The Wizard will bank this bet: 1/6 vs 1/11

[kewl]

Show me a video.

Do you agree, that if I show you a video of someone rolling dice 10 000 times and counting the number of times when at least one die is 2 and when both dice are 2 the ratio is very, very, likely to be close to 1/11?

[OnceDear]

So instead of these weirdly cliquish narcissistic responses, why not just sign your names and pretend there's an actual person facing you?

Sure thing Mr Redeitz.

Actually, I could agree with you that we 'maths guys' are becoming more and more snide, deriding Alan almost as much as we are deriding his stubborn and absurd argument.
It wasn't always so. I came to this forum to try to be as patient as possible in guiding him to the enlightenment of the correct answer to what could be considered a subtly tricky question. Not a trickster with a trick question.
But he's worn down any attempts at patience. I think he was first to describe someone as 'nucking futs'.
So, his forum, his rules and his precedents shall prevail.

[Rob.Singer]

Great one! And that rant above coming from the insult king! But agreed, there shouldn't be any.

I've been kicked out of more casinos than you all have ever been in, COMBINED! Last thing I'd do is reveal my identity anywhere!

One last thing. You COULDN'T PAY ME to be "trained" by Singer!! That's asinine!!

Now there's another good one. "I've been kicked out of more casinos......blah blah blah" as a reason to hide the identity. jbjb, care to present written proof on that statement? You know, like when I was banned IN WRITING for winning at vp at Bellagio, then published the letter in my Gaming Today column? With my real name in it. Did the world cave in? Nope. And you fear revealing your true name HERE!? As I said, these WoVers for the most part do not gamble with any significance if they do at all, and instead make believe they're the world's most feared "AP's" who claim to win. Theory = safety. Don't want to end up like Face or Teddy, right?

[redietz]

Personally, I have great respect for anyone who's been kicked out of more casinos than I've visited. He must be doing something right. Once you've been booted from the 85th place, you not only have to be a really good gambler. You've gotta be a master of disguise.

[jbjb]

I subscribe to the James Grosjean method to winning in a casino. Yes disguises are a part of this. For sure, it's not a badge of honor being in Griffin and OSN.

[Alan Mendelson]

Do you agree, that if I show you a video of someone rolling dice 10 000 times and counting the number of times when at least one die is 2 and when both dice are 2 the ratio is very, very, likely to be close to 1/11?

I don't know, nor do I care. I've been playing craps for more than 20+ years and I've seen all kinds of strange things happened with dice and dice combinations. I've seen players bet the 12 for $100 for 40 rolls in a row and never hit it. But after their $4000 was gone the next shooter rolled 12 three times in a row. And I saw a player lose $100,000 at the table making only one bet: hopping the 7 on the come-out with $100 on each of the 7s -- and the dice went around the table all night long and no one had a natural on the come out roll.

What you show me when you roll two dice only shows me what happens when you roll two dice and it doesn't answer the question.

[OnceDear]

I've seen players bet the 12 for $100 for 40 rolls in a row and never hit it. But after their $40,000 was gone ...

I'm not familiar with craps, but.....

[Alan Mendelson]

I've been kicked out of more casinos than you all have ever been in, COMBINED!

Here's a challenge I will respond to. I've been booted from NYNY, MGM and Bellagio for allegedly being a dice mechanic. Yes, I was winning and they didn't like that I set my dice and had "controlled throws" -- but I just said I was lucky. So, I have 3. How many for you?

[Alan Mendelson]

I'm not familiar with craps, but.....

If you are referring to the $40,000 -- yes I had too many zeros. Fixed it.

[OnceDear]

If you are referring to the $40,000 -- yes I had too many zeros. Fixed it.

Devil's in the detail.

[Alan Mendelson]

What is interesting here is that very few are acknowledging the confusion in the question and they treat the question only in the way that matches the answer of 1/11.

Personally I don't see the need to discuss this anymore. The way I read the question the answer is 1/6. I also know that when I use real, physical dice to present the question which means I cannot rotate any dice showing a 2 to show a different number, the answer is still 1/6.

