Ahigh Show Tuesday at 7:30pm Pacific Time
Quote: MrVHow about "A deluded dreamer who can't cash the checks his mouth writes?"
Alan, I was on to this guy from the beginning; his toss shows he's got nothin'.
Just a bunch of hot air yearning for a gullible audience.
End of story.
You guys want to BELIEVE you are experts. That much is obvious. All three of you guys (Alan, MrV, and sodawater).
Why not meet me IN PERSON and decide. It's quite possible that your conclusions and beliefs are both wrong.
Until then, I'm the real deal here in Vegas doing EXACTLY what I am showing I am doing, and you guys are just some dudes on the internet making forum posts.
Deluded? Me? It's an idea. It's a suggestion, even. But I doubt it's reality.
Quote: BuzzardI have an easier method of determining if a shooter is a expert dice setter or not. He is not a DI if he is not a Bigfoot or a Sasquash.
I thought a Bigfoot and Sasquash were the same thing.
Quote: AhighDeluded? Me? It's an idea. It's a suggestion, even. But I doubt it's reality.
Certainly you seem to believe that you have the ability to exert control on the dice, otherwise you wouldn't be televising your efforts; were you to consider yourself a random roller, there would be no point in televising the rolls.
To date, you've demonstrated nothing of particular value: your lack of success underscores your deluded believe that you can influence the dice.
Quote: AhighYou guys want to BELIEVE you are experts. That much is obvious. All three of you guys (Alan, MrV, and sodawater).
Why not meet me IN PERSON and decide. It's quite possible that your conclusions and beliefs are both wrong.
Until then, I'm the real deal here in Vegas doing EXACTLY what I am showing I am doing, and you guys are just some dudes on the internet making forum posts.
Deluded? Me? It's an idea. It's a suggestion, even. But I doubt it's reality.
There you go again, Ahigh, claiming that you're a DI/DC. Just two days ago you said you weren't. Please make up your mind. What are you?
Personally, I hope you are a DI because I want to show up at a casino with you and win big. I'd rather play craps than shoot Infomercials. :-)
But help the environment here (gas, oil, air) and instead of making me drive up there, on your show Tuesday night show us your dice set, and show us your grip, and what position you play from at the table (SL1, SR1, or ??) and let us see YOU throwing the dice... your arm movements from the moment you pick up the dice to the release. We might have you all wrong! You might be the Dice Messiah after all!!
I would be very happy to be at a craps table with you.
Quote: WizardI thought a Bigfoot and Sasquash were the same thing.
Always a critic in the audience GRRRRR !
\
The term "sasquatch" is an anglicized derivative of the word "Sésquac", meaning "wild man". The original word, in the Stó:lõ dialect of the Halkomelem language, is used by the Coast Salish Indians of the Fraser Valley and parts of Vancouver Island, British Columbia.
Indian tribes across North America have a total of more than sixty different terms for the sasquatch.
"Bigfoot" was a journalistic term generated in the middle of the last century during a rash of sightings in Northern California. The word has come to be recognized widely.
Many different terms have been used by pioneers and later non-native inhabitants of North America, including "skookums" and "mountain devils".
Quote: MrVCertainly you seem to believe that you have the ability to exert control on the dice, otherwise you wouldn't be televising your efforts;
Not true. I would absolutely not have invested in the equipment to do live broadcasts if nobody had made the point that it's possible to cherry pick recordings.
The live broadcasts are directly the results of people like you who assume that any positive results are the results of misrepresentation of facts.
Quote: MrVwere you to consider yourself a random roller, there would be no point in televising the rolls.
You are wrong.
Quote: MrVTo date, you've demonstrated nothing of particular value: your lack of success underscores your deluded believe that you can influence the dice.
I appreciate you giving your opinion that I have "demonstrated nothing of particular value."
Let me share my opinion that your criticisms are not warranted and also that you simply don't know as much about the subject at hand as I do (specifically with regards to my ability to have favorable results rolling dice in a real casino) because I am the one doing the work and you are just looking through a keyhole and making conclusions without all the information that I have available to myself.
