Uh, not surprising
Quote: MrVHow often have you (Dicenor 33) actually observed / verified that dice stay on the same axis from the moment they leave the shooter's hand until they come to rest, after first hitting the back wall?
I have to think that would be a rare event, given the variables at play.
Turn the coin on the other side. How often would you have to keep one of two die on axis to prevent a 6-1 seven out (thus changing the chance of a 6-1 seven out from 1 in 18 to 0 in 18 for that roll?) For each occasion that you keep even one die on axis with the 6-1 along the axis, you are accomplishing something, I believe. And there is a number associated with that "advantage" on a per-occasion. Even one of two dice. And I have video (on a short roll) of it happening.
You guys who believe that dice control is 100% bullshit probably don't realize that it is generally agreed upon (even among the casinos) that dice control is absolutely not bullshit for short rolls.
The only question about dice control being real is what domain does it live in; not whether it is possible.
It's not a black and white issue at all. From a protection standpoint, it's a question of what should the rules be to prevent a dice controller from getting an unfair advantage and using that to take money from the casino in a way that thwarts the house's advantage.
In general, most folks who appear to be dice controllers are not. That's a fairly well known fact among casino staff.
But you guys still thinking it doesn't exist are simply in denial. It does. Just when is the only question. Under what circumstances can it exist.
One video of it happening one time is meaningless, It dose not mean you could reproduced that toss again. It means you got lucky and the dice just happen to act a certain way.Quote: Ahigh. Even one of two dice. And I have video (on a short roll) of it happening.
The only question about dice control being real is what domain does it live in; not whether it is possible.
But you guys still thinking it doesn't exist are simply in denial. It does. Just when is the only question. Under what circumstances can it exist.
Quote: AxelWolfOne video of it happening one time is meaningless, It dose not mean you could reproduced that toss again. It means you got lucky and the dice just happen to act a certain way.
False and false. It's not meaningless; I think you're confusing that a sample size of one is meaningless with what you wish to assert. As a sample, it implies or proves nothing. But the video is meaningful because it actually shows the physical progression of how a dice can short roll and stay on axis for the duration of the roll.
The statement that I got lucky is also false. It was through diligence that I obtained this video. If it were luck, others would have the same video through simple good fortune as well.
"Have a drink on me next time we're at the craps table. Just cover the tip, alright?" That's meaningless.
Quote: Dicenor33Easy, you set v6 and v6 shows up at the end , nothing else . If point is 6 next throw is 6 , it means you have an edge . Similarly , you bet 15 in roulette and 15 comes up , you got an edge , you bet bank and bank comes up you have advantage ,you increase your bets 5 times in BJ and you win it means you got it . Everything else is only fun !
Not at all. Set the dice with a 2-4 and it comes up hard six more often than one time in 36, and then you got something (plus if other results are higher than average results on a meaningful number of samples). AHigh's software shows how the dice set can be related to the results (there may be some assumptions made in his analysis, but I've not dug into the details enough to bother asking).
Correlating the set and the result is the important part. The set doesn't have to be the final result. I'm not convinced that anyone has covered the 'meaningful number of samples' part yet. 'Books' of 720 throws aren't meaningful sets, IMHO. (and to be clear, I don't think Ahigh works on 720 books, but some of the DI magicians do put all their importance on these books).
Quote: Ahigh.
You guys who believe that dice control is 100% bullshit probably don't realize that it is generally agreed upon (even among the casinos) that dice control is absolutely not bullshit for short rolls.
The only question about dice control being real is what domain does it live in; not whether it is possible.
It's not a black and white issue at all. From a protection standpoint, it's a question of what should the rules be to prevent a dice controller from getting an unfair advantage and using that to take money from the casino in a way that thwarts the house's advantage.
In general, most folks who appear to be dice controllers are not. That's a fairly well known fact among casino staff.
But you guys still thinking it doesn't exist are simply in denial. It does. Just when is the only question. Under what circumstances can it exist.
