CRAPS ~ DICE UNBALANCE MYSTERY ~ DICE PHYSICAL DATA
Then why not exploit it? It should help a DI even more.Quote: BohemianPoor Zcore13, trapped in the land of Arizona, no dice and denial. But it's ok, we understand that you are just trying to defend the casino industry you work for so that they are not portrayed as the parking lot carnival they are for using crooked games. If it is not true, why aren't the dice factories and the Big Casinos taking the Biased Dice Research teams to court to prove their dice are balanced.
AxelWolf, the Biased Dice Research team have thousands of pieces of live casino evidence and they have shown me what the casinos do not want to be revealed as discovery in court.
Furthermore, the argument that not enough data is available is weak. Utilizing "Pearson's chi-square" hypothesis testing procedure you can recognize a bias after just 30 rolls. And this same bias can be verified after 100 rolls, 300 rolls and 500 rolls. What are the odds of that same bias occurring at each of those intervals!
Quote: AxelWolfThen why not exploit it? It should help a DI even more.
I believe they are still in the midst of their 60 year information gathering stage.
ZCore13
That explains the bias, they've been using the same dice this whole time. They look like this now:Quote: Zcore13I believe they are still in the midst of their 60 year information gathering stage.
hahahahahaQuote: MathExtremistThat explains the bias, they've been using the same dice this whole time. They look like this now:
Zore13, you know as well as me that all dice cant be perfect, so there will be a difference at times. The
question is, is there enough difference to make a difference you can see.
In addition, are all the dice on the table the same and will one particular pair preform differently than
others...
I get a real kick out of folks on here that deny and make fun of any DI as a waste of time, yet assume that
same guy can instantly spot unbalanced dice and within a second or two determine what set to use, when
according to them you cant affect the dice anyway.
One thing you should know and you either don't or wont admit to is that casino's don't balance the dice. I have
watched well over 20 casinos open new dice and they visually check them, they may measure them and they may actually
spin them as fast as they can... end of story, but they don't check for actual balance.
So the question is and remains don't they understand how to check for balance or don't they want to know???
All I know for sure is this idea of trying to gather enough proof on the matter is rather silly, because they dice you
played with today are long gone tomorrow and may or may not be similar to the ones you play with next week, and if you
have not spent any time working on your toss there is nothing you can do about it anyway.
dicesetter
Assume also that, over time, an observer can note the imbalances.
Given that casinos CHANGE the dice frequently: how can AP possibly result?
Quote: dicesitterSo the question is and remains don't they understand how to check for balance or don't they want to know???
How do you know that it matters? You and several other of the biased dice conspiracy theorists seem to think that a slight imbalance makes a huge difference in the results, but you don't seem eager to test that theory.
Here's a suggested experiment design:
a) Unwrap a fresh stick of 5 casino dice.
b) Test all 5 for bias using your preferred balancing technique.
c) If you find two that are "unbalanced" according to your test, roll them 1080 times on a regulation table and record the results.
d) Take two others and, with a sharp 1/4" drill bit (and preferably a drill press), drill a 1/4" deep, 1/4" diameter hole directly in the center of the 4 face. With fine sandpaper, smooth the lip of the drill hole so it does not snag when slid across the layout cloth, but otherwise do not deform the edges or corners of the dice.
e) Roll the drilled dice 1080 times on the same regulation table and record those results.
f) Now take two drugstore dice, such as those found in board games, roll those 1080 times on the regulation table and record the results. You can find these at any toy store.
g) Report your three sets of results here.
Your hypothesis is presumably that even a slight bias would affect the gaming results, but you have never tested this. My hypotheses are
a) a slight bias, as demonstrated by your balance test, will be statistically irrelevant;
b) a moderate bias (from drugstore dice) will also be statistically irrelevant; and
c) perhaps even a severe bias, from a gaping hole in the side of the dice, will be irrelevant.
I'm not sure of the last one but it's worth testing. If drilling a giant hole in the side of dice doesn't meaningfully impact the results at the table, it would be silly to keep arguing that a minor imbalance makes any difference at all.
The real question is whether you and the other biased dice alarmists are intellectually curious enough to do a proper investigation, or are you simply content to rely on unproven and untested conspiracy theories. There are only so many times you can cry "Wolf" without backing up your theories with testable evidence. As Ahigh might say, "do the work."
