My Six All-Time Favorite Hummers
Take a second and think about your six all-time favorites songs.
You know, the songs you hum along with or sing along with in the car when they come on the radio. The ones that no matter who is singing or which cover-band is performing it; provides the same level of satisfaction and pleasure that it had the first time you heard it.
No matter how each performer makes little changes, the lyrics are still as understandable as they always were (unless of course Mick Jagger or Bob Dylan is singing it). The point is, those songs are familiar and comfortable and you know every lyrical, melodic and rhythmic nuance about each of them.
And so too it should be with the six different dice-sets that constitute our entire dice-setting realm.
No matter what their facial permutation, you should know each of those six basic sets backwards, forwards and every way in between.
Here’s what each one of those basic dice-sets produce if they are kept on-axis:
The Imaginary Axle That the Dice Rotate Around
I want to thank Heavy for graciously providing the basic chart that you see above, which I subsequently MP-ized. You can link directly to his original work here.
As Heavy mentioned in his original piece, the “axles” refer to the numbers that show on the SIDES (left/right) of each individual die prior to the toss. The objective is to toss the dice "on axis" - as if there were a steel rod driven through the two dice like an automobile axle, with the dice tumbling or rolling forward without any excessive bouncing, pitching, popping or yawing.
You’ll also notice that I’ve added what appears to be a seventh set to the chart. I gave the Hardway-set its own dedicated space even though it is really just the All-Seven set in a not-so-clever-looking disguise. Although the on-axis expectation for the Hardway-set is exactly the same as the All-Sevens (A-7) set, I thought I’d break it out and let you gauge it on it’s own merits for yourself.
Distribution of Combinations
Our friends, ACDOC and Maddog were also very kind in letting me use their charts to illustrate a different way of looking at what each of these dice-sets offer up if they are kept on-axis 100% of the time.
When you look at this chart, one thing becomes quite clear. There are sets that produce a lot of on-axis sevens and sets that produce fewer O/A sevens.
➣ First take a look at the left side of the chart; that is what a random-roller will produce over the long-term.
➣ If you take a look at the V-2 set right beside it, the first thing you’ll notice is how flat the distribution-pyramid becomes. With random-outcomes, it is very steep and pointy, with the 7 dominating. The V-2 set is an almost polar-opposite. The expected-distribution across the six box-numbers (4, 5, 6, 8, 9 and 10) is perfectly flat. That not only means that the 7 has been “equalized” with the 6 and 8, but that the 4, 5, 9, and 10, have now become it’s equal as well. That is, you have two each of the on-axis occurrences of the 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10…a far cry from what the random-roller can expect. One more thing that you’ll notice about the V-2 set-up is that the 2 and 12 are missing entirely from that graph. That’s because they are not part of the on-axis package that the V-2 offers and they simply fall off of the outcome-expectancy radar screen.
¬ This graph captures exactly what on-axis dice-shooting is all about. We want to increase the appearance of the 7 (as well as the 11) during the Come-Out portion of our Rightsider-hand, and we want to decrease the appearance of the 7 during our Point-cycle rolls (those rolls that occur after we establish the PL-Point), and in that same point-cycle, we’ll probably want to increase the appearance of certain other box-numbers too.
➣ A quick look at the Straight-Sixes (S-6) and the Hardways (All-7’s) set (as well as the Parallel-Sixes (P-6) set to a lesser extent), tells us that they can offer up a productive Come-Out, but may offer limited practicality if used during the point-cycle portion of our hand unless we have developed extraordinary double-pitch-avoidance face-control skills.
➣ Next comes the V-3 set. Here again we see some on-axis surprises and profit-making opportunities waiting for us. With this set, the 6 and 8 become the on-axis dominant. That simply means that the 7 finally takes a back-seat to those two numbers. You get three O/A 6’s and three O/A 8’s, but only two O/A 7’s. All of a sudden our entire on-axis dice-influencing objective takes on a whole new significance with this set. In a situation where those two numbers outweigh the 7 by a ratio of 3:1, all but the hardest-headed among us can see the potential benefits of a 7-avoidance set like the V-3. When you factor in that the 5 and 9 are of equal expectancy as the 7 (all of them with two on-axis appearances each); this set has “Inside-Number profit-opportunity” written all over it. This makes it easy to see why variants of the V-3 are among the top choices of serious recreational players and dice-shooting pro’s alike.
