Convinced about Dice Setter, What Would it Take?

I am heading to the casino in the morning, so this will (unfortunately) be a drive-by. My take:

I make no claims about dice control or influence. I believe Alan in that CONTROL is impossible. But when I shoot:

• I set the dice into the 'hardway' set with 1/6 on the horizontal axis
• I grip the dice on edges and loft them as softly as possible
• I aim the dice to impact the table, limp to the back wall, and impact below the pyramids
• I want them to die at that moment

This constitutes a legal casino throw.
DI theory says as long as the dice's horizontal spin axis remains parallel to the table surface, and parallel to the back wall, and they do not impact the diamonds, then the 1/6 faces should never show. If one throws the dice so they rotate in a synchronous fashion, then the faces that lie on top should not equal seven. It says nothing about calling a specific number, or pointing to where you're going to hit a home run for that sick little boy in the hospital.

If you want to prove the negative that DI is impossible, this is the theory you must invalidate. The most common invalidation is "the pyramids/alligator bumps"! or some variant that constitutes an non-legal throw. Note the theory requires a legal throw, and posits the dice not impacting the pyramids. Two areas are not covered with pyramids: the bottom inch or two of the back wall as well as the angled lip where the racks rest. It is possible to have a legal throw that impacts these flat surfaces.

How are my results? Miserable. I suck at it. So why do it? It gives me the illusion that I am influencing the dice. Have I seen others doing this and succeed? Yes, absolutely. Nearly always one-and-dones. Guy came in, hit 9 nines in a dozen throws and left. Was he a DI? For that roll, probably. For lifetime stats, who knows?

Last bit: Why don't DIs show themselves? I can think of a dozen reasons, mostly doing with flying under the casino radar. I think there's a lot of willful obtuseness going on here, particularly when lots of APs talk about avoiding surveillance, and card counters discuss arcana such as showing ID when cashing out. But 98 percent demand that DIs prove their skill publicly. Not gonna happen. In fact, if I had any kind of skill at applying DI theory, I'd use it very intermittently during my rolls. I'd limit myself to one roll of 30 minutes and the rest of the time screw up the technique just enough to limit my roll. Win 500 out of a 2k bankroll, color up, walk away. That's how you get to roll for years without hassle.

Comparisons with pro athletes are specious, since those athletes are being publicly paid handsomely and highly touted for their physical skills. It's in their best interests to demonstrate those skills at every turn. Can any of us throw a football through a car tire at forty yards? I highly doubt it. What about dropping a Hail Mary into the breadbasket of the receiver thirty yards downfield running like hell? Yeah, no. Yet we expect our fave QB to to that day in and day out. Just because a skill is difficult to achieve does not mean it's impossible.

Final reminder: if you disagree with me (and almost everyone will) you must invalidate the theory, and not my technique, historical observations, or internal wish-fulfillment. I know I can't do it, but I'll keep throwing this way. You can throw your own way, for your own reasons.

Quote: BillHasRetired

In fact, if I had any kind of skill at applying DI theory, I'd use it very intermittently during my rolls. I'd limit myself to one roll of 30 minutes and the rest of the time screw up the technique just enough to limit my roll. Win 500 out of a 2k bankroll, color up, walk away. That's how you get to roll for years without hassle.

Let’s say you were able to influence the dice enough to reverse the 1.4% house edge on the passline to a 1.4% player edge.

That’s a very small edge. You’d have to properly use your DI technique several hours per day for months to have any confidence of realizing that 1.4% edge. The casino is not going to catch you based on those long-term results…you’d still be losing about half of your sessions. Like card counting, it would be a full time job and a very long grind

Quote: Ace2

Quote: BillHasRetired

In fact, if I had any kind of skill at applying DI theory, I'd use it very intermittently during my rolls. I'd limit myself to one roll of 30 minutes and the rest of the time screw up the technique just enough to limit my roll. Win 500 out of a 2k bankroll, color up, walk away. That's how you get to roll for years without hassle.

Let’s say you were able to influence the dice enough to reverse the 1.4% house edge on the passline to a 1.4% player edge.

That’s a very small edge. You’d have to properly use your DI technique several hours per day for months to have any confidence of realizing that 1.4% edge. The casino is not going to catch you based on those long-term results…you’d still be losing about half of your sessions. Like card counting, it would be a full time job and a very long grind
link to original post

$100 PL max odds always come strategy? Be super fun with insane variance. What bankroll would you need to make that be your Kelly bet I wonder.

Quote: Ace2

Let’s say you were able to influence the dice enough to reverse the 1.4% house edge on the passline to a 1.4% player edge.

That’s a very small edge. You’d have to properly use your DI technique several hours per day for months to have any confidence of realizing that 1.4% edge. The casino is not going to catch you based on those long-term results…you’d still be losing about half of your sessions. Like card counting, it would be a full time job and a very long grind
link to original post

Let me posit a different view. Given a 30-minute roll in which you believe the 1-in-6 chance of a seven-out is transformed into a 1-in-8, how would your betting strategy differ? Me, I'd press more often and 'same bet' less. And that's just on the 6/8 PBs. Consider how a lessened appearance of a seven affects the Small-Tall-All bonus. Would you play it more? I know I would probably throw 5 each at it instead of my current zero.

I've always stated that I play craps for entertainment. Juicing a 30-min roll is precisely the kind of entertainment I'd enjoy. Getting tossed out of a casino is not. But I don't need to make money in the casino, and it would never become a job.

