True odds question

Quote: sodawater

It doesn't matter if you were there or not. It cannot happen. Therefore you couldn't have seen it.

That's fine. I have nothing else to say.

Quote: sodawater

It doesn't matter if you were there or not. It cannot happen. Therefore you couldn't have seen it.

Devil's Advocate time.

Explain why it cannot happen. I maintain that the probability against that ever happening is both staggering and astronomical, but that it could, physically happen.

The probability of rolling a Yo is 1/18. The probability of rolling two Yos is (1/18)^2. The probability of rolling a Yo, having already rolled a Yo, is 1/18.

Everyone is arguing that this alleged event cannot possibly have happened for the exact same reason that the Martingale can only fail.

Imagine this, someone comes to the Forum and says, "I have Ten Million Dollars, and I am going to insure that it lasts me the rest of my life by running a twenty step Martingale, base of $5.00, betting the Pass Line for eight hours a day for the rest of my life." We're going to be all over him, we'll say, "No, you're crazy! That bad boy will eventually fail, maybe even on the first try!"

The probability of the Pass Line winning is .4929, the probability of it failing twenty consecutive times:

(1 - .4929)^20 = 0.0000012643642596871681 = 1/0.0000012643642596871681 = 1 in 790,911.32 attempts.

Now, I understand that the alleged event is many orders of magnitude more unlikely than this, but still consider, playing 48 hands of Craps per hour eight hours a day still yields a result of:

790911/(48 * 8) = 2059.6640625 days, or:

2059.6640625/365.25 = 5.639052874743326 years

Thus, the system will fail once every 5.639052874743326 years.

However, once the system has succeeded, no matter how many times it succeeds, the probability of failure on the next attempt always returns to 1 in 790,911.32 attempts.

But, we will argue (rightly) that the system will eventually fail, and when it does, the millionaire will be up Excrement Creek without a paddle.

We may also argue (rightfully) that, even given an infinite amount of time and money, the Martingale is not a successful system because it can theoretically lose forever. The player can theoretically lose every single decision from now until the end of eternity, especially since the Odds of any single decision are always against the player and the dice don't care what they did before or how many times they did it.

CONCLUSION

With this in mind, why do we contend that the dice care that they rolled Eleven on the previous roll? Why do we contend that the dice care that they rolled Yo on the Seventeen previous rolls before the eighteenth? Why do we maintain that, at some point prior to that nineteenth roll, the dice developed cognizance and said, "Enough! We have come up Yo a ridiculous number of times, we must do something else now?"

Do I believe Alan Mendelson's fabulous tale about the Eighteen Yo's? I don't know. But, am I in a position to say, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that it absolutely never happened? I contest that I am not, because to maintain such would be to maintain that the Martingale will absolutely work, if you give it enough steps.

Further, on the WoO Roulette Game, I had eight consecutive results that were either 00, 16, or 32...the probability of that is 1:662,672,958, Seven of those were 16's or 32's, and the probability of 7 out of 8 of either of those is 1:111,733,966.

Calling bullshit? Here's a screenshot:

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/general/10604-wizard-of-odds-games/#post164024

Mission... I think where we disagree is in the order of magnitude of the numbers. Your post cites things like 1 in 790,000 and 1 in 600 million, 1 in 111 million, etc.

10^-23 is not even in the same universe as those numbers.

What it comes down to, then, is a philosophical argument about the word "possible." Words are only as good as their meanings. If we have the word "impossible," it needs to mean something. What do we mean by "impossible"?

Quantum mechanics says it's possible that when you drop a solid fork on a solid table, all of the atoms in the fork will miss all of the atoms in the table, and the fork could pass right through the table. But that definition of "possible" is not within the philosophical range of possibility when we are assigning meaning to words -- or else the words would not have any utility in real life.

I think a probability of 10^-23 is well beyond the threshold for the definition of impossible.

Quote: sodawater

or else the words would not have any utility in real life. .

As I said, it's about life itself. 18 yo's in a row is either impossible or life doesn't exist as we know it here on earth.

Quote: sodawater

I think a probability of 10^-23 is well beyond the threshold for the definition of impossible.

Everyone is assuming that it was a fair game with legitimate dice. If someone slipped in a die with only 5's and a die with only 6's, then it becomes very believable.

I think it is safe to say that if it did happen, most likely someone cheated.

Quote: DRich

If someone slipped in a die with only 5's and a die with only 6's,
.

And that seems "impossible" at Caesars. In the story there is no mention of anyone getting rich on this series of rolls so again we are left with only one conclusion. It was impossible and didn't happen.

Quote: DRich

Everyone is assuming that it was a fair game with legitimate dice. If someone slipped in a die with only 5's and a die with only 6's, then it becomes very believable.

I think it is safe to say that if it did happen, most likely someone cheated.

Alan said the stickman inspected the dice a few times. Also if you switched in a die with only 6s on it, it would be obvious it was misspotted from any angle.


I guess the most likely way to cheat to get only elevens would be to use two dice with powerful magnetic loads, one on the 1 and one on the 2... then switch an electromagnet on at the end of the table... but that would look ridiculous as the dice did flips after stopping to get to the 11.

Quote: sodawater

Mission... I think where we disagree is in the order of magnitude of the numbers. Your post cites things like 1 in 790,000 and 1 in 600 million, 1 in 111 million, etc.

10^-23 is not even in the same universe as those numbers.

What it comes down to, then, is a philosophical argument about the word "possible." Words are only as good as their meanings. If we have the word "impossible," it needs to mean something. What do we mean by "impossible"?

Quantum mechanics says it's possible that when you drop a solid fork on a solid table, all of the atoms in the fork will miss all of the atoms in the table, and the fork could pass right through the table. But that definition of "possible" is not within the philosophical range of possibility when we are assigning meaning to words -- or else the words would not have any utility in real life.

I think a probability of 10^-23 is well beyond the threshold for the definition of impossible.

True, but you must admit that 1:600+M is pretty unbelievable, but I have proof that it happened. Between WoO, Video Games and live casinos, I've probably seen, conservatively, 5,000 spins of the wheel and, liberally, 10,000 spins. In these limited number of spins, a 1 in 600+ million shot.

