Dice Setting

Quote: midwestgb

We can agree to disagree.

The setting of dice along a horizontal axis in order to, for example, decrease the probability of a seven appearing should the axis be maintained will not conversely operate to negate randomness if the intended affect is not achieved. It just ain't so... ;-)

Wouldn't it be pretty easy to negate the randomness and also not get the desired result? I would think that might even be the most likely outcome.

So its a question of does Dice Control exist and then, if it does exist, does it have a sufficient effect that will overcome the house edge of passline with full odds which can be pretty low to begin with. (Some would phrase the question as "if Dice Control exists can it be exploited on the high house edge bets?").

I question its very existence and I question the manner in which its existence could be proven. I also question whether its affect (absent an alert crew) would be of any practical use.

The only real "evidence" is that some well respected advantage players in other games maintain that Dice Control may indeed exist. Now this could be the equivalent of a Nobel prize winning scientist believing in Little Green Men from Mars. There is no doubt that a great many seminars and practice tables are sold to the gullible. No one seems to be getting rich if they take a seminar, only if they sell seminars.

Casinos don't seem worried, only annoyed at any delay involved.

None of the dice influencers/controllers/whatever seem able to show a non-random pattern. No casino seems to be running a table in the red. I rate Dice Control as equivalent to a belief in leprechauns. There is never an advantage to be gained by denying the existence of leprechauns, but most people who express a belief in them do so only in social situations where it is entertaining to do so.

Quote: MathExtremist

For example, what if you keep the dice on-axis, but when they hit the back wall they do so at a slight angle and pitch 1/4 turn along the axis of travel? That would lead to a 100% incidence of the undesirable faces and a 0% incidence of the desired ones...

If dice setting fails to produce one pattern, but is seen to produce another, the only thing to do is get rich betting on the pattern that does get favored.

Quote: odiousgambit

If dice setting fails to produce one pattern, but is seen to produce another, the only thing to do is get rich betting on the pattern that does get favored.

Yes,
Find out what pattern it produce (If there is any), them bet on it.
The problem is to find out what pattern it produce (If there is any).

Buy low and sell high. Great advice for the stock market. And just as valuable as dice setting.

The ratio of 7s to any other number, if only slightly altered, can yield a favor to the player. For example, the place bet on the 6 and 8 is 0 if the 7s rolled ratio (SRR) is .1628. (That is, instead of rolling a seven 1 out of 6 times, you roll it 1 out of 6.14285 times. (meaning that in 258 rolls, you throw the 7 42 times instead of the mathematically correct 43 times) -- and all other numbers have an equal probability of appearing.

Of course, measuring your true 7s rolled ratio is difficult to measure because of the variance when throwing dice. In a controlled experiment when a claimant claims for example, their 7s rolled ratio is 6.5, the probability of actually winning that claim with no skill whatsoever over say, 1170 rolls, is calculable using any binomial calculator out there.

To win the particular claim above, the bettor would have to throw 180 or less 7s over 1,170 rolls (the expected number of 7s is 195). The probability of success is only 12.7 percent if the shooter is random). That means that one out of every 8 shooters would have that result EVEN if their roll is truly random. By the way, the player advantage on a 6 or 8 at that point is 3.6 percent (if all other numbers appear randomly).

I think it would be difficult to get the correct casino conditions to observe someone throw the dice that many times. That's why dice control stories are anecdotal. But I think you get a shooter to put their money where their mouth is: have them go to the Wynn and ask for a table for themselves as long as the bet black chips. The Wynn will set you up, and you can probably get in 1,200 rolls over 8 hours, easy, if you're the only one playing.

Anyone?

Quote: odiousgambit

If dice setting fails to produce one pattern, but is seen to produce another, the only thing to do is get rich betting on the pattern that does get favored.

Not that anyone's ever tried to figure this out before:

Quote: Of the Laws of Chance, or, a method of Calculation of the Hazards of Game, Plainly demonstrated, And applied to Games as present most in Use

It is impossible for a Die, with such determin'd force and direction, not to fall on such determin'd side, only I don't know the force and direction which makes it fall on such determin'd side, and therefore I call it Chance, wich is nothing but the want of art...

