TERRIBLE DICE
October 4th, 2014 at 1:06:48 PM
permalink
I think maybe I will order some of these dice just to see what they look like.
http://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Plastic-plastic-casino-dice_313041391.html
http://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Plastic-plastic-casino-dice_313041391.html
aahigh.com
October 4th, 2014 at 2:27:07 PM
permalink
Quote: dicesitterDemango
For you to say what you have just said makes me wonder if you ever put
any time in the game of craps. Some how the idea that biased dice are different than
cheap dice sounds almost like the comment i heard a couple of years ago "if you
like your doctor you can keep him)
dicersetter
There is a very funny thing about all of the posters that say it isn't so, when you ask how many times a year they play craps they won't answer your question!
Your so-called experts that are saying it isn't so, don't even live in a state where you can play craps! Yes they will tell everybody that the guys that started seeing these dice unbalanced dice haven't proven that there are unbalanced dice, or cheap dice. Now the truth of the matter was they were given a chance to see it first hand but turned it down, because they didn't what the truth to get out about the dice.
Could it be that if there were bad dice it might effect the students that they could bring in for their school? I have no agenda, I do not sell anything, all I want to see is fair dice on every table I go to, in accordance with most state laws!
So the question we all need to be asking Demango is how many times a year do you play craps, how many times a year do you play craps in Vegas, and do you live in a state that even has casinos or craps tables? Oh,..yes have you ever put any dice on a balancing caliber to see how bad the dice are that we are writing about?
Note, all my post start with this is just my opinion...!
You do good brada ..!
superrick
Winning comes from knowledge and skill when your betting and not reading fiction
http://procraps4u2.myfanforum.org/index.php
...
October 4th, 2014 at 6:00:06 PM
permalink
Really Rick? The proof that there are biased dice depends on how many times a year I play and where I play??? No, the burden of proof is on you. Give us the name of the casinos with biased dice. Proof it and I will quit my day job!
When a rock is thrown into a pack of dogs, the one that yells the loudest is the one who got hit.
October 4th, 2014 at 6:08:53 PM
permalink
Quote: petroglyphQuote: DeMango.
Well there you go. Multiple violations of forum rules, selling your product, name calling, trolling. Internet stalking with intent to belittle. Not my house, not my rules.
Me selling anything? Being called a troll is name calling. Pot. Kettle. Black. No the simple answer is nothing has been proven. Harley has had this obsession for years. So please, name casino names. Give us all an AP opportunity! Until then there will be derision.When a rock is thrown into a pack of dogs, the one that yells the loudest is the one who got hit.
October 4th, 2014 at 7:23:52 PM
permalink
Quote: DeMangoQuote: petroglyph
Me selling anything? Being called a troll is name calling. Pot. Kettle. Black. No the simple answer is nothing has been proven. Harley has had this obsession for years. So please, name casino names. Give us all an AP opportunity! Until then there will be derision.
Did someone call you a name?
You want me to name casinos? Ok, Wynn, MGM, Circus Circus, does that help you? Look them up on the web, I'm not your guy. At this point I'm am pretty sure if I had a great AP opportunity I doubt I would want to share it with you. But just so you know, I don't win at casino's. I don't claim to, and I don't sell anything to do with gaming, nor do I represent or am I associated with any di schools, how bout you?
And a threat, great. Just great.
Hey man, don't make me wrong about you. I'm trying to make you look good but you are going to have to help me at least a little bit, ok?
October 4th, 2014 at 8:31:04 PM
permalink
Quote: DeMangoReally Rick? The proof that there are biased dice depends on how many times a year I play and where I play??? No, the burden of proof is on you. Give us the name of the casinos with biased dice. Proof it and I will quit my day job!
Yes,..really, if you only play one time a year I can see why you would say it couldn't happen. So the question still stands, if you never used a balance caliber how can you say it wouldn't happen? So are you just like all the other so-called experts that don't even live in a state where they have craps? It's a very valid question to see just how much you would know about what is happening in the casinos.
Your so-called experts don't want to see that the dice are unbalanced, they want to stick their heads in the sand and say it isn't so, there are videos out that shows how the dice are not balanced. Are you saying that they don't tell the real story?
I just love your last sentence, if your so-called experts can't quit their day jobs how do you expect too?
Hell one of them had to come out of retirement and go back to selling his classes, maybe he couldn't make it playing craps!
Note, all my post start with this is just my opinion...!
You do good brada ..!
superrick
Winning comes from knowledge and skill when your betting and not reading fiction
http://procraps4u2.myfanforum.org/index.php
...
October 4th, 2014 at 9:31:33 PM
permalink
aahigh.com
.jpeg "Bohemian"){kind=small}
October 4th, 2014 at 10:54:06 PM
permalink
Aww the Dark Side, but not so fast my friend Ahigh. I studied from the best on biased dice, the Biased Dice Research Team based out of Las Vegas, all Live casino craps players which included:
- a double PhD tenured Math professor;
- a NASA aerospace scientist;
- a retired plastics engineer;
- a mechanical engineer;
- an electrical engineer;
- 2 finance majors;
- a CPA;
- a computer geek like thee;
- and 4 craps players that live and play in Las Vegas almost every day of the year.
The Biased Dice Research Team warned me about going to the Dark Side when I recognized biased dice, but I had read internet theories and great fiction from the likes of Mad Professor, irishsetter, DeMango and even moderators of the Wizard of Vegas (who barely play craps on live tables, especially not with full odds as they preach, at least not compared to the quality and quantity of real world experience of the Biased Dice Research Team).
And I was tempted to the easy lure of making millions from the impractical theory and fiction of these internet posters to venture onto the Dark Side. After 10 months of playing daily almost exclusively on the Dark Side when I encountered cheap unbalanced biased percentage dice, this is what I learned:
1. Biased dice increased the House Advantage on both sides - the PL and DP
2. Not only were more 7s and 11s often seen, but certain other numbers increased or repeated which allowed for Points to be made before the 7-out showed. For Instance a sample roll would be: 7, 12, 4, 11, 6, 4 (Point repeated and made), 9, 7-out. Sure some versions of the Dark Side would have made $$ on that 8 roll, but many versions of the Dark Side would have lost and even most versions of Frank Scoblete's 5-Count would have lost money on that 8 roll.
The next roll may have been a 11, 5, 7 or a technical PSO , but not a pure winner for all versions of the Dark Side.
3. When we had fair dice, you would see many Dark Side players making a decent living off just Laying the 4 and 10. Not any longer as most biased dice kill these Dark Side strategies, as noted from the example roll above.
4. Some dice sticks are unbalanced equally and most are not. I believe Ahigh has noted this before in his findings. So when you get a stick of dice from the Stickman, which 2 of the 5 dice present what bias? How do you know the bias of the 2 dice you picked up compared to the bias of the dice left in the bowl?
Did you just pick up 2 unbalanced dice, 1 unbalanced die and 1 fair die or 2 fair dice? And how do you bet accordingly? Same for the next roller and so on.
5. Not all dice are biased in the same way. Some favor more 6/1s, others favor more 4/3s. What bias you found on a certain table one day during a certain shift may be on a different table and a different shift the next day. It's called changing the combination to the vault. If you were in charge of protecting the Casinos's bank of chips, wouldn't you change the vault combination if you thought someone had the key to taking all the chips, especially if it only cost approximately $3.00 for a new key every 8 hours (new stick of dice).
- a double PhD tenured Math professor;
- a NASA aerospace scientist;
- a retired plastics engineer;
- a mechanical engineer;
- an electrical engineer;
- 2 finance majors;
- a CPA;
- a computer geek like thee;
- and 4 craps players that live and play in Las Vegas almost every day of the year.
The Biased Dice Research Team warned me about going to the Dark Side when I recognized biased dice, but I had read internet theories and great fiction from the likes of Mad Professor, irishsetter, DeMango and even moderators of the Wizard of Vegas (who barely play craps on live tables, especially not with full odds as they preach, at least not compared to the quality and quantity of real world experience of the Biased Dice Research Team).
And I was tempted to the easy lure of making millions from the impractical theory and fiction of these internet posters to venture onto the Dark Side. After 10 months of playing daily almost exclusively on the Dark Side when I encountered cheap unbalanced biased percentage dice, this is what I learned:
1. Biased dice increased the House Advantage on both sides - the PL and DP
2. Not only were more 7s and 11s often seen, but certain other numbers increased or repeated which allowed for Points to be made before the 7-out showed. For Instance a sample roll would be: 7, 12, 4, 11, 6, 4 (Point repeated and made), 9, 7-out. Sure some versions of the Dark Side would have made $$ on that 8 roll, but many versions of the Dark Side would have lost and even most versions of Frank Scoblete's 5-Count would have lost money on that 8 roll.
The next roll may have been a 11, 5, 7 or a technical PSO , but not a pure winner for all versions of the Dark Side.
3. When we had fair dice, you would see many Dark Side players making a decent living off just Laying the 4 and 10. Not any longer as most biased dice kill these Dark Side strategies, as noted from the example roll above.
4. Some dice sticks are unbalanced equally and most are not. I believe Ahigh has noted this before in his findings. So when you get a stick of dice from the Stickman, which 2 of the 5 dice present what bias? How do you know the bias of the 2 dice you picked up compared to the bias of the dice left in the bowl?