Quote: MathExtremistHow do you know that it matters? You and several other of the biased dice conspiracy theorists seem to think that a slight imbalance makes a huge difference in the results, but you don't seem eager to test that theory.
Here's a suggested experiment design:
a) Unwrap a fresh stick of 5 casino dice.
b) Test all 5 for bias using your preferred balancing technique.
c) If you find two that are "unbalanced" according to your test, roll them 1080 times on a regulation table and record the results.
d) Take two others and, with a sharp 1/4" drill bit (and preferably a drill press), drill a 1/4" deep, 1/4" diameter hole directly in the center of the 4 face. With fine sandpaper, smooth the lip of the drill hole so it does not snag when slid across the layout cloth, but otherwise do not deform the edges or corners of the dice.
e) Roll the drilled dice 1080 times on the same regulation table and record those results.
f) Now take two drugstore dice, such as those found in board games, roll those 1080 times on the regulation table and record the results. You can find these at any toy store.
g) Report your three sets of results here.
Your hypothesis is presumably that even a slight bias would affect the gaming results, but you have never tested this. My hypotheses are
a) a slight bias, as demonstrated by your balance test, will be statistically irrelevant;
b) a moderate bias (from drugstore dice) will also be statistically irrelevant; and
c) perhaps even a severe bias, from a gaping hole in the side of the dice, will be irrelevant.
I'm not sure of the last one but it's worth testing. If drilling a giant hole in the side of dice doesn't meaningfully impact the results at the table, it would be silly to keep arguing that a minor imbalance makes any difference at all.
The real question is whether you and the other biased dice alarmists are intellectually curious enough to do a proper investigation, or are you simply content to rely on unproven and untested conspiracy theories. There are only so many times you can cry "Wolf" without backing up your theories with testable evidence. As Ahigh might say, "do the work."
and video tape it. They must have already done something like this to come up with their theories though right?
ZCore13
Quote: Zcore13and video tape it. They must have already done something like this to come up with their theories though right?
I'd like to think that if that group had already run an equivalent experiment, they'd know better by now. Maybe in lieu of actually running the experiment with drugstore dice themselves, they can write to this guy and ask for a few thousand rolls:
http://gamesbyemail.com/News/DiceOMatic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7n8LNxGbZbs
When I developed the spreadsheet, it wasn't so I could make a fortune taking advantage of player edges from bad dice. It was so that I could investigate the possibility of the whole idea of increasing the house edge on one side without decreasing the house advantage on the other side.
Last night, we watched a guy at Palace Station turn $100 into over $10,000 in the field. Of course he got lucky, but the way that the hi-lo outcomes were appearing with his ability to profit from them was uncanny.
And while I'm not saying that I have ever profited from this sort of thing in any way shape or form (I would be very stupid to even if I had) I will say that all the tools that you need to count dice and run a spreadsheet are in this (and other) postings about the game of craps and how it is designed for fair dice and is not very tolerant of unfair dice (the casino can and will get killed by anyone who can spot and capitalize on a trend -- whether using math or guesswork matters not).
The guy who won $10,000, his name was Mark. He was a skinny african american guy. I saw more evidence of concern for losses at Palace Station's craps tables than I have ever seen before.
Exposure in the field is typically not a long term problem, and I expect this guy to be in overconfident mode and to give it ALL back except whatever shopping spree may occur before then.
But there is, still, an opportunity for INTELLIGENT FOLKS WHO DO NOT MIND DOING WORK to test this theory. The work for that spreadsheet will ABSOLUTELY POSITIVELY enable you to profit from biased dice if you can clearly identify them and bet accordingly.
The point ME makes is a good one: if there is any consistent bias (as in each die is biased the same way) it's a trivial matter to figure that out using a machine like the guy's machine in ME's post and go from there.
But let me join in to what ME is saying, if you're not doing the "work" I got no time for this myself. I don't work for free and don't expect ME does either!
I am not alarmed at anything, I merely said casino's don't want to or don't know how to check for balance.
I have indicated several times I don't think it matters because the vast, vast majority of craps players don't
know the difference and if they did could not do anything anyway.
I said if you see something that does not look right quit.
Those skilled enough to see goofy dice and do something about it don't need this forum.
