Poll
35 votes (58.33%) | |||
25 votes (41.66%) |
60 members have voted
Quote: AxelWolfIf you really believe Wong gave up on something that could make millions just because it was difficult. I just chuckle and shake my head.
Wong gave up on it because it doesn't work. He was obviously
where Ahigh is right now, and learned the truth and backed
off from it. He can't say Hey, I was fooled, don't waste your
time. So he acts like maybe its possible, just not by him. He
spent a lot of time on it, he look like an idiot if he admitted
how he really felt.
Quote: Ahigh
I thought Wong sounded like a real expert at the game until I heard him talk about it on the gambling with an edge radio show.
!
Thats because he's totally into downplaying it now. He
gave up and is bored to tears with the whole concept.
But I'm sure nobody has approached it like you have,
nobody has your setup or your skills. Just ask you,
you'll tell us. Like you do in every other post.
Quote: EvenBobI'm sure nobody has approached it like you have,
nobody has your setup or your skills.
"Skill" is one thing; "ability" is quite another.
Quote: AhighTwo second exposure. Sound triggered flash. The second image is from a longer exposure time after the dice came to a rest.
How did you infer that this image was part of an advantage play again? This is a demonstration of a controlled shot. I think it was you that I succinctly explained that control is what you have until you release the dice, not what you have as the dice bounce. This image shows control that is actually possible, and yes it also shows the final outcome.
I don't have enough data to correlate the final outcome orientation with the landing orientation. This is just a demonstration of control that is possible on at least one of my shots. Most of my shots are not this clean, especially when I'm messing with all this gear (wireless camera trigger in left hand, etc).
Oh, I get it now. Your controlled shot ends at the point of impact. Okay. And the rest is random. Okay.
Quote: AhighBut if someone wants to report back to the forum about the possibility of me having an advantage shot in the casino, they should go and record my performance in the casino for me.
I volunteer. I will meet you at the casino of your choice to document your rolls... roll by roll. You don't have to do a thing but make your bets and roll the dice. I will record each and every roll, and track your bets and wins... and losses. Please give me one week's notice so I can make appropriate plans.
Quote: AlanMendelsonI volunteer. I will meet you at the casino of your choice to document your rolls... roll by roll. You don't have to do a thing but make your bets and roll the dice. I will record each and every roll, and track your bets and wins... and losses. Please give me one week's notice so I can make appropriate plans.
Following up in PM.
edited to add: I will be there to "report." I won't even make a bet unless you think I should make a line bet so there is no heat?
And please don't start about the other "missed" meetings we had.
Quote: AlanMendelsonBetter that you pick, Ahigh. I don't want to interfere with your schedule or timing. I know that you prefer a certain time with fewest tourists. I want this to be on "your schedule." Just give me a week's notice.
PM sent.
I tried to respond to your private message but you have me blocked.
http://www.casinodetroit.net/Archivesc/Patterson/patterson1001.html
Hope to see MathExtremist' comments given the dialog on this subject over on "Charting The Table"
Quote: eclecticI am posting the link below to this thread which seems appropriate.
http://www.casinodetroit.net/Archivesc/Patterson/patterson1001.html
Hope to see MathExtremist' comments given the dialog on this subject over on "Charting The Table"
Total propaganda trying to push his for-profit ripoff business.
ZCore13
One might re-title the article: "2001: Spaced Idiocy."
His math is wrong. The house edge on the place 6 bet is not based on the ratio of sevens to rolls, it is based on the ratio of sevens to sixes because those are the only two numbers that resolve the place 6 bet. If you can actually decrease the ratio of sevens to sixes, you'd swing the edge on the place 6 bet toward your favor, breaking even at 7:6 (typical is 6:5).Quote: eclecticI am posting the link below to this thread which seems appropriate.
http://www.casinodetroit.net/Archivesc/Patterson/patterson1001.html
Hope to see MathExtremist' comments given the dialog on this subject over on "Charting The Table"
Unfortunately, most of these so-called teachers are passing off flawed math and sloppy reasoning in an attempt to convince greedy gamblers to pay for their seminars. It's a con job with just as much legitimacy as Trump University.
