Sure Sign of Dice-setting True Skill - and Intelligence
Thread Rating:
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/dice-setting/22578-can-any-one-really-control-the-dice/3/#post471408Quote: MathExtremistAs I have said many times, complete dice control is not even remotely necessary to beat the game. Even a tiny bit of influence -- two or three percent deviation in the probabilities depending on the direction -- would yield an exploitable edge over the casino. I know this because I've done the math and I can quantify exactly how much influence a shooter would need to produce a positive edge. It's nowhere close to "complete dice control." Basically, if you have any influence at all, you should have a theoretical edge over the game.
Something just occurred to me.
If there was a guy out there who could influence the dice, and he understood gambling theory, wouldn't he just play the pass line or the don't [the line], making no other bets? And I mean no other bets! He would not take the odds!
Especially conjuring up this image that ME has set up: the guy with a small edge. If he was like any other intelligent AP he would hate all the other bets but also would absolutely hate increased variance, praying every day for less variance!
Show me that guy and I'll consider the possibility he can do it.
Quote: odiousgambithttps://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/dice-setting/22578-can-any-one-really-control-the-dice/3/#post471408
Something just occurred to me.
If there was a guy out there who could influence the dice, and he understood gambling theory, wouldn't he just play the pass line or the don't [the line], making no other bets? And I mean no other bets! He would not take the odds!
Especially conjuring up this image that ME has set up: the guy with a small edge. If he was like any other intelligent AP he would hate all the other bets but also would absolutely hate increased variance, praying every day for less variance!
Show me that guy and I'll consider the possibility he can do it.
Whenever I talk about dice control / dice influence, all I'm talking about is in theory, since I don't believe in the dice control / DI stuff. Going forward...
If the point is set, and the DI could influence the dice so that he would be slightly more likely to hit his point than the regular odds (1/3, 2/5, 5/11) of making the point, then by placing the odds wager [on the pass-line], then he'd be making a +EV bet.
Or maybe he's better at throwing hardways than true-odds would suggest, then he should be betting hardways. Or maybe he should be hopping the 9-3. It all depends on what kind of throw he's doing, and which will yield the highest (positive) return.
It's up to the player to decide, as part of his game plan / before going into the casino, which bets he should be placing under which circumstances. Part of that is dissecting the game and determining if his bankroll and tolerance to risk would allow him to place whichever bets he wants to make.
Quote: RS
Whenever I talk about dice control / dice influence, all I'm talking about is in theory, since I don't believe in the dice control / DI stuff. Going forward...
Well, there is a rumor that the old Stardust site was going to go forward on a trendy new Euro theme called "Theory" backed by Chinese money. But the Chinese pulled out when someone told them craps would be a loser because "dice control works in theory."
Wouldn't someone who had a tiny bit of control beat the field silly if they bet the field that paid triple on both 2 and 12? Someone like Dicesitter should quickly see if he actually has ANY influence. Even if he can't sustain a "good shot". Sounds like a free roll situation to me.Quote: RSQuote: odiousgambithttps://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/dice-setting/22578-can-any-one-really-control-the-dice/3/#post471408
Something just occurred to me.
If there was a guy out there who could influence the dice, and he understood gambling theory, wouldn't he just play the pass line or the don't [the line], making no other bets? And I mean no other bets! He would not take the odds!
Especially conjuring up this image that ME has set up: the guy with a small edge. If he was like any other intelligent AP he would hate all the other bets but also would absolutely hate increased variance, praying every day for less variance!
Show me that guy and I'll consider the possibility he can do it.
Whenever I talk about dice control / dice influence, all I'm talking about is in theory, since I don't believe in the dice control / DI stuff. Going forward...
If the point is set, and the DI could influence the dice so that he would be slightly more likely to hit his point than the regular odds (1/3, 2/5, 5/11) of making the point, then by placing the odds wager [on the pass-line], then he'd be making a +EV bet.
Or maybe he's better at throwing hardways than true-odds would suggest, then he should be betting hardways. Or maybe he should be hopping the 9-3. It all depends on what kind of throw he's doing, and which will yield the highest (positive) return.
It's up to the player to decide, as part of his game plan / before going into the casino, which bets he should be placing under which circumstances. Part of that is dissecting the game and determining if his bankroll and tolerance to risk would allow him to place whichever bets he wants to make.
Quote: RSIf the point is set, and the DI could influence the dice so that he would be slightly more likely to hit his point than the regular odds (1/3, 2/5, 5/11) of making the point, then by placing the odds wager [on the pass-line], then he'd be making a +EV bet.
This is what I thought before, but then I came back to the idea that all the odds bets do is increase the variance.
Now, putting it the way you have, you have me wondering again.
