Dice control with a mechanical throwing device

Dice control with a mechanical throwing device

This setup is to show you that you too, can make a very simple dice throwing device. I set this up so the dice only have 6 inches to drop, then they fly through the air 6 inches before they hit the table, then they roll 14 1/2 inches to the back wall and hit under the diamonds.

Now we all heard all of these school's that teach on axis shooting say they have no problem controlling the dice because they hit underneath the diamonds, of course one of my favorite sayings is, what the hell happened the common sense in America?

This series of videos is going to show that it went out the door, when they coined those famous words dice control or dice influencer. After those famous words were coined all of the fiction writer jumped on board! Their way of controlling their followers was to run anybody off that question them, or worse yet call them every name in the book including nuts!

There are a few boards that allow all the fiction to continue so they can sell their schools, books, and the boards they use to suck in their next sucker with their great fiction! For them it's all about the money they can make, by having everybody believe their fiction!
These guys that are selling on axis shooting are not making money on their shoot ability, they are making it all the classes they sell and the hookup fees they correct! Their good old boys will defend them any time someone like me comes along to poke holes in their great fiction!

If you want to stand a chance of winning at craps you have to have a real outlook on the game, you need to know everything about the math of the game and how they run the casinos. Then you need to know what parts of the math of the game you can throw out, and what you can use!

This is going to be a series of videos on what happens when the dice hit the table and are thrown the same way every time. Remember these dice are flying off the ramp dropping six inches before they hit the table, they fly out six inches, where they hit the table and roll fourteen and a half inches to the back wall hit below the diamonds, then bouncing back about two inches some of the times!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i29XrhcBYM8

Watched carefully. Even by the second "roll" of the dice, they were off from the very beginning. They were not aligned; they were not together. They did not spend time in the air. They did not have a backspin.

The "machine" doesn't have the goods.

Only watched one video but if I have time I will watch the others. I would not get too upset Superrick because even the best baseball throwing machines, the ones used in the major leagues, do not throw the ball the same way.

Quote: FrankScoblete

Watched carefully. Even by the second "roll" of the dice, they were off from the very beginning. They were not aligned; they were not together. They did not spend time in the air. They did not have a backspin.

The "machine" doesn't have the goods.

Only watched one video but if I have time I will watch the others. I would not get too upset Superrick because even the best baseball throwing machines, the ones used in the major leagues, do not throw the ball the same way.

Now Now Now,.. Frank why did I know that you would be one of the first to respond to this series of videos with a statement like that. How about one more video, that I was going to call "The World Famous Blanket Roll", because basically that's what it's doing.

As soon as the dice come off the end of the ramp there is rotation, when they hit the felt, they start rolling just like the world famous blanket roll, that Scarne wrote about in his book Scarne on dice!

Frank didn't you write this?

Quote: FrankScoblete

Superrick posted some dice throws of mine and some others on some thread here to which I responded. I think it makes interesting reading.

As for belief, I guess it really doesn't matter. You can look at slow motion shots on the Internet of my throw --- good throws and bad throws. I would also recommend you read my book "Cutting Edge Craps" which explains exactly what dice do when they land --- they do a lot more than most players tend to think --- and study the idea of "correspondence" and the "V" shape landings. Also how the back wall isn't the complete dragon everyone supposes it is.

So evident what you said in the above quote must be BS, because in order to get "V" shape landings your dice would not be together!

Maybe you want me to make a video, with the dice super glued together, is that it? Well Frank, I don't think that will be happening anytime soon. Here enjoy this video too!

If you watch closely, you will see that the dice self center themselves, as they are going down the ramp!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dk6UTWUOBxw

You don't have a machine that even comes close to influencing the dice. You are just dropping the dice down a slide. Your "slide" makes no attempt at keeping the dice on axis, or controlling the spin, or even HITTING THE CENTER OF THE BACK WALL.

Your "machine" which is nothing more than a slide gets a "fail" for anything having to do with dice influencing or dice control.

Sorry. it was a waste of time.

Quote: AlanMendelson

You don't have a machine that even comes close to influencing the dice. You are just dropping the dice down a slide. Your "slide" makes no attempt at keeping the dice on axis, or controlling the spin, or even HITTING THE CENTER OF THE BACK WALL.

Your "machine" which is nothing more than a slide gets a "fail" for anything having to do with dice influencing or dice control.

Sorry. it was a waste of time.

Alan,... Really are you in La La land, you better open your eyes!

Sorry, Superrick, failed experiment. You can't get out of it by attacking me or Alan. If you invent a machine that actually does what you say it does I'd be the first to applaud you. I have no emotional stake in what you are doing.

Quote: FrankScoblete

Sorry, Superrick, failed experiment. You can't get out of it by attacking me or Alan. If you invent a machine that actually does what you say it does I'd be the first to applaud you. I have no emotional stake in what you are doing.

Come on Frank,.. I'm not attacking you or Alan. Quite the contrary, you are attacking what I came up that shows what the dice really do, when they are only thrown 20, ½ inches.
Let's face facts, the dice are only 6 inches off the table, when they are released from the end of the ramp. There is no disputing what you are seeing. The dice leave the end of the ramp with the same velocity every time, there is nothing that changes, every time dice are released.