Here's what you really need to know: SRR is a useless statistic -- it is not well-correlated to the house edge of anything other than the Any Seven bet. Anyone who tells you they have a theoretical (expected) SRR of 1:7 or 1:8 is sadly and grossly mistaken. That level of dice influence would, if properly harnessed and wagered upon, generate double or triple digit player advantages with little variance. In other words, someone who really could control the dice to that degree should be regularly earning several thousand dollars per day from a casino. It may seem like only a small difference -- going from an SRR of 1:6 to 1:7 -- but it's actually a massive one. It turns out that under several different models of dice influence, a small degree of influence generates reasonable, single-digit player edges on certain bets but that only results in an "SRR" of something like 1:6.02 or 1:5.97. But that's not what the gullible have been led to believe. Our own dicesitter keeps posting about how he has an SRR in the 1:9 or 1:11 range. He's not calculating SRR correctly (apparently, he ignores come-out 7s) and he's not using it correctly even if he were. But even if he had a long-term SRR in the 1:6.5 range, that'd be plenty for double-digit edges on many bets.
So if you want to explore dice advantage play, the first thing you need to do is learn how to figure the house edge on the bets under the assumption of equally-likely die faces. The second thing you need to do is learn how to measure whether your throwing is leading to unequal die face probabilities. If yes, then you can recalculate the house edges using those unequal probabilities and figure out whether you have an edge anywhere.
But you can't use SRR as a shortcut to any of that. That's what the dice-throwing seminar hucksters will tell you, but they're wrong.
Pure nonsense.
"So if you want to explore dice advantage play, the first thing you need to do is learn how to figure the house edge on the bets under the assumption of equally-likely die faces. The second thing you need to do is learn how to measure whether your throwing is leading to unequal die face probabilities. If yes, then you can recalculate the house edges using those unequal probabilities and figure out whether you have an edge anywhere. "
Math show me a single player anywhere at anytime that has done any of this your way, and is winning????
dicesetter
He can't because no one is actually winning except the casinos and DI pushers who are selling crap.Quote: dicesitter
Math show me a single player anywhere at anytime that has done any of this your way, and is winning????
dicesetter
You may be getting lucky, because it's possible to do seemingly impossible things including 18 yo's in a row.
You can't say 100% fact that you're not just running good nowadays.
Anyone who has actually taken the time to properly evaluate their dice rolls has already learned that they do not have the edge. Only those players who rely on guesswork, wishful thinking, and confirmation bias still believe they have an edge when they throw the dice. Those players could learn how to do the math but they choose not to because it would burst their happy little bubbles of innumeracy. In other words, ignorance is bliss.Quote: dicesitterPure nonsense.
Math show me a single player anywhere at anytime that has done any of this your way, and is winning????
There it took about six months to get you to say it. It is about time.... for you it is
impossible for anyone to get an edge, 100% impossible for anyone to develop
a shot to get an edge.
Why not just say that, why in the hell do you go round and round with the
math crap....... in your mind you have proven the game cant be beat.
We all have the right to our opinion.... you have yours, for others who feel
differently, quit the crap.... you have a right to be wrong. I have a right to
do. Your apparently happy telling people there is no difference going
to the table dead drunk and throwing and the guys I play with are
happy.
dicesetter
I am still waiting to see someone post a series of all of the shots that they have made, the bets made, and the "advantage" that they posted, followed by the Chi-Squared analysis to show that what they are shooting is statistically extremely improbable and therefore they are shooting undoubtably with an advantage.
Seriously. If you believe you have an advantage do us a favor. Buy a craps table (it will be a worthwhile adventure). Set up a camera or two (split screen, you throwing on one, the result on the other) with a video timer on it. Start throwing dice using your patented technique. Record the rolls. Do the analysis. It would cost about what, 5K to do all of that. When the Chi-Squared hits about 32 or so based on 11 degrees of freedom, post it all online with the results so that analysis can be independently done.
Then you will be a certified DI, and the case can be closed. You can sell your technique and your craps table.
Until then, dice are random.
I have a craps table. What you and Math have to do is get one and work on a shot
for about 20,000 rolls so when we discuss this stuff you will understand what
we are talking about.
Math is supposed to be an expert on the math, I don't doubt that for a second. He can
tell you everything you ever want to know about the math of the game. But that does not
mean a thing when it comes to winning on the table. It does not mean a thing when it
comes to player determining if his shot is working or what set to use , or kind of dice
you are up against. Unless you can determine some of the effects of your shot on
a real casino table, what you have done at home is useless.
