Tracking roll outcomes
Quote: VegasriderCurious, is it against the rules to track roll results in craps? I know Baccarat and roulette allows tracking. I’m thinking of playing craps and I have a system that I would like to use but it would make it easier if I could mark the rolls with a pen and paper vs remembering them in my head.
link to original post
Well, in Nevada, if you want to be pedantic, and hope a judge agrees with you, then no, it is not against the rules. What is illegal (and I do mean illegal; it is a crime under the Nevada Revised Statutes, and the penalty for a repeated offense is a mandatory, as in "no probation and no suspended sentence," minimum one year in prison) is to use a "computerized, electronic, electrical or mechanical device, or any software or hardware, or any combination thereof, which is designed, constructed, altered or programmed to obtain an advantage at playing any game in a licensed gaming establishment or any game that is offered by a licensee or affiliate, including, without limitation, a device that:
1. Projects the outcome of the game;
2. Keeps track of cards played or cards prepared for play in the game;
3. Analyzes the probability of the occurrence of an event relating to the game; or
4. Analyzes the strategy for playing or betting to be used in the game
except as may be made available as part of an approved game or otherwise permitted by the Commission."
The Commission specifically permits using handwritten notes to track cards in baccarat and roulette results.
Note #2 specifically says "cards," although technically those are just four examples of "obtaining an advantage."
There is also the question of whether a pen/pencil and paper are considered "a mechanical device altered to obtain an advantage."
Insert the somewhat obligatory "You are wasting your time trying to develop a system in craps" comment here - especially as, since you are basing it on rolls, you have to assume that the same two dice are being used for every bet.
Every combination of bets has a negative expectation. No system can beat thatQuote: VegasriderCurious, is it against the rules to track roll results in craps? I know Baccarat and roulette allows tracking. I’m thinking of playing craps and I have a system that I would like to use but it would make it easier if I could mark the rolls with a pen and paper vs remembering them in my head.
link to original post
Additionally, casinos are so confident that tracking the rolls for any system is a waste of time and pointless (and they're right), that some tables have history displays similar to that on roulette. Most (all?) electronic versions of craps, including the new systems that have players roll dice, include the history on the player's terminals.
So, as others have said, you're wasting your time trying, but are welcome to make the attempt.
Quote: VegasriderCurious, is it against the rules to track roll results in craps? I know Baccarat and roulette allows tracking. I’m thinking of playing craps and I have a system that I would like to use but it would make it easier if I could mark the rolls with a pen and paper vs remembering them in my head.
link to original post
You may track your rolls. And if you're the shooter and you think you are influencing the dice you absolutely should be tracking your rolls.
Just do your note taking quickly just as your dice setting should be done quickly.
This was the wrong forum to ask this question as it is anti dice influencing and every answer will show that bias.
You'd be better off asking DI-related questions at a DI friendly forum.
Quote: AlanMendelsonThis was the wrong forum to ask this question as it is anti dice influencing and every answer will show that bias.
You'd be better off asking DI-related questions at a DI friendly forum.
link to original post
I don't speak for everyone.
I'm actually pro-DI.
Unfortunately, like perpetual motion, I haven't seen it work yet.
Quote: DieterQuote: AlanMendelsonThis was the wrong forum to ask this question as it is anti dice influencing and every answer will show that bias.
You'd be better off asking DI-related questions at a DI friendly forum.
link to original post
I don't speak for everyone.
I'm actually pro-DI.
Unfortunately, like perpetual motion, I haven't seen it work yet.
link to original post
I have seen it work... but with fewer than 5 shooters. That's five in my lifetime.
Quote: AlanMendelsonQuote: DieterQuote: AlanMendelsonThis was the wrong forum to ask this question as it is anti dice influencing and every answer will show that bias.
You'd be better off asking DI-related questions at a DI friendly forum.
link to original post
I don't speak for everyone.
I'm actually pro-DI.
Unfortunately, like perpetual motion, I haven't seen it work yet.
link to original post
I have seen it work... but with fewer than 5 shooters. That's five in my lifetime.
link to original post
NO YOU HAVEN’T! You may THINK you have seen it, but JUST LIKE the 18 yo’s in a row, you are just plain wrong. DI to overcome the house edge does not happen (legally). You saying you’ve seen a few guys do it DOES NOT MEAN YOU HAVE ACTUALLY SEEN A FEW GUYS DO IT! Is that clear and simple enough?
Rant over…..