Translated by John Arbuthnot in 1692 from "De Ratiociniis in Ludo Aleae", which in turn was translated from the original 1656 German work "Van Rekeningh in Spelen van Geluck" by Christiaan Huygens.

Quote: boymimbo

The ratio of 7s to any other number, if only slightly altered, can yield a favor to the player. For example, the place bet on the 6 and 8 is 0 if the 7s rolled ratio (SRR) is .1628. (That is, instead of rolling a seven 1 out of 6 times, you roll it 1 out of 6.14285 times. (meaning that in 258 rolls, you throw the 7 42 times instead of the mathematically correct 43 times) -- and all other numbers have an equal probability of appearing.

Of course, measuring your true 7s rolled ratio is difficult to measure because of the variance when throwing dice. In a controlled experiment when a claimant claims for example, their 7s rolled ratio is 6.5, the probability of actually winning that claim with no skill whatsoever over say, 1170 rolls, is calculable using any binomial calculator out there.

To win the particular claim above, the bettor would have to throw 180 or less 7s over 1,170 rolls (the expected number of 7s is 195). The probability of success is only 12.7 percent if the shooter is random). That means that one out of every 8 shooters would have that result EVEN if their roll is truly random. By the way, the player advantage on a 6 or 8 at that point is 3.6 percent (if all other numbers appear randomly).

I think it would be difficult to get the correct casino conditions to observe someone throw the dice that many times. That's why dice control stories are anecdotal. But I think you get a shooter to put their money where their mouth is: have them go to the Wynn and ask for a table for themselves as long as the bet black chips. The Wynn will set you up, and you can probably get in 1,200 rolls over 8 hours, easy, if you're the only one playing.

Anyone?

See Stanford Wong Experiment portion....

https://wizardofodds.com/craps/appendix3.html

You mean see the Little Joe experiment. Wong would have had 80 if he continued. The sample is to small to mean anything. And without a magician to watch the results are even more meaningless

Quote: buzzpaff

Buy low and sell high. Great advice for the stock market. And just as valuable as dice setting.

I don't know what this shows, but it is extremely easy to play the stock market poorly by not following this rule. People do it all the time, usually by panicking or following the herd. On the other hand, it is hard to use this rule correctly even when you realize the importance of it.

This is the proverbial question which came first the chicken or the egg. There is no definitive proof that dice control works or does not work. Our exposure to the math in the casino on any game time wise is but a sliver of what it would take for the math to work out. I do believe that there are people who can influence the dice on the right tables. Can they do it every time or even every trip? No. I believe that by setting them certain numbers will come up more than others ,so yes there are trends and you should bet them. Can you get good enough to stand there and make hop bets? I doubt it, although that does not mean it can't be done. When you are shooting and your dice are not controlled then you are just like everyone else. If you can set the dice and deliver them quickly without holding up the game then what the hell is the difference. I set the dice and try to deliver them in controlled manner. I have not given up my day job. At most tables you will see some players who are not controlled throwers of the dice and they set the dice but they cannot find the sides they want or they have some other pre shot routine that takes much longer than what I do and they do hold up the game. The point is if a shooter wants to shoot a certain way who cares, it's his dime, as long as the game flows. The best roll I ever saw was at the Paris by an old lady who would shake them raise them up to her ear and let em fly. They sometimes hit the backwall sometimes hit every wall but she must have rolled 40 numbers & paid for my whole trip on that one. She also never made a bet for herself the dealer just kept making her bets and only the good ones. She had a few more turns with the dice and immediately sevened out. Lastly, the Wizard has not endorsed it but he has not ruled it out and if Stanford Wong is willing risk his reputation on the belief that it is possible then that works for me.

MrRalph- you say "there is no definitive proof that dice control works or does not work." Lack of definitive proof is of course in the eyes of the beholders. My understanding of the laws of physics, the nature of dice and craps tables, the limitations of the human body, are enough definitive proof for me that dice setting cannot alter the outcomes to exceed and reverse the house advantage in craps. I am willing to bet on it. No one is willing to take me up on it. Wonder why?

.....

Quote: gofaster87

No one takes you up on it because no one here, on this site, claims they can do it on a regular basis. Maybe I should whip out the felt, build a table, quit smoking and make a real attempt at it. Whats the worst that can come of it, failure? It'll be fun trying. Lets say I can practice till the next WOVCON. That's plenty of time to practice and if Im not confident by then we will call it a bust.

