Dice control with a mechanical throwing device

Quote: AlanMendelson

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

You know Alan, you're a genius, you figure it out. That my design is so you can see what really happens anytime you throw two dice and they hit the table, they turn out to be random.

Even if I was to build a machine to your specifications we would get the same results! “Random” is the only outcome you can have throwing to square cubes with numbers on them, called dice.
The reality of it is, you couldn't possibly throw two dice four or more feet through the air and expect anything different!

You are being sold BS, when you think that you can keep two dice on axis, now do you get the real picture?

...

Nice to hear from you


Again there is a difference between control and a toss that is not random.


As far as ahigh is concerned, i only saw 8-10 hands,,,, i wont comment, i just
don't have any interest in his play.

dicesetter

Quote: superrick

You know Alan, you're a genius, you figure it out. That my design is so you can see what really happens anytime you throw two dice and they hit the table, they turn out to be random.

Even if I was to build a machine to your specifications we would get the same results! “Random” is the only outcome you can have throwing to square cubes with numbers on them, called dice.
The reality of it is, you couldn't possibly throw two dice four or more feet through the air and expect anything different!

You are being sold BS, when you think that you can keep two dice on axis, now do you get the real picture?

...

Again, the issue is not if dice control or dice influencing works. The issue is can your device control dice. Just say it can't because it can't.

Besides your inability to defend your "device" I find this entire conversation ironic since you claim to be a dice controller... or are we to think you have such monster rolls over and over again only because you got lucky?

And that's the end of this thread.

Quote: AlanMendelson

Again, the issue is not if dice control or dice influencing works. The issue is can your device control dice. Just say it can't because it can't.

Gee,.. I guess that I have to admit that i was wrong, you just don't get do you?

Quote: AlanMendelson

Besides your inability to defend your "device" I find this entire conversation ironic since you claim to be a dice controller... or are we to think you have such monster rolls over and over again only because you got lucky?

There is more to being a DI then just shooting, and yes when I have a monster roll I just got lucky, I admit that, because everything had to be perfect for that roll to happen, something you don't understand, There wasn't money flying across the table hitting my dice while they were in the air, nobody was stopping the dice from coming back to me, there wasn't some clown that just bought in only to put his chips right where I've been landing my dice for the last 36 rolls.
My list goes on, but you will never understand what I'm writing about.

You only play craps a few times a year when you get into Vegas,.. only playing a Caesar's, when you are in town, telling everybody that you have never seen a so-called DI in all the time that you have played there! Have you ever question why that is?

...

Is it because no self respecting DI would ever play their, it wouldn't do me any good time telling you why that is you probably wouldn't understand.

Oh, I get it now, Superrick... you're playing devil's advocate. You're telling everyone else that dice influencing and dice controlling is something that only YOU can do. And to throw us a curve ball (so to speak) you presented a bogus device to mimic dice control knowing full well that your device was nothing but a sham.

You claim to be a dice controller, you report monster rolls, but only at out of the way casinos when no one else is around to watch you. My gosh... this sounds a lot like "the Captain" -- the guy with monster rolls that only Frank can verify.

In fact, when we've talked on the phone and we talked about getting together to play you carefully and deliberately and repeatedly cautioned me that there was no guarantee you would have good rolls.

Wow... and you have the nerve to criticize Frank and the GTC crowd?

So the bottom line is that for six pages here on this thread you trolled us. Well done.

Quote: AlanMendelson

You're telling everyone else that dice influencing and dice controlling is something that only YOU can do.

In fairness, that's just an off-by-one error. Progress!

Quote: AlanMendelson

Oh, I get it now, Superrick... you're playing devil's advocate. You're telling everyone else that dice influencing and dice controlling is something that only YOU can do. And to throw us a curve ball (so to speak) you presented a bogus device to mimic dice control knowing full well that your device was nothing but a sham.

Alan your a total waste of anybody's time, and now I know why I would never grant a newspaper reporter and interview.
You will never get it, keep playing at Caesars,.. They need suckers like you! How many times have you read one of my post where I say I know some of the best DI's in this country, but they don't win all the time, and they damn sure don't take hundreds of thousands of dollars off the craps tables every year like all our great fiction writers wants everybody to believe!

I've also said that I have seen Frank Scoblete and Dominator shooting on the craps tables here in Vegas, there were times that they were winning, and of course there were times a saw them losing!
No DI wins all the time, that is a fact! I've never called Frank a fiction writer, he is a real guy that you can bump into on the tables, unlike our great fiction write that nobody has ever seen in a casino, that writes some of the most outrageous pieces of fiction you will ever read!