Now, are we saying that in the history of the entire Universe that this roll never happened and could not happen? If not, are we saying that it may have happened, but Alan Mendelson was not there? Why not, when if we assume that it could have happened, somebody had to be there...and probability would have it that the someone (if it happened) would be a regular gambler.

It seems that we are saying that this roll could not have happened. The first thing I would do is return to my 1 in 18 argument, which is simply that the probability of a Yo is 1 in 18, regardless of how many Yos may or may not have proceeded it.

Hmm...I guess, "Impossible," does need to mean something, though, if we are going to accept the word, "Possible," to mean anything at all.

My first argument is that the word, "Possible," has no actual material meaning. The reason that the word has no material meaning is because the word defines a concept related only to abstractions and the theoretical. In any tense, the word only attempts to speak to what could be or could not be, rather than what is or is not. I would hasten to ask, however, who has complete knowledge of the Universe? If there are none who can claim the Universal Knowledge, then does it not follow that there are none who can make absolute conclusions about what can or cannot be?

In this case, we have a claim of 18 Yos in a row. This is a material claim. The roll either did or did not happen, therefore, the question of possibility is mute.

With that out of the way, let us consider the theoretical. That which is theoretically impossible should also not be imaginable. However, I can imagine this impossible thing. I picture myself at a Craps Table, and I can picture a shooter...screw that...I'm the shooter!!! I'm there, and I toss out a Yo, Come Out Winner (this is my imaginative tale, so it IS the CO roll!), then I do it 17 more times, pulling half of every win and adding the other half to my Pass Line Bet.

I can imagine that pretty easily, for one reason and one reason alone, the probability of rolling an 11...any number of 11's having already been rolled is 1 in 18.

Let's discuss the Math, at this time. Mathematics also deals in the theoretical, but it actually applies the theoretical to the actual, and sometimes it goes the other way around with the actual being applied to the theoretical. Mathematics is a little different than discussing possibility/impossibility, and the reason for that is the discussion of what is, "Possible," is mere semantics, but Mathematics bridges the gap between the theoretical and the actual...the Philosophical and the Material.

Now, Mathematics has a very convenient number to describe that which is considered to be, "Impossible," in the Philosophical sense, when bridging that particular gap, and that number is 0. Mathematics also has a number to describe an absence of a thing, when bridging the gap between the material and the theoretical, and conveniently, that number is also zero.

In describing the material, then, "0," describes an absence of a thing. In describing the theoretical, "0," describes an absence of possibility. "This cannot mathematically happen," is what zero says in referring to the theoretical. If you have three theoretical bananas and you subtract three theoretical bananas, you do not have any theoretical bananas left. That bridges the theoretical and the material, as it can be applied to material bananas.

In this case, we are looking at a non-zero number when we speak of the potential for 18 Yo's in a row. Let's link the theoretical to the material. There is a material claim that 18 consecutive rolls of the dice happened, and that all 18 of those rolls were Yos. If you add up the possible results of any 18 consecutive rolls of the dice, by probability, the answer will be 1 because the answer must be 1, because it refers to something that definitely happened.

If you describe eighteen consecutive Yos as, "Impossible," then it must not be included in the data set that describes what could happen in the course of eighteen material rolls. However, if you remove that from the data set as an impossibility, and you add up what remains, then the probabilities of all combinations of eighteen consecutive rolls add up to something less than 1.

Obviously, that is a clearly unsatisfactory mathematical result, because the result is meaningless and is not applicable to 18 material rolls of the dice. It can't be, because now, a complete 18 rolls of the dice is itself impossible because the culmination of the, "Possible," results does not equal 1.

Fear not, though, for I have witnessed eighteen consecutive rolls of a pair of dice...and if I want to account for every possibility and have a result that equals, "1," then 18 Yo's in a row must be one of those possibilities...because if we do not include it and it does happen, the Universe will probably explode.

/sigh. Want to engage, cannot do it without placing one foot into theology.

I'll spare the derail =(

Edit: I want to hear MathExtremist's opinion on this 18 Yo topic

Claims to fame, while I still say that Alan M made a mistake when he said he saw his 18 Yo's in a row, because I see that kind of thing happening all the time, when the players get caught up in what is happening on the table and when someone says that it was so may rolls they go along with what was said.

On the other hand we have statements like the 23,..6's in a row, in a 26 hand that some guys wants everybody to believe happened, because of their fantastic shooting ability. Now when ever I read something like that I just crack up, I don't have to do the math to know it didn't happen.

What makes me bring this back up is because someone had me sit down a watch a video of the guy they claim rolled that hand! Here is the link to that video. Now the funny thing is they are saying there is no trick video when they shot this video. Why should there be, you can't see what these guys rolled anyway, but what you can see is they are random, their dice are bouncing around just like anybody’s do when they are shooting.

Lets forget about the 18 Yo's and focus on the claim to fame with the 23,..6's!

http://www.casinotube.com/casino-games/craps/golden-touch-craps-practice-1


Watch when they are shooting and the camera is behind them and you can see their dice hitting the felt, some of Ahigh shots look better then theirs do. Alan are theses what you would call a DI's, if you didn't know who the shooters were?
Just look at 4.10 in the video can you tell if it was a hard 4? How about at 4.41 where the one die bounces back about 2 ft, is that controlled Alan?

Now in this video # 7 you got to love it when FS is shooting in slow-motion, is this what you call controlled shooting Alan M? Where is dice are all over the place? Just watch what is happening when his dice lands!

http://www.casinotube.com/casino-games/craps/golden-touch-craps-practice-7


Now does it look like any one of these guys would have a hand like the claim below, where they said there were 23,..6's in a 26 roll?

Quote: miplet

18 Yo's in a row: 1 in 39,346,408,075,296,537,575,424 (sorry just 2 zeros).
23 6's in a 26 roll: 1 in about 2,440,927,724,540,810,226,200,469 (5 zeroes)

Again thanks to miplet for doing the math on this problem, I do appreciate it!

