New droppers

[diane]

[dorbel]

All the statistical evidence regarding fibs dice points to the conclusion that they are in fact random and unbiased. There is no statistical evidence to the contrary.
All the scientific evidence points to the planet earth being several billion years old. There is no scientific evidence to support the theory that it was created in the space of a week ten thousand years ago.
Neither of these situations is a stalemate. What we have in each case is a theory unsupported by any evidence whatsoever that challenges the accepted status quo, yet relies on blind faith. They are analogous.
Science has observed that in the past an apple falling from a tree has invariably fallen downwards. I accept that tomorrow it is possible that one will fall upwards, but this does not mean that it deserves equal consideration to the established theory.

[Yvon]

All the statistical evidence regarding fibs dice points to the conclusion that they are in fact random and unbiased. There is no statistical evidence to the contrary.
All the scientific evidence points to the planet earth being several billion years old. There is no scientific evidence to support the theory that it was created in the space of a week ten thousand years ago.
Neither of these situations is a stalemate. What we have in each case is a theory unsupported by any evidence whatsoever that challenges the accepted status quo, yet relies on blind faith. They are analogous.
Science has observed that in the past an apple falling from a tree has invariably fallen downwards. I accept that tomorrow it is possible that one will fall upwards, but this does not mean that it deserves equal consideration to the established theory.

Come on dorbel there has not been ANY statistical evidence on the games themselves. Only statistical evidence on the dice. I said before that it only takes one joker roll if you have the means to cheat to in the game. THAT joker roll differs from game to game, so assuming you get it, it does NOT AFFECT whatever statistics  you do on dice.The randomness remains intact.

Now on scientific theories there are scientists today who question the law of gravity itself. In other words the common beleif so far is that it is a pulling force from the earth to the center of the apple. They say it is not a pulling force but a pushing one from the outside of the planet to the center... This is how humanity  progresses by questioning things, not by sticking around to beleif.

The heretic has spoken!!

[dorbel]

What you really mean is that you haven't actually gathered any evidence yourself. If the evidence is there, gather it and present it. To present your theories before you have done that is like the people who try to convince us of UFOs but who's camera mysteriously failed to work on the day that they saw one.
Why don't you play 100 matches against gammonbots, run them through Gnu (or Snowie, or BgBlitz or ExtremeGammon or even jellyfish) and count the jokers for each side? That would be a good start. At the same time you could of course record your playing level and that of the bot. You'll probably learn more from the second than the first.

[Yvon]

Should we repeat the same things over and over again?

I said before there are many parameters to evaluate a game and none of them will provide any evidence either pro or against the subject matter.Why do you concentrate on the matter of jokers? A simple hit decides the game more often than a joker. One simple round on bar...

Why don't you do yourself a test? Use GNU (I think this program gives you the option to manually input the rolls).So give yourself the option to decide on just one of the 2 dice once every game. So you will chose a number from 1-6 just for one of the dice once every game. I bet you will be able to win most of your MATCHES.Then do whatever statistics you like. If you ever manage to prove anything then i ll cut my throat!
But the fact REMAINS that you cheated haven't you?

[dorbel]

I said before that it only takes one joker roll if you have the means to cheat to in the game.

and later

Why do you concentrate on the matter of jokers?

Collect some stats Yvon. If it's there, it can be observed. Conversely if you can't observe it, it isn't there.

[Yvon]

Collect some stats Yvon. If it's there, it can be observed. Conversely if you can't observe it, it isn't there.

Same goes for you my friend re:the experiment i told you to do. The cheating will be there but you will not be able to observe it. So your conclusion that "because you can't observe it it isn't there" is obviously fallacious.

This brings us back to what I have proposed from the very very beginning:a password protected file containing pre rolled dice. It will clear up things once and for all.

Btw my suspicion towards the bots is something close to the experiment i told you to do.
But i still play the bots just to discover my weak points. Their weak point is very well known: "heavy backgame" they will do a total mess  

[dorbel]

Now I have, and I have hard evidence that I can use any time I wish.

and later

The cheating will be there but you will not be able to observe it.

Which is it? You can't say that you have hard evidence of cheating and that it can't be observed.

[stog]

Yvon by all means feel free to use the dice we provide here on Fibsboard - bottom of Front page right hand side below the donation info...

also..