I guess all reporters are nothing but spin doctors. My device, shows everybody that you can't even get the dice to fly through the air 6 inches and stay on axis all the time! Unfortunately for you, I'm not a little kid that wants to argue with somebody that can't see the handwriting on the wall.

Have a great day, there my friend!

If they can't take hundreds of thousands of dollars off the craps tables, then what exactly makes them great?

Either you can beat the game or you can't. Craps is a game with zero heat where you can bet as much as you want, so it would be easy to win hundreds of thousands a year even with a small edge.

Quote: superrick

Alan your a total waste of anybody's time

Personal Insult, Second Offense, Seven Days.

Quote:

They need suckers like you!

Lest there be any doubt.

Quote:

I guess all reporters are nothing but spin doctors.

Border-line personal insult, given that you mentioned he is a reporter in the same post. However, the two quotes above are more than enough to justify a Suspension.

Actually the biggest problem with Superrick's post is that he called me a newspaper reporter. :-)

But here's why Superrick's device is bogus: it is nothing more than a slide. Anyone who ever read Sharpshooter's book would know that there are many elements of "dice influencing" and there isn't a chance in hell that you could influence dice if you simply drop them or let them slide down a chute.

Letting them drop or letting them slide is a random act unto itself. If you are going to give yourself a chance at influencing the dice, at least go through the motions of it. You can't possibly call a random delivery an "influenced" delivery.

I am sure Superrick understands that. But why he of all people -- someone who claims to be a DI or DC and tells us about his great rolls -- would bring up such a ridiculous topic of discussion is something I can't figure out.

this quote is actually worth discussing:

Quote: superrick

My device, shows everybody that you can't even get the dice to fly through the air 6 inches and stay on axis all the time!

Of course his device can't get the dice to stay on axis. there is nothing done by the device to attempt to keep the dice on axis. So what are some of the things done to keep dice on axis?

Well there is the grip and keeping the dice pressed together when released.
There is the controlled backspin that is parallel to the table.

If you want to try to influence the dice and keep them on axis, then at least give yourself a chance to keep them on axis. And yes, there are shooters who can keep the dice on axis for longer than the six inches that Superrick mentions.

I've read through most of these posts and after sorting through all the opinions, then against my better judgement, decided to enter the fray.

1.....the launch mechanism was basically a down-dirty-quick way of seeing how dice behave.

2....in order to generate a haha perfect launch, you would need a 3 axis motor driven apparatus to generate any one of a 3 axis influence. a...vertical, b...horizontal, c...lateral

3.....doing anything more mechanically to this device would be costly and counter productive.

4.....the only thing I can see that would assist in evaluating the dice outcome results in these videos would be to have shown the axis outcome each launch was in. It requires 4 die faces to do this.

Before the hord of self made perfectionists come down on me, I would like to point out my credentials for all to see.

I am a retired Master Electronics Test Technician. I spent 33 years in a test lab designing and building test equipment. We have in our midst those that write about dice phenominon, practice specific kinds of dice launches which in either case IMO is not proper for me.

Because of my background, I feel my opinion of Superricks device carries significant weight as to what its purpose is. That is to see if the dice remain on axis or not. My contention is most of the time they did not. I could use the gentlemen's data analysis based on a single axis only [top numbers], then provide the board with an analogy but it would only be 67 to 76% correct. Why, only two die faces and a single axis was used to identify each dice outcome.

I too have a Bone Chucker. I heard one time on a board I no longer participate on that some mechanical engineer deemed it would cost thousands of dollars to design and build a bone chucker. Mine cost about 20 bucks and most of that cost was for a precision hole saw. One of your board members even used my Bone Chucker as an idea to build his on. I know you've seen it. It's bulky, cumbersome to operate and the cost to make it was no doubt quite high. Then there is a thing about using springs. It's called hysteresis . There is also doubt in my mind that each launch of the dice would not be the same becasue of no way I could see that each launch was identical. My apparatus uses a drop weight. This is consistent.

No, I will not post a picture of my Bone Chucker. It would serve no purpose. Back to my original train of thought. There is nothing wrong with Superricks device. The intent is to show that dice outcomes are typically off axis.

Rather than attempt to build a mechanical device, I challenge the board to present 36 rolls of the dice. Record the outcome of each roll not just by number but what axis it was in.

For instance you might roll a 51. You see the outcome was in the 3V. But you need to know if your preset was in the 3V, which of its axle variables was the preset and then the outcome.