For that reason, I say if you want to continue to pull some weight throwing your opinions around, why not come over her to Las Vegas and meet with me. That goes for all three of you, soda, and Alan.
The truth is that I am a real guy doing real stuff and sharing it for no other reason than for the purpose of sharing.
And yet the accusations continue that what I am doing is a deluded fantasy like some chasing a pot of gold at the end of a make-believe rainbow.
It makes me chuckle, really. But I'm just saying if you want to talk about being real, let's see YOUR real face on camera interacting with me and you can tell me in person on my show what you think and I can respond.
This typing on a keyboard and posting up a few critical words on a forum is pretty easy. IE: you have almost no skin in the game and therefore nothing to lose and your comments mean very little to me.
Quote: AlanMendelsonThere you go again, Ahigh, claiming that you're a DI/DC. Just two days ago you said you weren't. Please make up your mind. What are you?
Personally, I hope you are a DI because I want to show up at a casino with you and win big. I'd rather play craps than shoot Infomercials. :-)
But help the environment here (gas, oil, air) and instead of making me drive up there, on your show Tuesday night show us your dice set, and show us your grip, and what position you play from at the table (SL1, SR1, or ??) and let us see YOU throwing the dice... your arm movements from the moment you pick up the dice to the release. We might have you all wrong! You might be the Dice Messiah after all!!
I would be very happy to be at a craps table with you.
These comments make it sound like advantage play craps leads to instant riches.
I don't have this perspective. You have to grind on high denomination bets for a bunch of flat bets all stringed together for a long while after proving that it's possible for a pretty long while to turn it into substance.
Gambling is much easier and much more fun.
I think that it's critical to understand that just even proving that AP craps is possible doesn't change much else except prove that those of you who have believed that it's not possible at all are simply wrong.
The landscape of using AP craps play to generate infinite wealth is an ENTIRELY different topic altogether than what I am doing. The way that you folks group these two things together is a little unrealistic. AP blackjack players have tough jobs, and that's proven possible. I mean I don't want to be an AP blackjack player, and I don't want to be an AP craps player either.
I just want to prove that it's possible.
And that doesn't mean I even want to prove it with my own shot.
You guys, I think, just don't get it what I'm doing, frankly. And by you guys, I mean specifically Alan, Soda, and MrV.
I think several people on here DO get it what I am doing.
Were I to meet you at MGM, shake your hand, and smilingly say "You know, you really ARE deluded:" this would change ... what, exactly?
It seems to me the only benefit in that exchange would be to your puffed up ego, as I believe you would see it as a form of validation.
I too am a "real guy" and could share "for no other reason than for the purpose of sharing."
Hey, maybe I should post / "share" photographs of my daily defecations.
SS,DD.
Quote: MrVHey, maybe I should post / "share" photographs of my daily defecations.
This is exactly the type of comment I would expect from an anonymous person as you are in fact to me. Your comments mean nothing to me.
No thanks, your verbal diarrhea is nasty enough !
Quote: AlanMendelsonThe reason I use the cross-sixes set is that if I happen to keep my dice on axis, the only "7" that would show would be 6-1. And yes, I tend to 7-out with more 6-1s than anything else.
I'll bet you don't. I'll bet you don't seven out even 38% of the time with a 6 - 1. By the way, congratulations on doing well with a kidney pancreas transplant. That is amongst the most grueling of operations I participate in. Fixing two major organ systems at the same time is quite complex, and also requires a very complicated and difficult post op regimen, which you obviously have adapted to. I am hoping we can get together when I am in Vegas for the Nickolay/Ahigh dice influencing experiment.
I do think some of your comments were a little silly, but I absolutely wish you to be in perfect health!
Quote: AhighI think several people on here DO get it what I am doing.
The biggest level on WoV since the VideoPoker scandal of 2011?
I have no idea what you are doing, as I've still not seen a testable hypothesis, and everytime you are challenged to provide one (see teliot's single die experiment, or boymimbos great analysis, or ME's ideas) you appear to ignore these and go on the defensive about opinions from people you don't care about.
