Dice Influence challenge
I understand that a random roller may beat me due to normal variance, but at an even money bet I am ready for all comers.
The only rule as to the roll will be that both dice must hit the back wall, which I believe is a 'live casino' rule.
If I win I will happy to accept the $1000. If I lose then I will be happy to pay the winner, and to see something that my intuition tells me is impossible.
I will limit this to the first 5 challengers. If i am wrong that limits my potential losses to $5000.
Any takers? If so we can easily agree on details- who holds the money, where, etc...
Quote: SOOPOOExample- you say you can avoid 7's. 7 should occur 600 times in 3600 rolls, so you must keep 7 to 450 or under to win.
I like your challenge. Go get them. I know that dice influencing is a hoax also.
Wait...
450 or less 7s?? isn't that hmmmmm 0.0000000000020698 or 1 in 483,140,458,016.5
SD = 22.36 (hehehe)
How about making it a bit more fair? Maybe 500 or less? 0.0000026670 or 1 in 374,956.4
The dice would also have to be rolled, and hit the surface and then the back wall (I am assuming you would insist on that) in approximately the same way every time. Otherwise the dice control guy would say that the rolls were, in fact, random rather than controlled by his method.
I don't share your skepticism--I do think that some kind of dice control is possible, although to what extent and to what practical purpose, I have no idea. Common sense, as well as physics, tells me that any projectile's attitude and point of impact are dependent on its initial attitude and velocity, even if a randomizing element is introduced between launch and impact. The real question, then, is whether that randomizing element, in the case of the casino crap table, is strong enough to negate the factors of initial attitude (orientation), rotation, and velocity of the dice.
It should also be noted that any failure of a challenger would only refute his chosen method, not dice control per se.
Quote: 7winnerI like your challenge. Go get them. I know that dice influencing is a hoax also.
Wait...
450 or less 7s?? isn't that hmmmmm 0.0000000000020698 or 1 in 483,140,458,016.5
SD = 22.36 (hehehe)
How about making it a bit more fair? Maybe 500 or less? 0.0000026670 or 1 in 374,956.4
I agree with 7winner, your challenge is beyond the claimed capabilities of dice controllers. They claim they can reduce the sevens to 1 in 6.5 , or at best 1 in 7.
If you use 6.5, that would be 554 or less in 3600 rolls, something that would happen randomly for 1 out of 50 trials. Still a damn good bet at even money for you! However, 3600 rolls is also a lot of rolls... if you made it a mere 500 rolls, and challenged them to produce less then 77, that would happen by chance about 1 in 5 times, still a damn good bet for even money :)
Quote: DrEntropyif you made it a mere 500 rolls, and challenged them to produce less then 77, that would happen by chance about 1 in 5 times, still a damn good bet for even money :)
Actually on second thought, I would make them roll less then 70 sevens in 500 rolls (about 1 seven in 7 rolls) so that a random roller would do it about 6% of the time, and a 1/6.5 "dice controller" could do it 20% of the time. If I were to offer a wager of this kind, which I am not :)
Quote: DrEntropyI agree with 7winner, your challenge is beyond the claimed capabilities of dice controllers. They claim they can reduce the sevens to 1 in 6.5 , or at best 1 in 7.
Now, some DIs claim that they can roll just more numbers than others at different times. They go with the flow. Bet the numbers that they roll.
Some days they can't throw a 100mph fastball in the strike zone but they can get their slider to hit the sweet spot on those days.
still they will ALL have an excuse for any situation....both good and bad.
Make the challenge for the 1 in 6.5 to 7.0 range (SRR for 7s) and offer the guys at
www.goldentouchcraps.com.
a chance to accept the challenge. They should need the money since they are so good at dice control!
Any other numbers can be done shooter by shooter.
Quote: SOOPOOOk- I'll buy the 1 in 7 option. I believe they would have to hit 514 or fewer in 3600. I would bet on 515 or greater. Bring em on!
I don't think any skilled shooters would claim to be that good. As an example of something reasonable, when there was a challenge at BJ21 the bet was that two skilled shooters could roll 79 or less in 500 rolls (83.3 expected). The shooters won, with 74 sevens.