With 7 donations in 6 months it will surely die soon anyway...so time for new blood..

the donations you mention are for this forum - fibsboard which is not an official support board for Fibs.

Please read "about Fibsboard" on the Front page.



If you appreciate Fibsboard and would like to contribute to its ongoing running costs, please click below and choose how much you would like to give. We appreciate any size of donation, and depending on amounts provided, we could then lessen our dependence on corporate advertisements, thx again.

to donate or advertise see here

[Yvon]

and later

Which is it? You can't say that you have hard evidence of cheating and that it can't be observed.

Right.... We started the tit for tat now...

After so many posts you remembered to go back to what i said 3 pages ago.

The first hard evidence is for my rating. I have it and it's upto me to reveal it to you or anyone.
The second one refers to the experiment I told you to do. I told you to cheat on purpose and then try to do statistics to prove it.

Everything a bit clearer now dorbel?

Btw I totally lost interest now. Bye.

*****************************

Hey stog, I heard you man. You  will get 3 donations from me.

[ah_clem]

This brings us back to what I have proposed from the very very beginning:a password protected file containing pre rolled dice. It will clear up things once and for all.

FIBS has one dice generator that is used across all matches, so there is no such thing as the pre-rolled dice file for a specific match.  The generator simply gives the next roll to thread that asks for it, without regard for which match/player is doing the asking (in particular, it doesn't know or care if the player is a bot). You could obtain this master roll list for the entire server, but you'd have no way of knowing which match would get which roll since this isn't determined until the matches are actually played, and depends on the speed of play  amongst other things.   IOW what you are asking for does not exist.

BTW, plenty of information has been produced to "clear things up once and for all".  It's just that the dice whiners cannot or will not understand it.

[diane]

IOW what you are asking for does not exist.

BTW, plenty of information has been produced to "clear things up once and for all".  It's just that the dice whiners cannot or will not understand it.

Yvon isn't asking for something that exists...but something which cant ever happen.

If you tried, there would be sooooooooooo many ways to cheat - passwords protect nothing, they can always be broken.  Whoever was playing this would accuse the other of cheating, and we would be in exactly the same place as we are now.  What a waste of effort.

Yvon could simple generate her own list of rolls and sit and plug them into gnu and see what happens...but that wouldn't prove her point, and she really isn't interested in anything which which doesn't conclusively prove she is right.

[rebcalale]

I personally do not drop but the only smart players on FIBS are droppers.  Why would anyone not drop when u have a "FIBS" (which is synonymous with highly improbable, more like impossible) chance of winning?  Do players enjoy beating others because of the ridiculous rolls commonly seen on Fibs that blatantly favor one player over another.  Is this good sportsmanship? NO its not!!!!!!  Not surprisingly, do the stats and u will see that ranked players r more often than not the recipient of unusually favorable rolls.   Guess what (again do the stats and/or use GNU) this has nothing to do with ranked players making better moves.  It has everything to do with fibs dice being absurdly improbable.  I once saw one of the Fibs apologists offer some reward if anyone could prove cheating and or that Fibs dice were not legit.  Well the same goes for the opposite position, I'd like to see someone prove that fibs dice r legit rather than simply say they r.  Doubt I will ever see it and I'm betting it's because it is impossible to prove something that is false.

let me MAKE this POINT very clear droppers t the only smart players on fibs

[rebcalale]

In other words crap is crap and fibs is crap but we all know that alreaady

[boomslang]

I said before there are many parameters to evaluate a game and none of them will provide any evidence either pro or against the subject matter.Why do you concentrate on the matter of jokers? A simple hit decides the game more often than a joker. One simple round on bar...

Why don't you do yourself a test? Use GNU (I think this program gives you the option to manually input the rolls).So give yourself the option to decide on just one of the 2 dice once every game. So you will chose a number from 1-6 just for one of the dice once every game. I bet you will be able to win most of your MATCHES.Then do whatever statistics you like. If you ever manage to prove anything then i ll cut my throat!
But the fact REMAINS that you cheated haven't you?

If, in such an experiment, you simply look at 'luck' as reported by GnuBG (whether measured in MWC or in EMG), you *will* be able to tell which of the two players was able to choose one die per game: luck from the player with fair dice will have an average of zero, whereas luck from the player who was allowed to choose one die in each game will have a positive average.

Not sure if this will convince you though.