Burden of Proof

Discussion in 'Dice Influencing' started by kaysirtap, Jan 16, 2012.

  1. kaysirtap, Jan 16, 2012

    kaysirtap

    kaysirtap Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2011
    Messages:
    483
    Likes Received:
    19
    Instead of hijacking a thread like I normally do, I'll just steal a quote from one:

    [quote author="Southern-Comfort" date="1326714841"]But I do like to know what people are looking for as proof short of the second coming of Jesus.. or whomever/whatever you believe in.[/quote]It seems to me that when it comes to dice control, there are those who believe it can be done, those who don't believe, and those who don't know what to believe. Arguments about whether or not it's possible usually comes down to one side saying "prove it", and the other side saying "here is the proof", and then the previous side saying "no, that's not proof" or "that's not good enough" or something like that.

    Whichever side you believe in, I would like to know what kind of proof would be required to make you change your mind about dice control. If you believe that it can't be done, what could prove to you that it's possible? On the other hand, if you believe that people are really influencing the dice (or that it's at least possible), what could prove to you that this is not the case? Some of you have already stated that you cannot be convinced otherwise... but there has to be something that can change your mind... even if it's far fetched, like the "second coming of Jesus" as SC put it.

    I gave my opinion in a different thread, but I will re-post it here:
    [quote author="kaysirtap" date="1326714053"]For me, I would need slow motion video of what are supposedly controlled throws that show that at least one die is rotating in a consistent manner from throw to throw... from the point where the dice make initial contact with the table to the point where they are at rest. I would assume that it would be easier for a machine to make a precise dice throw, as opposed to humans. If a human were unable or unwilling to accomplish this feat, I would accept that it's at least possible if a machine could do it.

    My main issue with dice control is that I find it difficult to believe that the rotation along all three axes (x/y/z or roll/pitch/yaw) can be kept under "control" once the dice hit the back wall. I will even concede that it's possible that a shooter can eliminate roll and yaw after the dice strike the table, but I don't believe that the pyramids can be repeatedly struck so precisely as to predict how they will behave after they bounce off the wall. If, on "controlled throws", at least one die can be shown to repeatedly rotate along its axes (even if it's rotating along all three) in the same way before it comes to a rest, that will convince me.[/quote]
     
    #1
  2. Southern-Comfort, Jan 16, 2012

    Southern-Comfort

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Messages:
    850
    Likes Received:
    27
    Ok, so I'll play along this one time. I have no video, nor do I feel the need to make one to proove that which, frankly, I do not want publicly proven.
    I will say this, craps manipulation has been around since at least the great depression of the 30s. This I do know, and I was was introduced to it by one who basically survived and kept the family farm intact by it in those days. True, it was a bit different then, you were dealing with organized crime instead of crime organized. :)
    Film, no.. I have none. Do I expect you to accept me at my word, no. But, believe me... as much as some refuse to even accept the possibilty because its just too hard to open their mind to the possibility... I know it to be true, not from blind faith, but from seeing it... consistant over time.
    There are those who came before... there are those, unseen, among us now. Can people really make a living playing craps? Yes, but god it takes all the fun out of it.
     
    #2
  3. kaysirtap, Jan 16, 2012

    kaysirtap

    kaysirtap Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2011
    Messages:
    483
    Likes Received:
    19
    I understand that you believe that it's possible. What I wanted to know was what would be required to make you (and anyone else who believes) change your mind. The same question is asked to those who don't believe dice control is possible.
     
    #3
  4. Southern-Comfort, Jan 16, 2012

    Southern-Comfort

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Messages:
    850
    Likes Received:
    27
    I don't know. If I lost both hands in a bizzare accident, then I know there is no way I could possibly do it, but nevertheless I would still know that people can. I mean how do you change the facts? Do you believe, disbelieve, or in the middle. If in the middle, which side of the middle?
    What would it take to change your mind?
     
    #4
  5. kaysirtap, Jan 16, 2012

    kaysirtap

    kaysirtap Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2011
    Messages:
    483
    Likes Received:
    19
    For you, you believe that it is a fact that people can influence the dice... fine. But why is that? Because they win? Because of their SRR? Because you've seen video of it? My question asks, what would it take to prove to you that these things did not actually happen because of dice control?
     
