How to win at a cold craps and be ready when it turns hot
May 31st, 2010 at 7:35:04 PM
permalink
I placed this thread in Betting Systems for a reason. I know it's a system, with a very real risk of a huge loss with little return.
However, when it works, it works beautifully.
I was at Mohegan Sun yesterday and today. Played a lot of craps and poker. A lot of ups and downs.
I had just left a poker table to meet my group for lunch, when I found out they changed the time, so I had just under an hour to kill.
I was down $250 at this point, and really only wanted to eat lunch and come home, but started thinking about the discussions here.
Yesterday and earlier today, I'd find a $5 craps table, wait for a point, then spread $22 inside (5/6/6/5), then take a few hits before pressing. It seemed to me that too many shooters weren't getting long rolls. I was always losing or barely winning. Oh, sure, I hit a couple shooters and made a killing, but the killing was compromised by all the initial hits just to get over the profitability hump.
While waiting for lunch, it hit me: I never saw a player have a roll where he didn't hit a 5/6/8/9 at least once before a 7 out.
Then I started to think about the 1/10 bankroll and 10x bankroll thread, and my response.
I stepped up to a craps table, waited for a point, then threw down $88 inside. 20/24/24/20. If the shooter hit any inside number, I'd win $28, then drop my bet to $22 inside (5/6/6/5), for a $6 profit with bets still up.
I'd then take a few hits and start pressing.
And then it hit me:
All I needed was one hit to call a shooter "profitable" !
Yeah, I realize that mathematically, statistically, one in four shooters should 7 out prior to hitting an inside number, making the $6 profit from a $88 wager a terrible risk.
During the 45 minutes I tried this, 7 shooters hit an inside number once then sevened out. NO shooter failed to hit an inside number.
And the beautiful part is this:
If the shooter is luke-warm, and hits inside number a couple times, you're starting to make real money. And if the shooter turns warm or even hot, you're already there, well into a profitable shooter, with bets up and pressed before you realize he's hot!
I had two shooters have reasonable decent throws. If I had been betting my old way, these shooters would have taken some of the sting off, but I never would have been profitable at that table.
Funny thing is, during the last shooter's roll, I started to realize that I should spread $154. 35/42/42/35. They each would pay 49, so I could reduce to $44, 10/12/12/10, with a $5 profit. But it would also mean that I could start pressing immediately and take profits immediately too!
Instead, I went to lunch up $135 from that table.
Can't complain about that!
However, when it works, it works beautifully.
I was at Mohegan Sun yesterday and today. Played a lot of craps and poker. A lot of ups and downs.
I had just left a poker table to meet my group for lunch, when I found out they changed the time, so I had just under an hour to kill.
I was down $250 at this point, and really only wanted to eat lunch and come home, but started thinking about the discussions here.
Yesterday and earlier today, I'd find a $5 craps table, wait for a point, then spread $22 inside (5/6/6/5), then take a few hits before pressing. It seemed to me that too many shooters weren't getting long rolls. I was always losing or barely winning. Oh, sure, I hit a couple shooters and made a killing, but the killing was compromised by all the initial hits just to get over the profitability hump.
While waiting for lunch, it hit me: I never saw a player have a roll where he didn't hit a 5/6/8/9 at least once before a 7 out.
Then I started to think about the 1/10 bankroll and 10x bankroll thread, and my response.
I stepped up to a craps table, waited for a point, then threw down $88 inside. 20/24/24/20. If the shooter hit any inside number, I'd win $28, then drop my bet to $22 inside (5/6/6/5), for a $6 profit with bets still up.
I'd then take a few hits and start pressing.
And then it hit me:
All I needed was one hit to call a shooter "profitable" !
Yeah, I realize that mathematically, statistically, one in four shooters should 7 out prior to hitting an inside number, making the $6 profit from a $88 wager a terrible risk.
During the 45 minutes I tried this, 7 shooters hit an inside number once then sevened out. NO shooter failed to hit an inside number.
And the beautiful part is this:
If the shooter is luke-warm, and hits inside number a couple times, you're starting to make real money. And if the shooter turns warm or even hot, you're already there, well into a profitable shooter, with bets up and pressed before you realize he's hot!
I had two shooters have reasonable decent throws. If I had been betting my old way, these shooters would have taken some of the sting off, but I never would have been profitable at that table.
Funny thing is, during the last shooter's roll, I started to realize that I should spread $154. 35/42/42/35. They each would pay 49, so I could reduce to $44, 10/12/12/10, with a $5 profit. But it would also mean that I could start pressing immediately and take profits immediately too!
Instead, I went to lunch up $135 from that table.
Can't complain about that!
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
June 1st, 2010 at 5:38:28 AM
permalink
I just caught from your other post that you sometimes sleep in your car. I got a kick out of that.
