Ahigh Show Tuesday at 7:30pm Pacific Time

I just love it when dice setters compare dice setter's skill to Tiger Woods in Golf. Yet refuse to spot me any strokes. The dice setters
on this forum are much closer to Maurice Flitcroft than Tiger Woods.

Quote: AlanMendelson

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.

I already answered this question (multiple time even I think).

Quote: Ahigh

The phrase "so-called DI" means very little to me and I do not consider myself a DI, nor do I use that term in general.

taken from post:

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/tables/12063-why-dice-control-does-not-work/6/#post198829

Quote: Ahigh

Yeah, you know what, I think I do still believe that. I still don't consider myself a "DI" or an AP craps player, really.

taken from post:

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/craps/12072-blew-out-my-bankroll/4/#post199031

I am certain that by your definition of the term "dice influencer" I am not one. I generally think that there is not currently a term that is governed by any body that requires any testing and certification.

The term "DI" to me is an adjective, like "Super."

It's pretty ambiguous in meaning as anybody can apply it to themselves without fear for being inaccurate. IE: it means nothing.

" The term "DI" to me is an adjective, like "Super."

It's pretty ambiguous in meaning as anybody can apply it to themselves without fear for being inaccurate. IE: it means nothing. "

I beg to differ. I enjoy the title of World's Greatest Dice Setter and do not plan to relinquish my well earned title.

Maybe that is one thing that I can do after I get all this stuff figured out, offer certifications for shooters who think that they can perform an advantage throw.

Wouldn't it be nice if you had an instructor teaching you how to throw the dice who actually had some evidence from an unbiased party .. a SCORE even of how effective their techniques are for THEMSELVES in the long run of independent trials on my setup?

Even without proof, having a system of evaluation where you were not allowed to throw out previously recorded samples to come up with a single composite score would be great.

I'm coding up Chi-squared into my software, and it's pretty cool really.

Quote: Buzzard

" The term "DI" to me is an adjective, like "Super."

It's pretty ambiguous in meaning as anybody can apply it to themselves without fear for being inaccurate. IE: it means nothing. "

I beg to differ. I enjoy the title of World's Greatest Dice Setter and do not plan to relinquish my well earned title.

You keep running away from my challenge to take that title from you... man up! ;)

Just waiting for my agent to seal the deal with a Reality TV Producer. Preliminary plan is a challenge between Honey Boo Boo and Ahigh.

Ahigh, since you will not respond to the query about being a "dice influencer" directly, let me put the question to you differently:

do you think you have an advantage throwing the dice that is greater than a random shooter, and what do you attribute this advantage to? Please be specific:

1. do you have an advantage?
2. can you throw the dice with better results than a random shooter?
3. why can you throw the dice with better results than a random shooter?

Quote: AlanMendelson

The 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.

You can't make that assumption. In my last Craps Trip, I saw a lady shooting from Straightout using the 6/5 6/5 Dice Set during the Point Cycle and she was hitting numbers ALL DAY!

I always thought any Dice Set using the Railroad Track Dice Set (6/6) was ALWAYS full of Horns & 7's so I was very hesitant to bet on her roll however after she threw the Dice more than 30 times, I finally relented and bet on her for the last 15 minutes of her 45 minute roll.

She proved me wrong, we can no longer make an assumption that a specific Dice Set is only going to produce a specific set of #'s. I only wish I would have jumped and bet on her roll a lot earlier...

Quote: CrapsForever

You can't make that assumption. In my last Craps Trip, I saw a lady shooting from Straightout using the 6/5 6/5 Dice Set during the Point Cycle and she was hitting numbers ALL DAY!

I always thought any Dice Set using the Railroad Track Dice Set (6/6) was ALWAYS full of Horns & 7's so I was very hesitant to bet on her roll however after she threw the Dice more than 30 times, I finally relented and bet on her for the last 15 minutes of her 45 minute roll.

She proved me wrong, we can no longer make an assumption that a specific Dice Set is only going to produce a specific set of #'s. I only wish I would have jumped and bet on her roll a lot earlier...

I can think of two possible explanations for this:

1. She set her dice but was not a dice influencer and just let them fly. I think just about everybody sets their dice these days but few even attempt to control or influence their throw and bounce.

2. She has studied craps throwing techniques under Ahigh and was the mystery guest who is not showing up tonight.

Quote: AlanMendelson

I can think of two possible explanations for this:

1. She set her dice but was not a dice influencer and just let them fly. I think just about everybody sets their dice these days but few even attempt to control or influence their throw and bounce.

2. She has studied craps throwing techniques under Ahigh and was the mystery guest who is not showing up tonight.

3. The start position of the dice is only one factor in a controlled throw.

Quote: Ahigh

I think several people on here DO get it what I am doing.

Just what, exactly, are you trying to do with the TV show? Can you state it in one sentence or one short paragraph?

Prepare for the March 11th event and make it as fun as possible for all involved. It hasn't been that long ago that I stated all of this when I got jumped on that I was dreaming that the event would be "televised" and/or that "media" would be involved.

There's been plenty of confusion about the terms "televised" and "media" but all I want to do is to have the technical ability to share the March 11th event with the Wizard and Nickolay and SOOPOO present. I hope to have all the necessary things to make a fun event and broadcast it with all the great people who are going to be present for that event.

Since I'm not taking a bet, I'm putting my money into the presentation side.

Quote: thecesspit

3. The start position of the dice is only one factor in a controlled throw.

You're right. There are all sorts of magic spells that magicians can put on a pair of dice. While the rest of the dice influencers of the world are concerned that they keep dice on Axis, I am sure there are a few magicians who say "axis be damned" and can make the dice flip and twist and flop and jump in twenty different directions and still come up with the desired result.

I yield to the powers of magic.

Quote: AlanMendelson

You're right. There are all sorts of magic spells that magicians can put on a pair of dice. While the rest of the dice influencers of the world are concerned that they keep dice on Axis, I am sure there are a few magicians who say "axis be damned" and can make the dice flip and twist and flop and jump in twenty different directions and still come up with the desired result.

I yield to the powers of magic.

No need to be snarky. IF a person could find that X% of their rolls end up with the left dice ending up with the side face upwards, then it would be appropriate to set the dice that way. Maybe all the DI's say it has to be on axis, etc. They say a lot of unbacked up stuff as well.

That said, I still see no testable hypothesis from AHigh, so it's just another pile of electrons out there.

Quote: thecesspit

No need to be snarky. IF a person could find that X% of their rolls end up with the left dice ending up with the side face upwards, then it would be appropriate to set the dice that way.