Did you just pick up 2 unbalanced dice, 1 unbalanced die and 1 fair die or 2 fair dice? And how do you bet accordingly? Same for the next roller and so on.
5. Not all dice are biased in the same way. Some favor more 6/1s, others favor more 4/3s. What bias you found on a certain table one day during a certain shift may be on a different table and a different shift the next day. It's called changing the combination to the vault. If you were in charge of protecting the Casinos's bank of chips, wouldn't you change the vault combination if you thought someone had the key to taking all the chips, especially if it only cost approximately $3.00 for a new key every 8 hours (new stick of dice).
October 5th, 2014 at 12:14:58 PM
permalink
This whole thing continues to be interesting, and as the readers of this forum know, it was after using a spreadsheet and counting faces that I was trespassed from Fiesta Rancho and Fiesta Henderson.
Until I am allowed to come back to those properties and continue counting faces and betting according to a spreadsheet, it appears that, at the very least, even these casinos aren't sure just how fair their dice are. I have not used this technique since then for fear of becoming a "persona non-gratis" here in Vegas. I have too much to learn from just playing casually and watching folks gamble to be trespassed from more casinos researching this topic.
As a parallel item, it's a very simple procedure for someone to exploit biased dice using a spreadsheet. No matter where the bias comes from.
I think the most biased dice are going to come from the casinos with the hardest floors. I won't mention any names (Ellis Island cough cough -- they owe me $190), but that's what I would do!
Until I am allowed to come back to those properties and continue counting faces and betting according to a spreadsheet, it appears that, at the very least, even these casinos aren't sure just how fair their dice are. I have not used this technique since then for fear of becoming a "persona non-gratis" here in Vegas. I have too much to learn from just playing casually and watching folks gamble to be trespassed from more casinos researching this topic.
As a parallel item, it's a very simple procedure for someone to exploit biased dice using a spreadsheet. No matter where the bias comes from.
I think the most biased dice are going to come from the casinos with the hardest floors. I won't mention any names (Ellis Island cough cough -- they owe me $190), but that's what I would do!
aahigh.com
October 5th, 2014 at 12:16:28 PM
permalink
Here's the topic for folks who want to exploit biased dice. Again, it doesn't matter how the dice are biased, and you can likely come up with scenarios where you can model two dice very easily starting with this spreadsheet and come up with a good plan of attack.
http://forum.goodshooter.com/topic254.html
http://forum.goodshooter.com/topic254.html
aahigh.com
October 5th, 2014 at 2:57:22 PM
permalink
Regarding biased dice:
I have on several occasions found dice that were off balance because the name of the casino was simply engraved too deeply on the number two side of the dice.
Calliper spins have proved it. However, despite the fact that the dice were off balance, the effect wasn't really enough to affect the distribution. After several thousand trials, the results were actually pretty flat. Surprisingly random for most of the dice tested.
I believe the edges of the dice are far more important to the randomness of the dice than just being slightly off balance.
Now, that being said, it is theoretically possible that there could be a type of throw that would favor off balance dice. Meaning perhaps there's a way of throwing them that would exploit the off balance effect. I suspect a slightly dull corner or edge along the five side of the dice would enhance the effect.
One of the more interesting batches of dice that I tested produced the following outcomes. The sample size of the specific test below was relatively small at only 2,324 trials. The dice in the test were not tampered with or damaged. Six dice at a time were thrown.
Below is the number of times each face of the dice showed.
Standard deviation is in the far right column
1 390 0 390 5.96__ 0.15
2 395 0 395 5.88__ 0.43
3 373 0 373 6.23__ -0.80
4 358 0 358 6.49__ -1.63
5 374 0 374 6.21__ -0.74
6 434 0 434 5.35__ 2.60
Total 2,324 0
High 434 2.60
Low 358 -1.63
Chance of
random (1/x) 9.180E+00
Chi square 9.00
My prediction, before the dice were thrown, was that the number two would be the best number.
Even though the number two was likely the lightest side according to the caliper spin test, the number six side is adjacent to it, and shared the edge in the spin test, by being on top. My prediction, before the dice were thrown, was that the number two would be the best number.
-Keyser
I have on several occasions found dice that were off balance because the name of the casino was simply engraved too deeply on the number two side of the dice.
Calliper spins have proved it. However, despite the fact that the dice were off balance, the effect wasn't really enough to affect the distribution. After several thousand trials, the results were actually pretty flat. Surprisingly random for most of the dice tested.
I believe the edges of the dice are far more important to the randomness of the dice than just being slightly off balance.
Now, that being said, it is theoretically possible that there could be a type of throw that would favor off balance dice. Meaning perhaps there's a way of throwing them that would exploit the off balance effect. I suspect a slightly dull corner or edge along the five side of the dice would enhance the effect.
One of the more interesting batches of dice that I tested produced the following outcomes. The sample size of the specific test below was relatively small at only 2,324 trials. The dice in the test were not tampered with or damaged. Six dice at a time were thrown.
Below is the number of times each face of the dice showed.
Standard deviation is in the far right column
1 390 0 390 5.96__ 0.15
2 395 0 395 5.88__ 0.43
3 373 0 373 6.23__ -0.80
4 358 0 358 6.49__ -1.63
5 374 0 374 6.21__ -0.74
6 434 0 434 5.35__ 2.60
Total 2,324 0
High 434 2.60
Low 358 -1.63
Chance of
random (1/x) 9.180E+00
Chi square 9.00
My prediction, before the dice were thrown, was that the number two would be the best number.
Even though the number two was likely the lightest side according to the caliper spin test, the number six side is adjacent to it, and shared the edge in the spin test, by being on top. My prediction, before the dice were thrown, was that the number two would be the best number.
-Keyser
October 5th, 2014 at 4:28:46 PM
permalink
Are biased dice also bigoted dice?
"What, me worry?"
October 5th, 2014 at 4:47:30 PM
permalink
Quote: MrVAre biased dice also bigoted dice?
It seems like if they were being used at the horse or dog track they could be "race-ist"
October 5th, 2014 at 9:48:55 PM
permalink
High 5 to both MrV and petroglyph!!!
Keyser, I applaud your efforts and research!!! You observed something wrong and tried to identify it. You are what I call a 1-Percenter. Less than 1 percent of the craps players in the world have been able to do both of observing that unfair dice were in play and then try to identify the hows and why by actually putting the dice on a caliper. Casinos realize this and that is how they get away with using unbalanced dice.
May I ask more about your dice trials:
1. What kind of surface did the dice land on?
2. How far did the dice travel in air and on surface before the outcome was decided?
3. How were the dice dropped or tossed or rolled to a decision?
4. How fast were the dice traveling? and was the speed of the dice controlled throughout the trials?
Ahigh, I concur and I often take advantage of biased dice at Wynn's small craps tub outside just a few feet away from the topless European pool. It too has a hard surface near the pool to which a set of dice can be chipped on. Accidentally tossing the dice off the table and blaming it on the extra set of nipples nearby is standard protocol. Ask for the same dice, apply heavy moisture to your fingers from the misters above and you can quickly identify the new bias. Sometimes the chipped dice will either accentuate or offset the unbalanced dice that Mr. Steve Wynn usually employs on his tables.
Quote: Keyserthe effect wasn't really enough to affect the distribution. After several thousand trials, the results were actually pretty flat. Surprisingly random for most of the dice tested.
Now, that being said, it is theoretically possible that there could be a type of throw that would favor and off balance dice. Meaning perhaps there's a way of throwing them that would exploit the off balance effect.
Keyser, I applaud your efforts and research!!! You observed something wrong and tried to identify it. You are what I call a 1-Percenter. Less than 1 percent of the craps players in the world have been able to do both of observing that unfair dice were in play and then try to identify the hows and why by actually putting the dice on a caliper. Casinos realize this and that is how they get away with using unbalanced dice.
May I ask more about your dice trials:
1. What kind of surface did the dice land on?
2. How far did the dice travel in air and on surface before the outcome was decided?
3. How were the dice dropped or tossed or rolled to a decision?
4. How fast were the dice traveling? and was the speed of the dice controlled throughout the trials?
Quote: AhighI think the most biased dice are going to come from the casinos with the hardest floors. I won't mention any names (Ellis Island cough cough -- they owe me $190), but that's what I would do!
Ahigh, I concur and I often take advantage of biased dice at Wynn's small craps tub outside just a few feet away from the topless European pool. It too has a hard surface near the pool to which a set of dice can be chipped on. Accidentally tossing the dice off the table and blaming it on the extra set of nipples nearby is standard protocol. Ask for the same dice, apply heavy moisture to your fingers from the misters above and you can quickly identify the new bias. Sometimes the chipped dice will either accentuate or offset the unbalanced dice that Mr. Steve Wynn usually employs on his tables.
October 5th, 2014 at 10:50:29 PM
permalink
Quote: BohemianAhigh, I concur and I often take advantage of biased dice at Wynn's small craps tub outside just a few feet away from the topless European pool. It too has a hard surface near the pool to which a set of dice can be chipped on. Accidentally tossing the dice off the table and blaming it on the extra set of nipples nearby is standard protocol. Ask for the same dice, apply heavy moisture to your fingers from the misters above and you can quickly identify the new bias. Sometimes the chipped dice will either accentuate or offset the unbalanced dice that Mr. Steve Wynn usually employs on his tables.
I had no idea about this table.