Math could actually work with a couple of guys and understand where what he knows
would work with what they know, but he is so intent on insulting what they do and
elevating what he thinks he knows, it is not going to happen,
dicesetter
I've been telling you this for quite some time -- that if you actually had the ability to influence the dice, understanding how to quantify that influence would also indicate how to maximize your theoretical gains. You think the math doesn't mean a thing when it comes to winning, but I think it's the only thing that matters. You're relying on hope and guesswork rather than hard numbers, and your results show it. You simultaneously believe that you can control the dice yet you're taking out bank loans for your wife to gamble. If you actually had any skill, I could make it so you'd never need another loan again. Oh well.Quote: dicesitterMath is supposed to be an expert on the math, I don't doubt that for a second. He can
tell you everything you ever want to know about the math of the game. But that does not
mean a thing when it comes to winning on the table.
Math could actually work with a couple of guys and understand where what he knows
would work with what they know, but he is so intent on insulting what they do and
elevating what he thinks he knows, it is not going to happen,
And to your earlier point, I never said that nobody can control the dice. What I said is that the people who have actually quantified their results have learned that they can't. There is apparently a wide gulf between the people who believe in dice setting and the people who believe in mathematics. You're firmly in the former camp. You could be the first to bridge that gap but you'd have to be willing to subject your methods to rigorous scrutiny, and you've never been willing to do that. On several occasions, you've even said that other people are telling you to stop talking about it. So I don't know what you're expecting to happen next. Every time you say "I can influence the dice," someone inevitably asks you to prove it, and your answer is always "no."
You would think with all that passion they would be champing at the bit to silence the critics. I think they know what the truth is, just don't want to stop drinking the Kool Aid.
For me I don't have the time nor aptitude to do such an experiment. Maybe when I retire in 13 years...
Quote: dicesitterMath could actually work with a couple of guys and understand where what he knows
would work with what they know, but he is so intent on insulting what they do and
elevating what he thinks he knows, it is not going to happen,
dicesetter
He offered to meet you and play craps with you.
No doubt that would give you the opportunity to dazzle him with your dice dexterity.
Who knows, if you opened your mind to what he'd tell you, you might learn something useful.
You refuse to meet him, you blew him off, and still continue to spout nonsense.
You have seen my data, as limited as you say it is, Well I agree we maybe could have shown
some stuff, but you destroyed any possibility of that. I would rather quit the game than
work with you.
Now I have to believe your not dumb enough to think I had to take out a bank loan to send
my wife to Laughlin when my walleye boat new was $88,000, so I know you finding ways to
get around discussing that data I provided.
Now in terms of others not wanting to me say to much, I admit that one day I went to far
into some stuff, . I wont do that again. As far
as what I do, I have given you everything except my underwear size.
One more time. I have three shots I use on different tables or different locations at the
table. I have a couple of sets I start out with. Each of those sets when thrown correctly
will give you a set of numbers, now you can never tell which of those numbers you will
see more than others, but it will be only a few . For instance 3/6 3/5 I wont tell you which
shot I use with the set, but when I use it and it is working, I will see 5 and 9 and 6
much more than any other number. If you use the 3/5 3/1 I will bet more on than the
4.6 and 8. I have another set which will produce 4 & 10.
Your training in craps tells you, you have to have the edge proven before you get to the
table, I understand that thinking, I have been, done that. I don't worry about that, I make
the shot and it tells me which shot and set is producing what I think it should. I admit
this is different way to look at the game, and there is no question, how to bet it is much
harder than doing it.
dicesetter
When I quack like a duck my throw produces more 4's, 6's and 9's
When I bark like a dog (has to be like a deep voice bark, none of this woof sh*t) I throw more 5's and 8's.
My specialty though is what I call my dark side monkey noise. I squeal like a monkey making an Eeee...Eeee...Eeee noise and throw a ton of 7's mostly of the 6/1 variety. I load up on the hopping 7's and the box person sits there like they don't know what hit them.
I swore I would never give away my system for free but I decided that the casinos deserve to lose so I want you all to have my system free of charge.
P.S I am also currently working on a moo shot but it isn't very reliable at the moment. Dang cows!
What no Moose shot?Quote: PokerGrinderWhen I play craps I have a system too!