Quote: WizardI don't think any skilled shooters would claim to be that good. As an example of something reasonable, when there was a challenge at BJ21 the bet was that two skilled shooters could roll 79 or less in 500 rolls (83.3 expected). The shooters won, with 74 sevens.
Let's say that such a shooter only did the dice-control thing after the point was established. Let's also assume that his method's goal was to roll less sevens. How much would he have to decrease the frequency of sevens to at least negate the house advantage, assuming he throws normally on the come-out?
Also, it would seem that ANY reduction of the frequency of sevens would make odds bets +EV--what would a, say, 1 or 2 percent reduction in the frequency of sevens do for your odds bet?
Quote: WizardI don't think any skilled shooters would claim to be that good. As an example of something reasonable, when there was a challenge at BJ21 the bet was that two skilled shooters could roll 79 or less in 500 rolls (83.3 expected). The shooters won, with 74 sevens.
Too bad. If that is all they are claiming then for me disprove the claim would take too many rolls for me to reasonably expect them to submit to. I would guess the number of rolls required would be in the hundreds of thousands. i would guess 79 or less 7's out of 500 probably happens 47% of the time or so. Thanks for the info.
Quote: SOOPOOToo bad. If that is all they are claiming then for me disprove the claim would take too many rolls for me to reasonably expect them to submit to. I would guess the number of rolls required would be in the hundreds of thousands. i would guess 79 or less 7's out of 500 probably happens 47% of the time or so. Thanks for the info.
Actually, 32.66%, assuming a random shooter.
Quote: SOOPOO
Ok- I'll buy the 1 in 7 option. I believe they would have to hit 514 or fewer in 3600. I would bet on 515 or greater. Bring em on!
Quote: WizardI don't think any skilled shooters would claim to be that good.
I disagree. Dice control sellers have always pushed the SRR.
Look at what these dice 'sellers' are pushing!
These DIs have always pushed 6.5 SRR or better for years.
Craps Forum has "dice setters" showing their SRR.example: http://www.crapsforum.com/viewthread/1035/
The Wizard will see this one as being familiar: http://www.diceinstitute.com/2007/06/can_you_beat_the_golden_dice_challenge.html
www.goldentouchcraps.com
Frank Scoblete is the largest pusher of dice control crap and that magic 6.5 SRR (7 to rolls ratio) number. There are many others that also push the SRR but not worth my time to start listing them.
His new book, always has a new book, claims this:
http://grochowski.casinocitytimes.com/article/cutting-edge-craps-59151
Cutting Edge Craps ($16.95, Triumph Books.)
"The house normally has a 1.52 percent edge on place bets on 6. Cutting Edge Craps presents a chart that shows a swing to a 3.59 percent player edge if the shooter can depress 7s to once per 6.5 rolls"
I say force those DIs or what ever they want to be called in proving they can consistently hit a 6.5 SRR or better.
That will force them to change their tune like they always do and say, "Oh we now can roll other numbers more than others at different rates"
ALL TALK, always has been with these jokers and their list of excuses for why they are not successful keeps growing longer and longer and longer and longer and longer and longer and longer and longer and longer and longer and longer.....
Quote: 7winnerThese DIs have always pushed 6.5 SRR or better for years.
1 in 6.5 sevens would result in an average of 3600/6.5 = 554 in in 3600 throws. 514 is a lot less than that.
If the logistics could be worked out, I'll offer the same challenge but set the line at 555.5, to make it an easy to remember number.
Quote: Wizard1 in 6.5 sevens would result in an average of 3600/6.5 = 554 in in 3600 throws. 514 is a lot less than that.
If the logistics could be worked out, I'll offer the same challenge but set the line at 555.5, to make it an easy to remember number.
That seems fair. A person who believed his SRR was 6.5 would think have an edge on you (win 55% of the time) but you would have a steep edge on a random roller (the random roller would win only 2.2% of the time).
Quote: Wizard1 in 6.5 sevens would result in an average of 3600/6.5 = 554 in in 3600 throws. 514 is a lot less than that.
