CHARTING A TABLE
March 30th, 2016 at 9:00:14 AM
permalink
Quote: dicesitterMath 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
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
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
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.
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?"
March 30th, 2016 at 9:06:33 AM
permalink
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.Quote: dicesitterMy problem with Math and others is they flat out say and indicate
the experts say a player cant have any influence.
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
March 30th, 2016 at 9:08:30 AM
permalink
What? You were afraid if you didn't 'quote' that it might disapear?Quote: MrV
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
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.
Hello, brain fart.
"What, me worry?"
March 30th, 2016 at 9:30:27 AM
permalink
From my understanding he hits just below the diamonds.Quote: MathExtremistWhere 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.
♪♪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♪♪
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.
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.
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
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
March 30th, 2016 at 10:00:57 AM
permalink
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.Quote: dicesitterYou 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.
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
March 30th, 2016 at 10:13:02 AM
permalink
Math
laughing.....
I have told you 100 times, I don't care about staying on axis, and my shot
does exactly what I said it does.... takes the alligator board out of the shot.
I played last night, I looked for you, I could not find you, how in the
world did you know how much I bet or what I won.
dicesetter
laughing.....
I have told you 100 times, I don't care about staying on axis, and my shot
does exactly what I said it does.... takes the alligator board out of the shot.
I played last night, I looked for you, I could not find you, how in the
world did you know how much I bet or what I won.
dicesetter
March 30th, 2016 at 3:23:52 PM
permalink
How bad is it when you start answering your own posts? (:-) Confession time. I'm afraid I must report having tunnel vision. Apparently 7,500 rolls of the dice are not representative of an accurate sample size. Even 72-hours (the book) is not a representative sample size. I just ordered some material from Zumma and the vendor suggested (and was told by those who supposedly know the math) that 300-hours is more accurate representation. So, looks like the data is biased.
Sorry about that folks. The vendor stated that the 72-hours book is biased to the don't side and it appears so is the 7,500 craps rolls.
The reason I say that is that the charts show a long series of DP decisions. I have one more report to share with you. I looked at the charts where a long string of
DP decisions were recorded. These were DP decisions of 10 in a row, 14 in a row 16, separated by one Pass, etc. where the Don't bettor would have cleaned up.
I used the same rationale being the reading of the total number of rolls, and the number of 7's prior to those long, long, strings of DP. In this case I was looking
for a small number of 7's compared to the total rolls, thinking that the 7 was now due, leading to the probability of winning on the DP. Well, it didn't work out
that way: again.
There were 13 occasions where a string of very long DP decisions appeared. Well, only on 4 of those occasions did the math indicate to bet the Don't.
On the other 9 times, there were actually MORE 7's rolled than the math indicated! Speaking of the other 4, the numbers were 74%, 91%, 88%, and 82% less than
probability indicated.
Embarrassingly, looks like I need to start all over. I guess that's the price of a learning curve.
I'd appreciate any feedback or comments anyone might have on the material offered by Zumma? Thank you.
Sorry about that folks. The vendor stated that the 72-hours book is biased to the don't side and it appears so is the 7,500 craps rolls.
The reason I say that is that the charts show a long series of DP decisions. I have one more report to share with you. I looked at the charts where a long string of
DP decisions were recorded. These were DP decisions of 10 in a row, 14 in a row 16, separated by one Pass, etc. where the Don't bettor would have cleaned up.
I used the same rationale being the reading of the total number of rolls, and the number of 7's prior to those long, long, strings of DP. In this case I was looking
for a small number of 7's compared to the total rolls, thinking that the 7 was now due, leading to the probability of winning on the DP. Well, it didn't work out
that way: again.
There were 13 occasions where a string of very long DP decisions appeared. Well, only on 4 of those occasions did the math indicate to bet the Don't.
On the other 9 times, there were actually MORE 7's rolled than the math indicated! Speaking of the other 4, the numbers were 74%, 91%, 88%, and 82% less than
probability indicated.
Embarrassingly, looks like I need to start all over. I guess that's the price of a learning curve.
I'd appreciate any feedback or comments anyone might have on the material offered by Zumma? Thank you.
March 30th, 2016 at 3:36:47 PM
permalink
Eclectic
Please dude...
Save your energy.
If you cannot answer the question "Past rolls predict future rolls because?" then why even set out to chart past rolls?
DiceSetter apparently believes that Past rolls might indicate some influence in the shooter
That MIGHT give some benefit to charting that shooter if it were true. But ask yourself if you can chart one shooter long enough to establish that he is having a statistically significant influence, and then live long enough to bet on that analysis before he leaves the table.
I recommend charting consecutive Yos. Wait until you see ten in a row, then have a small wager on the next, and the next.
Really guys, Give it up. Perlease.
Please dude...
Quote: OnceDear
You can chart past results till the end of time, but past rolls (That's all you can chart) give no indication of future rolls (That's all you can bet on)
Save your energy.
If you cannot answer the question "Past rolls predict future rolls because?" then why even set out to chart past rolls?
