Ahigh
http://www.goodshooter.com/ahigh/mp4/r039_02.mp4
http://www.goodshooter.com/ahigh/mp4/r039_03.mp4
http://www.goodshooter.com/ahigh/mp4/r039_04.mp4
I am just demonstrating that my software now captures the release as well as two cameras for the bounce after touchdown.
I am next going to add another camera for still photo with sound triggered flash in order to obtain the moment of impact to see how much correlation there is between the two dice on initial impact.
All three of these videos are put into a windows media center play list immediately after being recorded for an instant replay. It still requires a quiet environment since I don't have the trigger based on the FFT code yet, but I do have the FFT library linked in and debug printing the frequency domain of the sounds; I just need to code the condition based on the frequencies. The refridgerator, when running, causes the cameras to record longer as it is now since it can't tell the difference between dice tumbling and the fridge running. These are the next problems to solve.
About your shot: for the first time I can see your throw. No wonder your dice bounce all over the place: your shot is too high. Lower your throw so that the dice don't go above the rail on the table, aim for the center of back wall, and let's see if your dice do anything different.
Quote: AhighI should have just let that lie there instead of responding to it at all.
Couldn't agree more.
Edit to add:
Aaron, will you resurrect your mechanical throwing device at some point or is that off the table permanently? Seems if these technologies were converged there'd be a possible element of "control" and that would be interesting to see demonstrated. Of course whether then any human could approximate similar control, even under laboratory conditions is another kettle of fish...
Quote: AlanMendelsonHere is where we disagree. Obviously you never even read Sharpshooter's book.
Not so.
In my earlier inquiries into dice setting, I purchased and read his book.
I disagree with his premise and his assertions.
Oh, I can see how it MIGHT work, if someone could control the variables sufficiently, but we cannot.
Quote: chickenmanCouldn't agree more.
Edit to add:
Aaron, will you resurrect your mechanical throwing device at some point or is that off the table permanently? Seems if these technologies were converged there'd be a possible element of "control" and that would be interesting to see demonstrated. Of course whether then any human could approximate similar control, even under laboratory conditions is another kettle of fish...
The mechanical throwing arm has been sidelined for a while. If someone else could build a throwing arm that's more precise and simpler than mine, I could do something with that. But I doubt I will do anything else with this one except possibly store it in the attic.
Quote: MrV
Oh, I can see how it MIGHT work, if someone could control the variables sufficiently, but we cannot.
Now that's progress -- you concede it MIGHT work. And I also say it MIGHT work. And Sharpshooter presented the physics about why it might work.
So using Sharpshooter's physics as a guide for what MIGHT work, we can easily understand what CANNOT work. This is why I only need to see ONE EXAMPLE of the form of a controlled throw to know if a shooter "has it" or "doesn't have it."
I know what Sharpshooter did back in the mid 1990s (haven't seen him since) and I know what the surgeon did and what that mystery shooter at Caesars did that I've written about. I haven't played with Frank so I don't know what he does. But what Sharpshooter, the surgeon and the mystery shooter all did was the same thing:
the slow easy toss to the end of the come box,
the dice travel close together appearing as mirror images of each other,
the soft bounce
the slow easy roll to the center (flat part) of the back wall rolling to under the first row of alligator bumps
the dice gently kissing or ever so slightly bouncing a small amount off the back wall
THAT is the only way to have any influence on the dice.
I want to thank Ahigh for finally showing us his toss. He can ignore my comments all he wants but I have seen all I need to see now and the dude ain't got it and has zero chance influencing the dice. If he wants to research and develop technology it's okay with me. But when it comes to being a wanna be DI or DC he should hang it up -- because I have seen enough to know he has no golden touch (sorry for the pun).
http://www.goodshooter.com/ahigh/mp4/r039_02.mp4
Quote: AlanMendelson
I know what Sharpshooter did back in the mid 1990s (haven't seen him since) and I know what the surgeon did and what that mystery shooter at Caesars did that I've written about. I haven't played with Frank so I don't know what he does. But what Sharpshooter, the surgeon and the mystery shooter all did was the same thing:
the slow easy toss to the end of the come box,
the dice travel close together appearing as mirror images of each other,
the soft bounce
the slow easy roll to the center (flat part) of the back wall rolling to under the first row of alligator bumps
the dice gently kissing or ever so slightly bouncing a small amount off the back wall
THAT is the only way to have any influence on the dice.