Short rolls?? Or how about no roll at all? Just lay the dice down how I would like them to appear. OK, we can agree on that. Getting a casino to allow it, thats another story. OK, so I roll them 2 inches and they stay the same as I set them down. Again, possible to "control" the number I want. Also again, not allowed. So we now agree DC is possible, or not bullshit as you call it.
So playing by the rules the casinos set, I still say it is "bullshit" and no one can or has proven otherwise. However you are on the side of no one has proven it is NOT impossible. And there lies the rub which will never be decided on here. Again, when casinos start banning players who play by their rules (i.e. no short rolls), like they do in BJ, wake me up.
Quote: SanchoPanzaMore focus on the substance of what is being said rather than imputing and impugning characteristics of that person.
So discussing issues is attacking in your book, then. Discussing
substance is a no no. Your idea is that everybody should agree
with everybody else. How vanilla of you.
IMO, maybe too rare of an event.Quote: Dicenor33I think if you hit 10 points in craps "the house "should start giving free 7 outs giving players a chance to win big .
Few hundred dollars in today's economy don't make much of a difference .
In hope of a big win people would be willing to spend more .
but the free 7out sounds good
Maybe 7 passes in a row to start a hand.
Now I have seen that event way more than 10 points hit by one shooter.
maybe something like 'Hot Craps Mulligan"
The Wizard could come up with the math and some other variations.
he is a TOP craps player.
Winner of $50,000 Venetian craps tournament (story somewhere?)
4th pic up from bottom (not 3rd or 5th)
https://wizardofodds.com/site/about/pictures/
AlanM I think may have first claim
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/craps/13981-missed-the-big-roll-again/#post242196
Quote: BozShort rolls?? Or how about no roll at all?
Exactly. Saying you can control short rolls is like
running with an arrow in your hand all the way
to the target and sticking it in the bullseye. Don't
need no stinking bow, waste of time.
And saying you don't need skill to beat craps, just
luck, is kind of a 'duh' statement. It applies to every
game in the casino. If you could just experience
positive variance (good luck) and no negative, it wouldn't
be gambling. When you actually say it out loud, 'all
I need is luck', people will say 'duh' right to your face.
Go ahead, try it.
Quote: Dicenor33Easy, you set v6 and v6 shows up at the end , nothing else . If point is 6 next throw is 6 , it means you have an edge . Similarly , you bet 15 in roulette and 15 comes up , you got an edge , you bet bank and bank comes up you have advantage ,you increase your bets 5 times in BJ and you win it means you got it . Everything else is only fun !
By that logic if you win MegaMillions you got an edge.
Quote: Dicenor33Easy, you set v6 and v6 shows up at the end , nothing else . If point is 6 next throw is 6 , it means you have an edge . Similarly , you bet 15 in roulette and 15 comes up , you got an edge , you bet bank and bank comes up you have advantage
So every time you win a bet, you have an edge?? *facepalm*
Quote: AhighWhy do you put spaces before your periods?
My grad school advisor did this before question marks and exclamation points. It's makes more sense than periods and commas because you can argue it creates emphasis, but I still don't like it. The editors of scientific journals probably wouldn't like it either if I didn't correct it for them first...lol
Quote: tringlomaneMy grad school advisor did this before question marks and exclamation points. It's makes more sense than periods and commas because you can argue it creates emphasis, but I still don't like it. The editors of scientific journals probably wouldn't like it either if I didn't correct it for them first...lol
It is all good, they were working on commadores with no double space option, must have been back in the day :) Besides that he was a l'il lazy and liked the space for his red mark lol. Either way, or another. :)
On the contrary. That was an attempt to explain why you maybe had not been suspended, precisely because of the focus on substance in "discussing issues." Not usually being called vanilla, I guess in this instance it's, uh, maybe a sort of left-handed compliment.Quote: SanchoPanzaMore focus on the substance of what is being said rather than imputing and impugning characteristics of that person
Quote: EvenBobSo discussing issues is attacking in your book, then. Discussing substance is a no no. Your idea is that everybody should agree with everybody else. How vanilla of you.