When I quack like a duck my throw produces more 4's, 6's and 9's
When I bark like a dog (has to be like a deep voice bark, none of this woof sh*t) I throw more 5's and 8's.
My specialty though is what I call my dark side monkey noise. I squeal like a monkey making an Eeee...Eeee...Eeee noise and throw a ton of 7's mostly of the 6/1 variety. I load up on the hopping 7's and the box person sits there like they don't know what hit them.
I swore I would never give away my system for free but I decided that the casinos deserve to lose so I want you all to have my system free of charge.
P.S I am also currently working on a moo shot but it isn't very reliable at the moment. Dang cows!
It's obvious you're a fake canadian. Any real canadian craps player knows that's the best shot in canadian weather.
You must be wanted by the law to purposely pretend to be a canadian.
This answer tells me that you don't actually "understand that thinking" because that's not at all what I've been saying. What I've been saying is that if you can quantify your altered distribution, you can calculate the edge and therefore know where to bet. You just said that you know exactly which numbers you expect to see more often (e.g., 5, 6, 9 in your first example). If that's true, you absolutely can calculate your edge if you assume that you're going to throw your shot correctly. But you're not doing that. If you really do understand how to perform that analysis, I can't for the life of me imagine why you haven't done it.Quote: dicesitterOne more time. I have three shots I use on different tables or different locations at the
table. I have a couple of sets I start out with. Each of those sets when thrown correctly
will give you a set of numbers, now you can never tell which of those numbers you will
see more than others, but it will be only a few . For instance 3/6 3/5 I wont tell you which
shot I use with the set, but when I use it and it is working, I will see 5 and 9 and 6
much more than any other number. If you use the 3/5 3/1 I will bet more on than the
4.6 and 8. I have another set which will produce 4 & 10.
Your training in craps tells you, you have to have the edge proven before you get to the
table, I understand that thinking
Quote: AxelWolfWhat no Moose shot?
It's obvious you're a fake canadian. Any real canadian craps player knows that's the best shot in canadian weather.
You must be wanted by the law to purposely pretend to be a canadian.
I really only play craps in the states. The moose shot is horrible in the states, like you said it only works in Canada.
thanks for the reply.
dicesetter
If someone thinks they're a dice influence professional, then put the money up. I'm SURE there would be a crowd of people (myself included) willing to put money up against a DI... Like, throw 50,000 dice throws. If you win more than X of the time (where X is a mathematical 'difference' in standard deviation to prove you have some influence) then you'll win the bet. If not, I (or someone else from the crowd) wins the bet.
It would be worth both parties time as I'm sure WHATEVER the DI is willing to put up others would match. I personally would match as much money as the DI wanted to bet. I have sources and people whom I could get backed for life changing amounts of money.
Perhaps there's a reason no DI has ever stepped up to this challenge? Whist I love math, no math needed to disprove this one.
Second way is to aim for someonea hand that is hanging over the sside. Hop the 7s, throw the dice off their hands
Profit!!!
You're forgetting the 3rd sure fire way... Find a don't player at the other end of the table and throw the dice hard at his "don't chips"... hopping the 7's before you do, of course.Quote: GWAEI have 2 sure fire DI sets. First you have to throw real hard so both dice go off the table. Then requeat new dice. Hop the 7s and bang.
Second way is to aim for someonea hand that is hanging over the sside. Hop the 7s, throw the dice off their hands
Profit!!!
One is Persi Diaconis. Another is Marcin Kapitaniak.Quote: gordonm888Could someone please repeat the name of the university professor who does research on the randomness of coin tosses and dice throws? I know it was mentioned earlier, but this is now a very long thread, and I can't seem to find the posts where he was mentioned.
Is Marcin male or female or Martian?
If you got it, don't explain it, don't give it away.
It's OK to come here and say Na, NA, Hah!
Try to be polite, I know it's hard........
My question may be simple to dismiss but based on the very latest DS/ME Post, it made me question as follows:
1. Since each table is different via length, surface characteristics, backwall bounciness, etc., any "altered distribution" that a truly skilled AP shot can regularly generate would still be different on a live casino table, especially one not previously encountered.
2. So wouldn't it make sense that the altered distribution on the unknown casino table would be altered to a different distribution from the practice table and be fairly useless for AP betting until enough hands were played in order to determine what that difference is all about? (The idea of signature numbers from the AP's altered distribution could very well change due to the new table's characteristics.)
