The final word on proving Dice Influencing

[jbjb]

Nobody needs to watch you. They only need to know what bets you make.

And "The Captain and crew" are fictitious!

[Alan Mendelson]

By report, one countermeasure adopted by casinos to the threat of dice setters winning millions from them was to make surfaces bouncier and / or otherwise less hospitable for DI.

Heavy once spoke of a "frankenstein table," with different materials under the felt, not just one unifrom material.

An at-home rig is fine for practicing grip and throw, but yeah, the actual casino conditions cannot be duplicated without tremendous expense to the at home player, and even if he gets a craps table of his own, it is pretty worthless because of the variation in casino tables and playing conditions.

I've never seen such a Frankenstein table but as regnis pointed out there are casinos with tables with good table conditions and casinos with bad tables.

If you are going to try DI I would avoid Caesars Palace now. The new layouts are too fast and too bouncy. And it's to the point dice are coming right off the tables. Even with my soft throw I have had dice bounce into the rail.

OneHitWonder: I'd rather read what regnis posts than your regurgitated nonsense. Please don't push regnis away. Why don't you just leave if the info is just nonsense?

[AxelWolf]

Nobody needs to watch you. They only need to know what bets you make.

And "The Captain and crew" are fictitious!

Alan is probably the only one that's figured out how to influence the dice against himself.

[OneHitWonder]

Nobody needs to watch you. They only need to know what bets you make.

And "The Captain and crew" are fictitious!

Alan is probably the only one that's figured out how to influence the dice against himself.

Masochism is the uncontrollable (DI) urge to get kicked in the balls for attention. His ex-wives finally figured it out, too, and gave him what he wanted.

[Alan Mendelson]

Nobody needs to watch you. They only need to know what bets you make.

And "The Captain and crew" are fictitious!

I bet the box numbers. 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10.
I bet the pass. Odds will range from 1x to full 3, 4, 5x odds depending how I'm doing.

I do not bet hardways or field.

I have a horn high ace deuce on the come out to insure my passline bet.

Now jbjb, how can you determine my edge without watching me throw?

[Alan Mendelson]

Nobody needs to watch you. They only need to know what bets you make.

And "The Captain and crew" are fictitious!

Alan is probably the only one that's figured out how to influence the dice against himself.

Masochism is the uncontrollable (DI) urge to get kicked in the balls for attention. His ex-wives finally figured it out, too, and gave him what he wanted.

Rob Singer is back. The SOB was running two IDs simultaneously.

Remember you owe me dinner for losing the stock market bet.

[RS__]

Nobody needs to watch you. They only need to know what bets you make.

And "The Captain and crew" are fictitious!

I bet the box numbers. 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10.
I bet the pass. Odds will range from 1x to full 3, 4, 5x odds depending how I'm doing.

I do not bet hardways or field.

I have a horn high ace deuce on the come out to insure my passline bet.

Now jbjb, how can you determine my edge without watching me throw?

If you try to influence the dice, but can't, then your "edge", or lack thereof, is the same as the house edge. For reference: https://wizardofodds.com/games/craps/appendix/2/

[Alan Mendelson]

But I tend to throw outside numbers using my cross sixes set. Unfortunately 2, 3, 11 and 12 are not points and they are hard to repeat. This is why my rolls don't last long. However, where I make money at craps is hitting the Bonus bets, and there hitting the outside numbers just once is essential.

So I am going to ask again: who wants to watch me play? Perhaps one of you math guys might determine that my edge would improve if I changed my betting? I'm open to advice.

[RS__]

But I tend to throw outside numbers using my cross sixes set. Unfortunately 2, 3, 11 and 12 are not points and they are hard to repeat. This is why my rolls don't last long. However, where I make money at craps is hitting the Bonus bets, and there hitting the outside numbers just once is essential.

So I am going to ask again: who wants to watch me play? Perhaps one of you math guys might determine that my edge would improve if I changed my betting? I'm open to advice.

Earlier you said you try to influence the dice (but can't). Now you're saying you tend to throw outside numbers, implying you do influence the dice.

Make up your mind.

