hammer and a screwdriver.

The Help file is also free to have in pdf form and has all the info in it also.

of course Wong has his Dice Tool program in Excel as does Bone Tracker and a few others.

But the original DI statistical testing was done strictly by empirical data years ago.
No program was needed to show any statistical significance in the data collected.
They did not need S Wong to come on board for what that was worth.

The Proof of DI was in the rolls already done by the Team.
And that was good enough for them then and now.

empirical data
we all know how accurate that can be.

"I tried to figure out how many rolls the Captain must have had before sevening out,
based on how much the player on the stool wagered.
At $1,500, his average win would be about $2,000 or so, if the numbers came up based on their probability.
Two thirds of the numbers are "point numbers" 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10.
That means the Captain hit about 50 of the point or box numbers,
not including come-out rolls where the man on the stool had his bets off.
I estimate that the Captain’s hand must have been between 80-100 rolls,
depending on how many points he made and how many come-out rolls he had. "

http://www.goldentouchcraps.com/WeeklyArticles/45.shtml
"Over the years I’ve used logic and the experiences of players who have used
the 5-Count successfully in relatively long-run play (10 years to 25 years)
to counter the claims of those who adhere to criticism #2.

My personal experience shows the 5-Count to work just as the Captain says it works.
There are probably a hundred other people I can point to who will verify that it does work as intended:
It selects the best possible shooters to bet on and,
if there’s a controlled shooter in their midst, you’ll be on them and in the positive monetary zone."

Quote: mdh

I cant get past this evidence as I see it.

But for years the DI mentality was a soft toss where the dice avoided even hitting the back wall, The dice are supposed to roll to the wall and just kiss it.

No wonder the short rolls dominated the scene.

Too much time to set and deliver the dice, that is great for the casino, less rolls per hour
The DI just claims they get banned because of their skill level and how much money they win.

He says She says stuff

both dice consistently not even hitting the back wall.
Casinos love that action. It is against their rules of play but not against any DI rules of play.

Of course, now days, you are taught how to hit the wall and still control the dice.

The best rolls still come from avoiding the back wall all together.
Excellent

Is Dice Control Real?
Yes
In a casino and not at home?

Can it be tested?
Yes

I use all my own custom software. Still waiting for a show instead of a tell.

I am working on a controlled throw. I throw the dice as high as possible in a looping arc so that the dice look like they are going to fly out of the table and hit the person on the other end. Then at the last possible second they swing back and come in right under the lip of the table. It is hilarious to watch the other players reactions.

Quote: FrankScoblete

Reading the comments by everyone --- and they are quite good (other than the sarcasm) --- I realize that the issue of dice control probably can't be resolved in conversations such as we're having.
I thought the use of the SRR and the SmartCraps program's tests would settle the issue but obviously those tests are being frowned upon by the critics.

There is no frowning from members of WoV.
inquiring minds want to know

You enter 200 to 500 rolls into SC and it says you pass the Pro Tests and your SRR is 7.32.
Hey that means , to you, one is set for life at a 95% confidence level. That is what the program says.
It uses Binomial probability for the p-value... So...

Again, a statistical significance of 90-95% to one means nothing to another that wants to see 99.9% before an eyebrow is raised.
And at home SRR vs at casino SRR are the same? Naw, different. How much?? Not much.
One can still win lots of $$$ with an at home SRR in a Casino where it really counts.
That really is the bottom line.

Lifetime SRR of 7 and higher over 10,000 dice rolls??
Yeah right
Ahigh wants the show.
Got to buy Franks books and DVDs for the show.
The $$$ rules

Quote: FrankScoblete

I don't know how many critics have bought SmartCraps (remember I have no financial interest in this product) so I am not sure if the criticism is of the product itself or the way the web site is promoting it.

I have never bought the Smart Craps program.
It is free to have and use. Only limits sim sizes and other things like writing custom scripts.
It is just another tool. There are many out there...

And in the end, only you can prove to yourself that you can have the DI skill
Only You can prevent forest fires.

7 craps


your being rude and silly at the same time. I understand you dont believe in dice control
or influence... that is your opinion... i get that, but if you want to go on and on about
this then i think you should atleast be honest........

by honest i mean you dont have the slightest idea if dice control works or does
not work, you have never tried it you have never spent week after week with a dice
controller to see what happens. You only sit there and try to find reasons why it cant work
and should not work, or why some one has not proven to you it works.

If you want to spend your time looking questioning, then question this.... dice control
is like any other physical activity, it is different for every one.. every one... some take 6 months
some take 6 years.. there is no way to know, and there cant be.... people are different heights,
different weights, have different hands, everything is different, so even though the basics are
the same, every other aspect is different.

To be taken seriously yo have to take all sides of an issue into account, not just your side,
and in the end you cant say you know!!!!! when you have never tried.

