In a documentary on craps legends, there was an incident in which the Dominator was about to roll, and the stick man reached behind the back of another player and touched Dom on the shoulder with his stick. Dom, of course, blew the roll. I understand that it is the job of the stick man to upset a roller, maybe with taunting or golf-style outbursts at critical times. But physical contact? Would the Gaming Commission really allow this?
Heh, I thought this would be about warning signs and the stick figures getting mangled by giant rollers.
Why do you think this? In the countless hours I’ve whiled away at various craps tables, I’ve never noticed a stickman to be antagonistic. Well, maybe one, but he appeared to just generally be an asshole.
I remember one time the girl on the stick was good-naturedly ribbed by another dealer (also female) behind the rails. She commented that the girl seemed “so excited” when calling “OOOUUUT SEVEN!”. (She really was a bit overly excited in making those calls, and subsequently toned it down slightly.)
I have no factual answers for you, but as the thread seems barren, I’ll offer the WAG that no human contact is allowed for the purpose of hindering cheating though complicity. The stick itself? No idea.
Because that’s what it said in the documentary, that one job of a stick man was to distract and upset a roller who was beating the odds.
Is the documentary credible? It sounds ridiculous. It seems like the same sort of notion that houses change dealers in order to thwart people’s luck at blackjack - just a silly notion.
It’s not as if people do well at craps by skillfully managing to control the roll of the dice, so what would be the point of antagonism? Very doubtful that the casinos would piss off gamblers in this way.
It sounds like the notion that a lot of gamblers have - that the house has ways beyond the odds of the games to beat them, like bringing in other dealers, or “coolers”, or… in this case, antagonistic stick men. I’m guessing they think this so that they can explain their losses at gambling not through their own stupidity, but through a conspiracy against them.
I’m lost. How can throwing dice require skill? Doesn’t it just require… throwing the dice?
In what way?
How does one roll ‘skillfully’ as opposed to with no skill because you’ve been put off? Why would a casino train someone to put people off doing something that involves no skill and is blind chance?
You’re correct. However, gamblers often have notions that they can somehow beat the system, and also believe that casinos will use tactics to counter this.
In this case, this just seems like some sort of urban legend a gambler cooked up who had a notion that dice could be rolled skillfully, or some such, but that the casinos have antagonistic stick men to counter it.
I watched the same documentary (“Breaking Vegas” on the History Channel) and it did not appear to me that the shooter blew a roll because of the touch. As it was presented, it appeared that the contact came before the roll and the roll was then not made. It was a re-enactment, though, so who knows what actually happened. There’s a disclaimer on the front of each episode stating that special attention is paid to historical accuracy, but there was an ep on that reporter guy who made the final table of the 2000 WSOP and there seemed to be some factual errors.
The narration of the craps episode indicated that part of the stickman’s job is to rattle players on streaks or who appear to be practicing dice control by heckling, but I got the impression that the touching was an extraordinary event.
Per the documentary, dice control involves lining up the dice faces so that certain numbers are more or less likely to come up, and controlling the trajectory and velocity of the dice to minimize the number of times the dice bounce when they come off the back wall. One example given in the documentary is that on the “come out” roll (the roll that establishes the point) the shooter should line up the dice faces so that they add up to 7 on each side. There is
This is the website for the Golden Touch craps team, which is the team established by documentary subject Dominic LoRiggio and craps author Frank Scoblete.
I meant to say, there is a lot of controversy that dice control works.
Thanks, Otto. I believe you’re right about that. People interested in the topic of dice control in general, or the Dominator, in particular can Google it.
Still, though, I’d like the question answered as a hypothetical. Would the Gaming Commission allow a stick man to touch a roller?
I used to hang around the rec.gambling.craps usenet group, and there the crazies abounded. Countless descriptions – in excruciating detail – about the best way to set the dice.
Every place I’ve ever shot craps, the primary job of the stickman(men) to drum up more bets through fast talking and heckling.
“Who want’s a YO bet?”
“Want me to press that bet for ya?”
“Put a couple chips behind the pass line, you’ll get better odds”.
I’d imagine this particular activity makes the house a lot more money than upsetting shooters on a roll. After all, if the shooter’s on a roll and everyone is winning, but the stickmen convince most of the people to press their bets, when the shooter finally sevens out, the house won’t have lost (nearly) anything.
Someone tell me what the heck a ‘stickman’ is? Is it the guy with the stick who collects the dice and returns them to the roller? Because from what you guys are saying it sounds like he’s someone else.
As for the ‘dice control’ thing I’ve seen all sorts in marathon D&D sessions. Good luck to them.
The stickman is the dealer who holds the stick. The basic job is to call out the current roll, collect and distribute the dice between each roll, and manage the horn bets.
The other two dealers are responsible for managing the Place/Buy/Lay bets as well as any established (don’t) come bets (plus their corresponding odds), and to collect/pay out all bets for any player on their side of the table.
The stickman will generally tell the other dealers who had which horn bets when hell freezes over and they actually hit.
You misspelled idiocy.
I think I spotted a statistical fallacy with respect to the claims made about Dominator’s dice control. The documentary listed about a half dozen runs that he had had in his career — 26, 37, 19, 29, etc. rolls between sevens, or some such. But it seems to me that that is not remarkable given the span of his career. I’d be interested in an unabridged dataset.
(Still waiting to hear whether anyone knows the Gaming Commission rule…)
Assuming that they’re both standard dice (and this being Vegas, I think that’s probably a safe assumption), this is impossible. At best, the shooter could arrange for the dice to add up to seven on four of the six faces. Whether that would be enough for dice control to be effective, I don’t know, but given the fact that the casinos are still in business, I’m going to guess probably not.
39 is quite impressive, but not unreasonable. Non-7 has an 83.3% chance of happening, so it isn’t that hard to string them together.
In my casino experience, which is not very extensive, I have personally witnessed 14 Passes in a row. The fact that I was playing a system on the darkside tested my resolve, which cracked after 9 consecutive losses. (Ouch!) I quickly switched* to the Aggressive Let It Ride strategy, which needs 4 Passes in a row to win and promptly won back $300 of the $450 the 9 passes cost me. I then stayed at the table until the Don’t hit, which happened after one final pass.
So, which is more impressive?
14 Passes in a row = .005% chance, or
39 non-7s in a row = .08% chance?
- Note the balls it took to bet a 4-bet progression on the pass line when 9 passes in a row just happened. The gambler’s fallacy in me was SCREAMING to go back to the don’t.
As to the OP, did our resident craps dealer bail on the SDMB when it went pay to post?