Thank you Wizard for an IMPORTANT Craps Website

Quote: Ahigh

This guy is a craps player! Bigger balls than I ever dreamed of having playing this game! And a smart better according to the math as well. Bets on any shooter any table following the Wizard's advice.

And he probably knows more about the details of various craps tables around town that most anyone else who's active on this forum, I would venture to guess.

Thanks, High-T. Unfortunately (fortunately?), the Wizard trained me too well. I had my biggest negative variance swing in any game on craps over about a three month period. It busted my bankroll and put me on full tilt.

Still love the game, though.

Quote: Ahigh

Uh huh..

http://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/craps/15425-ahighs-autorecord-software/3/#post278840

So that makes him the 'single biggest skeptic'? Really? One statement saying "not going to look too hard at this, there's no Math there to support it"?

It's a very good statement, I'll agree. But #1 skeptic? Oooo-kay. James Randi is the number one skeptic of ESP, because he spends time investgating it. The Wizard doesn't spend all his time looking at Craps dice influencing, because there's nothing (in his mind) to look at.

Quote: thecesspit

So that makes him the 'single biggest skeptic'? Really? One statement saying "not going to look too hard at this, there's no Math there to support it"?

It's a very good statement, I'll agree. But #1 skeptic? Oooo-kay. James Randi is the number one skeptic of ESP, because he spends time investgating it. The Wizard doesn't spend all his time looking at Craps dice influencing, because there's nothing (in his mind) to look at.

He proclaimed himself to be the skeptic. Listen to the whole show and if you find someone else who proclaims himself to be the skeptic about dice control, let me know. Maybe I could change my mind. But I maintain my position, and I think he's the #1 skeptic unless you can give me a case for someone else being a more prominent self-proclaimed skeptic on the subject.

Start listening at 8:24 and tell me you think there's a bigger more prominent public display of skepticism than the position the Wizard took on this Bob Dancer show.

Quote: Ahigh

He proclaimed himself to be the skeptic. Listen to the whole show and if you find someone else who proclaims himself to be the skeptic about dice control, let me know. Maybe I could change my mind. But I maintain my position, and I think he's the #1 skeptic unless you can give me a case for someone else being a more prominent self-proclaimed skeptic on the subject.

I am a skeptic of dice influence. I'm not claiming to be the #1 skeptic, but I can't think of anyone else who has been saying publicly from the beginning as loud and as often that there isn't the evidence to support belief in it.

This topic is not something I spend a lot of time on because there isn't much out there to debunk. When I was about 10 the kid next door said scientists discovered a beer car on Mars. I was skeptical and asked for evidence. The only thing I got was "George (his older brother) told me."

I've been saying for about ten years, show me any evidence that anybody can beat craps, and all I hear is talk. The only hard data I've seen is the 500-roll Wong/Little Joe experiment, and that was a fraction of the sample size needed to prove the slight level of influence they were claiming.

When it comes to a beer can on mars or the ability to beat craps, I'm suddenly from Missouri, SHOW ME! That is why I suggested to Ahigh that he develop a hypothesis of HOW he can influence the dice, we'll make a friendly wager on whether he can do it, and we'll gather some evidence. I'm eager to have some data to chew on. This topic has been talked to death. It is screaming out for the proponents to back up their claims. The burden of proof is on the other side. Lacking anything convincing they have put on the table, I remain a skeptic. I'm still waiting for evidence of that beer can on mars too.

WAIT NO MORE !

http://wafflinganglican.blogspot.com/2006/01/alien-beer-can-found-on-mars.html

I think that the truth is that in gambling "games " such as Craps and Roulette "Random " rules so that no one can claim certainty . So the Wizard can only give the "Expectation " of an event not it's " Certainty ". Gamblers , in turn, can only make guesses - guesses made haphazardly or with method . Criticism of gambling in a gambling site seems ridiculous .

I will be the #1 skeptic if you need one.

I don't think it exists AT ALL with throws that are legal in any legitimate Casino.

Can a person short throw or kill the dice at the base of the wall or stack the dice and have one die without movement one time? Maybe.
Can they get away with doing it enough to become an AP? No chance.

It's too easy to see what is happening. To be an AP at anything you have to be able to get away with whatever you are doing consistently.

Can someone count cards and get away with it consistently? Yes

Can someone hole card, count side bets, take advantage of high payout VP and rebates/comps, or use collusion to gain an advantage consistently? Yes

Can someone do anything with the dice and do it enough to be considered an AP player or even enough to turn the house edge enough to win more than just what a normal deviation would allow? No

Unless it can be proven (which it has never yet been) AP Craps exists just as much as Bigfoot, Aliens, Elvis is alive, Santa Claus and any other of the thousands of fables we all know.


ZCore13

Quote: Wizard

I am a skeptic of dice influence. I'm not claiming to be the #1 skeptic, but I can't think of anyone else who has been saying publicly from the beginning as loud and as often that there isn't the evidence to support belief in it.

I sit corrected.

Quote:

This topic is not something I spend a lot of time on because there isn't much out there to debunk. When I was about 10 the kid next door said scientists discovered a beer car on Mars. I was skeptical and asked for evidence. The only thing I got was "George (his older brother) told me."

The lack of evidence is... disturbing ;)

Quote: Ahigh

The Wizard chose to take the side of the skeptic, and from my perspective he is the #1 skeptic. Conversely, I am not the #1 proponent that AP is possible. I have stated, and in case it's not obvious already, it's not proven to be possible and therefore I don't have a belief that it's possible without that proof.

But similarly, there is no, nor can there ever be, a proof that it's impossible. This is where this is no onus of responsibility to prove that it's impossible: because it can't be done.

All I'm saying is that proving it's possible is hard work, and the other side, the skeptical side, has nothing to do but say, "meh."

I'm not sure a skeptic chooses sides. Skeptics simply refuse to believe in things for which there is no evidence. Anything that has been proven, someone has done the hard work. If you don't want to do the work, I believe that a skeptic is completely justified in saying, "Meh."

Quote: Mosca

I'm not sure a skeptic chooses sides. Skeptics simply refuse to believe in things for which there is no evidence. Anything that has been proven, someone has done the hard work. If you don't want to do the work, I believe that a skeptic is completely justified in saying, "Meh."

Well, my purpose in fingering the Wizard as the self-appointed skeptic is to have someone who is there to examine evidence and to say "still looks random to me" or "that's enough evidence that I'm not sure" or "wow, that's pretty convincing evidence that you can do it. Let's make sure you videos all look like legal throws or if some of them are short" or whatever else.

This is a lot of work to collect the evidence, and that's what I am still focusing on now: the equipment and process to easily-enough collect the evidence necessary to demonstrate if it's possible to control the dice enough for a player advantage.