« “Hit the Backwall…HARDER” | Main | Shooting Bible - Part 1 »

Developing an Equal-Distance/Equal-Rotation Rollback

Think about all the times when the outbound flight of your just-thrown dice looked absolutely perfect…only to witness each cube end up on an entirely dissimilar rebound path and a completely asymmetrical (irregular) distance from both the backwall and from each other.

The result…a facially-and-axially-mismatched “that-looks-like-random-to-me” outcome.

In my previous "Hit the Backwall HARDER" article, we talked about the high-rebound toss experiments that I conducted a year or two ago after Stanford Wong and I discussed heat-avoidance in casinos that wanted the dice thrown with more backwall rebound ‘action’. A recent trip to Casino de Montreal prompted me to dust off those particular toss-stats in preparation for that trip.

Casino de Montreal recently instituted a 3" rollback rule on the freshly installed “short” 12-foot, $25 (mid-day), $50 (evenings & weekends) table in their high-end Salon Privée.

For those who haven’t played there, Casino de Montreal has entrenched the hit-the-backwall mantra into the psyche of every player, every dealer, and every boxman since Day One (well actually since 1999 when craps was legalized in Canada). They’ll “no roll” any throw where both dice do not hit the backwall. Even if one die has rebounded halfway back to the shooter and the other die is just 1/16th of an inch short of the backwall…it’s still disqualified.

In fact, if every casino on earth was vying for the title of "No Roll" capital of the world; Casino de Montreal would be the runaway winner.

~Their “No Roll” decisions includes times where one die runs into a stack of chips at the other end of the table.

~It includes those rolls where the dice hit someone’s late-betting hand and one or both dice fall short of the backwall.

~It includes those high-trajectory tosses where one die takes an errant sideways hop that launches into the sidewall glass or in behind the base-dealers chip stack. No matter what else either die does or doesn’t ricochet off of before it’s final stop…it’s still declared a “No Roll” if both of them don’t hit the backwall and rebound from it.

~Even if your wheelchair-bound grandma throws one die a little short; they’ll still “No Roll” her ass every time it happens.

On Casino de Montreal’s new high-roller table, they have expanded that rule; requiring at least a three-inch (3”) rollback from both dice after impacting the wall.

Clearly this is not the place to be perfecting your stopped-in-its-tracks-at-the-base-of-the-backwall Dead Cat Bounce, but since we know the rules ahead of time and we know how strictly they are enforced; we have to deal with it if we want to play there.

Why even consider playing at that casino in the first place?

Well, I had been told by unimpeachable and highly-reliable sources that their new table had the exact same neutral-bounce characteristics as one of my favorites at the Mirage…and for that kind of layout, I am perfectly willing to go into the lion’s den to grab the loot, especially if they’ll gladly accept high-buck action without a hint of sweat.

So you can plainly see why I felt it was necessary to not only prepare to use a higher-rebound toss when I was heading for Quebec; but more importantly, I wanted to be sure that if I did so, I would still be throwing the dice with a high enough degree of influence to ensure that I emerged from that place with an overall net-profit.

Developing an Equal-Distance/Equal-Rotation Rollback

~To achieve a nice equal-distance/equal-rotation rollback from the wall, you have to start with a toss where both dice are flat and square to not only the table-surface itself when they are released from your hand, but also perfectly square to the backwall when they first impact it.

~That means the dice have to be horizontally level with the tabletop and vertically square with the backwall…and in doing so, upon impact with the wall, both dice should roll STRAIGHT BACK.

~If the dice are moving IN ANY OTHER DIRECTION than straight back, then they were either off-square before they even got to the backwall, or they are hitting the wall too far up into the pointed tips of the alligator-pyramids (instead of the flatter less-randomizing base of those same tips).

In either case, they are getting RE-RANDOMIZED even though they left your hand as DE-RANDOMIZED.

In other words, if the dice leave your hand perfectly flat and square to all of the surfaces they are going to come in contact with (including the larger and squarer less-randomizing base of the backwall pyramids), and they've both been thrown on the same trajectory at the same time with the same amount of force and the same amount of rotational spin; then you’ll get an equal-distance/equal-rotation rollback.

~If the dice leave your hand in less-than-aligned squareness, or less-than-equal energy, rotation, or elevation; then the outcome will be even-LESS-than-perfect and even-CLOSER-to-random than you’d like to admit.

~To minimize the RE-randomizing effects of the backwall alligator (if the dice are released perfectly from your hand); you’ll probably want to add a little more spin (either underhand-induced {palm-up} forward-spin or overhand-induced {palm-down} backspin). In either case, the slightly increased number of spinning revs reduces, but obviously does not completely eliminate, the off-axis disturbance of the backwall pyramids especially if the dice are striking the pointy-tips of the egg-crate bumps instead of their flatter less-randomizing bases.