Quote: Ace2

Quote: BillHasRetired

In fact, if I had any kind of skill at applying DI theory, I'd use it very intermittently during my rolls. I'd limit myself to one roll of 30 minutes and the rest of the time screw up the technique just enough to limit my roll. Win 500 out of a 2k bankroll, color up, walk away. That's how you get to roll for years without hassle.

Let’s say you were able to influence the dice enough to reverse the 1.4% house edge on the passline to a 1.4% player edge.

That’s a very small edge. You’d have to properly use your DI technique several hours per day for months to have any confidence of realizing that 1.4% edge. The casino is not going to catch you based on those long-term results…you’d still be losing about half of your sessions. Like card counting, it would be a full time job and a very long grind
link to original post

I haven't yet got a legitimate answer from anyone claiming to be a DI what their edge is.
As to be expected from anything that isn't actually real.

Assuming it's actually possible and someone has an edge, I understand one doesn't really know what their edge is at any given time since it's based on a difficult skill that changes with each toss. I would hope/assume that anyone who's put in the time and effort to be successful has thousands of logged rolls they can refer to. I would also assume they keep super good records. If you're not doing this, there's no way one could know if they lost their skill or not.

The betting strategy would differ from the current betting strategies, based on the new statistics of the game and the new probabilities. How does the new math look, with 1-in-8, with the probabilities of the other numbers increasing equally? That is for people smarter in such mathematics to calculate than I to report on.

Gene

You missate the science. The null hypothesis is that there is no statistical difference between random shooters and those who claim that as long as the dice's horizontal spin axis remains parallel to the table surface, and parallel to the back wall, and they do not impact the diamonds, then the 1/6 faces should never show or if one throws the dice so they rotate in a synchronous fashion, then the faces that lie on top should not equal seven. The burden is on those who wish to prove that as long as the dice's horizontal spin axis remains parallel to the table surface, and parallel to the back wall, and they do not impact the diamonds, then the 1/6 faces should never show or if one throws the dice so they rotate in a synchronous fashion, then the faces that lie on top should not equal seven.

With respect, anecdotal historical observations don't matter. Internal wish-fulfillment doesn't matter. Beliefs don't matter. Scientifically collected data matter.

Gene

Quote: AxelWolf

{snip}
Assuming it's actually possible and someone has an edge, I understand one doesn't really know what their edge is at any given time since it's based on a difficult skill that changes with each toss. I would hope/assume that anyone who's put in the time and effort to be successful has thousands of logged rolls they can refer to. I would also assume they keep super good records. If you're not doing this, there's no way one could know if they lost their skill or not.
link to original post

This is the only part that I agree with. Without records, all you have to go on is intuition, feelings, and memory—all of which is subject to the vagaries of human psychology and physiology.

You've stated that DI "isn't real", which, restated, is "DI is impossible". Tell me where DI theory is impossible.

For instance, given the exacting tolerances that are used to manufacture casino dice, it is possible to balance one on a corner. On a perfectly level surface, shielded from all vibrations, in a bell jar in vacuum, positioned by a micrometer-scale armature, it is possible to do. Practically, it's so exceptionally difficult for human hands to do so because the slightest placement imperfection causes the die to topple. But it's not impossible.

Quote: UP84

Quote: AlanMendelson

In plain talk the goal of a DI is to hit more winning numbers. If you want to call that changing the house edge then so be it.
link to original post

Ok, thanks that clears things up a bit. And just to clarify further...do you believe there are DI shooters out there...ie. shooters who can use their skill to repeatedly hit more winning numbers? I will NOT be judgmental on your response on this one way or the other, I'm just trying to understand what you believe.
link to original post

It's a big world out there. There must be.
Have I seen them? In all my years playing craps I've only seen three players I would describe as DIs. Maybe there was a fourth but he didn't have a roll that lasted more than about six tosses.

DI is not like running an 8 second 100 yard dash. Its throwing two cubes with one hand about six feet.

Why couldn't there be others?

Quote: BillHasRetired

I am heading to the casino in the morning, so this will (unfortunately) be a drive-by. My take:

I make no claims about dice control or influence. I believe Alan in that CONTROL is impossible. But when I shoot:

• I set the dice into the 'hardway' set with 1/6 on the horizontal axis
• I grip the dice on edges and loft them as softly as possible
• I aim the dice to impact the table, limp to the back wall, and impact below the pyramids
• I want them to die at that moment

This constitutes a legal casino throw.
DI theory says as long as the dice's horizontal spin axis remains parallel to the table surface, and parallel to the back wall, and they do not impact the diamonds, then the 1/6 faces should never show. If one throws the dice so they rotate in a synchronous fashion, then the faces that lie on top should not equal seven. It says nothing about calling a specific number, or pointing to where you're going to hit a home run for that sick little boy in the hospital.

If you want to prove the negative that DI is impossible, this is the theory you must invalidate. The most common invalidation is "the pyramids/alligator bumps"! or some variant that constitutes an non-legal throw. Note the theory requires a legal throw, and posits the dice not impacting the pyramids. Two areas are not covered with pyramids: the bottom inch or two of the back wall as well as the angled lip where the racks rest. It is possible to have a legal throw that impacts these flat surfaces.

How are my results? Miserable. I suck at it. So why do it? It gives me the illusion that I am influencing the dice. Have I seen others doing this and succeed? Yes, absolutely. Nearly always one-and-dones. Guy came in, hit 9 nines in a dozen throws and left. Was he a DI? For that roll, probably. For lifetime stats, who knows?