If the logistics could be worked out, I'll offer the same challenge but set the line at 555.5, to make it an easy to remember number.
From.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/general/3195-controlled-dice-shooting-is-bs/8/#post35969
Random dice rollers can expect: No fancy software needed. Excel does it real fast.
SRR the famous: sevens to rolls ratio
| rolls | expected 7s | #7s or less | #7s or less% | S.R.R |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 36 | 6 | 5 | 0.4308756 | 7.2 |
| 72 | 12 | 11 | 0.4510275 | 6.545 |
| 108 | 18 | 16 | 0.3586012 | 6.750 |
| 216 | 36 | 33 | 0.3299484 | 6.545 |
| 600 | 100 | 92 | 0.2067754 | 6.522 |
| 1200 | 200 | 184 | 0.1141594 | 6.522 |
| 4800 | 800 | 738 | 0.0081349 | 6.504 |
| 9600 | 1600 | 1477 | 0.0003531 | 6.500 |
Random craps shooters already have a 6.5 or higher SRR 43% of the time or more in less than 72 rolls of the dice. That is about 9 hands per shooter
3600 dice rolls at 200 rolls per hour would take 18 hours to complete. That would be a long day!
Quote: 7winner3600 dice rolls at 200 rolls per hour would take 18 hours to complete. That would be a long day!
That is why I added the condition about logistics. I don't plan to spent 18 hours judging. Maybe volunteers could help out, and/or we base it on less than 3600 rolls.
Also, Michael Bluejay expressed an interest in hosting such a challenge himself. I would defer to him if he is still interested. I don't want it to look like I'm stealing his idea.
These "dice control" BS'ers claim they can influence the dice over so many rolls, and at the same time they say they're "skilled shooters" so I'd like to see them do it. Let's see them throw dice 3600 times with just 20% accuracy of the dice hitting the same cones in the exact same way at the exact same speed at the exact same angle, and then we'll see if they can come within SOOPOO's range. I've got $5000 that says the shooter can't do that, and I'll bring a video recorder to record each roll while playing it back in super slo-mo to prove that this so-called "skilled shooter" does not attain the 20% parameters I just gave. You guys can tear this down to all the probability theories you want. I'll bet you that no one takes me up on it, no one takes SOOPOO up on his, and this thread turns into just another geekfest.
Also, I do not mind the others here 'picking it apart'. I appreciate the input. I did not know how accurate the DI guys purported to be, so my initial challenge was one that even they would never say they could beat. The Wiz's correction to 1/6.5, and his personal willingness to affix his name to it, I consider friendly amendments. And if Mr. Bluejay takes it over, I would be happy about that, too. I would guess that either of those 2 could advertise/promote it far better than I could, and thus give it a better chance of actually coming to fruition. All I would ask is to be allowed to witness the challenge if my work schedule would permit.
And JL, I appreciate your input, too.
We will roll the dice 100 times, you will be required to avoid a 7 all 100 times. If you fail, you pay me $1000. If you succeed, we will re-run the challenge a second time and you will be required to prove that it wasn't just dumb luck the first time. If you succeed a second time, we will have a third trial. We will continue until you fail.
Now THIS is a FAIR trial, you frauds have no excuses, you are all a bunch of money-grubbing liars and cheats, and if you don't accept my fair challenge I will continue to call you all the awful names I can think of.
A Die of Another Color
Some of these methods are trivial, like the blanket roll -- you literally let the dice roll out of your upturned hand and they just roll on-axis until they stop. Even I can do that. The question isn't whether dice control is possible. It is, and not surprisingly some of the best practitioners are stage magicians. The question is whether dice control can be done profitably on a casino dice table given the rather unique constraints placed upon the shooter, which includes tossing the dice through the air (not rolling them), landing amongst several piles of casino chips, and having them at least impact, if not bounce off of, the pyramid-rubber back wall.
Skeptics and non-believers have good reasons to be.
Dice Setting is great when it works, but consistency escapes us all. And I mean all.
So believe what you want …. as many of us have been down this road before.