Now here is my disclaimer, I've seen these guys shooting in the casinos, and just like anybody else they have their bad days and some good days also. For those of you that have never had the pleasure of seeing them shoot, just watch the videos, then remember that it's at home with no chips on the table and no one doing all the stupid things you will see happen in a casino when you are shooting!
The one thing I got out of these videos was they really had some bad camera work you couldn't tell what numbers were on the dice when they landed, Ahigh should give them some pointers on doing a video! We all knew what happened on his table when the guys were shooting, there was no one trying to hide what happened, with bad camera work!
..

This again is similar to the fiction written by Scoblette about the Captain's alleged world record breaking roll. When something happens that beat the odds of a billion to 1 or better, it is in the best interests of the casino to shout it out aloud. If indeed 18 yo's rolled in a row, beating odds of 26 septillion to 1, this would be an astounding event. Security tape would no doubt be kept of this event. It would make the paper at the least and all the gambling media in particular. Reams of stories would be written on how this roll could have been parlayed into incredible fortunes. Bovine feces on both stories.

Superrick dont ask me if I think there is "controlled shooting" because I don't believe there is "controlled shooting."

By the way, the 18 yos were thrown by a random shooter.

And Caesars does not keep its surveillance tapes beyond the time required by gaming rules. I asked.

DeMango

Lets not go back to the 18 Yo's, you have to admit that FS's claim to the 23,..6's in a 26 roll is more outrageous, and after watching those videos of them shooting they would have to be the luckiest craps shooters ever!

I have to hand it to this bunch of guys for being such good salesmen, when they put out stories like the 23,..6's and get their readers to believe it! Is the whole DI thing based on nothing but fiction, or is there a few guys that the casinos would have to worry about? By looking at those videos I would say the casinos didn't have a thing to worry about, except for all the hype, that has been written about becoming a DI. If that BS could do them any damage they would be losing millions everyday and that is not happening!

Sure you are going to have some shooters get on some good rolls when they are setting the dice, but is this just from luck? I know that I always get a lot of heat when I'm shooting and I will be the first to tell anybody that I'm getting lucky when I get on a big roll, because I can't do it all the time. The casinos freak out when anybody is on a roll, they know that it shouldn't be happening and they forget about variance and trends that happen all the time! They never look at someone that is setting the dice when they are losing, they only look at them when they are winning!

I still say that I think it's a good idea that someone takes a class on craps, before they try to beat the game, if the guys they are taking their class from are not writing a bunch of BS about the game and they teach good betting skills.
The same thing goes for anybody that has a board on becoming a DI, if they are not calling out these guys that write about their SRR of 28, why in the world would you take a class off of them. Wouldn't you want the real story about becoming a so-called DI instead of living in a fantasy world, where a great fiction writer,..writes about his one day helicopter-junket to a casino and turns it into a 6 part trip report, talk about nothing but BS to go along with his SRR of 28, I'm going to turn him in for the greatest fiction writer they ever was award!

Quote: Alan M

Superrick dont ask me if I think there is "controlled shooting" because I don't believe there is "controlled shooting."

Alan what happened to those two or three shooters that you said were DI's that you saw shooting?

..

But, but, I want to get back to the 18 Yo's!!!

For my next argument, I submit the following:

5, 9, 8, Yo, 7, 6, 6, 4 (Hard), 6, (Hard), 6 (Hard), 8, 7, 3, 6, 6, Snake Eyes, 7, 6

Okay, so those are 18 random rolls that I, literally, just finished doing on the WoO Craps game. Let's see what the probability of these eighteen consecutive rolls is, shall we?

4/36 * 4/36 * 5/36 * 2/36 * 6/36 * 5/36 * 5/36 * 1/36 * 1/36 * 1/36 * 5/36 * 6/36 * 2/36 * 5/36 * 5/36 * 1/36 * 6/36 * 5/36 = 1.04707729330486e-19

.0000000000000000000104707729330486

I believe that would be about 1 in 95503933319356840000, if I'm not mistaken.

If we are to conclude that 18 Yos in a row is impossible, are we not to conclude that the above series of rolls is nearly as impossible? It can't be, I just did it. I didn't even do it, a random number generator did it, I just stopped the random number generator at certain times and received the result.

Imagine I created a new thread and I called it, "Crazy Set of Rolls," and I stated, "You guys won't believe what happened on the WoO game, or at the casino last night," or what have you, and I posted this set of rolls.

Everyone would say, "Mission146, have you finally lost your mind? That's just a random set of eighteen rolls. I suppose the three consecutive Hard Ways is pretty cool, but other than that, it's just a worthless set of rolls. What are you so excited about?"

And, I could reply, "But, I did the nearly impossible!!!"

CONCLUSION

My point is this: if 18 Yo's in a row is, "Impossible," than virtually any set of 18 rolls in a row is impossible. However, I've seen eighteen consecutive rolls. I've rolled the dice (on WoO and real life) more than eighteen consecutive times. I've had single hands go longer than 18 consecutive rolls.

Let's look at the, "Most likely," individual set of results for 18 consecutive rolls, which is, technically, 18 consecutive sevens.

(1/6)^18 = 9.846400420048502e-15

.0000000000000009846400420048502

1 in 1015599566684161.1

If there were any claim to that happening, however, people would be saying, "Mission146, that is impossible!"

Impossible?

Impossible, how?

It's the most likely G****** result of eighteen consecutive rolls!

The probability of rolling a Seven is 1 in 6, regardless of how many Sevens may or may not have been rolled before that.

The probability of rolling an Eleven is 1 in 18, regardless of how many Yos may or may not have been rolled before that.

Either eighteen rolls could have been eighteen consecutive Yos, within the realm of possibility, or everything involving eighteen consecutive rolls is impossible and Craps is impossible. Dice do not exist, or if they do, they cannot be rolled eighteen times...because every result of those eighteen rolls is impossible.

The defense rests.

It is not impossible. It is just so super-fantastically unlikely that it totally strains the bounds of credibility.