BY the way nice night last night at the casino, two member of our craps got together by
accident and did fine. i got out of my weeks slump with 37% 6 & 8... 7.9 Srr about time
ths is was terrible week of practice.

dicesitter.

Quote: dicesitter

7 craps


your being rude and silly at the same time. I understand you dont believe in dice control
or influence... that is your opinion... i get that, but if you want to go on and on about
this then i think you should atleast be honest........

by honest i mean you dont have the slightest idea if dice control works or does
not work, you have never tried it you have never spent week after week with a dice
controller to see what happens.

Thanks man for the interest.
I see no rudeness.
Just stating facts.
Where in my facts and math am I wrong?
I can learn by my mistakes.

I dealt dice in Northern Nevada casinos (the BEST casinos in the universe IMO)
and have seen many DIs at work. Still do in my play.
In 1999 I thought, I knew, I was the best DI in the world, f**k all the others, I WAS the best.
I had proved it to myself back then with my throws and what I knew I could do with the dice...
until I did the statistical analysis on it.
all my rolls, not cherry picking

I am just a regular Gorilla type shooter.
get them to the end and where is my banana

Quote: 7craps

But for years the DI mentality was a soft toss where the dice avoided even hitting the back wall, The dice are supposed to roll to the wall and just kiss it.

No wonder the short rolls dominated the scene.

Too much time to set and deliver the dice, that is great for the casino, less rolls per hour
The DI just claims they get banned because of their skill level and how much money they win.

He says She says stuff

both dice consistently not even hitting the back wall.
Casinos love that action. It is against their rules of play but not against any DI rules of play.

Of course, now days, you are taught how to hit the wall and still control the dice.

The best rolls still come from avoiding the back wall all together.
Excellent

Is Dice Control Real?
Yes
In a casino and not at home?

Can it be tested?
Yes

I agree that if there is any DI the short roll would have to be part of it. I wonder if I would be scolded just as quick by the box or pit if I just grabbed the dice and threw them short ( without setting them and looking like a complete random thrower) as a so called DI would. How long does one expect to get away with a short roll. It seems that one would seek out the casinos that tolerate this more than others (Im sure they do) if he or she thinks they can gain an advantage with a short roll.

Quote: mdh

I agree that if there is any DI the short roll would have to be part of it.
How long does one expect to get away with a short roll.
It seems that one would seek out the casinos that tolerate this more than others (Im sure they do) if he or she thinks they can gain an advantage with a short roll.

Rapid Craps at old Bill's (I think it has been now moved)
is a shorter table and my best rolls and the absolute longest best rolls I have seen in the last few years happen on that table. By DIs and random rollers.
Every day I have played there someone had a 40+ hand and the Dealers there said it actually happens a few times each day. Well that was in the past.

Only one puck in the way and when shooting from the stick position you only have about a 3 to 4 foot toss.
Many of my soft tosses there are short,
and the dealers are quick to remind that both dice need to hit the wall. of course a $1 bet for them goes along way too.

"Thank you for the bet"

I really do not care what claims FrankS, ds or anyone has.
Ahigh wants the show of proof.
I let the math do the talking.
GTC members claim having a SRR of over 7.0 for more than 10k rolls. (I added the 10k dice rolls for effect)
because if you have an SRR of over 7 after 500 rolls, you will still have it over 50,000 rolls, until you start to wear out, as time wears everyone out.

Only tell, never show.
Believers will always believe
I believe in only what I see.
For me, it is more FUN.

If it is more FUN for DIs and FrankS and Team, more power to them

It doesn't have to be Frank, but here's a fact: in general, nobody (else) is willing to step up to the lights, camera, action.

Don't lose sight of the fact that I have invested quite a bit of time and resources to build a stage. A stage from which nobody has generally been able to outperform even little old me.

And my performance has been identified as nothing worthy of proof.

And yet I have high RSR's in sessions of 200 rolls.

And yet I have thrown nine hardways in ten throws.

And yet I have demonstrated a 1 to 1000 parlay on a hard eight just over 100 throws of effort as a result of the theory of my bias.

And yet I performed 29 rolls with only 4 sevens .. the last 14 of which had no sevens to win a bet against the Wizard.

Yet I have not proven that I have control.

And there is nobody out there who is confident enough that they can prove anything in a single session.

I have ceased my research into this area and I have declared that "everything is just random" and that "I am just lucky."

It is much less work for me and it is obvious that the stories are more important to those who tell them than the truth.

Because the stories make money from all of this, and I don't. I spend money to seek the truth for which nobody cares about.

So there is your answer: nobody cares about the truth. In general everyone wants confirmation that they already know the truth.

If the truth were desired, the truth would be sought; yet it is not the truth that people are after because the vehicle to obtain the truth has been made available and nobody cares to board.