I don't do this kind of betting, strictly pass or don't pass with the odds for me. Especially I don't like taking bets down, as it seems to say above you do. I can get confused as hell taking bets down. Anymore I never take down my odds for example.
But I enjoy reading about your win and who knows, maybe someday might imitate this. And I envy you your trip to Mohegan Sun, a great place.
I don't do this kind of betting, strictly pass or don't pass with the odds for me. Especially I don't like taking bets down, as it seems to say above you do. I can get confused as hell taking bets down. Anymore I never take down my odds for example.
But I enjoy reading about your win and who knows, maybe someday might imitate this. And I envy you your trip to Mohegan Sun, a great place.
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
June 1st, 2010 at 6:26:57 AM
permalink
Thanks. Sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do.Quote: odiousgambitI just caught from your other post that you sometimes sleep in your car. I got a kick out of that.
The important first step is to learn which garages have restrooms near the elevators. And then park near the elevator, but on an upper level where you won't get disturbed much.
"Like" taking bets down? Hardly.Quote: odiousgambitI don't like taking bets down, as it seems to say above you do.
Except for occasionally calling them 'off' for one roll, I have never taken bets down before. I was simply open to the idea. Since that's the core of this system, and exactly what I was talking about in the post I linked above, I figured it was time to put my money where my virtual mouth was.
I should edit the above, but instead I'll elaborate here.Quote: DJTeddyBearI realize that mathematically, statistically, one in four shooters should 7 out prior to hitting an inside number, making the $6 profit from a $88 wager a terrible risk.
Risking $88 to win $6, 75% of the time is a terrible risk/reward ratio. But that's not an accurate assesment. I'm risking $88 to win $6 and have the $88 returned to me, while $22 remains in play. And the shooter still has a 75% chance of hitting an inside number, generating more profit, before hitting a seven. And each time he's successful, there's another 75% chance that he'll be successful again.
Don't get me wrong. When I caught a real shooter, I was kinda kicking myself for taking it down after the first hit. But that's one of my favorite things about craps, and I often repeat it to the players next to me: "At craps, when you're losing, you want to kill yourself. But when you're winning, you want to kill yourself!"
For the record, I realize that like all systems, sooner or later the house is gonna win. The house edge will catch up to you in the form of a table that is not merely cold, but down right frozen: A series of two roll shooters.
But for the chance to get into profitability 75% of the time, this system is downright sexy!
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
June 1st, 2010 at 7:11:10 AM
permalink
I too have played with this scheme a bit, albeit at $44 and $154 inside.
My experiment turned out opposite of yours though. I had the misfortune of experimenting at a time when shooters appeared to be trying to set a new record of the 2 roll, point-seven out variety. I was down $300 before I could catch my breath.
I then reverted to my normal play,and kept a watch on the number of point- seven out before an inside number was rolled. For that session, it was a high number, which would have led to ruin. On the other hand, on my last trip, that strategy would have worked like a charm, as most shooters hit 2 or 3 inside numbers before seven out.
My experiment turned out opposite of yours though. I had the misfortune of experimenting at a time when shooters appeared to be trying to set a new record of the 2 roll, point-seven out variety. I was down $300 before I could catch my breath.
I then reverted to my normal play,and kept a watch on the number of point- seven out before an inside number was rolled. For that session, it was a high number, which would have led to ruin. On the other hand, on my last trip, that strategy would have worked like a charm, as most shooters hit 2 or 3 inside numbers before seven out.
Always borrow money from a pessimist; They don't expect to get paid back !
Be yourself and speak your thoughts. Those who matter won't mind, and those that mind, don't matter!
June 1st, 2010 at 7:34:25 AM
permalink
Ouch. I feel your pain.Quote: RaleighCrapsI had the misfortune of experimenting at a time when shooters appeared to be trying to set a new record of the 2 roll, point-seven out variety. I was down $300 before I could catch my breath.
But for anyone else that's looking for another piece of artilery in the war at the tables, there you go. Just remember that it can blow up in your face.
But that's gambling. And we're all too familiar with that...
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
June 2nd, 2010 at 10:01:31 AM
permalink
I wrote a WinCraps autobet program to simulate this "system":
for each shooter
when point first established AND bankroll sufficient
bet 35 42 42 35 on 5, 6, 8, 9
end when
if any bet wins
regress to 10 12 12 10
if any of those bets win
press
endif
else
lose the $154
endif
end for
I started each session with $1000 and stopped when:
1) bankroll less than $154
2) 200 rolls reached, in which case bets pulled
I ran 10,000 sessions.
The results:
One of the things you can do with WinCraps (which I didn't do this time) is to keep track, using "Chip Stacks", of various events, like having a profit on a shooter, number of shooters, etc. Maybe I will enhance this program to keep track of the number of shooters and the number of shooters on whom you make a profit.
