craps going to lay only 6 and 8

This weekend I think I am going to lay only the 6 and 8 for $25 each($50 total) on each come out and either win or let them fall. My bankroll will be $200. If I get a cold table watch out. Hot table I am dead. Any comments?

I'd be very careful with this strategy, it seems like a sure-fire way to slowly bleed money. If you (lose) one and then seven out, you're still down $6. Even if you personally get hot, you won't be making craploads of money... I think you'd be better off with a don't pass and one don't come (a little more strenuous on the bankroll).

I'd have to agree. You are making 2 bets with 4% HA and I don't even see for what reason. The probabilites say that it more than likely that a 6 OR 8 would be rolled before a 7, and therefore you lose. That's just me though. I HATE betting more than I will win.

I like that strategy. Low variance, with the chance to win a bundle if a lot of sevens roll. Plus, you might get rated higher than you would with just line/odds. Let us know how it goes!

Edit: I'm a little confused. Why don't you just use place bets to lose?

Quote: ruascott

I'd have to agree. You are making 2 bets with 4% HA and I don't even see for what reason. The probabilites say that it more than likely that a 6 OR 8 would be rolled before a 7, and therefore you lose. That's just me though. I HATE betting more than I will win.

1) The HA depends heavily on the rules at the particular casino. If they collect
the vig only after a win, that lowers the HA, but not as much as on buy bets,
since lay bets have >50% chance to win. Also, you are really betting $24 to win
$20, right? If they collect only on a win, they will pay you $19 for a win, take
the $24 if you lose. At this level, the HA is then 2.27%. However, you need to
find out the maximum bet for which they still charge only $1 vig, which may be as high as $36.

2) You are seriously under-capitalized at $200 with $50 on the table. Your risk of ruin is very, very high, about 44% in a sim I ran on WinCraps, 10,000 sessions of up to 60 bets. About 25% of the sessions turned $100 profit or more, up to $774.

I tried an alternate strategy, laying no 6 for $36, assuming a $1 vig collected
only on a win. This yields an HA that is the same as placing the six (1.515%). So, you have a lower HA and less money at risk on each comeout. The bust rate was still high, about 33%, but almost 30% of the time it won at least $100, up to $895, in 60 bets.

The trend towards collecting buy/lay vigs only on a win really tips the scale in favor of buy bets, because they win less than 50% of the time, only 33% for buy 4/10.

Cheers,
Alan Shank

Quote: goatcabin

1) The HA depends heavily on the rules at the particular casino. If they collect
the vig only after a win, that lowers the HA, but not as much as on buy bets,
since lay bets have >50% chance to win. Also, you are really betting $24 to win
$20, right? If they collect only on a win, they will pay you $19 for a win, take
the $24 if you lose. At this level, the HA is then 2.27%. However, you need to
find out the maximum bet for which they still charge only $1 vig, which may be as high as $36.

2) You are seriously under-capitalized at $200 with $50 on the table. Your risk of ruin is very, very high, about 44% in a sim I ran on WinCraps, 10,000 sessions of up to 60 bets. About 25% of the sessions turned $100 profit or more, up to $774.

I tried an alternate strategy, laying no 6 for $36, assuming a $1 vig collected
only on a win. This yields an HA that is the same as placing the six (1.515%). So, you have a lower HA and less money at risk on each comeout. The bust rate was still high, about 33%, but almost 30% of the time it won at least $100, up to $895, in 60 bets.

The trend towards collecting buy/lay vigs only on a win really tips the scale in favor of buy bets, because they win less than 50% of the time, only 33% for buy 4/10.

Cheers,
Alan Shank

I'd agree. I guess that's why he said if the table was hot he'd be dead. I wouldn't even think it would need to be hot. Just luke warm and he could be done real quick. Could be an incredibly short session.

If you do try this out, please post and let us know how it went.

Aweful weekend playing craps. I layed 6 and 8 before the come out, $25 each(vig of $1 after win, $24 will get you $20). The guy hit the 8 then the 6. I went again with just the 8 and he hit it. Famous last words, he can't hit again. I went again with the 8 he hit it. The dealer looks at me and says you should have been here 10 minutes ago. Then I put $5 on the don't and he hits 3 7's. I am down $115. I wait for the next shooter. I decide to play the pass. The guy hit 3 aces, then 2 3's. Another $25 gone. I am just standing there with my mouth open. The dealer makes some comment about my timing being off. He rolls a six, I go 3 times odds and put 12 on the 8 and 10 on the 5. He sevens out!!! I made it back on my $250 free slot play with job vp 9/6 max $5 and cashed it out. I hit a couple 4 of kind and several full houses. Yesterday I gave it all back. Even the food was bad. And I found 2 spiders in my suitcase. Not a good weekend. Later I played the don't and slowly went up to about $100 doing 2 $5 don't on the first 2 rolls with no odds. This time I was not betting the 6/8 lay and would have won ever session. All in the timing. Good stats guys, thanks for runnng them. I am going to try it again this weekend.

Quote: teddys

Edit: I'm a little confused. Why don't you just use place bets to lose?

I don't believe place bets to lose are accepted at many places. The Wiz says only a single casino in Australia and some internet casinos have it.

This seems a very unwise strategy. If your bankroll is so limited, I would avoid the dark side. If you do want the dark side but have a limited bankroll then a simple DP with one or two DC bets seems more sensible. Laying odds may eat up a good chunk of your bankroll.

Quote: FleaStiff

This seems a very unwise strategy. If your bankroll is so limited, I would avoid the dark side. If you do want the dark side but have a limited bankroll then a simple DP with one or two DC bets seems more sensible. Laying odds may eat up a good chunk of your bankroll.

I don't think the problem is with the "side", but rather the size of the bankroll relative to the size of the bets. With a $200 stake and $48 on the table, it doesn't take a whole lot of negative variance to wipe you out. The skew is opposite to the right-side skew, but you expect more winning bets than losing ones. Obviously, that didn't happen. Any strategy can get hammered by the wrong dice rolls - that's gambling!

The original poster might consider making one lay-no-4 bet for $40 or $50 (if $1 vig); that way, you'd expect to win 2 of 3 bets, so you'd have to be even more unlucky to wipe out, but it also means they'd collect the vig more often. Squeeze the balloon on one side, and it bulges out on the other!!!

As FleaStiff says, with only $200, you might be better of betting DP, where you can bet the table minimum and pay only 1.4% vig. I recommend laying single odds rather than making Don't Come bets, because they do not increase the expected loss, whereas DC bets do. At a $10 table, you can bet $10 DP and lay $12, $15 and $20 odds; you never have more than $30 on the table and your average bet is just about $21. That would reduce your chance of busting within a couple of hours to about 20%.
Cheers,
Alan Shank