Ahigh Show Tuesday at 7:30pm Pacific Time

Quote: Buzzard

I admit it to totally unskilled. Will throw dice over my shoulder, between legs, whatever. Cause it just does not matter.

You best add 'casino legal'. I'd hate to see you get blanket rolled and then complain if you lose the bet :)

Quote: Buzzard

We are betting $100 each , are we not ? I am math illiterate, but figure SOOPOO usually has the best of it.

I see, so you will not be giving your side of the wager to a third party in good faith (as I have), and you won't face how your previous statement relates to fact.

Quote: Buzzard

Now, Mister Dice Setter, what odds are you willing lay against me, heads up, you and I trying to roll a specied number, or not a number, in 100 rolls ?

I will bet nothing on you shooting against me shooting. But I happily will bet that someone who I feel can influence dice will beat expected outcomes.

Screw betting against some mathematical formula. Can any dice setter beat me, that is the question !

Buzzard, you should facetime call into the show. It would be awesome to have you present.

My facetime number is 702-305-7161 also aaron.hightower at icloud may work. (I'm not putting in the link so robots don't start e-mailing me).

But if you call in, it could be fun to hear your perspectives on why this is completely ridiculous to pursue this quest that I am on and help put a face to the name that is so frequently pouring doubts on the scene.

Quote: Buzzard

Screw betting against some mathematical formula. Can any dice setter beat me, that is the question !

No. The question is: Can someone influence the dice so that the results are better than expected?

Craps has a low edge when you bet smart. You can expect not to lose much money at all if you choose smart bets and know what you're doing.

That is half of the problem, though. You can just get lucky. And that gives fuel to the critics that this is all that is happening.

Quote: tupp

No. The question is: Can someone influence the dice so that the results are better than expected?

No The question is a dice setter better than an untalented fool, namely me !

Hightower, I'm planning on tuning in for a bit. Can you promise me you will be wearing a shirt.

Alright, but just since you're tuning in. There's a dealer at the Silverton who claims to have given me credit for the idea of having a show.

He has been making this joke for years talking about putting on a show.

But he refers to it as the "HIGHTOWER POWER HOUR." Then he laughs his ass off because he thinks it is hilarious.

Anyway, I'll make sure that if anybody is topless, it will not be me.

Remove rings before dishwashing so water doesn’t get trapped beneath them. And if you’d like to improve the look and feel of your hands while you’re dishwashing, try Dawn® Hand Renewal with Olay® Beauty. It improves the look and feel of your hands in just five dish washes along with the grease-fighting power you need. Be sure to dry hands thoroughly but gently after you finish the job, too, to keep skin looking soft and smooth.

Quote: sodawater

Remove rings before dishwashing so water doesn’t get trapped beneath them. And if you’d like to improve the look and feel of your hands while you’re dishwashing, try Dawn® Hand Renewal with Olay® Beauty. It improves the look and feel of your hands in just five dish washes along with the grease-fighting power you need. Be sure to dry hands thoroughly but gently after you finish the job, too, to keep skin looking soft and smooth.

Now your handle makes perfect sense to me. And I was thinking seltzer all this time.

If you're curious about the dishes being washed, the dishwasher broke, and I bought a new one. The next day I bought a new garbage disposal. Just yesterday I installed a switch for the garbage disposal on the sink (and air-activated disposal switch from in-sink-erator).

If you are truly interested in this stuff, we could take a break and show you around!

Quote: sodawater

Be sure to dry hands thoroughly but gently after you finish the job, too, to keep skin looking soft and smooth.

Hang up dish towel, watch Day of Our Lives while
painting toenails scarlet.

Quote: superrick

I'll try to put it in a way that you might understand, I'm not about to call any casino and tell them I'm here to take your money, because I wouldn't want to embarrass myself if that didn't happen. That's the problem with being a so-called DI. They don't win every time they hit a casino. I don't want to be hassled when I'm shooting by every casino in Vegas if I get on a roll because you showed my face on your show. Now you or the guy that is going to shoot for your show may not think that's its a big deal to have your face plastered in every security room there is in Vegas, but I don't want that honor!

The thing I'll take issue with is this: I have not been barred from playing anywhere. Even the Gold Coast. I have had over $1000 on the tables at the Gold Coast and while they watched me very closely, they were EXTREMELY polite and also very interested in the things that I told them about what I am doing. Carl is the boxman that I talk to the most over there, and I love going back and forth with him, and he loves watching to make sure I don't pull any questionable rolls on him. Wenda is also very friendly. No problems, and they love having me play, and they feed me at Fridays every time I have asked them! I'm not 100% sure, but I think I'm winning against them, but not more than a grand.

The idea that they are plastering my image on the walls in security doesn't bother me as long as they let me play and play fair, no worries at all!!!

Quote: superrick

I offered once before to help you out with your shooting, but you turned the offer down by saying that you knew more then the other so-called DI's, that live in Vegas. I even gave you my phone number to set something up, but your ego got in the way of that happening.

I honestly do not have anything that I want to learn from you Rick. It's not a slight, just I'm not aware of anything you have to offer to me.

When I saw you shoot, I saw you do several different throw types and sets. I highly doubt you are able to keep all the variables that you have going on in your shot straight in your head. I have one shot that I use for the most part, and that's hard enough. I think you may, in fact, be losing and in denial about it, or just lucky. But after watching you bet hop bets, I lost interest in getting help from you honestly.

Your arrogance in telling me what to do at the Silverton in front of the dealers that I know better than you and your position of authority generally made me feel like I don't really want to play with you at all.

The last time I ever saw you the last thing you did was tell me to write down rolls on your history log while you went to the can.

The dealer (Tim), at that time, remarked, "I thought he was going to turn you into his secretary."

Yeah. Awesome, and thanks!!!