My understanding is that Wynn uses Paulson and Midwest dice.
It never ceases to amaze me when I learn about stuff in Vegas that I had no idea about previously.
Last week, I went up into the Piazza room as part of my research into high limit table gaming areas.
Crazy.
aahigh.com
October 6th, 2014 at 8:16:33 AM
permalink
Ahigh, Crazy is that you now have to walk over to Encore to enjoy the European topless craps small table tub as Steve moved it over there from the Wynn. (Dealers say it has something to do with a clause in his divorce settlement?) Anyway, easy to find right next to the 6:5 BlackJack tables.
October 6th, 2014 at 9:35:10 AM
permalink
Quote: BohemianAhigh, Crazy is that you now have to walk over to Encore to enjoy the European topless craps small table tub as Steve moved it over there from the Wynn. (Dealers say it has something to do with a clause in his divorce settlement?) Anyway, easy to find right next to the 6:5 BlackJack tables.
Well, I won't be playing craps around topless girls. That's for sure. It must be nice being single, I suppose.
aahigh.com
October 10th, 2014 at 2:00:44 PM
permalink
Quote: BohemianMay I ask more about your dice trials:
1. What kind of surface did the dice land on?
2. How far did the dice travel in air and on surface before the outcome was decided?
3. How were the dice dropped or tossed or rolled to a decision?
4. How fast were the dice traveling? and was the speed of the dice controlled throughout the trials?
1. Actual craps felt, very thin pad underneath (I used a thinner felt underneath the main felt). Just placing a felt over hard wood damages the dice too quickly. And, the pad more closely matched the casino's table. I also had the pyramids at the end, which the dice did often hit.
2. Six feet
3. Dice were thrown using a relatively high arc. The dice were NOT preset. Several of the deeply engraved dice were thrown at the same time.
4. They weren't breaking the speed limit. However, at times, I was on a cellphone and texting.
-Keyser
October 10th, 2014 at 4:07:00 PM
permalink
To the contrary, that sequence is most definitely "a pure winner" for the Ricochet. It might be a good idea to brush up on "all versions" of the don't game.Quote: Bohemian2. Not only were more 7s and 11s often seen, but certain other numbers increased or repeated which allowed for Points to be made before the 7-out showed. For Instance a sample roll would be: 7, 12, 4, 11, 6, 4 (Point repeated and made), 9, 7-out. Sure some versions of the Dark Side would have made $$ on that 8 roll, but many versions of the Dark Side would have lost and even most versions of Frank Scoblete's 5-Count would have lost money on that 8 roll.
The next roll may have been a 11, 5, 7 or a technical PSO , but not a pure winner for all versions of the Dark Side.
October 10th, 2014 at 6:59:50 PM
permalink
SanchoPanza, that is a good catch. John Patrick's Ricochet would work for this small example I gave. However, the downfall of the Ricochet is if the Point immediately repeats which with biased dice as I noted above, numbers do often repeat, sometimes immediately (Ricochet). Also, I have several years of charting that show the DC does not play out very well (it also often repeats) with unbalanced dice and that is another big play in John Patrick's Ricochet. John Patrick's Ricochet is based upon fair dice distribution.
Again, sometimes the Dark Side works with unbalanced dice, but it's not a sure thing. Even in the sample above only a few dollars are won with the Ricochet as it is not a "pure winner" in my book as a couple of DCs did not travel, and it did not win millions as irish and Mad Professor would have you believe.
Again, sometimes the Dark Side works with unbalanced dice, but it's not a sure thing. Even in the sample above only a few dollars are won with the Ricochet as it is not a "pure winner" in my book as a couple of DCs did not travel, and it did not win millions as irish and Mad Professor would have you believe.
October 10th, 2014 at 7:15:07 PM
permalink
Bohemian,
Do you have any dice samples showing that the dice are likely biased?
I'd like to see samples showing the number of times each face has hit, not combined totals. Showing the combined totals simply washes out the data too much.
Ahigh,
The sample that I saw in your link was pretty random. The sample was also rather small. Do you have any other samples?
-Keyser
Do you have any dice samples showing that the dice are likely biased?
I'd like to see samples showing the number of times each face has hit, not combined totals. Showing the combined totals simply washes out the data too much.
Quote: AhighHere's the topic for folks who want to exploit biased dice. Again, it doesn't matter how the dice are biased, and you can likely come up with scenarios where you can model two dice very easily starting with this spreadsheet and come up with a good plan of attack.
http://forum.goodshooter.com/topic254.html
Ahigh,
The sample that I saw in your link was pretty random. The sample was also rather small. Do you have any other samples?
-Keyser
October 14th, 2014 at 8:40:06 AM
permalink
To recap almost every biased dice discussion I've ever heard, in real life or online:
"I played with these damned biased dice! Ridiculous how many 7s came up"
"Tell me where, so I can go play the Don't and make a fortune!"
"What if different numbers repeat? That would be horrible for the Don't!"
So, for the above to be internally consistent, we have "evidence" of a certain type of dice (or a place that uses them) that is biased to both have statistically significant increases in 7s, but also is somehow biased to repeat some other numbers?
Let's take for a second this claim at face value. Logically (HA, dare I try?!), the dice cannot be biased to repeat all of the numbers. I mean, good luck getting a robust sample where every outcome has a higher probability of occurrence than the standard dice distribution. Probability measures sum to 1 and all that...
So, it must be that some subset of numbers is included in the repeat-offenders category, yes? If that's true, let's pretend that those numbers are 4 and 9 (but you can pick any subset of points you like. I propose the following strategy:
Doey/Don't the come out, and bet max odds on pass for 4/9 and don't for 5/6/8/10. If bankroll allows (and why wouldn't it since we have a massive edge here), lay against the "infrequent" numbers and/or place the biased numbers.
Clearly variance can be a cruel mistress, but coming up with a single string of 7 not-so-random results that would hurt a don't player is as far from proof of anything as there is.
Also, taking the second claim (that dice are both biased for 7s and other numbers simultaneously) off the table and addressing the issue of biased dice for 7s only, I am blown away that someone would claim this is not a guaranteed money-making opportunity. I think part of the problem must be that these mythical casinos with biased dice have 3/4/5 odds structures. Where I play (and play A LOT) has 100x odds... I wish they'd bias the dice one way or another... imagine a $5 don't pass line bet and 500 odds, 5 DC and backing those up... yummy. But even in the standard 3/4/5 structure, the odds money goes from an actuarial fair bet to a definitive player edge, and by definition you have 3/4/5x the money on the bet with your edge... come out rolls be damned.
I'm too lazy to do the math, but it should be clear that max odds with or without follow-up DC/lay bets is +EV.
And again, nothing I've said speaks to the motivation or lack thereof for the casino to do this purposely. Either the results exist or they do not... and if they do, it can be exploited.
Last thing... since apparently it matters. I have played somewhere between 50 and 75 hours of craps since April. I am a losing player but I do it for fun. I have no systems, but I've seen them all. I've been at tables with 45 min - 60 min rolls, and my personal observed record for point-seven-outs is 6 in a row. I've seen short-term variance in favor of 6-1s to a degree that even the most stubborn proponent of fair play would start to waver, but I believe my casino is as clean as they come. I've lost thousands in minutes and wanted to believe something was amiss, but it just isn't there. I've even charted results on paper for local "experts" who are convinced that things like stick changes, dice off the table, hit the money or someone's hand, etc. result in causality of 7s. In case anyone is curious, I'll put them below. Granted not a huge sample, but instructive at least. My preferred place to play has always seemed on the up-and-up, even when I go through massive downswings. I don't think I'm the exception, just that confirmation bias is not in my psyche.
=============================
Event/ number of occurrences/ number of 7s on the next roll
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stick change 71 10
Dice off the table 19 4
Hit money/hands 52 9
New money in middle of a roll 33 5
Maybe I should save this for an AP book on craps?
Or, more likely, nothing is there fellas (and ladies).
"I played with these damned biased dice! Ridiculous how many 7s came up"
"Tell me where, so I can go play the Don't and make a fortune!"
"What if different numbers repeat? That would be horrible for the Don't!"
So, for the above to be internally consistent, we have "evidence" of a certain type of dice (or a place that uses them) that is biased to both have statistically significant increases in 7s, but also is somehow biased to repeat some other numbers?
Let's take for a second this claim at face value. Logically (HA, dare I try?!), the dice cannot be biased to repeat all of the numbers. I mean, good luck getting a robust sample where every outcome has a higher probability of occurrence than the standard dice distribution. Probability measures sum to 1 and all that...
So, it must be that some subset of numbers is included in the repeat-offenders category, yes? If that's true, let's pretend that those numbers are 4 and 9 (but you can pick any subset of points you like. I propose the following strategy:
Doey/Don't the come out, and bet max odds on pass for 4/9 and don't for 5/6/8/10. If bankroll allows (and why wouldn't it since we have a massive edge here), lay against the "infrequent" numbers and/or place the biased numbers.
Clearly variance can be a cruel mistress, but coming up with a single string of 7 not-so-random results that would hurt a don't player is as far from proof of anything as there is.