If memory serves me correctly Stanford Wong went down that DICE SETTING challenge road. Perhaps this may not satisfy everyone’s curiosity about the Dice setting, but there is a past example of a Dice Setting challenge and its out-come. .
So tossing out a challenge may seem like a way to say, YES it works or NO, it doesn’t work. But does it.
I have had the good fortune to either see, and/or play with the majority of Dice Setters and it’s not all black and white.
Dice setting confidence takes practice, commitment, and dedication, even then … we all have our good days, bad, and ugly days.
And I agree …too much BS and animosity has creep into the deeds of others which seem like story telling. Which is unfortunate because it distracts from the real, and I mean real true picture of what Dice setting is all about …. gaining a slight edge (I think of it as a “percentage shooting.”)
I will be surprised if any Dice Setter will be willing accept any or all challenges to Dice setting.
I do not believe Dice setting to be a Hoax, but rather a difficult task. Although some swear it can’t be done and others swear by it. And then we have the fence riders, “SHOW ME. “
Skepticism is good.
Because some days LUCK out shines the skill.
Quote: TinhornGamblerI do not believe Dice setting to be a Hoax, but rather a difficult task. Although some swear it can’t be done and others swear by it. And then we have the fence riders, “SHOW ME. “
Skepticism is good.
Because some days LUCK out shines the skill.
You have convinced yourself wrongly that you have a "skill". At a Craps table in a casino you have to follow their rules. Dice hit table and back wall.
A chimp throwing the dice (hitting the table and the back wall....those are casino rules) would still show the same results that you can have setting the dice.
That is what the challenge should be all about.
You do not understand random fluctuation at all. Sad.
boybimbo said it best below from:
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/general/3195-controlled-dice-shooting-is-bs/9/
Quote: boybimbo
Most people look for patterns in life. That's how they learn. Without knowing the math, or the physics, one can make an observation like, 'when I hold the dice like this, and throw them exactly like this, it seems I get results like this'. Indeed, it is in our nature to make connections like that and it is natural through our learning to employ the empirical method to try to logically explain the results.
But it's a fallacy. It's the same false conclusion someone makes from observations such as "when I stand on 14 against a dealer 10, I tend to win more than lose". You can prove that one wrong with simple math, but try to tell that to someone who has a winning record playing that way due to positive variance.
So we go to a dice control class, spend our $2,000, come out of it, and have a few good rolls, and say "it was worth it". Someone else in the same class has a few bad rolls, and says, "What a waste of money". Or, we go to the craps table and see the regulars there and you observe that the old man in the corner seems to have a bad throw everytime, then he comes out and surprises you with a 10 point roll which you miss because you weren't betting on him.
DIs have their good days and bad days?
Should not be so. You only have to toss the dice a few feet, should be a skill like bowling or golf. IF you are good as you say you are you should have many many better times and days than bad.
My 30 years dealing dice has proven to me all you DIs have brain washed yourselves.
The ones that sell this idea and scam others in believing lead can be turned into gold are the worst of them all.
Enjoy your misguided beliefs.
Quote: MathExtremistUnfairly rolling the dice has been around a lot longer than Wong or Scoblete. If you think they were the first to come up with that idea, you've got to break out the history books. Scarne talks about it quite a bit. Here's a book by Martin Gardner on how to execute controlled shots - see p. 27 for the beginning of the section on controlling dice without a cup (and without using hold-outs).
A Die of Another Color
Some of these methods are trivial, like the blanket roll -- you literally let the dice roll out of your upturned hand and they just roll on-axis until they stop. Even I can do that. The question isn't whether dice control is possible. It is, and not surprisingly some of the best practitioners are stage magicians. The question is whether dice control can be done profitably on a casino dice table given the rather unique constraints placed upon the shooter, which includes tossing the dice through the air (not rolling them), landing amongst several piles of casino chips, and having them at least impact, if not bounce off of, the pyramid-rubber back wall.