Quote: superrick

They have been trying to prove that there are DI's for years now and guess what; nobody is stepping up to the plate, to put on a show for everybody. I much rather stay in the background watching what you are doing, and wondering just how many casino security departments will be watching to see if they can spot any player that they should be watching when they are in their casinos!

I'm not worried. I could care less if I get banned from any casino because I'm not a professional gambler and hope to never be one either. But the joke is on your guys. I think the belief that a craps player is going to get turned away for taking a couple hundred bucks is just something to make someone else believe that they have something that they don't: a skilled shot.

Quote: superrick

If you want to feel the heat, from the casinos you are playing at the wrong ones. Why don't you take you little show on the road to Gold Coast, South Point or Tuscany. If you do manage to get on a roll when they have a highroller there I'm sure that they would have a different out look then the Wynn. Now you won't have the table dumping thousands in those casinos, but if the table is dumping anything, you might find that you have a problem. Call ahead and tell them you are coming you might give them something to laugh at for years to come.

Gold Coast loves to count beans and sweat small action: agreed. And South Point isn't double odds for no reason. They are chickens! Still, I go to both places and I have nothing but respect from those guys even after telling them anything they want to know about what I am doing.

Quote: superrick

Ahigh take a walk over to the Fremount the next time you are down town, look at their wall with all those guys and girls that had 60 rolls, they are immortalized on a wall display a few feet from the craps area. Big deal, do you know why? That's because most of those shooters were what everybody calls random rollers, that got lucky!

Fremont and California Club shooters are almost 100% Hawaiian. Whether they are any good or not doesn't matter to me. They rate people by units of time. I'd much rather see a roll count and a frequency chart of faces and outcomes like what my software provides. Time means nothing.

Quote: superrick

The DI's try to tell everybody they are special, their fiction writers tell them, if they want to win money the only way to do it, is to never bet on any other players. I love to read the BS they write, then pick it apart, just in case you didn't know it. So my answer to you would be I'm sorry but you will not see my face on a video. My offer still stands about helping you out with your shooting, but I don't think you would listen to what I had to say about it anyway, you are so convinced that you are a dice influencer I don't think that anybody could convince you that your shooting is nothing more then random.

For you to help me with my shooting, I would have to take the position that you're better at shooting than I am. I have no reason to believe that. Convince me that you're a better shot than me, and maybe I will be interested. Rick, you just love to go on and on preaching down to people like you are superior. It turns me off is all. I don't want to learn from someone like you. If anything, you could learn from someone like me. But you'd have to humble yourself first. I don't want to be around you at all because you treat me like a little stupid kid.

Quote: superrick

The main thing that I know you are getting out of this whole thing is you are the center of everybody's attention, some times for the wrong reasons. Please keep up the good work of proving that everybody is random with your slow motion videos.
Now let me ask you one quick question, today are you an dice influencer, or just a random roller? Every time you write something you keep jumping back and forth. The same thing goes for your balancer, one time it's the best there is and the next time it's not and you're are not going to waste you time proving anything. My, my, my just think you wasted over $2000, trying to prove that you were the best, you had the best balancer that mankind ever built, but now you admit defeat!

I'm someone who's doing research. I have no conclusions if I have bias to my shot or not. You have access to all the data that I have. So maybe you could tell me since you know so much. You have to add up the numbers in my recorded rolls for it to make sense to the numbers that you analyze. Otherwise you've got a couple thousand of my rolls. So why not you tell me? The guys on here say it looks random after looking at it. But I'm trying to develop a single consistent shot. Last time I watched you it looked like you had four shots and five sets. I can't imagine dealing with that complexity, but you're the master!

As far as the balancer, it absolutely shows the die is off balance. The balancer is damn sensitive and it can tell when something is balanced when nothing else can. But most often, the amount of imbalance it shows is not enough to make a hill of beans difference to anything at all.

The corner wear makes the bigger difference.

As far as the joke, the joke is on Harley, you, and on Koga. Especially Koga. When I watch Koga's videos and your videos, to me, it's really obvious how limited the ability to analyze what is going on you guys have. It's really pretty sad to be honest. I wouldn't be bringing this up, but both of you guys have made issues with me talking behind my back instead of working with me. It's my opinion that you and Koga make videos that are pretty low quality and lead to no value whatsoever at arriving at any conclusions.

Quote: superrick

Most people call this tough love when they tell their kids what they are doing is wrong, but I know that your take it in a negative way no matter how anybody tells you that you have a problem with what you are doing. I'm sure the guys will tell me all about your next show so I don't have to watch it, lets see what they can spot this time, if you are shooting! Please do some more slow motion live if you have the time.

I'm really sorry for digging in to you and Koga. But you guys should really just get off my back. It's annoying for you guys to criticize what I'm doing and try to marginalize it as it goes against what you're doing. If you want to say all I'm doing is proving that rolls are random, at least just say that's your opinion. But you present it like you are some kind of genius.

You're not. You are just somebody who wants more respect than you deserve for what you're doing who seeks attention of your own by attacking other people who have things to say that you choose to disagree with. In essence, you are riding on the coattails of others to bring more attention to yourself and at the same time claiming those that you are lifting a ride from are seeking the attention.

I think it is you that seeks the attention. I can't think of a single thing besides betting the four and ten for a quarter that you've really taught me. But you think in your head like you're a big mentor or something of mine and that maybe I learned everything I know from you.

It's damn annoying. I would take it more personally if I didn't already know how you are about this kind of thing from your clinging to every word that comes out of the Mad Professor's posts and trying to give your two cents on them.

Quote: Ahigh

and while they watched me very closely, they were EXTREMELY polite and also very interested in the things that I told them about what I am doing. .