3. Assuming that the AP has the ability to avoid the sevens as the primary but not necessarily the only source of their altered distribution, it would imply that the best bet might simply be inside or across, since signature numbers have not yet made themselves known?
4. If any of this makes sense then DS would be correct to the extent that if he really did have a true AP shot, and its clear to me that is not the case, he would have to toss on a new table AND see the results before he could determine the particular numbers that appear for a particular starting set and shot.
5. I agree with ME that a true AP in craps would know his altered distribution for a given starting set used for his home table/stats and how to best bet on it. However, until he determines what has changed on the unfamiliar table, he has to bet more generally before he would be sure of how to press his bets on numbers that provide his best advantage.
6. If any of this still makes any sense, then the true AP may find the best betting strategy to be one of regressing a substantial starting bet after a few hits, followed by typical press and pull bets. Only after seeing his results would he have a way to guage what set change to make in order to make more specific and lucrative bets appropriate to his altered distribution at the unfamiliar table? But what if the altered distribution includes not avoiding as many sevens(uh-oh)?
7. I guess trying to AP at craps is a lot harder than even I imagined since not only are very rare skills necessary, betting your strength requires knowing how to assess your live results as quickly as possible in order to do more than just bet like everyone else. Why did I ever try to attempt this insanity? That definitely does not make any sense.
Quote:if I were a profitable DI,
That's a BIG
Quote: surrender88sI think a point worth making is this: if I were a profitable DI, I would not tell a soul, keep jumping around to casinos getting VIP treatment, and then after making millions, write a book about it. I wouldn't prove it to people on a forum for the sake of pride or a few hundred bucks on a bet.
Do we have an award for post of the year? Will the cheesehead ever shut up? Will ME ever quit feeding the *****?
I didn't understand the 'write a book about it' part.Quote: DeMangoDo we have an award for post of the year? Will the cheesehead ever shut up?
Go Mormon, have sons, pass the knowledge within the family.
No books ;-)
I'm just perpetuating things to cover for the fact that I'm a highly-profitable DI with an edge of over 19%.Quote: DeMangoWill ME ever quit feeding the *****?
Whoops...
No one said a few hundred bucks.Quote: surrender88sI think a point worth making is this: if I were a profitable DI, I would not tell a soul, keep jumping around to casinos getting VIP treatment, and then after making millions, write a book about it. I wouldn't prove it to people on a forum for the sake of pride or a few hundred bucks on a bet.
It's been many year's now IF it was possible someone would have shown proof by now. Look at all the guys who have already written books about it. You don't think if Frank S and company would kill to prove DI is real? Professional gamblers almost never retire. If they can move their arm's and they have a legitimate advantage they are in the casinos making bets. They might slow down but, they rarely get out.
There's a significant amount of money to whomever can prove it. I highly doubt conditions would change overnight even if it was proven to be possible. There's just to many locations to play craps.
It's strange that you never see any DI's betting anything significant. It's not like they can hide. It take 2 seconds to spot someone who thinks they are a DI.
Math.....
If someone created a machine that replicated the same throw every single time / if dice influencing is true that that robot should roll the exact same roll every time - or at least a statistical abnormality of times . Or am I missing something ?
That would be completely useless..... you would have to make a machine to throw with
every different set of dice you could play with and then with every different type table
you could play on and then with every location at that table..
That is why this idea of a constant edge that you can prove at home and then take to
a casino is such nonsense.
If your going win at casino play you have to be able to adjust to what you see and
the conditions you encounter each time you play.
I may be wrong about this, but that is my opinion as to why you don't see so called
DI's betting thousands of dollars on each roll. They understand the game conditions have
changed and you need to pick your spots to stay ahead.
dicesetter
Quote: AxelWolfLook at all the guys who have already written books about it. You don't think if Frank S and company would kill to prove DI is real?
No.
Because if it could be proven to be real, part of the process would involve determining just how it is done; they'd soon lose their monopoly to prey upon the Desperate and the Deluded.
He's been making a good living keeping the whole thing to himself and a few like-minded entrepreneurs; why would he / they want the gravy train to come off the rails?
Make no mistake: it is a gravy train for these guys; they are earning a living from dice setting, just not the way they say it should be done.
There's sheep, and there are those who shear them.