And I might add...doing the work does no good if your doing the "wrong work"
dicesetter.
Quote: dicesitterThose skilled enough to see goofy dice and do something about it don't need this forum..
I'm not sure of an instance of a person that you have in mind (if any), but I side with ME on this one. The dice are not in action long enough to make solid conclusions about bias. As someone who has spent multiple sessions of eight hours straight recording throws, methinks you do not have a proper grasp on the law of large numbers.
If you're talking about broader generalizations (like a lot of dice all produced with the same factory defect causing biased rolls) that makes more sense. But I am still taking the position that this is more likely a creative imagination than anything real.
Quote: dicesitterI am not alarmed at anything, I merely said casino's don't want to or don't know how to check for balance.
I have indicated several times I don't think it matters because the vast, vast majority of craps players don't
know the difference and if they did could not do anything anyway.
That's like saying you don't want to or don't know how to shine your car's door handles. It's neither -- it simply doesn't matter if you do or not.
And with respect to perfect balance, it's not merely that it doesn't matter to the vast majority of craps players, it's that it doesn't matter to the house. If you aren't willing to actually run the experiments I've set out, that's fine (and understandable) but don't expect anyone to buy into the biased dice conspiracy theory without any solid evidence.
My hypothesis stands: any slight imbalance to one or more dice in a fresh stick of advertised fair dice from any reputable manufacturer is not going to be detectable over the casino lifetime of those dice.
I can't test every set of dice to confirm that hypothesis, but it only takes one counterexample to disprove it. Who among the biased dice conspiracy believers is going to disprove my hypothesis?
.jpeg "Bohemian"){kind=small}
Quote: AhighI get really tired of people making assertions without the work part of the equation. This guy obviously started off doing all the right things in the software, and certainly is lamenting from folks who understand less than he does about these things making dubious claims based on guesswork.
When I developed the spreadsheet, it wasn't so I could make a fortune taking advantage of player edges from bad dice. It was so that I could investigate the possibility of the whole idea of increasing the house edge on one side without decreasing the house advantage on the other side.
Last night, we watched a guy at Palace Station turn $100 into over $10,000 in the field. Of course he got lucky, but the way that the hi-lo outcomes were appearing with his ability to profit from them was uncanny.
And while I'm not saying that I have ever profited from this sort of thing in any way shape or form (I would be very stupid to even if I had) I will say that all the tools that you need to count dice and run a spreadsheet are in this (and other) postings about the game of craps and how it is designed for fair dice and is not very tolerant of unfair dice (the casino can and will get killed by anyone who can spot and capitalize on a trend -- whether using math or guesswork matters not).
The guy who won $10,000, his name was Mark. He was a skinny african american guy. I saw more evidence of concern for losses at Palace Station's craps tables than I have ever seen before.
Exposure in the field is typically not a long term problem, and I expect this guy to be in overconfident mode and to give it ALL back except whatever shopping spree may occur before then.
But there is, still, an opportunity for INTELLIGENT FOLKS WHO DO NOT MIND DOING WORK to test this theory. The work for that spreadsheet will ABSOLUTELY POSITIVELY enable you to profit from biased dice if you can clearly identify them and bet accordingly.
The point ME makes is a good one: if there is any consistent bias (as in each die is biased the same way) it's a trivial matter to figure that out using a machine like the guy's machine in ME's post and go from there.
But let me join in to what ME is saying, if you're not doing the "work" I got no time for this myself. I don't work for free and don't expect ME does either!
Ahigh, well said!
Only caveat is that ME's linked machine does not use the same centripetal physics as a toss on a craps table and will not give you the same axle bias results.
Quote: dicesittermathextremist
I am not alarmed at anything, I merely said casino's don't want to or don't know how to check for balance.
I have indicated several times I don't think it matters because the vast, vast majority of craps players don't
know the difference and if they did could not do anything anyway.
I said if you see something that does not look right quit.
Those skilled enough to see goofy dice and do something about it don't need this forum.
And I might add...doing the work does no good if your doing the "wrong work"
dicesetter.
dicesetter, I agree. Those of us that know can recognize that "tune" in less than 20 rolls. The rest of you, Caveat emptor.
I'm not sure what you mean by that, can you explain?Quote: Bohemiandicesetter, I agree. Those of us that know can recognize that "tune" in less than 20 rolls. The rest of you, Caveat emptor.