Why would you do that? Do you have a death
wish? You are obviously no threat to any casino,
but if you eventually are, you're certainly laying
the groundwork for getting kicked out. Why do
you need all the attention, I don't get it.

Quote: tupp

No. The question is: Can someone influence the dice so that the results are better than expected?

Buzz-- tupp is correct. A 'dice influencer' would claim to be able to beat an expected value, not the random value you would obtain. If the DI rolled 13 7's out of 100, he would consider it a success, even if you luckily randomly rolled 12.

Quote: EvenBob

Why would you do that? Do you have a death
wish? You are obviously no threat to any casino,
but if you eventually are, you're certainly laying
the groundwork for getting kicked out. Why do
you need all the attention, I don't get it.

First off, the money doesn't even have to come from the casino. I can bet against the money on the felt while I am shooting.

But the shorter answer is that I am not worried, that's why.

Every casino that I go in to has absolutely NO PROBLEMS taking my action, and I don't see that EVER changing no matter HOW MUCH I BET.

People like SuperRick who are paranoid are either just paranoid or they are kidding themselves thinking that the casinos think about them that much playing dice.

It's really a joke to me, honestly.

I bet tiny, but Super Rick bets smaller than I do every time I watched him play.

His musings about casinos worrying about my action are interesting, but I don't think I am worrying anyone.

There was one time I had $20,600 on the rail at a $5 table, and the boxman was visibly shaking. But if it had been the Wynn it wouldn't have been like that.

I've already seen plenty of action at the Wynn to know they can handle it.

Well hell you have me intrigued. I enjoy craps and have been an avid player for a loooong time. I look forward to your show and learning what I can.

Quote: SOOPOO

Buzz-- tupp is correct. A 'dice influencer' would claim to be able to beat an expected value, not the random value you would obtain. If the DI rolled 13 7's out of 100, he would consider it a success, even if you luckily randomly rolled 12.

my random value should be less than a dice setter in a series of test, or well, his is just random too. NO SKILL INVOLVED

Quote: Buzzard

my random value should be less than a dice setter in a series of test, or well, his is just random too. NO SKILL INVOLVED

Should... Not will.

WILL Thats why i am getting no takers Money talks and bullshit walks.

Quote: Buzzard

WILL Thats why i am getting no takers Money talks and bullshit walks.

I am surprised a man like you doesn't understand random variables. The best horse doesn't always win, the favoured football team sometimes loses.

No influencer has stated that they can roll exactly X every single time. You seem to believe that is what they are saying.

Watching your show right now. No offense, you are just another random shooter though I still believe someone out there who can
influence dice. By the way, why do you have something like this in your Perl code:
@a = (0,1,2,3,4,5,6);
@b = (0,1,2,3,4,5,6);

Instead of
@a = (0,1,2,3,4,5,6);
@b = @a;
?
Lastly, I'm very impressed by your passion in Craps. Good luck!

I watched for 6min and realized again why I loathe
craps so much. Thanks for that, anyway..

Using set 4242 starting at roll 0
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
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
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
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
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
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
62`63`66`23`63`11`44`33`63`23`31`31`55`64`12`44`42`43`53`53
Total rolls: 200
1) 67 16.75% - 16.67 = (+0.08)--------------------------------------------------- 1
2) 52 13.00% - 16.67 = (-3.67)--------------------------------------- 2
3) 68 17.00% - 16.67 = (+0.33)--------------------------------------------------- 3
4) 78 19.50% - 16.67 = (+2.83)----------------------------------------------------------- 4
5) 68 17.00% - 16.67 = (+0.33)--------------------------------------------------- 5
6) 67 16.75% - 16.67 = (+0.08)--------------------------------------------------- 6
fw 67,52,68,78,68,67 67,52,68,78,68,67

11: ---------- 2
21: ------------ 3
22: -- 4
31: ------------ 4
32: --------- 5
41: ------------ 5
33: -------- 6
42: ------------ 6
51: --------------- 6
61: ------ 7
52: ------ 7
43: ------------- 7
53: ---------- 8
44: -------------- 8
62: ----------- 8
63: ---------------- 9
54: -------------- 9
55: -------------- 10
64: ------------- 10
65: --------- 11
66: ------------ 12
Killing -9736

2) 5 2.50% - 2.78% = -0.28% (-0.56)-------- 2
3) 12 6.00% - 5.56% = 0.44% (+0.89)------------------- 3
4) 13 6.50% - 8.33% = -1.83% (-3.67)-------------------- 4
5) 21 10.50% - 11.11% = -0.61% (-1.22)-------------------------------- 5
6) 31 15.50% - 13.89% = 1.61% (+3.22)----------------------------------------------- 6
7) 25 12.50% - 16.67% = -4.17% (-8.33)-------------------------------------- 7
8) 28 14.00% - 13.89% = 0.11% (+0.22)------------------------------------------ 8
9) 30 15.00% - 11.11% = 3.89% (+7.78)--------------------------------------------- 9
10) 20 10.00% - 8.33% = 1.67% (+3.33)------------------------------10
11) 9 4.50% - 5.56% = -1.06% (-2.11)--------------11
12) 6 3.00% - 2.78% = 0.22% (+0.44)---------12

Total sevens 25 - Seven outs 17 (68.00%) - Seven winners 8 (32.00%)
Pairs 30 15.00% - 16.67% = -1.67% (-3.33 rolls)
Hards 19 9.50% - 11.11% = -1.61% (-3.22 rolls)
HiLos 11 5.50% - 5.56% = -0.06% (-0.11 rolls)
H2 5/1 ( 2.50% - 2.78% = -0.56)
H4 1/0 ( 0.50% - 2.78% = -4.56)
H6 4/0 ( 2.00% - 2.78% = -1.56)
H8 7/1 ( 3.50% - 2.78% = +1.44)
H10 7/2 ( 3.50% - 2.78% = +1.44)
H12 6/1 ( 3.00% - 2.78% = +0.44)



My hardways strategy failed, but this is the WOV, so nobody cares about those anyway. Above are the charts for 10x odds with varying numbers of points covered.