SHOW us a hypothesis, TELL us how you intend to test it, then SHOW us the experiment.
Everything else is cargo-cult science. I can draw a million random roll experiments, or generate my own patterns of betting... 7craps has done this tirelessly time and time again. It's interesting, if proving a hypothesis, but otherwise is just noise in terms of DI.
Quote: Buzzard" but otherwise is just noise in terms of DI. " I am available for consultation as I am the #1 ranked DI on this or any other forum.
You've yet to prove that, Buzz ;)
Quote: AhighI just want to prove that it's possible.
YES, it's possible. Everyone knows it's possible. But we just haven't seen anyone do it with enough consistency to make it a realistic endeavor.
But here's the problem Ahigh that you bring on yourself. On one hand you say "I just want to prove that it's possible" and then you say you can do it and you're the "real deal."
It's when you say you can do it that you are challenged.
I say yes, it's possible. But just having a great SRR isn't proof. The proof is in the delivery and "control" of the throw. SRRs can come from luck and luck only. But a well defined toss, hit, bounce and roll can only come from skill.
If dice influencing and dice control is supposed to be a skill show me the skill. The SRR doesn't matter. Dumb luck can give you a great SRR.
And thank you for your good wishes. For 32 years I was an insulin-dependent diabetic who took multiple shots per day. I even went on a vegetarian diet for 15 years in an attempt to preserve my kidneys. Every day I thank God and pray for the family and the loved one they lost.
Quote: AlanMendelsonYES, it's possible. Everyone knows it's possible.
"Everyone?"
I will concede that DI would be "possible" only in the context of a perfectly executed Dead Cat Bounce.
Quote: AlanMendelsonIf dice influencing and dice control is supposed to be a skill show me the skill. The SRR doesn't matter. Dumb luck can give you a great SRR.
Depends on the sample size. 25,000 rolls with a RSR of 8 would be interesting at least. I understand why you want to see the throw as a sign, but it's -possible- that the 'right' way to DI is not the way you expect.
Not that I ever expect to see creditable proof of DI skills. The onus is on the claimant.
Quote: Buzzard
The term "sasquatch" is an anglicized derivative of the word "Sésquac", meaning "wild man". The original word, in the Stó:lõ dialect of the Halkomelem language, is used by the Coast Salish Indians of the Fraser Valley and parts of Vancouver Island, British Columbia.
Indian tribes across North America have a total of more than sixty different terms for the sasquatch.
"Bigfoot" was a journalistic term generated in the middle of the last century during a rash of sightings in Northern California. The word has come to be recognized widely.
Many different terms have been used by pioneers and later non-native inhabitants of North America, including "skookums" and "mountain devils".
You forgot to mention that this info is a direct quote from http://www.bfro.net/gdb/show_FAQ.asp?id=584
Quote: thecesspitYou've yet to prove that, Buzz ;)
I remain unchallenged, not even by EvenbBob.
Quote: SOOPOOI'll bet you don't. I'll bet you don't seven out even 38% of the time with a 6 - 1. By the way, congratulations on doing well with a kidney pancreas transplant. That is amongst the most grueling of operations I participate in. Fixing two major organ systems at the same time is quite complex, and also requires a very complicated and difficult post op regimen, which you obviously have adapted to. I am hoping we can get together when I am in Vegas for the Nickolay/Ahigh dice influencing experiment.
Since I changed to the 4242 set, I have 79 6-1 sevens, 66 5-2 sevens, and 73 4-3 sevens.
Total is 218.
So that's 79/218 = 36.2% for me. So you're right for my data!
There was one recording session though .. I had 15 6-1, 7 5-2, and 9 4-3.
15/29 = 51.72%
7/29 = 24.13%
9/29 = 31.03%
That was a single session with 140 rolls, 20.71% of which were sevens. The session that sent the dice conspiracy theorists into quite a stir!!
If I eliminate that session, my numbers come out 64, 61, 64 for 6-1,5-2,4-3 respectively. Which is pretty even.
Quote: BuzzardI remain unchallenged, not even by EvenbBob.