It would be a lot of "fun" trying to herd cats, too, and no doubt just as productive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pk7yqlTMvp8

Thank god the Wright brothers did not live and die with the laws of physics we would all still be traveling in covered wagons. My point is sometimes you have to think out of the box as they did for their time. Everyone thought they were crazy and that it could not be done. And really who cares, you either try it or you don't there is no downside to trying, what are you going to become, more random, there is no such thing. Just because something is a little to abstract to justify does not mean that there are not times when it can be accomplished. Anything can and does happen in the casino. My favorite game and most profitable is video keno another thing that everyone says is the worst bet in the house but in my small little sliver of exposure to the math and physics of the RNG picking a winner I hold my own and I have the w-2G's to prove it. I play craps for fun and profit hopefully so if I think I can influence the dice maybe in my small exposure to the math and physics of this game maybe I can. I will never play enough to know a definitive answer but the glass is always half full for me.

Quote: MrRalph

Thank god the Wright brothers did not live and die with the laws of physics we would all still be traveling in covered wagons. My favorite game and most profitable is video keno another thing that everyone says is the worst bet in the house but in my small little sliver of exposure to the math and physics of the RNG picking a winner I hold my own and I have the w-2G's to prove it.

Umm, the Wright brothers *did* live by the laws of physics. Physics very neatly explains stationary-wing flight. And covered wagons for that matter.

As to the keno game, there is no physics involved in a video keno RNG. Just software.

it does seem a bit odd that this notion infuriates some, even in the face of the mildest assertions

You are correct I knew physics were involved probably a bad example but they still had to overcome the nay sayers. Just trying to get a point across I did a poor job. I just wonder why it fires everyone up as well.

Well, the Wright brothers didn't just write books or give seminars on how to fly. They overcame the nay sayers and proved they could fly by actually flying. To my knowledge, nobody who claims to have the ability to influence the dice has overcome the nay sayers and proved they could influence the dice by actually influencing the dice. They've just written a lot of books and given a lot of seminars.

Actually you would be correct again. Maybe someday the gurus will actually have an exhibiton to prove that it can be done. Anyway until then I will kepp trying anyway. It can't hurt.

The challenge made in this instance is always... Come to a Casino, invest a lot of money, and we'll test your theory.

There is no need to waste money. If someone can convince a K.C. or St. Louis casino to open a table for 4 - 6 hours, we'll meet and give it a try. Of course, no casino will agree to sponsor such an effort.... after all, what if 'randomness was beaten' and word got around on the Internet... ;-) ...?

P.S. Excellent points Mr. Ralph!

Quote: midwestgb

no casino will agree

No dice setter that good would want to advertise himself, is what I am thinking.

If all it did was lower the HE it would still be worth doing.

Hmmmm. It is starting to sound like I am convinced it is being done! Well, I don't know that it is, but those who are convinced there can be no effect at all from setting the dice sound so shrill I am just naturally going to have to tweak their noses!

Quote: MrRalph

Thank god the Wright brothers did not live and die with the laws of physics we would all still be traveling in covered wagons.

The opposite is true of course. The Wright brothers USED the laws of physics to accomplish their goal, they did not ignore them as the "Dice Setters" do.

Quote: MrRalph

Actually you would be correct again. Maybe someday the gurus will actually have an exhibiton to prove that it can be done. Anyway until then I will kepp trying anyway. It can't hurt.

The 'It can't hurt' part is not necessarily true. If a charlatan sells you snake oil to cure that lump you are feeling and you later find out it is cancer that could have been treated if caught earlier, well, the snake oil itself did not hurt you but your "BELIEF" in it did. The same can be said of dice setting. If it causes you to gamble more than you would have bvecause you now think you have a + EV game, while of course you do not, then the "BELIEF" did hurt you. And if you actually paid money and wasted time going to a seminar...

I'm not going to say it does exist or doesn't...
However I will say this...
I play craps every weekend, and the people I know, all "set" the dice in some fashion, and SOMEHOW the people I know have better hands more frequently than people who just pick em' up and toss em...
But maybe we're just lucky?
No we don't shoot good EVERY TIME, but it just seems like more of the good hands come from people I know...