On this we seem to agree: the "dead cat bounce," for lack of a better description.
Were a shooter able, in fact, to consistently roll dem bones as you've described above, he'd be an AP.
Quote: MrVOn this we seem to agree: the "dead cat bounce," for lack of a better description.
Were a shooter able, in fact, to consistently roll dem bones as you've described above, he'd be an AP.
Good.
Dead cat bounce is one type of influenced throw just as dice stacking is. But Sharpshooter's method is more of a low, slow roll to the back wall keeping dice on axis as much as possible hoping to limit the rotation of the dice faces.
I have never seen anyone execute a true dead cat bounce where the dice are thrown and die on the felt. I also think such a throw would run into problems because the dice don't hit the back wall.
I personally stopped using the stacked shot because even I could see that only one die hit the back wall (the top die).
Quote: AlanMendelsonI want to thank Ahigh for finally showing us his toss. He can ignore my comments all he wants but I have seen all I need to see now and the dude ain't got it and has zero chance influencing the dice. If he wants to research and develop technology it's okay with me. But when it comes to being a wanna be DI or DC he should hang it up -- because I have seen enough to know he has no golden touch (sorry for the pun).
http://www.goodshooter.com/ahigh/mp4/r039_02.mp4
If you had any credibility I might care what you wrote. Keep working on your betting techniques, and maybe you can master how to make an extra buck on your initial roll passline hedge. Then you can get really good at ensuring you only lose, but at the most predictable rate possible with the least amount of volatility. Eventually you can graduate to $100 on the pass and $100 on the don't pass with max odds.
Quote: AlanMendelsonI have never seen anyone execute a true dead cat bounce where the dice are thrown and die on the felt. I also think such a throw would run into problems because the dice don't hit the back wall.
I personally stopped using the stacked shot because even I could see that only one die hit the back wall (the top die).
I threw a "dead cat bounce" once, not intentionally, at the Golden Nugget. They allowed it. I couldn't do it again if my life depended on it, though.
But the stacked shot -- if you acknowledge that can be effective, why do you insist that the "only" possible method of dice influence is the gentle roll against the wall? Scarne discusses a number of alternatives, and some of them are still plausibly applicable with a modern dice table.
@ Alan, everything that I have ever seen written about the physics of influence calls for a launch angle close to 45*. Which every time will launch the dice higher than the edge of the table. And ahigh's launch angle looks pretty close to that.
Quote: MathExtremistI threw a "dead cat bounce" once, not intentionally, at the Golden Nugget. They allowed it. I couldn't do it again if my life depended on it, though.
But the stacked shot -- if you acknowledge that can be effective, why do you insist that the "only" possible method of dice influence is the gentle roll against the wall? Scarne discusses a number of alternatives, and some of them are still plausibly applicable with a modern dice table.
Apparently the world is indeed flat after all?
Quote: JB85
@ Alan, everything that I have ever seen written about the physics of influence calls for a launch angle close to 45*. Which every time will launch the dice higher than the edge of the table. And ahigh's launch angle looks pretty close to that.
While it might be "close" what he is doing results in wild bouncinig. Which is why I suggest adjusting his throw so that it goes no higher than the rail.
Frankly, I don't know why Ahigh is throwing from the end of the table??? Why is he not using SL1 or SR1 ?? When he throws from the end of the table he has to use more force which means more bounce. Also, we can't tell how much back spin he has on his dice to put the breaks on the dice from the forward movement of his throw. And he certainly is not aiming for the center, flat part of the wall. There are just too many problems in his throw. I know this will sound ironic because I don't like the schools, but Ahigh really could benefit from taking a course on DI. (LOL)
Quote: MathExtremist
But the stacked shot -- if you acknowledge that can be effective, why do you insist that the "only" possible method of dice influence is the gentle roll against the wall? Scarne discusses a number of alternatives, and some of them are still plausibly applicable with a modern dice table.
