Sharpshooter's Book: Truth or Fiction
Quote: AhighNice work, Nick.
Thanks Ahigh!
Question for you since I know you've played at most of the Casino's in Vegas. The space below the pyramids I'll call them the buffer zone.
Have you ever noticed any height difference in the buffer zones throughout the vegas casinos/tables? Any that were unusually higher?
Quote: nickolay411Thanks Ahigh!
Question for you since I know you've played at most of the Casino's in Vegas. The space below the pyramids I'll call them the buffer zone.
Have you ever noticed any height difference in the buffer zones throughout the vegas casinos/tables? Any that were unusually higher?
They aren't uniform even among tables at the same casino. I've never measured the "gap" so this is based on appearance.
As we all know tables within a casino can have different sizes and shapes.
Quote: AlanMendelsonI've never measured the "gap" so this is based on appearance.
At Caesar's Palace, they are the casino that has the most variety in their back walls.
In general, there are two main types of back walls. One I call five diamond and one I call seven diamond.
Seven diamond have a higher section of diamonds; the diamonds are a bit smaller, but still taller.
Seven diamond are the variety you find online and from Chinese replacement back-wall providers. It's what you will find at the Gambler's General Store.
Five diamond back walls generally come from Paulson aka GPIC. Very few people outside the casino have five diamond walls unless they came with a craps table that was originally in a casino. I have five diamond.
Caesar's also has six diamond, as does the Rio. Those are the only two casinos that I know of with six diamond.
Caesar's has no fewer than four different types of back walls installed. 5, 6, and 7 diamond. And I think two varieties of one of those. More than any other casino.
For more details, you can check my casino list on my website.
http://forum.goodshooter.com/topic6.html
Gazillion factors can change to bounce variable off the back wall.
The bounce factor off the back wall must be slightly different from table to table.
Quote: terapinedAnother huge variable is the bounce factor off the back wall. Due to how the table was constructed, age of rubber of that back wall and material used. Even the amount of glue used during construction, air pockets between rubber and wall. Drinks spilled ect.
Gazillion factors can change to bounce variable off the back wall.
The bounce factor off the back wall must be slightly different from table to table.
Everything you wrote about and more makes each and every table different. This is why I can't understand why anyone would buy a practice rig from any school, or even practice on their own table when the table at the casino will have a different bounce, size, etc.
Of course the true goal is not to bounce the dice off the back wall... just have the dice roll and stop at the back wall, or just slightly glance the back wall. But yes, there will be differences between every table.
Quote: AlanMendelsonEverything you wrote about and more makes each and every table different. This is why I can't understand why anyone would buy a practice rig from any school, or even practice on their own table when the table at the casino will have a different bounce, size, etc.
Of course the true goal is not to bounce the dice off the back wall... just have the dice roll and stop at the back wall, or just slightly glance the back wall. But yes, there will be differences between every table.
The bounce off each craps table is different, Everything I posted above also applies to the flat betting surface itself. The bounce of the betting surface itself, besides all tables being different, the surface itself at 1 table probabbly has inconsistent bounce spots depending on what part of the table the dice hit. Its like old Boston Garden. Larry Bird knew every dead bounce spot on that inconsistent floor.
I start loving BUZZ. I really doooooo.............Quote: BuzzardFor a real DI , none of that matters. I am willing to defend my title as the best DI in the world on any table in any casino on this planet.
Quote: BuzzardFor a real DI , none of that matters. I am willing to defend my title as the best DI in the world on any table in any casino on this planet.
I'd like to defend my claim to that as well, as long as I win the bet if anyone putting his money up can't prove that I'm not the best in the world.
In order for me to lose the bet, the evidence has to be statistically significant. If anyone takes me on, I'm sure the Wizard can define "statistically significant" for us.
PS: I think this is what Buzzard has in mind too.
Quote: BuzzardFor a real DI , none of that matters. I am willing to defend my title as the best DI in the world on any table in any casino on this planet.