I cannot accept the Wizard's video or miplet's video as a true representation of the original question -- because each of them changes the value of a die showing a 2. I still maintain that if at least one die is showing a 2 that die's value cannot be changed which eliminates 5 of the 11 possible dice combinations.

I have listened to all of the reasoning why rotating the die showing a 2 is valid -- including the reason that we don't know which of the two dice under the cup has the 2 on it. And that reason in particular makes no sense to me when there are only two dice in the problem.

I also asked you to show a video representing the problem without a cup and leaving the die with a 2 frozen showing that 2 and still maintain how the answer is 1/11 -- but no one has done it.

Ironically, even the 1/11 camp says if we saw that one die was a 2 and rolled just one die (the "other die") then the answer would be 1/6. Well, that's what I interpreted the original question to ask.

So, I really have nothing else to say. I am not closing the thread because I don't believe in closing threads. For those of you who still want to expound on your theories and your beliefs please knock yourselves out. But I can't imagine what is left to be said?

[kewl]

I don't know, nor do I care. I've been playing craps for more than 20+ years and I've seen all kinds of strange things happened with dice and dice combinations. I've seen players bet the 12 for $100 for 40 rolls in a row and never hit it. But after their $4000 was gone the next shooter rolled 12 three times in a row. And I saw a player lose $100,000 at the table making only one bet: hopping the 7 on the come-out with $100 on each of the 7s -- and the dice went around the table all night long and no one had a natural on the come out roll.

What you show me when you roll two dice only shows me what happens when you roll two dice and it doesn't answer the question.

I see...

Well, I thought that rolling two dice is exactly what answers the question, but you seem to be adamant in your decision to try and answer the question (or is it A question) by setting one die and rolling only the other. The way I read the OQ it involves rolling two dice and then, having some information on the outcome, try and determine a probability. But that's just me.

[Alan Mendelson]

I see...

Well, I thought that rolling two dice is exactly what answers the question, but you seem to be adamant in your decision to try and answer the question (or is it A question) by setting one die and rolling only the other. The way I read the OQ it involves rolling two dice and then, having some information on the outcome, try and determine a probability. But that's just me.

I think this statement of yours really crystalizes the difference of opinion. Yes, rolling two dice does answer the question. And that's what the question asks you to do. And when you roll two dice and at least one shows a 2 the chance that the other die shows a 2 as well is 1/6. Now in order for you to come up with your 1/11 answer -- and this was illustrated by the videos of both the Wizard and miplet -- you must switch the die that shows a 2. Don't believe me? Look at the videos they did. If either one of those videos kept the die showing a 2 on the 2 the only solution you could come up with would be 1/6.

Don't believe me? Take two dice and roll them. When at least one die comes to rest showing a 2 is there a 1/6 chance that the other die shows a 2 or is there a 1/11 chance that the other die shows a 2?

Based on the original question, when you are told that one die is a 2, why would you go through the exercise of considering either dice as being the 2 which is what Wizard and miplet did in their videos? Why wouldn't you accept that one die is a 2 and just consider the 6 possibilities on the second die? That is the wording of the original question as I interpret it.

I can't possibly interpret the original question to consider your methodology of considering all of the 11 combinations of dice showing a 2 when I am given the information that one die is a 2. And when you say "at least" one die is a 2 that means thee is a two on one of those dice. And if there is a 2 on one of those dice it stays a 2 -- you don't get to flip it around.

And by the way -- when I did my video I kept the die showing a 2 as a 2. I didn't flip that die around. I flipped around the second die to show it had 6 options for also showing a 2.

And please tell your buddies over on the WOV forum that I noticed my error about the $40,000 before I saw the post pointing out the error. I am in my office working and had not yet read through the thread to see the responses. If they want to make a big deal out of the typo they can. It's typical of what they do.

[redietz]

I just wanted to thank all of the WoV folks for their practical contributions to a Las Vegas forum. My next excursion to Las Vegas will undoubtedly be much better thanks to them.