Indeed those who closely follow "dice influencing" are well aware of dice shifting by one face or two, and there are sets designed to accommodate those "shifts." But -- and let's be honest here -- it all seems rather magical, doesn't it?

Really, what's the difference between "set dice that go off axis so that the left die goes off by two faces up and the right die goes off by one face down and then both dice shift one face to the left" and what a random shooter does when they throw the dice and they bounce all over the place?

If you're going to claim that you can influence the dice, then just show me some simple influence. I'd be happy with the dog jumping over one hurdle. The dog doesn't have to co-star in O at Bellagio and wear a scuba tank, dive from the high board, and do underwater ballet too.

Sure, but also don't insist it has to be a pedigree dog. A mongrel will do just as well if it can make it over the hurdle.

Get rid of the craps table and put in a stripper's pole and feature strippers on your show.

Call yourself a "dick influencer."

Your audience would grow.

Well, not really "grow:" just become tumescent and turgid.

Quote: thecesspit

No need to be snarky. IF a person could find that X% of their rolls end up with the left dice ending up with the side face upwards, then it would be appropriate to set the dice that way.

Not to stoke the flames too much, but being able to make the dice (or even one die) flop over to the side on X% of rolls would yield a *much* stronger advantage than keeping them on axis X% of rolls. Just like sliding, you're basically killing one face.

Quote: thecesspit

Sure, but also don't insist it has to be a pedigree dog. A mongrel will do just as well if it can make it over the hurdle.

I guess you could say the "mongrel" is the random shooter and I've said this over and over again: the best money making hands I've ever been on were shot by players who simply picked up the dice and threw 'em and they bounced all over the place. In fact the very first 6-point fire bet I was ever at was thrown by a random shooter. The first 1-hour hand was thrown by a random shooter. The second one-hour hand was thrown by a random shooter. Come to think of it, the longest hand I was ever on with a guy who set and carefully tossed his dice as if he were a "dice influencer" was that mysterious guy at Caesars who held the dice for about a half hour and I never saw him again. I have never seen a "deliberate shooter" (someone who attempts dice influencing) hold the dice for more than 40 minutes but Ive seen plenty of random shooters do that in 20 years of playing.

Quote: MathExtremist

Not to stoke the flames too much, but being able to make the dice (or even one die) flop over to the side on X% of rolls would yield a *much* stronger advantage than keeping them on axis X% of rolls. Just like sliding, you're basically killing one face.

AMEN MathExtremist !! .... the power of OFF-Axis !! ..... but shhh, don't tell all those On-Axis Car Salesmen and Fiction writers from Canada or that live with their Mother

Quote: Harley

AMEN MathExtremist !! .... the power of OFF-Axis !! ..... but shhh, don't tell all those On-Axis Car Salesmen and Fiction writers from Canada or that live with their Mother

Off-axis results is what I was getting in the session that came up almost all 6-1's.

Maybe I need to look at the video to see what I was doing.

The Chi-squared on the face results was something like .07 on 140 rolls.

Quote: AlanMendelson

I guess you could say the "mongrel" is the random shooter and I've said this over and over again: the best money making hands I've ever been on were shot by players who simply picked up the dice and threw 'em and they bounced all over the place.

Nope the analogy is that the mongrel is not what -you- (and the pedigree club of craps) define as a pretty throw.

Woof.

I must say I do not understand the debate. If in fact you can influence the throw of the dice, you should tell no one and make millions of dollars off of it. It is like the guys you have can't miss stock tips or their"play of the year". Why would they tell anyone since it would dilute their ROI and winnings.

Quote: hook3670

I must say I do not understand the debate. If in fact you can influence the throw of the dice, you should tell no one and make millions of dollars off of it. It is like the guys you have can't miss stock tips or their"play of the year". Why would they tell anyone since it would dilute their ROI and winnings.

You're not the only one who sees things this way.

It's possible there are people not saying anything who are professional craps players and who live off the tables.

I'm not one of them. I am just a guy trying to determine if such a person even exists.

To the best of my knowledge, the greatest craps player was just lucky.

Also, to the best of my knowledge, those who sell lessons on how to make "lifetime earnings" from playing craps have yet to step up to the plate to demonstrate their ability to bet and toss to their own advantage on my table at my house. No interest at all in proving they are not all frauds.

However, if it's possible to AP play the game, I feel like the casinos shouldn't feel threatened unless/until the AP play is threatening their bottom line.

If it's a hobby to demonstrate AP play on craps, one would want to continue to have fun with it instead of taking money from the casino.

For me it's a hobby. The worst thing that could happen to me would be if I won $100,000 and lost my job in the process. I would really need to win $10,000,000 or so for it to be a good thing, and I don't think that's going to happen.

Maybe this helps?

The only reason I would want a casino to lose a ton of money from my throw (right now) even if I *KNEW* I could do it would be if they pissed me off and I wanted to make a point. I wouldn't even want the money myself, either. I have enough problems already.

Quote: Ahigh

It's possible there are people not saying anything who are professional craps players and who live off the tables.

I'm sure there are. Maybe just a few. But how much $$ is it that they are scoring?

Quote: Ahigh

I'm not one of them. I am just a guy trying to determine if such a person even exists.

Like you I hope there is someone out there who really can do it so I can be at their table.

Quote: Ahigh

Also, to the best of my knowledge, those who sell lessons on how to make "lifetime earnings" from playing craps have yet to step up to the plate to demonstrate their ability to bet and toss to their own advantage on my table at my house. No interest at all in proving they are not all frauds.

Would you mind going on the record and telling us who you invited and who refused the invitation?

Quote: hook3670

I must say I do not understand the debate. If in fact you can influence the throw of the dice, you should tell no one and make millions of dollars off of it. It is like the guys you have can't miss stock tips or their"play of the year". Why would they tell anyone since it would dilute their ROI and winnings.

they tell their following to "pump and dump" the stock

Quote: Ahigh

Woof.

picture of my ex-wife

Quote:

AMEN MathExtremist !! .... the power of OFF-Axis !! ..... but shhh, don't tell all those On-Axis Car Salesmen and Fiction writers from Canada or that live with their Mother

Harley is a good example of someone that is always off axis, we were at a table a few years ago, and when he said to me he always had one die that was coming up off axis. So I said what’s the problem with that, here just change your set to this and shoot. His next roll was an 18 roll. There are more sets then the standard ones, but you have to know how to read what is happening on the table and what’s going on with your shooting and the dice!