Quote: SOOPOOQuote: AlanMendelsonQuote: DieterQuote: AlanMendelsonThis was the wrong forum to ask this question as it is anti dice influencing and every answer will show that bias.
You'd be better off asking DI-related questions at a DI friendly forum.
link to original post
I don't speak for everyone.
I'm actually pro-DI.
Unfortunately, like perpetual motion, I haven't seen it work yet.
link to original post
I have seen it work... but with fewer than 5 shooters. That's five in my lifetime.
link to original post
NO YOU HAVEN’T! You may THINK you have seen it, but JUST LIKE the 18 yo’s in a row, you are just plain wrong. DI to overcome the house edge does not happen (legally). You saying you’ve seen a few guys do it DOES NOT MEAN YOU HAVE ACTUALLY SEEN A FEW GUYS DO IT! Is that clear and simple enough?
Rant over…..
link to original post
I would not doubt that a person exists out of the 10 billion or so that we know of that can control dice enough to get a small advantage.
Quote: DRichQuote: SOOPOOQuote: AlanMendelsonQuote: DieterQuote: AlanMendelsonThis was the wrong forum to ask this question as it is anti dice influencing and every answer will show that bias.
You'd be better off asking DI-related questions at a DI friendly forum.
link to original post
I don't speak for everyone.
I'm actually pro-DI.
Unfortunately, like perpetual motion, I haven't seen it work yet.
link to original post
I have seen it work... but with fewer than 5 shooters. That's five in my lifetime.
link to original post
NO YOU HAVEN’T! You may THINK you have seen it, but JUST LIKE the 18 yo’s in a row, you are just plain wrong. DI to overcome the house edge does not happen (legally). You saying you’ve seen a few guys do it DOES NOT MEAN YOU HAVE ACTUALLY SEEN A FEW GUYS DO IT! Is that clear and simple enough?
Rant over…..
link to original post
I would not doubt that a person exists out of the 10 billion or so that we know of that can control dice enough to get a small advantage.
link to original post
Then you would be wrong. FACT.
Quote: SOOPOOQuote: DRichQuote: SOOPOOQuote: AlanMendelsonQuote: DieterQuote: AlanMendelsonThis was the wrong forum to ask this question as it is anti dice influencing and every answer will show that bias.
You'd be better off asking DI-related questions at a DI friendly forum.
link to original post
I don't speak for everyone.
I'm actually pro-DI.
Unfortunately, like perpetual motion, I haven't seen it work yet.
link to original post
I have seen it work... but with fewer than 5 shooters. That's five in my lifetime.
link to original post
NO YOU HAVEN’T! You may THINK you have seen it, but JUST LIKE the 18 yo’s in a row, you are just plain wrong. DI to overcome the house edge does not happen (legally). You saying you’ve seen a few guys do it DOES NOT MEAN YOU HAVE ACTUALLY SEEN A FEW GUYS DO IT! Is that clear and simple enough?
Rant over…..
link to original post
I would not doubt that a person exists out of the 10 billion or so that we know of that can control dice enough to get a small advantage.
link to original post
Then you would be wrong. FACT.
link to original post
I don't think it can be a fact until you have tested all 10 billion. This is clearly a mechanical feat not a mathematical feat.
If you have perfect muscle memory and can throw the dice exactly the same every time, you might be able to gain an advantage. I've never seen it, but it took me almost sixty years to find someone that had perfect pitch, which is quite rare.
Quote: billryanIf there are one or two people on this planet who can run faster than everyone else, why can't there be people who can control their movements better than everyone else.
If you have perfect muscle memory and can throw the dice exactly the same every time, you might be able to gain an advantage. I've never seen it, but it took me almost sixty years to find someone that had perfect pitch, which is quite rare.
link to original post
Billy…. Someone will always be the fastest human. But there are things no human will ever be able to do. How about a one minute mile as an example? How about jumping and dunking on a twenty foot hoop? How about controlling the dice (legally) to beat the house edge?
All three are JUST PLAIN STUPID.
Quote: DRichQuote: SOOPOOQuote: DRichQuote: SOOPOOQuote: AlanMendelsonQuote: DieterQuote: AlanMendelsonThis was the wrong forum to ask this question as it is anti dice influencing and every answer will show that bias.
You'd be better off asking DI-related questions at a DI friendly forum.
link to original post
I don't speak for everyone.
I'm actually pro-DI.