We're only talking about a casino table here, and it can't be done. If it could then not only would magicians be out of work, Wong & Scoblete etc. wouldn't be selling the system. And I read on LVA about the Wong challenge and it turned out to be nothing but another pile pf unsupportable crap. LVA carried the discussion for weeks, and they had a schill stand in for the challenger, just so Anthony Curtis could keep on selling books about it. It was just another marketing tool.
Quote: 7winner
DIs have their good days and bad days?
Should not be so. You only have to toss the dice a few feet, should be a skill like bowling or golf. IF you are good as you say you are you should have many many better times and days than bad.
I taught Dealers school in Reno in the late 90s and had a lot of time to practice my dice setting skills with others.
Then a student got me hooked on the math of gambling...especially Craps.
Before that, I KNEW I rolled more fields than any one else and could hit 4s and 10s as points way better than any one else.
I would have bet the farm that I could prove it.
But after being shown how to track my rolls, do the math....
I was just like every one else.
I was random. Some days more RANDOM than others.
"Damn It" I remember saying.
"I roll MORE 4s and 10s than anyone!"
But I was just random as we all are.
It would be nice to "not be random" but
we are all just random.
Try telling Craps players that 51% of ALL 7s that roll will do within 4 rolls. They think you are crazy!
OR...my personal fav...
Half of ALL shooters 7 out within 6 rolls.
This has started loud arguments at Craps tables!
It is just the math.
Dice Controlling is just another way of "seeing" what randomness is all about.
Quote: JerryLogan
We're only talking about a casino table here, and it can't be done. If it could then not only would magicians be out of work, Wong & Scoblete etc. wouldn't be selling the system. And I read on LVA about the Wong challenge and it turned out to be nothing but another pile pf unsupportable crap. LVA carried the discussion for weeks, and they had a schill stand in for the challenger, just so Anthony Curtis could keep on selling books about it. It was just another marketing tool.
Jerry, you got it.
That group you list above above only do things to SELL!
SELL!
and MORE SELL!
Buy Buy Buy!
The Wizard has a FREE website and only 1 book, that actually contains material you can find on his site.
The book is nice to have since it has chapters and is easy to find most topics.
And I have yet to see the Wizard "push" any crap. He is right to the point. Admits when he has made a mistake. Holds to his guns when he knows he is right.
Setting a good example to the rest of us.
Quote: CrappedOutHere's my challenge for all you dice influencer frauds:
We will roll the dice 100 times, you will be required to avoid a 7 all 100 times. If you fail, you pay me $1000. If you succeed, we will re-run the challenge a second time and you will be required to prove that it wasn't just dumb luck the first time. If you succeed a second time, we will have a third trial. We will continue until you fail.
Now THIS is a FAIR trial, you frauds have no excuses, you are all a bunch of money-grubbing liars and cheats, and if you don't accept my fair challenge I will continue to call you all the awful names I can think of.
You forgot the part where you get to beat them with a stick before every roll.
Those people who always cite math to gamblers should never set foot in a casino, because the house always has the edge.
I don't gamble with the expectation that I will win. I gamble with the expectation I will be entertained.
Quote: CrappedOutTrying to influence the dice adds an hugely enjoyable element to the game for me. I don't sell the knowledge, and I don't make any statistical claims.
Those people who always cite math to gamblers should never set foot in a casino, because the house always has the edge.
I don't gamble with the expectation that I will win. I gamble with the expectation I will be entertained.
That is a good attitude to have.
But everyone that gambles "wants" to win.
So if you have convinced yourself that trying to influence the dice just adds to the enjoyment is just like saying you should NOT say or think the #7 when a point is established on any number because that now takes away from that enjoyment.
Now we start to walk on all sorts of fine lines.
It does not matter one way or the other to what actually happens.
But you are 100% right. Gambling should be enjoyable.
The most common misused phrase at a craps table is "Crapped Out"
Remember the phrase "Crapped Out" refers to a shooter that rolls a 2, 3 or 12 on the come-out roll ONLY. Pass Line bettors never like that outcome.
A shooter "7 outs" when a #7 is rolled while a point is established on any number and losses the dice to the next shooter.
Pass Line bettors never like that outcome either.