Also, taking the second claim (that dice are both biased for 7s and other numbers simultaneously) off the table and addressing the issue of biased dice for 7s only, I am blown away that someone would claim this is not a guaranteed money-making opportunity. I think part of the problem must be that these mythical casinos with biased dice have 3/4/5 odds structures. Where I play (and play A LOT) has 100x odds... I wish they'd bias the dice one way or another... imagine a $5 don't pass line bet and 500 odds, 5 DC and backing those up... yummy. But even in the standard 3/4/5 structure, the odds money goes from an actuarial fair bet to a definitive player edge, and by definition you have 3/4/5x the money on the bet with your edge... come out rolls be damned.
I'm too lazy to do the math, but it should be clear that max odds with or without follow-up DC/lay bets is +EV.
And again, nothing I've said speaks to the motivation or lack thereof for the casino to do this purposely. Either the results exist or they do not... and if they do, it can be exploited.
Last thing... since apparently it matters. I have played somewhere between 50 and 75 hours of craps since April. I am a losing player but I do it for fun. I have no systems, but I've seen them all. I've been at tables with 45 min - 60 min rolls, and my personal observed record for point-seven-outs is 6 in a row. I've seen short-term variance in favor of 6-1s to a degree that even the most stubborn proponent of fair play would start to waver, but I believe my casino is as clean as they come. I've lost thousands in minutes and wanted to believe something was amiss, but it just isn't there. I've even charted results on paper for local "experts" who are convinced that things like stick changes, dice off the table, hit the money or someone's hand, etc. result in causality of 7s. In case anyone is curious, I'll put them below. Granted not a huge sample, but instructive at least. My preferred place to play has always seemed on the up-and-up, even when I go through massive downswings. I don't think I'm the exception, just that confirmation bias is not in my psyche.
=============================
Event/ number of occurrences/ number of 7s on the next roll
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stick change 71 10
Dice off the table 19 4
Hit money/hands 52 9
New money in middle of a roll 33 5
Maybe I should save this for an AP book on craps?
Or, more likely, nothing is there fellas (and ladies).
October 16th, 2014 at 6:17:36 AM
permalink
DicePhD, RE: your biased dice discussion: REAL good theory if you can do it, not so REAListic. To prove my hypothesis, try your theory on a live table and let us know how it works.
As for your last thing, take for instance "Dice off the table". I had a 29 roll at Luxor the other day that did not include 8 tosses that bounced off the table. On the first 7 tosses that bounced off the table, I was able to keep my composure and focus and knew NOT to change the energy of my toss. And it proved successful.
After the 8th toss that went off the table, the boxman grabbed his back after bending over to pick up the dice and complained about soreness in his lower back. A momentary compassion for him and lapse in judgement persuaded me to soften my next toss and move my landing zone. Since I altered my shot so much, of course my chances of continuing to avoid the 7 were also altered and sure enough 7 out.
Moral of the story, just because the "Dice go off the table" doesn't mean jacksquat. What matters is if the tosser loses his focus or is human enough to be embarrassed so as not to toss the dice off the table again and therefore alters his next shot enough from what he was previously doing.
As for your last thing, take for instance "Dice off the table". I had a 29 roll at Luxor the other day that did not include 8 tosses that bounced off the table. On the first 7 tosses that bounced off the table, I was able to keep my composure and focus and knew NOT to change the energy of my toss. And it proved successful.
After the 8th toss that went off the table, the boxman grabbed his back after bending over to pick up the dice and complained about soreness in his lower back. A momentary compassion for him and lapse in judgement persuaded me to soften my next toss and move my landing zone. Since I altered my shot so much, of course my chances of continuing to avoid the 7 were also altered and sure enough 7 out.
Moral of the story, just because the "Dice go off the table" doesn't mean jacksquat. What matters is if the tosser loses his focus or is human enough to be embarrassed so as not to toss the dice off the table again and therefore alters his next shot enough from what he was previously doing.
October 16th, 2014 at 10:09:17 AM
permalink
Quote: BohemianDicePhD, RE: your biased dice discussion: REAL good theory if you can do it, not so REAListic. To prove my hypothesis, try your theory on a live table and let us know how it works.
As for your last thing, take for instance "Dice off the table". I had a 29 roll at Luxor the other day that did not include 8 tosses that bounced off the table. On the first 7 tosses that bounced off the table, I was able to keep my composure and focus and knew NOT to change the energy of my toss. And it proved successful.
After the 8th toss that went off the table, the boxman grabbed his back after bending over to pick up the dice and complained about soreness in his lower back. A momentary compassion for him and lapse in judgement persuaded me to soften my next toss and move my landing zone. Since I altered my shot so much, of course my chances of continuing to avoid the 7 were also altered and sure enough 7 out.
Moral of the story, just because the "Dice go off the table" doesn't mean jacksquat. What matters is if the tosser loses his focus or is human enough to be embarrassed so as not to toss the dice off the table again and therefore alters his next shot enough from what he was previously doing.
The boxman like the rest of us needs to learn to bend with his knees. That could have been a "good tip" for the crew.
October 16th, 2014 at 4:01:22 PM
permalink
Quote: BohemianDicePhD, RE: your biased dice discussion: REAL good theory if you can do it, not so REAListic. To prove my hypothesis, try your theory on a live table and let us know how it works.
As for your last thing, take for instance "Dice off the table". I had a 29 roll at Luxor the other day that did not include 8 tosses that bounced off the table. On the first 7 tosses that bounced off the table, I was able to keep my composure and focus and knew NOT to change the energy of my toss. And it proved successful.
After the 8th toss that went off the table, the boxman grabbed his back after bending over to pick up the dice and complained about soreness in his lower back. A momentary compassion for him and lapse in judgement persuaded me to soften my next toss and move my landing zone. Since I altered my shot so much, of course my chances of continuing to avoid the 7 were also altered and sure enough 7 out.
Moral of the story, just because the "Dice go off the table" doesn't mean jacksquat. What matters is if the tosser loses his focus or is human enough to be embarrassed so as not to toss the dice off the table again and therefore alters his next shot enough from what he was previously doing.
I'm not sure if this hurts my heart or my brain more. I'll try not to cover all the same old back-and-forth about dice control fiction, but here are some points:
1- There is nothing theoretical about my "theory", and the only unrealistic thing here is the vapid talk of multi-biased dice (I think I'll coin that term... to be used when someone thinks dice are rigged for both an increase in 7s and an unprofitable increase in repeating numbers).
2- I would happily try my theory at any live table where you could prove/guarantee biased dice. Instead of the obvious demonstration of off-weighting, I would even consider witnessing ~5,000 throws of these "biased" dice where I can chart the distribution of outcomes. If you give me something like 22% 7s, I might be convinced enough to play at that table. If you claim that both the 7s are up and some other number is also way above statistical norms (for the sake of partial logic, let's say your dice are biased for 1s and 6s in some fashion, so that the tails of the distribution are 'fatter', I/e more 4s and 10s maybe? I dunno...), then I would also happily add more bets to my "theoretical" strategy.
3- I still feel like people don't understand this basic arithmetic, much less the probability theory. There are 36 possible ways for the dice to resolve, yes? Let me grant you the fiction that these dice come up more often on some combinations than they "should". The more combinations that deviate, and the higher the deviation from random probability, the more profitable the opportunity. To make an extreme illustration, in the (perhaps futile) hope of making my point, take the following fictional biased dice:
Probability of:
2- 5/36
3- 3/36
4- 0/36
5- 4/36
6- 5/36
7- 12/36
8- 1/36
9- 2/36
10- 2/36
11- 1/36
12- 1/36
Some of these are silly, but I'll relax these assumptions a bit later on. There are many combinations of bets that would be +EV in this situation... hopping the 2, $5 don't pass with $500 odds when the point is 8, etc.
Some bets would be less +EV, and have higher variance, but could still be profitable. Depending on your appetite for risk aversion and/or your bankroll, this hypothetical distribution might make you want to bet a different way than me. If there was a 0% chance of a 4, it's riskless to lay the 4 every hand for the table max (or your bankroll) and print money. It's clearly profitable to lay the 8 as well, though there is a chance of losing a bet. Hopping the 7s is also profitable under this distribution, though with considerably more variance.
What I hope you notice is that in each of these examples, the magnitude of the deviation from random is different, and is more or less the source of variance in any betting strategy designed to exploit my fake biased dice.
I can already hear you saying "but those numbers are just made up/they are way more biased than the dice I'm talking about." And I agree. All I'm hoping so far is to illustrate that with sufficiently biased dice, it's a piece of cake to make money. Now let's create a more pseudo-realistic situation:
2- 1/36
3- 2/36
4- 3.5/36
5- 4/36
6- 5/36
7- 8/36
8- 3.5/36
9- 4/36
10- 1/36
11- 2/36
12- 2/36
Surely you don't think that these more "realistic" but still fake numbers for biased dice cannot be exploited. Sure, the variance of any strategy could bite you in the short-run, but if you could give me proof of the actual probability density function for biased dice, I would happily play all day at that table. I don't care what the bias(es) is/are, just that I know the distribution or have at least a general idea of it, like "7s are way more likely than random, and 4s repeat".
If you gave me this distribution, I'd probably bet the don't have table max odds when the 8 is established or the 10 is established. Lay the 10/8 on other points, and maybe even hop the 12s every roll.
Could I go for long rolls without making money? Of course, but if this is the true distribution of outcomes, I'm going to converge to it at a rate much quicker than my bankroll will go to zero. Said another way, if I take $10,000 to the table, I'm not going to put $1000 on don't pass and lay the 10 for $5000, but by the end of the day, I might well have enough bankroll to have appropriate bet sizing of this magnitude.