Buzz, I'd definitely do a challenge against you. We'll put up some money tooooo. But I'm in China for maybe another 3-6 months. Afterwards we can duel it out on the craps table.
I'm proposing a challenge on who can set and hit more points in the allotted number of rolls. I welcome any other ideas.
Can I get 1.5 to 1 odds if I toss from a cup while blindfolded and furthest from the back wall. You can stand anywhere the casino normally allows.Quote: nickolay411Buzz, I'd definitely do a challenge against you. We'll put up some money tooooo. But I'm in China for maybe another 3-6 months. Afterwards we can duel it out on the craps table.
I'm proposing a challenge on who can set and hit more points in the allotted number of rolls. I welcome any other ideas.
Quote: AxelWolfCan I get 1.5 to 1 odds if I toss from a cup while blindfolded and furthest from the back wall. You can stand anywhere the casino normally allows.
Yes! lol.
And yes, my method works in China as well.
Any chance AHIGH might post a championship DI event at his home. Of course he would not be allowed to participate, due to an unfair home field advantage. Perhaps during G2E, with an entry fee for a trophy and the remaining proceeds going to his children.
Step purposely deleted. YOU ARE THE DAD NOW !
Quote: AxelWolfCan I get 1.5 to 1 odds if I toss from a cup while blindfolded and furthest from the back wall. You can stand anywhere the casino normally allows.
Keep the blindfold on the entire time, let me keep score, and you can get 100 to 1 odds !
Quote: HughJassHas anyone done a study to estimate the upper limits of dice influencing consistency with a pneumatic dice cannon, a robotic arm, or a similar means of accurate throwing repeatability?
If it was possible to make a legal shot that would be allowed in a casino consistently (hitting the diamonds on the back wall) with a pneumatic or robotic shooter the DI fanboys and teachers would be using it to show it is possible.
The problem is, nobody can prove it. Nobody can show it being done. Nobody can catch it on video. It's the Big Foot and Lockness Monster and second shooter of gambling. All other AP plays can be proven except this one type of alleged way to beat the house.
Ahigh spent A LOT of time and money. Maybe more than anyone else ever trying to show it could be done. At what point does it become pretty evident that since it can't be proven and/or verified that it really doesn't exist?
ZCore13
Betting systems can be more easily tested with a simulator.
Dice have to be actually thrown, and that's sort of a bottleneck for proof.
Even 100,000 samples still takes a thousand hours, and you're not even really proving anything with that many samples. Just max odds on 345x odds with 100,000 rolls can come out a winner with randomly generated outcomes.
It would actually be easier to prove that it can't work if it weren't for free odds and if the house edge on the pass line were 2% per roll.
But lacking that proof, it will continue to be a sort of legend of unproven beliefs among the religious followers of DI.
I have to disagree with this. If a mechanical arm was built to roll the dice consistently according to what ever DI's define as a perfect roll, if its possible the results should show up rather fast.Quote: AhighOne thing that's difficult for most to appreciate is that to get a million samples takes about ten thousand hours. Even a robotic arm doesn't help you prove much.
Betting systems can be more easily tested with a simulator.
Dice have to be actually thrown, and that's sort of a bottleneck for proof.
Even 100,000 samples still takes a thousand hours, and you're not even really proving anything with that many samples. Just max odds on 345x odds with 100,000 rolls can come out a winner with randomly generated outcomes.
It would actually be easier to prove that it can't work if it weren't for free odds and if the house edge on the pass line were 2% per roll.
But lacking that proof, it will continue to be a sort of legend of unproven beliefs among the religious followers of DI.
No DI advocate wants this because it will finalize DI and put it into a SYSTEM. Of course you will have some nut jobs who will just say the device cant do what they can do. Just like the baccarat system players who claim a computer program can't simulate their system, their systems only work in the casino.
