New Project Ideas

>I think that there should be a whole section on the odds of trying to achieve a reasonable goal.
The only reasonable goal is to go do something else until you've made enough money to buy the casino.
Seriously, I too would like the "odds that you will double your money before going broke".

>Or the age old Martingale question.
Or perhaps a Modified Martingale. Most counter arguments to Martingale emphasize a worst-case scenario of a run of really, really bad luck. Yes, that happens but how often is it only Five "reds" in a row rather than Fifteen in a row?

>Given how much better craps is with free odds, I can't see why anyone would play baccarat for big money.
Ability to deal with a more hectic pace and more options than just Players/Banker? The Evil Empire may not be able to see why either, but they are glad that so many play slot machines rather than craps or baccarat.

How about fixing this issue :: http://wizardofvegas.com/forum/info/help/1473-messageboard-features-foe-a-newbie/#post22587

More seriously, I do like the idea of some information about risk of ruin, variance and goal-orientated probabilities... it's been said that a casino allows players to trade expected value for variance.

Quote: Wizard

Thanks for the baseball links. I may be able to do something with the first one. It would be much better if it listed the money lines and posted total for each game.

About the props, I consider one of my strongest areas NFL props. However, that is one of those things that is too good to write about. I'm also sworn to secrecy on some of my strategies.

I think there's a ton of interesting sports stuff you could do. Although you say you are sworn to secrecy on some things, I bet there are a lot of good possibilities out there.

I've said this before, but although dice/cards don't have memories, sports teams and oddsmakers do. I think this can be used to one's advantage.

Even the "Picking the exact score of the football game" research was quite fascinating. So I vote sports.

Quote: FleaStiff

I'd like you to consider the work of a Yahoo Research Scientist set forth in blog.oddhead.com. He set forth a challenge in which there was a prize of twenty Yootles (a privately issued pseudo-currency). Unfortunately his Craps Strategy challenge was unrealistic in that it specified a 2x odds table and a five dollar minimum bet table. Sure, go to SouthPoint and all you will ever find is 2x odds. And 5.00 tables or even 3.00 craps tables are available if you trek a bit. However most of us are going to encounter ten dollar tables at 3x4x5x or 10x or 20x tables. The truly brave can hit Ramparts or Eastside Cannery and go to 100x.

Any craps "strategy" is essentially an attempt to add negative numbers together to produce a positive total, an exercise that is logically and mathematically pointless. If all the people who have spent time and energy devising craps strategies had instead been harnessed to hamster wheels and expended their efforts THAT way, a major city could have been supplied with power and light.

Quote: mkl654321

Any craps "strategy" is essentially an attempt to add negative numbers together to produce a positive total

Not at all. It is acknowledged that it is still a negative expectation game.

Again, thanks for the suggestion. I don't mean to sound ungrateful, but analyzing betting strategies, variance, risk of ruin, etc.. is not my thing. In my opinion, in the long run, those things are not important. What matters is playing a game with a low element of risk, and playing it properly. How much you bet and why is up to you. To lead my readers down the path of money management I think would confuse my message.

To add a corollary to my signature, it doesn't matter why you're making a bet, but whether or not it is a good bet.

Quote: FleaStiff

Not at all. It is acknowledged that it is still a negative expectation game.

Not by 99% of the people touting such a strategy, it isn't. Rather, it's the GENUWINE EZ-FOOLPROOF PATH TO CERTAIN RICHES, by Sy "the Wiz" Shyster (no relation to our website host).

In examining any such "strategy" for craps, given your assertion, the logical question would be, "strategy" to do what? What is the objective? Since it is, in fact, a losing game, the only logical objective could be to lose as little as possible. The only way to achieve that is to bet as little as possible. Te two components of that would be 1) bet the table minimum at all times and 2) make the bet that takes the longest to reach a decision. Therefore, any "strategy" that says anything other than "bet the minimum on either the pass or the don't pass line" isn't a strategy at all.*

*whether you take odds or not is immaterial

Quote: Wizard

it doesn't matter why you're making a bet, but whether or not it is a good bet.

Well, the only good bet is one that happens to win. Red and Black are each equally "good" ... and so too is a straight-up bet on 7. Each is equally good but one sure depletes my bankroll before I can even get a "free" drink.

I was reading the Pascal Wager thread when an idea jumped into my head:


The Math of the Pearly Gates Admittance Exam


OK. I'll go back to the Pascal thread now...

Quote: mkl654321

Not by 99% of the people touting such a strategy, it isn't. Rather, it's the GENUWINE EZ-FOOLPROOF PATH TO CERTAIN RICHES, by Sy "the Wiz" Shyster (no relation to our website host).

In examining any such "strategy" for craps, given your assertion, the logical question would be, "strategy" to do what? What is the objective? Since it is, in fact, a losing game, the only logical objective could be to lose as little as possible. The only way to achieve that is to bet as little as possible. Te two components of that would be 1) bet the table minimum at all times and 2) make the bet that takes the longest to reach a decision. Therefore, any "strategy" that says anything other than "bet the minimum on either the pass or the don't pass line" isn't a strategy at all.*

*whether you take odds or not is immaterial

Your argument breaks down in the phrase "the only logical objective could be to lose as little as possible". The objective could be to have the greatest chance of doubling up or going home. The objective could be to make a 30% gain. The objective could be to have fun. Or it could be to increase your variance as you like the thrill of highs and lows.


None of these are invalid onjectives and they may all have different strategies.

And it is NOT immaterial on taking the odds if your objective is to lose as little as possible. Taking odds is 0EV but adds to the variance. If you want to protect your bank as hard as possible, don't take odds. The house % changes when you take odds, but the actual amount doesn't change. (However I would argue if you were betting table minimum and want to increase your action, the first increase should be taking odds... $5+$10 behind is probably better than $5 on the pass and hitting $5 come bets for preserving your bank roll longer).

And this is why I am interested in the variance and patterns over time rather than just knowing the EV of perfect play. It is of course the Wizard's site and time and I should go do the work myself ;)