Ok, then having out a lucky coin is also cheating.

No. A lucky coin has nothing to do with the game. It's a belief. It's not an intentional action to influence the tools of the game.

I find it very difficult to believe that anybody is incapable of grasping this distinction between superstition and intent to cheat.

It´s not about rolling hits every time. If you suceed to influence your dice that you get an additional hit out of 100 throws, you have cheated. So you cannot distinguish between intent and result.

Furthermore, if you intent to influence your dice and fail, nonetheless you influenced the game in a manner (that can turn out to be advantageous for you later on).

If the player I mentioned in my first post looks at his dice during shaking, then hesitate and stops for half a second, make a short additional shaking movement while looking at the dice prior throwing them, it more than supsicious at least for me.

I think the real sticking point is the difference between "trying to use magic" (lucky hat, shirt, etc) and "actively trying to alter an outcome through mechanics" (a specific number of shakes to settle the dice right where you want them for a throw, or holding a die blank-side up between your 3rd and 4th finger before throwing it to provide a specific amount of torque and roll on the throw). Those are very different things. A lucky hat doesnt ACTUALLY do anything. However dice control is a real thing, and you can get banned from casinos for getting caught doing it.

True, but what if you're not so much rolling a hit on command as rolling slightly more hits over the long term? That could have a statistically significant difference throughout the course of the game, or a whole tournament, even if each individual throw isn't perfectly executed.

It's not an intentional action to influence the tools of the game.

Yes it is, the fact that you feel inclined to stick your fingers in your ear and keep repeating the same thing doesn't change the facts or the illogic of your post. The fact that you keep repeating that and denying the obvious logical flaw proves beyond a doubt you know you are wrong, so you keep repeating the same false statement.

There is no logical or practical difference between doing something that you think has an effect on the game, regardless of it's actual effect, and having a talisman. Both are based on the intent to change the outcome of the game with some sort of outside force.

Your argument is based purely on the intent of the person, and since intent is all that matters, then the actual action is irrelevant.

"It's cheating even if it doesn't do anything, but only if it may actually do something, because if it doesn't then it's not really cheating"

Exactly. Even if dice control only results in a 10% increase in his chances of getting a favorable result, that's still rigging the game in his favor.

Then show that you can achieve even 10% increase in odds with dice control.

If you're going to accuse someone of something, then the burden of proof is on you, because cheating like other legal cases is innocent until proven guilty. So if you think someone is cheating, and you call the TO over. You better have something to back up that claim, and not just 'they were using the force'.

Dom LoRiggio, known in craps circles as the “The Dice Dominator”, has turned the craps world upside down with his uncanny ability of being able to control the dice when he throws them. He was recently featured on the History Channel’s “Dice Dominator”.

So yeah, if someone keeps looking at his dice in order to set them a certain way before they throw them, it might be worth bringing up to the TO.

But craps dice are not the same thing as X-Wing dice, the shape is different, the space you throw is different, ect...

So while someone may be able to exert some control over a 2 6 sided dice on a craps table, that does nothing to prove you can do the same with 3-5 8 sided dice on a X-Wing table. Although there's plenty of people who still say that the idea of dice control is a myth.

It's quite simple, use dice control and roll 3 dice 1000 times and see if you can achieve greater than expected results. Until you actually prove such a thing, dice control in X-Wing is as much magic as my hat is.

So yeah, if someone keeps looking at his dice in order to set them a certain way before they throw them, it might be worth bringing up to the TO.

But craps dice are not the same thing as X-Wing dice, the shape is different, the space you throw is different, ect...

So while someone may be able to exert some control over a 2 6 sided dice on a craps table, that does nothing to prove you can do the same with 3-5 8 sided dice on a X-Wing table.

It's quite simple, use dice control and roll 3 dice 1000 times and see if you can achieve greater than expected results. Until you actually prove such a thing, dice control in X-Wing is as much magic as my hat is.

It looks just as suspicious as when my brother would reveal his dial towards him, holding it in both hands, before putting it down fully. I can't tell, but he could very well be adjusting his maneuver.

The point you are entirely missing is, if it looks shady, and your opponent isn't comfortable with it, stop doing it or discuss it with the TO. There is the possibility that it can change the outcome. Just because you keep shouting "prove it" doesn't mean it's okay to do. Again, it comes down to the agreement of the rest of the involved parties (opponents and TO), not just yourself about what is acceptable.

Again, it comes down to the agreement of the rest of the involved parties (opponents and TO), not just yourself about what is acceptable.

Of course, but you also have to accept that the TO may give you a 'strike' for waiting their time, because the other person as doing something you didn't like. Accusing someone of cheating is after all a fairly serious thing to do, or at least I think it is.

I've always said you are free to call the TO over anytime you like, but you better be prepared backup your case, or else you may have a ticked off TO.

Again, it comes down to the agreement of the rest of the involved parties (opponents and TO), not just yourself about what is acceptable.

Of course, but you also have to accept that the TO may give you a 'strike' for waiting their time, because the other person as doing something you didn't like.