Here is the result of just taking the distribution of faces that I got and applying that to the random number generator for 100,000 rolls.

Total rolls: 100000
1) 33567 16.78% - 16.67 = (+0.12)--------------------------------------------------- 1
2) 25890 12.95% - 16.67 = (-3.72)--------------------------------------- 2
3) 34152 17.08% - 16.67 = (+0.41)---------------------------------------------------- 3
4) 39105 19.55% - 16.67 = (+2.89)----------------------------------------------------------- 4
5) 33827 16.91% - 16.67 = (+0.25)--------------------------------------------------- 5
6) 33459 16.73% - 16.67 = (+0.06)--------------------------------------------------- 6

2) 2814 2.81% - 2.78% = 0.04% (+36.22)--------- 2
3) 4343 4.34% - 5.56% = -1.21% (-1212.56)-------------- 3
4) 7474 7.47% - 8.33% = -0.86% (-859.33)----------------------- 4
5) 11016 11.02% - 11.11% = -0.10% (-95.11)---------------------------------- 5
6) 13582 13.58% - 13.89% = -0.31% (-306.89)----------------------------------------- 6
7) 16553 16.55% - 16.67% = -0.11% (-113.67)-------------------------------------------------- 7
8) 13973 13.97% - 13.89% = 0.08% (+84.11)------------------------------------------ 8
9) 12480 12.48% - 11.11% = 1.37% (+1368.89)-------------------------------------- 9
10) 9234 9.23% - 8.33% = 0.90% (+900.67)----------------------------10
11) 5700 5.70% - 5.56% = 0.14% (+144.44)------------------11
12) 2831 2.83% - 2.78% = 0.05% (+53.22)---------12

Total sevens 16553 - Seven outs 11709 (70.74%) - Seven winners 4844 (29.26%)
Pairs 16810 16.81% - 16.67% = 0.14% (+143.33 rolls)
Hards 11165 11.16% - 11.11% = 0.05% (+53.89 rolls)
HiLos 5645 5.64% - 5.56% = 0.09% (+89.44 rolls)
H2 2814/791 ( 2.81% - 2.78% = +36.22)
H4 1683/503 ( 1.68% - 2.78% = -1094.78)
H6 2915/844 ( 2.92% - 2.78% = +137.22)
H8 3820/1171 ( 3.82% - 2.78% = +1042.22)
H10 2747/849 ( 2.75% - 2.78% = -30.78)
H12 2831/823 ( 2.83% - 2.78% = +53.22)



I wouldn't be surprised if you don't follow what I'm saying, but notice that the frequency of face outcomes in these two graphs are the same. The second set of 100,000 rolls of data was generated from a random number generator that generates random numbers between 1 and 6 for each die outcome with a frequency from the chart on the first graph. So the percentage of sevens was random, yet the strategy still beat the edge because it had more 4's and fewer 2's.

Here is all of my roll data to date:

Using set 6262 starting at roll 0
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
22`44`11`42`52`43`63`51`42`11`11`52`41`41`42`21`64`63`52
Using set 6262 starting at roll 49
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
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
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
51`62`44`43
Using set 6262 starting at roll 143
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
51`55`22`62`21`64`41`61`11`62`44`51`63`21`64`52
Using set 6262 starting at roll 189
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
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
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
63`21`53`63`54`63`53`55`53`41
Using set 6262 starting at roll 289
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
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
51`42`65`21`42`54`41`52
Using set 6262 starting at roll 357
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
32`52`63`42`53`43`62`11`43`65`65`43`53`32`52
Using set 6262 starting at roll 612
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
62`63`32`31`54`42`52
Using set 6262 starting at roll 649
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
63`54`65`33`41`43`53`31`51`32`33`53`51`11`63`11
Using set 1236 starting at roll 905
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
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
54`64`64`55`51`33`53`51`52`51`51`53`65`52`63`54`51
Using set 6262 starting at roll 982
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
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
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
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
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
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
21`23`55`22`41`52`52`21`21`43`42`41`62`11`61`54`22`62`42`53`53`54`31`52
Using set 4242 starting at roll 1186
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
63`65`25`53`44`15`45`42`55`33`13`45`42`43
Using set 4242 starting at roll 1410
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
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
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
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
63`54`66`31`23`54`33`41`23
Using set 4242 starting at roll 1539
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
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
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
42`34`25`31
Using set 4242 starting at roll 1633
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
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
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
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
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
61`62`51`51`21`53`43`23`23`66`62`53`64`61`52`51`54`62`53`42`43`63`55`52
Using set 4242 starting at roll 1807
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
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
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
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
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
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
54`43`51`42`55`22`65`41`52`53`62`52`62`22`66`12`31`65`64`62
Using set 4242 starting at roll 2007
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
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
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
52`64`42`65`64
Using set 4242 starting at roll 2102
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
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
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
63`44`42`42`41`32`52`64`33`12`44`13`54`22`11`62`43`53`61`41
Using set 4242 starting at roll 2212
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
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
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
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
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
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
62`63`66`23`63`11`44`33`63`23`31`31`55`64`12`44`42`43`53`53
Total rolls: 2412
1) 791 16.40% - 16.67 = (-0.27)-------------------------------------------------- 1
2) 823 17.06% - 16.67 = (+0.39)---------------------------------------------------- 2
3) 798 16.54% - 16.67 = (-0.12)-------------------------------------------------- 3
4) 835 17.31% - 16.67 = (+0.64)---------------------------------------------------- 4
5) 813 16.85% - 16.67 = (+0.19)--------------------------------------------------- 5
6) 764 15.84% - 16.67 = (-0.83)------------------------------------------------ 6