My good friend Linaway knows more about the dice then anybody I know, and when one of the guys is having problems with their set they are using we will send their rolls stats to him and see what he tells them to do. Most players will never figure out what they are doing wrong when they are shooting if they are DI’s, sure they have some good rolls but they could have better ones just by changing their sets.

I haven’t seen one of these dice programs that can tell you what to do with your sets when you are shooting, they only cover the basic dice sets and if you are having a problem that will not fit into those dice sets you have a problem that you may never over come!

Now I have to give Ahigh credit on the software he is working on, as it will show you different betting strategies for how you are shooting. I even think it may work for the random shooters out there; if when they are shooting have a tendency to repeat certain numbers.

Now I don’t know if this would hold true, as I’ve not seen it in person and had a chance to play with the software. Even the so-called random rollers do repeat certain points when they are shooting.

That is why you can bet on them and still make money off their shooting. I still say that you have to get lucky to beat the game of craps, but you also need to have all the information you can about what you are doing when you are shooting.

Linaway will out perform any computer when it comes to figuring out dice sets to use when a DI is shooting.

A good example of reading the dice was seen at the tables on this pass Sunday by Ahigh when I was shooting. It was the come-out and I made five sevens in a row. He was standing next to me and when I made the first on I told him I was not trying to make 7’s.
I stayed with the same set and made 4 more sevens on the come-out.

Then I change my set for one shot, I established a point, then told them to dump the bowl and went back to using the set I’ve been using all day. Was it bad luck that I was rolling all those 7’s on the come-out and did I need to change my set, you tell me. Doing something differently sometimes will get you out of trouble!

Quote: AlanMendelson

I'm sure there are. Maybe just a few. But how much $$ is it that they are scoring?

A tiny fraction of the total revenue for craps is reasonable, which is $400 million or less for the entire state. With approximately 400 tables, that's an average of a million dollars in revenue per craps table on average or so. So if you take $100,000 off a single table, on average you would be cutting the revenue of that table by 10% for the year on average. It's not hard to extrapolate from there that you're going to need a lot of stupid bets to keep the hold percentages at 10 to 15 percent and be able to take more than $100,000 per table on average without making yourself REALLY obvious.

Source:

http://gaming.unlv.edu/media/longterm_nvgaming.pdf

Quote: AlanMendelson

Like you I hope there is someone out there who really can do it so I can be at their table.

If you can do it, you still need TONS of samples, and the chance you could benefit from 100 or fewer rolls from such a person is no different in general than a random shooter. I think you already knew that, but just in case.

Quote: AlanMendelson

Would you mind going on the record and telling us who you invited and who refused the invitation?

I don't blame anyone for not showing up, but no there's no point or benefit to me or the other person to reveal who it was. It wasn't anybody really well known or anything (like Stanford Wong, etc). Just some dude that I thought has a good shot that I met somewhere.

Here's the link to last night's unannounced show aka not technically a show because it was unannounced, but roll recording session:

http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/29765719

Here's the characterized theoretical bias of my throw after 3000 rolls.

The theory of my bias is holding water. There are two theories: lower than the average number of sevens, and higher than the average number of hardways. But of particular interest is my ability to get 3.4% outcome of the pair on top of my set instead of the expected 2.78% after 3000 rolls.

Last night's roll? 5 hard 8's in the first 23 rolls.

Total rolls: 2998
1) 1020 17.01% - 16.67 = (+0.34)---------------------------------------------------- 1
2) 992 16.54% - 16.67 = (-0.12)-------------------------------------------------- 2
3) 983 16.39% - 16.67 = (-0.27)-------------------------------------------------- 3
4) 1008 16.81% - 16.67 = (+0.14)--------------------------------------------------- 4
5) 1000 16.68% - 16.67 = (+0.01)--------------------------------------------------- 5
6) 993 16.56% - 16.67 = (-0.11)-------------------------------------------------- 6
fw 1020,992,983,1008,1000,993 1020,992,983,1008,1000,993

11: ----------------------------------------------------- 2 (79)
21: ------------------------------------------------------------- 3 (182)
22: ----------------------------------------------------------- 4 (88)
31: --------------------------------------------------------- 4 (169)
32: ------------------------------------------------------- 5 (163)
41: ------------------------------------------------------- 5 (165)
33: -------------------------------------------------------- 6 (83)
42: ----------------------------------------------------- 6 (158)
51: ----------------------------------------------------------- 6 (177)
61: --------------------------------------------------------- 7 (169)
52: ------------------------------------------------- 7 (146)
43: ------------------------------------------------- 7 (146)
53: -------------------------------------------------------- 8 (168)
44: -------------------------------------------------------------------- 8 (102)
62: -------------------------------------------------------- 8 (167)
63: --------------------------------------------------------- 9 (171)
54: ------------------------------------------------------- 9 (163)
55: ------------------------------------------------------------- 10 (91)
64: ---------------------------------------------------------- 10 (172)
65: ------------------------------------------------------- 11 (164)
66: -------------------------------------------------- 12 (75)

2) 79 2.64% - 2.78% = -0.14% (-4.28)-------- 2
3) 182 6.07% - 5.56% = 0.52% (+15.44)------------------- 3
4) 257 8.57% - 8.33% = 0.24% (+7.17)-------------------------- 4
5) 328 10.94% - 11.11% = -0.17% (-5.11)--------------------------------- 5
6) 418 13.94% - 13.89% = 0.05% (+1.61)------------------------------------------ 6
7) 461 15.38% - 16.67% = -1.29% (-38.67)----------------------------------------------- 7
8) 437 14.58% - 13.89% = 0.69% (+20.61)-------------------------------------------- 8
9) 334 11.14% - 11.11% = 0.03% (+0.89)---------------------------------- 9
10) 263 8.77% - 8.33% = 0.44% (+13.17)---------------------------10
11) 164 5.47% - 5.56% = -0.09% (-2.56)-----------------11
12) 75 2.50% - 2.78% = -0.28% (-8.28)--------12
4:7 ratio is 0.557 - 0.500 = +0.057 or +11.50%
5:7 ratio is 0.711 - 0.667 = +0.045 or +6.72%
6:7 ratio is 0.907 - 0.833 = +0.073 or +8.81%
8:7 ratio is 0.948 - 0.833 = +0.115 or +13.75%
9:7 ratio is 0.725 - 0.667 = +0.058 or +8.68%
10:7 ratio is 0.570 - 0.500 = +0.070 or +14.10%

Total sevens 461 - Seven outs 321 (69.63%) - Seven winners 140 (30.37%)
Pairs 518 17.28% - 16.67% = 0.61% (+18.33 rolls)
Hards 364 12.14% - 11.11% = 1.03% (+30.89 rolls)
HiLos 154 5.14% - 5.56% = -0.42% (-12.56 rolls)
H2 79/22 ( 2.64% - 2.78% = -4.28)
H4 88/18 ( 2.94% - 2.78% = +4.72)
H6 83/21 ( 2.77% - 2.78% = -0.28)
H8 102/21 ( 3.40% - 2.78% = +18.72)
H10 91/30 ( 3.04% - 2.78% = +7.72)
H12 75/21 ( 2.50% - 2.78% = -8.28)
No bets

The above statistics are from transforming all roll data as if they were thrown with the same 4242 set (so boxcars become hard 8's in the above data).