➣ As you take a careful look at each one of these basic sets, one thing becomes patently clear. Some sets seem to be custom-made for Come-Out shooting (where a Rightside shooter is actively seeking some instant C-O wins on the Passline with a 7 and 11; or is looking to reap some money off of the higher-risk center-of-the-table Prop-bets like the Horn, World and Any Craps). In that case, the Straight-Sixes (S-6), Parallel-Sixes (P-6), and of course the All-Sevens (A-7) set fills that need quite well.
➣ Equally, some sets are geared more towards point-cycle shooting (again, those are the post Come-Out rolls that you throw once the Passline-Point has been established). In that case you are looking to avoid the 7, so the V-2, V-3 and the Crossed-Sixes (X-6) offer up a whole lot of on-axis 7-avoidance opportunity.
➣ So if your objective is to produce more 7’s like it would be for the Come-Out portion of your hand, then the H-W/A-7, S-6 and P-6 sets each look somewhat attractive although it should also be evident that both the S-6 and P-6 produce a fair amount of PL-losing craps numbers (2, 3 and 12) too. In that case, the Hardway-set also known as the (A-7) All-Sevens set would probably be the best dice-arrangement that would produce on-axis 7’s without as many on-axis C-O losing craps numbers.
➣ If your objective is to produce less 7’s like it would be for the point-cycle portion of your hand, then the V-3, V-2 and X-6 sets look way more attractive than any of the 7-dominant hands that you’d use for the Come-Out.
➣ Now I’d love to tell you that dice-influencing is as simple as choosing the right set and then proceeding to make obscene amounts of money; but it isn’t nearly so simple or direct as that. Rather, Precision-Shooting is more nuanced and subtle. You have to take into consideration how well and how often you can keep both dice on-axis as well as keeping them from double-pitching. You also have to consider if there is any consistency in your off-axis outcomes (off-axis dominants) that indicate an exploitable betting-option.
➣ Equally, you have to consider which of the two dice you are keeping on-axis most often (the left-die or the right-die) and then make your dice-arrangement decisions based on ACDOC and Maddog’s PASS-theory (where you maintain one particular die on the side with your best O/A dominance). Beyond that, you have to take an almost clinical look at each outcome (based on your starting-set) and find out if just a slight transpositional change would cure many of your hand-ending 7-Out problems.
➣ Depending on your betting strategy, each dice-set offers something a little (or a lot) different from the next. Part of your job as a Precision-Shooter is to figure out which set is best suited to your current skill-level and the types of bets that suit that particular set…all based on how much your dice-shooting ability has developed to this point.
We’ll get into figuring out exactly how to do that in upcoming chapters, but for now I can confidently tell you that when you combine your right-here, right-now skill-level with geared–to-advantage betting and an adequately funded bankroll; your earnings can be outstanding. However, if you mismatch any of those three components, your money will soon turn into their money. This series is all about keeping YOURS and getting some of THEIRS too.
Common Sense Still Isn’t All That Common
When you are shopping for a dice-set that suits your own DE-randomizing efforts, you have to use a little bit of common-sense. You have to look at what sets will produce the most box-numbers for your Point-cycle tossing.
I mean, if it makes sense to you to use a 7-dominant set to AVOID the 7’s, then go ahead.
If you arrange the dice in a 7-dominant set with the hope of knocking them off axis in order to fulfill the theory that there are less 7’s OFF-axis than there are ON-axis and that off-axis throwing should really be the prime objective…then have at it. It’s a free world and you can do pretty much whatever you want with your money.
However, most people who fully understand toss-dynamics and not only the concept behind dice-setting but the practical ways of applying it most effectively, have come to the conclusion that a set that is dominant with 7’s just doesn’t hold up much beyond the novice skill-level when it comes to avoiding them. That is, hope that you never gain the skill to keep them on-axis more than a random-roller does, because the better you get at keeping that 7-dominant dice-set on-axis…the worse it will perform in the hands of a rightside-betting skilled shooter.