Unfortunately, like perpetual motion, I haven't seen it work yet.
link to original post
I have seen it work... but with fewer than 5 shooters. That's five in my lifetime.
link to original post
NO YOU HAVEN’T! You may THINK you have seen it, but JUST LIKE the 18 yo’s in a row, you are just plain wrong. DI to overcome the house edge does not happen (legally). You saying you’ve seen a few guys do it DOES NOT MEAN YOU HAVE ACTUALLY SEEN A FEW GUYS DO IT! Is that clear and simple enough?
Rant over…..
link to original post
I would not doubt that a person exists out of the 10 billion or so that we know of that can control dice enough to get a small advantage.
link to original post
Then you would be wrong. FACT.
link to original post
I don't think it can be a fact until you have tested all 10 billion. This is clearly a mechanical feat not a mathematical feat.
link to original post
That’s idiotic. I can’t say ‘no man can run a one minute mile’ because I haven’t tested all 10 billion? There are some things, given our present knowledge, that are axiomatic.
THERE IS NO HUMAN THAT CAN SET THE DICE (legally) TO OVERCOME THE HOUSE EDGE. The same as there is no man that can run a one minute mile. Why you would think I’d need to prove such obvious facts is beyond me.
. Quite the opposite. Just that there are some laws of physics a human can’t overcome. It’s a really simple concept.Quote: DeMangoWhen you really think about it, Soopoo is claiming the laws of physics end at the dice table.
link to original post
Quote: SOOPOOQuote: DRichQuote: SOOPOOQuote: DRichQuote: SOOPOOQuote: AlanMendelsonQuote: DieterQuote: AlanMendelsonThis was the wrong forum to ask this question as it is anti dice influencing and every answer will show that bias.
You'd be better off asking DI-related questions at a DI friendly forum.
link to original post
I don't speak for everyone.
I'm actually pro-DI.
Unfortunately, like perpetual motion, I haven't seen it work yet.
link to original post
I have seen it work... but with fewer than 5 shooters. That's five in my lifetime.
link to original post
NO YOU HAVEN’T! You may THINK you have seen it, but JUST LIKE the 18 yo’s in a row, you are just plain wrong. DI to overcome the house edge does not happen (legally). You saying you’ve seen a few guys do it DOES NOT MEAN YOU HAVE ACTUALLY SEEN A FEW GUYS DO IT! Is that clear and simple enough?
Rant over…..
link to original post
I would not doubt that a person exists out of the 10 billion or so that we know of that can control dice enough to get a small advantage.
link to original post
Then you would be wrong. FACT.
link to original post
I don't think it can be a fact until you have tested all 10 billion. This is clearly a mechanical feat not a mathematical feat.
link to original post
That’s idiotic. I can’t say ‘no man can run a one minute mile’ because I haven’t tested all 10 billion? There are some things, given our present knowledge, that are axiomatic.
THERE IS NO HUMAN THAT CAN SET THE DICE (legally) TO OVERCOME THE HOUSE EDGE. The same as there is no man that can run a one minute mile. Why you would think I’d need to prove such obvious facts is beyond me.
link to original post
I think i'm going to disagree with Soopoo on the basis that there are things that can be tested even if it's not reasonable to attempt it vs a claim, where you're claiming something that couldn't possibly be tested. Such as claiming that something you can't find exists somewhere in the Universe. There's no known way to search the entire universe, yet even though no one would bother to test everyone in the world, no one would ever bother to do it. It's extremely difficult to seem impossible, but not impossible as it is possible to test people.
I also can't control a bowling ball Into the 1-3 pocket. But some people do it all the time.
Some people can get the golf ball into the clown's nose. Some people can hit the ball 200 yards to within inches of a flag.
Some people are paid millions of dollars a year to throw a football while being chased by six uniformed gorillas, to where there's a receiver waiting to catch it.
Some people can throw a baseball 90mph to a spot slightly larger than your palm.
Some people can throw a dart into a spot no larger than a dime.
And so it goes.
FWIW, I am very skeptical about it. But to me the fact that the casinos have implemented certain protection measures like the diamonds on the wall, and a certain amount of springiness under the felt, I take as evidence that dice influence was done by at least some people before those measures were taken.
Are the current measures the casino has taken sufficient to ensure DI is impossible? I dunno. Probably. If I show up at a casino and suddenly see something new like diamonds on the felt for the last three inches of floor, then I will conclude that they weren’t sufficient, the casinos found someone beating them at craps, and added a new measure.
I do find it strange that you believe so strongly that the current safety measures the casino takes means DI is IMPOSSIBLE. I guess I’m more skeptical but agnostic.