2) 64 2.65% - 2.78% = -0.12% (-3.00)-------- 2
3) 150 6.22% - 5.56% = 0.66% (+16.00)------------------- 3
4) 205 8.50% - 8.33% = 0.17% (+4.00)-------------------------- 4
5) 261 10.82% - 11.11% = -0.29% (-7.00)--------------------------------- 5
6) 359 14.88% - 13.89% = 1.00% (+24.00)--------------------------------------------- 6
7) 361 14.97% - 16.67% = -1.70% (-41.00)--------------------------------------------- 7
8) 329 13.64% - 13.89% = -0.25% (-6.00)----------------------------------------- 8
9) 288 11.94% - 11.11% = 0.83% (+20.00)------------------------------------ 9
10) 207 8.58% - 8.33% = 0.25% (+6.00)--------------------------10
11) 114 4.73% - 5.56% = -0.83% (-20.00)---------------11
12) 74 3.07% - 2.78% = 0.29% (+7.00)----------12

Total sevens 361 - Seven outs 254 (70.36%) - Seven winners 107 (29.64%)
Pairs 425 17.62% - 16.67% = 0.95% (+23.00 rolls)
Hards 287 11.90% - 11.11% = 0.79% (+19.00 rolls)
HiLos 138 5.72% - 5.56% = 0.17% (+4.00 rolls)
H2 64/22 ( 2.65% - 2.78% = -3.00)
H4 77/21 ( 3.19% - 2.78% = +10.00)
H6 65/20 ( 2.69% - 2.78% = -2.00)
H8 75/15 ( 3.11% - 2.78% = +8.00)
H10 70/20 ( 2.90% - 2.78% = +3.00)
H12 74/16 ( 3.07% - 2.78% = +7.00)

I enjoyed watching! Very interesting data, 35 less sevens than "average" is certainly significant in my book. Tonight was the first viewing for me, I will tune in next week as well! Don't worry about all of these pessimists, they're all just jealous of your equipment and ability to conduct a real-world experiment. They wish they could prove you wrong......but they don't have the means to.

Quote: apseeker

Watching your show right now. No offense, you are just another random shooter though I still believe someone out there who can
influence dice. By the way, why do you have something like this in your Perl code:
@a = (0,1,2,3,4,5,6);
@b = (0,1,2,3,4,5,6);

Instead of
@a = (0,1,2,3,4,5,6);
@b = @a;
?
Lastly, I'm very impressed by your passion in Craps. Good luck!

A lot of people come to the same conclusion as you do: that I am another random shooter.

But since you gave me your unsolicited opinion, let me give you mine: you can tell with certainty as easily as you think you can just by looking at my shot.

As far as why my Perl code is the way it is, the short answer is because it looks prettier to me. And when it comes to pretty code, Perl needs all the help it can get!

FYI: The 35 less sevens I was referring to was in the 2500 "real-world" throws you displayed on camera at the end of the show.

Quote: amidnitespecial

I enjoyed watching! Very interesting data, 35 less sevens than "average" is certainly significant in my book. Tonight was the first viewing for me, I will tune in next week as well! Don't worry about all of these pessimists, they're all just jealous of your equipment and ability to conduct a real-world experiment. They wish they could prove you wrong......but they don't have the means to.

My total just went under 15.00% with my last session. That's a milestone I wanted to achieve and was worried I wouldn't after the abysmal session before that.

But I guess the way to say it on the Wizard of Vegas is that I got REALLY LUCKY!!! having 41 fewer than average sevens in 2412 rolls. But I only had 8.33 fewer in the last 200 rolls, but that was, percentage-wise, pretty damn good at 12.50% (!!!) or a SRR of 8.00.

deleted

Quote: Ahigh

Here is all of my roll data to date:

Total rolls: 2412

Very Nice

What still stands out is your point win percentages.

I show 254 completed hands.
Longest is 69 rolls.

# of come out rolls: 681
passed: 137
missed: 81
# points established 463 (ev of 454)
passed: 209 (ev:188) about 2SDs better than average (1 in 38)
missed: 254

total pass: 346
total miss: 335

So, for just the pass line bettor from your rolls
$5 pass line bets
10x odds
+$2800

345X odds
+$1,110

2X odds
+$604

No odds
+$55
(of course these returns assume one had the bankroll needed to make all these bets.
The largest draw-down for 10X odds was only $170)

Keep up the good work!

Suggestion: expand your betting strats to include just pass with different popular odds.
and add in the place 6&8 since many just pass and place anyways over come betting

Quote: 7craps

Very Nice

What still stands out is your point win percentages.

I show 254 completed hands.
Longest is 69 rolls.

# of come out rolls: 681
passed: 137
missed: 81
# points established 463 (ev of 454)
passed: 209 (ev:188) about 2SDs better than average (1 in 190)
missed: 254

total pass: 346
total miss: 335

So, for just the pass line bettor from your rolls
$5 pass line bets
10x odds
+$2800

345X odds
+$1,110

No odds
+$55

Keep up the good work!

Suggestion: expand your betting strats to include just pass with different popular odds.
and add in the place 6&8 since many just pass and place anyways over come betting

Thanks for the feedback. I absolutely appreciate it. I also appreciate the suggestions. Thanks again.

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

I'd call it normal variance.

You may end up being right. At the beginning of the show it was not looking good for my little quest.

Even if I prove the advantage play is possible, it is still damn boring. Proving it's possible is way more fun than actually going to a casino and doing it.

I would absolutely HATE IT if my job were to advantage play gambling, whether craps or any other game.

I would rather do so many other things!