That is not to say that you can’t make any money while using a 7-heavy set for your Rightside point-cycle shooting; it’s just that you can likely make more of it…and do it more consistently and more efficiently with a 7-avoidance set, but like I said, it’s YOUR money.
The Individual Dice-Faces on Each Outcome Are Trying To Tell You Something
The whole idea behind dice-influencing is to de-randomize the dice to a point where we obtain an advantage over the house.
Now let’s take a look at the actual dice-results (the individual dice-faces) that each on-axis throw can produce for these sets.
When you look at these sets and the specific on-axis results they can produce, it becomes a matter of recognizing what each dice-outcome is indicating in light of the configuration that you first set them on.
In other words, to the savvy dicesetter who has taken the time to study these charts, it becomes quite easy to make permutational (transpositional) changes to his dice-set if he determines that a minor dice-arrangement change is required.
What it DOES NOT mean is that you should start changing your set after seeing each result. Rather, you have to build up your dice-throwing skill-set first, and then determine which set best suits your skill-level at that time. To do that, you need to track your practice-session results over a reasonable period in order to find out just what it is your throwing-results are trying to tell you.
➣ If they are telling you that your throw is still too inconsistent to gain an edge over the house, then you have to concentrate your efforts into developing a de-randomized throw BEFORE you get into all sorts of permutations and transpositions of dice-sets.
It’s all about the throw.
➣ Get good at throwing and landing the dice in a nice repeatable fashion and THEN you can look at ways to exploit your skill.
➣ Until that point though, fooling around with various permutations and transpositions of the basic sets WILL NOT HELP YOU AT ALL and is mostly a waste of time…you have to develop a reliably repeatable throw FIRST.
As your on-axis and face-control skills progress, you may find that a different set or a slightly different permutation (face-change) within your current set is all that is really called for.
Like I said a moment ago, the whole idea behind dice-influencing is to de-randomize the dice to a point where we obtain an advantage over the house. If a particular dice-set produces the outcomes that you want (and the ones that your bets REQUIRE); then USE IT…and yes, we can include the use of a 7-dominant set in that statement if it works perfectly for you (but please don’t whine to me when you suddenly discover how good you are at throwing perfect on-axis 7-Outs).
To that end, let’s look at how our dice-influencing objectives are usually met.
Precision-Shooting Objectives and Goals
As a Precision-Shooter...my first objective is to keep the dice on-axis.
Once I get to the point where I can keep them on-axis more than random, then my second objective is to exert a little more face-control over them in order to produce more primary hits and less double-pitches.
A primary-hit is where the dice end up on one of the four sets of faces that you first set them on (your “starting-set”) just prior to your toss. If you arrange them into your starting-set and at the end of your throw, the dice end up on one of the four faces that you first set them on, then we call that a primary-hit.
A double-pitch is where one die rotates a full 180-degrees more than the other die, and you end up with a 7-Out. Of course the simplistic cure to the double-pitch is to arrange them so that a 180-degree difference won’t produce a 7-Out. For example, if you take the traditionally arranged V-3 set and rotate one die a quarter of a turn forward, the double pitch is no longer the problem, but now a single-pitch outcome is.
Trading one problem in for an equally sized different one is clearly not the solution that savvy dicesetters desire. Rather, they de-funkify their basic grip and release so that double-pitches become a rarity. Instead of trying to “hide” a double-pitch problem that is just going to re-manifest itself as a single-pitch or three-quarter pitch problem a few tosses down the road; they (and I) prefer to tackle the problem straight on…and cure the cause instead of just trying to momentarily mask the ailment.
In simple terms, if I can keep both dice on-axis more that the 44% O/A performance that a random-roller turns in, then I also want to start controlling the facial relationship between the two dice. The preceding ten chapters in this series took serious aim at curing those problems as does the three Practice Session series (the five-part Getting The Most Out of Your Practice Sessions, the five-part More Gain, Less Pain, and the currently running eight-part Current Practice…Future Profit series), so if double-pitch problems still plague your outcomes, a serious re-review of those articles would definitely be in order.