Now to be honest, I did conduct a lot of rebound testing that also involved hitting the smooth lower, non-bumpy margin of the backwall that I usually shoot for with my Low, Slow, and Easy Toss; but frankly the results were not as promising as I had hoped they’d be. Though the lower smooth margin is perfect for Dead Cat Bounces as well as my minimal-rollback LS&E rebounds (and I continue to use the lower margin as the backwall contact-point for my low energy tosses); it proved to be impractical for the higher-energy throws that I was working with during the SW-inspired experiments.

So, to further prep for my Casino de Montreal trip and to ensure that my tosses would enjoy a high degree of correlation, I used my Inch-by-Inch Method to develop a highly reproducible equal-distance/equal-rotation rollback that I knew would avoid any “No Roll” hit-the-backwall-HARDER hassles on their new layout.

My Inch-by-Inch Method starts with the ultra-short throwing distances that we discussed in Shooting-Bible - Part 9 and then g-r-a-d-u-a-l-l-y lengthens out the throwing gap.

~Traditionally I have used this method to quickly determine the root cause of most off-axis and/or double-pitch problems that haven’t been solvable using some of the more traditional grip, release, trajectory, spin, apogee/toss-height and energy/force correction-methods that are commonly talked about. However in this case my Inch-by-Inch Method is used to increase the throwing energy of my tosses without a significant corresponding decrease in on-axis outcomes or a decline in facially-correlated results.

To that end, I can say that I was moderately successful.

While my on-axis percentage did drop by roughly 30% (as a percentage of my on-axis total and NOT by 30 actual basis points); which anyway you look at it, is still a substantial decline; my facially-correlated results remained quite high due to a sizeable shift in the increased number of Both Dice Off-Axis (BDOA) outcomes…in the magnitude of 270% (that is, my number of BDOA results increased by almost threefold).

Now obviously I knew going into the original experiment, that the harder you throw the dice and the more the backwall alligator de-randomizes the dice as they are designed to do, your on-axis percentage will decrease substantially, but the question then as now is; 'Can you moderate that on-axis decline enough so that your results are still influenced to an exploitable degree and can the pitch-controlled dice-faces still be correlated enough to offer a nonetheless exploitable situation?'

In other words, if you are going to play in a casino that requires a high backwall rebound, you still want to be sure that your throws are still sufficiently influenced enough to produce profitably exploitable results.

I can happily report that you can.

Now I know this isn’t earth-shattering news to all of you who have been throwing this way for a long time; but it’s significant in the fact that it shows that you can alter your game to satisfy changing rules without compromising your profit outlook.

If my high-rebound experiments reinforced one thing, it would be the point that if you can get the dice doing the same thing roll after roll after roll EVEN IF BOTH DICE GO OFF-AXIS or EVEN IF YOU GET A HIGH-INCIDENCE OF O/A DOUBLE-PITCHING, that consistency can be profitably used in the casino.

In dice-influencing, ANY significant degree of consistency above or below random can be profitably exploited.

Let me repeat that again, in dice-influencing, ANY substantive degree of consistency above or below random can be profitably exploited.

Throwing the same way to the same target, with the same force, the same trajectory, the same amount of spin and the same amount of backwall rollout; is where repeatability comes from…and where the real steady profits are found.

~Again, even if a disappointing number of those high-rebound outcomes result in both dice going off-axis; the consistency of your toss is what is exploitable.

~For example, for users of 7-avoidance sets like the V-2, V-3, and X-6; those BDOA outcomes roughly equate to primary or single-pitch ON-axis outcomes…and they don’t contribute any additional 7’s into the mix. In this case, those both-dice-off-axis results aren’t to be feared…they are to be exploited.

If more casinos start instituting a “dice must rollback x-amount of inches” rule, I’m not only prepared, I’m quite sure that my higher-rebound Equal-Distance/Equal-Rotation Rollback throws are de-randomized enough so that my craps income won’t show a significant decline.

To wit; during a recent 2-day period, a three-person team hit Casino de Montreal for a total of $63,000 in net-winnings…with nary a discouraging "Hit the backwall HARDER" word from the pit.

Good Luck and Good Skill at the Tables…and in Life.

The Mad Professor
Copyright © 2007

Do you have questions or comments about the articles and subjects discussed here at the Dice Institute? Sign up for our member's forum and share them with us!


This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on March 10, 2007 8:10 AM.

The previous post in this blog was “Hit the Backwall…HARDER”.

The next post in this blog is Shooting Bible - Part 1.

Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Powered by
Movable Type 3.34