Let everyone believe what they wish to believe, and that will be their truth.

All I know is that I am damn lucky! I mean look at my woman and look at me. I rest my case.

Quote: Ahigh

Yet I have not proven that I have control.

Sure you have. Only to a certain degree.
But just for short time periods.

You may say you have control today, others may say it is all due to simple variance in the dice rolls.

AlanM says you do not have any control by seeing what the dice do after you toss them just one time.

We are all so damn picky!
lucky!

Quote: mdh

7craps you are the pacomartin of craps. Ahigh, how lucky were you? BTW, is it me , or have you mellowed on your craps thread posts in recent weeks? What are your thoughts on this thread?

Ahigh hasn't mellowed. He's just taken to sarcasm now. He still believes he can influence. Maybe I can too. I play craps a few times a year. I put a hardway bet out on every hard number for the dealers and hit them all before sevening out. The dealers loved me. Corrected me on every mistake the rest of the night, reminded me to put odds up when I forgot. Even asked a guy to give me some more room when he came to the table. Thanks to my influencing of the hard numbers I had a great time!

ZCore13

I've also been in San Francisco attending the Game Developer conference, and I have been sick on top of that. Still recovering.

I had cough syrup and one of my Oakley hats stolen from my luggage on the way home last night. I am lucky, otherwise the plane would have crashed and I would have died instead of just becoming sick and having a hat an medicine stolen from me.

I got a note in the mail that a check that was issued to me was never cashed. I am lucky to get this note as the check was for a couple hundred bucks.

I am lucky that they sent me the note.

I am also lucky that so many people are so nice to me on this forum.

I am lucky.

Quote: FrankScoblete

I am not quite sure of the math of a dynamic game such as craps.

I am thinking that some of the math of the game of craps in relation to dice control might be in that nebulous area.

I buy into (I fully buy into) the legitimacy of the SRR and the SmartCraps tests as being real gauges of a real skill.

'Nuf said: a foundation laid on quicksand.

I've done this 200 roll challenge and destroyed it only 18 7s...

Not bragging... And I can understand how it could make a person feel as if there are influencing... But the difference is "I know" I didn't do anything special.



I will be in Vegas in July to display my talents

Quote: Zcore13

Ahigh hasn't mellowed. He's just taken to sarcasm now. He still believes he can influence.

100% correct. Like 7craps believed in 1999,
that he for absolutely certain was a real life DI,
that's Ahigh today. He'll find out in time what
the truth is, time is the great leveler..

Quote: odiousgambit

Perhaps if Scoblete got a little more mathematical? And I don't mean anything advanced necessarily. At my unimpressive level of math savvy, I can still read a chart. And at that wizard page there is a chart that says that if you have an SSR of 6.207 [correction], at a common 3x4x5x table just playing the line with full odds you have an advantage of over 1%.

SRR is a useless measurement. By itself, without understanding how the rest of the die face distributions change, it does not provide sufficient information to recalculate the house edge on any craps bets other than the Any 7 bet. If you have an SRR of 6.207 over the past N rolls, but you don't have any reason to believe it will continue for the next N rolls, then you're just committing the post hoc fallacy -- wishful thinking that you were exerting control and will continue to do so, without understanding how.

On the other hand, if you are a skilled on-axis roller and you have an SRR of 1:6.207 as a result of that skill, you have better than a 16% edge over the house. Not just 1%, 16%. That's a big difference, one that doesn't fit with the lack of big bankrolls and consistent winning sessions among the DI crowd (who routinely claim SRRs better than 1:7). It would be exceptionally unlikely for someone to fail to win consistently if they were playing a +16% game. That's like fading the Any 7 bet.

Either way, there's no reason to measure SRR at all. Either you can keep the dice on-axis, in which case you should be directly measuring that, or you can't keep the dice on-axis, in which case measuring SRR is as useful as looking at a roulette readerboard.

Dice control as it's currently being "packaged and sold", to me, seems a bit more like a cover for some other type of advantage play that may possibly be taking place with the dice.

Quote: MathExtremist

Quote: odiousgambit

Perhaps if Scoblete got a little more mathematical? And I don't mean anything advanced necessarily. At my unimpressive level of math savvy, I can still read a chart. And at that wizard page there is a chart that says that if you have an SSR of 6.207 [correction], at a common 3x4x5x table just playing the line with full odds you have an advantage of over 1%.

SRR is a useless measurement.

OK
The DI universe is awake now.