Quote: CrappedOutTrying to influence the dice adds an hugely enjoyable element to the game for me. I don't sell the knowledge, and I don't make any statistical claims.
That seems like a good attitude to have. When I was investigating claims of dice control, I figured out a set of 3 sets for: 1) passline comeout, 2)points of 4/10 and 3) the other points. The sets I used were just axis sets; it didn't matter which faces were on top, etc., so it was very easy to get them set without being obvious about it. I tried to grip them together and toss them softly to the base of the back wall. I don't believe it made the slightest difference to the outcomes, because they always bounced all over the place when they hit the pyramids. I bet passline plus odds in any case, so my betting did not change a bit. It was fun, though.
Quote: CrappedOutThose people who always cite math to gamblers should never set foot in a casino, because the house always has the edge.
Well, some people who "cite math" also understand that, despite the house edge, some individual players can and will win. You buy variance from the casino.
Quote: CrappedOutI don't gamble with the expectation that I will win. I gamble with the expectation I will be entertained.
I gamble with the hope that I will win, the knowledge of what my chances of that are and the expectation that I will enjoy it. If I stop enjoying it, I am gone.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA
Quote: CrappedOutHere's my challenge for all you dice influencer frauds:
We will roll the dice 100 times, you will be required to avoid a 7 all 100 times. If you fail, you pay me $1000. If you succeed, we will re-run the challenge a second time and you will be required to prove that it wasn't just dumb luck the first time. If you succeed a second time, we will have a third trial. We will continue until you fail.
Now THIS is a FAIR trial, you frauds have no excuses, you are all a bunch of money-grubbing liars and cheats, and if you don't accept my fair challenge I will continue to call you all the awful names I can think of.
This is very highly unlikely to accomplish, even I can not do this.
You're inviting anyone to roll 100 numbers before 7 out.
Firebet pays 1000:1
put $5.00 on it and you can make the firebet much easier (especially 100 rolls) pays 5k.
Quote: CrapsGeniousThis is very highly unlikely to accomplish, even I can not do this.
You're inviting anyone to roll 100 numbers before 7 out.
Firebet pays 1000:1
put $5.00 on it and you can make the firebet much easier (especially 100 rolls) pays 5k.
There are better ways to show that you don't understand sarcasm than by reviving a 3-and-a-half-year-old thread.
You beat me to itQuote: AxiomOfChoiceThere are better ways to show that you don't understand sarcasm than by reviving a 3-and-a-half-year-old thread.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceThere are better ways to show that you don't understand sarcasm than by reviving a 3-and-a-half-year-old thread.
My apologies to the members here, I did not look at the date.
I'm supposed to meetup with a member from here this morning and I was browsing through his thread posts to see if he plays craps.
Not showing that he does, but I did notice some crazy challenges that opened my eyes and attracted my attention.
I'm thinking he wants to meetup with me this morning to make side bets.
I don't mind meeting up with any members from the forum, but please don't expect the intention to wager with me.
I play craps and I play very well, If you want to make money from me, I suggest placing bets on the craps table and nothing private.
I just hope they are not dumb enough to tip you if they win. I have a feeling you will not do as good as you claim. You will just say it was bad luck.Quote: CrapsGeniousMy apologies to the members here, I did not look at the date.
I'm supposed to meetup with a member from here this morning and I was browsing through his thread posts to see if he plays craps.
Not showing that he does, but I did notice some crazy challenges that opened my eyes and attracted my attention.
I'm thinking he wants to meetup with me this morning to make side bets.
I don't mind meeting up with any members from the forum, but please don't expect the intention to wager with me.
I play craps and I play very well, If you want to make money from me, I suggest placing bets on the craps table and nothing private.
Quote: AxelWolfI just hope they are not dumb enough to tip you if they win. I have a feeling you will not do as good as you claim. You will just say it was bad luck.
I only take what I can afford or expect to lose in knowing i'm going up against a -EV game, If I win, then I win. (I most likely will because of my confidence)
I just don't want any members expecting any kind of "guarantee" :)
If you have no plans to meet up with Soopoo, explain.
Quote: odiousgambitIf you're meeting up with Soopoo, the subject line is fine. Just start a new thread though.