Just like saying someone could, on demand, replicate the exact same sequence of rolls you just made.

BTW did you notice 7 of your 18 were 6s?

Well mission, compare your number to 26 and 1/3 septillion. Again, impossible. The prosecution rests. And you are not going to get OJ Mendelson to fess up either!

Quote: superrick

Alan what happened to those two or three shooters that you said were DI's that you saw shooting?

..

What I said was that those two -- the surgeon from Washington and the "mystery shooter" I saw once at Caesars and never saw again, were the only two shooters I ever saw with the form and style that is what dice influencing and dice control is all about. However, the mystery shooter had one roll which lasted, if I recall, 25 minutes and never saw him again. I've played with the surgeon numerous times and he never had a roll that lasted more than ten or fifteen minutes.

Random shooters can roll the dice as long or even longer. The biggest winning hands I've ever played were thrown by random shooters.

This is why I say I am yet to meet anyone who can influence the dice enough to make a difference in the game.

Quote: DeMango

Well mission, compare your number to 26 and 1/3 septillion. Again, impossible. The prosecution rests. And you are not going to get OJ Mendelson to fess up either!

Again this is ridiculous. I was there and I saw it.

You're entire "case" is based not on another witness who says "Alan Mendelson you're full of it. He rolled a 7 and then a yo and then he sevened out." No. Your entire "case" is some statistics that indicate this is a one in a gazillion chance. Yet, you have no proof it didn't happen.

Earlier tonight I contacted one of the top execs at Caesars and asked him to do me a favor and check to see:

1. Is it possible to get tapes from years ago. Answer: no, we don't keep them unless they are "flagged" for some reason.
2. Does surveillance keep tapes of notable events at the craps tables such as "monster rolls" or fire-bets that hit? Answer: No, after the required time to keep tapes has passed, we record over them.
3. Does anyone in surveillance have a "keeper reel" (what we say in the TV news business when you are doing a story at the beach about pollution or crime and you "keep" shots of babes in bikinis)?? Answer: Well, there was no answer which I take as a "no" but I'm sure he got a chuckle out of my question.

Look, I don't have any proof of it either -- not even a win/loss statement for the day since I didn't make any bets on it nor did the other two players. I guess I could go back there and ask James if he remembers since he was the stickman. Do you think a dealer at Caesars will remember this event from several years ago, with everything they've seen?

I think the more interesting question at this point is why Alan is keeping this claim alive. It has been disproven as clearly as is possible, and there's nothing else to really add to that part of the discussion.

But what does Alan have to gain by reinforcing that he witnessed something that didn't happen?

Quote: sodawater

I think the more interesting question at this point is why Alan is keeping this claim alive. It has been disproven as clearly as is possible, and there's nothing else to really add to that part of the discussion.

But what does Alan have to gain by reinforcing that he witnessed something that didn't happen?

I have nothing to gain -- nor did I claim that I gained anything from it happening. I certainly haven't used it to promote dice control.

Not one of you have disproved it. All you have done is quote the odds of it happening. So the more interesting question is why do you persist? I left this subject days ago -- on June 4 -- and I was not the one to bring it up again. I think you just want to call me a liar. Or a nut job. You certainly can't call me a huckster for trying to sell a book on dice control or a course on "how to roll 18 yos without even trying."

It was mentioned at the trial that the odds of the blood not being from OJ were 1 in 5 billion. You have pushed the odds to a factor many times that. Yet you persist in huckstering your fable. Your credibility is at stake, the same tactic used by Scoblete to defend himself. So your persistent denial is understandable.

Quote: cowboy

It is not impossible. It is just so super-fantastically unlikely that it totally strains the bounds of credibility.

Just like saying someone could, on demand, replicate the exact same sequence of rolls you just made.

BTW did you notice 7 of your 18 were 6s?

The eighteen Yo's that allegedly occurred were not on demand, nor would any of the, "Impossible results," (inclusive to all of them) be on demand.

The sixes, I did notice that. I didn't want to say anything about this, because people have called me crazy, but I practice a little thing called RNG setting. The key is that you have to click the mouse with your ring finger as opposed to your index finger, and only on a multiple of zero or five seconds with respect to the time. It does pretty well, as you can see, I did better than one out of three sixes, but my usual six ratio is about one in 4.2. Now, sometimes I will miss and click on xx:xx:01, and that's where you see those Sevens come in. Interestingly enough, El Diablo is the most likely result when you're doing it close to perfectly, but not quite there.

(The second paragraph is 100% meant as a joke, and not meant to insult you or anyone else, just being silly...it's morning)

My point is not about replication on demand, or anything like that, just that some sets of rolls that have occurred are less likely than 18 Yo's in a row, but that all of them, from a probabilistic standpoint, are at least close to be considered impossible if we consider 18 Yo's impossible.

You say it's not impossible, though, which is what I have been arguing, so kudos for that! I'm not arguing the truthfulness or falsity of Alan M's tale, I'm merely arguing that, if it is false, it's not because eighteen Yo's in a row are impossible.

Quote: Mission146

I'm merely arguing that, if it is false, it's not because eighteen Yo's in a row are impossible.

For all intents and purposes the odds of 26 1/3 septillion to 1 make it impossible.

Quote: DeMango

Well mission, compare your number to 26 and 1/3 septillion. Again, impossible. The prosecution rests. And you are not going to get OJ Mendelson to fess up either!

I see what you're saying, but I intentionally just took eighteen rolls, "Right off the top," and posted the results.

Furthermore, I bet you if I played the WoO game long enough, and it might not even take that long, isolating any set of eighteen rolls, I could come up with a longer shot. I'd need a few Snake Eyes, a few Midnights, and some Threes and Yos in there, but I bet I could go further than:

2.541528055334343e-23

And, I might try it, but it'll need to wait until Monday night or Tuesday night because today's a work day. However, I bet, isolating any set of eighteen rolls that I choose, I can arrive at something longer within twelve hours.

BOOM!!!

I've done it!