Is there any merit to the idea of using a 7-dominant set and then specifically trying to avoid a double-pitch 7-Out?
Yes, of course there is. The more you can avoid double-pitching with ANY set, the better you can control the outcomes.
Double-pitch-avoidance is a noble and worthy pursuit. On it’s own it has merit, but when double-pitch-avoidance is teamed with a 7-avoidance set, it becomes even more functional and practical. Avoiding the 7 during the point-cycle is good, but hitting some of the numbers that you actually have bets on during that double-pitch-avoidance process is even better!
When we talk about avoiding the 7, we also have to take into consideration what outcome-expectancies (increased appearances of other numbers) those avoided-7’s are replaced with. In other words, you may see a slightly lower occurrence of the 7, but if it is replaced with a higher frequency of numbers that you don’t have any wagers on, and the ones that you do have money on still don’t show up often enough; then, a loss is still a loss.
Going Beyond a 1-in-8 Sevens-to-Rolls Ratio
A moment ago we looked at all the possible on-axis outcomes that each different dice-set offers. Those charts show what each set will produce if both dice free-wheel around the same axle.
➣ That means that even if you keep any of the 7-avoidance sets (like V-3 or V-2 or X-6) on-axis 100% of the time, but WITHOUT any facial-control (correlation), your Sevens-to-Rolls Ratio (SRR) cannot exceed 1:8 for any statistically significant amounts of time.
➣ It is critical that you understand that an SRR of 1:8 is a 33% improvement over the 1:6 random expectancy that a random-roller would produce. The real question however becomes, “Is it possible to achieve an SRR that is higher than that theoretical 1:8 benchmark WITHOUT consistently keeping the dice on-axis 100% of the time?”
The answer is “yes”, but it involves the more difficult task of facial-control.
➣ The only plausible way to achieve an SRR higher than 1:8 with a 7-avoidance set, is to produce better-than-average facial-control and obviously to avoid double-pitching the dice. Therefore you’ll want as much facial-control and double-pitch-avoidance as you can possibly get.
➣ Likewise, if you keep any of the 7-dominant sets (like the A-7, S-6 and P-6) on-axis 100% of the time, but WITHOUT any facial-control (correlation), your Sevens-to-Rolls Ratio (SRR) cannot exceed 1:4 for any statistically significant amounts of time.
➣ Clearly an SRR of 1:4 is a 33% decrease over the 1:6 random expectancy that a chicken-feeder would produce.
➣ As with the 7-avoidance set, the only plausible way to achieve an SRR LOWER than 1:4 with a 7-dominant set, is to have better-than-average facial-control. When you look at it in this light, you can see why a darkside-bettor who is shooting FOR a 7-Out winner, would find the 7-dominant sets so attractive in terms of satisfying his hand-ending 7-Out goals.
Facial-Control and Double-Pitch Avoidance
As mentioned above, my second Precision-Shooting objective is to get primary-face hits. These are the same four "as-set" faces that were first arranged prior to throwing. To my mind, the more primary-faces you produce and the less double-pitch results that you get; the higher your edge over the casino will be and the closer you come to reaching betting-opportunity nirvana.
We are going to be exploring the entire double-pitch avoidance approach in absolutely excruciating detail in upcoming chapters of this series, but in simple terms, facial-control and double-pitch avoidance means that if I can keep both dice on-axis more than the 44% O/A performance that a random-roller turns in, then I also want to start managing the face-control relationship (or “correlation”) between the two on-axis dice.
Wong on “Correlation”
Stanford Wong was very kind, generous and obviously quite patient in providing me with the following definition:
"Correlation" is a mathematical way of describing any difference from independence.
Here's an example using two 3’s on the top of your pre-throw set.
Suppose you have enough control over the dice that you can get the left die to stop on the 3 one-quarter of the time (1-out-of-4 times) and the right die to stop on the 3 one-fifth of the time (1-out-of-5 times). Do you have correlation?