Bet you I can roll more 7's in a 100 rolls than you, then you'd have to give up the title to me. Ha! I'm not laying odds though. Straight up match. You wouldn't be scared if you are the best DI on here.
But now do a Chi-squared test on [1]79,66,73Quote: AhighSince I changed to the 4242 set, I have 79 6-1 sevens, 66 5-2 sevens, and 73 4-3 sevens.
That was a single session with 140 rolls, 20.71% of which were sevens.
The session that sent the dice conspiracy theorists into quite a stir!!
If I eliminate that session, my numbers come out 64, 61, 64 for 6-1,5-2,4-3 respectively. Which is pretty even.
and on [2]64,61,64 and compare the p-values.
Remember it is just one test of goodness of fit whether or not an observed frequency distribution differs from a theoretical distribution.
[2]0.953496955
p-values from Excel chitest function
For your "dice conspiracy theorists" do the same test on the [3]15,5,9 sample set and see what you get
report back when time permits
That means that the probability fair dice would produce results this skewed or more is 7.3%.
The bottom line is while these results are more skewed than would be expected, they are not skewed enough to raise any eyebrows.
added:Quote: AhighThere was one recording session though .. I had 15 6-1, 7 5-2, and 9 4-3.
15/29 = 51.72%
7/29 = 24.13% (this is an error. There were only 5, 5-2 7s rolled for 17.24%)
9/29 = 31.03%
That was a single session with 140 rolls, 20.71% of which were sevens.
The session that sent the dice conspiracy theorists into quite a stir!!
yes, when people have NO CLUE as what IS expected to happen and the possible range of expectations during any time frame,
it is ALWAYS cry "foul"
"The Dice are biased!"
"My DI skills are useless against biased dice."
"I will sue you and take everything from you cheating casinos!!!"
LOL
15, 6-1 7s in 140 dice rolls is perfectly within the 3sd bell curve.
Who knew??
"The Dice are biased!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" yells the peanut gallery
How about what it looked like as a time series. OK, I got the photo from Excel
Just another simple random walk from a random variable.
Around the 1SD for what 80 rolls where about the 61st roll it was where we would expect it to be, almost perfect.
Once the Earth was flat, for centuries.
How about all 3 7s and their time travel.
Holy Crap Batman!
The 4,3 was dominating early on.
Are not these dice double-double biased???
The "dice conspiracy theorists" are just in their own hell.
Keep up the good work
Face array 59,37,41,42,42,59
Expected result 46.67 (140/6 * 2 [two dice]) (for each face) = 46.67
Chi squared: 0.071287
Hmmmm...
Not sure but I think the video for that session may be up on Ustream.
7.1% would not even get a CNN crew to investigate the outcome, maybe not even AlanM and his film crew.Quote: AhighThe conspiracy theory analysis on the FACE outcomes is this:
Face array 59,37,41,42,42,59
Expected result 46.67 (140/6 * 2 [two dice]) (for each face) = 46.67
Chi squared: 0.071287
Hmmmm...
Now as your sample size grows with the same dice that produced the above results, see what happens to the p-value.
Quote: EvenBobYou forgot to mention that this info is a direct quote from http://www.bfro.net/gdb/show_FAQ.asp?id=584
Actual it is a quote from my book " Buzz & Bigfoot in Las Vegas " Available on Amazon.
Quote: 7craps7.1% would not even get a CNN crew to investigate the outcome, maybe not even AlanM and his film crew.Quote: AhighThe conspiracy theory analysis on the FACE outcomes is this:
Face array 59,37,41,42,42,59
Expected result 46.67 (140/6 * 2 [two dice]) (for each face) = 46.67
Chi squared: 0.071287
Hmmmm...
Now as your sample size grows with the same dice that produced the above results, see what happens to the p-value.
Yes, I have those two dice set aside, but I fully expect the trend NOT to continue. Of course they can be tested quickly because if it's the dice, random rolling is much faster to do.
From this image, this is a 6262 set. My thumb goes between the twos and my three fingers go on the fives.