You're like a good politician Frank, that is trying to spin facts by putting the blame on the quality of what the ramp type machine is doing every time the dice leave end of the ramp. Even if I took the time to build the perfect machine to throw the dice to your specifications, you would find fault, in what everybody was seeing!

They used to say, that one picture was worth 1000 words, but that is no longer true, because common sense went right out the window here in America. Everybody wants to live La la land, they have politicians like you, that became spin doctors!

Frank,.. I have one question for you, well lets make it two. How many years, had you been writing and teaching about dice control? Now here's the killer Frank, why didn't you, come up with some type of machine to prove that dice control works?

Here I'll answer that last question for you, you know that if you made a machine everybody would see the same type of results they are seeing with my very simple, ramp type machine.

I would expect for a dice setting machine, you would at least have the portion of the fall under control where your device touches the dices. Even that is way off.

The first step towards a dice setting machine would be to get the throw itself consistent. Put your device above a sandbox, let the dice slide down your machine, and if they all stick in the same place, same orientation in the sand - then maybe you have something. Before that, I would not even try putting it on a felt.

You're kidding, right?

Even if we were to accept that your device might prove or disprove something, there's way too much human influence in it's design and function to allow the results to hold any significance.

1 - The dice don't always start at the top of the slide.
2 - The dice aren't always flat / level.
3 - The gate doesn't always lift cleanly.
4 - The camera angle doesn't allow the viewer to see any of the other sides of the dice before release.

Redesign the slide:

1 - Use square tracks.
2 - Have the end of the slide curve up, ski-jump fashion, so that the dice get a uniform spin. This will probably produce forward spin, but it's far better than no spin.
3 - Have the slide be long enough so the dice have enough speed so that they can be launched from the other side of the prop bets and still hit the wall.
4 - Use a secondary mechanism on the gate so human influence doesn't affect the launch characteristics.

Do those things and maybe, just maybe, you'll have something worth watching and talking about.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

You're kidding, right?

Even if we were to accept that your device might prove or disprove something, there's way too much human influence in it's design and function to allow the results to hold any significance.

1 - The dice don't always start at the top of the slide.
2 - The dice aren't always flat / level.
3 - The gate doesn't always lift cleanly.
4 - The camera angle doesn't allow the viewer to see any of the other sides of the dice before release.

Redesign the slide:

1 - Use square tracks.
2 - Have the end of the slide curve up, ski-jump fashion, so that the dice get a uniform spin. This will probably produce forward spin, but it's far better than no spin.
3 - Have the slide be long enough so the dice have enough speed so that they can be launched from the other side of the prop bets and still hit the wall.
4 - Use a secondary mechanism on the gate so human influence doesn't affect the launch characteristics.

Do those things and maybe, just maybe, you'll have something worth watching and talking about.

Truly amazing you really think that a human, has more control over what I'm showing on all these videos?

Quote: superrick

Truly amazing you really think that a human, has more control over what I'm showing on all these videos?

You're totally missing the point. You want to demonstrate that your machine generates some level of consistency, and then contrast that with what humans can do. If neither your machine nor a human has any consistency, your test has only proven that you can't build a machine that is better than a human.

The rolls on that video:

9 point
8
7 out
6 point
4
6 point made
6 point
7 out
7 winner
2 loser
3 loser
6 point
7 out
10 point
8
9
9
7 out
4 point
6
8
11
7 out
8 point
6
8 point made
6 point
7 out
8 point
8 point made
3 loser
5 point
7 out
7 winner
6 point
10
video ends

3 come out losers
2 come out winners (both 7s)
10 points established
- 3 points made
- 7 seven out

36 rolls (a small sample, but nice for calculating)

2 = 1 time, on the come out for a loser
3 = 2 times, both a come out loser
4 = 2 times, once as a point (not made), once for no decision
5 = one time as a point (not made)
6 = 8 times (but only one point made vs. 4 points missed)
7 = 9 times (two come out winners, seven points missed)
8 = 6 times
9 = 3 times, once as a point (not made)
10 = 2 times, once as a point (not made)
11 = once
12 = none rolled

As a guy that plays the Don't, I'd have loved to have been at the table for that set of rolls. Even at a $5 table playing my usual 3/4/3 odds I'd be up $86 ($23 on the table waiting for the final point [6] to resolve and $63 on the rail in addition to my starting bankroll).

ETA = if the shooter fails to hit that final point, I've made $100+ in well under an hour.

Superrick what really surprises me here is that you claim to be some kind of dice influencer yourself. So why are toying around with some device which is nothing more than a slide that delivers a random roll onto a table?

Apparently you are the only one who can't see the flaws in what you are presenting. i guess there was too much ego involeved in your contraption for you to realize just how ridiculous your presentation is.

Your device does nothing to influence the dice -- it is only a slide. Period. That's it. Nothing more to discuss.