    #5
  6. Southern-Comfort, Jan 16, 2012

    Southern-Comfort

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Messages:
    850
    Likes Received:
    27
    Are the facts that some people who call themselves dice controllers win often?

    EDIT: That's not the right question.... hold on a sec...[/quote]
    I'm off to bed so I'll answer this as is for now, and see about your revision in the morning over coffee.
    The answer is no. I look at it more like how they taught kids to figure averages in school. First you take away the best and worst to eliminate the rare stuff thats way out of line, the divide whats left by the number of examples.
    Well, DI tends to eliminate the best (DIs are not even close to holding any longest roll record whatsoever) and the worst (early sevenouts). With the worst eliminated, and the house advantage being what it has to be to not run off players, you get a little bit going your way.
    Just the way I look at it, don't ask me for video, you won't get it. :)
    Goodnight.
     
    #6
  7. kaysirtap, Jan 16, 2012

    kaysirtap

    kaysirtap Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2011
    Messages:
    483
    Likes Received:
    19
    I won't ask for video, and I secretly hope that nobody else asks for proof in this thread. I created this thread with the intent to find out what kind of proof would be necessary to convince someone to change their mind. I did not intend for it to be a "request" to see proof one way or the other.

    For those of you who are skipping the first few posts, here is my original question:

    Whichever side you believe in, I would like to know what kind of proof would be required to make you change your mind about dice control. If you believe that it can't be done, what could prove to you that it's possible? On the other hand, if you believe that people are really influencing the dice (or that it's at least possible), what could prove to you that this is not the case? Some of you have already stated that you cannot be convinced otherwise... but there has to be something that can change your mind... even if it's far fetched, like the "second coming of Jesus" as SC put it.
     
    #7
  8. tercol58, Jan 16, 2012

    tercol58

    tercol58 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2010
    Messages:
    402
    Likes Received:
    55
    Gender:
    Male
    Myth Busters you put it on Myth Busters and you can change any ones mind. In my short time at the tables I have seen folks loft the dice into the air spinning together as though they were stuck with glue and set down litely on the other end with very little bounce back some times there would still be a seven showing when they came to rest. The very fact that they left the shooters hand together and stayed that way while in flight is proof enough for me that that shooter had some control of the dice .
     
    #8

  9. JHPA

    JHPA Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2011
    Messages:
    242
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    suburban philadelphia
    To me, proof is in statistics.

    No, not a hole in one every time.

    This is reposted from another thread...

    I have a dice game on my PC. It randomly “throws the dice”. It tracks the results and compares them against what would be expected. Over time, the distribution gets more and more identical to the random expected distrbution. It is interesting that, even over a couple of hundred rolls, the actual distribution can be very different from the expected distribution. For example, as of right now, there have been 189 rolls since I last reset the counter. There have been 43 sevens rolled - a normal distribution would have 31 sevens rolled out of 189 rolls. (This does reflect what we all experince at a table, right: At a craps table, 189 rolls could take about an hour and a half. Sometimes, we see a lot more sevens during that time; other times there could be a lot less.)

    So here is my test: I would believe that a certain technique for throwing is influencing the dice if the shooter kept track of throws in the same way and compared the results to what would be expected randomly. There is a statistical test which would determine - to a certain degree of confidence (for example 98%) that the actual distribution is statistically different from the expected distribution. This will take quite a number of rolls to be statistically valid....I am sure some statistician could determine the minimum number. This is not some simple experiment....I believe the number of throws to be statistically valid could be in the thousands. But, if the people who are selling books and making money off of seminars are serious about this, they could easily arrange the test.

    For that matter, I would be willing to ignored the human element, have a robotic machine throw the dice identically - as long as it is on a regulation table, with pyramids and it meets the requirement to hit the back wall. If a robot could do it, I would believe that it would be theoretically posssible for a person with skill a discipline could duplicate it.
     
    #9

  10. JHPA

    JHPA Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2011
    Messages:
    242
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    suburban philadelphia
    I doubt that street craps games were played with bouncy tables and pyramids on the back wall and video cameras monitoring the action. By all means, someone could manipulate dice if it were not for the preventions put in place by the casinos.
     
    #10

  11. JHPA

    JHPA Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2011
    Messages:
    242
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    suburban philadelphia
    Sure people "influence the dice": by the way they pick them up and release them. The question is, is this enough to influence the final outcome so that the result is less than random once the dice hit the table and bounce off the pyramids on the back wall?
     