This 6262 set I used until August 2012. I started using the 4242 set in September.
I generally always use the same set and throw the same way.
Hopefully the show will at least be something different from previous shows. Trying to continue making it better each time. Thanks for the support.
Quote: AhighJust a reminder I am planning to have a show tonight. We may have a guest shooter on the show, but not confirmed yet. I will keep you guys updated.
Hopefully the show will at least be something different from previous shows. Trying to continue making it better each time. Thanks for the support.
I just watched your last show... Keep it going... Have you modified the piece that holds the dice on your machine yet?..maybe make a smaller mold. I think that's probably the only thing that's needs to changed on it, other than that, I applaude your efforts.. And do you mind showing your mechanics of your throw?
I need you to give me a clear illustration or description of your 4242 set.
Quote: AlanMendelsonThe 6262 set you show, with the 6s running like railroad tracks is a set used to INCREASE the number of 7s. It is used for the come out roll. If you are telling me that this set decreases the appearance of a 7 you are not influencing the dice.
I need you to give me a clear illustration or description of your 4242 set.
Yeah that set is like 7s all day... If I see a guy 'thinking' of using it I turn my bets off that ... The 4,1 set is also a 7s natural set
Quote: AlanMendelsonThe 6262 set you show, with the 6s running like railroad tracks is a set used to INCREASE the number of 7s. It is used for the come out roll. If you are telling me that this set decreases the appearance of a 7 you are not influencing the dice.
I need you to give me a clear illustration or description of your 4242 set.
But that would only be true if AHigh is using the same on axis orientation that most DIs profess.
What if AHigh has learned that he has a problem with one die going off axis on the majority of his shots?
In that case, settings the 7s, but knowing one die is going to rotate, would in fact, be a better set for him.
Quote: RaleighCrapsBut that would only be true if AHigh is using the same on axis orientation that most DIs profess.
Yes. The recent commenters assume that there is only one way to try to influence the dice. Obviously, his methods are different, and methods differ even between the traditional DI schools.
Quote: RaleighCrapsWhat if AHigh has learned that he has a problem with one die going off axis on the majority of his shots?
In that case, settings the 7s, but knowing one die is going to rotate, would in fact, be a better set for him.
An insightful observation.
Quote: RaleighCrapsWhat if AHigh has learned that he has a problem with one die going off axis on the majority of his shots?
In that case, settings the 7s, but knowing one die is going to rotate, would in fact, be a better set for him.
This is why I asked Ahigh to show us his actual set, his grip, his actual arm movement and toss. I don't think he has ever shown anything but the dice hitting the table.
If he says he is a dice influencer (well, sometimes he says he isn't and just lucky) then we need to see the whole set and delivery. perhaps on tonight's show?
yes, that would be like aiming at the lake when playing golf knowing you will always miss your targetQuote: tuppYes. The recent commenters assume that there is only one way to try to influence the dice. Obviously, his methods are different, and methods differ even between the traditional DI schools.
An insightful observation.
Quote: treetopbuddyyes, that would be like aiming at the lake when playing golf knowing you will always miss your target
No. That is an inaccurate golf analogy. There is no intentional "misaiming."
As I see it, the method in question is more analogous to hitting the golf ball so that it always rolls along the ground -- never travelling through mid air. One is still aiming, but it takes more strokes to get there.
Quote: AlanMendelsonThis is why I asked Ahigh to show us his actual set, his grip, his actual arm movement and toss. I don't think he has ever shown anything but the dice hitting the table.
Not sure why you are confused.
The set 4242 set Ahigh describes is straightforward -- it's the "all hardways" set. Furthermore, his toss is shown in some of the videos. In regards to his grip, he describes it in the same post in which he explains his current set.
Quote: AlanMendelsonIf he says he is a dice influencer (well, sometimes he says he isn't and just lucky) then we need to see the whole set and delivery. perhaps on tonight's show?
I don't recall him ever saying that he is a DI. Perhaps you could provide a link to such a post.