Quote: SOOPOO

The same can be said of dice setting. If it causes you to gamble more than you would have bvecause you now think you have a + EV game, while of course you do not, then the "BELIEF" did hurt you.

now that makes sense anyway, to object on that basis.

However, no one seems to be selling any snake oil here, unless I missed something. Perhaps a few are too snake oil friendly.

Be assured I am selling no oil here. No book to sell, or seminar to offer. I just enjoy engaging in argument with those committed to a viewpoint different from my own. And to be sure, there are those who are committed to their view on this issue.

I'll close with this thought. You can sit down at a poker table and win, or lose. The cards you are dealt randomly are one part of the game, and your 'sixth sense' as to your opponents is another - perhaps even the more important aspect.

In Craps, the dice and the dimpled walls are one part of the game that are in place courtesy of the Casino to randomize as much as possible each betting event. Now, if you choose to believe that these factors control entirely the betting event, that is just fine. Plainly there are folks who believe otherwise.

I think the casino's biggest gripe with dice setting is that it slows the game down for everyone. Realistically speaking, that's going to have a *much* larger effect on casino revenues than the theoretical advantage, if any, gained by a successful dice setter. Consider that a table with an average 100/rolls/hour, each roll takes 36 seconds. If each player takes an extra second to fiddle with the dice each time, you're looking at almost a 2.8% reduction in monthly revenue. In Vegas, that's about $2,500/month/table! I doubt that the total amount of money removed from the average dice table each month by successful dice setters, if there are any, is anywhere close to that figure.

Quote: TIMSPEED

I'm not going to say it does exist or doesn't...
However I will say this...
I play craps every weekend, and the people I know, all "set" the dice in some fashion, and SOMEHOW the people I know have better hands more frequently than people who just pick em' up and toss em...
But maybe we're just lucky?
No we don't shoot good EVERY TIME, but it just seems like more of the good hands come from people I know...

Hey, great!

Time for you to cut the soles off your shoes, sit in a tree, and learn to play the flute.

I mean, it's time for you to quit your day job, liquidate all your assets, become a member of this posse, bet heavy whenever they roll dem bones and win a fortune.

That is what you are saying could happen.

Yeah, right.

Guys like you ... starry eyed ... choose your delusion.

.....

If you're attempting to pitch the dice while spinning on the horizontal axis, then the trick is to test it on a thick felt. This will absord some of the bounce.
However, you really have to look around for one that will work. If the table has a thin felt and no pad, then I'd try a less successful helicopter type of shot.

If you're serious about playing this way, then practice setting the dice in your hand after having quickly glanced at them before picking them up. Why people take there time, telecasting to the casino what they are doing in advance, is in my opinion, a bad idea.

Tracking the dice is very simple. Just record the number that shows up on each face of the dice and then drop the data into a spread sheet to computer the chi and standard deviation. If you don't have such a sheet, then I can compute it for you. If you find that you are having success, then let me know and I can also fix you up with some software that will tell you which bets have the best edge based on your test results.

By the way, don't rely on small short term test samples. Collect at least a couple thousand throws first. Also, use new dice, not the ones from the gift shop if you are testing at home.

-Keyser

.....

Okay, I have decided discussing dice setting is like trying to discuss politics and religion. The I believe's and do not believe's will never agree that it is possible or not possible.

Just for the heck of it (after reading all of these posts and post from similar threads) I put together a very simple experiment.... and one that you can put together in 5 minutes if you wish to simulate my results.

I took a flat, slightly cushioned, felt covered surface (my home poker table); one standard craps die (no, it may not be precisely the same as what you'd find in your local casino but you'll see in a moment why it doesn't matter); one smooth, flat surface as a take-off point (another, higher table top) and a "starting" mechanism (a round pencil).

I put the die at the edge of the higher of the two tables and placed the side of the pencil against it. I then began to roll the pencil VERY slowly and in a very controlled manner to JUST push the die over the edge of the table 14.5 INCHES to the surface of the poker table below.

I was VERY careful to set the die up from the same spot with the same faces in the same direction every time. Of course it was never EXACTLY the same from one roll to the next but I assure you it was very close.