DiceSetter apparently believes that Past rolls might indicate some influence in the shooter
That MIGHT give some benefit to charting that shooter if it were true. But ask yourself if you can chart one shooter long enough to establish that he is having a statistically significant influence, and then live long enough to bet on that analysis before he leaves the table.
I recommend charting consecutive Yos. Wait until you see ten in a row, then have a small wager on the next, and the next.
Really guys, Give it up. Perlease.
Psalm 25:16
Turn to me and be gracious to me, for I am lonely and afflicted.
Proverbs 18:2
A fool finds no satisfaction in trying to understand, for he would rather express his own opinion.
March 30th, 2016 at 4:03:27 PM
permalink
oncedear
Years ago I tried that with the yo's...... laughing, well all I can say is I think I got to
57 rolls before one hit, I had long sense got to the table max which means no matter
what happened I was going to get my butt kicked.
As far as charting one shooter for a long time, don't bother. Whether you or I like it ,or not,
craps is a game played in the shortest of times. Every time you go to the table, everything is
different, the dice, the temperature, the location of players at the table, as well as yourself.
You cant expect the same chart to apply. All I ever know is I have a couple of different
shots I can use and a couple of different sets that have worked for me. I then do what
makes the most sense based on the table I am playing on. If I can make it work I play
a few hands and get some profit and get the hell out. If I cant make it work, I limit
my loss and get the hell out.
Even if your dead on, you cant throw that shot for much more than an hour and it starts
to get off kilter, and then what ever you make goes right back to the casino.
dicesetter
Years ago I tried that with the yo's...... laughing, well all I can say is I think I got to
57 rolls before one hit, I had long sense got to the table max which means no matter
what happened I was going to get my butt kicked.
As far as charting one shooter for a long time, don't bother. Whether you or I like it ,or not,
craps is a game played in the shortest of times. Every time you go to the table, everything is
different, the dice, the temperature, the location of players at the table, as well as yourself.
You cant expect the same chart to apply. All I ever know is I have a couple of different
shots I can use and a couple of different sets that have worked for me. I then do what
makes the most sense based on the table I am playing on. If I can make it work I play
a few hands and get some profit and get the hell out. If I cant make it work, I limit
my loss and get the hell out.
Even if your dead on, you cant throw that shot for much more than an hour and it starts
to get off kilter, and then what ever you make goes right back to the casino.
dicesetter
March 30th, 2016 at 4:27:52 PM
permalink
Quote: dicesitterI have told you 100 times, I don't care about staying on axis, and my shot
does exactly what I said it does.... takes the alligator board out of the shot.
I don't particularly care about staying on axis either. However, I know what the math looks like if the dice actually do stay on axis with a given level of consistency. That's because the movement of dice that stay on axis can be modeled. If you were to explain how you expect your dice to move when you throw them, that could be modeled too. But you haven't ever explained that. Why not?
Now then, you say you're not attempting to stay on axis with your throws, but instead you're "taking the alligator board out of the shot." How often do you succeed in doing that? 100% of the time or less? How much less? Do you know?
And when you successfully avoid the alligator board, how does that change the die face distribution of your throws? Do you know? If not, why aren't you keeping track of this information? It's required to understand whether -- and to what extent -- you have the edge when you shoot. I just don't understand why someone would practice dice throwing for eight years without learning how to measure how effective that practice is. Can you explain that?
In other sports, athletes keep statistics like "percentage of fairways hit" or "batting average on balls in play" or "shots on goal" -- none are directly indicative of the final results but they are correlated indicators of how you're likely to do. A golfer who hits more fairways is more likely to win than a golfer who doesn't. What statistics are you tracking that are indicative of your success? If you're not tracking any, why not?
"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
March 30th, 2016 at 4:31:43 PM
permalink
When he wins, his shot "works," and when he loses, his shot is "off."
By his logic, when I win at slots my button pushing is "on," and when I lose it is "off."
By his logic, when I win at slots my button pushing is "on," and when I lose it is "off."
"What, me worry?"
March 30th, 2016 at 4:37:02 PM
permalink
If that's what it is, that's a sad example of confirmation bias. I'm hoping there's more substance to it than that, because I can't imagine spending eight years pursuing a trivial fallacy. On the other hand, I've read Dostoevsky's "The Gambler."Quote: MrVWhen he wins, his shot "works," and when he loses, his shot is "off."
By his logic, when I win at slots my button pushing is "on," and when I lose it is "off."
As for your results, it's not your button pushing skills at all. When you win, it's because somewhere within 20 feet of you is a left-handed woman with brown hair. You lose when one of the elevators in the casino is carrying a luggage cart. I can't tell what will happen when you're on an elevator with a left-handed brunette holding a luggage cart though.
"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
March 30th, 2016 at 5:52:29 PM
permalink
ME what about whether or not your bankroll is increasing or decreasing? Example, Iv'e been to LA on 15 occasions, just getting exposed to learning about the game, getting my feet wet so to speak.
Based on this limited data, Iv'e won on 57% of my trips, and am so many dollars ahead. Isn't that simpler? Why can't one's bankroll be the ultimate BS or truth detector?
Based on this limited data, Iv'e won on 57% of my trips, and am so many dollars ahead. Isn't that simpler? Why can't one's bankroll be the ultimate BS or truth detector?