If you have no plans to meet up with Soopoo, explain.
Quote:
I feel i'm missing something here?
Do you want to meet up to meet me?
Is it for some challenge at the craps table?
What is the reason?
I read your threads and you don't sound like a craps player to me, not to be rude but I don't know who I will be looking for either?
If you're wanting to come to play craps and wager, that is your choice. but please don't expect me to accept any private challenges.
I don't see a valid reason to meet up with soopoo other than a challenge he had made me that I refused.
Quote: CrapsGeniousI don't see a valid reason to meet up with soopoo other than a challenge he had made me that I refused.
Then Soopoo IMO accomplished what he intended. Congratulations, Soopoo!
If there is anything in gambling, hell, in life that holds up it's gotta be "money talks and bullshit walks"
Afford to lose? with the numbers you were claiming before it would be hard to lose. What you just said is a far Cry from how you started out your first posts. I seem to remember you saying you always win.Quote: CrapsGeniousI only take what I can afford or expect to lose in knowing i'm going up against a -EV game, If I win, then I win. (I most likely will because of my confidence)
I just don't want any members expecting any kind of "guarantee" :)
If you want to make guaranteed money bet on DI at the table bla, bla, bla, bla
He may want to go, just so he can report on how good you are compared to your claims.
I cant believe you are to scared to make side bets on yourself. Perhaps you can bet less then you normally do and have him book the rest of your action. If you play and win x amount he will double that if you lose x amount you owe him what you would have lost normally. So it wouldn't cost you anymore then normal.
Quote: CrapsGeniousI don't see a valid reason to meet up with soopoo other than a challenge he had made me that I refused.
I told you that no private challenge would be necessary. I am always happy to meet with forum members to see how they gamble, what interests them, especially those that live sort of nearby! I am not a 'craps player' per se, but I do periodically play craps, and would with you. If you are interested in meeting with a forum member who would basically watch your betting style, and report it to the group, I am still available this morning. Of course if you win it proves nothing, and likewise, if you lose, it proves nothing. I just asked how I would know who you are, as we don't have pictures here. I have a friend who might be able to join me, but she can't make it until Wednesday afternoon. I would consider driving up alone today, but most likely only if I knew we would meet up. And to answer Axel-- I would never tip someone money for a joint winning session of craps, but I would always treat a forum member to a lunch or a drink, regardless of the outcome of the gambling session. My guess is CG gets enough comps to treat me, though!
Quote: SOOPOOno private challenge would be necessary
Yep, but he is probably 'hating on you' for exposing the fact he is not willing to "put up or shut up"
I'm wondering,
a] if I'm a gambler and
b] somebody challenges me to prove I can do something I know I can do and
c] it's easy to do ...
d]why wouldnt I accept the challenge, or, as should be the case with a bonafide gambler, if I didn't like the terms, why wouldnt I at least make a counter-offer?
Quote: odiousgambitYep, but he is probably 'hating on you' for exposing the fact he is not willing to "put up or shut up"
I'm wondering,
a] if I'm a gambler and
b] somebody challenges me to prove I can do something I know I can do and
c] it's easy to do ...
d]why wouldnt I accept the challenge, or, as should be the case with a bonafide gambler, if I didn't like the terms, why wouldnt I at least make a counter-offer?
If the 'somebody' is a friend, and you know you can win, you might not want to take advantage. I recently had such an occurrence with Axel, and even though the amount was trivial ($10), I couldn't do it. He was willing, even when I told him that unless there was a massive conspiracy of silly proportions, I could not lose. I have also had many basketball challenges that I 'know' I wouldn't lose, but of course could never be 100% sure. Those bets I have accepted but just for 'a milkshake' or 'a beer', just so my opponent knew we were playing for 'something'.
It is interesting how, as an example, Mike and I would bet $100's against each other, with not even a hint of a thought of hard feelings between the two of us. My experience with my non WoV friends is that if any 'real' money would be involved, 'misinterpretation' of terms, amounts, results, etc... might cause hard feelings. So I won't bet against my friends in general...