Quote: ThatDonGuy
Well, in Nevada, if you want to be pedantic, and hope a judge agrees with you, then no, it is not against the rules. What is illegal (and I do mean illegal; it is a crime under the Nevada Revised Statutes, and the penalty for a repeated offense is a mandatory, as in "no probation and no suspended sentence," minimum one year in prison) is to use a "computerized, electronic, electrical or mechanical device, or any software or hardware, or any combination thereof, which is designed, constructed, altered or programmed to obtain an advantage at playing any game in a licensed gaming establishment or any game that is offered by a licensee or affiliate, including, without limitation, a device that:
1. Projects the outcome of the game;
2. Keeps track of cards played or cards prepared for play in the game;
3. Analyzes the probability of the occurrence of an event relating to the game; or
4. Analyzes the strategy for playing or betting to be used in the game
except as may be made available as part of an approved game or otherwise permitted by the Commission."
The Commission specifically permits using handwritten notes to track cards in baccarat and roulette results.
Note #2 specifically says "cards," although technically those are just four examples of "obtaining an advantage."
There is also the question of whether a pen/pencil and paper are considered "a mechanical device altered to obtain an advantage."
Insert the somewhat obligatory "You are wasting your time trying to develop a system in craps" comment here - especially as, since you are basing it on rolls, you have to assume that the same two dice are being used for every bet.
link to original post
Your mention of the use of a pencil and paper - to write down previous results in plain view of the dealer and pit boss - as possibly qualifying as 'a mechanical device" or "hardware" designed to obtain an advantage by keeping track of cards played or cards prepared to be played in the game' is intriguing. I suppose it might be argued that such a common practice that is commonly allowed by casinos in baccarat and roulette might qualify as a crime under Nevada Revised Statutes! Especially for plausible advantage plays like trying to take advantage of a vulnerable baccarat side bet.
I hate overly broad language in statutes defining criminal activity because it gives the police (and casinos in this case) the opportunity to use their discretion and selectively enforce the statute against parties that they otherwise don't like very much - legally, that they "bear animus towards."
Quote: VegasriderWith so many chips on the table, how can anyone throw a controlled roll? It’s more believable if the surface of the table remained constant free of chips
link to original post
Just supposing that someone could DI successfully, in theory, trying to only play when alone at the table or only playing half tables would remedy the chips problem.
You just hit the nail on the head.Quote: VegasriderKeeping track of roll results is much different than keeping track of what cards remain or has been dealt. It’s a new roll with a new results on every roll, just like roulette. It’s like shuffling the cards after every hand in BJ.
link to original post
Dice have no memory. Previous rolls have no effect on future rolls
I take it as some casinos are paranoid. Other casinos, seeing what the paranoid casinos have done, do a collective corporate shoulder shrug, and implement the same protections.Quote: unJon… to me the fact that the casinos have implemented certain protection measures like the diamonds on the wall, and a certain amount of springiness under the felt, I take as evidence that dice influence was done by at least some people before those measures were taken.
link to original post
Whether you believe in DI or not, you have to agree that such measures make it harder.
Quote: VegasriderWith so many chips on the table, how can anyone throw a controlled roll? It’s more believable if the surface of the table remained constant free of chips
link to original post
What makes you think a DI would play at a crowded table? They don't.
They don't want to hit chips and they certainly don't want chips in their landing zone.
Quote: Ace2DIs play in fantasyland
link to original post
Fantasy DIs play in fantasyland. You've probably never seen a real DI because there are so few of them.
I'd say being at a table with a true DI is like being in a foursome with Tiger Woods.
Even if DI were possible, which it isn’t since no one has demonstrated consistent statistically significant results, the effect on the dice would be small. You wouldn’t see it, it would only become evident over thousands of rolls (or more)
Quote: Ace2BS.
Even if DI were possible, which it isn’t since no one has demonstrated consistent statistically significant results, the effect on the dice would be small. You wouldn’t see it, it would only become evident over thousands of rolls (or more)
link to original post
That's right... because you've never been at a table with a true DI.
You've never seen a player do it so you repeat what you've read by others who also have never seen it.
DI is not something supernatural. However it is a very rare skill in part because few have actually learned or practiced it.
If DI were taught in public schools beginning in the fourth grade there would be enough professionals to fill up the tables at casinos. But it's not taught or practiced and few have the basic physical abilities to even make a decent attempt at it.