March 30th, 2016 at 5:54:57 PM
permalink
Quote:I can't tell what will happen when you're on an elevator with a left-handed brunette holding a luggage cart though.
Maybe I'll get "lucky."
Last edited by: MrV on Mar 30, 2016
"What, me worry?"
March 30th, 2016 at 6:26:03 PM
permalink
In a phrase, too much variance. There is a very good chance to be ahead after many sessions or even years based on pure luck, especially when you play the odds bets. Similarly, someone who has some skill may have losing sessions or years even if they have the edge (just ask any honest AP). In short, you can't distinguish skill from luck over a short timeframe by financial results alone. You actually have to look at the dice.Quote: eclecticME what about whether or not your bankroll is increasing or decreasing? Example, Iv'e been to LA on 15 occasions, just getting exposed to learning about the game, getting my feet wet so to speak.
Based on this limited data, Iv'e won on 57% of my trips, and am so many dollars ahead. Isn't that simpler? Why can't one's bankroll be the ultimate BS or truth detector?
If you can observe that your dice behave a certain way every 3 or 10 or 25 rolls on average, such as not tumbling sideways or skidding to a stop face-up, then that's knowledge you can use to recompute the house edge on the bets you make, and then adjust how you bet to maximize your expected gain. Nobody who practices dice throwing ever seems to do this, though.
"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
March 30th, 2016 at 6:35:08 PM
permalink
Hopefully not years, but I think I would try to avoid playing anything that had such a small edge where you could go years without winning.Quote: MathExtremistIn a phrase, too much variance. There is a very good chance to be ahead after many sessions or even years based on pure luck, especially when you play the odds bets. Similarly, someone who has some skill may have losing sessions or years even if they have the edge (just ask any honest AP). In short, you can't distinguish skill from luck over a short timeframe by financial results alone. You actually have to look at the dice.
If you can observe that your dice behave a certain way every 3 or 10 or 25 rolls on average, such as not tumbling sideways or skidding to a stop face-up, then that's knowledge you can use to recompute the house edge on the bets you make, and then adjust how you bet to maximize your expected gain. Nobody who practices dice throwing ever seems to do this, though.
♪♪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♪♪
March 30th, 2016 at 7:57:46 PM
permalink
I'm really talking about the typical, occasional gambler who knows how to count or maybe plays an above average poker game but doesn't live in a gaming town. A full-time AP would be hard-pressed to go for years losing and still be considered an AP.Quote: AxelWolfHopefully not years, but I think I would try to avoid playing anything that had such a small edge where you could go years without winning.
The thing about dice is that if you had enough influence to generate an edge, there would be some pretty simple betting spreads to minimize variance and guarantee a win over any reasonable timeframe, like a few weeks. However, tracking only bankroll or an uncorrelated stat like SRR would never tell you enough to determine where that edge was.
"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
March 30th, 2016 at 7:59:20 PM
permalink
Math
On a bouncy table I use a shot which takes the alligator board out of the
mix, and you do it every shot. I did not start doing this to avoid the
back wall, but I was getting tired of the crap from casino's when you
threw a shot that looks more like everyone else that sets the dice.
I also starting to use the shot because it works far better on a bouncy table
than a shot with more elevation prior to hitting the table.
Then I found something interesting, the shot not only worked better on
a bouncy table, but even on a table with decent bounce I was getting anywhere from
1-2 more rolls on average per hand.
For years I used to worry about the charts and the on axis finish percentage and all the
other crap, now I worry about the result..... that is it. There are a couple of things
I look for in the finish, but mostly I measure the term of each roll.
When I play at home I measure the SRR, when I play at a casino I measure the SRR and
wins and losses. What was my average hand on that casino, as compared to others, What
was my average hand with a over hand shot as compared to a tabletop shot
The golfer wants to know how often he hit the fairway, because it may indicate a better
chance of winning than another player... Likewise a craps player that can average 7.8 rolls per
hand after the come out, has a better chance to win than one that averages 6. I would
rather spend my time on a table where I win more than 60% of the time than on a table where
I win less than 40% of the time. Most of the time that is because you can adapt your shot
better on one table than you can another. I know what my average is on every table in the
area, and I use that information when I play.
These golfers today are great, but it is no secrete some favor some courses over another
because that course better fits there game. A long ball hitter wants to play on a course
with longer par 5's , a player with a shorter drive wants a shorter course so the long
ball hitter has less of an advantage. I want a shorter table with less bounce because i
have more options.
In the end, I am not trying to give you a hard time, I just look for different things to
guide my play. You don't agree, your not alone, I took many GTC classes, many of
those folks don't agree with what I am doing, nor to I agree with their on axis
stuff.
Someday we can play a game and you will either understand what I do or you
wont.
dicesetter
On a bouncy table I use a shot which takes the alligator board out of the
mix, and you do it every shot. I did not start doing this to avoid the
back wall, but I was getting tired of the crap from casino's when you
threw a shot that looks more like everyone else that sets the dice.
I also starting to use the shot because it works far better on a bouncy table
than a shot with more elevation prior to hitting the table.