It almost reminds me of how the tunnel dwellers talk about taking credits left on machines. Technically that's advantage play too, because you come out ahead in the long run.

But also, pretty boring.

I am really lucky I have a great job and this is just for fun. And really lucky that I was fortunate enough to have a great life that enabled me to study hard and get a great job.

But yeah, this could all just be normal variance.

You are right.

Quote: Ahigh

As far as why my Perl code is the way it is, the short answer is because it looks prettier to me. And when it comes to pretty code, Perl needs all the help it can get!

You are telling the truth since this is the same as what you are doing with Craps that you obsess with formality and superficial stuff. No offense, you are just one of thousands of bad programmers out there though they have been programming for decades. Talk less and focus when you roll dice if you really want to be a dice influencer in future. It was just amussing that you kept talking when you rolled dice during the show. Well, you may say, when it comes to pretty rolling, talking is all needed ;-)

Quote: Ahigh

I would absolutely HATE IT if my job were to advantage play gambling, whether craps or any other game.

Thats because you hate money so much, right? You're
just a fun seeker. What you're doing is far more boring
than playing, there's no payoff. Just hours and
hours of monotonous dice throwing and chart making.

Methinks you doth protest too much..

Quote: apseeker

You are telling the truth since this is the same as what you are doing with Craps that you obsess with formality and superficial stuff. No offense, you are just one of thousands of bad programmers out there though they have been programming for decades. Talk less and focus when you roll dice if you really want to be a dice influencer in future. It was just amussing that you kept talking when you rolled dice during the show. Well, you may say, when it comes to pretty rolling, talking is all needed ;-)

There's a spell checker in Google Chrome Mr. Non-obsessive. When it comes to making mistakes, I think I make fewer than you. And that is, in part, thanks to my habits that you are trying to dissect.

When you write as much production code as I have written in my career, mistakes are very dangerous. I've written my fair share of bugs, and each one of them carries a lesson learned.

I've been writing production game code for well over 25 years. My first published video game software was published by Electronic Arts in 1986 for the Commodore 64. It was published earlier by another game company before EA bought the rights to republish it in 1986.

Also, I do take offense to your calling me a bad programmer. I don't write Perl code for a living, and I never even claimed that my Perl code was any good. But you don't go around calling people bad programmers based on the thing that you noticed. Even if I was a bad programmer, why would you do that?

If you are any kind of programmer at all, connect with me on Linked-In and see what people who have worked with me say about my programming. Then tell me I am a bad programmer. Not glance at a couple of array inits and compare it to how you would have done it in your clearly superior way.

It's a joke!

Quote: Ahigh

I've been writing production game code for well over 25 years. My first published video game software was published by Electronic Arts in 1986 for the Commodore 64.

So that makes you what, mid to late 40's? You
don't nearly that old, congrats..

Quote: EvenBob

So that makes you what, mid to late 40's? You
don't nearly that old, congrats..

I'm 43 and I'll be 44 in June.

I wrote that software right after turning 15 years old, and it was published by EA right as I turned 17 after my Junior year in high school. It was published by Progressive Peripheral and Software when I was 15.

In my video game programming career after college I have done many more things, but I was pretty proud to have done this at a very young age. I didn't have anything significant published between 1986 and 1994, but I wrote a few BBS's that I charged money for, and did some fun games for college courses like a fun self-playing Tetris game.

In 1996, I worked with Nintendo on PilotWings 64, the first launch title besides Mario 64 on the Nintendo 64.

After that I worked for Atari Games on San Francisco Rush 2049 Coin-op as the lead programmer.

That game is actually still being played in several casinos around town! I showed my picture in the game to Teddy the last time we were at Joker's Wild, but it still gets played and you can still find it in arcades 14 years after release.

I worked on a bunch of other games too...

But as Super Rick points out, I have never written a book on how to play games. So I am not published book author!

Quote: Ahigh

I'm 43 and I'll be 44 in June.

You are about my son's age.

I really think you need to decide if you are a researcher taking an objective view into dice influencing and dice controlling -- whether it is possible, can make a difference, etc. -- or if you are trying to prove your own ability as a dice influencer and dice controller.

Sometimes your posts are about what you can do. Then there are other posts about your research and investigation.

To be honest, you can't do both. Either you want to prove your belief in your own skill, or you are trying to investigate whether or not there is such a thing as DI and DC.

I suggested this before and will again: ask those who claim to be dice controllers and dice influencers to allow you to test their ability and to show the results to the world. (I would be very surprised if you get any "takers" especially on a live Internet TV broadcast, or over time with recorded sessions that are edited to show each and every throw over hours and hours.)

By the way, I cannot consider someone a DI or DC if they cannot deliver good results consistently. If anyone is going to claim the title of DI or DC then consistency becomes an integral part of the claims. Even random shooters can have good days and bad days.

And I want to suggest something else: A DI or DC who cannot quickly adjust his performance for any table at any casino can't be much of a DI or DC anyway. So if you can shoot well on one table at one casino, what good is it if the table felt is changed or a position at that particular table is not available?

To claim DI or DC must mean you have a skill that can be applied at any table at any casino at any time... and not just when conditions are "right."

Quote: Ahigh

I don't write Perl code for a living, and I never even claimed that my Perl code was any good. But you don't go around calling people bad programmers based on the thing that you noticed.

But why you borther defend your bad coding habits in Perl by saying it looks prettier? Only a rookie or a-bad-and-old-who-cannot-leran-any-new-stuff programmer will feel that way.

deleted

Quote: AlanMendelson

You are about my son's age.

I really think you need to decide if you are a researcher taking an objective view into dice influencing and dice controlling -- whether it is possible, can make a difference, etc. -- or if you are trying to prove your own ability as a dice influencer and dice controller.

I am a research engineer for my full time job. So there is no decision to make about that. That is what I do for money right now, and there's no question that it's what I do.

