Wong on Dice

[Nottom]

Anyone else watch this?

Seemed pretty interesting.

[wayabvpar]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone else watch this?

Seemed pretty interesting.

[/ QUOTE ]

I saw it. I have never rolled at a craps table, but now I want to screw around with it and see how hard it is to do this (I am guessing QUITE).

[Cyrus]

Greetings, Mason.

[ QUOTE ]
My impression, though I could be wrong, based on a source I have is that Wong has lost his mind.

[/ QUOTE ]I cannot assess your source's reliability, but I know this : Writing and publishing a book about beating Craps, even if the book contains false information and/or promises, does not mean that the author has lost his mind.

I'll let Schoonmaker elaborate.

[ QUOTE ]
I also understand that [Stanford Wong] has done a live demonstration of his methods and it failed miserably.

[/ QUOTE ]Wong made a bet and a group that included a mathematician, an economist, a sharp sports bettor, a couple of advantage players and assorted fauna took him on - and lost. It has been subsequently argued that the combined results of Little Joe and Stanford, in the course of the bet, could have been a product of variance, rather than advantage play. But Wong won the bet.

Here's the relevant post made on 7 September 2004 by Stanford Wong from the subscription-only area of his Blackjack website:

[ QUOTE ]
The challenge has taken place, though I won’t say where or when.
<font color="white"> .</font>
The monitors counted dice tosses made by Little Joe and me; there were no other shooters whose tosses were included. Overall in 500 tosses we had 74 sevens, for an SRR of 1:6.76. Random rollers achieve 74 or fewer sevens in 500 rolls 14.4% of the time.
<font color="white"> .</font>
Little Joe Green tossed the dice 222 times, of which 29 were sevens, for an SRR of 1:7.66. I tossed the dice 278 times, of which 45 were sevens, for an SRR of 1:6.18.
<font color="white"> .</font>

The under 79.5 was the winner. Little Joe and I had the under, and won $15,350 on the side bet. People taking the over 79.5 and losing are Kim Lee $5500; Fezzik $5500; MathProf $2750; Shadow $550; David Matthews $550, and Thatch $500.

[/ QUOTE ]

Cheers,

--Cyrus

[Al Schoonmaker]

I don't remember making that statement about Wong, and I doubt very much that I did so. I NEVER play anything but poker, and I have no reason to comment on any other game.

Regards,

Al

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't remember making that statement about Wong, and I doubt very much that I did so. I NEVER play anything but poker, and I have no reason to comment on any other game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not even "What's My Line?"

[Luv2DriveTT]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't remember making that statement about Wong, and I doubt very much that I did so. I NEVER play anything but poker, and I have no reason to comment on any other game.

Regards,

Al

[/ QUOTE ]

Dr. Al:

I don't think the poster was implying that was your quote on Wong, I think he was making a jovial comment related to your profession. I actually got a laugh out of it, but I had to re-read his post 3 times before i got the joke.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]