If you can come up with a device that mimics what goes into what a human ATTEMPTS to do with dice influencing then there MIGHT be something to test. You would have to build a TRUE ROBOTIC ARM that could consistently deliver two dice with the same speed, pitch, axial control, angle, trajectory, targeting and whatever else goes into dice influencing. Your slide does not do that. It only lets two dice slide.

Your slide does not control the dice. Your device only shows what happens when two dice slide down a chute -- and nothing more or nothing less.

Now, since you are a dice influencer yourself, be honest and answer this question: does your slide show how YOU throw the dice?

So why don't you take a video of how you throw the dice with one of your influenced throws and let us all compare which is closer -- your throw or the slide -- to dice influencing? I am sure there is a huge difference.

this is hilarious...when you fixed elevators did you ever get one that goes up????

Superrick: The biggest insult of all is calling me or anyone a "politician."

Now seriously, I have been a dice controller for over 25 years. I learned directly from the Captain, I played extensively with the greatest controller I ever saw (and I think of as the greatest of all time) the "Arm," and with Jimmy P. often called the Captain's first mate. Took me three years to get proficient and maybe a couple of more to get decent and by the 10th year I was good. My SmartCraps tests show that I have terrific on-axis control and recommended I use the 3-V (which is what I have been using all 25 of those years anyway).

I started Golden Touch Craps with Dominator, Bob "Mr. Finesse," and the late Bill Burton in 2002. I did classes for 10 years until I retired. I'll still go to the casino (usually with Jerry "Stickman") but no longer 130 days of playing. I'm working on non-gambling pieces now and travelling the country and the world.

I do want you to recall that when I was with Golden Touch we had an ironclad money-back-guarantee. If you did not like the class, you could ask for your money back and we would promptly return it. No one in my 10 years asked for their money back. I am guessing that guarantee is still in effect.

In my latest two craps books (I think) I have laid out just about everything concerning controlled shooting including how the dice actually act when they hit the back wall, land on the table, finally settle, the "V" shape and so on.

As far as me making a machine, that's a laugh. I have trouble making the bed. But if such a true dice control machine were made it would prove without a doubt that --- a dice control machine could be made. That has nothing to do with a human having that ability.

I browse these forums looking for a place where the members get along, have descent discussions and as no surprise to me, this boards MODUS OPERANDI is one of criticism and defamation of character like so many other boards I’ve visited.

It’s no wonder the casinos find you an easy mark. They use each of you as a club to beat the others with and your not wise enough to see it.Your education gets in the way.

The launch mechanism presented to the board is simplicity of how consistency can be accomplished with very little cost or human bias. Yet you paper hangers can’t see it. In past years a mechanical engineer was asked about how a mechanical device could be made to launch dice. The reply was it would cost thousands of dollars as I recall.

I find that strange behavior coming from one with so much education.I personally built my own device using precise weight, force and gravity to launch the dice the same way every time. This is a feat humans have a great deal of trouble with. The device I built was difficult to beat.

You people might consider the idea that if you approached a craps game where all acted as one, you might level the playing field a bit. The way your carrying on, the casinos have a large audience acting as their shills for free.

As I read through the many posts mostly all having about the same useless information and redundancy, how you have managed to lastas long as you have is beyond me.

Seldom if ever do I see anything original. Rarely do I see mutual support of one member helping another. While I’m having my rant, I might as well challenge this on axis crap. Looks to me like you all have been sold a load of poles.

All any of you saw coming out of this device was top numbers. Not one of you had a clue about an outcome residency. Was any of the outcomeresults on axis or what was the on/off axis ratio out of 36 rolls? Who cares what the SRR was, who cares how many were on axis?

Now that the many of you have had a shot at Superricks efforts, which one of you genius’s will step up to the plate and present their version of a mechanical device? You math boys need to put your heads to work and deal with the force formula to see what might be needed, then build a device with little cost that actually works and will fit all your design parameters. You know, those parameters you were so critical about on SR’s device.

When you’ve presented your magical device to the board, I would like an opportunity to play the part of “A FLY SPEC INSPECTOR PICKING THE SPECKS OUT OF THE PEPPER”!

You all have read what I had to say and no doubt the flaming will begin with a vengeance. If my post is allowed to remain on the board, there probably won’t be any need to say more. My comments don’t need to be defended. I came, I saw, I acted like the board members do.

Linaway

Wow! Here is a poster I never thought I would see here. I also await Tino Gambino, to come to SR's rescue.

Alan







I think before we ask anyone to show or prove or demonstrate influence we need to define
exactly what you mean by that.

Are you using the ahigh standard that influence means you make a living playing craps?

Does it mean every time you get the dice you have a 10-20 roll?

Does it mean you say i am going to throw a hard 8 and do ?

Or does it mean that your toss produces a result that is unlikely from a random toss?

What baffles the snarf out of me is after all this time people still think influence has to
produce a positive result.

So you tell me what it is and then maybe we can find a way to show it???


dicesetter

Quote: FrankScoblete

Superrick: The biggest insult of all is calling me or anyone a "politician."