I agree with that...however you spent a great of time in your studies of the game
and I spent a great deal of time on the toss and took a number of classes and
saw a number of different ways to throw and many people do it. I have seen enough
to not discount another's ability.
So I wont say there are not a couple of guys that can do it... I cant.
I know dice are not all perfect.... I don't care....I have two choices... play or
don't play.
Ahigh, I really don't have a dog in this silly fight....
dicesetter
Quote: BohemianOnly caveat is that ME's linked machine does not use the same centripetal physics as a toss on a craps table and will not give you the same axle bias results.
Yes, I had the same realization.
About the 20 rolls assertion, and I have heard that before, I don't think that I could tell that much after 20 rolls myself. If I saw three of the same pair, I might have a hunch, but still no certainty of anything at all.
There is very little that is intuitive about how randomness works, really.
Quote: AhighThere is very little that is intuitive about how randomness works, really.
Ahigh, I concur wholeheartedly. With a square cube, you will always have some randomness, no matter how heavy the bias. Hence, the definition of "Percentage Dice" used by the casinos that alters the probabilities and actual odds of craps.
Quote: BohemianHence
Was it bad luck or "percentage dice?"
I would love to believe it was percentage dice that led to my worst losses because it would make me feel better about the losing risks that I took.
But I have to be conscious about the fact that my brain likes believing in lies to make itself feel more comfortable about the stupid bets that I have taken.
So I'm going to let my brain settle on randomness plus house edge to explain it.
But that's just me.
Quote: BohemianAhigh, well said!
Only caveat is that ME's linked machine does not use the same centripetal physics as a toss on a craps table and will not give you the same axle bias results.
Wait a second, are you saying that the dice at craps tables are biased because of the way you're throwing them? That's not bias in the dice, that's bias in the throw.
And if you're citing "centripetal physics," have you performed calculations of what the centripetal force is for your throw? And what it is for a random shake-and-toss craps player?
Of course there is a bias depending on the way dice are thrown... that cant even be
in question....
The only question which remains is does that bias make any difference in the outcome
of the game
dicesetter
What does that mean? Does that include bouncing off the far wall and, maybe, its pyramids?Quote: dicesitterOf course there is a bias depending on the way dice are thrown... that cant even be
in question....
Quote: dicesitterOf course there is a bias depending on the way dice are thrown... that cant even be
in question....
The only question which remains is does that bias make any difference in the outcome
of the game
Your definition of "bias" is different than mine. My definition of bias is "the die faces are not equiprobable." If the die faces are all equally likely, it doesn't really matter how you throw them so it's not accurate to say "of course there is a bias."
I'm not interested in edge cases where you can define "throw" as "I put the dice down showing 1 and 1 all the time, so that's 'biased' based on the way the dice are 'thrown'." I'm talking about the practical reality of throwing the dice on a regulation craps table so you don't get no-rolled. What evidence do you have that "the way the dice are thrown" leads to any bias in the outcome of the game?
And when did discussion of biased dice become about the throw of the dice and not the dice themselves? If you're saying that you can bias the results of perfectly fair dice, it's not the dice that are biased.
I simple said the thrower can cause the dice to vary in terms of results and that produces
a bias from standard.....just as improperly balanced dice produce a result that should not
be expected.
Don't get your panty hose in a bundle.
Your supposed to be the math guy, I offered now many times to have us all work together
to show if there is a difference in results based on shooter bias.
I always wonder just what your afraid of.
dicesetter
Quote: dicesittermathExtremist
I simple said the thrower can cause the dice to vary in terms of results and that produces
a bias from standard.....just as improperly balanced dice produce a result that should not
be expected.
Don't get your panty hose in a bundle.
Your supposed to be the math guy, I offered now many times to have us all work together
to show if there is a difference in results based on shooter bias.
I always wonder just what your afraid of.
dicesetter
Just as me, he's probably afraid that someone is going to read the false information written, like "the thrower can cause the dice to vary in terms of results and that produces a bias from standard." and someone might not know any better and believe it.
ZCore13
Quote: dicesitterI simple said the thrower can cause the dice to vary in terms of results and that produces
a bias from standard.....just as improperly balanced dice produce a result that should not
be expected.