Last bit: Why don't DIs show themselves? I can think of a dozen reasons, mostly doing with flying under the casino radar. I think there's a lot of willful obtuseness going on here, particularly when lots of APs talk about avoiding surveillance, and card counters discuss arcana such as showing ID when cashing out. But 98 percent demand that DIs prove their skill publicly. Not gonna happen. In fact, if I had any kind of skill at applying DI theory, I'd use it very intermittently during my rolls. I'd limit myself to one roll of 30 minutes and the rest of the time screw up the technique just enough to limit my roll. Win 500 out of a 2k bankroll, color up, walk away. That's how you get to roll for years without hassle.

Comparisons with pro athletes are specious, since those athletes are being publicly paid handsomely and highly touted for their physical skills. It's in their best interests to demonstrate those skills at every turn. Can any of us throw a football through a car tire at forty yards? I highly doubt it. What about dropping a Hail Mary into the breadbasket of the receiver thirty yards downfield running like hell? Yeah, no. Yet we expect our fave QB to to that day in and day out. Just because a skill is difficult to achieve does not mean it's impossible.

Final reminder: if you disagree with me (and almost everyone will) you must invalidate the theory, and not my technique, historical observations, or internal wish-fulfillment. I know I can't do it, but I'll keep throwing this way. You can throw your own way, for your own reasons.
link to original post

Great, well thought out, well written post. For the reasons you state, I may be able to prove any particular shooter cannot DI, but there is no way I can ‘prove’ that a shooter I have never seen nor met is a DI.
Of course you can and should keep setting the dice if it’s how you enjoy the game! Heck, I jokingly do, and will out loud pre call my rolls sometimes. Nothing beats me yelling ‘’yo’ then rolling an 11. The one in 18 times I’m correct is a good feeling….

Quote: GenoDRPh

You missate the science. The null hypothesis is that there is no statistical difference between random shooters and those who claim that as long as the dice's horizontal spin axis remains parallel to the table surface, and parallel to the back wall, and they do not impact the diamonds, then the 1/6 faces should never show or if one throws the dice so they rotate in a synchronous fashion, then the faces that lie on top should not equal seven. The burden is on those who wish to prove that as long as the dice's horizontal spin axis remains parallel to the table surface, and parallel to the back wall, and they do not impact the diamonds, then the 1/6 faces should never show or if one throws the dice so they rotate in a synchronous fashion, then the faces that lie on top should not equal seven.

With respect, anecdotal historical observations don't matter. Internal wish-fulfillment doesn't matter. Beliefs don't matter. Scientifically collected data matter.

Gene
link to original post

Actually, I did not clearly enough articulate the theory. Note the bolded 'or'. The requirement to spin the dice (to maintain dynamic stability during flight) is also a requirement of the theory. It should be a part of the bullet points. My apologies.

I know that all of the other things I mentioned any you emphasized do not matter. I said so. I also brought them up so that objections to the theory as stated would not arise with regard to those items. I don't believe I can influence dice because I lack the skill.

I stated the theory so that the multitudes who scorn DI will point out to me where the theory fails. Tell me why it won't work. I don't mean "won't work in practice" I mean "it can never work in this quantum mechanical universe as we understand it today." Argument via null hypothesis is a way to refute statistical tests. I respond that the DI throw (one that comports with all of the elements of the theory) is an ideal and the closer one can get to all the elements, the more DI may emerge. But only if the theory doesn't have a fatal flaw. For those who are such ardent believers in a non-DI world, what is that fatal flaw? There is no physical reason one cannot balance a die on a corner; it is only in the actual attempts that one fails because the margins of error are so tiny. But one cannot state that it is impossible.

In science, the term "theory" refers to scientific theories, a well-confirmed type of explanation of nature, made in a way consistent with the scientific method, and fulfilling the criteria required by modern science. Such theories are described in such a way that scientific tests should be able to provide empirical support for it, or empirical contradiction ("falsify") of it. Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge. Your "DI theory" isn't a theory. It is hypothesis, which is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon. For a hypothesis to be a scientific hypothesis, the scientific method requires that one can test it.

DI theory is impossible, because it does not exist. A DI hypothesis, on the other hand, does exist and is testable using the scientific method. As far as I know, and as far as is publicly known, no person has successfully tested for and discovered the existence of a single person woman born who can successfully alter the probabilities of the dice rolls on a game of casino craps, using legal throws. That person-either person-does not exist.

Gene

Thank you, SooPoo for the kind reply.

I'm basically convinced that DI is impractical for me (because of numerous requirements of the DI Throw). But, like the golfer out on the driving range, I keep plugging away at it. For I see nothing in the theory that would prohibit it working in the real world for someone who was highly skilled at this narrow task.

Ah, well. Casino in the morning. Retirement is great.

Quote: GenoDRPh

In science, the term "theory" refers to scientific theories, a well-confirmed type of explanation of nature, made in a way consistent with the scientific method, and fulfilling the criteria required by modern science. Such theories are described in such a way that scientific tests should be able to provide empirical support for it, or empirical contradiction ("falsify") of it. Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge. Your "DI theory" isn't a theory. It is hypothesis, which is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon. For a hypothesis to be a scientific hypothesis, the scientific method requires that one can test it.

DI theory is impossible, because it does not exist. A DI hypothesis, on the other hand, does exist and is testable using the scientific method. As far as I know, and as far as is publicly known, no person has successfully tested for and discovered the existence of a single person woman born who can successfully alter the probabilities of the dice rolls on a game of casino craps, using legal throws. That person-either person-does not exist.