As I mentioned, with the stack shot BOTH dice don't hit the back wall. When I threw the stacked shot at Rio about six or seven years ago, I aimed for the corner where the top die trapped the bottom die on the table surface then the top die bounced into the back wall. The bottom die technically never reached the back wall. I got away with it. But ever since then I didn't use it because I realized I could be called on it.
Quote: AlanMendelsonWhile it might be "close" what he is doing results in wild bouncinig. Which is why I suggest adjusting his throw so that it goes no higher than the rail.
Frankly, I don't know why Ahigh is throwing from the end of the table??? Why is he not using SL1 or SR1 ?? When he throws from the end of the table he has to use more force which means more bounce. Also, we can't tell how much back spin he has on his dice to put the breaks on the dice from the forward movement of his throw. And he certainly is not aiming for the center, flat part of the wall. There are just too many problems in his throw. I know this will sound ironic because I don't like the schools, but Ahigh really could benefit from taking a course on DI. (LOL)
Any idea why the dealer's insist on the dice not going above the level of their eyes?
Quote: AhighIf you had any credibility I might care what you wrote. Keep working on your betting techniques, and maybe you can master how to make an extra buck on your initial roll passline hedge. Then you can get really good at ensuring you only lose, but at the most predictable rate possible with the least amount of volatility. Eventually you can graduate to $100 on the pass and $100 on the don't pass with max odds.
This is a predictable response from you. You know everything. So I will continue having discussions with others who don't already know everything so we can all find out more working together.
Quote: petroglyphAny idea why the dealer's insist on the dice not going above the level of their eyes?
If the crew is all looking up, someone can be doing something sneaky on the table. Like stealing chips or past posting. Also, a higher throw increases the chance of a bounce-out and slows the game down.
Quote: petroglyphAny idea why the dealer's insist on the dice not going above the level of their eyes?
First reason is game protection. Dealers are required to watch the dice and the bank and the chips on the table and also in the players' rail. If the dice go too high they lose something in their field of vision.
Second reason is safety -- they don't want anyone get hit in the face, or the eyes.
Third is practicality. Throw the dice too high and they'll bounce off the table.
Quote: AlanMendelsonAs I mentioned, with the stack shot BOTH dice don't hit the back wall. When I threw the stacked shot at Rio about six or seven years ago, I aimed for the corner where the top die trapped the bottom die on the table surface then the top die bounced into the back wall. The bottom die technically never reached the back wall. I got away with it. But ever since then I didn't use it because I realized I could be called on it.
If you can pull this off even a little, you're influencing the dice. Just aim for close to the back wall and most of the time the shot won't work, but some of the time it will. If you know the percentage of the time it works, you can recalculate your edge. I'm assuming you didn't successfully kill one die 100% of the time or you'd have a huge edge. The question isn't whether you could be called on it, it's whether you ever were. Were you? Because you were called on your gentle-roll at the Bellagio yet you keep trying that...
Ahigh is shooting from SR1. And I don't see any fundamental problem with his shot, this one wasn't perfect but the mechanics of the throw are fine. And I don't think this was about the perfect shot, but more about showing his video equipment.
Quote: MathExtremistThe question isn't whether you could be called on it, it's whether you ever were. Were you? Because you were called on your gentle-roll at the Bellagio yet you keep trying that...
the gentle roll is "legal" because both dice hit the back wall, and as I wrote, Bellagio management apologized to me for the way the table crew reacted and the table crew was "retrained" according to management. And perhaps that's why I ran into trouble there -- I may be viewed as a trouble maker.
At MGM I concede both dice did not hit the back wall with my "gentle throw." I was guilty.
At Caesars years ago -- a boxman (yes, when they had boxman -- looked at me and sternly said "both dice must hit the back wall." And that one warning was enough. I still try a gentle throw but I also make sure the dice reach the back wall. Now, on a RARE occasion one of the dice will stop dead because they get caught on those new felts that they have there. But this is rare, like maybe one time in a weekend -- and at the same time the second die will hit the back wall and it is pretty obvioous it was not my intention to have one die stop.
I would not try the stack shot at Caesars. Nor would I try it anywhere else now.
I was allowed to do a dice slide at one casino on a come out roll just as a "test" and I did it. The deal I made with the dealers was that they would "no roll" it. this was right after the Wynn incident and I was alone at the table and we were talking about the case. And I said "let me try it here." And I did, just as I did it on my mini table on my video.