I bet even if you took the diamonds off the back wall and moved the arm closer to the wall then a DI can get, it would still be random.
Quote: AxelWolfif its possible the results should show up rather fast.
That's so true! I ran a computer sim. Dropping 2 dice from a foot above the table. Both dice touching side by side. Two 6's up. The results showed very quickly.
In the simulation there was also a rule for randomness. Each die upon simulation entry was injected with random spin acceleration between 0-360 degrees per second.
Quote: AxelWolfIf a mechanical arm was built to roll the dice consistently according to what ever DI's define as a perfect roll, if its possible the results should show up rather fast.
A mechanical arm that was programmed to hit the pyramids in a particular way, with a particular force, at a particular angle could show the same exact result over and over again -- barring any unusual wear on the table or air currents.
This is why dice influencing is possible. For every action there is a reaction. Hit the table the exact same way every time, and you will get the same result every time. But what person can do that?
Quote: nickolay411I ran a computer sim. Dropping 2 dice from a foot above the table. Both dice touching side by side. Two 6's up. The results showed very quickly.
In the simulation there was also a rule for randomness. Each die upon simulation entry was injected with random spin acceleration between 0-360 degrees per second.
Run your similation without randomness... with an exact shot to the same exact spot, with the same exact force and angle... and what do you get?
Quote: AlanMendelsonRun your similation without randomness... with an exact shot to the same exact spot, with the same exact force and angle... and what do you get?
Exactly what you'd think you get. The exact same outcome reoccurs over and over again infinitum. In theory/simulations DI is very real.
But as we take it out of the computer and into the real world how fast does it fall apart?
If I could guess the success rates of a 'perfect' throw they would look something like this :
Simulation = 100 %
Robotic Arm/Machine = 1%
Human <=.01%
For my research I want to see how far you could deviate from a perfect throw and still get successful results or a so called edge.
And from what I have found so far is that you don't need a perfect throw to influence the dice.
Quote: nickolay411Buzz, I'd definitely do a challenge against you. We'll put up some money tooooo. But I'm in China for maybe another 3-6 months. Afterwards we can duel it out on the craps table.
I'm proposing a challenge on who can set and hit more points in the allotted number of rolls. I welcome any other ideas.
It'd be fun to bet you, hope I can some day. But I would decline to say that you were the best DI in the world, or even any better than anyone else, on the basis of the conceivable number of throws we could do. It's that statistical significance thing.
OK, well, if you can call 18 yo's in a row and then do it, you get the crown.
Quote: odiousgambitOK, well, if you can call 18 yo's in a row and then do it, you get the crown.
haha I certainly cannot achieve that kind of feat. Nor do I care to be labeled as the best DI or anything like that. I just think its fun and since my last showing wasn't so great It can be a chance for a little bit of redemption!
Edit: Plus who doesn't like a chance to win some money?
Theoretically maybe, but is it possible to do? I assume if it were possible it would take some serious micro machining and computer assistance. The dice might need to be be built perfectly as well, with zero imperfections. Possibly even computer guided.Quote: AlanMendelsonA mechanical arm that was programmed to hit the pyramids in a particular way, with a particular force, at a particular angle could show the same exact result over and over again -- barring any unusual wear on the table or air currents.
This is why dice influencing is possible. For every action there is a reaction. Hit the table the exact same way every time, and you will get the same result every time. But what person can do that?
Run your similation without randomness... with an exact shot to the same exact spot, with the same exact force and angle... and what do you get?
I doubt an arm could be made that could achieve this in a normal environment (there are always going to be air currents and temperature changes. You have to control the dice and the environment) The fact is, No human can even come close to achieving this.
The real question is how much control does the dice need to change them from being random to non random. Then after that see if this is even humanly possible.
To be clear when I talk about DI and the possibilities I am only referring to a +EV situation. Who cares if you can get 1 in 10,000 rolls to have a slight bit of control.