The complete original roll data is as follows:

==> aaron_sr1_2012-08-05-1245pm.txt <==
s 6262
a 11`55`32`31`51`51`43`65`62`21`41`41`63`11`55`32`62`63`32`64`62`61`42`21`54`21`21`64`53`64
a 22`44`11`42`52`43`63`51`42`11`11`52`41`41`42`21`64`63`52

==> aaron_sr1_2012-08-07-0833pm.txt <==
s 6262
a 41`63`54`66`63`63`64`41`33`43`64`63`51`52`41`52`42`64`44`32`21`66`11`32`11`22`63`53`43`31
a 21`66`53`53`54`53`65`54`66`65`31`31`52`11`65`22`66`55`43`31`53`44`54`42`64`51`55`21`63`42
a 11`31`21`42`53`41`42`43`42`61`21`64`66`65`52`61`32`62`61`63`63`64`41`65`51`32`53`54`53`62
a 51`62`44`43

==> aaron_sr1_2012-08-08-1006pm.txt <==
s 6262
a 64`42`62`21`22`62`54`42`42`32`62`42`51`51`44`62`65`43`65`33`66`51`33`64`62`55`54`43`32`55
a 51`55`22`62`21`64`41`61`11`62`44`51`63`21`64`52

==> aaron_sr1_2012-08-13-0931pm.txt <==
s 6262
a 33`52`51`32`51`66`32`64`43`54`51`21`64`51`51`53`32`44`63`51`41`63`53`66`65`42`41`44`42`42
a 52`21`31`62`21`44`32`66`32`31`52`52`44`44`33`65`53`22`43`22`51`65`54`53`31`51`53`31`51`43
a 65`31`62`54`53`52`54`53`51`21`42`64`63`55`65`53`22`55`41`33`54`63`51`64`32`61`21`42`43`51
a 63`21`53`63`54`63`53`55`53`41

==> aaron_sr1_2012-09-01-0207pm.txt <==
s 6262
a 53`62`32`42`42`53`61`22`66`61`54`22`43`52`54`43`54`52`61`21`51`42`43`62`41`21`41`54`21`44
a 22`31`32`66`31`64`55`55`65`62`33`33`54`51`54`31`66`41`32`42`42`21`21`22`21`42`11`32`31`11
a 51`42`65`21`42`54`41`52

==> aaron_sr1_2012-09-08-0123pm.txt <==
s 6262
a 43`31`21`55`61`65`51`42`52`32`42`43`33`63`43`21`63`42`61`32`61`44`43`63`32`21`64`44`32`64
a 66`42`52`41`66`31`65`64`33`52`52`42`33`21`22`33`44`21`51`32`41`43`33`31`54`43`55`61`63`51
a 54`53`43`65`66`41`62`43`32`53`21`52`11`54`41`31`41`63`41`51`32`64`51`66`51`63`21`21`21`44
a 31`43`31`64`43`62`53`51`61`41`54`31`55`53`31`63`65`63`32`41`64`31`54`54`53`31`22`43`21`54
a 64`42`61`44`32`61`22`32`33`62`65`52`32`41`66`43`66`42`21`52`54`31`55`65`53`43`63`66`61`65
a 44`65`54`55`22`53`22`63`65`41`51`22`21`61`52`32`62`32`61`66`33`31`66`66`51`52`33`65`51`31
a 52`63`54`65`32`52`65`43`52`42`32`65`54`55`42`32`22`22`41`54`21`31`41`66`21`22`65`61`52`61
a 21`11`32`53`31`22`41`53`55`31`21`53`63`11`41`65`65`54`22`21`53`42`32`42`54`33`31`52`52`53
a 32`52`63`42`53`43`62`11`43`65`65`43`53`32`52

==> aaron_sr1_2012-09-09-0307pm.txt <==
s 6262
a 41`32`11`44`51`61`44`61`21`66`61`53`31`21`64`44`51`54`63`41`64`52`65`54`43`64`21`43`61`52
a 62`63`32`31`54`42`52

==> aaron_sr1_2012-09-09-0803pm.txt <==
s 6262
a 51`22`66`51`64`61`55`52`62`42`51`52`51`63`61`41`43`43`41`63`32`54`21`32`64`52`43`32`66`66
a 42`63`51`61`51`54`21`52`42`53`43`64`54`42`31`21`55`32`41`53`42`44`63`65`64`62`52`63`53`32
a 64`44`65`21`44`31`43`62`41`62`31`32`52`55`44`42`51`44`42`41`11`43`52`31`31`63`21`64`52`63
a 43`63`61`33`54`21`54`61`51`44`54`51`61`41`42`53`41`61`54`41`62`32`53`62`22`51`55`22`41`42
a 62`54`54`42`43`52`61`11`64`21`54`63`32`31`61`22`31`33`66`63`42`66`63`53`51`53`42`53`54`22
a 52`61`64`42`61`41`65`32`61`31`53`41`61`54`66`64`11`21`64`31`11`53`52`62`42`62`42`61`32`65
a 54`66`42`33`54`52`53`42`63`43`32`63`66`42`33`66`53`44`11`54`22`43`64`61`52`11`55`62`64`21
a 51`54`43`32`43`53`32`55`32`11`61`33`62`64`65`41`11`51`43`62`32`64`44`62`64`21`61`42`64`22
a 63`54`65`33`41`43`53`31`51`32`33`53`51`11`63`11

==> aaron_sr1_2012-09-14-1011pm.txt <==
s 1236
a 51`63`54`51`54`51`42`11`53`32`55`53`54`52`62`43`31`22`11`62`64`65`44`53`52`64`31`21`31`53
a 63`42`64`51`51`43`66`63`51`11`66`66`62`51`54`51`65`51`21`42`22`54`32`31`52`43`64`64`43`32
a 54`64`64`55`51`33`53`51`52`51`51`53`65`52`63`54`51