Quote: AlanMendelson

Sometimes your posts are about what you can do. Then there are other posts about your research and investigation.

Posting what I can do is just evidence. I'm interested in documenting what I can do. The couple thousand rolls I have recorded are a TINY fraction of the total rolls I have made. I estimate I have rolled multiple hundreds of thousands of rolls in the casino in the last three years. I am behind technically. But for the _most_ part I am even. That may not make sense, but I haven't lost as much as I should have lost based on how much I play.

Quote: AlanMendelson

To be honest, you can't do both. Either you want to prove your belief in your own skill, or you are trying to investigate whether or not there is such a thing as DI and DC.

I can do both. One I do for a living and has nothing to do with craps. The other I do for fun. So I will always be a researcher as long as that is my job. But researching into the possibility of advantage play craps is _not_ part of my job. And since there is generally NOBODY that wants to help me, I have to do EVERYTHING by myself.

Maybe to understand you need to think about what I'm saying. The ONLY reason I play the part of everything is because NOBODY physically is around to help me. Nobody works the cameras. Nobody buys me equipment. Nobody works the stick for me. Nobody records my rolls. Nobody watches me play to give me feedback in the casino. It's just little old me.

Quote: AlanMendelson

I suggested this before and will again: ask those who claim to be dice controllers and dice influencers to allow you to test their ability and to show the results to the world. (I would be very surprised if you get any "takers" especially on a live Internet TV broadcast, or over time with recorded sessions that are edited to show each and every throw over hours and hours.)

By the way, I cannot consider someone a DI or DC if they cannot deliver good results consistently. If anyone is going to claim the title of DI or DC then consistency becomes an integral part of the claims. Even random shooters can have good days and bad days.

And I want to suggest something else: A DI or DC who cannot quickly adjust his performance for any table at any casino can't be much of a DI or DC anyway. So if you can shoot well on one table at one casino, what good is it if the table felt is changed or a position at that particular table is not available?

To claim DI or DC must mean you have a skill that can be applied at any table at any casino at any time... and not just when conditions are "right."

I've been doing this. Check the threads. I've sent e-mails to Stanford Wong. DiceCoach knows me and who I am. Several people are OBVIOUSLY aware of what I'm doing.

Nickolay is the only dude to step up to the plate otherwise we wouldn't even have the March 11th date coming up.

Anyway, even the terms DI and DC and whatever else are generally foreign to me. I'm as curious as anybody to see if there are any people out there willing to subject themselves to a live broadcast.

Tonight was the first live broadcast that I did where I felt I performed within the tolerance of what I normally perform.

The previous live performance was clearly a failure.

But even with the failed performance recorded into my rolls, I still am under 15% sevens.

As far as finding that person, why don't you do it for me? I'm already doing a ton of stuff! I do have a job too. I do have to work pretty hard nearly non stop to do all I am doing for this stuff with the WOV and my craps stuff at home in addition to all the work I do for real money!

I have my hands full just trying to get all this stuff set up for the WOV challenge on March 11th.

Plus I'm missing a day of pay just to be here.

It's a financial set back just to sponsor and host this whole event.

Maybe some of you guys could hold back on the criticism a little bit?

Quote: apseeker

Only a rookie or a-bad-and-old-who-cannot-leran-any-new-stuff programmer will feel that way.

Jesus, really? First off, this is a gambling website, not a programmer website.

Second off, I am clearly not a rookie, so you're wrong about that.

Thirdly, the reason I like the code prettier is because I can ensure that it doesn't have bugs in it faster which means that it is less likely to have bugs.

Here's my point: I didn't ask for your opinion about my programming abilities and you clearly know nothing about my programming expertise. You certainly knew nothing about my career as a programmer at the time you made the comment.

But why not answer my question: why would you accuse ANYONE of being a bad programmer? Do you think it's possible that the problem lies within yourself? Maybe you shouldn't be asking me about my programming practices .. AT ALL.

I recommend that you simply drop the subject. Nobody wants to talk about programming on this forum anyway!

I don't think it's a coincidence that I am telling you about my lack of mistakes while you are unable to spell the word learn as leran after I make the point that Google Chrome has a spell checker built into it. Again, maybe you should check yourself before you wreck yourself as they say.

Ahigh you are setting yourself up for criticism. You think you can do both -- research and at the same time prove your ability or claims of an ability.
You are just asking for it. And now you are putting yourself on your own cross telling us about your own personal sacrifice for your own just cause.

Quote: AlanMendelson

Ahigh you are setting yourself up for criticism. You think you can do both -- research and at the same time prove your ability or claims of an ability.
You are just asking for it. And now you are putting yourself on your own cross telling us about your own personal sacrifice for your own just cause.

No I think you're looking at it the wrong way. I'm not setting out to prove that *I* can influence the dice. I am setting out to prove that *anybody* can influence the dice. If it happens to be me first, that doesn't mean I will be the only one.

But if I weren't willing to be my own test subject, I would not have made ANY progress so far.

Certainly you're not saying that I should have done nothing since I am not worthy of analyzing with my own tools!

But I have already made the point that it's possible that I can't influence the dice but someone else can.

So failure testing myself as a subject is not complete failure. Just a setback until someone better than me can be tested.

But to be perfectly honest with you, I have yet to meet the person who shoots better than me consistently.

Certainly I have not met the person who is better and also willing to allow me to test their shooting skills on a live broadcast!!

As far as applying your skill in a casino at any time, you're wrong about that too. To take advantage of advantage play craps, you have to make smaller bets than a regular gambler and you have to get enough events that your edge will show up. In other words, you would have to do what would normally result in a small loss equal to about the house edge, which means play a whole lot over and over at the same levels until you achieve the expected small return and wait until both the good and the bad luck cancel each other out and you are left with your edge.