Now seriously, I have been a dice controller for over 25 years. I learned directly from the Captain, I played extensively with the greatest controller I ever saw (and I think of as the greatest of all time) the "Arm," and with Jimmy P. often called the Captain's first mate. Took me three years to get proficient and maybe a couple of more to get decent and by the 10th year I was good. My SmartCraps tests show that I have terrific on-axis control and recommended I use the 3-V (which is what I have been using all 25 of those years anyway).

I started Golden Touch Craps with Dominator, Bob "Mr. Finesse," and the late Bill Burton in 2002. I did classes for 10 years until I retired. I'll still go to the casino (usually with Jerry "Stickman") but no longer 130 days of playing. I'm working on non-gambling pieces now and travelling the country and the world.

I do want you to recall that when I was with Golden Touch we had an ironclad money-back-guarantee. If you did not like the class, you could ask for your money back and we would promptly return it. No one in my 10 years asked for their money back. I am guessing that guarantee is still in effect.

In my latest two craps books (I think) I have laid out just about everything concerning controlled shooting including how the dice actually act when they hit the back wall, land on the table, finally settle, the "V" shape and so on.

As far as me making a machine, that's a laugh. I have trouble making the bed. But if such a true dice control machine were made it would prove without a doubt that --- a dice control machine could be made. That has nothing to do with a human having that ability.

look some guy in the face and ask for your money back? How embarrassing and awkward is that? Some People have a hard enough time sending bad food back at a restaurant, I feel guilty just doing that. I'm very apologetic if i must do so.

When can they get their money back? Right after the class only? If so, this is absolutely an ingenuous sales tactic. It's just a way to make it sound legitimate. It's like many other things, if you can just get them to the class, you can convince them of anything. You only need a good presenter. People who take the class want so badly to believe for so different many reasons. The love of gambling, Desperation, Greed, easy money. Ya, ya, ya, you say its not easy, I know You have to say, that it even makes it sound more legitimate, no one with any sense would believe you if you said it was going to be easy. What percent of people who take the classes are successful? Do they lead with them numbers before customers pay? Everyone wants to believe in themselves they would want to try the system out before asking for any money back. Even if they gave the money back weeks or months later. People would then have to come back and admit they were losers and failed.

YouTube has an interesting item supposedly marketed by "lineaway".
Here these guys use it
http://youtu.be/kU125GQgJWE

Quote: Scan

YouTube has an interesting item supposedly marketed by "lineaway".
Here these guys use it
http://youtu.be/kU125GQgJWE

"And if you don't bet the 4 your a fool buddy" Is what the guy filming this says at one point. This is exactly the type of guys who I hear and see doing this DI stuff nowadays and it just turns my stomach. Reminds me of that NOR Bac guy I seen the other day.

Got a 404 on that link, Wolf

Quote: AxelWolf

look some guy in the face and ask for your money back? How embarrassing and awkward is that? Some People have a hard enough time sending bad food back at a restaurant, I feel guilty just doing that. I'm very apologetic if i must do so.

What percent of people who take the classes are successful? Do they lead with them numbers before customers pay? Everyone wants to believe in themselves they would want to try the system out before asking for any money back. Even if they gave the money back weeks or months later. People would then have to come back and admit they were losers and failed.

System sellers and anybody that has a questionable product had been using this tactic for years. It's human nature that someone will not admit that they are a failure, or worse yet they got taking by nothing but BS.

Everybody that I know that has bought a system will never admit that it didn't work. Now how do I know this for a fact, it's very simple they tell me how great the system is, they cannot tell you enough accolades about what they just bought for lets say $3000, when they find out that it's not working, they are talked into the gold system, or the next class that teaches the”V” shape throw.

Then here comes the kicker, a few months down the road, they are telling me about the next great system they bought, or the class that they just took for the tenth time, granted I can see someone taking a class for the second time, because they could comprehend what they were being taught the first time around. I've seen that happen before, there was just too much information in the short period of time for them to digest.

Common sense should tell you if the system was so good,.. Why in the world would they tell anybody about it! Same thing goes for becoming a DI, if you're such a great shooter then why are you teaching how to shoot instead of going to the casinos and making your living doing that instead of taking your time to market and sell a school or books? Does anybody that is not living in a fantasy world really believe that these guys are making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year playing craps?

I know that F.S answer is going to be, it's not his fault that nobody comes back and ask for their money back, and he is 100% right, but with all marketing done with money back "Guarantees" any more, all you need to do is look at any commercial for the miracle make up that is going to erase 50 years from your wife's face!
Why don't you ask her why she didn't send back all that junk that's in her makeup drawer back. Hell you know it didn't work, she damn sure doesn't look like that 21-year-old that you married! If I was you guys, I would go clear out that make up drawer! I'm sure you have more than enough for a few buy-in's sitting there if only you had the guts, or the initiative to get your money back. Just admit it, she didn't turn into your princes that you married, with all that makeup!

The companies that market that craps knows it will never be coming back, money back guarantees are nothing but a big joke!

scan

the indicator by lineaway is great, it is not only fun
but it is very helpful in practice.