And I said that the first bias would be due to the throw, not the dice, while the latter would be the opposite. It does no good to consider them together, especially if you don't have any evidence of either.
Quote:Your supposed to be the math guy, I offered now many times to have us all work together
to show if there is a difference in results based on shooter bias.
I always wonder just what your afraid of.
Well, thanks for hijacking the thread, I guess. This discussion was formerly about allegations of unbalanced dice; that has nothing to do with "shooter bias." Good riddance, I suppose. We don't need any more unsubstantiated lunacy about how every casino in Las Vegas is using noticeably biased dice.
But since you're on the subject, before anyone should consider anything further, you need to demonstrate any evidence of "shooter bias" at all. Take a pair of fair dice, one red and one green, and throw them using a consistent technique (including the dice set) on a regulation casino craps table 1080 times, with video. Post the video on YouTube and post the distribution of the red and green results here. Then we'll talk about working together.
you said Well, thanks for hijacking the thread, I guess. This discussion was formerly about allegations of unbalanced dice; that has nothing to do with "shooter bias." Good riddance, I suppose. We don't need any more unsubstantiated lunacy about how every casino in Las Vegas is using noticeably biased dice.
I am with you on that....
and But since you're on the subject, before anyone should consider anything further, you need to demonstrate any evidence of "shooter bias" at all. Take a pair of fair dice, one red and one green, and throw them using a consistent technique (including the dice set) on a regulation casino craps table 1080 times, with video. Post the video on YouTube and post the distribution of the red and green results here. Then we'll talk about working together.
As I said... where is your proof no can affect the results with their rolls.
This is an easy one way street for you, you just cut the hell out of anyone's data... and you do nothing, prove nothing,,, offer nothing
no wonder these threads continue endlessly resulting in ......nothing
dicesetter
Quote: dicesitterAs I said... where is your proof no can affect the results with their rolls.
This is an easy one way street for you, you just cut the hell out of anyone's data... and you do nothing, prove nothing,,, offer nothing
no wonder these threads continue endlessly resulting in ......nothing
That's not the way "proof" works. You can't prove or disprove that "no (one) can affect the results with their rolls" because you can't evaluate everybody. You can only demonstrate whether a particular person actually did or did not create a biased distribution.
You and the other dice influence proponents have routinely made claims like "my SRR is 8.7" without providing any verifiable proof of that ability. The video two-color dice test I described would do that. Are you unwilling to demonstrate your alleged abilities to influence the dice?
Pretend we're in Missouri and "show me."
Sorry it is the way it works..... if I feel I have an advantage when my roll is working
I can and do feel free to indicate that. If I feel you can get different results with'
different sets I can and I will indicate that. If I am not mistaken I am the only
person on here to provide rolls data with different sets.... and I even provided two
video's with indicated better dice control and a lowering of the effect of the back wall.
There were people on here that responded with decent comments about the data.
Not lets see what Mathextremist has provided... you know I am still thinking and
I cant come up with anything you provided.
Saying your wrong, saying you have not provided enough proof for me and on and
on offers nothing... anyone can do that....
So in the end your either to lazy, or just afraid to take some time and have yourself, me
and maybe Ahigh provide some roll data. We can change sets are certain times, etc and
see if there is anything that can be noticed.
But again that is if you wanted to "do something" instead of just "say something"
dicesetter
Unable to answer. Figures.Quote: dicesitterOf course there is a bias depending on the way dice are thrown... that cant even be in question....
Quote: SanchoPanzaWhat does that mean? Does that include bouncing off the far wall and, maybe, its pyramids?
Quote: dicesitterSo in the end your either to lazy, or just afraid to take some time and have yourself, me
and maybe Ahigh provide some roll data. We can change sets are certain times, etc and
see if there is anything that can be noticed.
You want *me* to roll dice to demonstrate that *you* can't control them? That's hilarious.
I don't pretend to control the dice or create bias with my throws when I play craps. I expect that when I throw the dice in a craps game, the faces will all be equally likely. You apparently think otherwise when you're shooting. Show me. Not with bogus "SRR" measurements, but with the 1080 roll experiment I described above. You have an opportunity to prove your claims by posting the video footage and tabulated roll data right here. For your trouble, you will get some of the finest minds in the business evaluating your results and providing statistical analysis.