If you simultaneously do not understand how this is nearly a certain profit opportunity (given a decent bet size discipline), but you do feel like A) dice can be multiple biased, and B) you have the ability to control the physics of dice at the table, I'll never be able to get through to you.
=====================================================
Lastly, perhaps I hadn't made my point clear with my hand-tabulated numbers...
I only did that to show a fellow craps buddy that there is no such thing as outside influence with events like stick changes. It both baffles me and makes me smile to read about your "sure enough 7 out" nonsense.
I agree with you that "dice go off the table" doesn't mean jacksquat. Neither does the stickman's back, or your shot altering, or your concentration levels, or your humanity or level of embarrassment.
I will admit that you can beat physics (within it's immutable laws) long before you can devise a bet strategy for -EV combinations that become +EV. And I won't implore you to turn your bets off one roll before the "sure enough" debacle. I would just ask that you give the same consideration to mathematical certainty like long-term convergence as you do to your ability to spot biased dice or to "influence" or "control" them in a craps setting.
October 16th, 2014 at 7:19:20 PM
permalink
Quote: DicePhD
2- 1/36
3- 2/36
4- 3.5/36
5- 4/36
6- 5/36
7- 8/36
8- 3.5/36
9- 4/36
10- 1/36
11- 2/36
12- 2/36
Surely you don't think that these more "realistic" but still fake numbers for biased dice cannot be exploited.
No these cannot be exploited because these outcomes are actually IMPOSSIBLE. biased dice do not work this way in the real world. Only in wincraps fantasy land can you just type in some random numbers and profit.
The problem is that you're 1st and 2nd biggest bias comes from the 1 and 6 sides... But that can't work because they sit on opposite sides of each other. Doh! If both the 1 and 6 were both biased they'd actually counter act each other.
I'd say try a new set of values from which to make your point.
October 16th, 2014 at 7:27:59 PM
permalink
interesting dice last night
at the table for about 26 hands ..... 135 rolls
there was 1 -3 and 1 12 and 1 2 and 1 11 that is a total of 4 crap numbers in 26 hands..... this was on a ATS table. there should be about
6 out of 36 rolls or about 22 every 135 rolls. If it were not for all the 5/2 2/5 it would have been a good night for the 4, 6,8 numbers.
Dicesetter
at the table for about 26 hands ..... 135 rolls
there was 1 -3 and 1 12 and 1 2 and 1 11 that is a total of 4 crap numbers in 26 hands..... this was on a ATS table. there should be about
6 out of 36 rolls or about 22 every 135 rolls. If it were not for all the 5/2 2/5 it would have been a good night for the 4, 6,8 numbers.
Dicesetter
October 17th, 2014 at 7:27:44 AM
permalink
Quote: nickolay411No these cannot be exploited because these outcomes are actually IMPOSSIBLE. biased dice do not work this way in the real world. Only in wincraps fantasy land can you just type in some random numbers and profit.
The problem is that you're 1st and 2nd biggest bias comes from the 1 and 6 sides... But that can't work because they sit on opposite sides of each other. Doh! If both the 1 and 6 were both biased they'd actually counter act each other.
I'd say try a new set of values from which to make your point.
I agree I could've/should've put more than zero thought into how I imbalanced the distribution, but my point is that no matter what the biased distribution is, if it is sufficiently deviating from random, it can be exploited. The magnitude of the deviation will impact the betting strategy variance. My point is invariant to the set of numbers I arbitrarily chose.
Whether these values are possible is logically irrelevant to my point. If they exist, then they can be exploited. You give me a "realistic" biased distribution, and if it exists, it can be exploited. For OP or anyone to suggest that a significant bias is not exploitable is nonsense. And don't muddle the point by arguing that the make believe bias I present isn't possible. Who cares?
Side note: I thought much of the apocryphal dice rigging included dice being balanced to show 6/1s, which can only happen if each die is separately biased. But that is neither here nor there.
It feels to me this discussion boils down to the following exchange:
The dice are biased!
(so bet that way)
The dice are double biased!
(well, then bet THAT way)
You try... it's not so easy.
(if it exists, it is relatively easy, though not without variance... let me illustrate)
Your illustration is not possible!
I'll say it again: get someone to PROVE or at least "prove" a robust statistical deviation in the distribution.... either by showing the dice weighted improperly before we play, or by allowing a sufficiently large sample to be compiled beforehand, and I guarantee there will be plenty of players lined up and ready to play. They might not even all bet identically.
Beyond that, this feels like a fake story about 2 sports bettors I just made up in my head. The first guy becomes convinced that someone is rigging games and that only favorites cover. A second guy challenges this assumption, and is invited to bet all favorites to take advantage. At the end of the season, both guys are down on the year and the first guy goes, "see, it's totally rigged but you can't make a profit off it".
October 18th, 2014 at 1:56:18 AM
permalink
haha zero thought :) From what I gather there isn't any dice bias that I have come across that can get rid of certain point numbers repeating. This will bite you when you're playing don't. And the seven will still bite when you're playing pass.
Like you said Variance will still exist no matter what. For me if there is such a thing as biased dice then there certainly isn't any set strategy like playing only don't pass. You'd have to be very flexible about switching between do's and don'ts lays and places in a single session. Just enough to make the dealers annoyed.
Like you said Variance will still exist no matter what. For me if there is such a thing as biased dice then there certainly isn't any set strategy like playing only don't pass. You'd have to be very flexible about switching between do's and don'ts lays and places in a single session. Just enough to make the dealers annoyed.
October 18th, 2014 at 8:56:52 AM
permalink
Quote: nickolay411haha zero thought :) From what I gather there isn't any dice bias that I have come across that can get rid of certain point numbers repeating. This will bite you when you're playing don't. And the seven will still bite when you're playing pass.
Like you said Variance will still exist no matter what. For me if there is such a thing as biased dice then there certainly isn't any set strategy like playing only don't pass. You'd have to be very flexible about switching between do's and don'ts lays and places in a single session. Just enough to make the dealers annoyed.
You're making my points for me. I said the betting strategy depends on the bias, clearly. My point is that if you know that bias, it's almost riskless money if you bet size with some intelligence. Why are you making it seem like being flexible switching between do's and don'ts is anything more than a trivial activity? It's not like this bias is dynamically changing over time. Either the dice are biased or they aren't. If they are, a new distribution can be calculated. And a betting strategy will exploit it.
So what if you lose more come out rolls? Are your odds bets not a multiple of the pass/don't pass? Are you saying that somehow, an increase in one unit losses on the pass line can't be made up for by full odds with a materially higher edge? Or that repeating numbers (whatever they may be), somehow eliminate money making opportunities? I'm baffled by all of this.
You pick a distribution that deviates from random... I don't care what it is. I don't care which numbers repeat, how often 7s come, or whatever. Just tell me the distribution. As long as you aren't talking about a "bias" that increases 7s from 16.667/100 to 17/100 (as I said the bias needs to be sufficiently high to overcome the house edge), and I will make money on it. It's not more complicated than that.
You can submit all the red herrings you like as evidence to the contrary, but the math is immutable. I don't claim that every bet or every session is a winner... I'm doing nothing but rephrasing the concept that in the long run the house always wins with casino games. Biased dice change the edge, and sufficiently biased dice change the edge enough to be in my favor.
Back of the envelope, more 7s hurt on the come out and help after that for a don't player, right? Since my odds bets pay some small multiple of my don't pass bet I can withstand some increased come out losses and still be +EV. If the 7s are sufficiently frequent to overcome that bet, then I'll just change to a different strategy. If 7s are WAY more frequent, maybe hop them? Or more importantly, by definition, an increase in any number has to come with a decrease in at least 1 other number... so if some numbers are well below normal, they can be candidates for lay bets.
Bottom line: actual biased dice (with sufficiently large deviations) can be exploited.
October 18th, 2014 at 10:57:12 AM
permalink
Quote: DicePhD
Whether these values are possible is logically irrelevant to my point. If they exist, then they can be exploited.Quote:You give me a "realistic" biased distribution, and if it exists, it can be exploited. For OP or anyone to suggest that a significant bias is not exploitable is nonsense
Just surmising on my part, but are you sure the op isn't "exploiting" some advantage?. I didn't see where the op mentioned not being able to take advantage, only that a pure don't strategy wouldn't work as well as one would like.
That may be a bit of an obstacle, seems many want a thousand or 10 or 100k throws before a statistical difference from expected will be acceptable. Given it seems that 3sd's are common. To compile that size sample for that bowl of dice, will be difficult indeed. While its still all friendly and all, I don't know that they aren't approachable? Definitely not going to publicly give away their means of support though, would you?Quote:"prove" a robust statistical deviation in the distribution.... either by showing the dice weighted improperly before we play, or by allowing a sufficiently large sample to be compiled beforehand,
Imo, if you get a chance to play with either of them, I would take it, but I am a curious sort. Personally I am in the camp that endeavors to never spill a thing and hold my cards fairly close to the chest.
October 22nd, 2014 at 12:27:59 PM
permalink
Quote: DicePhDI agree with you that "dice go off the table" doesn't mean jacksquat. Neither does the stickman's back, or your shot altering, or your concentration levels[b/], or your humanity or level of embarrassment.