Gene
link to original post

Just what percentage of all the craps players in the world have you observed?

Ever see two legally thrown dice end up stacked on the table?

Quote: BillHasRetired

Quote: AxelWolf

{snip}
Assuming it's actually possible and someone has an edge, I understand one doesn't really know what their edge is at any given time since it's based on a difficult skill that changes with each toss. I would hope/assume that anyone who's put in the time and effort to be successful has thousands of logged rolls they can refer to. I would also assume they keep super good records. If you're not doing this, there's no way one could know if they lost their skill or not.
link to original post

This is the only part that I agree with. Without records, all you have to go on is intuition, feelings, and memory—all of which is subject to the vagaries of human psychology and physiology.

You've stated that DI "isn't real", which, restated, is "DI is impossible". Tell me where DI theory is impossible.

For instance, given the exacting tolerances that are used to manufacture casino dice, it is possible to balance one on a corner. On a perfectly level surface, shielded from all vibrations, in a bell jar in vacuum, positioned by a micrometer-scale armature, it is possible to do. Practically, it's so exceptionally difficult for human hands to do so because the slightest placement imperfection causes the die to topple. But it's not impossible.
link to original post

I don't think anyone is or can activity gain an advantage in the casinos via DI.

Quote: AlanMendelson

Quote: UP84

Quote: AlanMendelson

In plain talk the goal of a DI is to hit more winning numbers. If you want to call that changing the house edge then so be it.
link to original post

Ok, thanks that clears things up a bit. And just to clarify further...do you believe there are DI shooters out there...ie. shooters who can use their skill to repeatedly hit more winning numbers? I will NOT be judgmental on your response on this one way or the other, I'm just trying to understand what you believe.
link to original post

It's a big world out there. There must be.
Have I seen them? In all my years playing craps I've only seen three players I would describe as DIs. Maybe there was a fourth but he didn't have a roll that lasted more than about six tosses.

DI is not like running an 8 second 100 yard dash. Its throwing two cubes with one hand about six feet.

Why couldn't there be others?
link to original post

You may "describe" them as DIs. But those pinhead pit bosses who booted you from those casinos described you as a DI as well...

Gene

Can't say that I remember any particular set of unusual dice results in my 21 tears of playing craps. Usually, I am only concerned with the numbers that result, and not any other results. Not to say I haven't observed it, but I don't remember because it didn't make a memorable impression on me.

In science, observation will only get you so far. You need to use the scientific method to get good results.

What scientific methods have you observed regarding DI?

Gene

Quote: GenoDRPh

In science, the term "theory" refers to scientific theories, a well-confirmed type of explanation of nature, made in a way consistent with the scientific method, and fulfilling the criteria required by modern science. Such theories are described in such a way that scientific tests should be able to provide empirical support for it, or empirical contradiction ("falsify") of it. Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge. Your "DI theory" isn't a theory. It is hypothesis, which is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon. For a hypothesis to be a scientific hypothesis, the scientific method requires that one can test it.

DI theory is impossible, because it does not exist. A DI hypothesis, on the other hand, does exist and is testable using the scientific method. As far as I know, and as far as is publicly known, no person has successfully tested for and discovered the existence of a single person woman born who can successfully alter the probabilities of the dice rolls on a game of casino craps, using legal throws. That person-either person-does not exist.

Gene
link to original post

Pardon me for using your profession's jargon incorrectly. My training is in civil engineering, computers, and other real-world things. There are better ways to correct/restate my deficient posting—which is really a restatement of AlanMendelson's argument. I strongly suspect, though, when you nit-pick the language used, it's because you are out of ammo.

I say "If I throw dice that comport with all these hypothetical elements, it should reduce the appearance of the seven." and you tell me that it's impossible because nobody's ever volunteered for testing. But you still haven't pointed to any of those elements and said "this cannot happen because it violates this scientific theory." See, for example, perpetual motion proponents and the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.

You say "we've never found a real-life DI", and I say "Black swan." Just because one has never agreed to arduous testing doesn't mean the phenomena (DI Throws) cannot exist. Yet everyone seems convinced that it is impossible. What element is actually, physically, impossible?

Quote: AxelWolf

I don't think anyone is or can activity gain an advantage in the casinos via DI.
link to original post

Why? Because people can't throw dice precisely enough? Or that if anyone showed that demonstrated they could, the casino would eject them? I suspect that it's a whole lot of the first, and a smidgeon of the second.

When I played PL at tables, I'd have to wait for my turn to shoot and by that time I had lost 5-8 PL bets on others. During my turn I'd have to make that up. So having a 1.4% player advantage is not enough against a 50% HA when other players are losing around the table. My biggest wins were on the DC; or the PL when I shoot.

Earlier the subject of dice sliding was raised by Alan, and it was claimed to be "illegal."

Why would it be illegal?

I can see a No Roll or even a banning but not an arrest.

Any known cases of criminal charges and a conviction for dice sliding?

Quote: ChumpChange

When I played PL at tables, I'd have to wait for my turn to shoot and by that time I had lost 5-8 PL bets on others. During my turn I'd have to make that up. So having a 1.4% player advantage is not enough against a 50% HA when other players are losing around the table. My biggest wins were on the DC, or the PL when I shoot.
link to original post

DIs know better than to play at crowded tables.
Look for them at 5am.