Then I found something interesting, the shot not only worked better on
a bouncy table, but even on a table with decent bounce I was getting anywhere from
1-2 more rolls on average per hand.
For years I used to worry about the charts and the on axis finish percentage and all the
other crap, now I worry about the result..... that is it. There are a couple of things
I look for in the finish, but mostly I measure the term of each roll.
When I play at home I measure the SRR, when I play at a casino I measure the SRR and
wins and losses. What was my average hand on that casino, as compared to others, What
was my average hand with a over hand shot as compared to a tabletop shot
The golfer wants to know how often he hit the fairway, because it may indicate a better
chance of winning than another player... Likewise a craps player that can average 7.8 rolls per
hand after the come out, has a better chance to win than one that averages 6. I would
rather spend my time on a table where I win more than 60% of the time than on a table where
I win less than 40% of the time. Most of the time that is because you can adapt your shot
better on one table than you can another. I know what my average is on every table in the
area, and I use that information when I play.
These golfers today are great, but it is no secrete some favor some courses over another
because that course better fits there game. A long ball hitter wants to play on a course
with longer par 5's , a player with a shorter drive wants a shorter course so the long
ball hitter has less of an advantage. I want a shorter table with less bounce because i
have more options.
In the end, I am not trying to give you a hard time, I just look for different things to
guide my play. You don't agree, your not alone, I took many GTC classes, many of
those folks don't agree with what I am doing, nor to I agree with their on axis
stuff.
Someday we can play a game and you will either understand what I do or you
wont.
dicesetter
Last edited by: dicesitter on Mar 30, 2016
March 30th, 2016 at 9:05:07 PM
permalink
Why aren't you explaining it here? You've made a lot of bold claims but you've never backed them up with anything specific at all. No numbers, no data, no player edge calculations, nothing. You just claimed to be able to throw the dice so they miss the alligator bumps 100% of the time. That's highly unlikely to begin with, but it's even more incredible that you'd actually develop such a skill and not know how it affected the dice probabilities or your edge. Why should anyone believe your outlandish claims of dice-throwing prowess when you won't even provide the scantest bit of explanation? And then on top of it, how do you justify your even more outlandish claim that, in the bigger picture, you're not actually all that good at dice throwing and anyone could be better than you with just a bit of effort?Quote: dicesitterSomeday we can play a game and you will either understand what I do or you wont.
It just doesn't add up. You'll need to do a lot better in explaining yourself if you expect anyone here to believe your claims.
"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
March 30th, 2016 at 9:44:33 PM
permalink
Confucius say never tell fib about winning lottery, some may ask to see ticket.
I just summed up 38 pages in one sentence.
Can't go wrong reading M.E's posts
however its getting redundant perhaps this is an agree to
disagree situation.
I just summed up 38 pages in one sentence.
Can't go wrong reading M.E's posts
however its getting redundant perhaps this is an agree to
disagree situation.
Last edited by: rainman on Mar 30, 2016
March 31st, 2016 at 4:49:44 AM
permalink
DS: Can you please explain what it means to "take the alligator board out of the mix"? I thought the shooter had to hit the back wall or would be at risk of the casino calling a 'no roll'!?
You have also mentioned video postings of your shots. Can you please provide a link? I know ME says the dice just 'bounce around' implying no influence, but maybe
I can pick up some pointers on the visual mechanics of your toss.
There is an expert here in town who invented 'rush poker' and he claims any attempt on my part to develop 'trained hands' is not going to work at my age.
You know, you can't teach an old dog new tricks; and one can't physically be born again into a Tiger Woods dice prodigy scenario.
Thank you.
You have also mentioned video postings of your shots. Can you please provide a link? I know ME says the dice just 'bounce around' implying no influence, but maybe
I can pick up some pointers on the visual mechanics of your toss.
There is an expert here in town who invented 'rush poker' and he claims any attempt on my part to develop 'trained hands' is not going to work at my age.
You know, you can't teach an old dog new tricks; and one can't physically be born again into a Tiger Woods dice prodigy scenario.
Thank you.
March 31st, 2016 at 8:02:36 AM
permalink
eclectic
My video stuff is somewhere on you tube, it was under dicesetter 1 and 2 I think.
As far as taking the alligator board out of play, you can do that with a number of shots
There are three shots I have seen that do that very well. Two of which I can throw, the
other, not so much ...laughing.
You will notice that on most tables the alligator board starts about a inch or so
up the wall. All you need to do is use a shot that hits that lower part and stops
or comes back. Now when you use them, now and then you can screw up
and throw to hard or get a bounce you don't want, and hit up in the wall, but
that is on you, that is not because that the shot does not work.
Now math is pretty good at insults, and he has repeated a number of times that
I am to stupid to know the difference between a shot that bounces all over the
table, hits people in the chest and off every stack of chips on the table, and the
ones that consistently use the lower inch of the table. I know better, and so
does he.
Eclectic, age and hands are a problem, me to, as you get to my age you tend
to be very different from day to day. that's why I keep it very simple. I keep
track of my SRR on different tables and at home.