    #11
  12. DeMango, Jan 16, 2012

    DeMango

    DeMango Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2010
    Messages:
    4,751
    Likes Received:
    1,518
    Gender:
    Male
    Jesus is coming back.
    I can influence the dice.
    You won't find me.
    I'll make sure of that.
    The last thing I want is you making money of my roll so I can lose it on your roll.
    No proof will be given.
    I really, really hope my brothers will see the wisdom here and STFU.
    Please.
     
    #12
  13. kaysirtap, Jan 16, 2012

    kaysirtap

    kaysirtap Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2011
    Messages:
    483
    Likes Received:
    19
    Once again, I'm not asking for proof to be given one way or the other... nor have I seen anyone ask for this so far on this thread. I hope it stays that way. I'm simply asking what would be required to change your mind about dice control.
    Okay, what would be required to show you that the dice rotating together before initial impact is not enough to control the outcome of the dice? Whatever is required... would this change your mind about dice control? If not, what would?

    Also again, I'll post the original question here:

     
    #13
  14. kaysirtap, Jan 16, 2012

    kaysirtap

    kaysirtap Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2011
    Messages:
    483
    Likes Received:
    19
    Sorry, I hit the wrong button by mistake when I was editing my previous post.
     
    #14
  15. DeMango, Jan 16, 2012

    DeMango

    DeMango Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2010
    Messages:
    4,751
    Likes Received:
    1,518
    Gender:
    Male
    Come to think of it, what a dumb donkey question. Asking those of us with some semblence of influence, what would change our minds?
    Huh??? I'm going to sleep, hopefully in 8 or 10 hours this nightmare of a thread will be dead and buried.
     
    #15
  16. kaysirtap, Jan 16, 2012

    kaysirtap

    kaysirtap Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2011
    Messages:
    483
    Likes Received:
    19
    You don't want to acknowledge that there's even the smallest possibility that you're wrong? Fine, thanks for your dumb donkey opinion on the subject.

    Many non-believers are said to be close-minded because they are not open to the possibility that dice control exists. Well, I believe the street goes both ways.
     
    #16
  17. Southern-Comfort, Jan 16, 2012

    Southern-Comfort

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Messages:
    850
    Likes Received:
    27
    As I stated earlier in another thread... people on each side of the issue believe from what they hve experienced consistantly over a long period of time. Consistancy over a long period of time is pretty much all you will have to decide how you feel on the issue, so we have people who are on both sides, and who can back up their beliefs with the only thing we have. I'm good with that. You cannot always have all the answers in life, so take what you can get, and accept what you cannot.
    I believe dice can be influence on a modern casino table because I have done, and have seen others do, consistantly and over a long period. Others have witnessed the exact opposite. Who is correct? We both are. How can that be? We cannot have all the answers all the time. But my guess is that the nay-sayers are either grouping all shooters together and assuming the mass result is the same as any individual in the group, or possibly they haven't had the chance to witness a singe DI consistantly over a long period of time.
     
    #17
  18. kaysirtap, Jan 16, 2012

    kaysirtap

    kaysirtap Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2011
    Messages:
    483
    Likes Received:
    19
    I agree. But what could convince you that what you experienced was due to something other than attempting to influence the dice?
     
    #18
  19. Southern-Comfort, Jan 16, 2012

    Southern-Comfort

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Messages:
    850
    Likes Received:
    27
    I would imagine years of experience being erased from my memory, since thats where my belief comes from. Or I'm pretty sure I could switch sides for 10 million dollars in cash... $100 bills.
     
    #19
  20. basicstrategy777, Jan 16, 2012

    basicstrategy777

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    8,043
    Likes Received:
    6,357
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    CT.
    It seem to me the reason to pursue this dark art is to win money at craps. It is not done to show off at party's.

    What good is it, if it can be done and you still lose money.

    If it can be done, can it be done good enough to switch you from a loser to a winner. This would be the test, for me.

    My strong belief is the people here that call themselves dice influencers still lose money at craps. Their skill is not strong enough.

    Unfortunately, this subject brings out the passions in people and it spills out into the land of nasty comments. Hopefully,people can keep their verbal guns hostered, but history suggests otherwise.

    I want everybody here to be a winner, regardless of their faith.

    777
     
    #20
Reminder: This is the Dice Influencing section.