Dicesetter

You ain't seen nothing yet!! The greatest invention known to the dice world: The streak detector! Hopefully someone has a link to that black box and blinking lights!

Quote: AxelWolf

look some guy in the face and ask for your money back? How embarrassing and awkward is that? Some People have a hard enough time sending bad food back at a restaurant, I feel guilty just doing that. I'm very apologetic if i must do so.

When can they get their money back? Right after the class only? If so, this is absolutely an ingenuous sales tactic. It's just a way to make it sound legitimate. It's like many other things, if you can just get them to the class, you can convince them of anything. You only need a good presenter. People who take the class want so badly to believe for so different many reasons. The love of gambling, Desperation, Greed, easy money. Ya, ya, ya, you say its not easy, I know You have to say, that it even makes it sound more legitimate, no one with any sense would believe you if you said it was going to be easy. What percent of people who take the classes are successful? Do they lead with them numbers before customers pay? Everyone wants to believe in themselves they would want to try the system out before asking for any money back. Even if they gave the money back weeks or months later. People would then have to come back and admit they were losers and failed.

Of course they are all successful. That is why all the casinos are bankrupt and no one will offer a craps game any more.

Quote: Linaway

The launch mechanism presented to the board is simplicity of how consistency can be accomplished with very little cost or human bias. Yet you paper hangers can’t see it.

Linaway what are you talking about? It's a damn slide and offers no "influence" or "control" of the dice.

Bye.

Quote: dicesitter

Alan

I think before we ask anyone to show or prove or demonstrate influence we need to define
exactly what you mean by that.

thank you for bringing this up because several times I have asked that we have some definitions here for when we talk about dice influencing and dice control.

No -- I reject Ahigh's definition. He had ZERO control.

I follow what Sharpshooter defined in his book.

While I don't believe in actual "control" I think a "controlled" or "influenced" throw is possible where the speed, trajectory are in a defined range, the dice travel together, remain on axis, softly roll or hit the back wall and bounce off slightly with limited movement.

The slide presented by superrick does none of that and neither did our friend Ahigh.

And don't worry... I can't do it either.

Quote: Scan

YouTube has an interesting item supposedly marketed by "lineaway".
Here these guys use it
http://youtu.be/kU125GQgJWE

Quote: dicesitter

scan

the indicator by lineaway is great, it is not only fun
but it is very helpful in practice.

Put two dimes on your bed and practice throwing your dice to hit them.

What if I had said there were no "money-back guarantee"? I think the attacks would come as surely as they have above when I said we had an ironclad "money back guarantee." Obviously the argument might be that we had no faith in what we taught and therefore were afraid to offer such a guarantee. Certainly a student could make a phone call or write a letter if he were shy. The craps players we dealt with were not shrinking violets. Those of you who play craps or even know gamblers know that the shrinking violet varieties are few and far between. These are the same folks who ask for comps. I don't see much hesitation in their personalities. Yes, of course, it is easy for critics to comment on people who took the Golden Touch classes; the very people the critics don't know. (I can't speak for other dice control classes except for Golden Touch.)

Are the casinos concerned about dice control? Obviously or they wouldn't ban certain players. I'll have plenty of examples of that in a new book that will be coming out in May of 2015. Casinos are concerned with ALL advantage players and that is why they will ban card counters. Still no casino has gone bankrupt because of card counters. So does card counting work or not since the casinos have not gone bankrupt because of it?

Is teaching something that you are good at somehow a suspicious activity? I think not. Donald Trump taught real estate courses at the Learning Annex. Is he successful or not at real estate? And if he is successful why would he sell his expertise? Why would a great heart surgeon teach his breakthrough techniques? Couldn't he make more money if he were the only one using such techniques? Great actors teach their methods of acting. Great fishermen teach their methods of fishing. Golfers, baseball players teach others their methods. Those who can do will do and those who can do will also teach what they do successfully.

Now, the Captain, my mentor, would never have been known if I hadn't opened my "big mouth" (as Ralph Kramden would say). He was content to do what he did without publicity. If I hadn't written about him none of these discussions would be taking place because his ideas would have died with him. Yet, he is attacked for doing the non-teaching as others are attacked for doing the teaching. Yes, I did the teaching. All of my gambling books teach.

Anyway, I realize we are on the hamster treadmill at the moment so I rest my case (I hope).

Quote: AlanMendelson

While I don't believe in actual "control" I think a "controlled" or "influenced" throw is possible where the speed, trajectory are in a defined range, the dice travel together, remain on axis, softly roll or hit the back wall and bounce off slightly with limited movement.

The main problem with this belief is that the actions of the dice are essentially chaotic, which means that small changes in initial conditions will cause large changes in outcomes.

In other words, even if the initial speed and trajectory are within a very narrow range, the final outcomes are still random.