I will admit that you can beat physics (within it's immutable laws) long before you can devise a bet strategy for -EV combinations that become +EV. And I won't implore you to turn your bets off one roll before the "sure enough" debacle. I would just ask that you give the same consideration to mathematical certainty like long-term convergence as you do to your ability to spot biased dice or to "influence" or "control" them in a craps setting.
DicePhD, if you and I cannot agree on simple physics of why altering your shot or losing focus may increase the chances of a 7, then we will never see eye-to-eye on any thing else as complicated as the physics of unbalanced dice. We will have to agree to disagree. But I will leave you with the thoughts of Troy Henderson, Associate professor of Mathematics:
Quote: Troy HendersonLet's take a closer look at our dice problem.
Without performing any analysis on the process of rolling two dice, it would appear that the outcome is without a pattern and thus unpredictable. However, there are many physical conditions that affect the outcome. For example, the initial orientation of the dice in the hand of the roller, the speed and angle that the dice are tossed, the type of surface that the dice are tossed upon, and even atmospheric conditions (such as temperature, relative humidity, and barometric pressure) can all affect the outcome.
Prior to considering all the physical conditions that affect the dice, the outcome appears unpredictable. However, the appearance of unpredictability does not imply unpredictability. For example, if all of the physical conditions were identified and fully understood, it is conceivable that the outcome could actually be predicted.
In this case, such an event -- which was initially thought to be random -- was actually deterministic and was just not fully understood.
I have observed that people often use the words "random" and "chance" to avoid a reasonable explanation because either all the reasons to explain the cause are not fully understood or they do not believe that the effect in question has a cause.
October 22nd, 2014 at 1:23:23 PM
permalink
Bohemian/Harley,
Here are some of the problems that I have with your claims.
1. Your sample sizes are too small. Why have you guys dedicated so much time posting conspiracies, instead of collecting larger test samples?
2. You're using the dice totals, rather than recording the number that showed on each dice. Doing this washes out the data too much.
3. The samples that have been posted, so far, are not statistically relevant.
4. You seem to be misinterpreting the data, and are overstating the results.
5. There's too much conspiracy, and not enough supporting evidence.
-Keyser
Here are some of the problems that I have with your claims.
1. Your sample sizes are too small. Why have you guys dedicated so much time posting conspiracies, instead of collecting larger test samples?
2. You're using the dice totals, rather than recording the number that showed on each dice. Doing this washes out the data too much.
3. The samples that have been posted, so far, are not statistically relevant.
4. You seem to be misinterpreting the data, and are overstating the results.
5. There's too much conspiracy, and not enough supporting evidence.
-Keyser
October 22nd, 2014 at 1:39:11 PM
permalink
Well, my last trip to Vegas I shot dice. But after 7 rolls without a 7 ( should happen 1 in 6 ), I left and forwarded my findings to gaming.
I am awaiting their reply !
I am awaiting their reply !
Shed not for her
the bitter tear
Nor give the heart
to vain regret
Tis but the casket
that lies here,
The gem that filled it
Sparkles yet
October 22nd, 2014 at 3:32:27 PM
permalink
Quote: Troy Hendersonif
Indeed, if.
October 23rd, 2014 at 4:25:37 PM
permalink
Keyser
There is more than enough supporting evidence, just not enough common sense to look at it
dicesetter
There is more than enough supporting evidence, just not enough common sense to look at it
dicesetter
October 24th, 2014 at 2:08:06 AM
permalink
Quote: dicesitterKeyser
There is more than enough supporting evidence, just not enough common sense to look at it
dicesetter
Keyser, Ditto to what dicesetter said. Your last post and claims are totally without merit.
For instance, Craps is a game based upon the outcome of 2 dice, just not 1 die. Therefore, the study of BOTH individual die faces and the sum of both dice must be accumulated. We have done that. Also, our database shows that whatever bias exists after 50 rolls will usually be the same bias after 500 rolls over 90% of the time. Calculating a bias beyond 500 rolls is nonsense since a new stick of dice are usually inserted every 8 hours (rare exceptions). Again it is a moot issue as the bias in small samples are religiously the same as in larger samples if the dice are unbalanced. You just can't Fool Mother Nature and the Laws of Physics.
With fair dice, this may not be the case. However, we do have almost perfect pyramid distributions after 50 rolls that also exist after 250 rolls and the same near perfect pyramid distribution exist after 500 rolls with with the same fairly balanced stick of dice on the same shift.
Don't take my word for it, observe for yourself. Or just ignore altogether what dicesetter, Howard Rock' n Roller, Harley, several dice schools and myself are reporting and just ASSume you are playing with fair dice 100% of the time.
October 26th, 2014 at 12:05:18 PM
permalink
I don't know why I bother but of course physics is deterministic once we get larger than the quantum realm. I am inclined to post a link to confirmation bias. We agree that every physical input plays a role in the deterministic system. I'll even buy that brain states are a variable worth including. What I do not agree in, however, is that you believe you can understand this dynamical system in a predictive fashion. Sure, if you could control the humidity of the room, the moment of inertia, the precise weight of the dice, the air flow in the room, the motion of every person at the table, and the other practically infinite number of control variables, you could predict with certainty the outcome of dice resolution. But there is the rub.
Not only is it silly to think you could get precise readings for these variables (many of which are stochastic random variables in and of themselves), but to then optimize those variables you do control to respond? Nonsense.
Here is where you offer some version of "most of those variables are a statistical wash, so I need only worry about toss velocity, launch angle, etc."
Yes and no. Your control variables are likely the most important, but for every shortcut you make in your physical model of such a complicated system, the higher your prediction error, and the more random your results. You can't have it both ways.
So, sources of randomness include: the complicated physical dynamics of the environment that are either beyond shooter control (whether the AC turns on mid roll, for example), measurement error for every variable (even the ones you do control), imperfections in your toss, etc. The list is quite long, and with each variable comes an error term, and the errors, even if orthogonal to the prediction variables, are large enough in total to provide a massive barrier to overcoming randomness. Even if you can reduce your toss errors, the article you posted should be discouraging about the practical ability to predict/influence outcomes. Using it as evidence of the possibility of attaining a perfect, deterministic, closed-form solution for a dice throw is folly.
The irony of all these threads is that it's exactly the randomness in the system that can generate short-run deviations that appear to those confirmation-bias-prone among us as influence, or skill, or edge.
Finally, it should be laughable to you that 50 rolls is a sample of anything, and I would love to know with more precision how you quantify "the same bias usually exists". I agree in the biased dice portion of this, if the dice are literally changed, it is impossible to have a large sample. I think you should experiment with collecting the sample distribution every 50 rolls, and then test the asymptotic distribution for deviations from normality.
Not only is it silly to think you could get precise readings for these variables (many of which are stochastic random variables in and of themselves), but to then optimize those variables you do control to respond? Nonsense.
Here is where you offer some version of "most of those variables are a statistical wash, so I need only worry about toss velocity, launch angle, etc."
Yes and no. Your control variables are likely the most important, but for every shortcut you make in your physical model of such a complicated system, the higher your prediction error, and the more random your results. You can't have it both ways.
So, sources of randomness include: the complicated physical dynamics of the environment that are either beyond shooter control (whether the AC turns on mid roll, for example), measurement error for every variable (even the ones you do control), imperfections in your toss, etc. The list is quite long, and with each variable comes an error term, and the errors, even if orthogonal to the prediction variables, are large enough in total to provide a massive barrier to overcoming randomness. Even if you can reduce your toss errors, the article you posted should be discouraging about the practical ability to predict/influence outcomes. Using it as evidence of the possibility of attaining a perfect, deterministic, closed-form solution for a dice throw is folly.
The irony of all these threads is that it's exactly the randomness in the system that can generate short-run deviations that appear to those confirmation-bias-prone among us as influence, or skill, or edge.
Finally, it should be laughable to you that 50 rolls is a sample of anything, and I would love to know with more precision how you quantify "the same bias usually exists". I agree in the biased dice portion of this, if the dice are literally changed, it is impossible to have a large sample. I think you should experiment with collecting the sample distribution every 50 rolls, and then test the asymptotic distribution for deviations from normality.
October 26th, 2014 at 1:19:06 PM
permalink
Quote: Bohemian/HarleyKeyser, Ditto to what dicesetter said. Your last post and claims are totally without merit.
For instance, Craps is a game based upon the outcome of 2 dice, just not 1 die. Therefore, the study of BOTH individual die faces and the sum of both dice must be accumulated. We have done that. Also, our database shows that whatever bias exists after 50 rolls will usually be the same bias after 500 rolls over 90% of the time. Calculating a bias beyond 500 rolls is nonsense since a new stick of dice are usually inserted every 8 hours (rare exceptions). Again it is a moot issue as the bias in small samples are religiously the same as in larger samples if the dice are unbalanced. You just can't Fool Mother Nature and the Laws of Physics.
With fair dice, this may not be the case. However, we do have almost perfect pyramid distributions after 50 rolls that also exist after 250 rolls and the same near perfect pyramid distribution exist after 500 rolls with with the same fairly balanced stick of dice on the same shift.
Don't take my word for it, observe for yourself. Or just ignore altogether what dicesetter, Howard Rock' n Roller, Harley, several dice schools and myself are reporting and just ASSume you are playing with fair dice 100% of the time.
Using only 50 rolls of the dice to determine bias is absurd and would have absolutely no statistical relevance, whatsoever. Especially since you're not even tracking the individual die faces.