==> aaron_sr1_2012-09-18-1027pm.txt <==
s 6262
a 43`51`21`42`41`32`65`61`61`21`63`36`35`14`42`51`36`63`44`34`21`51`24`61`43`41`21`32`33`34
a 13`54`33`53`62`55`64`15`52`31`31`36`21`62`26`15`31`51`35`25`52`61`41`62`61`53`33`54`53`36
a 66`54`21`44`32`45`52`43`54`64`64`12`11`55`16`65`26`64`64`21`64`16`63`53`61`13`53`42`23`52
a 62`43`43`32`66`65`66`21`23`65`43`55`61`21`53`64`65`45`43`32`64`32`56`41`56`64`31`41`66`22
a 36`66`65`35`21`16`43`53`51`33`61`54`43`52`31`55`23`65`41`56`53`55`66`41`52`53`41`21`11`52
a 42`21`43`42`52`32`61`11`11`31`62`51`62`44`22`55`55`22`31`33`44`55`55`21`54`41`62`21`65`63
a 21`23`55`22`41`52`52`21`21`43`42`41`62`11`61`54`22`62`42`53`53`54`31`52

==> aaron_sr1_2012-09-23-0629pm.txt <==
s 4242
a 11`23`16`53`15`22`12`32`26`35`44`13`14`25`45`64`31`31`46`22`34`42`45`14`35`34`46`13`54`32
a 42`46`42`21`46`11`31`53`45`21`26`25`21`65`61`34`31`55`12`15`54`35`16`12`25`24`33`23`16`64
a 44`31`51`31`33`44`54`62`53`56`51`31`15`65`61`16`31`14`36`61`15`52`13`26`51`11`63`12`62`61
a 15`65`24`12`41`31`56`36`35`32`12`26`42`46`43`33`54`24`11`22`25`14`66`44`33`32`62`63`11`61
a 22`41`13`61`24`51`42`63`22`56`52`53`31`42`25`64`56`22`22`31`46`14`44`45`63`45`42`45`62`46
a 65`24`61`61`52`31`11`62`33`51`21`22`63`26`51`11`43`31`56`11`42`51`35`56`61`46`23`26`42`61
a 14`51`32`33`25`12`42`45`61`33`32`21`66`42`56`32`25`24`53`33`23`54`63`65`44`55`22`42`55`14
a 63`65`25`53`44`15`45`42`55`33`13`45`42`43

==> aaron_sr1_2012-09-23-0858pm.txt <==
s 4242
a 64`33`53`11`53`41`21`22`53`52`62`54`23`62`62`44`31`53`22`62`54`54`11`66`43`31`42`31`22`42
a 54`55`12`23`52`43`51`63`54`12`51`54`44`54`31`31`44`55`62`51`54`61`51`55`43`52`12`43`53`22
a 53`53`55`11`43`66`61`23`41`54`23`55`51`64`41`42`12`64`64`53`53`23`54`56`31`55`33`41`64`12
a 23`31`66`43`32`45`56`62`31`64`44`12`44`31`42`41`51`54`45`31`65`33`44`11`51`51`23`22`65`31
a 63`54`66`31`23`54`33`41`23

==> aaron_sr1_2012-10-10-0840pm.txt <==
s 4242
a 66`65`63`65`61`35`64`32`64`35`61`31`12`12`26`14`13`44`56`65`12`56`44`64`61`41`24`35`22`15
a 31`42`23`53`64`11`61`55`51`51`65`45`34`13`46`36`62`46`61`55`46`24`43`26`65`63`42`32`43`63
a 41`53`24`46`54`35`52`44`52`22`22`54`14`44`31`43`32`54`51`66`13`34`63`53`52`36`12`64`54`56
a 42`34`25`31

==> aaron_sr1_2013-01-13-0917pm.txt <==
s 4242
a 23`13`44`12`62`51`54`21`43`63`64`32`63`22`43`54`65`23`43`53`54`22`64`42`22`63`51`33`52`54
a 62`33`52`64`21`65`65`53`53`41`22`65`62`62`63`42`62`22`61`33`65`43`44`33`32`52`53`43`32`61
a 63`65`31`62`32`54`65`41`63`62`32`61`54`23`41`53`65`54`63`62`65`23`21`66`31`62`31`22`54`21
a 21`43`53`23`55`52`52`62`42`63`63`63`21`51`53`51`66`23`63`41`44`23`42`44`43`63`63`41`61`64
a 23`51`63`53`41`63`41`55`21`42`66`52`42`43`23`62`41`61`63`22`52`21`44`63`51`62`23`61`62`43
a 61`62`51`51`21`53`43`23`23`66`62`53`64`61`52`51`54`62`53`42`43`63`55`52

==> aaron_sr1_2013-01-21-0811pm.txt <==
s 4242
a 23`33`63`64`64`42`43`63`65`65`51`64`53`42`43`63`54`31`62`42`55`41`21`41`22`54`33`51`66`51
a 42`61`43`22`22`21`66`53`52`32`54`43`43`64`42`61`42`63`63`51`62`66`61`22`23`21`63`41`64`51
a 11`44`61`33`54`44`52`65`64`52`41`54`64`53`31`42`65`52`65`23`51`22`42`41`21`51`53`51`62`42
a 33`64`41`44`42`31`51`43`21`22`33`62`42`41`42`23`52`21`53`54`41`21`44`21`54`52`42`51`21`66
a 21`43`64`43`55`23`66`51`42`23`22`52`65`31`64`41`44`52`54`41`65`12`61`43`55`21`12`64`62`52
a 42`63`66`64`31`63`53`63`65`64`33`53`61`41`22`12`23`61`66`41`41`52`53`23`63`62`54`44`41`12
a 54`43`51`42`55`22`65`41`52`53`62`52`62`22`66`12`31`65`64`62

==> aaron_sr1_2013-01-22-0056pm.txt <==
s 4242
a 51`53`31`61`64`23`63`61`31`31`42`33`65`31`53`63`41`61`43`11`11`51`22`55`44`44`61`11`65`61
a 64`51`61`62`52`61`52`52`62`66`61`61`61`21`11`11`63`12`51`54`65`42`31`33`55`22`54`41`64`11
a 55`21`54`65`55`53`51`66`64`23`11`43`52`52`53`41`53`42`21`64`54`41`21`64`63`33`22`41`12`65
a 52`64`42`65`64