Naturally there probably will be members that would evaluate such a trial. That's what the challenge is for. I don't care if the shooter stands on his head or any other kind of stance to launch the dice. The drill is to see what the outcome results are. Remember. Not just the top numbers but what axis it was in.

Linaway

Dice control with a mechanical device needs one additional parameter for judging.

The number of times that what starts as a Face-Up value turns out to be the Final Result.

A tossed coin has a slight bias to landing on whatever side is face up when it is first tossed.

Here we go again. I am not looking for CONTROL of any kind. Simply launch the dice then read the outcome results. You don't want to go there over how a test should be performed. To begin with I will not participate. Don't need or want attitudes or opinions, just roll the dice.

Linaway

Quote: FleaStiff

Dice control with a mechanical device needs one additional parameter for judging.

The number of times that what starts as a Face-Up value turns out to be the Final Result.

A tossed coin has a slight bias to landing on whatever side is face up when it is first tossed.

Say what?

1. I've never seen or heard that any DI expects the dice to land in the same position as thrown. They place them in a certain position to increase or decrease their chances of rolling a seven, but that's about it.

2. I would love to see some kind of scientific research that backs up your coin toss claim, especially with a mechanical coin flipper.

Quote: TerribleTom

Say what?

1. I've never seen or heard that any DI expects the dice to land in the same position as thrown. They place them in a certain position to increase or decrease their chances of rolling a seven, but that's about it.

2. I would love to see some kind of scientific research that backs up your coin toss claim, especially with a mechanical coin flipper.

There have been tests that show that the tail side of US coins are more likely to land showing up because the "heads side" of US coins is heavier because of the portrait.

I've often wondered if the "Super Bowl Coin" was ever tested for its weight distribution? I have emailed the company that mints the Super Bowl Coin many times but they never responded to my question.

I think is an interesting thread, but i think we have taken this way to far.

The point Supperick was making was you take something as simple as
a slide and allow the dice to drop just 6 inches you will have variance.

This was not an attempt to replace a throw with back swing etc.

Which one of us that has not played with his toss for years has
not screwed around with a very short toss to see how much the
control varies from 2 feet to 9 feet.

And if you found out what i did , it can vary allot when it should not
vary much. You may have also found out that a short shot that looks
damn good still varies in the results more than you thought it would.

In the end none of us is the GOD of craps, we are all trying get
the best results we can , and i dont think we need to be critical
of others that simple say "lets try this" or "here look at this".

This type of exchange makes us look a little silly.


Dicesetter

Quote: TerribleTom

Say what?

1. I've never seen or heard that any DI expects the dice to land in the same position as thrown. They place them in a certain position to increase or decrease their chances of rolling a seven, but that's about it.

2. I would love to see some kind of scientific research that backs up your coin toss claim, especially with a mechanical coin flipper.

A mechanical coin flipper can produce a given result 100% of the time. See the intro of http://statweb.stanford.edu/~susan/papers/headswithJ.pdf

Quote: MathExtremist

A mechanical coin flipper can produce a given result 100% of the time. See the intro of http://statweb.stanford.edu/~susan/papers/headswithJ.pdf.

The URL doesn't work, but now that you bring it up I'd imagine a mechanical coin flipper could be very good at flipping a coin very precisely.

Quote: dicesitter

I think is an interesting thread, but i think we have taken this way to far.

The point Supperick was making was you take something as simple as
a slide and allow the dice to drop just 6 inches you will have variance.

I still don't understand what Superrick was up to with this thread. He says he is a dice influencer. Of course he should know that a simple slide cannot influence the dice and would result in a random outcome. What was all this about?

Quote: TerribleTom

The URL doesn't work, but now that you bring it up I'd imagine a mechanical coin flipper could be very good at flipping a coin very precisely.

Fixed, the auto-URL feature of this forum incorporated my trailing period into the link.

Alan,

Allow me to simply this for you. The slide shows how the dice WILL GO OFF AXIS A GOOD DEAL OF THE TIME. If this still doesn't satisfy you, I challenge you to react to my last post about the 36 rolls. Show the board what your toss is doing. Just like Dicesitter said talking about variance. There was no intent on Superrick's part to suggest any modicum of control was being applied. Just variance.

Linaway

Quote: MathExtremist

Fixed, the auto-URL feature of this forum incorporated my trailing period into the link.

I should have noticed that and stripped it myself.

That coin flipper looks like it uses an awfully short throw - I imagine the coin barely makes a single revolution. It also flips the coin like a pancake, instead of balancing the coin on a fulcrum and striking one side from beneath at an angle (like you would in a hand flip).