I learned a lot from this thread. WoV has a gentlemen who has been tossed by somewhere between 100 and 200 casinos, which has to be a record. I'm not sure if it's a record for persistence or having really bad disguises or what, but it's undoubtedly a record. I learned that writing in mixed tenses can be really helpful in creating verbal illusions. I had never really considered that, but then a friend in law enforcement said tense changing in an interview is a dead giveaway and an obvious red flag for obfuscation, and I was somewhat embarrassed I hadn't immediately realized that. I learned that being on the math department grad basketball team at Penn State was poor preparation for touting math skills; I should have joined WoV.

I hate to ask for one more insight, but I'm hoping one of the honored guests from WoV can explain what "stg" stands for. I will forever be in your debt.

Thanks.

[Rob.Singer]

Hopefully this will die down with the slow death that it deserves. But clearly, Alan did a number on these geniuses because not only are they now arguing with each other--the discussion dragged in MathExtremist, who loathes getting involved in circle jerks.

Meanwhile, they're still making believe Alan's still arguing in real time, probably so they can keep insulting him. I even saw them take another shot at me by claiming I live in an RV park, etc.! It is just too funny, what you've done to them. And have you EVER seen so many Brits turn away their delicious gourmet nightly dinners in favor of spending that precious time one-upping each other in their posts?

[arcimede$]

I think this statement of yours really crystalizes the difference of opinion. Yes, rolling two dice does answer the question. And that's what the question asks you to do. And when you roll two dice and at least one shows a 2 the chance that the other die shows a 2 as well is 1/6. Now in order for you to come up with your 1/11 answer -- and this was illustrated by the videos of both the Wizard and miplet -- you must switch the die that shows a 2. Don't believe me? Look at the videos they did. If either one of those videos kept the die showing a 2 on the 2 the only solution you could come up with would be 1/6.

You were told about this possible difference in interpretation long ago ... many times. No one is switching dice. We are talking about multiple independent throws. No different than multiple VP hands. You went off in la la land. That is your problem.

Based on the original question, when you are told that one die is a 2, why would you go through the exercise of considering either dice as being the 2 which is what Wizard and miplet did in their videos? Why wouldn't you accept that one die is a 2 and just consider the 6 possibilities on the second die? That is the wording of the original question as I interpret it.

You've been told many times your interpretation is wrong by numerous folks.

I can't possibly interpret the original question to consider your methodology of considering all of the 11 combinations of dice showing a 2 when I am given the information that one die is a 2. And when you say "at least" one die is a 2 that means thee is a two on one of those dice. And if there is a 2 on one of those dice it stays a 2 -- you don't get to flip it around.

Silly nonsense. All that was stated is one die was a 2 on the independent throws in question. No one said that same die has to be a 2 on future throws. That is your own silly BS.

[Alan Mendelson]

Arc well before you ever saw this thread on THIS forum I was the one who brought up on the WOV forum about how the question was worded and the difference in interpretation. You came late to the party.

And yes, dice are being switched and dice values are being changed and I saw two videos showing it being done to justify the answer 1/11.

[arcimede$]

Arc well before you ever saw this thread on THIS forum I was the one who brought up on the WOV forum about how the question was worded and the difference in interpretation. You came late to the party.

And yes, dice are being switched and dice values are being changed and I saw two videos showing it being done to justify the answer 1/11.

The dice values change because they are from different throws. Duh. You've been told this fact over and over again.

There's no coming late to this party. It's been going on for weeks.

[Alan Mendelson]

Arc stop. The Wizard and Miplet both in their videos are rotating the dice showing the 2 to justify their 1/11 answer. That is to say: on the same simulated roll, they have to rotate the die with the 2 to simulate how there can be eleven different combinations -- and that is not showing different rolls. They are doing that on the same roll. Look at the Wizard's video again. Look at miplet's video again.

One roll. One die shows a two. Yet both of them rotate that die with the two to justify their claim that the odds of 2-2 are 1/11.

And for the record, this "party" was going on the WOV forum long before it ever came here.

[redietz]

If Pharoah's version of the question is indeed the original question, it is not at all clear that there are multiple throws. If this were a well-written experimental protocol, the question would actually state that there are multiple throws and how many.