==> aaron_sr1_2013-01-22-1056pm.txt <==
s 4242
a 54`21`43`41`43`64`43`21`64`54`53`66`63`33`42`31`52`42`52`53`64`43`62`21`44`51`42`33`31`43
a 64`51`21`43`62`41`33`66`23`63`62`64`13`61`11`23`64`22`42`62`12`44`54`63`33`21`41`52`63`63
a 53`62`55`55`41`51`31`61`63`54`63`54`51`65`31`64`52`55`41`42`63`63`53`64`11`54`66`64`61`51
a 63`44`42`42`41`32`52`64`33`12`44`13`54`22`11`62`43`53`61`41

==> aaron_sr1_2013-01-29-0850pm.txt <==
s 4242
a 63`66`22`31`11`31`61`52`64`31`54`31`61`43`43`51`64`63`63`44`21`11`62`53`61`65`43`64`64`63
a 51`51`23`23`66`53`51`52`51`41`61`43`33`63`64`31`43`43`64`42`54`53`63`52`52`51`66`55`64`65
a 52`33`61`21`65`54`23`42`61`62`41`63`12`63`61`12`54`23`64`44`11`51`23`61`61`53`65`43`42`63
a 62`61`55`65`53`21`66`61`65`12`65`12`55`51`54`61`65`62`62`62`66`53`51`11`44`22`53`61`11`44
a 64`64`31`61`43`42`31`61`12`21`11`42`21`21`41`21`64`41`43`55

==> aaron_sr1_2013-02-05-0904pm.txt <==
s 4242
a 44`43`64`44`54`53`42`64`64`12`51`43`66`65`32`66`11`53`41`43`63`44`41`61`12`13`43`62`63`64
a 12`43`41`54`66`31`51`51`61`51`51`52`65`54`43`11`41`52`61`64`41`43`51`51`63`66`53`64`64`41
a 51`62`51`42`41`42`12`63`51`54`12`55`63`41`12`54`62`42`61`65`52`61`31`51`54`65`23`54`63`23
a 11`41`44`42`42`12`52`55`44`62`43`23`62`54`31`33`33`42`65`41`53`62`64`33`54`51`55`62`61`43
a 43`63`62`52`55`62`51`66`65`64`63`65`55`53`43`23`22`42`53`31`51`63`41`53`64`43`54`54`12`12
a 64`31`31`32`54`63`31`42`54`54`11`55`12`63`13`65`52`53`42`23`42`62`12`31`63`63`51`65`41`64
a 62`63`66`23`63`11`44`33`63`23`31`31`55`64`12`44`42`43`53`53

==> aaron_sr1_2013-02-12-0838pm.txt <==
s 4242
a 11`51`23`62`54`42`52`41`66`64`63`66`55`42`11`51`63`21`62`62`31`55`31`53`43`62`54`63`42`63
a 61`52`63`61`42`31`42`33`52`53`42`55`65`64`31`54`65`63`43`32`12`64`52`65`65`53`42`66`41`61
a 53`62`43`13`51`23`55`61`51`54`61`51`12`64`54`64`32`21`54`31`54`62`66`53`54`31`42`66`61`63
a 61`55`21`31`54`63`42`53`42`52

==> aaron_sr1_2013-02-19-0909pm.txt <==
s 4242
a 53`31`62`41`31`53`22`21`54`63`52`55`62`65`62`61`62`61`31`44`63`41`65`54`64`63`52`54`41`63
a 52`31`44`61`22`31`62`52`64`42`52`31`63`23`31`54`51`55`44`12`62`12`43`41`12`63`54`63`44`11
a 65`41`54`41`65`32`61`31`64`51`12`51`53`51`62`52`53`64`61`53`62`51`41`53`43`64`51`31`65`41
a 61`31`64`42`43`62`41`41`41`43`43`63`44`41`41`22`42`33`63`61`31`53`42`53`21`41`65`65`42`52
a 41`51`21`32`51`65`42`54`62`64`61`64`42`22`21`65

==> aaron_sr1_2013-03-05-0910pm.txt <==
s 4242
a 23`64`44`61`52`64`44`65`31`62`44`52`53`53`63`63`61`63`65`41`41`44`44`61`61`52`41`42`52`65
a 52`62`53`31`65`62`41`33`51`64`51`43`65`64`55`53`22`12`42`22`51`33`55`41`63`32`54`54`52`61
a 43`42`52`33`51`64`11`53`62`54`33`51`61`63`66`53`43`23`31`42`51`53`65`55`54`43`44`11`66`43
a 63`61`43`63`33`21`61`42`62`65`22`11`62`65`55`42`51`65`12`63`54`41`12`46`41`66`12`53`41`51
a 56`56`36`46`62`61`35`44`31`65`12`51`52`22`64`61`63`21`42`62`64`53`64`53`66`51`33`63`61`51
a 41`44`31`53`23`43`43`31`23`12`41`11`61`54`43`42`43`41`41`61`64`61`33`41`31`52`63`54`42`12
a 53`23`51`12`56`52`31`65`61`51`22`21`44`43`55`12`22`33`44`55`41`41`42`31`61`54`44`23`63`61

Is it just me? I can't watch this show at any time. Live or recorded. What is incorrect with my computer system? Anyone? I am told to download Adobe Flash Player. Have it. Using Firefox (latest iteration.) Any clues or advice with my problem appreciated.

EDIT: Nevermind. I am an idiot. Did not realize one had to have a UStream account. All is good now.

Quote: bushman

Is it just me?

I seem to be able to watch OK without sign-up, just not download. Old computer too. Just have to endure an ad!

At some point, I will likely create a custom you tube channel for previous shows.

I don't get ads at all after creating an account, though. I'm not sure if that's from creating an account, or broadcasting from an account, or if because I use Google Chrome with adblock or some combination of those, but in case anybody wants to replicate my environment, that's what I'm doing and I get no ads.

The two short roll hard eights are at 14:00 minute mark if you want something interesting to look at.

The ten minute mark to the 14 minute mark I show the part of my software that advises what set to use.

I'm fortunate that my theoretical bias is so simple I can just put something on top and be more likely to get it.

But as I said in the video, I'm not exploiting my sets in the casino yet. It's WIP.

face____ total hits_ std
1__ 1,020__ 0.72
2__ 992__ -0.25
3__ 983__ -0.57
4__ 1,008_ 0.30
5__ 1,000_ 0.02
6__ 993__ -0.22


The chi square for the test is amazingly random. It's only .86! Thats a chance of randomness of 1 in 1.028.
I think I'm more amazed at the flatness of the data!