I'd like to see a slow-motion video of that device flipping a coin.

Quote: Linaway

Alan,

Allow me to simply this for you. The slide shows how the dice WILL GO OFF AXIS A GOOD DEAL OF THE TIME. If this still doesn't satisfy you, I challenge you to react to my last post about the 36 rolls. Show the board what your toss is doing. Just like Dicesitter said talking about variance. There was no intent on Superrick's part to suggest any modicum of control was being applied. Just variance.

Linaway

Without speaking out of turn, I think Alan's point was that sliding down a concave chute doesn't impart the same movement as a human throw, so it shouldn't be expected to yield the same distribution (unless both are uniform anyway, which is assuming the conclusion). If you're going to do it right, build a robotic pincer and propel the dice using the same back-handed flip that everyone seems to advocate. And I don't think it would cost a huge amount (in equipment) if you used Legos and a smartphone. See CubeStormer:

http://www.engadget.com/2014/03/16/lego-cubestormer-rubiks-cube/

Plus, you can always reuse the Legos when you're done...

Quote: MathExtremist

Without speaking out of turn, I think Alan's point was that sliding down a concave chute doesn't impart the same movement as a human throw, so it shouldn't be expected to yield the same distribution (unless both are uniform anyway, which is assuming the conclusion). If you're going to do it right, build a robotic pincer and propel the dice using the same back-handed flip that everyone seems to advocate. And I don't think it would cost a huge amount (in equipment) if you used Legos and a smartphone. See CubeStormer:

http://www.engadget.com/2014/03/16/lego-cubestormer-rubiks-cube/

Plus, you can always reuse the Legos when you're done...

Not to take away from your point at all, but not everybody advocates a back-handed flip/rotation. There are also under-handed / forward rotation advocates, not to mention any other "unorthodox" tosses which don't necessarily fit the "Sharp Shooter model."

MathExtremist thanks for the response you gave Linaway. It was "right on."

Sliding dice down a chute or holding dice and dropping them from a fixed height does not influence the dice to keep them on axis. You need some "influence" to help keep the dice moving in an influenced throw.

I said I wasn't going to put up a picture of my Bone Chucker, but had a change of mind. To begin with, all that have responded to this thread have it in their minds I am an on axis shooter. Never happen. I'll have to agreee to disagree with what has been presented.

For this round of being crituqued, check out my Bone Chucker. Simplicity. It don't give a hoot about any gyrations you on axis folks like. This gizmo was made in the early 90's and the following post from a now closed board will be presented during that time. Take note that all data shown is accompanied by an axis outcome. This is something few ever do. I strongly believe this is how all data should be recorded.


HELP......
Anybody know what I have to do to get this IMG to show here? It works just fine on any other board I've been on, but not here. . I did use the entire string and it worked, but I do not want to expose the entire album content. I don't want just the link but the picture. It is JPG format.

Now guys, I've put an effort forward showing that I back up what I say by doing, not just talking or showing reference to anothers work. Step up to the plate and design then build your Bone Chucker. Mine works just fine. Before you evaluate the Chucker, remember this statement. I do not believe in on axis shooting. What Rick used to demonstrate his thoughts was just fine. Hence a favorite remark a superior once told a group "THAT'S GOOD ENOUGH!". Bells and whistles, spit and polish won't make this project work any better than what has been suggested.

*********************************************************************
A test using only the parallel 6's aka Horizontal 6's by my venue.

Two comparisons will be made.

One will be using a designed bone chucker to eliminate all human errors via the typical inconsistencies we all experience. Yes indeed, ole Linaway is at it again. I have built a dice tosser using a drop hammer premise that appears to be very exacting and consistent.

The second comparison will be by me personally attempting to replicate what I saw the "Bone Chucker" doing. As you will see in the two tables, I was indeed inferior to the machine tosses. Not only in quantity of shoots but also in quality of outcome. You decide. Are we truly in possession of valid information currently being touted, or are we shooting ourselves in the foot?

Conditions: 72 degrees and 88% humidity October 27, 2004
Dice in use are Blue by color and weight about 20 grams.

Bone Chucker: Total rolls 23

1-5 HW
4-2 HW
3-3 3V
1-4 3V
2-3 HW
6-4 3V
1-2 2V
2-2 HW
6-2 H6
6-3 2V
1-1 X6
1-3 X6
3-3 3V
3-2 3V
4-4 3V
1-5 X6
1-3 2V
4-6 2V
1-5 3V
6-6 X6
5-3 3V
5-1 3V
2-5 2V

My Toss: I attempted to simulate what the machine was doing. No powder, nothing to alter the dice and environment conditions. Attempts were made to hit about the same target area and trajectory height as well as release point.