Quote: JB85Ahigh is shooting from SR1. And I don't see any fundamental problem with his shot, this one wasn't perfect but the mechanics of the throw are fine. And I don't think this was about the perfect shot, but more about showing his video equipment.
Unfortunately, I have never seen a video of Ahigh's showing the dice gently rolling to the back wall. He has posted many videos of his throws online. I have asked him repeatedly to put JUST ONE online and he has ignored my requests. If he could do it, he would. I told him if he showed me JUST ONCE I would shut up.
Well I think that is the goal of his process here. He has created this video recording system (which is pretty damn awesome). If he can produce a controlled shot I'm sure we will see it.Quote: AlanMendelsonUnfortunately, I have never seen a video of Ahigh's showing the dice gently rolling to the back wall. He has posted many videos of his throws online. I have asked him repeatedly to put JUST ONE online and he has ignored my requests. If he could do it, he would. I told him if he showed me JUST ONCE I would shut up.
This said, you seem to have in your mind that the only type of controlled shot is a low shot that gently rolls into the back wall. I agree with the gently part but I think the best way to achieve that is with a higher shot, not a low shot.
Quote: JB85
This said, you seem to have in your mind that the only type of controlled shot is a low shot that gently rolls into the back wall. I agree with the gently part but I think the best way to achieve that is with a higher shot, not a low shot.
Actually the angle of the shot depends on the bounce of the table and the position you are throwing from. One of the basics of DI is that you have to make adjustments according to each table you play on.
When I suggested to Ahigh that he try a lower level throw it was because his dice were bouncing violently. DI does not come in "one size fits all." And this is my criticism of those selling practice rigs and those who practice on home tables -- when they get to the casino the table conditions will absolutely be different so all of that "muscle memory" they built up at home will have to be adjusted for the new table conditions at the casino.
My number one complaint about the "schools" is that they sell practice rigs.
I like what Wong said: if you want to practice your release, throw dice on your bed and have the dice hit a sheet of aluminum foil and look for stripes and not stars where they hit.
And with all due respect to Ahigh... I've been in the TV business for more than 40 years. His stuff is not that great. Any TV station in America has all the equipment and switchers and animation tools Ahigh dreams about. Unfortunately we can't walk into a TV station, set up a craps table, and do slow mo of our craps play. Heck I have high definition cameras that I shoot my show with that are perfect plus I have the software to do everything Ahigh wants to do. But so what?
I practice at home and then go to the casino and the table is a different length with a different bounce and a different layout surface. The analysis is worthless.
Anyway, the too high of shot is probably as you guys stated. I was stuck at the end on a long table with only one other shooter. The only way I could get them to the end was with a pretty lofty shot. The dice weren't real high certainly not above a tall dealer's chin, but I threw 5 seven's in a row before the box complained about the trajectory. It was like a horseshoe toss, up and flop down and touch the rubber and die. Not claiming any mastery but it was one after another. Not unlike throwing a horseshoe, two or three spins and stop. It was pretty neat. Yeah it's probably for chip protection, but there was no question of hitting anyone in the eye or even the dice leaving the table. In fact they stayed on the table better than if they'd made first contact in the come box.
As has been said before. It wouldn't take very many influenced throws to match or overcome the house edge.
I've witnessed a stacked shot on more than one occasion produce some long rolls and not a word from the box. I think mostly the house just wants a fair shot. That's why they sometimes don't jump all over little old lady's that only get 'em half way?
I am not sure what you mean by dead bounce.
On a tub here that i play on each week, they call a no roll if you dont hit the back wall
with both dice.
When i start playing i always warm up for a couple of rolls and land the dice short and many times
they stay right where they hit. That is not unusual. On a tub like we have you have to either
throw very low and soft and try to stay under the aligator board. or you have to throw higher with
less revolutions so when the dice hit the table, they hit as flat as possible and almost die there, barely hitting the
back wall. On a good roll i can miss the wall a couple of times because the dice just stopped.
When you play on the tables you have out there, that is a completely different ball game.
dicesetter
Quote: JB85Ahigh is shooting from SR1. And I don't see any fundamental problem with his shot, this one wasn't perfect but the mechanics of the throw are fine. And I don't think this was about the perfect shot, but more about showing his video equipment.
BINGO! Yeah, you guys who think I'm demonstrating a shot don't read really well. But go ahead and pick apart the shooting equivalent of color bars if you want Alan. I'm not going to stop you from putting your ignorance on display.
Quote: AlanMendelsonThe analysis is worthless.
Which is why you can't stop posting. Listen, the thread, as CLEARLY indicated by the title is about my software, not about my shot. All the shots are SAMPLES of video not shots for you to put your detailed analysis on.
Quote: AhighWhich is why you can't stop posting about it. Your posts are what are worthless. Just stop spamming, troll.
Sorry, but someone has to keep you honest. You can snow these other people but I've been in the TV and video busienss longer than you've been alive. I've also been part of the DI movement before you were allowed to play craps.
One more time: put up or shut up. Show me the controlled throw with the soft roll to the back wall. Just once.
Quote: AlanMendelsonSorry, but someone has to keep you honest. You can snow these other people but I've been in the TV and video busienss longer than you've been alive. I've also been part of the DI movement before you were allowed to play craps.
One more time: put up or shut up. Show me the controlled throw with the soft roll to the back wall. Just once.
Why don't you wash my car?
Quote: MathExtremist
But the stacked shot -- if you acknowledge that can be effective, why do you insist that the "only" possible method of dice influence is the gentle roll against the wall? Scarne discusses a number of alternatives, and some of them are still plausibly applicable with a modern dice table.
Scarne has got to be the most used miss quoted book out there! In his book he tells everybody about all the crooked shot used by cheats, but none of them were used in casinos!
The Blanket Roll shown on page 259 was thrown on a blanket and the shot rolled a few inches and stopped! This shot wouldn’t work now days where you had to roll the dice 4 or 5 feet to the back wall, the casinos would insist that you put air under your shot! Remember all casinos say that you must throw the dice, in places like NJ, Colorado and Pennsylvania, they even have laws where the shooter has to throw the dice, it’s not up to the casino to come up with any rule they feel like on different shooters.
The Even Roll Shot page 261 Scarne describes a shot that again is made on a blanket, where the cheat uses capping liquid to keep the dice together when making the shot!
The Backboard control shot made when they used a foam rubber backboard, remember we now have diamonds on our back walls!
The Three Cushion Shot,.. shot on a smooth table usually with something like linoleum on it.
The Whip Shot again shot on a smooth surface, or with sand or salt on it.
I’m not going into every shot that he wrote about, I will let the reader, do the research on the rest of the shots he wrote about in chapter 14, everybody that plays the game should have a copy of his book to understand what they are up against when they are playing craps. There in no doubt that Scarne was the foremost gaming authority in his time, and most authors still use his work in anything they write about gaming, but when it comes to craps and controlled shooting nothing that he wrote about in chapter 14 will work in the casinos now days, if anyone believes that these shots will work, go back and reread what he wrote about!
http://www.amazon.com/Scarne-Dice-John/dp/0879804319
...
Quote: petroglyphIn fact they stayed on the table better than if they'd made first contact in the come box.
It comes down to basic geometry. If a high shot hits close to the back wall, the back wall will trap the dice and bounce them back onto the table.
But if a high shot hits in the come box, there are no walls to "trap" the dice and the dice can bounce out.
Now, what happens with a high shot? If you are hitting the back wall and bouncing hard off the back wall you lose any hope of control or influencing. If the high shot bounces in the come box you again have no control or influence. Hence, the soft toss with the gentle roll to the center of the back wall. I know we've discussed the "physics" of dice, but this is basic geometry.
Instead of charting what numbers are thrown, chart what kind of triangle your throw resembles. You want a scalene triangle.
Quote: AlanMendelsonActually the angle of the shot depends on the bounce of the table and the position you are throwing from. One of the basics of DI is that you have to make adjustments according to each table you play on.
DI does not come in "one size fits all." And this is my criticism of those selling practice rigs and those who practice on home tables -- when they get to the casino the table conditions will absolutely be different so all of that "muscle memory" they built up at home will have to be adjusted for the new table conditions at the casino.
The launch angle should be consistent regardless of table length. The shot will just fly higher the longer the shot.
As far as bounce, yes tables have different bounce, but I won't play on tables that are too bouncy. So that leaves us with low and medium bounce tables. It doesn't take long at all to dial in a shot, usually just a few throws. What I'm looking for is for the dice to hit flat and land as soft as possible. Usually this just means moving the landing area a little closer or further from the wall.
I've got the FFTW library linked in, and I am working to make it recognize the specific frequency fingerprint of dice hitting the table and to ignore other sounds that might be louder but in the wrong frequency spectrum.
Right now, my stuff only works when it's quiet. The fridge, when turned out, causes the dice to get recorded longer than they should because the volume level to continue recording when the dice are bouncing around has a low threshold.
Quote: JB85The launch angle should be consistent regardless of table length. The shot will just fly higher the longer the shot.
As far as bounce, yes tables have different bounce, but I won't play on tables that are too bouncy. So that leaves us with low and medium bounce tables. It doesn't take long at all to dial in a shot, usually just a few throws. What I'm looking for is for the dice to hit flat and land as soft as possible. Usually this just means moving the landing area a little closer or further from the wall.
I agree that you have to move your landing area based on the bounce of the table, but you should try adjusting the angle of the shot also for the bounce of the table. Remember it's not just the angle, but it's also the force you use to throw the dice. If you have a harder throw then a lower angle might be needed.
Quote: AhighWhy don't we talk about stuff related to the thread?
I've got the FFTW library linked in, and I am working to make it recognize the specific frequency fingerprint of dice hitting the table and to ignore other sounds that might be louder but in the wrong frequency spectrum.
Right now, my stuff only works when it's quiet. The fridge, when turned out, causes the dice to get recorded longer than they should because the volume level to continue recording when the dice are bouncing around has a low threshold.
Let me be honest with you. You are trying to come up with a system for a one-man lab. In reality, all you need is a second person to start and stop the recording with each throw. If you think having an automated start and stop is important then go ahead and unplug your fridge and be sure no one else is talking in the room. But if you want to test and record throws, get someone to push the record button and the stop button.
I am sure there is a use for your system. In fact, there are several security systems on the market today that trigger the start and stop of digital recording based on sound and movement. Why don't you go to an alarm company, buy one of those devices and attach it to your home system. This wheel has already been invented.
Quote: AhighWhy don't we talk about stuff related to the thread?
I've got the FFTW library linked in, and I am working to make it recognize the specific frequency fingerprint of dice hitting the table and to ignore other sounds that might be louder but in the wrong frequency spectrum.
Right now, my stuff only works when it's quiet. The fridge, when turned out, causes the dice to get recorded longer than they should because the volume level to continue recording when the dice are bouncing around has a low threshold.
Yeah good point. Most of this conversation is just rehashing stuff that's been rehashed a thousand times.
Quote: AlanMendelsonLet me be honest with you. You are trying to come up with a system for a one-man lab. In reality, all you need is a second person to start and stop the recording with each throw. If you think having an automated start and stop is important then go ahead and unplug your fridge and be sure no one else is talking in the room. But if you want to test and record throws, get someone to push the record button and the stop button.
I am sure there is a use for your system. In fact, there are several security systems on the market today that trigger the start and stop of digital recording based on sound and movement. Why don't you go to an alarm company, buy one of those devices and attach it to your home system. This wheel has already been invented.
Well that's one of the main points of the whole system. Logging and recording practice throws is tedious. The "one-man lab" is exactly what he wants.
Quote: AlanMendelsonIt comes down to basic geometry. If a high shot hits close to the back wall, the back wall will trap the dice and bounce them back onto the table.
But if a high shot hits in the come box, there are no walls to "trap" the dice and the dice can bounce out.
Now, what happens with a high shot? If you are hitting the back wall and bouncing hard off the back wall you lose any hope of control or influencing. If the high shot bounces in the come box you again have no control or influence. Hence, the soft toss with the gentle roll to the center of the back wall. I know we've discussed the "physics" of dice, but this is basic geometry.
Instead of charting what numbers are thrown, chart what kind of triangle your throw resembles. You want a scalene triangle.
Does your interpretation allow for spin?
Do you think you can still look at this objectively or is your opinion on the matter chiseled in stone? [petroglyph]
You are the one who asks to see something, [possibly the end result] but you also want to create parameters that disallow creative variables. You are asking the dog to leave while chained to a tree.
Quote: AlanMendelsonI agree that you have to move your landing area based on the bounce of the table, but you should try adjusting the angle of the shot also for the bounce of the table. Remember it's not just the angle, but it's also the force you use to throw the dice. If you have a harder throw then a lower angle might be needed.
Last comment from me that is not related to the thread. Physics tells us that there is an optimum launch angle that will dissipate the energy of the die most efficiently, which is the mechanism that will lead to a soft toss. And that launch angle is 45*. So the angle should never change. You only need to adjust the energy of the throw based on length of the throw if your launch angle is consistent.
It's absolutely about the 1-man lab. And the 1-man lab that works while the kids are screaming and the wife is cooking and all hell is breaking loose around me and nobody wants to help.
If you think it's easy to overlap my schedule with a helper, you must view my life quite differently from what is reality for me. Just the simple process of setting up a dedicated computer to do this was a huge leap to allow me to get this coding done. I have two kids and a wife who don't exactly make it really easy for me to concentrate on technical tasks.
And I will tell you another thing: you're comments are pretty much in the same bucket of distractions for what I'm doing. Especially when you're like "do this" and "do that." I get that from people floating around the house while I'm working too. But nobody is willing to press start and stop on the camera and do it perfectly every time.
As far as you got all this stuff because you're a TV dude: if you were ahead of me on your equipment tuned to gathering data for researching craps, someone else would be mentioning it, not you.
Your participation is anything but helpful so far from my perspective. You're basically as much of a distraction as my kids are.
My focus over the next few hours of my work on the software is going to be on the FFT to allow the software to work in a noisy environment. When I do my show, I'm going to want to talk without triggering off the recording mechanism.
Quote:“The view among neuroscientists is that this emphasis on neurotransmitters as the cause of mental illness is more of a (drug sales) concept than a scientific concept,” he says.
“It helps drug companies sell drugs.”
It very easy for the on axis dice schools to come up with anything to sell their school, that can’t be proven, just like the drug companies do to sell their drugs!
http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2013/10/18/mental_illness_is_chemical_imbalance_theory_a_myth.html
Quote:Using bad science
Phillips, however, says drug company labs were not looking at the wrong targets and diseases so much as employing bad science.
He says their huge, in-house labs were too insular and secretive and often too focused on small numbers of neurochemical targets.
“Sadly, the (drug company) scientists, while very good, weren’t necessarily as good as all the scientists in the world working in an open-sourced way to address these matters.”
One person working to prove that AP craps is possible,.. is just bad science in my book! The one thing I do have to give credit to ahigh is that any person with reasonable intelligence, should be able to look at all of his videos and see that on axis shooting is just BS, and when the dice do come up with the numbers the shooter or the rest of the table wants, they are just getting lucky! One of the reason why none of the schools that teach on axis shooting has never shown the dice in slow-motion is, because they knew how much damage it would have done to their schools.
The videos they have are all well edited where you can’t see what really happened, in full speed.
...
Quote: AhighAlan,
It's absolutely about the 1-man lab. And the 1-man lab that works while the kids are screaming and the wife is cooking and all hell is breaking loose around me and nobody wants to help.
If you think it's easy to overlap my schedule with a helper, you must view my life quite differently from what is reality for me. Just the simple process of setting up a dedicated computer to do this was a huge leap to allow me to get this coding done. I have two kids and a wife who don't exactly make it really easy for me to concentrate on technical tasks.
And I will tell you another thing: you're comments are pretty much in the same bucket of distractions for what I'm doing. Especially when you're like "do this" and "do that." I get that from people floating around the house while I'm working too. But nobody is willing to press start and stop on the camera and do it perfectly every time.
As far as you got all this stuff because you're a TV dude: if you were ahead of me on your equipment tuned to gathering data for researching craps, someone else would be mentioning it, not you.
Your participation is anything but helpful so far from my perspective. You're basically as much of a distraction as my kids are.
My focus over the next few hours of my work on the software is going to be on the FFT to allow the software to work in a noisy environment. When I do my show, I'm going to want to talk without triggering off the recording mechanism.
If the kids are screaming and the wife is cooking, why don't you stop thinking about yourself and go help??
ZCore13
Quote: AhighIt's absolutely about the 1-man lab. And the 1-man lab that works while the kids are screaming and the wife is cooking and all hell is breaking loose around me and nobody wants to help.
If you think it's easy to overlap my schedule with a helper, you must view my life quite differently from what is reality for me. Just the simple process of setting up a dedicated computer to do this was a huge leap to allow me to get this coding done. I have two kids and a wife who don't exactly make it really easy for me to concentrate on technical tasks.
And I will tell you another thing: you're comments are pretty much in the same bucket of distractions for what I'm doing. Especially when you're like "do this" and "do that." I get that from people floating around the house while I'm working too. But nobody is willing to press start and stop on the camera and do it perfectly every time.
As far as you got all this stuff because you're a TV dude: if you were ahead of me on your equipment tuned to gathering data for researching craps, someone else would be mentioning it, not you.
Your participation is anything but helpful so far from my perspective. You're basically as much of a distraction as my kids are.
Ahigh is right about trying to redirect the comments back on topic of his thread.
Kudos. The mods in the past have warned about the topic that will go unmentioned. Opinions and emotions do run deep however and the enthusiasts are drawn like a moth to a flame.
I sympathize with you on trying to accomplish anything with family distractions, I got a good visual of the chaos disturbing the thought process, been there.
Great analogy of the cliché "life is what happens while your making other plans"
I see great possibility's with your program although you might not be interested. I can see it used for things like a golf swing, table tennis, archery, bowling and adapted for a myriad of uses, even surgery?
It's also interesting upthread somewhere you mentioned you could build a computer to do all this on probably a much smaller cost basis than a tv network.
I'm impressed, interested and entertained, keep up the good work.
Quote: Zcore13If the kids are screaming and the wife is cooking, why don't you stop thinking about yourself and go help?
Do you just get excited to post personally insulting things about me? I hope you get nuked from this forum. Your posts are the most worthless posts to me personally, and generally only serve to insult me, for what purpose I don't know. If you were truly any better than me, you wouldn't need to do what you are doing with these kinds of posts.
Quote: AhighDo you just get excited to post personally insulting things about me? I hope you get nuked from this forum.
No insults. Just a question. There's only one person that gets personal and that's you. You bring up peoples jobs, talk down to people telling them to wash your car, criticize how people spell, correct grammar and a lot more.
ZCore13
Quote: petroglyphyou also want to create parameters that disallow creative variables. You are asking the dog to leave while chained to a tree.
there are no creative variables. Folks, this stuff has been researched for 20 years. There is nothing new here. Its all been worked out and done before.
For those of you who believe in the math of gaming, you also have to be believe in the physics of this game.
Quote: JB85Physics tells us that there is an optimum launch angle that will dissipate the energy of the die most efficiently, which is the mechanism that will lead to a soft toss. And that launch angle is 45*. So the angle should never change. You only need to adjust the energy of the throw based on length of the throw if your launch angle is consistent.
Agreed and the key word is "soft toss." And when the toss isn't soft, or the bounce of the table is too bouncy or not bouncy enough then perhaps you have to change the angle or the force of the throw.
Now, getting back to Ahigh's work: if he could make his lab "portable" so it could be used at different schools and at different players' homes on their private tables, he might have a neat little side business because he could use his system to closely show how the dice are performing.
Quote: petroglyphIt's also interesting upthread somewhere you mentioned you could build a computer to do all this on probably a much smaller cost basis than a tv network.
Ten years ago when I worked at the CBS station in LA we recorded audio, and edited our video in an "edit bay" that cost about $40,000 to set up.
Today TV shows are edited on a MAC with a program such as Final Cut Pro which has all of the effects already programmed in, and the total out of pocket cost is under $5,000.
Ten years ago we shot our reports on video cameras costing $20,000 plus another $20,000 for the lenses.
Today, high definition cameras for most TV shows and even movies cost $3,000 or less.