Quote: nickolay411And from what I have found so far is that you don't need a perfect throw to influence the dice.
So far, you're one of the few on this site to be more realistic about the possibilities. Let me ask you this, and I hope you are familiar with baseball:
Ty Cobb has the best batting average in major league baseball at .366 -- meaning he had a hit 36.6% of the time.
What percentage of "good throws" does a DI need?
Some on this site seem to think a DI needs to be 100% perfect. How about if a DI only got 36.6% of his throws "right"?
And getting back to the robotic arm: if someone were to build a robotic arm at least it would demonstrate that it was possible to throw the dice and even when hitting the pyramids a "wanted number" could be thrown over and over again. That doesn't mean any human could do it -- but it proves the possibility.
Why is the possibility important? Because if there were no possibility there would be no reason to try. Because there is a possibility it validates the attempts. I'm all for trying. Hope springs eternal.
Quote: Zcore13
Ahigh spent A LOT of time and money. Maybe more than anyone else ever trying to show it could be done. At what point does it become pretty evident that since it can't be proven and/or verified that it really doesn't exist?
I'm sorry. I can't let this pass.
Ahigh, God bless him, did not show anything about DI except that he wasn't a controlled shooter himself.
But a mechanical or robotic arm could prove the possibility. Whether or not any human could do it is the question.
Yes, you can use a robot to aim the dice at the pyramids and program the robot to deliver the dice in such a way that the dice would show the same result every time. It's basic. For every action this is a reaction. Throw the dice the same way to an exact spot on the pyramids each and every time, and the dice will bounce back to the same end point each and every time. You might have to do this in a vacuum but it would happen. Accept it. It's science.
Exactly, a vacuum is needed with a mechanical arm. Since no casinos are currently offering this, there is no such thing as DI's. DI is not possible in any casino.Quote: AlanMendelsonI'm sorry. I can't let this pass.
Ahigh, God bless him, did not show anything about DI except that he wasn't a controlled shooter himself.
But a mechanical or robotic arm could prove the possibility. Whether or not any human could do it is the question.
Yes, you can use a robot to aim the dice at the pyramids and program the robot to deliver the dice in such a way that the dice would show the same result every time. It's basic. For every action this is a reaction. Throw the dice the same way to an exact spot on the pyramids each and every time, and the dice will bounce back to the same end point each and every time. You might have to do this in a vacuum but it would happen. Accept it. It's science.
If I'm not mistaken, two separate events cannot be "the exact same". It's just not how things work. There will always be the slightest differences between two occurrences.
It seems like some are trying to use the "if a robot can do it, then a person can do it" argument. Huh? If I can make a robot throw a 300 mph fastball....does that mean a person can throw a 300 mph fastball?
Okay, sure, maybe it's possible....but then again, everything is possible. But at the same token, nothing can be proven. Soo....there's that.
But realistically speaking, is it possible? I don't think so. I believe Alan or Ahigh have been saying something about a batter who's batting 300 (0.3 hits/at-bat) so "how many good rolls does a DI need?". Controlling (or influencing) the dice only makes sense if it can generate an edge. If you can control the dice 1/100 times (and assuming that isn't enough to generate an edge), it doesn't make sense to claim just because you can control them 1% of the time that it's possible. Controlling or influencing the dice means nothing if you can't generate an edge.
What do you mean by a "good roll"? One where the dice both remain on axis? Land in a certain area? Surface of dice hit felt in a specific way (ie: flat part hits surface instead of corner)? How specific does this have to be? Do all these have to hold true for it to be a good roll? Or is a 'good roll' merely one that does not land on 7?
Quote: AlanMendelsonAhigh, God bless him, did not show anything about DI except that he wasn't a controlled shooter himself.
Alan, could be a little bit more condescending, perhaps? In all truthfulness, this doesn't paint you in the best of light to say things like this.