I've always said you are free to call the TO over anytime you like, but you better be prepared backup your case, or else you may have a ticked off TO.

I gotta say, I wouldn't play in any sort of environment where the TO gets angry over doing his job. Or where people are trying to manipulate dice. That just sounds like a hostile, unenjoyable experience altogether. I prefer playing with people who fling their dice naturally, and are pleasant company, and the TO is happy to help sort out any confusion over rules, making everyone better and easing any tension.

and the TO is happy to help sort out any confusion over rules, making everyone better and easing any tension.

But you're not talking about confusion over the rules, you're talking about accusing someone of cheating.

Perhaps it's just me, but I consider that to be a fairly serious thing to do, and so you shouldn't be done lightly. It sure won't foster a casual and enjoyable environment for anyone once that kind of accusation starts getting thrown around.

and the TO is happy to help sort out any confusion over rules, making everyone better and easing any tension.

But you're not talking about confusion over the rules, you're talking about accusing someone of cheating.

.........You realize that "cheating" means "breaking the rules," right? I'd say that trying to determine if something is or is not "breaking the rules" constitutes "confusion over the rules." Or "concern." Same difference.

.........You realize that "cheating" means "breaking the rules," right?

Cheating isn't just making a mistake or being confused about the rules. It's an intentional breaking of the rules to gain an advantage, not a honest mistake.

You don't accuse someone of cheating because you believe they misunderstand the rules and did something wrong unintentionally.

I don't see how anyone can honestly confuse the two things...

.........You realize that "cheating" means "breaking the rules," right?

Cheating isn't just making a mistake or being confused about the rules. It's an intentional breaking of the rules to gain an advantage, not a honest mistake.

You don't accuse someone of cheating because you believe they misunderstand the rules and did something wrong unintentionally.

I don't see how anyone can honestly confuse the two things...

I don't see how it makes a lick of a difference. Either way, it's the TO's job to sort it out. Ultimately, if the players don't agree, it's his call.

I don't see how it makes a lick of a difference.

You can't see how there's a difference between someone confused about how Push the Limits and Experimental Interface interact vs accusing someone of cheating?

You do realize I hope that calling someone a cheater is generally seen as derogatory.

This again... People, it is nigh-impossible to influence a dice roll if the dice bounce. The higher you go up the dice# the more random your roll. Anything else is just a superstition.

As they fall, gravity converts the potential energy of a set of dice to kinetic energy. Each time they bounce, they transfer some of their kinetic energy to the table. Because the table's reaction force is subject to a number of uncontrollable initial conditions, each bounce adds to the "randomness" of the final result.

(A good dice-rolling surface is a Goldilocks sort of thing: enough energy is transferred away from the dice with each bounce that they slow down and stop after a couple of rolls and bounces, but they also can't die off too quickly.)

The kind of dice manipulation I've seen (in RPGs, not in X-wing) is people who set the die in their hand and then "roll" it by setting it down with a thump. It's pretty easy to tell when it's happening if you're watching for it, and in general if the dice don't roll or bounce then the result isn't random...

The attempt itself to physically manipulate the outcome is cheating.

Other than the fact that you can't actually do that, you might actually have a point. But you can't, so you don't.

...and that's why I'm sympathetic to Jeff's position here even if someone isn't actually able to manipulate the dice. The message from the TO should be "don't cheat, don't pretend to cheat, and don't do things that make me think you might be trying to cheat". The opposing player in the OP was acting squirrely about his dice, which alone ought to trigger a warning from the TO.

To put it another way: would it be okay if my opponent dealt damage cards off the bottom of the deck, or shuffled the deck every time he was about to pull a face-up card? Neither one is likely to actually impact the result, unless the deck has been stacked. But it still looks weird, and there's no reason to do it unless you're trying to cheat, so it's probably a good idea to avoid it.

The message from the TO should be "don't cheat, don't pretend to cheat, and don't do things that make me think you might be trying to cheat".

I agree, but there's a rather large difference between staring at your dice and shaking them so a given side is up before you roll them and placing them on the table so they don't actually roll or bounce.

As long as they roll and/or bounce a few times, anything you do is no more effective on control the dice then a lucky coin is, and so accordingly is not and can not be cheating. Unless we accept anything done to control random chance is cheating... Again making that lucky coin cheating.

The message from the TO should be "don't cheat, don't pretend to cheat, and don't do things that make me think you might be trying to cheat". The opposing player in the OP was acting squirrely about his dice, which alone ought to trigger a warning from the TO.

To put it another way: would it be okay if my opponent dealt damage cards off the bottom of the deck, or shuffled the deck every time he was about to pull a face-up card? Neither one is likely to actually impact the result, unless the deck has been stacked. But it still looks weird, and there's no reason to do it unless you're trying to cheat, so it's probably a good idea to avoid it.

Pretty much exactly the point I was making. If someone else sees your actions as sketchy, they have every right to call the TO over, and it's the TO's responsibility to make a ruling (which, I think we should all agree, is what Vorpal said - "don't do anything that even gives me reason to suspect you.")