In less than an hour of trying, at approximately 10:08a.m. EST, I produced the following results, with an RNG, on the WoO Craps Game:

4, Hard-10, Hard-10, 6, 6, Hard-4, Midnight, Yo, 10, Yo, 8, Hard-8, Midnight, Hard-Six, 4, Hard-Six, 3, Hard-Ten

3/36 * 1/36 * 1/36 * 5/36 * 5/36 * 1/36 * 1/36 * 2/36 * 3/36 * 2/36 * 5/36 * 1/36 * 1/36 * 1/36 * 3/36 * 1/36 * 2/36 * 1/36 = 2.617693233262149e-24

If 18 Yo's in a row is practically impossible, I have done the even more practically impossible, without much effort.

I am the Supreme God and Ruler of Craps, I am the second coming of the Captain. I simply set the RNG for Hardways, and now, I have done the impossible.

Now, the Defense rests!

Quote: DeMango

It was mentioned at the trial that the odds of the blood not being from OJ were 1 in 5 billion. You have pushed the odds to a factor many times that. Yet you persist in huckstering your fable. Your credibility is at stake, the same tactic used by Scoblete to defend himself. So your persistent denial is understandable.

Exactly. You are turning this into a personal attack. You want to attack my credibility.

Look buddy, if you want to attack my credibility do it over something more important than what I saw happen at a craps table.

By the way Demango, the issue for the jury was not if it was OJ's blood or not. The issue was how did it get at the crime scene?
Just as the issue here is not what the odds of 18 yos in a row being rolled are... the issue is did you see something else happen?

Quote: Mission146

But, but, I want to get back to the 18 Yo's!!!

For my next argument, I submit the following:

5, 9, 8, Yo, 7, 6, 6, 4 (Hard), 6, (Hard), 6 (Hard), 8, 7, 3, 6, 6, Snake Eyes, 7, 6

Okay, so those are 18 random rolls that I, literally, just finished doing on the WoO Craps game. Let's see what the probability of these eighteen consecutive rolls is, shall we?

4/36 * 4/36 * 5/36 * 2/36 * 6/36 * 5/36 * 5/36 * 1/36 * 1/36 * 1/36 * 5/36 * 6/36 * 2/36 * 5/36 * 5/36 * 1/36 * 6/36 * 5/36 = 1.04707729330486e-19

.0000000000000000000104707729330486

I believe that would be about 1 in 95503933319356840000, if I'm not mistaken.

If we are to conclude that 18 Yos in a row is impossible, are we not to conclude that the above series of rolls is nearly as impossible? It can't be, I just did it. I didn't even do it, a random number generator did it, I just stopped the random number generator at certain times and received the result.

Imagine I created a new thread and I called it, "Crazy Set of Rolls," and I stated, "You guys won't believe what happened on the WoO game, or at the casino last night," or what have you, and I posted this set of rolls.

Everyone would say, "Mission146, have you finally lost your mind? That's just a random set of eighteen rolls. I suppose the three consecutive Hard Ways is pretty cool, but other than that, it's just a worthless set of rolls. What are you so excited about?"

And, I could reply, "But, I did the nearly impossible!!!"

CONCLUSION

My point is this: if 18 Yo's in a row is, "Impossible," than virtually any set of 18 rolls in a row is impossible. However, I've seen eighteen consecutive rolls. I've rolled the dice (on WoO and real life) more than eighteen consecutive times. I've had single hands go longer than 18 consecutive rolls.

Let's look at the, "Most likely," individual set of results for 18 consecutive rolls, which is, technically, 18 consecutive sevens.

(1/6)^18 = 9.846400420048502e-15

.0000000000000009846400420048502

1 in 1015599566684161.1

If there were any claim to that happening, however, people would be saying, "Mission146, that is impossible!"

Impossible?

Impossible, how?

It's the most likely G****** result of eighteen consecutive rolls!

The probability of rolling a Seven is 1 in 6, regardless of how many Sevens may or may not have been rolled before that.

The probability of rolling an Eleven is 1 in 18, regardless of how many Yos may or may not have been rolled before that.

Either eighteen rolls could have been eighteen consecutive Yos, within the realm of possibility, or everything involving eighteen consecutive rolls is impossible and Craps is impossible. Dice do not exist, or if they do, they cannot be rolled eighteen times...because every result of those eighteen rolls is impossible.

The defense rests.

Mission: I don't think you've proven a thing by your example. What Alan is maintaining, and what you seem to be supporting, is that 18 YO'S were rolled IN SUCCESSION. I suppose if he said a 6 or 8 were rolled 18 times, there'd be no controversy. To say that any other random 18 numbers are impossible, does not discount that a specific number, the yo, is impossible. You're comparing apples to oranges, I think.

I'm math challenged. I'm just looking at your method. You displayed your method as "2/36 * 3/36 * 5/36," etc. (My numbers arbitrary.) What would "2/36 * 2/36 * 2/36," etc., look like? I can't do the math. Just asking.

BTW, what does the following mean in layman's terms:

"1.04707729330486e-19

".0000000000000000000104707729330486

"I believe that would be about 1 in 95503933319356840000, if I'm not mistaken."?

It could well be that 18 yo's in a row has a higher probability than 18 rolls of random numbers. I just think you ought to show that, as well. I do not care who's right/wrong in this argument.

We spend months around here with many saying that all rolls are random and dice influencers/controllers are pretty much outcast hucksters and then one of our members says that he saw an interesting random roll of 18 Yo's in a row...and we tell him that it is impossible because the odds are against it happening.

Do the dice remember the last roll?

Is it possible that this happened? Of course it is--the odds against it are high but no one can prove that it can or can't be done. That leaves the possibility open that it could happen.

Are there instances of the poster telling lies? Is he known to be dishonest?

Quote: Sonny44

Mission: I don't think you've proven a thing by your example. What Alan is maintaining, and what you seem to be supporting, is that 18 YO'S were rolled IN SUCCESSION. I suppose if he said a 6 or 8 were rolled 18 times, there'd be no controversy. To say that any other random 18 numbers are impossible, does not discount that a specific number, the yo, is impossible. You're comparing apples to oranges, I think.

