befamous7
befamous7
Joined: Sep 9, 2013
  • Threads: 15
  • Posts: 92
September 9th, 2013 at 12:33:38 AM permalink
Hello, I'm new to the forums and I've been playing craps for about two years now. I don't know where I stand on the dice control aspect of craps but I am interested in maintaining consistency with my shot. I am curious to know what popular dice sets are to avoid rolling a 7? I'm heading to Vegas in a couple weeks and I'd like to try and use a consistent set and see how this works for me.
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
  • Threads: 144
  • Posts: 18128
September 9th, 2013 at 4:44:29 AM permalink
Ahigh you definitely must get the attention of craps players, every time you come back new members start signing up and posting questions like this.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
Dicenor33
Dicenor33
Joined: Aug 28, 2013
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 624
September 9th, 2013 at 6:24:41 AM permalink
Befamous , casinos require dice to be completely random , that's where their edge comes from . Anything you or anybody else does is illegal and the house reserves the right to stop you from shooting . This fact alone reduces your chances of winning to zero . I've seen people winning 50K or more , they had no idea about dice control and house could not do anything because they were 100% legitimate .
odiousgambit
odiousgambit
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
  • Threads: 300
  • Posts: 8294
September 9th, 2013 at 6:41:18 AM permalink
Quote: befamous7

I am curious to know what popular dice sets are to avoid rolling a 7? I'm heading to Vegas in a couple weeks and I'd like to try and use a consistent set and see how this works for me.



As a 2 year vet you should know whether it can be done or not is controversial.

I don't believe in it, but just for fun do try to do it. Do you know the basics? If not, check out the Wizard's page.
http://wizardofodds.com/games/craps/appendix/4/

I've never seen any convincing evidence that set#1 on that page isn't the best for not rolling 7s. I set either the ones or the sixes facing towards me [forming the axis]. 2, 3, 4, or 5 as a pair can face up, doesnt have to be as shown.

Good luck!
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
MathExtremist
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 6526
September 9th, 2013 at 7:17:20 AM permalink
If you can keep the dice on axis, and all you care about is minimizing 7s, the best sets are those with different axial numbers on each die. It doesn't matter which: if 1 and 6 are on the side of one die, 2 and 5 or 3 and 4 should be on the sides of the other.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
dicesitter
dicesitter
Joined: Jan 17, 2013
  • Threads: 32
  • Posts: 1157
September 9th, 2013 at 7:46:31 AM permalink
Well if a person does not believe dice control is possible, than axis control is also not
possible.

In short if you cant get the number you want by setting for it, it makes sense
you cant avoid a 7 by setting to avoid one.

On the other hand since most of us cant get the number we want, atleast setting for
one particular 7 will take 1/3 third of them out of the game.

Hell set for a 6/1 you may never see one again


Dicesetter
chickenman
chickenman
Joined: Nov 1, 2009
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 997
September 9th, 2013 at 7:54:13 AM permalink
Quote: dicesitter


Hell set for a 6/1 you may never see one again


Dicesetter



Now THAT'S control! ;-)
Ahigh
Ahigh
Joined: May 19, 2010
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 5114
September 9th, 2013 at 8:15:10 AM permalink
This is a good question and one that doesn't require any belief in order to follow the common wisdom that is prevailing.

There are 8 sets that qualify as an answer to your question. They are collectively known as "hardway sets."

The hardway set has both dice with the exact same orientation. The six face and the one face are facing the same directions as the axis of rotation during flight.

All of my research actually supports evidence that the hardway set is the best set to avoid throwing sevens. This set is no better or worse than sets that have the something other than the six-one faces along the axis. But fewer six one faces, according to theory, and also backed up by my research, should be along the axis to reduce the occurrence of the hi and the lo when you have a come bet as well.

You do not want to use this set on the initial roll of the comeout.

Taking the hardway set and rotating one of the two dice 180' along the axis of rotation so that instead of having all hardways you have all sevens (continuing with the six faces and one faces along the axis) is the ideal set when you have nothing but a pass line bet.

Even the best influencers, in my opinion, will have the best results in the long term by making only a single pass line bet and a single odds bet in order to avoid the case of hedging the odds bet with a come bet. This is controversial and it is boring not to employ any come bets. It matters more if you don't take odds (which is a legitimate way to approach DI in my opinion regardless of the Wizard's believe that it is important to take odds if you want the best chance at success) the hedging between one bet wanting a hardway set and one bet wanting an all-seven set is more of a problem without odds bets.

This is a GROSS OVERSIMPLIFICATION of much of the theories behind DI. But this is the most popular approach to the game.

I also want to add in that a lot of people like the 3V set. I have zero evidence that there is any merit at all in this set myself. I haven't done a ton of work, but that set does not like my throw at all, and I haven't heard any evidence supporting that this approach has merit. I am not saying it doesn't work, but you'd think that if it did work I would know SOMETHING about it by now. It could just be my problem, though. But FWIW, I would not mess with the 3V set. I also advise against ICE-TONG grip as I doubt that this is an effective grip myself.
dicesitter
dicesitter
Joined: Jan 17, 2013
  • Threads: 32
  • Posts: 1157
September 9th, 2013 at 9:13:14 AM permalink
i love this stuff


done a ton of work, but that set does not like my throw at all, and I haven't heard any evidence supporting that this approach has merit. I am not saying it doesn't work, but you'd think that if it did work I would know SOMETHING about it by now.

I apologise, i had take a break i was laughing so hard.....