1-1 V6
1-1 X6
6-3 2V
5-3 2V
4-6 V6
4-4 3V
6-5 2V
3-2 2V
6-6 V6
4-6 3V
4-2 X6
5-5 2V
1-4 X6
5-2 HW

Total rolls are 14. Not very impressive by content or performance. IMO, this tells me that most of us with our human inconsistencies need to do a lot more work on improving our shooting capabilities.

Now it can readily be understood why I lean so hard towards designing and building training aids such as the Target Zone Detector and Trajectory Detector while also ferreting out the Harbored Traits of the Cubes.
linaway

*****************************************************

Horizontal 6's testing continued:

HORIZONTAL 6s.

Tossing machine was set the same way as initial test in the Horizontal 6,s. Side by side dice stance.

Conditions: Red Dice used in this application. Weight is 18 grams, 2 less than the Blue dice. Environment about the same.

Bone Chucker:
6-5 X6
1-5 3V
3-1 3V
2-4 2V
2-6 H6
1-3 V6
3-5 X8
3-6 X6
2-6 H6
3-6 X6
4-2 X6
4-1 3V
4-5 3V
1-6 H6
Total 14

My Toss:
4-6 X6
6-6 X6
3-2 2V
2-2 HW
5-3 HW
2-3 3V
2-5 HW
Total 7

As expected both with the machine and my shooting, Red dice performed at a lesser magnitude than the Blue Dice. Again, my performance was not acceptable by machine standards.

This next series I will not participate in other than machine results. Thought it might be interesting to see what the Vertical 6's would look like.

Bone chucker and Blue Dice:
6-2 H6
4-6 V6
4-2 3V
3-3 HW
4-6 X6
1-5 H6
6-5 3V
2-6 H6
3-3 3V
6-6 X6
3-3 3V
4-2 HW
1-5 3V
4-5 HW
1-3 V6
5-4 2V
5-5 HW
1-4 3V
2-5 H6
Total 19

Bone chucker and Red Dice:
6-6 H6
1-5 3V
4-5 3V
4-6 2V
2-2 HW
5-1 H6
4-2 HW
4-1 V6
6-2 H6
4-6 V6
2-4 HW
3-4 3V
Total 12

Once again, in a controlled condition using only the " Bone Chucker", the Blue Dice out performed the Red Dice. Had I participated in these last two sessions, no doubt my performance would have lagged with both kinds of dice.

Now I will stick my neck out and make a statement for all to read. IMO, there can not be such a thing as a precision shooter. Human frailties circumvents such thoughts. Precision implies a specific tolerance which you can not establish in human approaches. We are subjected to all kinds of mental and physical aspects where the machine is not.

The machine can be calibrated precisely to cause end result effect within its design parameters. I can not find that illusive adjustment on myself to make these calibrations ergo I can never be precise in shooting attempts.

However, I can be ever so observant of outcome and whatever is working at that specific point in time, I will continue to do.

This may sound like I do not believe in "Dice Setting" but that is not true. I firmly believe in my ability to observe and reveal cube traits. Then apply this knowledge to what I see and do.

Linaway

Fixed your image:

Quote: Linaway

Once again, in a controlled condition using only the " Bone Chucker", the Blue Dice out performed the Red Dice.

The singular form of the word dice is actually "die."

AcesAndEights

Thanks for the assist.

Linaway

ok


Does nay one here watch any of the old Gunsmoke shows, i do almost everry day, marshall and
festus.

Well some of the discussion on this threads reminds of one of those conversations..


Festus : golly gee Mathew, sometimes a person does not understand what he has been a thinkin
about because he just dont know for certain that he has been a thinkin about it.



dicesetter

Quote: dicesitter

ok


Does nay one here watch any of the old Gunsmoke shows, i do almost everry day, marshall and
festus.

Well some of the discussion on this threads reminds of one of those conversations..


Festus : golly gee Mathew, sometimes a person does not understand what he has been a thinkin
about because he just dont know for certain that he has been a thinkin about it.



dicesetter

I always liked Miss Kitty

Quote: Linaway

Bone Chucker: Total rolls 23

Wholly insufficient. You need hundreds or thousands of rolls to have a reasonable chisquare result, not two dozen. There's nothing particularly wrong about your catapult either, but your goal should be to get it to the point where it *does* show influence, not demonstrate that it doesn't. A negative result isn't useful here. A positive result can be analyzed to determine the source of influence.

mathextremist




It does not matter what you do in terms of trying to show influence, all you really
can do is show variance from what would be a perfect toss.