I believe that it's possible to control the dice until they hit the felt. In other words, you can get them to hit the felt "on axis". After that, all bets are off, particularly if they have to hit the back wall as well. The dice cannot hit the felt "softly", they must (ignoring energy lost through air resistance) have the same kinetic energy that they had when they left your hand, plus whatever potential energy (from their distance above the felt) they had. There is no way around this; it's simple physics. If you toss the dice with enough energy to get them across the table, they are hitting the table with that amount of energy. Once that happens, forget it, they are bouncing around essentially randomly. Even a tiny change in the angle between the face and the felt at the point of contact will cause the dice to pop up off the felt at a different angle, hang in the air (rotating!) for a different amount of time, hit the back wall at a different height... at this point each dice has an independent 1/6 chance of landing with any face up.

In short, there is no way in hell that this is possible. This is the stuff of degenerate gamblers who WANT to believe.

Quote: AlanMendelson

thank you for bringing this up because several times I have asked that we have some definitions here for when we talk about dice influencing and dice control.

No -- I reject Ahigh's definition. He had ZERO control..

It's not complicated. Either the dice distribution is what you'd get with equally-likely die faces or it's not. If it's not then it's changed (or "influenced"). If you know how the distribution is changed, you can recalculate the house edge on all the bets and see whether you have the edge.

So far, nobody's been able to (or been willing to) demonstrate that they actually have the ability to change the distribution, let alone that they know how to properly bet based on that changed distribution.

Amen, Axiom.

I don't believe that anyone can consistently throw dice in a manner that will result in anything other than a normal distribution of results.

The bigger the sample, the closer the results should get to this normal distribution.

If there really is someone out there that can throw the dice with consistent out of the ordinary results the absolute last thing they would do is tell anyone about it. Once they were identified by the industry they'd be blacklisted.

Quote: AxiomOfChoice

The main problem with this belief is that the actions of the dice are essentially chaotic, which means that small changes in initial conditions will cause large changes in outcomes.

In other words, even if the initial speed and trajectory are within a very narrow range, the final outcomes are still random.

I believe that it's possible to control the dice until they hit the felt. In other words, you can get them to hit the felt "on axis". After that, all bets are off, particularly if they have to hit the back wall as well. The dice cannot hit the felt "softly", they must (ignoring energy lost through air resistance) have the same kinetic energy that they had when they left your hand, plus whatever potential energy (from their distance above the felt) they had. There is no way around this; it's simple physics. If you toss the dice with enough energy to get them across the table, they are hitting the table with that amount of energy. Once that happens, forget it, they are bouncing around essentially randomly. Even a tiny change in the angle between the face and the felt at the point of contact will cause the dice to pop up off the felt at a different angle, hang in the air (rotating!) for a different amount of time, hit the back wall at a different height... at this point each dice has an independent 1/6 chance of landing with any face up.

In short, there is no way in hell that this is possible. This is the stuff of degenerate gamblers who WANT to believe.

As I said I can't do it. But it's the theory that is being discussed which is what would constitute dice influencing or a "controlled" delivery.

In theory the dice have to be gripped a certain way, released a certain way, they have to fly in the air a certain way, hit the table a certain way, bounce to the back wall a certain way and hit or bounce off the back wall a certain way. THAT is what is theoretically dice influencing or a controlled throw. And that is all that I am saying.

Quote: MathExtremist

It's not complicated. Either the dice distribution is what you'd get with equally-likely die faces or it's not. If it's not then it's changed (or "influenced"). If you know how the distribution is changed, you can recalculate the house edge on all the bets and see whether you have the edge.

So far, nobody's been able to (or been willing to) demonstrate that they actually have the ability to change the distribution, let alone that they know how to properly bet based on that changed distribution.

If you use the definition that dice control means that a normal distribution is changed, well then if someone gets lucky and has an abnormal distribution they would be "dice influencing" or "dice control." But random shooters can have an abnormal SRR and you would never call them DI or DC would you?

But we are getting off topic. The topic should be whether or not Superrick has a device that controls dice. I'll say it again -- there is nothing controlled about this sliding device. It is a test of nothing.

Quote: AlanMendelson

As I said I can't do it. But it's the theory that is being discussed which is what would constitute dice influencing or a "controlled" delivery.

In theory the dice have to be gripped a certain way, released a certain way, they have to fly in the air a certain way, hit the table a certain way, bounce to the back wall a certain way and hit or bounce off the back wall a certain way. THAT is what is theoretically dice influencing or a controlled throw. And that is all that I am saying.

Yes, and I'm saying that neither can anyone else do it :) Even doing it "a certain way", there are going to be tiny variations between throws, and those tiny variations will lead to large differences in what the dice do after they bounce. It's not like throwing a football where if you are slightly off, the ball goes slightly higher than you wanted. When you are slightly off, the dice do something completely different.

Nobody can do it, or if they can (and they've got half a brain) they sure as hell won't let anyone know that they can.

Anyone who claims otherwise is either delusional or selling something.

Alan


thanks for the reply, but that is not exactly what i am asking....

I agree that ahigh has a completely random roll, i have seen it, however there we part
ways a tad. I dont think a roll has to be perfect to have some influence. For instance no matter
how they got there or what type of toss you have, if you get results time and time again that
vary from random.... that is influence.