But will you? Not a chance.
And get a dose of reality? Sometimes it's better to not know the truth, especially if you have spent countless hours and money pursuing something.Quote: MathExtremist
But will you? Not a chance.
You got it... you cant control the dice so if you provide some data, and I provide some data and then if we change sets your change should show nothing,
and mine should show some difference in distribution, you do that a couple of times, and there is either a difference or not.
Now I have provided sets of numbers of thrown with different sets a couple of times and indicated there was difference
between the distribution above 8 and below 8. I have already done that.....
Now I understand none of that was good enough for you,......I don't think anything anyone could do would be good
enough for you.... I get that....
Having said that the only way to improve the odds of you opening your eyes is for you to take part.
There is a large gap between showing that a player can affect the dice with the throw and sets and actually then
be able to affect the outcome in terms of wins or losses every time that person plays.. I am not and never will
be in that camp.... I don't think it can be done.. dice control is a myth, the idea that dice control can hurt the
casino is a myth. But I also know that a player can have some affect and coupled with decent betting can bend
the HA at times and have more wins than you should.
Now that statement should not even be a mild threat to your mind set that we may as well get monkeys to
throw the dice.
Since you know nothing about dice influence and you can't do it and don't even try to do it, I am the only one
that risks looking stupid.
dicesetter
Quote:Now I understand none of that was good enough for you,......I don't think anything anyone could do would be good
enough for you.... I get that....
You "get" nothing.
There most certainly is SOMETHING someone could do which would convince me that there really is something to this quasi-religious, mystical dice setting nonsense.
Were all casinos to crack down on dice setting as they have with card counting: that would suffice.
Such an action would show that they have objectively determined that dice setting "works," that it is a threat to their bottom line, and they'd bar it as an effective countermeasure, as they've done with card counting.
I've read of casinos that discourage dice setting, but I've never seen any actually prohibit someone from setting the dice and then throwing them, so long as the dice touch the back wall and the shooter doesn'tt slow down the game with their silly bone arranging affectation.
Quote: MathExtremistYou want *me* to roll dice to demonstrate that *you* can't control them? That's hilarious.
can you read
"There is a large gap between showing that a player can affect the dice with the throw and sets and actually then
be able to affect the outcome in terms of wins or losses every time that person plays.. I am not and never will
be in that camp.... I don't think it can be done.. dice control is a myth, the idea that dice control can hurt the
casino is a myth. But I also know that a player can have some affect and coupled with decent betting can bend
the HA at times and have more wins than you should".
The casino never has and never will have anything to be afraid of with dice control... the concept of the dice control is
in the end the illusion human beings have of control....
I am not the Mad Professor here or others that suggest a 28 SRR and on and on. all I am saying is a person that
puts in the time can affect the results a tad and even if you cut the HA in half on certain numbers and lose less
than you should that is worth the effort.
You and others are suggesting you may as well have that cat ( and that was cool by the way) hit the dice down
the table.... that is absolutely false.
dicesetter
Good.
Time to move on.
Quote: MrVSo then, we agree....
This is a more egregious failure of logic than believing in the idea that one could be able to AP the game of craps even though the actual experience has been one of lifetime losses.
The resiliency of the hard-core believer to not dispel their false beliefs of positive expectations is a big part of our motivation to offer AP in Vegas 2047.
People just want to believe. And they definitely do NOT want to agree with folks like you who are more interested in rational thinking. Those who think that spelling words properly and contemplating the proper form of grammar as part of their expression as being relevant to a conversation.
It's quite possible that, even in the domain of sound arguments using logic, luck may be required, by some, in order to make a sound logical proof that is indeed legitimate.
We are not all this way, but certainly some are formed of this method in thinking. The method in thinking that chance that leads to good fortune may be considered skill.
That is not what I said......not even close
But we can leave it at that
Dicesetter
Quote: dicesitterThere is a large gap between showing that a player can affect the dice with the throw and sets and actually then
be able to affect the outcome in terms of wins or losses every time that person plays.. I am not and never will
be in that camp.... I don't think it can be done.. dice control is a myth, the idea that dice control can hurt the
casino is a myth. But I also know that a player can have some affect and coupled with decent betting can bend
the HA at times and have more wins than you should.