The only edge that the player theoretically could get would be on the lay odds bet.

Do you have any other trials that you can share?

Thanks for posting your data set above.

4____ 0.07%
5____ -0.12%
6____ -0.12%

8____ 0.37%
9____ 0.26%
10___ -0.07%

The bias (if I have any) is in the hop data not the face data.

The fact that the face outcomes reveal fair dice further strengthens it's the correlation between the two dice that is responsible for the theoretical throw bias.

This is why I commented to dicesitter that I have no information leading me to believe in Axis theories, although I would love to see some data, I have none of my own.

I may in fact still be just a random roller and waiting for data from a "real DI" as evidence by comments from clearly superior shooters than I.

Outcome	Observed	Expected	Number of Rolls	Chi-squared
ACES	79	83.27777778	2998	0.808349017
ACE-DEUCE	182	166.5555556
HARD 4	88	83.27777778
EASY 4	169	166.5555556
3-2 / FIVE	163	166.5555556
4-1 / FIVE	165	166.5555556
HARD 6	83	83.27777778
4-2 / SIX	158	166.5555556
5-1 / SIX	177	166.5555556
6-1 / SEVEN	169	166.5555556
5-2 / SEVEN	146	166.5555556
4-3 / SEVEN	146	166.5555556
5-3 / EIGHT	168	166.5555556
HARD 8	102	83.27778
6-2 / EIGHT	167	166.5555556
6-3 / NINE	171	166.5555556
5-4 / NINE	163	166.5555556
HARD 10	91	83.27777778
EASY 10	172	166.5555556
YO 11	164	166.5555556
BOXCAR	75	83.27777778

Quote: Ahigh

The fact that the face outcomes reveal fair dice further strengthens it's the correlation between the two dice that is responsible for the theoretical throw bias.

If there's no bias in the dice, then I can't see why adding the two random dice together could be of any value.

Thanks for posting the data.

I fall into the correlation camp according to the way the Wizard views this topic.

https://wizardofodds.com/games/craps/appendix/4/

I hope that helps.

For those following along, I am 100% happy to end my entire craps playing career if there is nobody that can demonstrate even a reasonable hope that a controlled throw may be able to overcome the house edge.

As I get more and more samples, it's appearing that the throw I am currently using is very likely just a random throw!

The idea behind all this equipment is that it's all relatively cheap compared to just gambling and losing to find out I have no game with my throw.

After increasing my bet sizes recently, I lost all the wins I had made up until this point this year.

I've also lost a lot of confidence.

And I have also lost a lot of interest.

In general all of the comments and suggestions from people on this website have only led me to bet more money and then very quickly and subsequently lose.

I guess that, in general, they could be doing me a favor because I absolutely will not continue playing the game as a loser, and I will move on to other things.

eitds

Well, don't give up just yet. There's still the fact that certain controlled throws actually do work. It's just that none of the "siminar bunk" actually works. There's the method that Archie Karas used successfully at Binions (helicopter short shot) on an unpadded table. (Good luck finding such a table these days) There's also the method that the Argentinian player named Leo used to take the Wynn for over 750k. (FYI, the Wynn was very unhappy with him and refused to payout some of the money and they say some people also lost their jobs.)

From the chart above, in 3000 throws it looks like you threw 40 fewer 7s than expected and 40 more hard 8s. Is that not significant, from the math (chi-square?) perspective? I'm asking sincerely, it seems like a relatively big difference from the expected values.

Quote: Keyser

Well, don't give up just yet. There's still the fact that certain controlled throws actually do work. It's just that none of the "siminar bunk" actually works. There's the method that Archie Karas used successfully at Binions (helicopter short shot) on an unpadded table. (Good luck finding such a table these days) There's also the method that the Argentinian player named Leo used to take the Wynn for over 750k. (FYI, the Wynn was very unhappy with him and refused to payout some of the money and they say some people also lost their jobs.)

The equipment is all still good, but I may be resigned to saying my throw only yields good results on a short throw, which will not be tolerated for any sizable amount of money anyway.

There are plenty of witnesses and evidence to my throws that lead to hard 8's on my current set and throw, and I can accomplish it from multiple shooting locations.

But I just don't know how exploitable that is. There may be an edge there that requires too much patience for me.

Honestly, I want to go in and win fast with big bets. I understand that's impossible, but the closer I can get to that the better.

I am not really up for grinding and trying to stay awake and focused enough not to lose.

My best analysis says that grinding the buy on the four with a 2323 set is a good possibility. But I have to have a whole lot of push throws and frankly I get bored!

Maybe if it's $500 on the four instead of $25 it wouldn't be so boring, I don't know.

But I'm broke now and not happy.

If you just look at the hard 8 to sevens ratio, I have 102 hard 8's and 461 sevens. Expected numbers are 83.2778 and 499. Chi-squared on just those samples is 0.007696.

So isolating that part does not look random.

But how do I exploit that? A Crapless buy on the 12 with a boxcar set? That may be the way to go... But for now, and again, I am broke. Maybe I will do $50 buy-ins on crapless and try to boot-strap myself that way with a $50 loss per session.

It really annoys me that I lost all my wins this year trying to take advantage of a lower seven ratio, only to find out after losing and coming home and shooting that my seven ratio is pathetic! I'm sure it's just random that it's so pathetic!

Ahigh,

I was simply referring to the bias aspect of the dice, and not your controlled throwing skills. I haven't taken the time, as of yet, to study how well you actually controlled the dice. Actual data is always interesting. Thanks for taking the time to share the data.

Below is a link that you might find interesting as well. I found it just last night. http://www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/That's_How_I_Roll_-_A_Scientific_Analysis_of_Dice

For my recorded roll data, I don't see any bias to the dice to be clear.

There was the one session where the 140 rolls looked like biased dice to onlookers during that show.

I still don't know that I believe that as it wasn't enough rolls recorded.

I still don't know that I believe Harley's theories about biased dice either, also because there are not enough samples.

I will need at least 10,000 throws before I can have any serious confidence in what I am doing. Hopefully the video will let me go back and see what's going on for specific instances of what might be a biased throw, but even that I just don't know if it's all a waste of time or not.

But for now, I will keep recording at home.

I promised the Wizard I would record my rolls in the casino, and I have found that I can't do it and still throw with the same focus I normally have.

