MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
• Posts: 6526
March 30th, 2016 at 9:00:14 AM permalink
Quote: dicesitter

Math I guess that was supposed to scare me.

Well you are wrong again, I have spoken with several of them, and I
do that because I want to know how they think, not what.

You guys all think the same, no difference at all. If a player could get an
advantage it must be a constant advantage, one that shows up exactly
the same on the spread sheet of thousands of rolls. Pure nonsense!!!!!

I'm not trying to scare you, I'm trying to make you think clearly. I doubt very much that you spoke with anyone who understands probabilities, but if you did they certainly never discussed this notion of constant advantage because it's wrong.

The idea of provably demonstrating an advantage through dice-throwing skill is based on an average advantage, not a constant one. If someone's skill at dice manipulation is non-zero, then of course there is variance. Nobody has perfect precision, not baseball pitchers, bowlers, dart throwers, or dice shooters. However, by wagering on the right combination of bets, often including hedges, the effects of variance can be minimized or even eliminated. In the normal case, hedging your bets is a bad idea -- reducing variance means a guaranteed loss because all the bets are house-favorable. However, if you have certain theoretical advantages, hedging can reduce variance and lead to a guaranteed win. As an example, in roulette, betting on all 38 inside spots means a guaranteed loss of 2 units per spin. That's a loss with zero variance. If you had a cohort dealer who could guarantee he'd never hit the 1, 00, or 27 spots, but otherwise you didn't know where the ball would land, you could make any other bets you wanted with an advantage. However, if you bet on *all* of the remaining 35 spots, you would have the same advantage and zero variance, a guaranteed win of 1 unit per spin.

Similarly for craps, if you could quantify your average player edge for all the bets on the table, assuming you had one in the first place, you could derive a bet spread to minimize your variance while maximizing your gain. This isn't the first time I've said this, yet each time you've totally ignored this clear path to increased profits -- again, assuming you have enough skill to generate a player edge in the first place.
"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
Joined: Jan 17, 2013
• Posts: 1157
March 30th, 2016 at 9:02:24 AM permalink
TwofeathersATL

IT has been journey that's is for sure, and thanks for the post.

My problem with Math and others is they flat out say and indicate
the experts say a player cant have any influence. Then in the next
sentence they want proof., some even say they would love to have
some one prove something.

You cant have it both ways.

dicesetter
MrV
Joined: Feb 13, 2010
• Posts: 7159
March 30th, 2016 at 9:04:54 AM permalink
Non-believers believe dice setting is no more effective than a rabbit's foot; believers such as yourself claim it works.

We say "OK then, prove it!"

The burden of proof is on those who claim it works, not those who claim it is hogwash.
"What, me worry?"
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
• Posts: 6526
March 30th, 2016 at 9:06:33 AM permalink
Quote: dicesitter

My problem with Math and others is they flat out say and indicate
the experts say a player cant have any influence.

Where did I say that? I've *seen* influence. Only it was not a legal throw and it was done as a demonstration on what to disallow on the craps tables. There are lots of ways to influence fair dice that shouldn't be allowed (but sometimes are). If the only thing you do is pull off one of these rolls once every four or five hands, you could have the edge. That's not what you're doing, but it would work.

What I've said is that I don't think you have any influence based on your records and reported results. If you had the influence you claim, you should be much further ahead than you've suggested. I also don't think anyone can influence the dice if they bounce off the bumpy back wall, but I'm willing to see proof to the contrary.
"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
TwoFeathersATL
Joined: May 22, 2013
• Posts: 3616
March 30th, 2016 at 9:08:30 AM permalink
Quote: MrV

What? You were afraid if you didn't 'quote' that it might disapear?
RR+1

<edit> OK, that doesn't make sense. Whatever I saw, or thought I saw, just a couple minutes ago, is no longer there. Hmm. I don't think MrV is playing tricks on me. Might be more serious than that ;-)
<2nd edit> I may be hallucinating again, there's an ugly 3 headed monster thing that just popped up in my living room, I'll be right back......
Last edited by: TwoFeathersATL on Mar 30, 2016
Youuuuuu MIGHT be a 'rascal' if.......(nevermind ;-)...2F
MrV
Joined: Feb 13, 2010
• Posts: 7159
March 30th, 2016 at 9:29:34 AM permalink
I was going to parse part of DS's quoted screed in my text, but reflexively hit "post" before constructing my reply.

