"Snake-Eyes" Joe introduced a die of his own into a game of chance.
He was subsequently challenged that the die was biased.
Very rigorously test
to see if there are grounds to substantiate this claim; don't accept just two or three trial runs. Are you able to offer a theoretical model consistent with your findings?
"Snake-Eyes" Joe's Die with this simulator which has a run of 60,000 at a time:
Note: the data changes with each subsequent mouse-over visitation to the link.
(In reply to possible theory
I wondered about your choice of the fraction 11/66 to represent 1/6 but I now understand your reason.
In looking at your result I very much doubt that one could come much
closer to my 'ideal', ie, the concept against which the simulated data
was generated to 'mirror'. It seems that, as a percentage, your model
differs by about 0.107% on the value of "1" against mine.
In terms of your "NOTE:", your observations, as are those of Charlie,
are consistent with mine as I developed this. I have some exercise of
control over the tally allocated to "1" but to a lesser degree for the
And yes, a small margin of 2% might net casinos a tidy reward.
I have a serious thought before I release my "official solution".
Posted by brianjn
on 2008-07-29 10:57:48