The hypothesis is that the dice are off balance because of the unusually deep engraving on the number two face side of some dice. As long as you can feel the deeper engraving in each die, then you can continue collecting data on the number of times each face of the die shows, even when the dice are changed. You would not be limited to one stick of dice, or only one day of data collection.
If you want people to take you seriously, then collect some real data, and stop with the wild conspiracies. (Referencing dice schools doesn't help) Start by collecting 5,000 die faces. Again, do not add the faces together to determine the number of sevens, etc. Just determine the number of times each face of the die hits. Again, when you add the two die together, it washes out the data and we can not determine if the dice are truly biased.
Below are the totals from the dice that I tested. It would be interesting to see if someone else could replicate the results. The results that I had were interesting, but they were not conclusive and there was roughly a one in nine chance that they were random results. Notice that I did NOT add the two die together. Again, adding the two die together is a foolish thing to do if you're testing the dice for bias. Adding the two faces together would be like tracking the dozens instead of the individual numbers on a roulette wheel in order to determine if the wheel was bias. You must limit the degrees of freedom in your testing in order to determine if the results are statistically relevant... Understand?
When I tested, my prediction was that the number two would show the most. However, the six showed the most. It is worth noting that the two and six share an edge, and when the dice were repeatedly spun, the number six was sharing the top edge. By the way, when spinning die, to determine if they're off balance, you must repeatedly change corners, as the corners can skew your spin test results. Since the number six was not the face that I predicted, in advance, I must collect another sample to see if I can replicate the results.
_total__freq____standard deviation
1 390 5.96__ 0.15
2 395 5.88__ 0.43
3 373 6.23__ -0.80
4 358 6.49__ -1.63
5 374 6.21__ -0.74
6 434 5.35__ 2.60
Total 2,324
High 434__ 2.60
Low 358__ -1.63
Chance of
random (1/x) 9.180E+00
Chi square 9.00
Average 387.33
Break even 464.8
80% hi conf. 427.76
95% hi conf. 436.74
80% low conf. 346.91
95% low conf. 337.93
Best ratio 5.35
Worst ratio 6.49
Please, more science, less conspiracy.
1.hypothesis
2.prediction
3.testing
4.analysis.
October 26th, 2014 at 10:52:47 PM
permalink
Quote: KeyserUsing only 50 rolls of the dice to determine bias is absurd and would have absolutely no statistical relevance, whatsoever. Especially since you're not even tracking the individual die faces.
Keyser, at the risk of being banned, I refer you to your previous post where you quoted me and ask that you read it again when you are sober and take particular note of the following which contradicts your comprehension:
Quote: BohemianKeyser, Ditto to what dicesetter said. Your last post and claims are totally without merit.
For instance, Craps is a game based upon the outcome of 2 dice, just not 1 die. Therefore, the study of BOTH individual die faces and the sum of both dice must be accumulated. We have done that.
2nd, Would you like to tell those that use "Pearson's chi-square" hypothesis testing procedure that "Using only 50 rolls of the dice to determine bias is absurd and would have absolutely no statistical relevance, whatsoever"
3rd, after you have finished doing all your testing with ONLY single die faces and not including ALSO the sum, what kind of bets are you going to make on the craps table with your single die results ?
Again, make your tests equal reality. At least you are no longer dropping the die 12 inches straight down, which like several University dice studies only helps you with Monopoly.
Don't get me wrong. We appreciate your efforts Keyser. You have done more than 99% of the world's craps players as far as testing the dice. Many craps players on this board have never touched a caliper before. IMO, that is like buying a gun without ever going to a shooting range. You have to know your equipment that you are playing with.
October 27th, 2014 at 8:02:33 AM
permalink
Keyser
I get what your saying in terms of statistical analysis.....
We all know that when you judge your advantage or lack thereof with things like
Wincraps or Smartcraps you want enough rolls to judge over time.
BUT....... you miss the mark or misunderstand when we talk about unbalanced dice
and there affect on players.
I think most of us understand that most dice schools teach long term results.... you throw like this,
bet like this, think like this etc you will do better than the average player over time...
However we play in a series of short term sessions, and in those, the long term means nothing
or nearly nothing. It is precisely the ability to make decisions about the short term that will make you
money. Look at it this way, if you went to the table and the first 10 people went point 7 would you
double up or walk. Most people would walk.... that trend is easy for anyone to see, Those of us that
watch the dice, see unbalanced dice just as clear as others would see 7 point 7's in a row. In 50 rolls we can
pretty much tell you if the dice are fair or unbalanced. Now you cant always see that quickly if the
unbalance is enough to form a betting pattern on, many times there is not enough difference. That
is why I keep track of the rolls, most times it is just information, but maybe 30% of the time, it tells
something that will make you money. The dice help determine your betting patterns.
Keyser it is like shooting at a deer, many hunters aim at the deer, the good shooters aim at a very
small spot of the deer. Same deer, same gun,, different hunter....... same craps table, same dice
different player...
You determine what you see at the table.
dicesetter
I get what your saying in terms of statistical analysis.....
We all know that when you judge your advantage or lack thereof with things like
Wincraps or Smartcraps you want enough rolls to judge over time.
BUT....... you miss the mark or misunderstand when we talk about unbalanced dice
and there affect on players.
I think most of us understand that most dice schools teach long term results.... you throw like this,
bet like this, think like this etc you will do better than the average player over time...
However we play in a series of short term sessions, and in those, the long term means nothing
or nearly nothing. It is precisely the ability to make decisions about the short term that will make you
money. Look at it this way, if you went to the table and the first 10 people went point 7 would you
double up or walk. Most people would walk.... that trend is easy for anyone to see, Those of us that
watch the dice, see unbalanced dice just as clear as others would see 7 point 7's in a row. In 50 rolls we can
pretty much tell you if the dice are fair or unbalanced. Now you cant always see that quickly if the
unbalance is enough to form a betting pattern on, many times there is not enough difference. That
is why I keep track of the rolls, most times it is just information, but maybe 30% of the time, it tells
something that will make you money. The dice help determine your betting patterns.
Keyser it is like shooting at a deer, many hunters aim at the deer, the good shooters aim at a very
small spot of the deer. Same deer, same gun,, different hunter....... same craps table, same dice
different player...
You determine what you see at the table.
dicesetter
October 27th, 2014 at 9:25:42 AM
permalink
Short term? Dice Schools? 50 rolls?
This is getting absurd.
This is getting absurd.
October 27th, 2014 at 9:56:30 AM
permalink
Keyser
This appears to be over your head, this is fine, it was way over my head the first
35 years I played, now I understand and it has helped me have much more fun at the
table and do better.
These things are always a choice, you can play forever with what you know, or you
can ask if there is more you can learn to add to where you are.
dicesetter
This appears to be over your head, this is fine, it was way over my head the first
35 years I played, now I understand and it has helped me have much more fun at the
table and do better.
These things are always a choice, you can play forever with what you know, or you
can ask if there is more you can learn to add to where you are.
dicesetter
October 27th, 2014 at 7:44:00 PM
permalink
Dicesitter, I see you have been a pro for years.
You could detect an advantage in 50 rolls when there is.
I believe, there are more information players who are not pro-dice players ignore. In case we take only 50 trials we mig. be fooled by random fluctuations, you know it.
I'm agree we must make decisions to play as soon as posible to hit earlier.
The more experienced player the better your predictions.
It is a question of risk to place real money after 50 or 500 rolls analized.
Using scientific tools(probability formulaes) we should cross some hurdles to state an advantage exists.
Using prior knowledge of dice(edges, weigh, way to through and do on) we might make an hypothesis to accelerate a decision
We must break some standard deviation numbers to work seriously
Dice is not my area, I surely ignore many tips.
I apologize in case I wrote nonsense
Ybot
You could detect an advantage in 50 rolls when there is.
I believe, there are more information players who are not pro-dice players ignore. In case we take only 50 trials we mig. be fooled by random fluctuations, you know it.
I'm agree we must make decisions to play as soon as posible to hit earlier.
The more experienced player the better your predictions.
It is a question of risk to place real money after 50 or 500 rolls analized.
Using scientific tools(probability formulaes) we should cross some hurdles to state an advantage exists.
Using prior knowledge of dice(edges, weigh, way to through and do on) we might make an hypothesis to accelerate a decision
We must break some standard deviation numbers to work seriously
Dice is not my area, I surely ignore many tips.
I apologize in case I wrote nonsense
Ybot
October 28th, 2014 at 7:06:18 AM
permalink
ybot
The trouble with the dice community is that many in it always look for perfection.
Dice control people are really not any good if they cant make a profit on every roll, or
if the dice have to look perfect on every roll, or any set they use on any table must
have to be demonstrated on a camera to be perfect every time. Every betting system has to
work every time you use it and on and on........I don't know why this is, people are to jealous of
each other or something.
But the truth is nothing works every time... this is not 2 + 2 equal 4 stuff. However the more
you understand the conditions, the more options you have.
The first 50 rolls can tell you quite a lot. Say you have 8-10 rollers and there are 3 ( 3/4 4/3) and
3 6/1 1/6 and 3 5/2/2/5 that's a very good sign the dice are fair. then again say you have 6/1 or 1/6
7 times and a couple of 2's and 12's , that should tell you something different.