Every time I record rolls, I seem to lose quickly as I am recording, and I revert back to putting that stuff in my pocket and doing what I have years of experience with .. which is a physical motor memory routine that has seemed to work for me at lower denomination bets.

I do use strategies that increase and decrease my bet amounts. Strategies that I have not disclosed to anyone in my shows or online.

It may be that I am depending heavily on those strategies with a large enough bankroll to win, and that it doesn't have anything to do with my throw at all.

Time will tell.

Quote: AndyGB

From the chart above, in 3000 throws it looks like you threw 40 fewer 7s than expected and 40 more hard 8s. Is that not significant, from the math (chi-square?) perspective? I'm asking sincerely, it seems like a relatively big difference from the expected values.

If you just look at the hard 8 to sevens ratio, I have 102 hard 8's and 461 sevens. Expected numbers are 83.2778 and 499. Chi-squared on just those samples is 0.007696.

Yeah, that part isn't random if you isolate it.

Boxcar set and buy the 12 on the grind on crapless is the best exploit for this form of non-randomness.

Unfortunately, the good crapless tables in Vegas have limited hours of operation and they are not tables like the table I have at home.

But also capitalizing on a 2323 set, which transforms hard 8 to hard 4 and transforms ace-deuce to easy four, I still have a chi-squared of 0.020051 with a 193 fours to 461 sevens or .418655 instead of the expected 0.50000.

I think that's a 16% advantage on the fours to seven ratio, which works out to about 4% edge per roll or a little lower.

I have had limited success with the 2323 set. I hit a $100 odds bet last week on the four using this set (it rolled 3-1).

Normally that ace-deuce outcome with the hard eight set HAUNTS me!!! It's nice to put it to use for the purposes of good rather than evil.

I have rolled ace-deuce into a $750 come bet before(!!!)

Quote: AndyGB

From the chart above, in 3000 throws it looks like you threw 40 fewer 7s than expected and 40 more hard 8s.
Is that not significant, from the math (chi-square?) perspective?

The chi-square test answers the null hypotheses question (yes or no)
Do the results from these rolls (all of them) show that they came from random dice rolls?
If yes (from the p-value or the x² statistic)
then
the No is the result for the alternative hypothesis
Do the results show that they are not from random dice rolls?
re-did the results (i did not catch the data Ahigh posted was not actual so I had to run the rolls)

For the 11 totals of 2 thru 12
statistic: 11.75
p value: 0.302296973

We know the statistical significance by the degree of certainty (less than 5% or better, less than 1%)
All the p-values are higher than 30%.
Results are random. No evidence showing they are not random
Next

Quote: AndyGB

I'm asking sincerely, it seems like a relatively big difference from the expected values.

Nice question

the math.

For the 7 we expect ~500 (2998/6) and observed 463 for a difference of 37
The standard deviation is the square root (2998*(1/6)*(5/6)) = ~20.4
37/20.4 = 1.81SD or ~3.7% or 1 in 27 for 463 7s or less.

No statistical evidence IMO that this result is anything but a result from random events. 1 in 27
not 1 in 270 or 1 in 2,700, just 1 in 27 (~37,000 out of 1 million by just random rolls)

Even if you looked at the 3k rolls by sets of 500, there are a few 500 roll sets that are higher than 1/6 (16.67%) for the 7.
Any statistical difference we see there?
============================================
For the Hard8 we expect ~83 (2998/36) and observed 95 for a difference of 12
The standard deviation is the square root (2998*(1/36)*(35/36)) = ~9
12/9 = 1.3SD or about 1 in 10.
Fantastic
The same results for each set of 500 on the H8 also. A few sets of 500 were at or below 1/36

IMO, No statistical evidence that this result is anything but a result that could be from random events

It would be more impressive if these stats came from a real casino.
But that will not happen.

Quote: 7craps

The chi-square test answers the null hypotheses question (yes or no)
Do the results from these rolls (all of them) show that they came from random dice rolls?
...

IMO, No statistical evidence that this result is anything but a result that could be from random events.

Thanks for showing this math, including the standard deviations and all. Ahigh, are you going to keep tracking for 7k more rolls?

Assuming that I don't give up altogether, I will.

I've invested a lot of money into my craps setup at home. Even if there are no viewers, I plan to broadcast all my rolls on Ustream for evidence of my roll data.

I will probably get to 10,000 rolls by September. Maybe sooner if I go into recording rolls more frequently. Doing it all myself, I do about 100 rolls in 40 minutes at a normal pace. So 4,000 minutes for 10,000 rolls, it's about a week's worth of work at full time. So I could just take off from work for a week and get it done right away, I guess.

Quote: 7craps

It would be more impressive if these stats came from a real casino.
But that will not happen.

I take a little bit of issue with this statement. You know what, I also take issue with the Wizard's position on this too: in order to prove it, I have to show the money I made. Sort of the same meme.

Here's my counter, though. If I were claiming to do this in the casino and I wanted to lie, I could fake the data, and I could fake the money too, and nobody would be able to prove otherwise.

Half of the battle of proof is credibility. And I'm telling you that I am already financially capable with or without craps play adding to my bottom line.

It would be LESS impressive to me if these stats came from the casino because there would not be a live video broadcast and there were not be any evidence of what exactly happened on each and every roll.

There's a lot of video to go along with all of these throws.

So my response to "it would be more impressive" is that it would be more likely questionable.

I have worked very diligently to have credibility, and I tell it like it is. Whether I am winning or losing. Whether I am rolling well or not, I let you know how things are going and I am up front about it.

It's simple why I am able to do this: it really makes no difference to me if this turns out to work or not. There are plenty of other things that I could be doing. In truthful fact, there are lots of things I would rather be doing than this stuff, which in my opinion, it is a hobby, but it's very much like work that I am doing without compensation due to the technical nature.

When I get responses like "this means nothing because it's not in the casino" it just tells me that you don't understand how much like a casino my lab is. It is absolutely like the casinos that I go to here in general in terms of my expected performance.

So I respectfully disagree about how impressive it is relative to someone else who has stats from a casino without video tape and without any substantial proof or reputation worthy to believe.

Lots of people who have met me can hopefully respect the fact that if I have one thing going for me, it is credibility that I am presenting all of my rolls whether they go my way or not, I decide before I get started if I am recording rolls or not, and if I record rolls, it gets logged regardless.

That's going to matter a lot more than being in a casino or not. It's easy to go into a casino and win and report back that you won and just not report back when you didn't win on other casino trips. Just keep your bankroll in cash and don't do ATM transactions at the casino and who can prove what?