Answer: Not enough information is given to figure it out. Yes you have axial-control, if you are getting frequencies of 1-out-of-4 outcomes for the left die and 1-out-of-5 and especially when you consider that random is 1-out-of-6.
To know whether you have “correlated outcomes” you also need to know how often you get that 3-3 result. Independence between the two dice would give an outcome of 3-3 with frequency 1-out-of-20, which you get by multiplying the frequency of seeing each face individually. If the appearance of the two faces together happens significantly more than 1/20 of the time or significantly less than 1/20 of the time, then you have correlation.
Dice tosses WITH correlation but WITHOUT axial control means each die comes up with each number 1/6 of the time, but certain combinations of two dice will come up significantly more or significantly less than 1/36 of the time, and there is an exploitable edge that can be derived from that.”
Let’s see how that fits into my prime Precision-Shooting objectives.
The whole idea behind my dice-influencing is to yield axis-control WITH at least a certain amount of facial-control.
That is, I want my dice to be on-axis way more than the 44% random expectancy, and I want those O/A outcomes to produce quite a bit more than those 4-out-of-16 (25%) results if the dice were just “freewheeling” around their on-axis axle.
To that end, I definitely do want my dice results to exhibit a large amount of facial-control correlation where I get significantly more than 4-out-of-16 primary hits, and significantly fewer than 2-out-of-16 double pitches.
Taken one step further; if I was using the 7-dominant Hardway-set for my point-cycle throwing; and even if I could keep the dice on-axis 100% of the time, I would still definitely want and NEED them to end up on their 4-out-of-16 prime axial-faces MORE than 25% of the time just to get over that self-imposed 1:4 SRR hump. To do that, a significant amount of additional facial-control correlation and double-pitch-avoidance would clearly be required.
Off-axis Dominants are the outcomes where one or both dice do not maintain their axis. You’ll often notice that even when the dice DON’T stay on-axis, they DO tend to end up on a small number of what we call off-axis dominants.
This is where Stanford Wong’s dice-correlation argument takes on new meaning and significant gravity.
Off-axis dominants (where you still have a high degree of facial correlation but without on-axis integrity) holds some very consistent money-making opportunities and should not be overlooked or dismissed out-of-hand simply because the dice went off-axis. Rather, if your off-axis dominants produce a nearly-identical number of the same bettable-outcomes as your on-axis results do (and ESPECIALLY if some of those off-axis dominant numbers perfectly match your on-axis Signature Numbers which they’ll often do); then you should treat them with the same value, respect and betting-weight as you would if they were among your on-axis dominant Signature-Numbers.
Obviously then, face-control correlation (along with 7-avoidance…double-pitched or otherwise) is related directly to my prime Precision-Shooting objectives, and so it becomes patently clear as to why the transpositional relationship that each die has to the other is based on the dice-set that I start with (my “starting-set”); which is also directly related to my ability to figure out the ideal starting-set that I should be using in order to achieve a higher percentage of the "desired" outcomes I am looking for.
The whole subject of Signature-Numbers and Off-Axis Dominants is covered in the six-part series The When, Where, Why and How of Signature-Numbers. Further, we’ll be adding significantly to that body of work in the upcoming Things Your Mother Never Told You About Signature-Numbers.
What Sets I Use and Why
Any discussion of dice-sets should properly be divided into two subsets. There are, the times when you are seeking as many 7’s as possible, like during the Come-Out portion of your hand; and times when you are avoiding as many 7’s for as long as possible…such as during the point-cycle portion of your hand.
For today’s discussion, we are looking at rightside shooting only. If you’ve been following my exploits in the on-going “Shooting From The Darkside…A Journey of Opportunity”, then you know all about what sets I use for shooting from the Don’t side of the dice.
My Come-Out Sets
The simplest explanation that I can use to describe my dice-shooting philosophy is that I play the game to make money, and the Come-Out portion of my hand offers an excellent opportunity to make some dough before the PL-Point is even established.