You can't do this any time you want. You need a table where you can get a whole lot of rolls done in a shorter period of time in more ideal circumstances.

The problem with what you are saying is that you're demonstrating a lack of knowledge of what is required for AP play. It does not matter if you do all these rolls at once, but you will absolutely have winning sessions and losing sessions and just come out ahead a little bit in the long run.

Most gamblers just get happy when they win and get sad when they lose, and they all lose in the long run and they get in denial for that.

Anyway, I don't know how much it helps to argue about this, but I think you're off.

It's really disappointing because it seems like you enjoy the game and want to know about this stuff. But I think you're constantly trying to redefine what it takes to be able to take advantage of advantage play demonstrates a lack of understanding on your part for what it takes. Generally speaking, it takes a whole lot of rolls and a whole lot of patience, and a whole lot of searching for tables where you get the majority of the time to throw the bones all by yourself.

Quote: AlanMendelson

To claim DI or DC must mean you have a skill that can be applied at any table at any casino at any time... and not just when conditions are "right."

Alan, buddy, you've just separated dreaming from reality.
You're exactly correct. Money talks and well, you know the
rest of the saying. The wannabee's in craps and roulette
blind us with charts and graphs and extremely edited
demonstrations. But when it comes to the rubber meeting
the road, in a real casino, betting real money, they're at
a loss. Something just wasn't 'right'. They never reproduce
what they do in practice. And the casino dealers wink and
nod at each other and say really unflattering things about
these experts in the break room. Such is the reality of
ersatz advantage play..

Quote: superrick

If you want to feel the heat, from the casinos you are playing at the wrong ones. Why don't you take you little show on the road to Gold Coast, South Point or Tuscany. If you do manage to get on a roll when they have a highroller there I'm sure that they would have a different out look then the Wynn. Now you won't have the table dumping thousands in those casinos, but if the table is dumping anything, you might find that you have a problem. Call ahead and tell them you are coming you might give them something to laugh at for years to come.

Well, I went to Gold coast, and I bet on one roll. A guy had a $5 fire bet and I made the fourth point. I was working on the fifth point when Alex walked up. I had already taken my money down as I had won enough and wasn't risking my money but still wanted to make the 6-point fire since a guy had a $5 bet on the fire bet. I had already made the 5 twice, the 6 once, the 8 once, and just made the 9. Now I was setting the point to 10 when alex walked up and I was celebrating hitting the ten without only having hit one of the previous numbers (the 5) more than once on a comeout roll.

So anyway, Alex walks up as I set the fifth point with a $5 fire up there. And I look at Alex. I had a $5 come bet on the ten that I got back as I set the point to ten. And I said "that's all my money came back now, the rest is for you" referring to the guy with the fire bet.

The first roll after Alex shows up, it's short and comes up 6-1.

I then proceed to blame Alex for not making the fifth point. And I say, "oh well, I got all my money back except $5 on the passline."

Then Alex says "you hungry? Let me know what you want to eat. Anywhere you wanna go."

Here's the receipt .. I asked for $20 at TGI Fridays and won much more than that during my roll.



Alex was super duper friendly. I have no idea if he got the 411 on me or not, but he treated me like royalty!

Heat? None at all. They didn't warn me about any of my rolls at all and they let me shoot with no problems in the slightest.

Feel free to go back and check up on my story if you wish.

The table didn't dump hard like it would have at the Wynn on a high roller table, but they gave me no problems while doing nothing but rolling like a champ and having a damn good time!

Webster was my dealer if you want to ask about the details and know the dealers there. I have no idea if he would recall the roll as it was relatively uneventful aside from making 5 points and 4 point fire.

I can go to South Point and see if they give me a hard time or not. I rarely go there though. Not crazy about that place.

Quote: Ahigh

Well, I went to Gold coast, and I bet on one roll.

That's good to hear that they are treating you well there. Always been a personal favorite, even though they have 3x4x5x odds. Try the Noodle Express or Ping Pang Pong next time. Friday's sucks!

Quote: thecesspit

I am surprised a man like you doesn't understand random variables. The best horse doesn't always win, the favoured football team sometimes loses.

No influencer has stated that they can roll exactly X every single time. You seem to believe that is what they are saying.

I understand what a skill is and is not. Tiger Woods does not hit each shot perfectly. But he would destroy a novice again and again.

What would be a fair line for a dice setter in a series of challenges against me ? That is the question. Is the so called skill so small as to be immeasurable ? Say a series of 100 rolls. Or is it just dumb luck? That is the question.

The favored football team is indeed favored. The dice setter seems not to be.

Quote: Buzzard

I understand what a skill is and is not. Tiger Woods does not hit each shot perfectly. But he would destroy a novice again and again.

The claimed gap between a DI and a random roll is not as great as that between me and Tiger Woods. You can't wish it to be so.

Quote:

What would be a fair line for a dice setter in a series of challenges against me ? That is the question. Is the so called skill so small as to be immeasurable ? Say a series of 100 rolls. Or is it just dumb luck? That is the question.

The gap between a Basic Strategy player and a Card counter is a matter of 1-2%. No-one -should- get suspicious if over two shoes of Blackjack if the counter makes less than the random ploppie.

Quote:

The favored football team is indeed favored. The dice setter seems not to be.

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/craps/12879-betting-3-1-on-a-di-the-buzzards-proposition/

I did the sums just for you last night. Let me know what you think.

" The claimed gap between a DI and a random roll is not as great as that between me and Tiger Woods. "

I agree. so whatis the edge. I mean there is a handicap system in golf. 18 holes is considered a fair test.

Why not a hundred rolls in dice? Say rolling sevens. what odds would a dice setter lay me. So far it seems to be 1 to 1.