mustangsally
Joined: Mar 29, 2011
• Posts: 1995
July 16th, 2015 at 10:33:29 AM permalink
Quote: MathExtremist

I used to think that minimizing theo was of paramount importance.

does that not lead us to what is the advantage of taking the odds?

here is from Steen
"The correct conclusion is that taking odds reduces your average loss per dollar of action"

is it that simple?

i guess it looks to B
I Heart Vi Hart
tommyngo215
Joined: Jul 13, 2015
• Posts: 47
July 16th, 2015 at 10:44:55 AM permalink
that's horrible. I heard about this couple days ago too. I was so shocked because they're one of a few big boys in town, I wonder why would they do that? But the good news is there are plenty of other casinos on the Strips offer much better odds then Wynn and the minimum isn't so high.

SLS has 1 table offer 10x odds flat across the board, and 4 others are 3/4/5

Red Rock has 10 odds too I believe I was just there last night.

Venetian is still 3/4/5
MGM, Bellagio, Cosmo, Aria are still good.
Ibeatyouraces
Joined: Jan 12, 2010
• Posts: 10537
July 16th, 2015 at 10:59:18 AM permalink
MSS is still 20x I believe.
"And that's the bottom lineeeee, cuz Stone Cold said so!"
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
• Posts: 16173
July 16th, 2015 at 11:01:50 AM permalink
The bottom line is the combined house edge under 2x odds is 0.606% and under 3-4-5x odds is 0.374%.

Let's consider these two players:

Adam: 2x odds with an average pass line bet of \$100.

Eve: 3-4-5x odds with an average pass line bet of \$61.72

Both players will risk the same amount of money but Eve will lose 38.3% less on average.

My advice is to 2x players is to simply cut your pass bets by 38% and walk over to a casino that takes 3-4-5x odds. The player will get the same amount of action and lose less money.

For those who just want to enjoy the casino ambiance with as little cost and risk as possible, I agree, just bet the minimum on the pass and no odds. Or bet equal amounts on the pass and don't pass if minimizing variance is paramount.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
• Posts: 6526
July 16th, 2015 at 11:42:32 AM permalink
Quote: Wizard

Adam: 2x odds with an average pass line bet of \$100.
Eve: 3-4-5x odds with an average pass line bet of \$61.72
Both players will risk the same amount of money but Eve will lose 38.3% less on average.

My advice is to 2x players is to simply cut your pass bets by 38% and walk over to a casino that takes 3-4-5x odds. The player will get the same amount of action and lose less money.

All absolutely true, but I submit that virtually nobody thinks about total action when playing craps. I'd bet that the majority of \$100/2x players at the Wynn would not, as a matter of course, walk to the Palazzo across the street to play \$60 or \$65 with 3-4-5x. No question that it costs less, but also no question that \$100 players get different treatment than \$60 players. I'm not just talking about comps.

It's a different story if you're shooting angles and trying to scoop up EV from improperly accepting dealer overpays/mistakes. If that's the approach, certainly betting oddball numbers like \$62 would increase the chances of that happening. Two green, two red, two white for the flat, plus 4x odds on a point of 5 is two black, one green, four red, three white. Good luck not getting nasty looks from the pit crew on that...
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
SanchoPanza
Joined: May 10, 2010
• Posts: 2966
July 16th, 2015 at 12:13:29 PM permalink
Quote: MathExtremist

If that's the approach, certainly betting oddball numbers like \$62 would increase the chances of that happening. Two green, two red, two white for the flat, plus 4x odds on a point of 5 is two black, one green, four red, three white. Good luck not getting nasty looks from the pit crew on that...

Some decent toking ought to be able to take care of most of the nasty looks.
ahiromu
Joined: Jan 15, 2010
• Posts: 1900
July 16th, 2015 at 12:39:42 PM permalink
Quote: MathExtremist

All absolutely true, but I submit that virtually nobody thinks about total action when playing craps.

I'm going to have to disagree with you there, but I think you have history on your side. I didn't think the average person was stupid enough to deal with 6:5, obviously I was wrong.

I'm more afraid of odds becoming something you can buy with a higher minimum like they have with 3:2. The difference between a \$10 table at 3,4,5x and a \$25 at 3,4,5x is pretty drastic in the variance world.
Its - Possessive; It's - "It is" / "It has"; There - Location; Their - Possessive; They're - "They are"
howesmr
Joined: Jul 12, 2015
• Posts: 6
July 16th, 2015 at 3:03:55 PM permalink
Quote: Ahigh

The Wynn is just making a ton of changes. Maybe they are just doing this to get people talking about what they are doing.

There were black curtains and "under construction" all over the place there.

Something is going on...

The dealers I talked to seem to think they were being cheated of watching all the girls go. The old spot had a lot of distractions, now they are in the middle of the casino. Maybe there was too much congestion there and they want the hooting a hollering to draw people on the floor.
howesmr
Joined: Jul 12, 2015
• Posts: 6
July 16th, 2015 at 3:20:29 PM permalink
Quote: NokTang

Has the Encore(next door to Wynn, also owned by Wynn) property also gone to 2 X odds in craps?

Yes Encore is 2X too
Eric721
Joined: Jul 15, 2015
• Posts: 23
July 16th, 2015 at 3:32:30 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard

Our point of departure seems to be whether it is good advice to recreational players to take full odds. I say it is, assuming the player is comfortable with the risk.

No, no, no.

This mentality is easy to fall into because most people ignore the come-out roll, which is a ridiculously large part of craps and can't (or at very least shouldn't) be ignored.

Odds serve no purpose whatsoever except to increase your variance. That has exactly one effect: you reach your loss limit faster. Odds in no way affect the expectation; they have none. The line bets retain their original expected value, and the odds carry zero expectation, thus 1.41% (or 1.40%) plus zero is still 1.41%. (or 1.40%.) So when you play odds, all you are doing is shortening your lifespan at the table. Yet countless other gamblers love to tell me about how I'm failing to take advantage of the odds, without realizing that they are the ones being taken advantage of.

As I was getting at earlier, the most favorable position in the casino is the come-out roll on a pass or come bet. Betting odds minimizes this position. I'd much rather put my money on the line for the come-out than I would leaving it behind the line with an expected value of nothing.

Quote: Wizard

If somebody is going to gamble anyway, then he should at least lose as little as possible.

If minimizing losses is the highest priority, you can't gamble in the first place. For all practical purposes, in order to minimize losses you absolutely must define your session bankroll, win limit, and loss limit, and then tailor a system within those criteria. Debating without those ideas at the forefront is irrelevant and often misleading, since real-world limitations change what is or is not the best strategy. As a general rule, though, there is no such thing as "minimizing losses." Whatever your loss limit is for a session, that's what you have to plan to lose.