I will play tonight, I know which shot has worked on this table before so I
will use it. I have three sets I will start with, 65,51..... 35,31 or 15,21
Now since you have no idea how I will throw them, they are of no use to
you. But they are the only ones I will use. If I start and get an SRR over 7
I will continue to use it. If on the come out roll I get a 7 and the second
or third roll after that is the same seven , I will adjust the set to the next
option. If I throw 5-6 short hands in a row and the dice look good and
my SRR is still low I will go home or try one last ditch effort with an
all seven set.
Now to be honest, if I have 5-6 short hands in a row, I don't fret
about it, shit happens... I wont risk my money on less than a 7
SRR.
dicesetter
My video stuff is somewhere on you tube, it was under dicesetter 1 and 2 I think.
As far as taking the alligator board out of play, you can do that with a number of shots
There are three shots I have seen that do that very well. Two of which I can throw, the
other, not so much ...laughing.
You will notice that on most tables the alligator board starts about a inch or so
up the wall. All you need to do is use a shot that hits that lower part and stops
or comes back. Now when you use them, now and then you can screw up
and throw to hard or get a bounce you don't want, and hit up in the wall, but
that is on you, that is not because that the shot does not work.
Now math is pretty good at insults, and he has repeated a number of times that
I am to stupid to know the difference between a shot that bounces all over the
table, hits people in the chest and off every stack of chips on the table, and the
ones that consistently use the lower inch of the table. I know better, and so
does he.
Eclectic, age and hands are a problem, me to, as you get to my age you tend
to be very different from day to day. that's why I keep it very simple. I keep
track of my SRR on different tables and at home.
I will play tonight, I know which shot has worked on this table before so I
will use it. I have three sets I will start with, 65,51..... 35,31 or 15,21
Now since you have no idea how I will throw them, they are of no use to
you. But they are the only ones I will use. If I start and get an SRR over 7
I will continue to use it. If on the come out roll I get a 7 and the second
or third roll after that is the same seven , I will adjust the set to the next
option. If I throw 5-6 short hands in a row and the dice look good and
my SRR is still low I will go home or try one last ditch effort with an
all seven set.
Now to be honest, if I have 5-6 short hands in a row, I don't fret
about it, shit happens... I wont risk my money on less than a 7
SRR.
dicesetter
March 31st, 2016 at 9:09:39 AM
permalink
Persistence is often an admirable trait, I think they sell a poster/picture about persistence that you see in lawyers and doctors offices frequently........
OK, I googled it, saw several. The one with the mouse wearing a football helmet, approaching the mousetrap baited with cheese was cute ;-)
OK, I googled it, saw several. The one with the mouse wearing a football helmet, approaching the mousetrap baited with cheese was cute ;-)
Youuuuuu MIGHT be a 'rascal' if.......(nevermind ;-)...2F
March 31st, 2016 at 9:19:50 AM
permalink
tf
If you have a cheese head hat on, the trap wont work!!!!!!!!
dicesetter
If you have a cheese head hat on, the trap wont work!!!!!!!!
dicesetter
March 31st, 2016 at 9:44:45 AM
permalink
So if you could find a table without the alligator boards there would be absolutely no question your shot works. Your SRR number would skyrocket to a point where it's practically impossible to be considered luck/variance. Please demonstrate that and then I'll be convinced you have an advantage.Quote: dicesittereclectic
My video stuff is somewhere on you tube, it was under dicesetter 1 and 2 I think.
As far as taking the alligator board out of play, you can do that with a number of shots
There are three shots I have seen that do that very well. Two of which I can throw, the
other, not so much ...laughing.
You will notice that on most tables the alligator board starts about a inch or so
up the wall. All you need to do is use a shot that hits that lower part and stops
or comes back. Now when you use them, now and then you can screw up
and throw to hard or get a bounce you don't want, and hit up in the wall, but
that is on you, that is not because that the shot does not work.
Now math is pretty good at insults, and he has repeated a number of times that
I am to stupid to know the difference between a shot that bounces all over the
table, hits people in the chest and off every stack of chips on the table, and the
ones that consistently use the lower inch of the table. I know better, and so
does he.
Eclectic, age and hands are a problem, me to, as you get to my age you tend
to be very different from day to day. that's why I keep it very simple. I keep
track of my SRR on different tables and at home.
I will play tonight, I know which shot has worked on this table before so I
will use it. I have three sets I will start with, 65,51..... 35,31 or 15,21
Now since you have no idea how I will throw them, they are of no use to
you. But they are the only ones I will use. If I start and get an SRR over 7
I will continue to use it. If on the come out roll I get a 7 and the second
or third roll after that is the same seven , I will adjust the set to the next
option. If I throw 5-6 short hands in a row and the dice look good and
my SRR is still low I will go home or try one last ditch effort with an
all seven set.