I have a couple of routes I can go. I can take the simplest route, which is to set for C-O winner-7’s, or I can use my “Game Within A Game” approach and tackle it from a slightly more adventurous but also more gratifying and rewarding angle by trying to hit a few of the exotic prop-wagers like the Horn or World-bet.
In the first instance where I want as many Come-Out winner-7’s as possible, I use the All-7 dice-arrangement. This gives me four on-axis 7’s, but none of the Horn-numbers of 2, 3, 11 or 12. One of the side benefits of using this set is the fact that the other possible on-axis outcomes are three each of the 6’s and 8’s. That means that even if I don’t get a 7-winner from this set, I still have a good chance of setting an easier-to-repeat PL-Point of 6 or 8.
With my “Game Within A Game” approach, I prefer to use the Straight-Sixes (S-6) set for the Come-out portion of my hand to garner even more net-profit by way of the prop-bets.
It is important to note that the S-6 set throws off a high percentage of PL-defeating on-axis Craps numbers of 2, 3, and 12 too. With geared-to-ability betting, those crap numbers can be self-serving in that I WANT them to show up for some high-dividend payouts on the World and Horn-bets. However, it is important to remember that this set and those bets can just as easily be self-defeating unless they are coupled with matched-to-skill betting where your edge over wagers such as the Horn or World (whirl) or Any Craps or any other bets for that matter, have been seriously validated and confirmed not by your gut, but by verified roll-tracking and quantification. Otherwise, if your shooting-skills don’t properly match your betting-inclinations; then this whole dice-setting exercise can become self-defeating and seriously erosive to your bankroll.
Again, you have to do your homework to determine exactly where your current skills lie and precisely where your best profit-opportunities are found. These are the fundamental things that most overly-eager players DON’T do and they almost always end up not being able to profitably exploit the dice-influencing edge that they’ve developed over the house. In the alternative, many players with marginal abilities will chase the high-paying but highly-corrosive Prop-bets in the HOPE that they’ll produce a profit.
To their frequent chagrin and disappointment, that “disconnect” between their dice-shooting SKILLS and their gambling HOPES, often ends in searing disillusionment and rapid evaporation of their bankroll.
If you ever stop to wonder why so many guys who you’ve met over the years seemed to have mastered the physical side of dice-influencing yet still went broke…your answer is in that last sentence. Don’t let it happen to you.
I can’t stress enough just how vitally important it is to determine how much of an edge you have, and then to make appropriately sized bets only on the wagers where you have an appreciable and exploitable edge.
In an upcoming series, we’re going to delve much deeper into my whole “Game Within A Game” approach and talk about the prudent use of these C-O sets as well as a number of uniquely specific betting-methods that are related to each of them.
My Point-Cycle Sets
Crossed Six (X-6) Set
With only two on-axis 7’s, but a decent looking boatload of box-numbers (two each of the 5, 6, 8, and 9; plus one each of the 4 and 10), many intermediate shooters use this set as they transition from the Hardways-set (which produced so many good results in the early stages of their development, but declined in value as their on-axis proficiency increased while their specific face-control abilities still lagged).
With the X-6 set, you have the benefit of a lower on-axis 7-occurrence along with a just-as-attractive off-axis production of additional box-numbers. As with most compromises, the trade-off with this set is that you’ll get a high O/A incidence of point-cycle trash-numbers (one each of the 2, 3, 11 and 12).
The biggest problem I see with that is in the effect this set has on your average hand-length (the average number of rolls you make during your point-cycle). Even though you may be getting more rolls-per-hand, many players find that the results are actually less actionable because of the high on-axis content of those four “junk” numbers.
We’ll be looking at some specific details and betting-methods in terms of proportionately exploiting those O/A trash-numbers in the upcoming second installment of the “Cow Patty” series, but for now the point should be obvious in that if you throw let’s say an average of eight rolls during the point-cycle (including the roll that establishes the Point and the roll that you ultimately 7-Out on), then you’ll probably see two trash-numbers somewhere in the roll-outcome mix. That means that 2-out-of-your-6 “heart-of-the-roll” (mid point-cycle) throws are eaten up by 2’s, 3’s, 11’s or 12’s. That “problem” is in and of itself quite exploitable, but most low-bankroll players can’t sustain the whipsaw volatility that comes with most types of wagers that best utilize those junk numbers.