Local casino shuts down the craps tables between midnight and 2 am. Best chance to play alone is at the $25 table. Best that I could afford is the odd $10 table. If I could get a few more lucky breaks on Bubble Craps I could give tables a go again.

Quote: MrV

Earlier the subject of dice sliding was raised by Alan, and it was claimed to be "illegal."

Why would it be illegal?

I can see a No Roll or even a banning but not an arrest.

Any known cases of criminal charges and a conviction for dice sliding?
link to original post

V,
As I understand it, dice sliding is an attempt to keep at least one die from rotating during a throw, and trying to get it to stop juuuust short of the back wall. The lack of hitting the back wall makes it an illegal throw.

Why would people want to do this? If you slide one die so the six shows, that means that no rolls will be below seven, and PBs or prop bets on the 7-12 numbers will be that much more likely to hit. Want to hit the low numbers? Change the slid die to a 1.

Quote: BillHasRetired

Quote: AxelWolf

I don't think anyone is or can activity gain an advantage in the casinos via DI.
link to original post

Why? Because people can't throw dice precisely enough? Or that if anyone showed that demonstrated they could, the casino would eject them? I suspect that it's a whole lot of the first, and a smidgeon of the second.
link to original post

I believe both to be correct.


There are just too many elements involved.

If one had the perfect eye and hand coordination, the dedication, the patience, an exact copy of a craps table and the dice, put in months of daily practice, all while keeping track of each roll and continually practicing. Then maybe that person could make a little at that one casino before they got tossed out or elements were changed.

All right, it's been fun. Time to get some rest, I've got some driving to do tomorrow. Thanks for the discussions, everyone. Bill out.

I'm not saying it's impossible. I'm saying it's not proven to be possible. If you are a civil engineer, then you've had a physics course or two. Which means you should already be familiar with the scientific method, just as much as I am through my studies to become a license pharmacist. My jargon is your jargon. And I note the irony a civil engineer who claims he spent his working life working on real-world things telling us that his "theory" hasn't worked so far in the real world.

Again, and hopefully for the last time. The burden is on the DI proponents-that's you-to prove it exists, not on the skeptics to prove it doesn't. The burden is on you to prove your theory, not on me to disprove it. Are you willing to take the Pepsi Challenge?

Gene

All state gambling jurisdictions have language in their laws that invalidate any “roll” where the dice are slid. Instead, most jurisdictions require that the shooter makes a legitimate attempt to toss dice off the back wall.

News reports of several convictions available via google.

Gene

About dice sliding:

It's not criminal until you've been told not to do it or the dealers participate in the coverup of the slide.

When I was interviewed for that Review Journal story i immediately suspected dealer involvement. I was right. But the dealer involvement was exposed after that story was printed. The crew was fired.

Every once in a while I'm at a table where a player tries to beat the casino using an illegal throw -- usually a short roll.

As I said in the article I saw a slide used by a player only once.

A more common illegal throw is when the dice are lofted high in the air, allowing chips to be removed from the layout. The dealers must keep their eyes on the dice.

A legal dice throw must be below eye level.

Quote: GenoDRPh

All state gambling jurisdictions have language in their laws that invalidate any “roll” where the dice are slid. Instead, most jurisdictions require that the shooter makes a legitimate attempt to toss dice off the back wall.

News reports of several convictions available via google.

Gene
link to original post

Actually you will not find dice sliding written in any state laws except, I think, Colorado.

In Nevada you won't find written what a legal throw is.

But the NGC uses the UNWRITTEN terms that the dice must be tossed together, they must fly in the air, they must hit the table surface at least once, then they must hit the back wall.

It's not written anywhere in Nevada laws but that's the rule.

Sliding has been interpreted as a non random delivery of the dice but also not written in Nevada.

But dice setting and influenced or controlled throws are legal because the casino gives the dice to players and these throws are -- to quote the NGC -- "an expected part of the game."

Quote: AlanMendelson

About dice sliding:

It's not criminal until you've been told not to do it or the dealers participate in the coverup of the slide.

"It's not criminal until you've been told not to do it"

Reference?

Quote: AlanMendelson

Quote: GenoDRPh

All state gambling jurisdictions have language in their laws that invalidate any “roll” where the dice are slid. Instead, most jurisdictions require that the shooter makes a legitimate attempt to toss dice off the back wall.

News reports of several convictions available via google.

Gene
link to original post

Actually you will not find dice sliding written in any state laws except, I think, Colorado.

In Nevada you won't find written what a legal throw is.

But the NGC uses the UNWRITTEN terms that the dice must be tossed together, they must fly in the air, they must hit the table surface at least once, then they must hit the back wall.

It's not written anywhere in Nevada laws but that's the rule.

Sliding has been interpreted as a non random delivery of the dice but also not written in Nevada.

But dice setting and influenced or controlled throws are legal because the casino gives the dice to players and these throws are -- to quote the NGC -- "an expected part of the game."
link to original post

It's an expected part of the game, because they know it's a bunch of malarkey...

Gene

Quote: AxelWolf

Quote: AlanMendelson

About dice sliding:

It's not criminal until you've been told not to do it or the dealers participate in the coverup of the slide.

"It's not criminal until you've been told not to do it"

Reference?
link to original post

You'll have to check the archives of KCAL TV in Los Angeles for my interviews with Keith Copher of the NGC.

Part of my business and consumer news reporting was reporting on gaming in Nevada and California.

I've also interviewed gaming regulators in other states regarding their laws.