Now to be honest, if I have 5-6 short hands in a row, I don't fret
about it, shit happens... I wont risk my money on less than a 7
SRR.
dicesetter
♪♪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♪♪
March 31st, 2016 at 10:14:05 AM
permalink
I think there's a confusion in terms. I've discussed before how the SRR statistic isn't well-correlated to EV, but it's an easy statistic to calculate. Unfortunately, dicesitter doesn't appear to be calculating it over a statistically-significant sample like several hundred or thousand rolls. He's calculating his SRR statistic from the time he steps up to the table until he passes the dice, which is usually less than ten rolls. It should be obvious that the difference between zero, one, or two sevens in ten rolls is not something upon which any valid conclusions about skill can be made. Nor should it be something used to adjust play strategy. In other words, none of what follows is statistically-valid reasoning:Quote: AxelWolfSo if you could find a table without the alligator boards there would be absolutely no question your shot works. Your SRR number would skyrocket to a point where it's practically impossible to be considered luck/variance. Please demonstrate that and then I'll be convinced you have an advantage.
Counting sevens over a few rolls might sound good to the uninitiated, but it's just as irrelevant as waiting five rolls before betting on a new shooter or calling bets off after the dice leave the table. There's no actual correlation between what he's tracking and the house edge.Quote: dicesitterIf I start and get an SRR over 7 I will continue to use it. If on the come out roll I get a 7 and the second or third roll after that is the same seven , I will adjust the set to the next option.
"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
March 31st, 2016 at 11:44:13 AM
permalink
Math
I am convinced your only point in any discussion is to bring people down to
your level. I thought you were some type of expert, I wonder what that would be
at.
I know your never there when I play so I know you have no idea how much I
bet, how I play or how much I win, now I have to worry about your eyesight
as well....
There must be some type of problem your having with the thought that a
player could throw a pair of dice and hit mostly the bottom of the
back wall. The only reason for a notion like this is that you have never played
craps. hah!!
Math in fact, my wife just went though the den to get something and
while she does not play craps she has spent time helping me record
on the table. I asked here to pick up the dice and roll toward the
end so as not to hit high on the back wall. She did it, and my god she
did it again. The funny thing was, and I know you wont believe this
without some type of proof, but the back wall on my table has that
stuff you call alligator board on top.
She must be real good.
At any rate, I will make sure that when I play tonight that the table does
have the alligator board on the upper part of the wall. I sure as hell
don't want to be accused of taking advantage of a casino table without
one.
What kinda of a person do you think I am???
dicesetter
I am convinced your only point in any discussion is to bring people down to
your level. I thought you were some type of expert, I wonder what that would be
at.
I know your never there when I play so I know you have no idea how much I
bet, how I play or how much I win, now I have to worry about your eyesight
as well....
There must be some type of problem your having with the thought that a
player could throw a pair of dice and hit mostly the bottom of the
back wall. The only reason for a notion like this is that you have never played
craps. hah!!
Math in fact, my wife just went though the den to get something and
while she does not play craps she has spent time helping me record
on the table. I asked here to pick up the dice and roll toward the
end so as not to hit high on the back wall. She did it, and my god she
did it again. The funny thing was, and I know you wont believe this
without some type of proof, but the back wall on my table has that
stuff you call alligator board on top.
She must be real good.
At any rate, I will make sure that when I play tonight that the table does
have the alligator board on the upper part of the wall. I sure as hell
don't want to be accused of taking advantage of a casino table without
one.
What kinda of a person do you think I am???
dicesetter
March 31st, 2016 at 11:57:16 AM
permalink
The sort of person who intentionally confuses "being able to miss the bumps" with "having an edge". It doesn't matter how you throw the dice or where they strike the table unless you're actually altering the probabilities. That's the only thing that matters because that's the only thing that affects the edge. That's what "dice influence" is -- being able to alter the probabilities.Quote: dicesitterWhat kinda of a person do you think I am???
You haven't once demonstrated any influence. You can be as mad about that as you want, or hurl all manner of puerile insults my way, but until you can demonstrate that you're actually able to alter the probabilities with your well-practiced throw, you're just blowing smoke. Can you convince anyone you're not just full of hot air?
"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
March 31st, 2016 at 12:08:33 PM
permalink
The Wolf can smell blood, from a distance, from a long distance.
This is the way the Wolf evolved, the way the Wolf survives.
Good for the Wolf, good for the rest of us, diversity is magic, in and of itself...
This is the way the Wolf evolved, the way the Wolf survives.
Good for the Wolf, good for the rest of us, diversity is magic, in and of itself...
Youuuuuu MIGHT be a 'rascal' if.......(nevermind ;-)...2F
March 31st, 2016 at 12:39:58 PM
permalink
Math
I don't want to harm you long term, so I will give you a hint.
All you have to is take a open faced underhand shot, throw it within
8 inches of the table top and land it anywhere from 18 -24 inches
of the back wall and you miss the vast majority of the effect
of any alligator board.
I don't use it this shot, but a 10 year old could throw it consistently
enough to take away most of the effect of the alligator board and beat
you if you throw off the middle of the back wall.
An expert would already have known about that.
dicesetter
I don't want to harm you long term, so I will give you a hint.
All you have to is take a open faced underhand shot, throw it within
8 inches of the table top and land it anywhere from 18 -24 inches
of the back wall and you miss the vast majority of the effect
of any alligator board.
I don't use it this shot, but a 10 year old could throw it consistently
enough to take away most of the effect of the alligator board and beat
you if you throw off the middle of the back wall.