I personally could never master it for many reasons and I'll list some:
1. I dont have the necessary vision or depth perception.
2. My hand shakes from medicines I take.
3. I've never practiced enough.
4. I don't have the concentration or physical discipline to repeat the same motions with my arm and hand
The bottom line is just because you can't do it, it doesn't mean everyone else can't do it either.
By the way, I can't sing or dance either.
And one more point: a DI doesnt need thousands of rolls to prove the ability. DI is easy to detect. A shooter needs to keep the two dice travelling close together as if they were twins in a gentle arc parallel to the table and hitting the back wall softly. A real expert DI will hit the back wall just under the pyramids or hitting the pyramids so gently that the dice appear to die immediately.
Quote: SOOPOO. Quite the opposite. Just that there are some laws of physics a human can’t overcome. It’s a really simple concept.Quote: DeMangoWhen you really think about it, Soopoo is claiming the laws of physics end at the dice table.
link to original post
link to original post
Says you. You wrong.
Quote: AlanMendelson
A shooter needs to keep the two dice travelling close together as if they were twins in a gentle arc parallel to the table and hitting the back wall softly. A real expert DI will hit the back wall just under the pyramids or hitting the pyramids so gently that the dice appear to die immediately.
link to original post
I've given some thought to DI in terms of how the physics might play out and most of what you say makes sense to me. The exception is your statement about "a gentle arc parallel to the table". If by "parallel" you mean a mostly flat trajectory then I would, from a theoretical POV, disagree.
The motion of the dice when they hit the table can be broken down into an X and Y vector. Hitting the table as close to the back wall as possible where the table is stiffest should absorb the greatest amount of energy in the Y (i.e.., vertical) dimension. If I recall the lessons from my high school physics correctly, minimal velocity along the X axis is achieved via a parabolic arc in which a high toss is used to allow increased travel time (i.e., more energy in Y and less in X). A low and flat trajectory requires a much higher horizontal velocity and, therefore, more of a bounce off the back wall.
Quote: TumblingBonesQuote: AlanMendelson
A shooter needs to keep the two dice travelling close together as if they were twins in a gentle arc parallel to the table and hitting the back wall softly. A real expert DI will hit the back wall just under the pyramids or hitting the pyramids so gently that the dice appear to die immediately.
link to original post
I've given some thought to DI in terms of how the physics might play out and most of what you say makes sense to me. The exception is your statement about "a gentle arc parallel to the table". If by "parallel" you mean a mostly flat trajectory then I would, from a theoretical POV, disagree.
The motion of the dice when they hit the table can be broken down into an X and Y vector. Hitting the table as close to the back wall as possible where the table is stiffest should absorb the greatest amount of energy in the Y (i.e.., vertical) dimension. If I recall the lessons from my high school physics correctly, minimal velocity along the X axis is achieved via a parabolic arc in which a high toss is used to allow increased travel time (i.e., more energy in Y and less in X). A low and flat trajectory requires a much higher horizontal velocity and, therefore, more of a bounce off the back wall.
link to original post
Thanks. I'm not disagreeing with you, and my terminology and choice of words may not be correct. My point is that a DI throw has special characteristics that limit the movement of dice.
Quote: AlanMendelsonI have seen it work... but with fewer than 5 shooters. That's five in my lifetime.
link to original post
Describe one session with a "successful" DI that you have witnessed, i.e., the number of hands played and the number of rolls/hand and the number of point conversions within those hands. How many sessions with that DI did you witness? Did the "successful" DI 7 out at any time on a "short" hand? How long was he or she at the table, and was the shooter playing with green and black chips?
tuttigym
Quote: Ace2Every combination of bets has a negative expectation. No system can beat that
link to original post
Please provide a "Webster" like definition of "negative expectation," and also provide the source of such. While you're at it, please define AP as opposed to "sure thing." Can an AP overcome the "negative expectation"? So, if a "combination of bets" has an overpowering advantage of beating the house on a onetime event, it still has a "negative expectation"? ("No system can beat that") Perhaps but players can and do all the time.
tuttigym
Quote: tuttigymQuote: Ace2Every combination of bets has a negative expectation. No system can beat that
link to original post
Please provide a "Webster" like definition of "negative expectation," and also provide the source of such. While you're at it, please define AP as opposed to "sure thing." Can an AP overcome the "negative expectation"? So, if a "combination of bets" has an overpowering advantage of beating the house on a onetime event, it still has a "negative expectation"? ("No system can beat that") Perhaps but players can and do all the time.
tuttigym
link to original post
Oh, good. We'd gone far too long here without nonsensical arguments being made. Glad to have you back, Tuttigym.
