I caught a load to Austin, TX, that doesn't deliver till Tues., so I stopped off in Biloxi for a little craps session. Parking's been a little hit-or-miss around there lately, so I parked at the truck stop and grabbed an Uber to Boomtown. I bought in for $200, and only played the do side. Usually a PL w/single odds and either one or two come bets w/single odds. Sometimes I'd keep the 6 and 8 covered - either instead of, or in addition to the come bets. Nothing was shaking to speak of - a couple of mediocre rolls that got me back up NEAR even, but that was it. Mostly I was dying a slow death. I tried a couple of "swing-for-the-fences" moves along the way. There were an utterly bizarre number of yo's being thrown for some reason, so, at one point, I tried hitting a parlayed yo for a buck - no cigar. Of course, 10-15 minutes after I abandoned that, back-to-back yo's showed - twice! They have the ATS, and I played it, 1/3/1, five or six times, and finally hit the small once. Probably about even ON THAT BET, but still losing. So the pain continues, and I got down to only 7 or 8 red chips and several whites, and the dice pass to me. I was resigned to let this be my last hand, and I would go eat and try again. So, a nickel on the pass line, and (FUGGET) 1/3/1. I make a point, put a buck each on the hardways, and I'm off. The hardways did chit, but I was rolling numbers. I got the place 8 pressed up to 30, and I hit it again. I'm not sure how many rolls later (maybe 20-25) I made a point, and looked over and all I needed was the 2 and the 10. I popped the 2 before I made a point, and one of the other players laid the 10 for fifty, and says, "I hope I lose it." So a couple rolls later - BAM! - there's the 10. I think everyone on the table must've been on the ATS. It took quite a while to get paid off, but I was OK with it. Now this is why I asked you all here today: Would you go right back up on the ATS? Right now? After 30 rolls and no seven? Everyone, as near as I could tell, did. I did not. Two rolls later, seven-out. Now I know that the odds of rolling the small, the tall, or all are exactly the same now as they were 30 rolls ago, but but but. . . And I also know that I wouldn't be betting for it to happen twice in a row (that bet would've had to be made prior), but, but, but. At any rate, providing you are still awake, I colored-up $617, tipped the crew the $17, and left ahead $400, and two cups of terrible coffee. I've been on a bit of a cold streak lately. I think the last 4 sessions were losers, so I'm glad to put a check in the 'W' column.
Nice "stretch run". Bad coffee might be due to bad water in that area, the fountain sodas taste really bad too. Zzzzzzzzzzzzz............
I played at a table recently at the Flamingo on the Strip - I was SR2 - wife at SR1 - another couple at SR 3 and 4 - The female at SR 4 sets the dice with a 6 - 1 seven on the top and proceeds to have a nice roll hitting the ATS then 7'ing out - Husband proceeds to set the dice - which I could not determine - and proceeds to hit the ATS - Back to back - The Flamingo allows the ATS bet to be reset after a win - which I found to quite unusual ! Needless to say - EVERYONE - who was on the ATS bet the 1st time - was on it the 2nd time - Whoever was NOT on it initially - got on it after the 1st hit by " Hubby " ! $...eE..$
I have 57,549 rolls saved on wincraps under one shooter name that I've been using for quite some time. The number of times that it has went 40 rolls or over without a seven is 10 times. I used 40 because it would take 10 rolls minimum to make the all again.
Nice win. Congrats! There's absolutely no contemplation for me....after the first ALL TALL hits....I WALK.
AND ????? Almost 60K rolls and THIS particular shooter can NOT cut the mustard ! WHAT the FUCK ? Perhaps he / she should play Bingo ! $...eE..$
Perhaps you should contact Steen and tell him his RNG isn't cutting the mustard like another forum member did a while back when he claimed the RNG was biased because it tossed too many sevens in a 15 roll sample.
Don't mistake possibility with probability. Everything's possible; but not everything's probable. When you stay on the probable side of things, you're considered a practical thinker. When you hang around the anything's-possible side of things, they'll call you lost in the clouds. In the end it's your call. Find your balance somewhere in the middle, for each has its place. Thus, the art of the game.
There is NO " A " game ; there is NO " B " game - YOU are playing against a Random Number Generator computer chip - Which CAN BE manipulated - through the software / programming algorithms - to eliminate YOUR presumed advantage ! I have programmed computers in the past - YOU would NOT believe WHAT is POSSIBLE - TODAY ! $...eE..$
I would believe what is possible with the tech industry today....but I was just commenting on Steen's integrity in offering the highest quality simulation program available on the net today....in my opinion, and many others I might add.
I took your number, 57549 and multiplied by .833333333, and kept multiplying the product by .83333333, and the numbers say that you should have have had 40 or more rolls without a seven, 39 times. I don't know what "standard deviation" would be for something that is about a one in 1500 chance, but you're way short of normal, with only ten successes. How was it, that the rolls were accomplished? Were the rolls a record of actual Casio play? Ok, now let's "solve" the mystery. What are the possibilities. Well, maybe you're just unlucky, a veritable shleprock. Or, maybe you're just the sorriest thrower this side of the Yangtze River. Or, maybe, just maybe, there is a more sinister reason. But, we don't have any proof, of anything, just another set of very unlikely results, which by the way, figure to be in the houses favor, but we can't prove that either.