An expert would already have known about that.
dicesetter
March 31st, 2016 at 12:48:37 PM
permalink
Memo to DS:
Yes, this is a rough crowd for dice setters such as you.
This is a math-based board; the members believe strongly in using empirical evidence, aka proof via application of The Scientific Method to prove or disprove gambling-related claims.
In contrast, dice setting proponents seem to believe in smoke, mirrors, faith, and the persuasive powers of their blizzard of BS.
You'd get a warmer reception for your dice setting posts at a pro-dice setting board.
Here, all you get is put to your proof, and as we all know you have none.
Your posting with ME have become an absurdist, ongoing saga of whack-a-mole: and hey, guess who's the mole?
Yes, this is a rough crowd for dice setters such as you.
This is a math-based board; the members believe strongly in using empirical evidence, aka proof via application of The Scientific Method to prove or disprove gambling-related claims.
In contrast, dice setting proponents seem to believe in smoke, mirrors, faith, and the persuasive powers of their blizzard of BS.
You'd get a warmer reception for your dice setting posts at a pro-dice setting board.
Here, all you get is put to your proof, and as we all know you have none.
Your posting with ME have become an absurdist, ongoing saga of whack-a-mole: and hey, guess who's the mole?
Last edited by: MrV on Mar 31, 2016
"What, me worry?"
March 31st, 2016 at 1:02:35 PM
permalink
So let me get this straight. You spent eight years practicing your dice throwing skills. Then you say your wife can do it, even though she presumably didn't spend the same time practicing. And now you believe a 10 year old can beat the game just by using a low underhand toss so the dice land two feet from the wall and bounce off the bottom of the wall?Quote: dicesitterAll you have to is take a open faced underhand shot, throw it within
8 inches of the table top and land it anywhere from 18 -24 inches
of the back wall and you miss the vast majority of the effect
of any alligator board.
I don't use it this shot, but a 10 year old could throw it consistently
enough to take away most of the effect of the alligator board and beat
you if you throw off the middle of the back wall.
Do you comprehend how silly that is? Do you actually think that if you can just miss the alligator bumps with regularity that you're necessarily successful in altering the dice probabilities and therefore you have the edge -- and that even a 10 year old can do it?
My gosh, this is rapidly descending into lunacy. If even a 10 year old can make a controlled dice-influencing throw consistently, why on earth did you spend eight years practicing?
"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
March 31st, 2016 at 1:32:47 PM
permalink
Quote: MathExtremist
My gosh, this is rapidly descending into lunacy.
Rapidly? The descent has taken quite some time....
March 31st, 2016 at 2:10:17 PM
permalink
Math
Yup math that is how easy this is, my wife picked up the dice
and threw two throws that effectively took most of the back wall
out of play and then she went back up stairs.
I thought you were an expert at craps or something to do with it.
I have spent 7-8 years on this stuff and according you I did not
get anywhere, you have spent the last 7-8 years being an expert
at something, and you still cant tell the difference between a shot
that hits the back wall, bounces all over the table, off people's
chest and hits the chips stacks, and one which hits the very lower
inch of the back wall. Gosh I hope you have some type of skill that
you can earn a living doing, craps does not appear to be your game.
dicesetter
Yup math that is how easy this is, my wife picked up the dice
and threw two throws that effectively took most of the back wall
out of play and then she went back up stairs.
I thought you were an expert at craps or something to do with it.
I have spent 7-8 years on this stuff and according you I did not
get anywhere, you have spent the last 7-8 years being an expert
at something, and you still cant tell the difference between a shot
that hits the back wall, bounces all over the table, off people's
chest and hits the chips stacks, and one which hits the very lower
inch of the back wall. Gosh I hope you have some type of skill that
you can earn a living doing, craps does not appear to be your game.
dicesetter
March 31st, 2016 at 2:14:11 PM
permalink
I don't know, I think the nonsense about 10 year olds has accelerated things. I *have* a 10 year old, and I'd bet that dicesitter's practiced throw wouldn't yield longer craps hands more than half the time compared to how my child would fare.Quote: SOOPOORapidly? The descent has taken quite some time....
In fact, there's a challenge in the making. I'll substitute myself for my children since they can't legally be throwing dice in a casino, but I'll bet that dicesitter's practiced throw wouldn't generate longer craps hands than me if I were throwing left-handed over my shoulder while facing away from the table. A hand is measured by the total number of rolls from come-out to seven-out, and he gets a point if his hand is longer than mine. If we do that 10 times, I'm willing to bet lots of money that he doesn't have more than 5 points at the end.
"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
March 31st, 2016 at 2:18:41 PM
permalink
TLDR; still waiting for dizesitter to post a log of dice rolls.......
March 31st, 2016 at 2:33:56 PM
permalink
Are you now suggesting that you earn a living playing craps with the same dice throwing skill that your wife and any ten-year-old can perform?Quote: dicesitterI have spent 7-8 years on this stuff and according you I did not
get anywhere... Gosh I hope you have some type of skill that
you can earn a living doing, craps does not appear to be your game.
How about you step out from behind your keyboard and prove it? I'm sure we could arrange a dice table in Vegas for you to demonstrate your dexterous dice discipline in front of an audience of fellow forum members.