So, let's compare this experiment to a real-life craps throw.

CRAPS THROW: By human hand
EXPERIMENT: mechanically

CRAPS THROW: Distance covered - 3 to 4 feet MINIMUM
EXPERIMENT: Distance covered - 14.5 inches

CRAPS THROW: 2 dice
EXPERIMENT: 1 die

CRAPS THROW: Potential obstacles on every throw
EXPERIMENT: No obstacles ever

CRAPS THROW: Must hit pyramids on back wall
EXPERIMENT: Falls straight down to flat surface

Ok, I'm sure you get the idea. I'm dropping 1 die 14.5 inches to a flat surface with no obstacles from practically the EXACT same FLAT surface with practically the EXACT same force whereas the craps player has 2 dice to control (that can even hit one another) and his release has NO chance of being anywhere near as close to having the same precision as I had with this experiment. He has to hit the pyramids and unless someone is going to talk out of their backside and tell me that they or anyone else can hit the same pyramid at the same spot with the same force there is obviously going to be a HUGE amount of bias from the back wall.

The result after 500 drops? I could let you guess but here it is:

1 - 83
2 - 81
3 - 88
4 - 86
5 - 82
6 - 80

Pretty close to what I'd call random. I could have stopped at 100 when I saw what was happening but I figured I keep going a while longer. If anyone of you has a bunch of time on your hands like I do, give it a try and see what you find. I was actually a little surprised as I figued at least ONE number would come up more often... but nope, just about as close to random as you could find.

Of course, the dice setters might tell me how they spin the dice on axis to keep them from showing certain faces or some nonsense but come on people, give this a try, even if it's only for 50 rolls and see for yourself. I couldn't make one number come up more or less often even a paltry 6% outside of random distribution under these fairly controlled conditions.

What I'd like to do is get a camera that will produce a slo-mo video to see the exact moment of impact and the way the die moves left, right or forward with every roll but even in real time it was easy to see it takes hops in every direction with every roll. It did seem to have a tendency to stay on axis from the forward roll off of the table more than half the time but even so, by the time it hit the felt it had just enough imbalance to kick off to on side or the other.

If anyone else wants to give this a try please show your results. I've never believed dice setting to be a plausible way to gain an advantage over the house in Craps but now I'm convinced that it's flat out not possible.

**EDIT** in case you're wondering, it took just about 2 hours...

Quote: TheNightfly

Just for the heck of it (after reading all of these posts and post from similar threads) I put together a very simple experiment.... and one that you can put together in 5 minutes if you wish to simulate my results.

I took a flat, slightly cushioned, felt covered surface (my home poker table); one standard craps die (no, it may not be precisely the same as what you'd find in your local casino but you'll see in a moment why it doesn't matter); one smooth, flat surface as a take-off point (another, higher table top) and a "starting" mechanism (a round pencil).

I put the die at the edge of the higher of the two tables and placed the side of the pencil against it. I then began to roll the pencil VERY slowly and in a very controlled manner to JUST push the die over the edge of the table 14.5 INCHES to the surface of the poker table below.

I was VERY careful to set the die up from the same spot with the same faces in the same direction every time. Of course it was never EXACTLY the same from one roll to the next but I assure you it was very close.

So, let's compare this experiment to a real-life craps throw.

CRAPS THROW: By human hand
EXPERIMENT: mechanically

CRAPS THROW: Distance covered - 3 to 4 feet MINIMUM
EXPERIMENT: Distance covered - 14.5 inches

CRAPS THROW: 2 dice
EXPERIMENT: 1 die

CRAPS THROW: Potential obstacles on every throw
EXPERIMENT: No obstacles ever

CRAPS THROW: Must hit pyramids on back wall
EXPERIMENT: Falls straight down to flat surface

Ok, I'm sure you get the idea. I'm dropping 1 die 14.5 inches to a flat surface with no obstacles from practically the EXACT same FLAT surface with practically the EXACT same force whereas the craps player has 2 dice to control (that can even hit one another) and his release has NO chance of being anywhere near as close to having the same precision as I had with this experiment. He has to hit the pyramids and unless someone is going to talk out of their backside and tell me that they or anyone else can hit the same pyramid at the same spot with the same force there is obviously going to be a HUGE amount of bias from the back wall.