No one can duplicate it anyway, so in the end all you can hope for is that can
roll consistantly enough to understand little things you can do.

You could devise a machine that rolls the bowling ball exactly the same so you
gert a strike all the time. but..................what if your in a house where the
pin setters are old and dont set the pine exactly the same every time..... opps
no strike....now is it the pin setter or is the machine .

If you take guys like Linaway and Supperick that have been playing for many years, they
dont say you need to develope a perfect roll, because it cant be done, they do want people
to understand what the roll they have is doing, so you can adjust and get the most you
can out what you already have.

Lets say you roll consistantly gives you many more 4' on top on the left dice than you
would get, but a good number of right die is a 3 .... you can either get pissed off and
quit, you can go home and practice hour after hour to get a 4 on the right die or you can
change your set to adjust to what your rolling. Or if you are like many Di's have done,(me included)
you can play another 3 hours and continue to get a 4/ 3.

Small adjustments can make us money.... it is understanding variance, not trying to stop all of it.

dicesetter

Nobody said anything about trying to stop variance. If you remove variance, the process is predictable and therefore not random.

The premise of a dice-throwing machine should be to replicate a human's throw and determine that the machine's increased precision can yield a non-uniform distribution of die faces. If it can't, neither can a human using the same throw -- if you assume that no human is as precise as the machine, which is the point of using it in the first place. If it can, however, then understanding the altered distribution would allow you to determine how to bet with the edge (if at all). Superrick's device wasn't relevant to that premise.

You're assuming the conclusion, namely, "you roll consistently gives you many more 4' on top on the left dice than you would get, but a good number of right die is a 3." Actually quantifying that instead of saying "many more" or "a good number" would be the right step toward understanding your edge. I don't think you know what that is, and as a result you're not taking advantage of it.

In the 2004 Stanford Wong experiment chronicled here: https://wizardofodds.com/games/craps/appendix/3/

Wong and another DI "Little Joe" were able to demonstrate an ability to roll fewer 7s than expected over 500 rolls. Not the largest statistical sample in the world, but enough for somebody to lose a bet over it.

I imagine that Little Joe is betting the pass line with max odds as well as placing come bets with max odds on nearly every roll.

With craps, it really comes down to the 7. If you can roll fewer than average, there's money on the pass & come bets. If you can roll more than average, the money is on the don't side of those wagers.

When somebody starts talking about rolling specific numbers with a specific die, I get real skeptical real fast.

I also think it's safe to assume that any DI with a real and consistent edge is very unlikely to be talking about it online.

I have seen first hand a craps player with a very methodical throw go for 46 rolls before he hit a single seven. I don't know how many points he hit during that time, as I walked up to the table when he was already halfway there. He rolled a seven on roll #47. That's a hell of a turn, and there is no doubt in my mind that the shooter thought he was influencing the dice. He had a meticulous set and a very consistent toss. I'd love to follow a guy like that around and track his rolls for a year or so.

mathextremist



Your misunderstanding the entire premise....

But its ok, there is no reason to go further with this, everyone has a right to their
own opinions. In the end we all have to play our own game anyway.

This was an interesting conversation.

dicesetter

Hey superrick,

Just came back and watched the videos again. I think the machine is a good start. One thing it does very well is that it self centers/aligns the dice to the table as they travel down.

Here is where I think the machine goes wrong.

It seems from the video that the dice at the top of the chute are well above the rail! With my tests the lower their downward force is the better.

Also how the dice are coming off the chute, the impact between the table and dice is happening on the edges of the dice. This is also really bad for control. You want as much surface area to hit so as much energy that can be absorbed is absorbed in the first bounce. When edges are hit dice tend to go flying.

If you still have the machine and are willing to put in some work I have some suggestions.

Lower the angle of the chute to something like 15 or 20 degrees to the table. Also at the bottom of the chute create a curved section that travels parallel to the table surface sort of like a children's playground slide. That little lip at the end. It should help with a flat landing of the dice. Forget the backspin it just complicates things way too much.

I'd be curious to see what the results would be.

Have to agree with the boys, dice also keep sliding off to the left...

Ahigh throws with too much spin, looks like Greg Norman when he used to spin the ball off the green. He does have nice mechanics, maybe slow it down a little, less wrist...

Quote: robchell

Ahigh throws with too much spin, looks like Greg Norman when he used to spin the ball off the green. He does have nice mechanics, maybe slow it down a little, less wrist...