My sense of it is that for most modestly-bankrolled PL w/Odds, Come-wagers and Place-bet types of players; this dice-set will eat up about one-third (33%) of your non-determining (non PL-Point establishing and non PL-Point ending) rolls with non Box-Numbers. Now if your adequately-funded wagering-method does efficiently address this dilemma (like some of the ones we discussed in You Can’t Shine A Cow-Patty…Or Can You? - Part One)…then all the better. However, if your modestly-financed wagers are focused on box-numbers and trying to repeat your PL-Point; then the X-6 set may not offer you the best bang for the bucks you have out on the layout.
Flying V-3 Set
By far, the V-3 set is my all-time favorite for point-cycle shooting. Not only is there a low preponderance of on-axis 7’s, but there is a much healthier and broader population of box-numbers that match up quite well against those two O/A 7’s.
Let’s have a look:
There are three each of the on-axis 6’s and 8’s. Those two numbers dwarf the O/A 7 by a margin of 3:1. Taken individually, (the 6 vs. the 7 for example), and you still have a 3:2 domination. As your on-axis skills improve and your face-control deftness develops, this set takes on almost unspeakable money-earning potential in the hands of savvy Precision-Shooters.
With two each on-axis 5’s and 9’s, plus one each of the 4 and 10, the V-3 offers a decent range of box-numbers, but with an obvious weighting towards the 6 and 8. If you were looking for a set that you could use to specifically snipe out the 6 or 8; then this would definitely be the one.
On the other hand, if you still have significant unresolved double-pitch problems, then this set is no better (or no worse) than any of the other 7-scarce sets.
Mini V-2 Set
I would term this dice-arrangement as a “broad spectrum” set in that it offers a wide and equally balanced range of box-numbers right across the board.
With two each of ALL the box-numbers (4, 5, 6, 8, 9 and 10), the V-2 is ideal for both Come-bettors looking for repeating numbers, as well as PL-Point “echoes” where the Pass-line number comes back to show itself again before the 7-Out.
Both the 2 and 12 are entirely absent from the on-axis expectancy for this set, and the 3 and 11 only make one appearance each. The significance of this should be clear, and again we’ll be delving into on-axis proficiencies in much greater detail in upcoming chapters, but suffice it to say that the less trash you throw during your point-cycle (especially if you aren’t betting on them); the better your chances of producing PL-Point, traveled-Come and Place-bet repeaters.
An astute dicesetter gets to know each of the six basic dice-sets as well as any tune he may know off by heart or anything else that is intimately familiar. You have to know what each of these sets offers and what each of them can or cannot do for you in terms of where your current dice-influencing skills are at right now.
Clearly the entire idea of influencing the dice to avoid 7’s is much more complicated that just saying, “Use the X-6 set…avoid the double-pitch and everything will be fine” or “Use the Hardway-set…throw them OFF-axis and the world is yours”.
Precision-Shooting is a little more complex than that.
It is also a little more difficult than sitting down and doing a few math equations; then pronouncing what is best for the world. That’s a little like trying to fight a global war…on a piece of paper. It might have made perfect sense back at headquarters where each army-division is neatly represented by one little plastic soldier, and each Air Wing is represented by a miniature plastic airplane. Unfortunately, the friction of real-world battle most always turns those neat and tidy plans into sadly referenced and jokingly referred to footnotes in the annals of history.
Without a doubt, dice-influencing is a thinking-persons game, and you have to put significant thought and effort into determining how best to couple and match your current on-axis and double-pitch-avoidance skills with the right dice-set to meet your objectives in a real-world casino setting.
The next five chapters in this series will provide some penetrating insight to help you do just that, as well as taking an in-depth look at on-axis proficiencies and what they mean to you in terms of utilizing, exploiting and reliably profiting from your right-here/right-now dice-influencing abilities.
Good luck & Good Skill at the Tables…and in Life.
The Mad Professor