Quote: DeMangoHoo boy, it gets deeper. No the V3 eliminates 4 fookin sevens, if you keep them on axis. There are 16 on axis results. You guys need to goto dice school!
PACEPALM. AGHHH. Iknew DeMango was a DI...
Quote: DeMangoHoo boy, it gets deeper. No the V3 eliminates 4 fookin sevens, if you keep them on axis. There are 16 on axis results. You guys need to goto dice school!
LOL The V3 eliminates four 7's. Now that's one of the funniest things I've read in a while.
ZCore13
What drives this conversation is all the fiction writers and all of the authors that are selling books on becoming a DI. Lets not forget the craps schools that are teaching you how to become a DI, that are telling their students that you can keep your dice on axis when you are shooting.
The casinos should love to see any of these so-called DI's walking into their casinos, with them they bring a false hope to any of the players that are there playing when they see one of these guys getting lucky and they think they can do the same thing that is why you now see so many players setting the dice. These players will never realize that the shooter they saw having a big hand was just getting lucky when they were shooting!
There are big hands going on right now in some casinos around the country, and the shooters are not DI's they are just lucky, just like everybody else when they have a big roll.
What makes this so controversial is that there is such a misunderstanding about what it is and just how few rolls you need to influence to get an edge on the game.
There is no reason not to try. If you don't try then you are throwing your money down the drain when you play.
Versus throwing your money down the drain while trying to win.
Quote: superrickWhat happened to common sense in this country? DI has not been proven, even looking at what Little Joe Green did, sure he beat the odds one time but can he do it every time, not taking away from anything he did!
What drives this conversation is all the fiction writers and all of the authors that are selling books on becoming a DI. Lets not forget the craps schools that are teaching you how to become a DI, that are telling their students that you can keep your dice on axis when you are shooting.
The casinos should love to see any of these so-called DI's walking into their casinos, with them they bring a false hope to any of the players that are there playing when they see one of these guys getting lucky and they think they can do the same thing that is why you now see so many players setting the dice. These players will never realize that the shooter they saw having a big hand was just getting lucky when they were shooting!
There are big hands going on right now in some casinos around the country, and the shooters are not DI's they are just lucky, just like everybody else when they have a big roll.
I've mentioned it before. If it isn't the casinos holding these dice schools it ought to be.
After watching some of the slo-videos if I understand on axis throwing correctly than it isn't happening. My understanding would be two squares [or cubes] rolling down the felt like two round marbles and miraculously ending on one of the derivatives of "the set". And of course collecting all that easy house money.
I guess I'm like many others and would like to see it but I don't believe the casinos have anything to worry about. A dice school might be a lucrative sideline for the casinos if they are losing on the gambling. Then there could be a whole new group of stealth di's out competing for the L1 position and haggling over whether or not the dice hit the back wall with the boxperson.
Good grief.
I suppose that "there is a possibility" that if you stab youself in the heart with a steak knife the wound will instantly heal without medical attention.
Go ahead and try that little test and tell us how it goes.
ANYTHING is possible, right?
"What makes this so controversial is that there is such a misunderstanding about what it is and just how few rolls you need to influence to get an edge on the game."
So then, tell us all definitively what DI "is and just how few rolls you need to influence to get an edge on the game."
"There is no reason not to try. If you don't try then you are throwing your money down the drain when you play."
Magical thinking, Alan: magical thinking.
Maybe you need to use that steak knife test to give yourself a much needed dose of reality.
Quote: AlanMendelsonThe number of rolls that need to be influenced is less than what a ball player with a 300 batting average needs to hit.
Really?
Any PROOF for that little nugget of wisdom?
Of course not.
Alan, your credibility is getting tarnished the longer you try to defend the indefensible.
Fun to watch though, in a schadenfreude sort of way.
Since the era of the 162-game schedule, the requisite number of PAs has been 502.
In Master's DI classes, I always exhibit my talent with a minimum of 600 rolls.