Coach me, then, expert! You know how it's done I can infer?

Quote: nickolay411

Hey superrick,

Just came back and watched the videos again. I think the machine is a good start. One thing it does very well is that it self centers/aligns the dice to the table as they travel down.

Here is where I think the machine goes wrong.

It seems from the video that the dice at the top of the chute are well above the rail! With my tests the lower their downward force is the better.

Also how the dice are coming off the chute, the impact between the table and dice is happening on the edges of the dice. This is also really bad for control. You want as much surface area to hit so as much energy that can be absorbed is absorbed in the first bounce. When edges are hit dice tend to go flying.

If you still have the machine and are willing to put in some work I have some suggestions.

Lower the angle of the chute to something like 15 or 20 degrees to the table. Also at the bottom of the chute create a curved section that travels parallel to the table surface sort of like a children's playground slide. That little lip at the end. It should help with a flat landing of the dice. Forget the backspin it just complicates things way too much.

I'd be curious to see what the results would be.

You guys just don't get it do you, if what you are seeing in not perfect in your minds, how in the hell do you expect a shooter to make that perfect shot?

Quote: superrick

You guys just don't get it do you, if what you are seeing in not perfect in your minds, how in the hell do you expect a shooter to make that perfect shot?

lol what! I just got back from Macau, I made two perfect shots in my first session at the MGM... Both were called no rolls by the crew because the dice didn't turn over...Dead cat bounce right against the back wall.

That's why I went to another unnamed casino. There they don't care if you hit the back wall so its a great trade for the higher minimums.

The last thing I wanted was to be mean in my post but your response is aggravating to say the least. Your machine doesn't make anywhere near a perfect shot! And anyone can clearly see that. That is not DICE CONTROL or Dice Influencing as you like to call it. You machine doesn't even reproduce a so called GTC shot. Frank Scoblete shoots better than your machine.

Learn to take advice and feedback, the first thing you make is never perfect. I know that you are very knowledgeable when it comes to craps but you don't know it all superrick! nobody does.

Quote: nickolay411

lol what! I just got back from Macau, I made two perfect shots in my first session at the MGM... Both were called no rolls by the crew because the dice didn't turn over...Dead cat bounce right against the back wall.

That's why I went to another unnamed casino. There they don't care if you hit the back wall so its a great trade for the higher minimums.

The last thing I wanted was to be mean in my post but your response is aggravating to say the least. Your machine doesn't make anywhere near a perfect shot! And anyone can clearly see that. That is not DICE CONTROL or Dice Influencing as you like to call it. You machine doesn't even reproduce a so called GTC shot. Frank Scoblete shoots better than your machine.

Learn to take advice and feedback, the first thing you make is never perfect. I know that you are very knowledgeable when it comes to craps but you don't know it all superrick! nobody does.

edit

+1 (If the dice reacted and resolved exactly as you planned) Congrats Nick, awesome news dude-your practice has paid off. Hopefully, it's paying off!

Quote: nickolay411

lol what! I just got back from Macau, I made two perfect shots in my first session at the MGM... Both were called no rolls by the crew because the dice didn't turn over...Dead cat bounce right against the back wall.

That's why I went to another unnamed casino. There they don't care if you hit the back wall so its a great trade for the higher minimums.

The last thing I wanted was to be mean in my post but your response is aggravating to say the least. Your machine doesn't make anywhere near a perfect shot! And anyone can clearly see that. That is not DICE CONTROL or Dice Influencing as you like to call it. You machine doesn't even reproduce a so called GTC shot. Frank Scoblete shoots better than your machine.

Learn to take advice and feedback, the first thing you make is never perfect. I know that you are very knowledgeable when it comes to craps but you don't know it all superrick! nobody does.

Yea,..I know everybody goes to Macau just to play craps, please tell which one of the many craps tables you made your amazing shots on!

My machine is just as random as Frank, so how can you say that he is better then my machine?
You gave me one more really good laugh, so keep up the good work!

...

Quote: superrick

Yea,..I know everybody goes to Macau just to play craps, please tell which one of the many craps tables you made your amazing shots on!

My machine is just as random as Frank, so how can you say that he is better then my machine?
You gave me one more really good laugh, so keep up the good work!

...

I never said I had amazing shots at the second casino...Their table was actually much harder and had little give so it was tougher to reproduce the shots I had at the MGM whose table was so soft it reminded me of throwing dice on a bed...

I say he's better than your machine because roughly 1 in so many of his shots ( GTC videos) at least one of die stays on axis throughout the entire shot. That to me is some level of control.