In regards to needing to see his whole set and delivery, please speak for yourself -- "we" don't "need" to see anything. "We" are not some sort of court that sits in judgement of those who post here, nor is he obligated reveal something just because a poster demands so. "We" are simply having a discussion on an Internet forum, and some of us are trying to have an orderly and enlightening exchange of ideas, experiences and information.
And again, there is no "need" to see anything, because he has already described everything in detail.
For the first 300 rolls, the set it recommended _was_ the 6262 set.
My software does transforms on roll outcomes to test what the outcome would have been if you had used a different set.
It then tests the strategies that I tell it to test for all 548 possible sets and it tells me which set produced the highest profit.
I do not claim to know anything at all about my bias. I just try to get a bias, any bias, and I let computers to the tuff stuff.
That's the way I do it. That is the way I recommend others try to do it.
I think blind association with set and outcome could easily just be superstition. *IF* you have a biased throw (something I have no proof even exists), what are the chances it's the same bias as the guy who told you what set works for him?
Too many variables IMO.
Quote: tuppNot sure why you are confused.
The set 4242 set Ahigh describes is straightforward -- it's the "all hardways" set. Furthermore, his toss is shown in some of the videos. In regards to his grip, he describes it in the same post in which he explains his current set.
I don't recall him ever saying that he is a DI. Perhaps you could provide a link to such a post.
I missed that. Would you mind providing the link to the post? I can get a 4-2 set with either cross-sixes on the top, or 6-3 on the top.
Quote: tuppIn regards to needing to see his whole set and delivery, please speak for yourself -- "we" don't "need" to see anything. "We" are not some sort of court that sits in judgement of those who post here, nor is he obligated reveal something just because a poster demands so. "We" are simply having a discussion on an Internet forum, and some of us are trying to have an orderly and enlightening exchange of ideas, experiences and information.
And again, there is no "need" to see anything, because he has already described everything in detail.
Ahigh has said that he is "the real deal" and if he is, I'd like to see what his real deal is. By the way, "real deal" is a direct quote.
Quote: AhighYou guys want to BELIEVE you are experts. That much is obvious. All three of you guys (Alan, MrV, and sodawater).
Why not meet me IN PERSON and decide. It's quite possible that your conclusions and beliefs are both wrong.
Until then, I'm the real deal here in Vegas doing EXACTLY what I am showing I am doing, and you guys are just some dudes on the internet making forum posts.
Deluded? Me? It's an idea. It's a suggestion, even. But I doubt it's reality.
And I think it's time for Ahigh to set the record straight:
Ahigh, are you or are you not a dice influencer? Can you throw the dice in a certain way to improve your chances of winning? Do you have a bias when you throw your dice?
Okay tupp, let's wait for Ahigh's response.
Of all the people who claim to be able to have a better than average shot, very few are volunteering for a live performance.
It doesn't bode well for the proof that this is possible!
Quote: AhighWell, my guest shooter cancelled. I'm not going to say who it was. But I do want to make this point:
Of all the people who claim to be able to have a better than average shot, very few are volunteering for a live performance.
It doesn't bode well for the proof that this is possible!
Hello??? Isn't that what some of us have been saying all along? That dice control and dice influencing while good in theory is difficult or impossible in practice?
Quote: AlanMendelsonHello??? Isn't that what some of us have been saying all along? That dice control and dice influencing while good in theory is difficult or impossible in practice?
Yeah, so sorry, Alan. I should have realized this a long time ago. Sometimes it just takes time to realize who the wiser people are.
All this time, and I thought it was easy. Thanks for clearing it up.
Quote: AhighYeah, so sorry, Alan. I should have realized this a long time ago. Sometimes it just takes time to realize who the wiser people are.
All this time, and I thought it was easy. Thanks for clearing it up.
At this point, I don't know if you are being sarcastic. I do want to say that it doesn't hurt to try. If craps is a random game, then anything you do with the dice shouldn't hurt the random results -- but might improve your results. So keep trying. I TRY each and every time I shoot the dice (except at card craps, of course).
Pursue your investigation. Keep practicing. Keep trying. But don't drink the kool-aid.