Check this post of mine from about 9 years ago.

https://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/showthread.php?467-Nevada-does-NOT-publish-regulations-for-throwing-dice

https://web.archive.org/web/20150121182236/http://alanbestbuys.com/id322.html

Yes Axel, I've done more than get married at a craps table.

Quote: AlanMendelson

[In all my years playing craps I've only seen three players I would describe as DIs. Maybe there was a fourth but he didn't have a roll that lasted more than about six tosses.

Out of curiosity, how many thousands of rolls did you watch and record for each of those three DIs? It would probably take at least a few thousand rolls to objectively demonstrate DI.

Or were they first-time players, maybe even tourists(!), that had a bit of luck when it was their turn to shoot ? I was recently at a table when this woman lasted over 30 rolls…it was the first time she ever played craps

Quote: Ace2

Quote: AlanMendelson

[In all my years playing craps I've only seen three players I would describe as DIs. Maybe there was a fourth but he didn't have a roll that lasted more than about six tosses.

Out of curiosity, how many thousands of rolls did you watch and record for each of those three DIs? It would probably take at least a few thousand rolls to objectively demonstrate DI.

Or were they first-time players, maybe even tourists(!), that had a bit of luck when it was their turn to shoot ? I was recently at a table when this woman lasted over 30 rolls…it was the first time she ever played craps
link to original post

Did your lady shooter have a soft toss with both dice parallel to the table, rotating slowly, gently bouncing off the table then striking the back wall just under the pyramids and softly rolling back and coming to a stop?

How many rolls like that do you need to know the shooter isn't a random chucker?

Nope, no special toss

So you’re saying your three were DIs because their technique looked like DI? Not due to measured results that fell several deviations outside of expectations?

Quote: ChumpChange

When I played PL at tables, I'd have to wait for my turn to shoot and by that time I had lost 5-8 PL bets on others. During my turn I'd have to make that up. So having a 1.4% player advantage is not enough against a 50% HA when other players are losing around the table. My biggest wins were on the DC; or the PL when I shoot.
link to original post

1.4% player advantage. 50% HA. What does that mean ?

Quote: AlanMendelson

[
DIs know better than to play at crowded tables.
Look for them at 5am.
link to original post

I believe that’s also the best time to spot leprechauns, rainbows, pots of gold and UFOs

Quote: Ace2

Nope, no special toss

So you’re saying your three were DIs because their technique looked like DI? Not due to measured results that fell several deviations outside of expectations?
link to original post

Since I'm not there for the long term I have to decide pretty quickly if I'm going to bet with the shooter?

So, if the shooter looks like a duck and walks like a duck and quack likes a duck I'm going to bet on his roll.

So... how do you decide what shooter to bet on? Do you bet on random checkers who throw the dice wildly so they bounce from wall to wall?

Or, do you bet on a shooter who appears to care about how he throws?

In fact that's a question I'd like to put to the biggest non believers of DI:

HOW DO YOU DECIDE WHAT SHOOTER YOU'LL BET WITH?

And I wonder... would you prefer to bet on a random shooter or a shooter who has a throw that is planned and measured and shows some care?

Quote: AlanMendelson

Quote: AxelWolf

Quote: AlanMendelson

About dice sliding:

It's not criminal until you've been told not to do it or the dealers participate in the coverup of the slide.

"It's not criminal until you've been told not to do it"

Reference?
link to original post

You'll have to check the archives of KCAL TV in Los Angeles for my interviews with Keith Copher of the NGC.

Part of my business and consumer news reporting was reporting on gaming in Nevada and California.

I've also interviewed gaming regulators in other states regarding their laws.

Check this post of mine from about 9 years ago.

https://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/showthread.php?467-Nevada-does-NOT-publish-regulations-for-throwing-dice

https://web.archive.org/web/20150121182236/http://alanbestbuys.com/id322.html

Yes Axel, I've done more than get married at a craps table.
link to original post

I don't doubt you have.

I haven't a clue what the actual law is about dice sliding. I find it very odd that it's not criminal unless you've been told not to do it. It's obvious anytime an employee is in on something, there's a good chance it's illegal.

"Told not to do it" Would that be per casino, per day, per trip, or if you have ever in your life been told not to do it?

Is your use of the word criminal the same as saying illegal?

I can see why it might not be illegal since it could be an accident or someone legit didn't know better. I would think that even if one wasn't told not to do it but their intent was to slide the dice in order to cheat the casino, that would be illegal.

It's like past posting. The first time a past poster gets caught chances are the pit boss is going to tell you "you can't do that."

Do it again and you'll get trespassed.

Keep doing it and you'll get arrested.

I once saw a past poster dragged out of Suncoast by NGC agents -- one grabbing each limb. He had been warned and they were watching for him to do it again.

Dice sliding however is rare. It's very rare because it's so obvious. It's done in open view on a table for all to see.

As I said in the Review Journal article I saw it only once... and I'm pretty sure the casino felt sorry for him after he lost so much.

Quote: AlanMendelson

Quote: UP84

Quote: AlanMendelson

In plain talk the goal of a DI is to hit more winning numbers. If you want to call that changing the house edge then so be it.
link to original post

Ok, thanks that clears things up a bit. And just to clarify further...do you believe there are DI shooters out there...ie. shooters who can use their skill to repeatedly hit more winning numbers? I will NOT be judgmental on your response on this one way or the other, I'm just trying to understand what you believe.
link to original post

It's a big world out there. There must be.
Have I seen them? In all my years playing craps I've only seen three players I would describe as DIs. Maybe there was a fourth but he didn't have a roll that lasted more than about six tosses.