Maybe I missed a good looking shot in your video, please point it out.

Quote: nickolay411

Quote: superrick

Yea,..I know everybody goes to Macau just to play craps, please tell which one of the many craps tables you made your amazing shots on!

My machine is just as random as Frank, so how can you say that he is better then my machine?
You gave me one more really good laugh, so keep up the good work!

...

I never said I had amazing shots at the second casino...Their table was actually much harder and had little give so it was tougher to reproduce the shots I had at the MGM whose table was so soft it reminded me of throwing dice on a bed...

I say he's better than your machine because roughly 1 in so many of his shots ( GTC videos) at least one of die stays on axis throughout the entire shot. That to me is some level of control.

Maybe I missed a good looking shot in your video, please point it out.

No it's the other way around, please show everybody in the world where your hero's shot stayed on axis!

Quote: superrick

No it's the other way around, please show everybody in the world where your hero's shot stayed on axis!

he's far from my hero lol. thats funny. now you have me laughing. I don't have his videos but I can recall at least one decent shot from them. Maybe it wasn't Frank , but anyway it was one of those dice guys. If you have the gtc video feel free to rummage through and see if you can see one die doing what its supposed to. I'd be happy to be proven wrong but I think you can find at least 1 die doing something right in all of those shots they took.

Quote: nickolay411

t I can recall at least one decent shot from them..

Damned by Faint Praise.

Practice Practice Practice It took me 50+ years to master dice setting. Practice Practice Practice

Quote: nickolay411

Quote: superrick

No it's the other way around, please show everybody in the world where your hero's shot stayed on axis!

he's far from my hero lol. thats funny. now you have me laughing. I don't have his videos but I can recall at least one decent shot from them. Maybe it wasn't Frank , but anyway it was one of those dice guys. If you have the gtc video feel free to rummage through and see if you can see one die doing what its supposed to. I'd be happy to be proven wrong but I think you can find at least 1 die doing something right in all of those shots they took.

Any video that they put out was very well edited, but even with that said, sorry I don't know of one of their shots that you could say really stayed on axis! I've even asked Frank if he had one that we all could look at and guess what he never got back with one!

I would love to see just one slow motion video where the dice did say on axis, the sad truth is the dice bounce all over the place when they hit the table. When you look at them in slow motion the truth comes out! You can believe anything that you want to, some people will never be convinced that the dice do not say on axis, even when they are looking at the slow motion videos!

Everybody is just wishing and hoping that every time they make a shot that the dice will end up back on axis. They believe all of the hype that the DI schools have put out over the years. I've reviewed way to many beautiful looking shots in slow motion and they do not stay on axis. Look even Stanford Wong, came to the same conclusion, when he looked at some slow motion video of the perfect shot, that came up with the two top numbers they wanted to get!

To put it very bluntly slow motion videos are the on axis DI schools killer. But there will always be guys that want to buy into the hype, they are looking for that magic bullet, and they are an easy touch for anybody selling anything that gives them false hope.

I've done all of my home work, the ball is in your court, if you want to prove that the dice do stay on axis, find that video that actually shows that they do stay on axis! Have fun trying to find one!

Look I would even hate to guess how many hours of video they had to take to even get a few good looking shots!

Now when I was looking at this video, I was almost crying I was laughing so hard. Not one time could you see what the two top numbers were, and if those dice were on axis I don't know what to tell you!

http://www.casinotube.com/casino-games/craps/golden-touch-craps-practice-7

Is this what you call great shooting, if it is you need some glasses, hell I'm half blind and I can see the dice are bouncing all over the place!

I just loved Practice 4 video, it show one thing the dice are random bouncing all over the place, do you any other videos to show the world?

Can you please tell me why in these videos you can not see the out comes of each shot? These videos were made to show one thing, how easy it is to deceive someone looking for that magic bullet. I just loved the video of the back wall when there was no dice hitting it! Did you really buy into what they were doing?

Please tell me that you didn't, because if you think those dice are under anybody's control as the are bouncing all over the place, I don't know what to tell you!

Most of the time the right die is crossing over the left die, is that control? Lets get real, all they are doing is throwing the dice to the back wall and letting them bounce all over the place.

One time they bounce back more then two feet, some times they are bouncing back more then that. Yea,..great looking shots if your blind like me, other wise they look like any random roller!
Your fighting a losing battle, unless you can come up with that magical video that nobody has come up with yet!

'Winning comes from knowledge and skill when your betting '

what the hell does that mean?????????????