[MisterV]

Earlier you said you try to influence the dice (but can't). Now you're saying you tend to throw outside numbers, implying you do influence the dice. Make up your mind.

"What a waste it is to lose one's mind, or not to have a mind is being very wasteful, how true that is. "

--- Dan Quayle

[Alan Mendelson]

Unfortunately you can't win at craps just hitting outside numbers one time.

You don't play, do you RS__? And you even claimed to be a craps dealer once?

Yes you claimed to be craps dealer before you told us you were a Seven Stars player.

I think it's time I disappear again.

Adios.

[OneHitWonder]

Perhaps one of you math guys might determine that my edge would improve if I changed my betting? I'm open to advice.

Betting strategy, and hence selection; or betting amount? The standard line to negative-expectation casino games is that you can't measurably hurt any more than help yourself beyond a certain point with any strategy. But, is that really the case? As it is universally easier and faster to wreck something than to build it up.

The theorists focus exclusively on direct improvements to play rather than on indirect reversals of the "worse than losing" betting selections and amounts. If we can consistently engineer or "massage" wins and losses so that our losses occur before wins, instead of always going for the win all along, then a very mild negatively increasing progression, simplistically speaking, can work well for two mathematical reasons. Firstly, we can, to a degree, have the losses "out of the way" for each and every cycle or series of bets, and secondly, we can "sacrifice" the smaller bets for the larger ones.

The trick, of course, is to maneuver more of the losses to the front of the queue. The other thing too, don't play until you know that you can beat 'em, and well without years of specialized practice, or other investment. No harm in sitting on your ass, and thinking about crazy stuff, as long as it's crazy enough.

[OneHitWonder]

"What a waste it is to lose one's mind, or not to have a mind is being very wasteful, how true that is. "

--- Dan Quayle

From a guy who couldn't spell worth potatoes, ha. Insanity has no other definition than pure imagination.

[MisterV]

From a guy who couldn't spell worth potatoes, ha.

Ooooh, a spelling critic.

Curious, I checked out this clown's posts.

His SECOND post on this forum has a classic spelling error.

see:

====================

05-07-2015, 09:54 AM
Thread: Question for Math/Gambling/Craps Experts
by OneHitWonder

"As far as I understand your apparently unique... "

====================

It's "you're" not "your."

Trolls who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

ha

[RS__]

I'm not seeing any posts by OHW before 5-19-2015.

Unfortunately you can't win at craps just hitting outside numbers one time.

You don't play, do you RS__? And you even claimed to be a craps dealer once?

Yes you claimed to be craps dealer before you told us you were a Seven Stars player.

What're you rambling on about now?

I think it's time I disappear again.

Adios.

Good.

Good riddance.

[mickeycrimm]

So I am going to ask again: who wants to watch me play? Perhaps one of you math guys might determine that my edge would improve if I changed my betting? I'm open to advice.

The objective of DI's is to change the frequencies from what the math says they are, like changing the frequency of rolling a seven to 1 in 7 or longer. If that frequency can be changed from 1 in 6 to something longer then the frequencies of the other numbers will be shortened, like the frequency of rolling a four would change from 1 in 12 to 1 in 11 or a fraction between 11 and 12.

Alan, that's the problem with figuring one's expectation in these spots. No purveyor of dice influencing that I know of has ever covered this subject. The only way to figure those odds is with an empirical study. Replicate casino conditions and have a "good dice influencer" make a few thousand throws with independent reputable observers recording the results. This would tell what the odds are on his throws and a strategy could be built around that.

This type of experiment could have been done a long time ago but for some reason the purveyors of dice influencing have avoided it.

[Alan Mendelson]

The gurus have NOT avoided it Mickey. In the early days we had get-togethers at places like Ellis Island and we played on real tables and we kept our counts. Yes the SRRs were better than 1 in 7 but frankly a random shooter often can step up to the table and roll eight, nine or ten times before a seven out. So the SRR was no proof.

What could be proof is the actual delivery: the soft toss, the dice in parallel on axis, hitting the center of the back wall gently. And as I watched I realized not even the gurus could do that.

This is why I say I've only seen three true dice influencers.