I'm math challenged. I'm just looking at your method. You displayed your method as "2/36 * 3/36 * 5/36," etc. (My numbers arbitrary.) What would "2/36 * 2/36 * 2/36," etc., look like? I can't do the math. Just asking.

BTW, what does the following mean in layman's terms:

"1.04707729330486e-19

".0000000000000000000104707729330486

"I believe that would be about 1 in 95503933319356840000, if I'm not mistaken."?

It could well be that 18 yo's in a row has a higher probability than 18 rolls of random numbers. I just think you ought to show that, as well. I do not care who's right/wrong in this argument.

Perhaps not, but now I have done the even more impossible than 18 consecutive Yo's, within an hour and using a RNG.

My point is this, there are events, isolating 18 rolls, that are less, "Possible," than eighteen consecutive Yos. There are events that exist even further out in the far reaches of probability, and I have demonstrated one such event. My point is that eighteen consecutive Yos are more likely than the eighteen rolls that make up the content of my most recent post.

There have been irrelevant arguments along the way, such as statements of 18 Yo's, "On demand." In this case, however, there is no reason to believe that the eighteen Yo's were demanded. There have been statements concerning standing there and throwing eighteen Yo's right off the top, by implication, yet there has been no such claim.

In fact, the claim seems to be that the shooter was in the middle of a roll, which is why I made my statement about being able to isolate a set of eighteen rolls, at my choosing, that would be less likely than 18 Yo's. That is the claim. That there were eighteen isolated consecutive Yo's in a larger set.

My method simply determines the probability of a certain result being rolled once, and multiplies it by the probability of all the other individual rolls, to determine the overall probability of the set of eighteen rolls.

2/36 * 2/36 * 2/36 would be akin to any combination of consecutive Yos or Threes as there are two ways out of thirty-six to get such a result, so it would be Yo, Three, Three; Yo, Yo, Yo....etc.

If you rolled eighteen random numbers, right off the top, you are extremely likely to get a more likely set of eighteen numbers than eighteen consecutive Yo's, by probability. My point is that there are less likely sets, as well, and I have demonstrated one such set. Within that hour, I had more sets of eighteen with a greater probability than eighteen consecutive Yo's than I care to count.

Quote: Face

/sigh. Want to engage, cannot do it without placing one foot into theology.

I'll spare the derail =(

Edit: I want to hear MathExtremist's opinion on this 18 Yo topic

Which part -- the epistemological part, the quantum mechanical part, or the combinatorial part?

:)

Edit: alright, here's how I look at it. The probability of rolling 18 11s in a row is vanishingly small but not impossible. Roughly 1 in 4*10^22. That's about 136 times more likely than winning Powerball three times in a row. But over time, the probability of a vanishingly small event having occurred at least once will approach certainty. The issue is quantifying "over time" to get a sense of how long that will take. In the case of 18 11s, if you try one trillion times to roll 18 11s, the chance of it having happened are still just about 1 in 40 billion.

So it's not at all likely over any reasonable timeframe. It's a reasonable assumption that one trillion sequences of rolls starting with one or more 11s have yet to be concluded during the course of human history. Loose upper-bound assumptions: 1000 worldwide craps tables running 24x7, 4 rolls/minute, for 100 years yields about 210B casino craps rolls ever, and those are all overly-generous figures to make the point. There certainly weren't 1000 craps tables worldwide in 1913, and there probably aren't today, either: Nevada has held steady at around 400 tables for the past 25 years.

The point is that 18 11s in a row is possible to have occurred. It's just not at all likely. But it's a qualitatively different situation than a real-number scenario where the computed probability of the event is actually zero -- like the probability of a randomly selected real on [0,1) being equal to 0.5. That can obviously happen, but the probability is zero. But that's a different discussion...

Quote: RonC

Do the dice remember the last roll?

Is it possible that this happened? Of course it is--the odds against it are high but no one can prove that it can or can't be done. That leaves the possibility open that it could happen.

I agree with your post, the dice do not remember. The probability of rolling a Yo, any number of Yos either being rolled or not rolled previously, is 2/36.

I maintain that I have effectively proven that it can be done, however, by way of doing something even more unlikely and documenting it.

Quote: Mission146

There have been irrelevant arguments along the way, such as statements of 18 Yo's, "On demand." In this case, however, there is no reason to believe that the eighteen Yo's were demanded. There have been statements concerning standing there and throwing eighteen Yo's right off the top, by implication, yet there has been no such claim.

You are taking that out of context. What I meant was if you state your 18 rolls and say the odds are such and such than in order to perform that identical feat and beat those odds, I need to replicate those rolls. That is totally relevant.

Quote: Mission146

BOOM!!!

I've done it!

In less than an hour of trying, at approximately 10:08a.m. EST, I produced the following results, with an RNG, on the WoO Craps Game:

4, Hard-10, Hard-10, 6, 6, Hard-4, Midnight, Yo, 10, Yo, 8, Hard-8, Midnight, Hard-Six, 4, Hard-Six, 3, Hard-Ten

3/36 * 1/36 * 1/36 * 5/36 * 5/36 * 1/36 * 1/36 * 2/36 * 3/36 * 2/36 * 5/36 * 1/36 * 1/36 * 1/36 * 3/36 * 1/36 * 2/36 * 1/36 = 2.617693233262149e-24

If 18 Yo's in a row is practically impossible, I have done the even more practically impossible, without much effort.

I am the Supreme God and Ruler of Craps, I am the second coming of the Captain. I simply set the RNG for Hardways, and now, I have done the impossible.

Now, the Defense rests!

Great, we know what the odds of that are. Now do it again and get back to us. Take any 18 rolls (which you did) and work out the odds for that occurrence. Fine. That is one set of 18 rolls out of whatever gazillion possibilities of 18 rolls exist. All you've done is shown us one set of those gazillion. Now here's the proposition: Please duplicate those 18 rolls. You can declare any roll starting with the right first number to be the beginning and you can start over as often as you like. Let us know when you've succeeded and after trying for awhile, you'll understand the magnitude of the odds you're up against.