The odds bet in Craps seems to be so different from other bet combinations that it continuously confounds my thinking!
Quote: odiousgambitIf there was a guy out there who could influence the dice, and he understood gambling theory, wouldn't he just play the pass line or the don't [the line], making no other bets? And I mean no other bets! He would not take the odds!
It depends on how the guy influenced the dice. If he could raise or lower the probability of rolling a 7 at will, then he might bet odds, since odds would now be an advantage play. Of course, that assumes (a) his influence could overcome the house edge of the pass/DP bet itself, and (b) his influence would not reduce the probability of rolling the point number.
I've rolled the 6 as point and made it four times in a row before. Does that make me a DI?? I'll answer that question with a definate no!! I normally arrange the dice and toss them but I don't believe it has any impact on my results. It's just the way I like to play if I roll. Lately I've been passing the dice most of the time and playing the don't.
Quote: odiousgambithttps://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/dice-setting/22578-can-any-one-really-control-the-dice/3/#post471408
Something just occurred to me.
If there was a guy out there who could influence the dice, and he understood gambling theory, wouldn't he just play the pass line or the don't [the line], making no other bets? And I mean no other bets! He would not take the odds!
Especially conjuring up this image that ME has set up: the guy with a small edge. If he was like any other intelligent AP he would hate all the other bets but also would absolutely hate increased variance, praying every day for less variance!
Show me that guy and I'll consider the possibility he can do it.
The one guy I saw and have mentioned before, that if you told me he was a DI I would agree, was throwing 12's. He has to place a PL or DP bet to throw, though, right? He, and the 2 7Stars playing black/purple in the field at the other end of the tub, were heavy on the field every throw and doing well with it. So, if you can throw 12's with a greater frequency but otherwise rainbow, you'd be min-betting the PL and cranking the field/horn/anycraps like they were, wouldn't you?
Quote: ThatDonGuyIt depends on how the guy influenced the dice. If he could raise or lower the probability of rolling a 7 at will, then he might bet odds, since odds would now be an advantage play. Of course, that assumes (a) his influence could overcome the house edge of the pass/DP bet itself, and (b) his influence would not reduce the probability of rolling the point number.
I highlighted the important part. The dice-influence fanatics seem to think that it's always about "minimizing sevens" when in reality nothing could be further from the truth. In many (theoretical) cases, you can establish a +EV pass bet by slightly *increasing* the frequency of seven.
Babs' story of someone who was rolling 12s is a good example. An appropriate analysis of their throw, combined with a math model of altered probabilities under that throw (if altered at all), would be able to optimize the right combination of bets and sets. For that person rolling 12s, the chances are pretty low that trying to roll 12s is the best strategy for his given level of influence. He's probably better off trying to roll hard 8s and loading up on PL and hard 8 bets.
The moral of the story is to stop guessing. All of this is quantifiable, you just have to do it. The folks who spend years practicing their throwing technique without ever understanding how they should be applying it if they ever did achieve any meaningful influence -- that's just wasting time.
Quote: MathExtremist
I highlighted the important part. The dice-influence fanatics seem to think that it's always about "minimizing sevens" when in reality nothing could be further from the truth. In many cases, you can establish a +EV pass bet by slightly *increasing* the frequency of seven.
Couldn't agree more. In DI theory the seven is the hardest number to minimize. It has the most combinations. Anyhow you turn the dice there is usually a seven somewhere creeping up on you.
Your SRR could be 1:6 and you can still get +EV on other bets.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/dice-setting/18433-the-best-dice-shooter-would-shoot-7s/
Quote: RSQuote: odiousgambitIf he was like any other intelligent AP he would hate all the other bets but also would absolutely hate increased variance, praying every day for less variance!
If the point is set, and the DI could influence the dice so that he would be slightly more likely to hit his point than the regular odds (1/3, 2/5, 5/11) of making the point, then by placing the odds wager [on the pass-line], then he'd be making a +EV bet.
All I'll say now is that RS has laid out why I was wrong in my thinking - yet my point above about variance still gives me pause.
I think this is the problem for the dice-setter who just wants to know what he is doing is working by whether or not he is winning sessions. He is introducing enormous variance into the system by playing the odds, variance he can't want if his action is +EV, but action it seems he needs since it is his best shot at going into positive expectation.
I remember the GWAE show where IIRC Stanford Wong* was backing off earlier claims about it and said that some shooters he knew who had been ahead of the game by large numbers later decided they had just been lucky.
*maybe it was somebody else, but someone being given a lot of respect
If you can't tell the difference between skill and luck, it's not enough skill to matter.Quote: odiousgambitI remember the GWAE show where IIRC Stanford Wong* was backing off earlier claims about it and said that some shooters he knew who had been ahead of the game by large numbers later decided they had just been lucky.