Hello, brain fart.
"What, me worry?"
AxelWolf
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
• Posts: 19798
March 30th, 2016 at 9:30:27 AM permalink
Quote: MathExtremist

Where did I say that? I've *seen* influence. Only it was not a legal throw and it was done as a demonstration on what to disallow on the craps tables. There are lots of ways to influence fair dice that shouldn't be allowed (but sometimes are). If the only thing you do is pull off one of these rolls once every four or five hands, you could have the edge. That's not what you're doing, but it would work.

What I've said is that I don't think you have any influence based on your records and reported results. If you had the influence you claim, you should be much further ahead than you've suggested. I also don't think anyone can influence the dice if they bounce off the bumpy back wall, but I'm willing to see proof to the contrary.

From my understanding he hits just below the diamonds.
♪♪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♪♪
eclectic
Joined: Jan 3, 2016
• Posts: 105
March 30th, 2016 at 9:39:21 AM permalink
Thank you all for your feedback and comments. Re the balance concept and percentage difference. And as a previous poster stated, how long will it continue to be imbalanced? FWIW, here is how I calculated the deviation of the balance.

55o-245-104 = 550 divided by 2 = 92 vs 104 Deviation = 13% (104 divided by 92 = 13%)

I'm not good at math so excuse my horrible description. These numbers preceded a 26 number roll.

The 'deviation' percentage ranged from a low of 6% to a high of 27%. So, these points are totally valid based on math's assertions as explained by Ebstein.

So, can we get our head handed to us by jumping in and betting big after a 6% deviation? You bet! I think there are two take aways here apart from the
obvious.

1. Never fight the current trend at the table by chasing losses, betting that rebalance 'has' to occur.
2. Maybe wait for those times (based on the data from this short study) only when you see deviations of 20% or more.

Even then it may not be worth the charting chore because there were only six (6) instances where that occurred in 7,500 rolls

It caught the longest roll under study (44). 44 roll: 999-465-207

One would have to have been 'ballsy' to bet big before these stats which preceded a 43 roll.

42-21-5

I think this may be just another tool to use along with whatever other betting strategy the shooter likes to employ.
dicesitter
Joined: Jan 17, 2013
• Posts: 1157
March 30th, 2016 at 9:49:59 AM permalink
Math

You have no idea how much I make or don't make..... second, I provided video's
showing you don't have to put up with the back wall, you just made no attempt
to look, just like you have made no attempt to record rolls and develop some
type of shot.

As I have said you cant have it both ways.

I keep giving examples of what anyone can do, I am not very good compared
to most people that have worked as hard as I have. If I give examples
and you don't like them, or if I make a video and you wont look at it,
and then you keep telling me how much I make or how my shot hits
all over the back wall..... give me a break, you don't have any expert that
would except that lack of effort in supporting any position.

dicesetter
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
• Posts: 6526
March 30th, 2016 at 10:00:57 AM permalink
Quote: dicesitter

You have no idea how much I make or don't make..... second, I provided video's
showing you don't have to put up with the back wall, you just made no attempt
to look, just like you have made no attempt to record rolls and develop some
type of shot.

As I have said you cant have it both ways.

Your videos show the dice bouncing all over the place without staying on axis, and you have explicitly stated that you play a break even or "tad ahead" game.

The only way I'm "having it" is based on what you've stated directly. Based on that, I conclude that either you don't have any skill, or you don't have the knowledge to profit from your skill. If you actually did have enough skill to overcome the house edge in a meaningful way, and you knew where to put your money on the table to take advantage of it, you would be much further ahead than "a tad".

But prove me wrong. Quantify your player advantage.
"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