I take different sets and roll and record the differences in the number of times my set numbers appear, then i
throw a set of random rolls.... there is a difference that you cant explain.

Now here is my contention...... influence can produce a negative result in terms of getting more 7's than
random....

when that happens we all assume that guy is awful.. he has no control at all... well that may not be true.

That also begs the question then, what good is dice control... i dont have an answer for that except to
say that dice control alone means nothing if you dont understand the game and how to make adjustments.
I would be the first to say i am not nearly good enough to make money at craps if i take my shot to different
tables and bet and throw the same way on each table.....

to be real honest i dont think any DI can do that based only on the expection that their roll will be the same everyday
and produce the very same results with signature numbers no matter where they play.

I think that is a pipedream, and there is no reason to try to prove it because there is no human being or table
that is exactly the same day after day.

You said it before and Superrick says everyday, winning at craps is vastly harder than throwing the dice down
the table.

dicesetter

Quote: dicesitter

I dont think a roll has to be perfect to have some influence. For instance no matter
how they got there or what type of toss you have, if you get results time and time again that
vary from random.... that is influence.

Yes, everyone has some degree of influence on the dice. When I am really good my influence keeps both dice travelling low and appearing to be on axis parallel to the table, so they hit about six inches before the wall and roll gently to the back wall. I can do that pretty routinely. But that's where my influence ends.

Now, if that's enough "influence" to change the outcome of what would otherwise be a random roll then good for me. But I know that once the dice hit the table my influence can go totally awry by many things including a table vibration or a soft spot on the felt or heaven knows what. Therefore luck takes over as soon as the dice hit the table surface.

Some people have less influence than I do and their influence stops with keeping the dice from bouncing off the table after the first bounce.

When I got into that problem at the table at Bellagio and the dealers accused me of being a dice mechanic I looked at them and said "are you serious?" When my dice came to rest against the back wall showing 5-4 three times in a row it was just luck. It was only luck. But the dealers wanted to believe I was a dice controller. From their point of view the "results" were the proof... while I knew the results were just "random chance."

Quote: AlanMendelson

If you use the definition that dice control means that a normal distribution is changed, well then if someone gets lucky and has an abnormal distribution they would be "dice influencing" or "dice control." But random shooters can have an abnormal SRR and you would never call them DI or DC would you?

Nope. You're confusing what actually happened before with what is expected to happen next. It's the expected distribution that you (should) care about, not the short-term results based on getting lucky or unlucky. It is nearly impossible for someone to play for an hour and have their actual results match the expected distribution. The question isn't whether the past few dozen rolls contain a skewed distribution, it's whether you can expect the next few dozen rolls to contain a specific favorable distribution. Only then can you know how to bet and thereby achieve a +EV. Looking at data after the fact and saying "if I had only bet on X, I would have cleaned up" is useless.

Quote: AlanMendelson

In theory the dice have to be gripped a certain way, released a certain way, they have to fly in the air a certain way, hit the table a certain way, bounce to the back wall a certain way and hit or bounce off the back wall a certain way. THAT is what is theoretically dice influencing or a controlled throw. And that is all that I am saying.

Alan, I could be standing right next to you at Caesar's and have a 25 roll, a 38 roll, and a 56 roll, and you would tell everybody about the great rolls that a random roller had because the shot I was using didn't fit your description of what you read in one book.

You took it upon yourself to claim that sharpshooter is the only DI in the world, and if everybody else doesn't do exactly what he is all about they are totally random.
You really don't know what you're talking about when you say anything about DI's, after all you claim that it all these years of you playing craps you may have seen one guy that might have been able to influence the dice.

You only come to Vegas a few times a year, otherwise you're playing card craps California. So sorry buddy your definition just doesn't filled the bill.
Maybe if you got out of Caesar's you would actually run into a few DI's.

If the dice cannot be influenced, traveling only 6 inches then rolling to the wall, your definition of that perfect shot will never be filled.

Quote: AlanMendelson

If you use the definition that dice control means that a normal distribution is changed, well then if someone gets lucky and has an abnormal distribution they would be "dice influencing" or "dice control." But random shooters can have an abnormal SRR and you would never call them DI or DC would you?

I guess if every time they went to the tables and did the same thing, I would have to call them a dice influencer, what else would you call them by your silly definition? Your the only one that keeps bringing up sharpshooter, who by the way is old news, with his definition of what a DI should be!

Why don't you use all of your investigative powers as a news man and asked a university to come up with a machine that will prove all dice shots are random, even if they were thrown by a perfect machine down to a 100,000s tolerance, you would still get a random out come. It would make for a great story, and it would make you an investigative super star!

Why do you put words in my mouth, Superrick? I never said Sharpshooter is the only DI in the world. What I said is that I follow what Sharpshooter presented as what is needed to have a controlled or influenced throw.

Now, if you don't do what Sharpshooter has laid out, then you're no better than Ahigh.

Sharpshooter in his book clearly explains why a "controlled throw" needs to have certain elements to even attempt control. Have you read his book? Do you understand what he presented about the physics of a controlled or influenced throw?