The point is lets say you pay attention to the first 50-60 rolls and you gain nothing...so what, it did not cost
you anything.... when you back your car you always look behind, you don't stop and say , crap
that was a waste of time.....because now and then it was important.
The first 50 rolls, now and then they can tell the whole story.
dicesetter
The trouble with the dice community is that many in it always look for perfection.
Dice control people are really not any good if they cant make a profit on every roll, or
if the dice have to look perfect on every roll, or any set they use on any table must
have to be demonstrated on a camera to be perfect every time. Every betting system has to
work every time you use it and on and on........I don't know why this is, people are to jealous of
each other or something.
But the truth is nothing works every time... this is not 2 + 2 equal 4 stuff. However the more
you understand the conditions, the more options you have.
The first 50 rolls can tell you quite a lot. Say you have 8-10 rollers and there are 3 ( 3/4 4/3) and
3 6/1 1/6 and 3 5/2/2/5 that's a very good sign the dice are fair. then again say you have 6/1 or 1/6
7 times and a couple of 2's and 12's , that should tell you something different.
The point is lets say you pay attention to the first 50-60 rolls and you gain nothing...so what, it did not cost
you anything.... when you back your car you always look behind, you don't stop and say , crap
that was a waste of time.....because now and then it was important.
The first 50 rolls, now and then they can tell the whole story.
dicesetter
October 28th, 2014 at 11:21:45 AM
permalink
Dicesetter players would still play craps even if they saw these rolls, 6/1, 6/1, 6/1, 6/1, 6/1, 11, 3, 2, 12, 10, 4, 11, 6/1. Next roll 3, 3, 11, 4, 6/1 Next roll 2, 6/1, 5, 12, 6/1. What everybody wants to know is how do you beat bad dice. It's not enough that you gave them a warning about them, they want you to lay out a specific strategy to beat what they are seeing. Everybody wants the easy way out they don't want to do the work for themselves.
I see some of what everybody would call the stupid prop betters winning, when the smart guys that know it all are losing, because they refuse to open their eyes to what is really happening on the craps table they are playing on. They keep betting on the 6's and 8's and go down in flames!
So much for all of the know it all's!
I see some of what everybody would call the stupid prop betters winning, when the smart guys that know it all are losing, because they refuse to open their eyes to what is really happening on the craps table they are playing on. They keep betting on the 6's and 8's and go down in flames!
So much for all of the know it all's!
Note, all my post start with this is just my opinion...!
You do good brada ..!
superrick
Winning comes from knowledge and skill when your betting and not reading fiction
http://procraps4u2.myfanforum.org/index.php
...
October 30th, 2014 at 5:31:01 AM
permalink
Quote: AhighHere's the topic for folks who want to exploit biased dice. Again, it doesn't matter how the dice are biased, and you can likely come up with scenarios where you can model two dice very easily starting with this spreadsheet and come up with a good plan of attack.
http://forum.goodshooter.com/topic254.html
I saw the spreadsheet to detect biased dice.
Very nice work
October 30th, 2014 at 7:03:59 AM
permalink
I agree people shouldn't be so close minded about everything all the time. Some people don't think beyond the black and white.Quote: superrickthey refuse to open their eyes to what is really happening on the craps table they are playing on.
With all the years of experience the "AP craps players" have why can't anyone come up with some solid explanation, data, proof?
Take a challenge, show the money, DO OR SHOW SOMETHING, ANYTHING.
are there ANY "AP craps players" around here that make 100% of there living from craps?
Usually everybody that claims there's something to beating craps are playing small stakes a few hrs a day. Oftentimes it's someone retired using money from other sources where they can afford to low roll along with a low HA.
I want to hear from someone who can say something like.....
IE. I've been playing craps for 5 years for 30 hrs a week.I play this way[ ]. I made X year 1, X year 2 etc etc.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
October 30th, 2014 at 1:50:48 PM
permalink
Quote: AxelWolfI agree people shouldn't be so close minded about everything all the time. Some people don't think beyond the black and white.
With all the years of experience the "AP craps players" have why can't anyone come up with some solid explanation, data, proof?
Take a challenge, show the money, DO OR SHOW SOMETHING, ANYTHING.
are there ANY "AP craps players" around here that make 100% of there living from craps?
Usually everybody that claims there's something to beating craps are playing small stakes a few hrs a day. Oftentimes it's someone retired using money from other sources where they can afford to low roll along with a low HA.
I want to hear from someone who can say something like.....
IE. I've been playing craps for 5 years for 30 hrs a week.I play this way[ ]. I made X year 1, X year 2 etc etc.
I'll be the first to tell you that nobody is ever going to prove that being a DI works. Now that is coming from someone that is called a DI. Yes I practice all the time, but right now I couldn't shoot if I wanted to. I came down with a really bad cold and along with that I had a allergic reaction to the medication I was given. Right now It hurt to even move my arm, when I look up what medication I given that was one of the allergic reaction you could get from this medication.
We are not machines, there are many things that can affect the way we feel and perform every day. What worked yesterday will not work today. Yesterday you had totally different conditions on the craps table you were playing on, the dice were different, there were no players on the table doing stupid things, but today you have everybody that is making late bets, there are chips stacked right were you want to land you dice.
It's not like golf, shooting pool, throwing darts, pitching a perfect pitch. You don't have all of the things that are happening on the craps tables when you are doing any of those things. You damn sure don't have some screaming fool standing next to you, screaming out for his point that he has money on. You wouldn't have someone standing next to you that is bumping into you when you are shooting doing any of the above mentioned things.
Those dice are square, they bounced all over the place when they land, they don't roll were you want them to go, you don't have to put them into a pocket to make your point, you have to get them both to come up with the numbers you want on them.
Watching slow-motion videos tell the real story of what a so-called DI is up against, yes the on-axis schools do not want anybody to see these videos, they have all kinds of reasons why they say the guy that was shooting didn't know what he was doing! But they have never came forward with even one shot that they could say stayed on axis.
I've always said that the dice do not stay on axis as they are bouncing all over the place, from the first time that someone told me about what they were calling on axis shooting!
The DI schools want everybody to believe that you can't bet on these so-called random rollers that they came up with when they coined the words dice controller or dice influencer. Before that everybody was just shooters, and guess what you had winners way back then, and you still have these so-called random rollers that are winning on the tables, they hit way more fire bets then the so-called DI's because they out number them tens of thousands to one. It's bound to happen that way.
When you question any of these guys that run the DI boards they just kick you off if they don't like what you are asking, or they lock down the thread. It's their way of protecting what they are selling. If you don't fall in line with what they are teaching they start calling you every name in the book, you are labeled as a nut case and members of their board that never met you, fall right in line and jump on the bandwagon calling you names!
I often wonder just how many players they have ran off these DI boards, because they didn't fall right in line and were asking questions that they couldn't answer, or wouldn't answer!
There will be days that the so-called DI's get on some good rolls, but the so-called random rollers do the same thing, the only difference is they don't have a craps board that they go and brag about their good rolls. One day I could have a 50 roll and the next roll will be a PSO, there is no guarantees that every time you pick up the dice you will have a good roll.
The other problem is there is so much fiction written about the DI's that nobody can tell fact from fiction. Most so-called DI's don't play that often, the stories are always very vague, so anybody that was living in the middle of the country couldn't find out if some thing really happened. There was a story about two guys they were calling the Lee Brothers, one of these fiction writers wrote that they were killing the tables in Sunset Station, at the same time I was playing there all of the time, funny that I never ran into them or any of the guys that played in there didn't either. The dealers never heard of them when I asked about them, then their was one more writer that jumped on the bandwagon and used their name also, therefore giving a little bit of credibility to the first guys story. I've been trying to find that story about the Lee brothers and when they were supposedly playing at Sunset Station, because I would hate to get it wrong, but because one of the boards were shut down, then restarted again I've not been able to find it!
Our greatest fiction writer on the game of craps has never been seen by real DI's that everyone knows, sure there may be a few sock puppets out there, but the stories he writes doesn't hold water! This guy has been writing since the 70s, please tell me how it's possible that no real DI has every seen this guy!
I do know a few guys that do win big, but at the same time they also lose big, if the were playing red, green and black chips they would have won a few thousand dollars, but because they are playing$100 = Black - Licorice,
$500 = Purple/ Barneys
$1,000 = Yellow/Orange - Pumpkins, Bananas
$5,000 = White/Grey - Flags
$25,000 = Brown - Chocolate
$100,000 & up = These are usually plaques, and vary in color
They look like big time winners, but what happens when they are losing at those levels, you will never hear about those stories, losers only write about when they won!
If I can find these videos of what really happens when the dice hit the tables, these on axis craps schools should be able to show one video where the dice are not bouncing all over the place and staying on axis!
Slow motion videos of dice shots.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2FYrndlrpc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jej4WNRGyR8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiZf3jbjie0&list=UUfDRf2L1rCEgYtGFlS_z9ag
Note, all my post start with this is just my opinion...!
You do good brada ..!
superrick
Winning comes from knowledge and skill when your betting and not reading fiction
http://procraps4u2.myfanforum.org/index.php
...
October 30th, 2014 at 8:23:27 PM
permalink
I apologize. I am to blame for your cold, not the medication. I'm a health influencer. It doesn't always work and I cant/wont show you how I do it. But I do increase the odds of certain people getting sick. You can't prove me wrong.