Whoa! That's way off and makes no sense whatsoever. There's no simple formula for this number. It requires a repeated summation of successive terms using a lot of elbow grease or a computer program. A lot of hard core math guys have worked on this kind of stuff and a lot have gotten it wrong. For us non-math guru types, a computer simulation such as WinCraps can provide a reasonable estimation of the answer. Very unlikely results? No. Mssthis1's report of 10 streaks of 40 'no 7's in 57,549 rolls is really quite likely. While running some simulations using truly random rolls (such as those on my web site created from random atmospheric noise or atomic decay) I got averages ranging from 5 to 8 streaks. Switching to a pRNG and running a simulation for over 11.5 million rolls (broken into sessions of 57,549 rolls) I got the following: average of 6.55 streaks per session ranging from 0 to 14 streaks per session a mode of 7 streaks per session standard deviation 2.48 This would place Mssthis's average of 10 at 1.39 standard deviations. More data would refine these numbers further but not to an average of 39 streaks as you claim. Consider: prob 'no 7' in one roll = 5/6 prob 'no 7' in 40 rolls = (5/6)^40 = 0.00068038 1/0.00068038 is about once every 1470 rolls, right? So how many 1470-roll sequences are there in 57549 rolls? 57549/1470 = 39 Is this where you got your figure of 39? Well, unfortunately, it's wrong. These streaks are not confined within sequences of 1470 rolls. They can be anywhere and figuring out how many there are is not very intuitive. Let's try a simpler example using a fair coin. What's the probability of seeing back-to-back tails (TT) in two flips? 0.5^2 = 25% Now what's the probability of seeing TT at least once in four flips? Let's count. Here are all the possibile outcomes of four flips: Code: TTTT THTT HTTT HHTT TTTH THTH HTTH HHTH TTHT THHT HTHT HHHT TTHH THHH HTHH HHHH There are 8 that contain at least one TT, so the probability is 8/16 = 50% Hmmm ... so the prob of seeing at least one TT went from 25 to 50% when we doubled the flips? Yes, and the probability will continue to increase as the number of flips are increased. Stands to reason, right? By 23 flips we'll have a better than 99% chance of seeing at least one TT. Similarly, the probability of seeing at least one streak of 40 'no 7's in 57549 rolls is over 99%. There's a nice streak calculator here: https://sites.google.com/view/krapstuff/home However, we're not just interested in the probability of seeing at least one streak. What we really want is the average number of TT streaks that we should expect to see within four flips. Recounting all instances, there are 9 times when TT appeared (it appeared twice in the TTTT instance) so the average number of TT streaks we should expect to see per four-flip trial is 9/16 = 0.5625 Let's try six flips: Code: TTTTTT TTHTTT THTTTT THHTTT HTTTTT HTHTTT HHTTTT HHHTTT TTTTTH TTHTTH THTTTH THHTTH HTTTTH HTHTTH HHTTTH HHHTTH TTTTHT TTHTHT THTTHT THHTHT HTTTHT HTHTHT HHTTHT HHHTHT TTTTHH TTHTHH THTTHH THHTHH HTTTHH HTHTHH HHTTHH HHHTHH TTTHTT TTHHTT THTHTT THHHTT HTTHTT HTHHTT HHTHTT HHHHTT TTTHTH TTHHTH THTHTH THHHTH HTTHTH HTHHTH HHTHTH HHHHTH TTTHHT TTHHHT THTHHT THHHHT HTTHHT HTHHHT HHTHHT HHHHHT TTTHHH TTHHHH THTHHH THHHHH HTTHHH HTHHHH HHTHHH HHHHHH I count 57 so the average number of TT streaks we should expect to see per six-flip trial is 57/64 = 0.8906 Without listing them all: At seven flips there are an average of 135/128 = 1.055 At eight flips there are an average of 313/256 = 1.223 How does this compare to the logic you seem to have used to get to 39 streaks? prob TT in two rolls = 0.25 1/0.25 = once every 4 rolls Number of 4-roll sequences in 8 rolls = 8/4 = 2 So would you say that we should see an average of 2 TT streaks in 8 flips? As you can see, the real figure (1.223) is substantially lower. If you're interested in more about streak probability here's an interesting thread with someone named BruceZ who seems to have a good handle on this stuff: https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/25/probability/successes-row-904091/ Here's a histogram of the 200 session I ran (over 11.5 million rolls) And here's the WinCraps code I used to collect the data: Code: If # of rolls = 57549 Then Start new session EndIf If dice total = 7 Then cs1.#rollsno7 = 0 Else add 1 to cs1.#rollsno7 If cs1.#rollsno7 = 40 Then add 1 to cs2.#streaks40 EndIf EndIf Steen
This is Barney, That's very greatest works Mr. Steen. If the LID ever gets back I'll get him to confirm your work on his supper computer. Thank you very much.
Sometimes people confuse probable , possible and practical What might be improbable , impractical for some is practical for others
That's why I never play the lottery. The more money involved the lower the chances for a fair game. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_Lotto_fraud_scandal