He has defined the throw -- and why the dice must be thrown that way.

And that's the problem with every Joe Lunchbucket who claims to be a dice controller -- they all have their own definitions of what a controlled throw is. And that's why there is so much disbelief because all of these "other throws" and styles CANNOT work.

Let me give you an analogy: in baseball there is only one definition for a curve ball and either you can throw it or you cant. In baseball there is only one definition for a knuckle ball and either you can throw it or you cant.

The problem with craps is that everyone has their own definition of what dice control or dice influencing is. We need one definition and do away with all of the "pretenders" -- and then "dice control" can get some respect.

With random throwers claiming to be dice controllers how can anyone believe there is such a thing as dice control?

Superrick if your rolls look like random throws, with dice bouncing all over the place, and not hitting the center of the back wall gently, then I am afraid you can't claim to be a dice controller either... and you just got lucky.

And yes, you can be lucky.

Now, we seem to have missed the original discussion here: can you Superrick defend your slide as being able to control the dice? Or are they just sliding?

Quote: MathExtremist

Nope. You're confusing what actually happened before with what is expected to happen next. It's the expected distribution that you (should) care about

What you wrote about expected results/distribution is fine when choosing which video poker game to play-- we choose to play the game with the better expected return. But the only way I can judge "dice control" is how the dice are actually controlled. In other words, do they appear to be controlled (angle of flight, number of bounces, where they hit the back wall, how they bounce off the wall). Without a disciplined delivery, all results are random. A disciplined delivery might not be able to define the result, but at least it gives you a chance to limit the possible results.

Now let me ask you, ME, a question:

ME, how do you determine the "expected distribution" of a shooter? Do you check the shoes he is wearing, the color of his eyes, the size of his knuckles?

If the expected distribution is what you use how do you predict who will have the expected distribution that makes them a DI or DC ??

Quote: AlanMendelson

Now let me ask you, ME, a question:

ME, how do you determine the "expected distribution" of a shooter? Do you check the shoes he is wearing, the color of his eyes, the size of his knuckles?

If the expected distribution is what you use how do you predict who will have the expected distribution that makes them a DI or DC ??

Your inquiry is based on the incorrect assumption that I (or anyone) can determine the expected distribution of someone else's throwing, or that I even attempt to predict whether someone can control the dice.

Here's the right question to ask:
Based on your own practiced throwing method, and a careful statistical analysis of your results, are you personally able to alter the expected distribution of dice outcomes such that the EV of at least one craps wager is positive? If so, which one(s) and by how much?

If you can't answer those questions, all your careful practice is for naught and you're just guessing. In that case, looking at shoes or knuckles is as good a method as any.

Quote: AlanMendelson

If you use the definition that dice control means that a normal distribution is changed, well then if someone gets lucky and has an abnormal distribution they would be "dice influencing" or "dice control." But random shooters can have an abnormal SRR and you would never call them DI or DC would you?

A random roller that has a skewed distribution result in any given session is just short term variance. To be considered influence, you would have to be trying to achieve influence by setting the dice and then attempting a controlled throw.

Quote: dicesitter

I dont think a roll has to be perfect to have some influence. For instance no matter
how they got there or what type of toss you have, if you get results time and time again that
vary from random.... that is influence.

I do think you need a perfect throw, or at least one that is as close as possible to potentially achieve influence. By that I mean, one that you can duplicate time and time again. And the only way you can do this is by having a "pretty" throw. It is my opinion (if influence is possible) that it would come due to dice correlation. It is also my opinion that axial control is not possible without almost perfect correlation. Therefore, if one cannot throw the dice as mirror images (in a parr type throw, spinning around a horizontal axis) a very high percentage of the time, then they have no hope of influencing the dice. I can count on both hands the number of throws I've seen in the last 10 years that have the potential for influence, and I've played a lot of craps during that time, both in Vegas and elsewhere.

Quote: dicesitter

I agree that ahigh has a completely random roll

Actually, ahigh has a well correlated throw, which as I stated above is the one thing that I think you MUST have. I played a ton of craps with him last time I was in Vegas so I got to see his throw plenty. He also has a unique betting approach which IMO would probably be the most efficient way to attack a potential edge.

Quote: DeMango

You ain't seen nothing yet!! The greatest invention known to the dice world: The streak detector! Hopefully someone has a link to that black box and blinking lights!

The streak detector is most effective when it is placed near a pile of clothes laying on the floor......

This has turned into another debate about dice control, instead of a discussion as to whether or not Superrick's device can control dice. I wish we would get back to the original question -- because no one's opinion about the ability of a human to control dice will ever be changed on this forum.

I watched the entire video, even tracked the results (see page 1).

The device did nothing as far as I could tell. No different than my preferred device:

Quote: TerribleTom

I watched the entire video, even tracked the results (see page 1).

The device did nothing as far as I could tell. No different than my preferred device:

What did you expect it to do ? Once the dice hit the table they are random and that is all there is to it!

What you won't concede Superrick is that your slide is also random.