DI is not like running an 8 second 100 yard dash. Its throwing two cubes with one hand about six feet.

Why couldn't there be others?
link to original post

Ok, thanks Alan. I think I've now got your viewpoint. I may not agree with it, but at least I now understand it and have a clearer awareness of the factors that shape it.

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AlanMendelson

Quote: UP84

Quote: AlanMendelson

In plain talk the goal of a DI is to hit more winning numbers. If you want to call that changing the house edge then so be it.
link to original post

Ok, thanks that clears things up a bit. And just to clarify further...do you believe there are DI shooters out there...ie. shooters who can use their skill to repeatedly hit more winning numbers? I will NOT be judgmental on your response on this one way or the other, I'm just trying to understand what you believe.
link to original post

It's a big world out there. There must be.
Have I seen them? In all my years playing craps I've only seen three players I would describe as DIs. Maybe there was a fourth but he didn't have a roll that lasted more than about six tosses.

DI is not like running an 8 second 100 yard dash. Its throwing two cubes with one hand about six feet.

Why couldn't there be others?
link to original post

You may "describe" them as DIs. But those pinhead pit bosses who booted you from those casinos described you as a DI as well...

Gene
link to original post

And THAT is the point! Confirmation bias! Alan saw those few guys on a hot roll and decided they were DIs. They moved to another table and someone else saw them on a cold roll. Do you think the someone else came to the conclusion that those guys were DIs, just on a cold roll?!?

Quote: SOOPOO

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AlanMendelson

Quote: UP84

Quote: AlanMendelson

In plain talk the goal of a DI is to hit more winning numbers. If you want to call that changing the house edge then so be it.
link to original post

Ok, thanks that clears things up a bit. And just to clarify further...do you believe there are DI shooters out there...ie. shooters who can use their skill to repeatedly hit more winning numbers? I will NOT be judgmental on your response on this one way or the other, I'm just trying to understand what you believe.
link to original post

It's a big world out there. There must be.
Have I seen them? In all my years playing craps I've only seen three players I would describe as DIs. Maybe there was a fourth but he didn't have a roll that lasted more than about six tosses.

DI is not like running an 8 second 100 yard dash. Its throwing two cubes with one hand about six feet.

Why couldn't there be others?
link to original post

You may "describe" them as DIs. But those pinhead pit bosses who booted you from those casinos described you as a DI as well...

Gene
link to original post

And THAT is the point! Confirmation bias! Alan saw those few guys on a hot roll and decided they were DIs. They moved to another table and someone else saw them on a cold roll. Do you think the someone else came to the conclusion that those guys were DIs, just on a cold roll?!?
link to original post

No no no no no.

It wasn't just a hot roll. It was the way they threw the dice.

As I've said before, even random chuckers have hot rolls.

Quote: AlanMendelson

Quote: SOOPOO

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AlanMendelson

Quote: UP84

Quote: AlanMendelson

In plain talk the goal of a DI is to hit more winning numbers. If you want to call that changing the house edge then so be it.
link to original post

Ok, thanks that clears things up a bit. And just to clarify further...do you believe there are DI shooters out there...ie. shooters who can use their skill to repeatedly hit more winning numbers? I will NOT be judgmental on your response on this one way or the other, I'm just trying to understand what you believe.
link to original post

It's a big world out there. There must be.
Have I seen them? In all my years playing craps I've only seen three players I would describe as DIs. Maybe there was a fourth but he didn't have a roll that lasted more than about six tosses.

DI is not like running an 8 second 100 yard dash. Its throwing two cubes with one hand about six feet.

Why couldn't there be others?
link to original post

You may "describe" them as DIs. But those pinhead pit bosses who booted you from those casinos described you as a DI as well...

Gene
link to original post

And THAT is the point! Confirmation bias! Alan saw those few guys on a hot roll and decided they were DIs. They moved to another table and someone else saw them on a cold roll. Do you think the someone else came to the conclusion that those guys were DIs, just on a cold roll?!?
link to original post

No no no no no.

It wasn't just a hot roll. It was the way they threw the dice.

As I've said before, even random chuckers have hot rolls.
link to original post

So with ‘the way they threw the dice’, if they had lost while you were watching the very short session you watched them, would you still have called them DIs? Meaning it wasn’t the single sessions RESULTS that convinced you, but ‘the way they threw the dice’?

Yes. It's a combination of how they threw and their results.

Anyone chucking dice can't be a DI.

There is a particular form or path that dice must follow so they don't bounce all over the table haphazardly.

Sharoshooter's book properly describes DI.

In short, DI is an attempt to limit dice from bouncing around haphazardly.

Quote: AlanMendelson

Yes. It's a combination of how they threw and their results.

Anyone chucking dice can't be a DI.

There is a particular form or path that dice must follow so they don't bounce all over the table haphazardly.

Sharoshooter's book properly describes DI.

In short, DI is an attempt to limit dice from bouncing around haphazardly.
link to original post

Not sure why I’m doing this anymore…. Yesterday at Pai Gow table 4 young adults sat down, didn’t know how to play, me and dealer patiently helped them. In conversation with the guy who was taking A LONG time to even get the basics down , tells me about his Blackjack from earlier. Of course, the 3rd base guy ‘ruined the flow’ by taking a card when he shouldn’t have. Me and his 3 friends agonizingly tried to convince him the 3rd base guys ‘errors’ will help him as often as they hurt him. Just could not convince him.
Me trying to show you that DI is make believe is analogous. Why do I keep trying!?!??