Quote: Mission146Oh, good. We'd gone far too long here without nonsensical arguments being made. Glad to have you back, Tuttigym.
link to original post
Glad to oblige. So, are you going to answer the questions or do your dance and dodge thingy.? You know, the "I could, but it is a gambling fact, so I won't" or words of that nature like when I asked about the calculation of the odds of performing the 495 one time only come rolls to establish the 1.41% HA PL wager.
tuttigym
Quote: tuttigymQuote: Mission146Oh, good. We'd gone far too long here without nonsensical arguments being made. Glad to have you back, Tuttigym.
link to original post
Glad to oblige. So, are you going to answer the questions or do your dance and dodge thingy.? You know, the "I could, but it is a gambling fact, so I won't" or words of that nature like when I asked about the calculation of the odds of performing the 495 one time only come rolls to establish the 1.41% HA PL wager.
tuttigym
link to original post
I answered this question head on and in simple terms in the other thread it was brought up in. Don’t recall you responding, but if you want to then please do in that thread.
Quote: tuttigymQuote: AlanMendelsonI have seen it work... but with fewer than 5 shooters. That's five in my lifetime.
link to original post
Describe one session with a "successful" DI that you have witnessed, i.e., the number of hands played and the number of rolls/hand and the number of point conversions within those hands. How many sessions with that DI did you witness? Did the "successful" DI 7 out at any time on a "short" hand? How long was he or she at the table, and was the shooter playing with green and black chips?
tuttigym
link to original post
I played with a cardiac surgeon many times at Caesars. On two other occasions I played with different DIs once.
What you are asking for is some statistic that shows these shooters win more than random shooters. Well, I have also reported that the biggest/longest rolls I've been on were by random shooters.
DI is not measured by wins. DI is identified by the (for lack of a better word) look of the roll of the dice.
Let me give you an example.
Put a sheet of aluminum foil on your bed and throw your dice so they hit the aluminum foil. Now look at the marks on the foil.
If you see impressions from the dice corners you dont have a controlled throw.
But if you see impressions of the two dice hitting flat or on the edges and the dice land close to each other then you have a controlled throw.
No one controls the dice after they hit the table. But if you have a controlled throw you have a better chance of limiting the movement of the dice after they hit the table.
They did built a machine to throw the dice perfectly every time. It could not influence the dice to any statistically significant degree. See attached linkQuote: VegasriderYou would think someone could have created a mechanical device that would be able to toss the dice with the same amount of pressure and velocity and trajectory after setting the dice in a certain position to verify if this is even possible.
link to original post
https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1415&context=grrj
But that is not going to stop believers from believing. Nothing will
Negative expectation is when the probability of winning times the winning payout is less than 1. If you are betting that the next roll will be a 7 (1 in 6 chance) then any payout less than 6 for 1 (6.00) is negative expectation. Over the long run, you will roll a 7 almost exactly 1 in 6 times, so you will lose money with any payout less than 6.00. GuaranteedQuote: tuttigymQuote: Ace2Every combination of bets has a negative expectation. No system can beat that
link to original post
Please provide a "Webster" like definition of "negative expectation," and also provide the source of such. While you're at it, please define AP as opposed to "sure thing." Can an AP overcome the "negative expectation"? So, if a "combination of bets" has an overpowering advantage of beating the house on a onetime event, it still has a "negative expectation"? ("No system can beat that") Perhaps but players can and do all the time.
tuttigym
link to original post
There is no AP in craps. It’s 100% a game of chance and every bet on the table is negative expectation. The most profitable strategy is to not play, the second best option is to play only the lowest house edge bets…which are pass/DP with max odds
Quote: tuttigymQuote: Mission146Oh, good. We'd gone far too long here without nonsensical arguments being made. Glad to have you back, Tuttigym.
link to original post
Glad to oblige. So, are you going to answer the questions or do your dance and dodge thingy.? You know, the "I could, but it is a gambling fact, so I won't" or words of that nature like when I asked about the calculation of the odds of performing the 495 one time only come rolls to establish the 1.41% HA PL wager.
tuttigym
link to original post
There is no possible question that you could ever ask that I would feel an obligation to answer, so, no. I'll respond to your posts if and when I feel like it, which won't be often. When I do, you can be sure that the tone will be condescending, sardonic, dismissive or some combination of the three.