But I also say it doesn't hurt to try.

Frankly I don't know why Axel argues with me? I'm saying what he should agree with. Is it just that he objects to even one true DI being alive? Do three true DIs make his life unbearable?

I've never seen regnis roll. Perhaps he's the fourth and Scoblete is the fifth?

With millions of people in the world who have thrown dice and with thousands who practice is it not reasonable to think someone can have the skill?

We're not all able to be professional golfers or pro bowlers or NFL quarterbacks but some people are.

For the AP community to say no one is a DI is ridiculous.

[mickeycrimm]

The gurus have NOT avoided it Mickey. In the early days we had get-togethers at places like Ellis Island and we played on real tables and we kept our counts. Yes the SRRs were better than 1 in 7 but frankly a random shooter often can step up to the table and roll eight, nine or ten times before a seven out. So the SRR was no proof.

What could be proof is the actual delivery: the soft toss, the dice in parallel on axis, hitting the center of the back wall gently. And as I watched I realized not even the gurus could do that.

This is why I say I've only seen three true dice influencers.

But I also say it doesn't hurt to try.

Frankly I don't know why Axel argues with me? I'm saying what he should agree with. Is it just that he objects to even one true DI being alive? Do three true DIs make his life unbearable?

I've never seen regnis roll. Perhaps he's the fourth and Scoblete is the fifth?

With millions of people in the world who have thrown dice and with thousands who practice is it not reasonable to think someone can have the skill?

We're not all able to be professional golfers or pro bowlers or NFL quarterbacks but some people are.

For the AP community to say no one is a DI is ridiculous.

Recording the results in a casino is a slow cumbersome method. Ahigh owned his own craps table. Scoblete and others didn't give classes at the casino craps table. They either owned or leased craps tables to give classes. Doing it outside the casino is the fastest way to get the stats. You do it on at least a few thousand throws. You want to know what your frequencies are before you go to the casino. You can devise a strategy around the stats. Those guys never did such an emprical study with independent verifiers--and it could have easily been done. Excuses for not having done it are worthless.

[regnis]

The gurus have NOT avoided it Mickey. In the early days we had get-togethers at places like Ellis Island and we played on real tables and we kept our counts. Yes the SRRs were better than 1 in 7 but frankly a random shooter often can step up to the table and roll eight, nine or ten times before a seven out. So the SRR was no proof.

What could be proof is the actual delivery: the soft toss, the dice in parallel on axis, hitting the center of the back wall gently. And as I watched I realized not even the gurus could do that.

This is why I say I've only seen three true dice influencers.

But I also say it doesn't hurt to try.

Frankly I don't know why Axel argues with me? I'm saying what he should agree with. Is it just that he objects to even one true DI being alive? Do three true DIs make his life unbearable?

I've never seen regnis roll. Perhaps he's the fourth and Scoblete is the fifth?

With millions of people in the world who have thrown dice and with thousands who practice is it not reasonable to think someone can have the skill?

We're not all able to be professional golfers or pro bowlers or NFL quarterbacks but some people are.

For the AP community to say no one is a DI is ridiculous.

Recording the results in a casino is a slow cumbersome method. Ahigh owned his own craps table. Scoblete and others didn't give classes at the casino craps table. They either owned or leased craps tables to give classes. Doing it outside the casino is the fastest way to get the stats. You do it on at least a few thousand throws. You want to know what your frequencies are before you go to the casino. You can devise a strategy around the stats. Those guys never did such an emprical study with independent verifiers--and it could have easily been done. Excuses for not having done it are worthless.

Mick-you are overlooking one important factor. Every table in every casino is different. What you do on your practice table at home does not carry over to the casino. At the casino, you then have to practice your throw and make adjustments. That is also why you can't just take your show on the road to all the various casinos. You first have to practice on each table and make the necessary adjustments.

[Alan Mendelson]

You mickey, obviously don't play craps. If you played you'd know how exhausting it is to properly throw the dice even 40 times.

Emphasis is on the word properly.

Ahigh had zero skill. I saw his videos. A bullshit artist. His dice bounced uncontrollably.