If it does not work for Ahigh... it cant be any good and the craps world should not use it.


You cant make this stuff up.


Dicesetter
Ahigh
Ahigh
Joined: May 19, 2010
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 5114
September 9th, 2013 at 9:18:52 AM permalink
Quote: dicesitter

i love this stuff

done a ton of work, but that set does not like my throw at all, and I haven't heard any evidence supporting that this approach has merit. I am not saying it doesn't work, but you'd think that if it did work I would know SOMETHING about it by now.

I apologise, i had take a break i was laughing so hard.....

If it does not work for Ahigh... it cant be any good and the craps world should not use it.

You cant make this stuff up.

Dicesetter



Oh, that reminds me, I don't think the WOV has seen your roll data you submitted to me.

http://forum.goodshooter.com/topic349-10.html

Quote: rollresults


You need to correct my data above. I have 185 rolls and a RSR (not srr) of 8.08.

Total rolls: 185
1) 74 20.00% - 16.67 = (+3.33)------------------------------------------------------------ 1
2) 29 7.84% - 16.67 = (-8.83)------------------------ 2
3) 60 16.22% - 16.67 = (-0.45)------------------------------------------------- 3
4) 54 14.59% - 16.67 = (-2.07)-------------------------------------------- 4
5) 72 19.46% - 16.67 = (+2.79)----------------------------------------------------------- 5
6) 81 21.89% - 16.67 = (+5.23)------------------------------------------------------------------ 6
X**2: 28.56 p: 0.00003
fw 74,29,60,54,72,81 74,29,60,54,72,81

11: --------- 2 (9)
12: ---- 3 (4)
21: -- 3 (2)
13: --------- 4 (9)
22: ---- 4 (4)
31: ------------ 4 (12)
14: ---------- 5 (10)
23: - 5 (1)
32: -- 5 (2)
41: 5 (0)
15: ---- 6 (4)
24: - 6 (1)
33: 6 (0)
42: - 6 (1)
51: ---- 6 (4)
16: ------- 7 (7)
25: - 7 (1)
34: ----- 7 (5)
43: --- 7 (3)
52: - 7 (1)
61: ---- 7 (4)
26: ---- 8 (4)
35: --------- 8 (9)
44: 8 (0)
53: -------- 8 (8)
62: ---- 8 (4)
36: ---- 9 (4)
45: ------ 9 (6)
54: --------- 9 (9)
63: ------- 9 (7)
46: ----------- 10 (11)
55: ------ 10 (6)
64: -------- 10 (8)
56: ---------- 11 (10)
65: -------- 11 (8)
66: ------- 12 (7)
X**2: 82.57 p: 0.00001
Killing -5140

2) 9 4.86% - 2.78% = 2.09% (+3.86)--------------- 2
3) 6 3.24% - 5.56% = -2.31% (-4.28)---------- 3
4) 25 13.51% - 8.33% = 5.18% (+9.58)----------------------------------------- 4
5) 13 7.03% - 11.11% = -4.08% (-7.56)---------------------- 5
6) 10 5.41% - 13.89% = -8.48% (-15.69)----------------- 6
7) 21 11.35% - 16.67% = -5.32% (-9.83)----------------------------------- 7
8) 25 13.51% - 13.89% = -0.38% (-0.69)----------------------------------------- 8
9) 26 14.05% - 11.11% = 2.94% (+5.44)------------------------------------------- 9
10) 25 13.51% - 8.33% = 5.18% (+9.58)-----------------------------------------10
11) 18 9.73% - 5.56% = 4.17% (+7.72)------------------------------11
12) 7 3.78% - 2.78% = 1.01% (+1.86)------------12
X**2: 40.03 p: 0.00002

4:7 ratio is 119.048% - 50.000% = +69.048% (+138.10% diff)
5:7 ratio is 61.905% - 66.667% = -4.762% (-7.14% diff)
6:7 ratio is 47.619% - 83.333% = -35.714% (-42.86% diff)
8:7 ratio is 119.048% - 83.333% = +35.714% (+42.86% diff)
9:7 ratio is 123.810% - 66.667% = +57.143% (+85.71% diff)
10:7 ratio is 119.048% - 50.000% = +69.048% (+138.10% diff)
X**2: 30.12 p: 0.00004

Observed: 21.0 sevens - 164.0 non sevens RSR 8.8095
Expected: 30.8 sevens - 154.2 non sevens RSR 6.0000
X**2: 3.76 p: 0.05239

Seven outs 19 (90.48%) - Seven winners 2 (9.52%)
Pairs 26 14.05% - 16.67% = -2.61% (-4.83 rolls)
Hards 10 5.41% - 11.11% = -5.71% (-10.56 rolls)
HiLos 16 8.65% - 5.56% = 3.09% (+5.72 rolls)
H2 9/0 ( 4.86% - 2.78% = +3.86)
H4 4/1 ( 2.16% - 2.78% = -1.14)
H6 0/0 ( 0.00% - 2.78% = -5.14)
H8 0/0 ( 0.00% - 2.78% = -5.14)
H10 6/1 ( 3.24% - 2.78% = +0.86)
H12 7/1 ( 3.78% - 2.78% = +1.86)
EZ: 159 (85.95% - 83.33% = +4.83)
X**2: 14.40 p: 0.02546



Check out those p-values.

Dicesetter is the most accomplished shooter ever. Either that or he types in numbers about as accurately as he spells.

  • Jump to: