move the dice
October 30th, 2013 at 8:02:39 AM
permalink
Quote: dicesitterIf finishing on axis is done about 44%
It's not. Most people finish on axis 0% of the time. A die doesn't go off-axis and then come back on; that's like unbreaking a window. There's a huge difference between ending with one of a specific four faces on a die due to random tumbling vs. one of the same four faces appearing because the die stayed on axis. Equating the two is like suggesting that a car that plummeted of a cliff, rolled down the mountainside, and landed wheels-down on a side street below somehow "stayed on the road."
Driving off a cliff is not a sign of good driving skill regardless of how the car ends up. Tumbling dice are not a sign of good shooting skill regardless of how the dice end up.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice."
-- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
October 30th, 2013 at 10:23:23 AM
permalink
backspace
aahigh.com
October 30th, 2013 at 5:09:29 PM
permalink
Math
That is incorrect, there is a vast difference between a roll that allows the dice to bounce
10 times after they hit the table rather that 1-3 times.
The more you limit the action of the dice after they hit the table, the better chance you
have at influence.
A car that wonders all over the road has a better chance of going over that cliff than one
that consistently goes down the center line.
Dicesetter
That is incorrect, there is a vast difference between a roll that allows the dice to bounce
10 times after they hit the table rather that 1-3 times.
The more you limit the action of the dice after they hit the table, the better chance you
have at influence.
A car that wonders all over the road has a better chance of going over that cliff than one
that consistently goes down the center line.
Dicesetter
October 30th, 2013 at 5:54:14 PM
permalink
Quote: MathExtremistIt's not. Most people finish on axis 0% of the time.
ME; In the scheme of things, the dice community has measured the final results, of a throw, in relation to how good are you at keeping dice on axis. Random is 44%. That is 4 primary face hits, 4 double pitches, 8 single pitches(or triple), 16 one die off axis and 4 both die off axis. Sixteen on axis results out of 36. That is how we keep score. That is OUR "One Astronomical Unit". Thanks for understanding. A punter with no influence finishes at 44%. So once again if you can shoot with 0% on axis, you will shortly, with proper set and bankroll own the casino.
When a rock is thrown into a pack of dogs, the one that yells the loudest is the one who got hit.
October 30th, 2013 at 6:09:44 PM
permalink
Quote: DeMangoME; In the scheme of things, the dice community has measured the final results, of a throw, in relation to how good are you at keeping dice on axis. Random is 44%. That is 4 primary face hits, 4 double pitches, 8 single pitches(or triple), 16 one die off axis and 4 both die off axis. Sixteen on axis results out of 36. That is how we keep score. That is OUR "One Astronomical Unit". Thanks for understanding. A punter with no influence finishes at 44%. So once again if you can shoot with 0% on axis, you will shortly, with proper set and bankroll own the casino.
If this is true, what numbers are you betting on to own the casino?
The "bottom line" is not that you can influence the dice or even limit the number of 7s as with a great SRR. The bottom line is are you hitting the numbers you are betting on and then calling the bets off before that 7 does appear.
October 30th, 2013 at 6:22:19 PM
permalink
Quote: AlanMendelsonIf this is true, what numbers are you betting on to own the casino?
With 0% (final outcome) on-axis, using the hardway set you have two possible 7s out of twenty total possible outcomes, and 6 of them are horns... I'm sure you can find something profitable out of that.
October 30th, 2013 at 6:44:22 PM
permalink
Quote: wudgedWith 0% (final outcome) on-axis, using the hardway set you have two possible 7s out of twenty total possible outcomes, and 6 of them are horns... I'm sure you can find something profitable out of that.
so which numbers are you betting on? the horn numbers are all one roll bets. There's a problem for a start.
October 30th, 2013 at 7:13:32 PM
permalink
Quote: AlanMendelsonso which numbers are you betting on? the horn numbers are all one roll bets. There's a problem for a start.
What's the problem with one roll bets?
The 20 outcomes are:
1, 1 = 2
1, 2 = 3
1, 3 = 4
1, 4 = 5
1, 5 = 6
1, 6 = 7
2, 1 = 3
2, 6 = 8
3, 1 = 4
3, 6 = 9
4, 1 = 5
4, 6 = 10
5, 1 = 6
5, 6 = 11
6, 1 = 7
6, 2 = 8
6, 3 = 9
6, 4 = 10
6, 5 = 11
6, 6 = 12
That's:
2: 1
3: 2
4: 2
5: 2
6: 2
7: 2
8: 2
9: 2
10: 2
11: 2
12: 1
Field - you have 12/20 winning combinations, with double and triple payouts = 12/20 + 1/20 * 2 + 1/20 * 3 + 8/20 * -1 = 9/20 = +45%
Buy 4/10 - 2 winners and 2 losers - for a 2:1 payout = (2/4 * 39 + 2/4 * -20) / 20 = 9.5/20 = +47.5%
Hop any easy way - 2/20 * 15 + 18/20 * -1 = 12/20 = +60%
Similarly for place 5/6/8/9 - with an even shot of hitting the number before the 7, and a greater than even payout, it will result in +EV.
Take your shot to a crapless table and buy the extremes...
The ridiculous edge of fire bet probably even becomes +EV at this point.
October 30th, 2013 at 7:17:48 PM
permalink
Actually you havent answered my question: where are you putting your money? And how much?
Your math means nothing until you tell me how much money is on the table.
Your math means nothing until you tell me how much money is on the table.
October 30th, 2013 at 7:20:09 PM
permalink
Further, change your set to straight sixes (6s on top, 3s facing - so 2 and 5 are on the sides) - all 3 combinations of 4 and 10 will be "off-axis"
Buy 4/10 - 3 winners and 2 losers - for a 2:1 payout = (3/5 * 39 + 2/5 * -20) / 20 = 15.4/20 = +77%
Buy 4/10 - 3 winners and 2 losers - for a 2:1 payout = (3/5 * 39 + 2/5 * -20) / 20 = 15.4/20 = +77%
October 30th, 2013 at 7:20:51 PM
permalink
Quote: AlanMendelsonActually you havent answered my question: where are you putting your money? And how much?
Your math means nothing until you tell me how much money is on the table.
What? You put it on ANY / ALL of those bets I just listed. Why would you not be betting something that is +EV
October 30th, 2013 at 7:43:25 PM
permalink
Quote: wudgedWhat? You put it on ANY / ALL of those bets I just listed. Why would you not be betting something that is +EV
Do you put it all on one number? A combination of numbers? Which number/numbers do you bet on? As they say "show your work."
Quote: wudgedFurther, change your set to straight sixes (6s on top, 3s facing - so 2 and 5 are on the sides) - all 3 combinations of 4 and 10 will be "off-axis"
Buy 4/10 - 3 winners and 2 losers - for a 2:1 payout = (3/5 * 39 + 2/5 * -20) / 20 = 15.4/20 = +77%
I see. But with the straight sixes set the most likely outcome is a 7 out.
October 30th, 2013 at 7:46:19 PM
permalink
numbers
I would love to know what number to bet on, i would be the first to do it.
Give me a $100 4, hit and go home. Next day maybe a 10.
There is no way to know what number will come up next.
dicesetter
I would love to know what number to bet on, i would be the first to do it.
Give me a $100 4, hit and go home. Next day maybe a 10.
There is no way to know what number will come up next.
dicesetter
October 30th, 2013 at 8:05:46 PM
permalink
the straight sixes is a version of the hardway set. No more or less likely to throw a seven than any of the hardway formations with the 1 and 6 on the axis.Quote: AlanMendelsonDo you put it all on one number? A combination of numbers? Which number/numbers do you bet on? As they say "show your work."
I see. But with the straight sixes set the most likely outcome is a 7 out.
October 30th, 2013 at 8:11:15 PM
permalink
Quote: DeMangoME; In the scheme of things, the dice community has measured the final results, of a throw, in relation to how good are you at keeping dice on axis. Random is 44%. That is 4 primary face hits, 4 double pitches, 8 single pitches(or triple), 16 one die off axis and 4 both die off axis. Sixteen on axis results out of 36. That is how we keep score. That is OUR "One Astronomical Unit". Thanks for understanding.
I do understand, in exactly the same way Copernicus and Galileo understood geocentricity.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice."
-- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
October 30th, 2013 at 8:19:56 PM
permalink
It's getting to be like the Bac section. You lose one and a couple more pop up. It's like Zombies.
ZCore13
ZCore13
I am an employee of a Casino. Former Table Games Director,, current Pit Supervisor. All the personal opinions I post are my own and do not represent the opinions of the Casino or Tribe that I work for.
October 30th, 2013 at 8:55:01 PM
permalink
Quote: Zcore13It's getting to be like the Bac section. You lose one and a couple more pop up. It's like Zombies.
ZCore13
LOL! It's like bugs hatching on a hot sidewalk in
July. You stomp a bunch of them and 6 more
show up. And bac is such a nothing game.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
October 30th, 2013 at 9:58:54 PM
permalink
Quote: JB85the straight sixes is a version of the hardway set. No more or less likely to throw a seven than any of the hardway formations with the 1 and 6 on the axis.
Youre right, which is why I dont use it:
with the straight sixes set, any double rotation will give me a 7 on all paired landing faces.
with the hardway set, any double rotation will give me a 7 on all paired landing faces.
With the cross sixes set a double rotation gives you a 7 on only two paired landing faces.
October 30th, 2013 at 10:49:12 PM
permalink
Anyway, with a theoretical 0% on axis throw using a single axis set you have a SRR (RSR) of 10.
When a rock is thrown into a pack of dogs, the one that yells the loudest is the one who got hit.
October 30th, 2013 at 11:03:09 PM
permalink
Quote: DeMangoAnyway, with a theoretical 0% on axis throw using a single axis set you have a SRR (RSR) of 10.
I cannot visualize what you are saying here. Could you help me out and give me an example?
October 31st, 2013 at 2:21:13 AM
permalink
20 off axis results. 2 sevens. 20/2=10 Off course this is all in the fantasy world ME created.
When a rock is thrown into a pack of dogs, the one that yells the loudest is the one who got hit.
October 31st, 2013 at 4:25:13 AM
permalink
Quote: AlanMendelsonDo you put it all on one number? A combination of numbers? Which number/numbers do you bet on? As they say "show your work."
What does it matter? Just pick something and bet it. You are expected close to a 50% return on anything I listed...
Put max bet across with a max bet in the field.
Quote: AlanMendelsonI see. But with the straight sixes set the most likely outcome is a 7 out.
With a 0% (final result, not compelte toss) on-axis result, there are only 2 possible 7s with the straight sixes set - 2-5 and 5-2. With any traditional on-axis "7 strong" set, there are only 2 7s that will appear with a 0% on-axis result. I already listed every possible combination before for the hardway set.
October 31st, 2013 at 7:44:10 AM
permalink
Correct, but to take advantage of this with the X6 or any of the flying V sets you need to land a high percentage on axis. If you don't this doesn't really matter. Since I don't believe in axis control my opinion is that the hardway sets in general are the best option if you are trying to influence the dice.Quote: AlanMendelsonYoure right, which is why I dont use it:
with the straight sixes set, any double rotation will give me a 7 on all paired landing faces.
with the hardway set, any double rotation will give me a 7 on all paired landing faces.
With the cross sixes set a double rotation gives you a 7 on only two paired landing faces.
October 31st, 2013 at 7:50:18 AM
permalink
If you don't believe in "on axis" control, what kind of control do you believe in? To have influence, you first must have some sort of control.
ZCore13
ZCore13
I am an employee of a Casino. Former Table Games Director,, current Pit Supervisor. All the personal opinions I post are my own and do not represent the opinions of the Casino or Tribe that I work for.
October 31st, 2013 at 8:20:18 AM
permalink
Quote: DeMango20 off axis results. 2 sevens. 20/2=10 Off course this is all in the fantasy world ME created.
You think that a roll should be defined as "on axis" if it bounces off someone's shirt, back onto the table, crashes into a stack of chips, and happens to land with the initial faces upward. If anyone's fantasizing, it's not me.
Edited to add: A roll should be evaluated quantifiably based on how its expected distribution is altered from equally-likely faces. There are several ways to do this, but all of them result in sufficient information to compute the altered expectation for each bet. Your flawed concept of "on-axis" does not, and because the expectation of rolls under equal face likelihood is 44% of what you're calling "on-axis" already, what you're really saying is that there is no influence evident from that measurement. The oft-discussed SRR measurement provides even less information.
If you're serious about understanding how your attempts at influence may alter the probability distribution of the dice and the resultant expectations for the wagers, you'll first need to properly measure them. Then you can determine how best to deploy your bankroll. If you're not serious, just keep talking about "on-axis" and "SRR" as you have been.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice."
-- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
October 31st, 2013 at 4:14:16 PM
permalink
ME; the work has been done for many, many years. You just can't jump in and give it your parameters. If you wish to investigate further, there are dice centric boards that will help you out. Maybe Stanford Wong could explain it to you!
When a rock is thrown into a pack of dogs, the one that yells the loudest is the one who got hit.
October 31st, 2013 at 4:49:48 PM
permalink
Quote: DeMangoME; the work has been done for many, many years. You just can't jump in and give it your parameters. If you wish to investigate further, there are dice centric boards that will help you out. Maybe Stanford Wong could explain it to you!
So the work has been done for many, many years, but the only place you can find "proof" that it exists is at dice centric websites?
How is it that everything else in the world has proof that it exists, if it does, outside of just a small groip or website, but not dice control?
ZCore13
I am an employee of a Casino. Former Table Games Director,, current Pit Supervisor. All the personal opinions I post are my own and do not represent the opinions of the Casino or Tribe that I work for.
October 31st, 2013 at 4:56:00 PM
permalink
I say start with a zero shot......
Forget the back wall for a second.... Just start with a shot on the felt that can be hit 90% of the time and land within 6-10 inches of the same spot. To start the new Test. a person has to be able to do this.
Forget the back wall for a second.... Just start with a shot on the felt that can be hit 90% of the time and land within 6-10 inches of the same spot. To start the new Test. a person has to be able to do this.
"I'm a DO'er and you my friend, are a Don'ter"
-Mark Walberg
pain and Gain
October 31st, 2013 at 5:12:47 PM
permalink
Quote: DeMangoME; the work has been done for many, many years. You just can't jump in and give it your parameters. If you wish to investigate further, there are dice centric boards that will help you out. Maybe Stanford Wong could explain it to you!
Work? What work? Wishful thinking about avoiding sevens without any real math to back it up? If that's what passes for "work" in the DI crowd, it's easy to understand why it gets no respect.
Think I'm wrong? Then please demonstrate that your "work" is useful:
Assume a shooter has an RSR of 6.5. Compute the EV on the passline, place 6, and hard 8 wagers. Go.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice."
-- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
October 31st, 2013 at 6:11:41 PM
permalink
Quote: MathExtremist
Assume a shooter has an RSR of 6.5. Compute the EV on the passline, place 6, and hard 8 wagers. Go.
As a matter of fact Stanford Wong wrote Dice Tool. It's part of the program Bone Tracker. It will give you the figures you seek. You find it. Go.
When a rock is thrown into a pack of dogs, the one that yells the loudest is the one who got hit.
October 31st, 2013 at 6:13:52 PM
permalink
Quote: Zcore13
How is it that everything else in the world has proof that it exists, if it does, outside of just a small groip or website, but not dice control?
ZCore13
We are talking about measuring calculations, not proof of anything. Try to follow along and stay on topic!
What is a groip?
When a rock is thrown into a pack of dogs, the one that yells the loudest is the one who got hit.
October 31st, 2013 at 7:53:18 PM
permalink
Quote: DeMangoAs a matter of fact Stanford Wong wrote Dice Tool. It's part of the program Bone Tracker. It will give you the figures you seek. You find it. Go.
No it won't. Dice Tool requires many inputs, not just RSR, and it assumes that variables like "primary hit", "double pitch" and "single pitch on axis" are independent of each other. That is clearly not true, and just as clearly it assumes a particular physical model. Invalid assumptions lead to invalid results.
So I'll ask again: what is the EV on the passline, place 6, and hard 8 wagers if the shooter has an RSR of 6.5? Dice Tool can't calculate that. Can you?
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice."
-- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
October 31st, 2013 at 8:54:18 PM
permalink
Dice Tool has but one input; Foundation Frequencies. With those your questions are answered depending on the dice set you choose. So now that you know the inputs, you do the work. Go.
And telling us that RSR (SRR) is an input tells me you know extremely nothing about Dice Tool.
And telling us that RSR (SRR) is an input tells me you know extremely nothing about Dice Tool.
When a rock is thrown into a pack of dogs, the one that yells the loudest is the one who got hit.
October 31st, 2013 at 9:45:06 PM
permalink
Quote: DeMangoDice Tool has but one input; Foundation Frequencies. With those your questions are answered depending on the dice set you choose. So now that you know the inputs, you do the work. Go.
And telling us that RSR (SRR) is an input tells me you know extremely nothing about Dice Tool.
Well, "foundation frequencies" is multiple inputs, not just one. The concept is interesting but ultimately flawed because it is not grounded in physics. I'm very aware of the computations inside Dice Tool and they are lacking. There is no reason to believe that any particular method of throwing, if it indicated influence at all, would involve the multiple degrees of freedom implied by multiple independent frequencies. Dice Tool is a theoretical what-if analysis tool that is not grounded in any plausible physical model. Invalid assumptions lead to invalid results.
And I didn't say RSR was an input to Dice Tool. You were the one who brought that up. I simply asked you whether you could compute the house edge from the RSR. You can't, and I'm pretty sure you know that.
The bottom line is that you're conflating a real physical model, the idea of keeping the dice on axis, with how the dice end up irrespective of any physical model. If you pick any four faces on each die, one of them will show on both dice 44% of the time if you throw the dice randomly and they never stay on axis. Calling that "on axis" anyway is clearly incorrect, despite the many years you and your colleagues have spent mis-using the phrase. It doesn't ultimately matter -- you can call it whatever you want -- but it's not doing you any favors when someone who actually can do the math asks "wait, what if you *could* keep the dice on-axis 5% of the time?" If the dice stay on axis, the chances of one of the four axis faces appearing on each die is 100%, not 44%. The question you should be asking, if you weren't so stubbornly committed to your flawed spreadsheets, is "what percentage of the time can I actually make the dice stay on axis and guarantee one of those on-axis results?"
What tools like Bone Tracker and Dice Tool evaluate are different questions. They answer "what did my results show based on post-hoc analysis without any plausible reason to believe it will continue."
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice."
-- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
October 31st, 2013 at 9:47:12 PM
permalink
Quote: DeMangoME; In the scheme of things, the dice community has measured the final results, of a throw, in relation to how good are you at keeping dice on axis. Random is 44%. That is 4 primary face hits, 4 double pitches, 8 single pitches(or triple), 16 one die off axis and 4 both die off axis. Sixteen on axis results out of 36. That is how we keep score. That is OUR "One Astronomical Unit". Thanks for understanding. A punter with no influence finishes at 44%. So once again if you can shoot with 0% on axis, you will shortly, with proper set and bankroll own the casino.
Sounds like a pretty exclusive club you have there.
October 31st, 2013 at 9:49:19 PM
permalink
Quote: DeMangoAs a matter of fact Stanford Wong wrote Dice Tool. It's part of the program Bone Tracker. It will give you the figures you seek. You find it. Go.
That's all find and dandy, but now days after seeing slow-motion videos, Stanford Wong is saying something different. Maybe you never took the time to listen to this radio show but I think you should, I've been on the tables many times with Stanford Wong, and he was doing the same thing that everybody does, losing when it wasn't his day for him to be in the spot light of good luck! The one thing I can say about Stanford Wong, is that he sure knows how to bet the game if it's going his way, his shooting still looks good, but that still didn't help him to win some of the times he was on the table.
Here is a link that tells you what he thinks now days, please pay close attention to 26:50 and on from there, but you should listen to the whole interview. http://www.bobdancer.com/mp3/gwae102711.mp3?CFID=65484348&CFTOKEN=31651067
At lease he is telling it like it is even when he is still selling his books. Now days the slow-motion is even better then when he was looking at it, and it truly shows the dice bouncing all over the place when they hit the table!
Note, all my post start with this is just my opinion...!
You do good brada ..!
superrick
Winning comes from knowledge and skill when your betting and not reading fiction
http://procraps4u2.myfanforum.org/index.php
...
October 31st, 2013 at 9:51:05 PM
permalink
ahigh comment
when i suggest he take a class to improve, here was his reply....
The truth is already out there for those who wish to see it: the effort is not worth the return just on your time alone. Add in the costs of a class, and I could shoot for a whole year and lose less money with a random shot.
When a guy is that good you need to listen....
Tonight was an example.....
4 of us got together for a session, we have all taken atleast 2 classes, and we were joined by two other good players.
It was awful, no one bought in during a roll, no one slowed the game down with poor bets, no one forgot what they
had bet on, no one got in an argument with the crew, no one placed any chips when some one was shooting.
ON top of that, in 3.5 hours we managed only a 41, 40, 29,27,25,21,18 and 17. plus couple of short rolls.
Imagine that, what a waste, we could have saved our money and just all gone on the ahigh show and made video
records of the random throws we used to have. hell ahigh can do thatin one evening himself.
No doubt when the guy is right, he is right.
dicesetter.
when i suggest he take a class to improve, here was his reply....
The truth is already out there for those who wish to see it: the effort is not worth the return just on your time alone. Add in the costs of a class, and I could shoot for a whole year and lose less money with a random shot.
When a guy is that good you need to listen....
Tonight was an example.....
4 of us got together for a session, we have all taken atleast 2 classes, and we were joined by two other good players.
It was awful, no one bought in during a roll, no one slowed the game down with poor bets, no one forgot what they
had bet on, no one got in an argument with the crew, no one placed any chips when some one was shooting.
ON top of that, in 3.5 hours we managed only a 41, 40, 29,27,25,21,18 and 17. plus couple of short rolls.
Imagine that, what a waste, we could have saved our money and just all gone on the ahigh show and made video
records of the random throws we used to have. hell ahigh can do thatin one evening himself.
No doubt when the guy is right, he is right.
dicesetter.
October 31st, 2013 at 10:41:01 PM
permalink
Quote: DeMangothere are dice centric boards
Youve made comments before about certain "dice boards" and I've asked you to list them. You never have. Care to now?
October 31st, 2013 at 10:43:41 PM
permalink
Rick; I listened to that a while back, interesting it was. I'm sure you have read Heavy's take on that, I'll go along with what the big man says.
When a rock is thrown into a pack of dogs, the one that yells the loudest is the one who got hit.
October 31st, 2013 at 10:44:58 PM
permalink
Quote: AlanMendelsonYouve made comments before about certain "dice boards" and I've asked you to list them. You never have. Care to now?
Every one here wants others to do their research. Sorry.
When a rock is thrown into a pack of dogs, the one that yells the loudest is the one who got hit.
October 31st, 2013 at 10:49:01 PM
permalink
Quote: DeMangoEvery one here wants others to do their research. Sorry.
It's not a matter of research. Research has shown that all of the "dice centric boards" are usuaully those of the misinformed and the hucksters. Now if you have discovered some real, vital reseach on a dice centric board, you would gladly share the ifnormation. Instead, I am sure your "dice centric boards" are the same ones we all know about with various magical and supernatural claims.
So, until you can show otherwise, I will classify your "dice centric boards" as being more of the BS variety.
November 1st, 2013 at 8:55:26 AM
permalink
Quote: AlanMendelsonIt's not a matter of research. Research has shown that all of the "dice centric boards" are usuaully those of the misinformed and the hucksters. Now if you have discovered some real, vital reseach on a dice centric board, you would gladly share the ifnormation. Instead, I am sure your "dice centric boards" are the same ones we all know about with various magical and supernatural claims.
So, until you can show otherwise, I will classify your "dice centric boards" as being more of the BS variety.
I've already done the research -- that's why I know RSR is useless. The favored technique of the dice-setting acolytes is to record a large number of rolls based only on their final resting position, load all that into a spreadsheet, and then determine what dice set to use based on transformations. But all that is predicated on the obviously-wrong premise that the player already has a consistent ability to bias the dice -- specifically, that the distribution that was observed in the player's rolls is going to continue rather than the distribution that is expected from equiprobable faces. But that premise is the very thing that should be tested. It should not be assumed to be true.
And then that flawed assumption is compounded with incorrect data-gathering techniques. That involves another flawed assumption that any roll that merely starts and ends on the same two faces was intentionally achieved, and was therefore an "on-axis" throw despite how the dice may have tumbled in the interim. Add it all together and you have nothing more than a bunch of innumerate gibberish. It's not useful, despite how old it is.
I'll say this again: if you can actually keep both dice stable on the pitch axis while they travel, bounce, and come to rest -- even 10% of the time, or just once out of every 10 rolls on average -- you can have a meaningful edge over the casino. But nobody knows that because they're too busy counting their own rolls as being "on axis" regardless of how they tumble.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice."
-- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
November 1st, 2013 at 9:03:24 AM
permalink
Yeah, you can't trust people on this site. People with math, statistic, high level casino employment, game developers, game protection experts, etc. It's the "dice centric" sites with all the yard maintenance workers, Taco Bell employees and construction workers that should be trusted when it comes to the chances of controlling how dice end up after being thrown in the air, hitting a surface, bouncing off an abnormally shaped wall and rolling to a stop.
ZCore13
ZCore13
I am an employee of a Casino. Former Table Games Director,, current Pit Supervisor. All the personal opinions I post are my own and do not represent the opinions of the Casino or Tribe that I work for.
November 1st, 2013 at 9:51:53 AM
permalink
Quote: DeMangoRick; I listened to that a while back, interesting it was. I'm sure you have read Heavy's take on that, I'll go along with what the big man says.
No,.. I've not read that, as you may already know, Heavy's does like anybody that will question The Madprofessor about his great fiction! So, I'm not a member there, but some guys just can't resist sending me stuff that is just BS, and they want me to prove that it couldn't happen. With that said, I still tell everybody that if they are going to play craps all the time they should take a class, I've never said that they shouldn't take a class that he puts on, I've said many time if you decide to take any class to make sure that the class has a well rounded section on betting the game and you will get some quality one on one time with more then one instructor, and what ever school that they choose shouldn't allow a bunch of fiction on their craps board.
There has been a lot of minds change after seeing some good slow-motion videos, about what happens once the dice hit the tables! I've even seen some casinos change there tables, from tables that were like trampolines, to tables where everybody can keep the dice on the tables. Casinos were losing a lot of money by having tables that nobody could keep the dice on, after all they make their money of rolls per hour. If the dice are on the floor on just about every throw, they are losing money on their craps tables.
There is nothing that you can call anything but random after watching a good slow-motion video. The same thing goes for an on axis shot, we all have been hoodwinked by the guys that sell on axis shooting! Watch one of Ahigh videos and please tell me that you still think that the dice stay on axis. Now that is if you can be honest with yourself when watching one!
Sure the dice may end up on the two top numbers that you want, but they bounce all over the place to get them.
I know that I'm not the best like guy, because I tell it like it really is when it comes to trying to become a DI. If you want to believe in fairytales, you have every right to! There are some really great fiction on some of the craps boards, but as I like to say, fiction doesn't put money in your pocket.
Ahigh had a very interesting post on his board, where he showed the chips in a guys rack, and now get this, he made all of those chips, making the bad field bet. Damn I just hate it when nobody is hitting those 6's and 8's and everybody is making those damn field numbers. Ahigh said this guy had about $10,000 in his rack but didn't know when to quit, and gave it back.
And the moral of the story is?
Note, all my post start with this is just my opinion...!
You do good brada ..!
superrick
Winning comes from knowledge and skill when your betting and not reading fiction
http://procraps4u2.myfanforum.org/index.php
...
November 4th, 2013 at 9:20:47 AM
permalink
Math
what your saying about SRR does not make any sense.
Id you an influence the dice, you will extend your rolls beyond random....period.
If you think your a DI and your srr is 6 after 3 years of practice, you have no
influence at all.
The only way one could say that an extended SRR over time is not important is because
you think influence is not possible..If you think that , well most people dont think
it can be done so you are in good company. In that case all you have do is forget about it
and talk about how to lesson your loses on the table.
If i did not think it worked i would not bother with it , i would not fish in lake that i felt
had no fish.
If the perfect roll were possible, it would be hard 4,6,8,10 on with a hardway set.
If you srr was only random at 6, and you had no idea which "perfect" roll you would
throw, you could hit them all day and never make a dime since you have to bet on
4,6,8,10 or hardways 4/6/8/10 and with on a random SRR of 6 you would be in deep
crap.
What makes you money is having an srr of 7 or more and you hope that most rolls are not
garbage numbers. This is vital if you are a place better. If you are a come better, extended
rolls are great, but repeating numbers is more important.
You appear to assume that all DI's that have an extended SRR throw all garbage or bet
on numbers they dont expect to make.
I think they go hand in hand, one reliable indicator of influence is SRR.
Betting is part of it, you cant always bet 6 & 8 if you throw 9 and 10.
Thursday night i had a good SRR and made very good money, friday night
i had a terrible SRR and lost money, and i was hitting all good numbers, but
it was 4/8/9 out , 10/4/6/ out 8/8/9 out all night long . So hitting good numbers
without a positive SRR is slow death.
dicesetter
what your saying about SRR does not make any sense.
Id you an influence the dice, you will extend your rolls beyond random....period.
If you think your a DI and your srr is 6 after 3 years of practice, you have no
influence at all.
The only way one could say that an extended SRR over time is not important is because
you think influence is not possible..If you think that , well most people dont think
it can be done so you are in good company. In that case all you have do is forget about it
and talk about how to lesson your loses on the table.
If i did not think it worked i would not bother with it , i would not fish in lake that i felt
had no fish.
If the perfect roll were possible, it would be hard 4,6,8,10 on with a hardway set.
If you srr was only random at 6, and you had no idea which "perfect" roll you would
throw, you could hit them all day and never make a dime since you have to bet on
4,6,8,10 or hardways 4/6/8/10 and with on a random SRR of 6 you would be in deep
crap.
What makes you money is having an srr of 7 or more and you hope that most rolls are not
garbage numbers. This is vital if you are a place better. If you are a come better, extended
rolls are great, but repeating numbers is more important.
You appear to assume that all DI's that have an extended SRR throw all garbage or bet
on numbers they dont expect to make.
I think they go hand in hand, one reliable indicator of influence is SRR.
Betting is part of it, you cant always bet 6 & 8 if you throw 9 and 10.
Thursday night i had a good SRR and made very good money, friday night
i had a terrible SRR and lost money, and i was hitting all good numbers, but
it was 4/8/9 out , 10/4/6/ out 8/8/9 out all night long . So hitting good numbers
without a positive SRR is slow death.
dicesetter
November 4th, 2013 at 11:38:47 AM
permalink
Quote: dicesitterMath
what your saying about SRR does not make any sense.
Id you an influence the dice, you will extend your rolls beyond random....period.
But you won't know how to bet unless you look at the entire distribution, not just SRR. When you actually do the calculations, you'll realize what I've been saying. But if you're just going to stick with what you've read in the popular dice-controlling lore, written by people who are using hand-wavy assumptions and guesswork rather than actual calculations, you'll be just as in the dark as they are.
SRR is a useless measurement because it doesn't tell you if you have a player edge on any given bet, nor what it is, so you can't properly determine where to put your money. You think SRR is important, and you think a larger SRR is "better." That may make intuitive sense but it's totally wrong. When you stop buying into the conventional wisdom and actually try to calculate the house edge for yourself, you'll see why.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice."
-- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
November 4th, 2013 at 6:17:16 PM
permalink
This is probably the most important point that everyone should understand:
All of you folks with practice rigs and home tables: you can have the highest SRRs in the universe but if you are not hitting the numbers you bet on, and if you don't hit them enough to cover your original outlay and put a profit in your rail, you will lose.
Quote: MathExtremist
SRR is a useless measurement because it doesn't tell you if you have a player edge on any given bet, nor what it is, so you can't properly determine where to put your money.
All of you folks with practice rigs and home tables: you can have the highest SRRs in the universe but if you are not hitting the numbers you bet on, and if you don't hit them enough to cover your original outlay and put a profit in your rail, you will lose.
November 4th, 2013 at 6:34:49 PM
permalink
More Extreme Garbage. Your foundation Frequencies are all important. Knowing those, then you pick a set that has the number distribution you seek. For example if you throw more double pitches than normal you may use an all sevens set to avoid the seven, instead of the hardway set. Your deviation from normal is paramount and SRR is merely a measurement of a set, not necessarily the set you will use.
When a rock is thrown into a pack of dogs, the one that yells the loudest is the one who got hit.
November 4th, 2013 at 7:16:29 PM
permalink
Alan
This is true, but the idea that SRR is unimportant is nonsense...... it is part of
the effect of working to have some influence over the dice outcome.
You cant say you have an effect on the dice if you average 6 rools per hand your random period....
There is no question you have to hit the numbers your on, but whether your a place better or
a come better, the more outcomes you have per hand, the most money you can make.
Now SRR has to be measured correctly, you cant have a 3 hand and make the point, then have
3 sevens on the come out, a winner and another 7 and think you have an SRR of of 8. Your
SRR have to be a true measurement of the 7 ratio.
The last 3 months i was lucky enough to play with 3 of the best craps players in the country, and
all of them indicater SRR is vital, but they also say that betting is where the money is, you have to
understand your advantage and bet accordingly.
dicesetter.
This is true, but the idea that SRR is unimportant is nonsense...... it is part of
the effect of working to have some influence over the dice outcome.
You cant say you have an effect on the dice if you average 6 rools per hand your random period....
There is no question you have to hit the numbers your on, but whether your a place better or
a come better, the more outcomes you have per hand, the most money you can make.
Now SRR has to be measured correctly, you cant have a 3 hand and make the point, then have
3 sevens on the come out, a winner and another 7 and think you have an SRR of of 8. Your
SRR have to be a true measurement of the 7 ratio.
The last 3 months i was lucky enough to play with 3 of the best craps players in the country, and
all of them indicater SRR is vital, but they also say that betting is where the money is, you have to
understand your advantage and bet accordingly.
dicesetter.
November 4th, 2013 at 7:16:31 PM
permalink
Alan
This is true, but the idea that SRR is unimportant is nonsense...... it is part of
the effect of working to have some influence over the dice outcome.
You cant say you have an effect on the dice if you average 6 rools per hand your random period....
There is no question you have to hit the numbers your on, but whether your a place better or
a come better, the more outcomes you have per hand, the most money you can make.
Now SRR has to be measured correctly, you cant have a 3 hand and make the point, then have
3 sevens on the come out, a winner and another 7 and think you have an SRR of of 8. Your
SRR have to be a true measurement of the 7 ratio.
The last 3 months i was lucky enough to play with 3 of the best craps players in the country, and
all of them indicater SRR is vital, but they also say that betting is where the money is, you have to
understand your advantage and bet accordingly.
dicesetter.
This is true, but the idea that SRR is unimportant is nonsense...... it is part of
the effect of working to have some influence over the dice outcome.
You cant say you have an effect on the dice if you average 6 rools per hand your random period....
There is no question you have to hit the numbers your on, but whether your a place better or
a come better, the more outcomes you have per hand, the most money you can make.
Now SRR has to be measured correctly, you cant have a 3 hand and make the point, then have
3 sevens on the come out, a winner and another 7 and think you have an SRR of of 8. Your
SRR have to be a true measurement of the 7 ratio.
The last 3 months i was lucky enough to play with 3 of the best craps players in the country, and
all of them indicater SRR is vital, but they also say that betting is where the money is, you have to
understand your advantage and bet accordingly.
dicesetter.