Since you know nothing about dice influence and you can't do it and don't even try to do it, I am the only one that risks looking stupid.
It is clear from your self-contradictory statements ("I don't think it can be done" and "a player can have some affect") that you have not actually studied the mathematics of how on-axis dice influence should work. I have, and I can quantify the changes in house edge based on given levels of assumed dice influence. This is why I know you don't understand this subject. Even a small amount of dice influence, decreasing the probability of axial faces, has an *enormous* impact on the house edge for many, many bets.
A rigorous study of your own throw would reveal whether you have any ability to decrease the probability of axial faces. If you actually do -- and if you're not regularly beating the house -- then your betting pattern is not well-suited to your altered outcome distribution. That's entirely your own fault for not learning how to properly invest in your own abilities. That's like spending years learning how to throw a curveball and then realizing you're a hockey player.
If you can demonstrate that you have the ability to alter the dice distribution, I will put together a betting structure to give you a theoretical edge over the house (if such is possible). My fee will be 25% of your winnings, capped at $10,000/month. To put this in perspective, I'm looking right now at the math for a minor amount of influence and it shows a theoretical gain of 4 bets per hour. At $100/bet, that's $400/hour. At 5 hours/day, 5 days/week, 3 weeks/month, you're looking at a $30,000 monthly win. Obviously you could play more; 75 hours a month is less than two weeks' of full-time-equivalent work. But I'm not going to do any research on your behalf until and unless you demonstrate that you're not just blowing smoke with your alleged ability to "have some affect" on the distribution of the dice.
That brings us back to your proof that you can produce an altered dice distribution with your throw at a regulation craps table. Show me. Or stop prattling on about it.
Quote: MathExtremistShow me. Or stop.
Probability of this is sufficiently low that I would love to lay odds against this happening.
Can anyone provide odds for me?
See it is a free country, you don't have to do anything.
But I did notice you wanted me to work for hours on my roll, then you want
to make money off my roll.
That sorta fits
But I think I am doing fine on my own.
dicesetter
Does the DI cult now require its members to go door to door proselytizing, like the Jehovah's Witnesses?
Sure, you are free to post here so long as you don't run afoul of the forum's rules, but I see little or no sense in your continuing to do so.
Have you masochistic tendencies?
People have been soundly refuting everything you claim, yet you keep coming back for more, spinning the same dogma.
It gets old.
Quote: dicesitterBut I did notice you wanted me to work for hours on my roll, then you want to make money off my roll.
No different than any other financial manager. A skilled fund manager doesn't need to have $10B himself to know how to invest a $10B fund, and I don't need to be able to execute a skilled dice shot to know where to bet if I could. I've done the math and I know exactly what my EV would be if I had a particular quantified influence over the dice. I don't think you can say the same.
Quote:But I think I am doing fine on my own.
Really? Even though you believe that "the idea that dice control can hurt the casino is a myth"? If you could influence the dice and you knew how to properly bet to profit from that influence, you wouldn't think it was a myth. You'd be rich.
If you can influence the dice and you're not rich, the only explanation is that you have no idea how to bet. I was simply offering to show you. If you don't think the knowledge is worth anything, that's your call. I'm not losing anything from it because we both know you can't actually influence the dice.
What you offer is a pretty important aspect to DI. Would you be up for offering a trial offer? I can supply 1,000 most recent rolls from June and this coming July.
Maybe we can work something out on my next trip to Vegas in August.
I can give you a %fee for two days of play and you can provide a 'piece of the puzzle'
But I am wondering how it will be any different than the data something like wincraps gives me?
Quote: nickolay411@MathExtremist
What you offer is a pretty important aspect to DI. Would you be up for offering a trial offer? I can supply 1,000 most recent rolls from June and this coming July.
Maybe we can work something out on my next trip to Vegas in August.
I can give you a %fee for two days of play and you can provide a 'piece of the puzzle'
But I am wondering how it will be any different than the data something like wincraps gives me?
I don't know what Wincraps gives you, I haven't looked at that in many years. Does Wincraps tell you that you have the edge on any wagers?
As far as roll data, exactly what information can you supply? Please post an example roll or two here.
As far as roll data, I can offer:
The set.
Comeout Roll outcome.
A change of set if a point number is rolled.
Further outcomes until seven out or point is hit.
Rinse and Repeat.