The result after 500 drops? I could let you guess but here it is:

1 - 83
2 - 81
3 - 88
4 - 86
5 - 82
6 - 80

Pretty close to what I'd call random. I could have stopped at 100 when I saw what was happening but I figured I keep going a while longer. If anyone of you has a bunch of time on your hands like I do, give it a try and see what you find. I was actually a little surprised as I figued at least ONE number would come up more often... but nope, just about as close to random as you could find.

Of course, the dice setters might tell me how they spin the dice on axis to keep them from showing certain faces or some nonsense but come on people, give this a try, even if it's only for 50 rolls and see for yourself. I couldn't make one number come up more or less often even a paltry 6% outside of random distribution under these fairly controlled conditions.

What I'd like to do is get a camera that will produce a slo-mo video to see the exact moment of impact and the way the die moves left, right or forward with every roll but even in real time it was easy to see it takes hops in every direction with every roll. It did seem to have a tendency to stay on axis from the forward roll off of the table more than half the time but even so, by the time it hit the felt it had just enough imbalance to kick off to on side or the other.

If anyone else wants to give this a try please show your results. I've never believed dice setting to be a plausible way to gain an advantage over the house in Craps but now I'm convinced that it's flat out not possible.

**EDIT** in case you're wondering, it took just about 2 hours...

Good idea of a quick and easy EXPERIMENT.
May be it is too small of a sample?

I agree, it's a very small sample. If anyone thinks dice setting/precision throwing can work, show me a sample and we can compare notes.

You birds just don't get it.

If dice setting worked, the casinos would never allow it.

The men running casinos are far from stupid, gullible, and easy to trick.

They'll tolerate no threat to their bottom line, and will allow no actions which impair or take away the house edge on every roll.

Look at what they did to defang card counting.

No, if the casinos believe there is nothing to fear, then there really is nothing to fear.

In the end, dice setting can be dimissed as an affectation, a superstition, and a form of mental masturbation.

The casinos just love a good circle jerk.

I am not convinced that dice setting works or does not work. On any given roll anything can happen and by setting or controlling your throw ,or trying to, you lose nothing as long as you do not slow down the game. But I have noticed some changes so the Casinos must be a little wary. First a lot of the casinos now have surfaces that make the dice jump like a scalded monkey. I mean you do not even hear them land on the table and they fly everywhere. #2 they have made the tables longer, now I know they can accomodate more people but it would also be harder to keep the dice flying and rotating togther over a longer distance. #3 there use to be a flat face at the bottom of the pyramids and at the top. Some of the newer tables now have an angled surface at the bottom so no matter where you hit hit wall the dice would hit an angled surface. I would have to agree that on this type of table that control of the dice would seem impossible. Stanford Wong has stated though on this type of table (I am not endorsing this) that by setting all faces showing sevens he had better than random results, but this was not a controlled study. Do you think the casinos went to the super bouncy long tables with different pyramids because they have seen some ability of the dice to be controlled or are they just hedging their bets? What the casinos really love are all the shooters who either set or do not set the dice and make all the bets in the middle of the table.

Quote: MrRalph

Stanford Wong has stated though on this type of table (I am not endorsing this) that by setting all faces showing sevens he had better than random results, but this was not a controlled study.

I once had a high opinion of Wong and his ability to think clearly and cut through all the B.S. which is so prevalent in the gambling world, but after his dice setting debacle, my opinion of him has lessened.

GIGO.

I reached that conclusion when he started promoting his discovery of "Wonging " in. Thorpe promoted back counting in
" Beat the Dealer " decades before.

Quote: MrV

The men running casinos are far from stupid, gullible, and easy to trick.

I'm sure that is debatable.

I'm not talking necessarily about the pit bosses, or floormen: I am thinking of the casino manager and the experts the casino hires to help them maximize their advantage.

In the game of cat and mouse, the casino will always be the cat.

The casinos purchase and license their games from the inventors/ vendors. They are by no means the experts on the games. They will forever be playing the game of "catch up" when it pertains to the sometimes better educated, creative, and ambitious advantage player or casino cheating "mouse".