(One caveat - you don't get to seed the random number generator or restart the simulator.)

Doesn't the question of the 18 yo's in a row boil down to trying to explain history?

If I go to the craps table, and watch the next 100 throws, and then come here and say I just witnessed the following 100 roll sequence. What are the chances that I would have seen this EXACT 100 roll sequence? It doesn't matter what the chances are that I would have seen it, because I already did. What are the chances I will see that EXACT same 100 roll sequence again in the future? Now the math matters

Sure, to have odds, you need a proposition.

Quote: MathExtremist

Which part -- the epistemological part, the quantum mechanical part, or the combinatorial part?

Thanks for playing =)

The reason I wished for your input was because of your specific mind. You’ve obviously shown you have an understanding of math including the very large and the very small. You also, if I remember your participation in the God threads correctly, subscribe to the same belief as I that our existence is the result of randomness.

With comments that such an event as 18 straight Yos was so impossible that to do so would disprove existence, I was wondering how someone who believes in something much, MUCH less probable (random creation) looked at the 18 Yo problem.

And the more I think about it, even a Creationist who claims impossibility is still suffering from a break in consistency. Your God, who created all of everything, placed us near one of approx 300 septillion stars, on one of what much be octillions of planets. He could’ve obviously made us capable to survive anywhere, yet he chose this one rock we call Earth.

I don’t argue that Alan’s claim is highly unlikely. It’s unlikely to an extent that I cannot even comprehend it (my understanding of large numbers stops at about the trillions). I just think some of the more extreme opposition is misguided. I actually think that events that would dwarf 18 Yos in “unlikeliness” are all around us.

I also find it odd that the same place that destroys betting systems by saying that “losing can go on infinitely” is the same site that cannot comprehend the idea that something much more likely than an infinite losing streak had happened.

Let's not forget the human factor, that if this truely happened, the dealers, the casino, and then the media would have shouted this out from the rooftops. Similar to the argument against The Captain's roll. It didn't happen. No fabrication by the Mission, on a mission, can change the odds to help out our friend in LA.

Quote: DeMango

Let's not forget the human factor, that if this truely happened, the dealers, the casino, and then the media would have shouted this out from the rooftops. Similar to the argument against The Captain's roll. It didn't happen. No fabrication by the Mission, on a mission, can change the odds to help out our friend in LA.

Well, this is interesting!

First of all what would you expect the media to report on here? Someone rolled 18 yos in a row but no one made any money on it? Do you think anyone would care?

Do you think the casino would put out a press release that said "a shooter rolled the dice and the yo came up 18 times, but no one won any money."

How about the dealers? What are they supposed to talk about, the big tip they got after the monster parlay of a lifetime that didn't happen?

Heck, I didn't even think it was worthy of a mention and I've been at tables at Caesars where high rollers have won between one and three million dollars on a shooter's hand.

In fact, when there was discussion on the Internet about a shooter winning 3-million dollars on a hand (I think it was back in December) and I asked an exec at Caesars to confirm, his response was "people win that kind of money every day here."

And DeMango thinks that 18 yos in a row in which no one won any money is supposed to be news?

Let me sum up this discussion this way:

I talked about a very unusual turn with the dice that a random shooter had.
Several have said the "math" of the game makes this event impossible to happen.
Several have said that it could happen.
And most people don't really care.

Alan M

You might want to read this story, nobody would ever report something strange happening on a casino table,..right?

http://www.lasvegassun.com/blogs/kats-report/2012/jun/21/quickies-great-wheel-malfunction-rio-goss-returns-/#axzz2VYkCAIXT

Way top funny if you ask me, because we all forget things like this after they happen! Just think it was only one month ago when this story was all the rage for a few days! It sure made it's way around the internet super fast. Come to think about it,..I think it even made a few of the craps boards!

Superrick... take it from me. After working in the news business for more than 40 years I can tell you that what becomes news is arbitrary and capricious... and if someone has a picture it's more likely to get in the paper... or if someone has a video it is more likely to get on TV... then a story without a visual element. This is why you see waterskiing squirrels on TV. Is it news? Of course not. But someone has a video camera.

Would the tote board error make the paper if there weren't a photo? I doubt it.

Quote: Face

Thanks for playing =)

The reason I wished for your input was because of your specific mind. You’ve obviously shown you have an understanding of math including the very large and the very small. You also, if I remember your participation in the God threads correctly, subscribe to the same belief as I that our existence is the result of randomness.

With comments that such an event as 18 straight Yos was so impossible that to do so would disprove existence, I was wondering how someone who believes in something much, MUCH less probable (random creation) looked at the 18 Yo problem.

I don't think that random creation is necessarily unlikely at all, but part of it is a frame of reference question. Life exists on Earth (insofar as we can tell, but that's a WHOLE different discussion), so the probability of life in the universe is 1. Intelligent Design / Creation Science tends to use the argument that the probability of terrestrial life having arisen in its current form is infinitesimal, therefore it must have been an intelligent, non-random creator. But that argument is based on the same argument that 18 11s in a row is impossible. Nobody is claiming that if 18 Yos ever roll at a dice table, God made it happen.

In fact, many scientists believe that life should not be uncommon in the universe. This belief, coupled with our actual failure to observe life elsewhere, is known as the Fermi Paradox. In short, "where is everybody?" Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox. For what it's worth, current geopolitical events would seem to give credence to the theory that intelligent life is ultimately suicidal; and if so, it's entirely reasonable that many intelligent societies (like ours) have existed over time, but not sufficiently close in time or space to know about each other. But we're still for practical purposes Earthbound. Talk to me in another 1000 years -- if humanity still exists (as the dominant life form, e.g., not being oppressed by our robot overlords), we won't be stuck on this planet and should be able to go exploring firsthand rather than relying on Earthbound radio telescopes.

Futurism aside, what you're running into is mostly biological in nature. We are not wired to intuitively comprehend either randomness or extremes of scale (in either direction). There is a meaningful difference to the average person between 10 apples and 100 apples, but there is no meaningful difference between 10 billion apples and 100 billion apples. The same is true for extremely small numbers, which is why nobody really cares when Powerball adds a few more numbers to the bin. The difference between 1 in 10 million and 1 in 100 million is only academic, it is not intuited.