Donald Catlin
"Don Catlin is a retired professor of mathematics and statistics from the University of Massachusetts."
http://catlin.casinocitytimes.com/article/rhythmic-rolling-and-the-gamblers-jamboree-8159
says

"What is the mathematical story when it comes to controlled shooting?
One way to quantify the skill of a shooter is to calculate that shooter's sevens to rolls ratio or SRR. "
he continues

"Clearly the player has an advantage whenever 7r > 43 or r > 43/7.
The number 43/7 is approximately 6.1428.
In other words, if a shooter has an SRR greater than 6.1428 he has an advantage when placing the 6 or 8.
A player with an SRR of 7 has, according to (7), an 8.333…% advantage over the house. Not bad!"

Mr. Catlin in another article does point out he is sure that by increasing the ratio of 7s does not mean all other numbers are equally distributed.
But he still does the math as they are. Interesting.
But, that seems to be lost in the fog.

To be SRR or not to be SRR
Is that the question FrankS asked?
By entering your rolls into Smart Craps program, it will tell you what your on-axis ratios are and your SRR is
and what sets to use and what bets have the advantage.
I did not pay anything for my version to have. I do not really use it much.
It was free to download from SC website.

Maybe we can just agree that the truth lies some where in between everyting that'everyone has talked about.

Now there is no question Frank is " the expert" and i my add Frank has a beautiful throw, Jerry
Stickman has one and many others. Yet Frank is the first person to say he has had long losing streaks.

So what does that mean... you test him in the losing streak and he has no advantage.. the guy is a quack,
you test him when his toss is good he is a great thower, Wow what a dice controller. Some of the
throws that have been indicated about Stick man are almost magical.... but i will bet a dollar he can also tell
tales of poor shooting..

I was great Friday night... terrible saturday and terrible this week in practice and yet last night it was a beautiful
thing. When our toss is right the dice go to the back wall, when off they can scoot, for me it is to the left.

For me if i am successful it is how well i can do the shot, when i am on it is a pure pleasure when off it is
terrible.

So i guess here is the realty of it.... if you expect dice control guys to always be on, never have their toss
change.... well then there can never be any dice control....ever, we cant win that argument....

On the other hand if dice control is what we saY it is, a learnable shot that when used correctly will
give some people an advantage, by that i mean i have enough days when my shot is really on and i can
average 36% or better on the 6 & 8 and make good money, and when i am off i bet less so over -all
i win. That type of dice control does exist.

So in the end maybe it depends on what we both mean by dice control , by those definitions we both could be
correct.

dicesitter

The only problem is, it is my and many others belief that a random thrower has just the same chance as you of having your 2 bad and 1 good day. It's hard to accept that you were "on" after the fact and after you had a winning session.

ZCore13

Quote: dicesitter

Now there is no question Frank is " the expert"

Sure there is.
He is not the expert among all DIs. Period.
That leads to this question.
expert at what??

Quote: dicesitter

I was great Friday night... terrible saturday and terrible this week in practice and yet last night it was a beautiful
thing.

You are then saying your skill is not always "on".
That skill has to be keeping the dice on-axis more than just by total random skills.

This is what ME and AlanM are looking for.

It is like playing a video poker machine that has a return of 101%.
You still will have way more losing sessions than winning ones.
If you believe in many sessions over a lifetime of play.

In truth and reality, each and every one of us plays just one session.
We just stop and take a break here and there and then we die.

if you have more fun playing Craps believing you are truly influencing them, great! keep it up.
But if you or any DI starts making claims that you are better than the rest because of your unproven to the world skills,
and the rest can NEVER win by playing a negative expectation game,
watch out, as some have more FUN by showing the other side of the coin and there are many.

I have way more fun playing Craps not influencing them dice
and I still will have the same chance as you of showing a net profit, if that even matters, after a lifetime of play.

Quote: dicesitter

Now there is no question Frank is " the expert"

Of course there is.

He's demonstrated he is "expert" ONLY at writing gambling books: nothing more.

He's used the dice setting "movement" as subject material to fill the gap between book covers.

Heck, there's only so much you can write about the game otherwise, and it's all been said before.

I'd give him an "A" for creativity, but a resounding "F" for credibility.

"We've beaten the casinos for twenty years"

absolutely not......the average player has good days and bad days, couple long rolls
many short rolls....and in the end...always..he loses....

A good dice sitter has the same, but in the end he wins.... I have not taken a dime
of my wallet for a very long time to play craps... it comes out of my collective
wins... i can show you my bank statements of when i was learning and betting
more thinking " i had an advanage" and i can show them now when i have proven to myself i do"

And to answer 7 craps... if you have more fun playing that way do it.... i think that is great, 99%
of the people play like that, i love it, it gives me a tremendous variety of casinos to play at. I wish
you well.... if others like myself play differently, why not wish us well, why question our honestly
skill level and motives.

dicesitter

Quote: MrV

"We've beaten the casinos for twenty years"

"Frank and the Dominator have been banned from whole
states for winning too much."

Which states are those, Frank?

deleted