"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
March 31st, 2016 at 3:39:01 PM
permalink
Math
Could be true, you may be pretty good over your shoulder.
But I forget, I thought we were talking about how hard it was to make
a shot that takes most of the bad affect of the back wall out of play.
But keep up the good work, a shoulder shot may be just what you
need.
dicesetter
Could be true, you may be pretty good over your shoulder.
But I forget, I thought we were talking about how hard it was to make
a shot that takes most of the bad affect of the back wall out of play.
But keep up the good work, a shoulder shot may be just what you
need.
dicesetter
March 31st, 2016 at 3:40:37 PM
permalink
Whenever the DI's actually show up and demonstrate anything, if they (the dice) don't preform as expected they claim it was bad variance or they were having an off day. Whenever they(the dice) preform well they claim it's all skill. Even if the dice bounce around the table.Quote: MathExtremistAre you now suggesting that you earn a living playing craps with the same dice throwing skill that your wife and any ten-year-old can perform?
How about you step out from behind your keyboard and prove it? I'm sure we could arrange a dice table in Vegas for you to demonstrate your dexterous dice discipline in front of an audience of fellow forum members.
♪♪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♪♪
March 31st, 2016 at 4:17:33 PM
permalink
It simply doesn't exist
No longer hiring, don’t ask because I won’t hire you either
March 31st, 2016 at 4:37:32 PM
permalink
I put dice control on the same level (or thereabouts) as having a win goal / limit / betting system that beats the casino.
Like WON said - it don't exist
Like WON said - it don't exist
March 31st, 2016 at 4:38:27 PM
permalink
Working back, this is how I would visualize a consistently controlled throw; or some influence, though it lacks any rigorous empirical scrutiny.
1. Dice land on same face up numbers as the pre-set numbers.
2. At the end of the roll, the Die are no further apart than 12 inches.
3. Dice hit no more that 6 inches from the back wall: preferably below the alligator bumps.
4. Dice make a distinct loud noise, indicating they are landing flat on the table.
5. Dice move through the air as if glued together, with a backspin of 3-5 rotations.
I'll stop right. Even if all these descriptive elements are in place, it presupposes other mechanics are in place before the toss. o
I'm sure everyone has seen the GTC videos.
DS, it seems to me that the closer the dice land to the back wall, with that landing flat noise, the better the throw?
As stated, I am guilty of not keeping meticulous records, not to mention the evidence that ME and others demand, but that's what seems to work
more often than not, based on my limited experience.
Can I execute 1-5 consistently? NO! But I'm not making any claims of influence. I'll continue to practice for fun and look for good results.
1. Dice land on same face up numbers as the pre-set numbers.
2. At the end of the roll, the Die are no further apart than 12 inches.
3. Dice hit no more that 6 inches from the back wall: preferably below the alligator bumps.
4. Dice make a distinct loud noise, indicating they are landing flat on the table.
5. Dice move through the air as if glued together, with a backspin of 3-5 rotations.
I'll stop right. Even if all these descriptive elements are in place, it presupposes other mechanics are in place before the toss. o
I'm sure everyone has seen the GTC videos.
DS, it seems to me that the closer the dice land to the back wall, with that landing flat noise, the better the throw?
As stated, I am guilty of not keeping meticulous records, not to mention the evidence that ME and others demand, but that's what seems to work
more often than not, based on my limited experience.
Can I execute 1-5 consistently? NO! But I'm not making any claims of influence. I'll continue to practice for fun and look for good results.
March 31st, 2016 at 4:41:01 PM
permalink
No, we're talking about how hard it is to make a shot that -- stay with me -- alters the dice probabilities. That requires a lot more than a consistent landing spot or missing the bumps.Quote: dicesitterBut I forget, I thought we were talking about how hard it was to make
a shot that takes most of the bad affect of the back wall out of play.
Your latest theory is that hitting underneath the bumps on the back wall is the same thing as demonstrating influence, but it's not. As you've correctly noted, anyone can learn to miss the bumps -- even your wife and a ten year old. But not anyone can actually change the probabilities of the dice with their throwing. Your wife can't, a ten-year-old can't, and nothing you've ever posted indicates that you can either.
"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
March 31st, 2016 at 4:41:38 PM
permalink
Forgot one additional point.
Dice come to rest within 24 inches from the back wall.
Dice come to rest within 24 inches from the back wall.
March 31st, 2016 at 4:50:18 PM
permalink
That's the confirmation bias talking. Nothing about the throws I've seen any DI record -- including dicesitter -- was controlled or precise in any way. Dice hit the table, bounce awkwardly at various angles, hit the back wall, tumble around a few more times, and come to rest. That's not a controlled shot even if it lands on the desired number.Quote: AxelWolfWhenever the DI's actually show up and demonstrate anything, if they (the dice) don't preform as expected they claim it was bad variance or they were having an off day. Whenever they(the dice) preform well they claim it's all skill. Even if the dice bounce around the table.
These people are willing to spend thousands of dollars and, apparently, hundreds to thousands of hours practicing. Why does nobody care enough to track their rolls properly to determine whether their efforts are actually influencing the probabilities?
"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