If someone else sees your actions as sketchy, they have every right to call the TO over, and it's the TO's responsibility to make a ruling

Because you are in fact accusing someone of cheating at that point, that is IMO not something that should be done lightly. So I'm not saying you can't or even shouldn't... Just that you shouldn't do it lightly.

I do think it is possible to consistently roll very similar dice results.

If you roll dice the exact same way, on the exact same surface, with the dice facing the exact same direction in your hand before the roll, or even bouncing them the exact same way in your hand each time, then it stands to reason that you should get the exact same result. We have to think about the Physics behind the dice rolling. If you have the exact same inputs with the exact same frictions and forces each time, then the dice SHOULD roll the exact same way each time. Heck, maybe table friction and things like air pressure have such little affect that the rolling input forces can greatly outweigh the forces out of your control.

Obviously, putting in the exact same input is not possible for us humans (or even most machines, though you can get pretty tight tolerances).

6 Sided Cubes themselves are not random objects. You can model the ideal performance of a cube/any object. If you flip a coin with the exact same forces and catch it at the exact same time (ideally) you should get the exact same result. Has anyone built a machine that does this? Something that flips coins to get roughly the same result? I'd like to know!

I think it stands to reason that using one consistent technique to roll dice will give you more consistent results, though it obviously needs a large sample size to prove.

This again... People, it is nigh-impossible to influence a dice roll if the dice bounce. The higher you go up the dice# the more random your roll. Anything else is just a superstition.

As they fall, gravity converts the potential energy of a set of dice to kinetic energy. Each time they bounce, they transfer some of their kinetic energy to the table. Because the table's reaction force is subject to a number of uncontrollable initial conditions, each bounce adds to the "randomness" of the final result.(A good dice-rolling surface is a Goldilocks sort of thing: enough energy is transferred away from the dice with each bounce that they slow down and stop after a couple of rolls and bounces, but they also can't die off too quickly.)The kind of dice manipulation I've seen (in RPGs, not in X-wing) is people who set the die in their hand and then "roll" it by setting it down with a thump. It's pretty easy to tell when it's happening if you're watching for it, and in general if the dice don't roll or bounce then the result isn't random...

The attempt itself to physically manipulate the outcome is cheating.

Other than the fact that you can't actually do that, you might actually have a point. But you can't, so you don't.

...and that's why I'm sympathetic to Jeff's position here even if someone isn't actually able to manipulate the dice. The message from the TO should be "don't cheat, don't pretend to cheat, and don't do things that make me think you might be trying to cheat". The opposing player in the OP was acting squirrely about his dice, which alone ought to trigger a warning from the TO.To put it another way: would it be okay if my opponent dealt damage cards off the bottom of the deck, or shuffled the deck every time he was about to pull a face-up card? Neither one is likely to actually impact the result, unless the deck has been stacked. But it still looks weird, and there's no reason to do it unless you're trying to cheat, so it's probably a good idea to avoid it.

I agree with this.

Obviously, putting in the exact same input is not possible for us humans (or even most machines, though you can get pretty tight tolerances).

Yes of course, in theory it's possible, but in practice dice control of a 8 sided dice on a unknown surface has as much impact as my lucky coin does.

in order to control the dice to any meaningful amount would require things out of anyones control.

For one you'd have to control how much impact the dice have in the air with each other. Then you'd have to use the same surface every time. You'd have to give them the same amount of energy every time, and control the number of bounces they make.

Just the fact that you get a random surface on a random table alone would mess up most methods to control the dice.

Accusing someone of cheating should not be done lightly, but if you give anyone reason to suspect you're cheating, that's on you, not the person noticing it.

At what point does superstition become a reason to suspect someone? All dice superstitions are inherently about controlling random chance after all.

So again as I've said a number of times now. If you effectively place the dice on the table so they don't actually roll or bounce. Then yes you're doing something wrong.

But if you roll the dice and they bounce and roll across the table, then you've given up all possible control, and what you did is nothing more than just another superstition.

I found an article about a coin flipping machine:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1697475

Sometimes I get mad when I come up with an idea that has already been done.

But my argument stands, if you roll dice with the exact same method, table, same dice, etc, you WILL get the exact same results. And it IS possible that there are certain aspects, like the rolling technique and dice position in hand, that could have a greater influence on the over all result.

Random dice generators might just give more random results than hand rolled dice. Take THAT VASSAL dice haters!

Obviously, putting in the exact same input is not possible for us humans (or even most machines, though you can get pretty tight tolerances).

Yes of course, in theory it's possible, but in practice dice control of a 8 sided dice on a unknown surface has as much impact as my lucky coin does.in order to control the dice to any meaningful amount would require things out of anyones control.For one you'd have to control how much impact the dice have in the air with each other. Then you'd have to use the same surface every time. You'd have to give them the same amount of energy every time, and control the number of bounces they make.Just the fact that you get a random surface on a random table alone would mess up most methods to control the dice.