Quote: BillHasRetired

If you want to prove the negative that DI is impossible, this is the theory you must invalidate. The most common invalidation is "the pyramids/alligator bumps"! or some variant that constitutes an non-legal throw. Note the theory requires a legal throw, and posits the dice not impacting the pyramids. Two areas are not covered with pyramids: the bottom inch or two of the back wall as well as the angled lip where the racks rest. It is possible to have a legal throw that impacts these flat surfaces.

How are my results? Miserable. I suck at it. So why do it? It gives me the illusion that I am influencing the dice. Have I seen others doing this and succeed? Yes, absolutely. Nearly always one-and-dones. Guy came in, hit 9 nines in a dozen throws and left. Was he a DI? For that roll, probably. For lifetime stats, who knows?

Last bit: Why don't DIs show themselves? I can think of a dozen reasons, mostly doing with flying under the casino radar. I think there's a lot of willful obtuseness going on here, particularly when lots of APs talk about avoiding surveillance, and card counters discuss arcana such as showing ID when cashing out. But 98 percent demand that DIs prove their skill publicly. Not gonna happen. In fact, if I had any kind of skill at applying DI theory, I'd use it very intermittently during my rolls. I'd limit myself to one roll of 30 minutes and the rest of the time screw up the technique just enough to limit my roll. Win 500 out of a 2k bankroll, color up, walk away. That's how you get to roll for years without hassle.

Comparisons with pro athletes are specious, since those athletes are being publicly paid handsomely and highly touted for their physical skills. It's in their best interests to demonstrate those skills at every turn. Can any of us throw a football through a car tire at forty yards? I highly doubt it. What about dropping a Hail Mary into the breadbasket of the receiver thirty yards downfield running like hell? Yeah, no. Yet we expect our fave QB to to that day in and day out. Just because a skill is difficult to achieve does not mean it's impossible.

Final reminder: if you disagree with me (and almost everyone will) you must invalidate the theory, and not my technique, historical observations, or internal wish-fulfillment. I know I can't do it, but I'll keep throwing this way. You can throw your own way, for your own reasons.
link to original post

(Quote clipped, relevance)

Even though I edited it out, I want to say that I liked your description of the mechanics involved and the intent behind the set and the throw.

The first thing that I would respond is that I have no interest in, "Proving that DI is impossible," which is essentially asking me to prove a negative. Once again, the people who don't subscribe to DI as a currently working concept are not the ones making a positive claim. The people making the positive claim are the ones that say there are people out there who are currently doing it, so they are the side with something to prove. I'm simply stating how it could be proven, on a preponderance of the evidence (more likely than not basis) to my satisfaction; they are obviously under no obligation to actually try to do that.

As you mention, when it comes to lifetime stats, I would not need to know someone's lifetime stats to be satisfied and I wouldn't trust the source anyway. There are mathematical ways that people could, in theory, demonstrate that it is more likely than not their DI sufficiently alters the probabilities to create an advantage.

I both agree and disagree with, "Flying under the casino's radar." People post about advantage plays all the time here and there with such postings certainly not being limited to Blackjack Card Counting. We have a recent UTH thread where people have been asking, "If x, then what would the player's advantage be," for situations that likely come up much more frequently than someone successfully altering the probabilities of the dice to a necessary extent.

Beyond that, you have slot advantage play that gets discussed, cards, hole-carding, edge-sorting...Dice Influencing seems to be the lone advantage play game...especially one to get so much discussion...that nobody has ever actually proven can be done with a long-term positive expectation. Can you think of anything else that has not been demonstrated successfully at least once?

Final Reminder: Asking me to invalidate the theory is like asking me to invalidate the theory of (insert religion), how would I ever prove that such a thing can't happen?

To that point, I don't actively disagree with the theory itself; I want to see the theory become proven or disproven. I have no grounds to say, "Absolutely not," and I do not say that.

Quote: AlanMendelson

Quote: Ace2

Nope, no special toss

So you’re saying your three were DIs because their technique looked like DI? Not due to measured results that fell several deviations outside of expectations?
link to original post

Since I'm not there for the long term I have to decide pretty quickly if I'm going to bet with the shooter?

So, if the shooter looks like a duck and walks like a duck and quack likes a duck I'm going to bet on his roll.

So... how do you decide what shooter to bet on? Do you bet on random checkers who throw the dice wildly so they bounce from wall to wall?

Or, do you bet on a shooter who appears to care about how he throws?

In fact that's a question I'd like to put to the biggest non believers of DI:

HOW DO YOU DECIDE WHAT SHOOTER YOU'LL BET WITH?

And I wonder... would you prefer to bet on a random shooter or a shooter who has a throw that is planned and measured and shows some care?
link to original post

In the rare event I play Craps, and in the rarer event I play with anyone else at the table, then I do nothing until it is the person's turn who would be the shooter before me, at that point, I make a Pass Line bet so that I can shoot next. I probably haven't rolled dice in years.

Quote: SOOPOO

In conversation with the guy who was taking A LONG time to even get the basics down , tells me about his Blackjack from earlier. Of course, the 3rd base guy ‘ruined the flow’ by taking a card when he shouldn’t have. Me and his 3 friends agonizingly tried to convince him the 3rd base guys ‘errors’ will help him as often as they hurt him. Just could not convince him.
link to original post

Ruined the Flow vs Saved the Table.
(sigh) Selective memory.