The computations for 18 11s in a row are straightforward and nobody disputes them. If there is still an argument to have, it's on an intuitive comprehension of what those numbers mean, not what they are. But at that point, you're attempting to have a debate about what other people understand via intuition, and good luck changing anyone's mind there...

I would LOVE to be at a table where 18 12's where rolled in a roll. The would certainly be the parlay of a lifetime!!! With 30 to 1 payout I'd be leaving the table with pockets full of chips.

I agree with all of MathExtremist's arguments.

Such claims are not impossible, but I don't fault anyone being cynical (or even thinking it's a complete lie) since it's such an unlikely event.

Unlikely events DO happen though.

This terribly unlikely event occurred to me on December 20, 2009. The date is also significant because this could have been the 74th birthday of my favorite uncle who died in May 2000 who I often played Rummy with. I was dealt the nuts 4 times within 16 hands of 2-7 Triple Draw Lowball. The nuts in this game is 75432 not of the same suit. The probability of this being dealt to you in any given hand is: [4^5 -4 (flushes)]/C(52,5) = 1020/2,598,960 = 1 in 2548.

Excluding the birthday coincidence of my uncle, the odds of this happening to me in any given set of 16 hands in 1 in 23.25 billion. For my online real-money career, I estimate I played 300k hands. Over 300k hands, this event happening to me is a 1 in 311,849 shot for any given 300,000 hands. Over 1 million hands, it would happen to me 1 in 93,272 times for any given set of one million hands.

I won $26 over these 16 hands. I have yelled up to my Uncle when thinking about this event (easily the rarest event in my 6 years of real-money online poker), "Why couldn't you let me hit Powerball instead?"

~Proof is posted here:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showpost.php?p=36299004&postcount=17

Obviously any of those who do not believe me can try to ask PokerStars for the hand history numbers listed. I'm not tringlomane in those hands though...lol

What also is scary/impressive is that PokerStars has played ~63 billion hands in the last 3.5 years. They are expected to play their 100th billionth hand next week.

1 in 23 billion is nothing compared to the odds of rolling 18 elevens in a row.

I remember a Fermi discussion here back 2 or 3 years ago when I was mostly a lurker; I won't rehash it here and continue the derail. I just wanted to point out (which I couldn't without using god stuff) that I find myself to be surrounded by things so random that 18 Yos looks as easy as sinking a 2 ft putt in comparison.

I do agree it's more likely Alan remember wrong. And no disrespect to Alan, but just because of the numbers involved, it probably is more likely somebody slipped him a mickey or he dreamed the whole thing. (It's probably even more likely that I've dreamt this whole conversation up, it's that unbelievable). But that being said, it's not impossible, and I wouldn't have raked him over the coals so harshly.

And off topic, but about talking to you in 1,000 years...

I dunno how much internet compliments from strangers please you, but if there should be an afterlife, I'd surely not mind having a palaver with you for a few eternities. Your thoughts often strike a chord in my mind and I enjoy discussions in which you take part =)

Quote: sodawater

1 in 23 billion is nothing compared to the odds of rolling 18 elevens in a row.

Get all technical on me why don't you.

But yes, I agree. Mainly because 18 Yo's weren't publicized/videotaped. If it happened, there would be video proof of it, imo.

I showed my ~proof of my terribly unlikely event in the link. I would also give out the name of my uncle if it wouldn't lead you to his former Social Security Number. :(

Quote: tringlomane

If it happened, there would be video proof of it, imo.

I'm curious, where would the video proof come from? ESPN? Travel Channel? Caesar's Surveillance Camera System perhaps?

Well, I can tell you with certainty that ESPN wasn't there. Nor were the producers of Caesars 24/7 that TV show. Travel Channel wasn't there either. And Caesars Surveillance System? Why?

I do have a tape of my wedding ceremony at a craps table at Caesars. In fact, Caesars provided the video. Would that video do? It was the only wedding ever to take place at a Caesars craps table.

Let's figure the odds. On average there are 315 weddings a day in Vegas. Caesars opened in 1966. So since Caesars opened we can estimate that there have been 5,403,825 Vegas weddings and my wedding was the only one at a Caesars craps table. Granted, 1 out of 5,403,825 is not like rolling 18 yos in a row, but since Caesars didn't release to the public the video of my wedding (and I have the only copy, shot by Caesars) what makes you think they would release the surveillance videos of the 18 yos in a row?

Do you think someone in surveillance thought that it might come up for discussion one day on the Internet?

Quote: sodawater

1 in 23 billion is nothing compared to the odds of rolling 18 elevens in a row.

If my division is correct and we round down to 23 septillion, you would have to repeat that series one trillion times. Boggles the mind.

Quote: cowboy

Great, we know what the odds of that are. Now do it again and get back to us. Take any 18 rolls (which you did) and work out the odds for that occurrence. Fine. That is one set of 18 rolls out of whatever gazillion possibilities of 18 rolls exist. All you've done is shown us one set of those gazillion. Now here's the proposition: Please duplicate those 18 rolls. You can declare any roll starting with the right first number to be the beginning and you can start over as often as you like. Let us know when you've succeeded and after trying for awhile, you'll understand the magnitude of the odds you're up against.

(One caveat - you don't get to seed the random number generator or restart the simulator.)

That's all irrelevant, I don't need to duplicate those exact rolls as they have already happened. I'll tell you what I can do, I can use the simulator and achieve another result more unlikely than 18 Yo's in a row, only now I would bet that I can do it within six hours.

The only relevant thing is whether or not 18 Yo's in a row is possible, I maintain that it is. You are now asking me to reproduce the results, "On demand," which again, is totally different than my claim or the claim by AlanMendelson.

Quote: Face

I also find it odd that the same place that destroys betting systems by saying that “losing can go on infinitely” is the same site that cannot comprehend the idea that something much more likely than an infinite losing streak had happened.

Thank you, Face!