It seems to me the weakness of this system is that, when you keep pressing, your net for the shooter goes up very slowly, because you're always losing back much of your winnings when the shooter sevens out. For example:
one hit then seven out: +$5
one hit, one hit on five, then seven out: +$9
one hit, one hit on six, then seven out: +$7
one hit, one hit on five, one on six, then seven out: +$11
compare to same system, but without pressing
one hit then seven out: +$5
one hit, one hit on five, then seven out: +$19
one hit, one hit on six, then seven out: +$19
one hit, one hit on five, one on six, then seven out: +$33
etc., etc.
When you parlay, you never get ahead until you reach the table limit. When you press, you get ahead, but only by a little each hit.
Would you really keep pressing?
Cheers,
Alan Shank
for each shooter
when point first established AND bankroll sufficient
bet 35 42 42 35 on 5, 6, 8, 9
end when
if any bet wins
regress to 10 12 12 10
if any of those bets win
press
endif
else
lose the $154
endif
end for
I started each session with $1000 and stopped when:
1) bankroll less than $154
2) 200 rolls reached, in which case bets pulled
I ran 10,000 sessions.
The results:
| parameter | |
|---|---|
| mean num. rolls | 180 |
| mean num. bets | 147 |
| mean bet handle | $3555 |
| mean net result | -$88 |
| median net result | -$106 |
| mode of net result | -$760 to -$716 |
| standard deviation of net | $545 |
| mean house advantage | 2.47% |
| winning sessions | 4237 |
| breakeven sessions | 8 |
| losing sessions | 5755 |
| number of busts | 7 |
| lost more than $700 | 2220 |
| lost more than $500 | 2770 |
| won more than $100 | 3558 |
| won more than $500 | 1431 |
| won more than $1000 | 292 |
| biggest win | $3886 |
One of the things you can do with WinCraps (which I didn't do this time) is to keep track, using "Chip Stacks", of various events, like having a profit on a shooter, number of shooters, etc. Maybe I will enhance this program to keep track of the number of shooters and the number of shooters on whom you make a profit.
It seems to me the weakness of this system is that, when you keep pressing, your net for the shooter goes up very slowly, because you're always losing back much of your winnings when the shooter sevens out. For example:
one hit then seven out: +$5
one hit, one hit on five, then seven out: +$9
one hit, one hit on six, then seven out: +$7
one hit, one hit on five, one on six, then seven out: +$11
compare to same system, but without pressing
one hit then seven out: +$5
one hit, one hit on five, then seven out: +$19
one hit, one hit on six, then seven out: +$19
one hit, one hit on five, one on six, then seven out: +$33
etc., etc.
When you parlay, you never get ahead until you reach the table limit. When you press, you get ahead, but only by a little each hit.
Would you really keep pressing?
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Cheers,
Alan Shank
"How's that for a squabble, Pugh?" Peter Boyle as Mister Moon in "Yellowbeard"
June 2nd, 2010 at 10:45:46 AM
permalink
When I hit the quote button, I saw you had code-like formatting. To preserve formatting and make programs easier to read, put [code] tags around this sort of stuff:
My pressure approach, even before I came up with this system, was to alternate taking a win with pressing it the minimum. And I would *try* to track each number individually so I can correctly press/not press.
Of course several things can happen: I can forget whether a hit for a number should be taken or pressed, or a dealer can do the reverse of what I intended. Then it's bad mojo to change :)
At some point, instead of pressing, I'd put $5 each on the 4/10 and put them to work for me.
And if I felt the shooter was really hot, I might press in pairs. (I.E. If 6 hits, press both the 6 and 8.)
I also tend to sit tight for a few hits when they reach 35/42. There's something downright sexy about dropping a white and picking up two greens. Of course, the one time I ever got to 70/84, it seemed MORE than doubly sexy to drop two whites and pick up a black, so when that happens I'd tend to hang out there even longer...
I also tend to press every hit once I pass the 35/42 level. But I'm still pressing only the miinimum.
For what it's worth, when I tried this system this weekend, no shooter got me to either the 35 or 42 level. And yet I still won $135 in about 45 minutes. Of course, I never saw a dreaded two roll shooter...
On a side note, does anyone know of a WinCraps type program for Macintosh? I searched but couldn't find one, not even one that isn't free...
for each shooter
when point first established AND bankroll sufficient
bet 35 42 42 35 on 5, 6, 8, 9
end when
if any bet wins
regress to 10 12 12 10
if any of those bets win
press
endif
else
lose the $154
endif
end for
No. Sorry if that's the impression I gave above.Quote: goatcabinWould you really keep pressing?
My pressure approach, even before I came up with this system, was to alternate taking a win with pressing it the minimum. And I would *try* to track each number individually so I can correctly press/not press.
Of course several things can happen: I can forget whether a hit for a number should be taken or pressed, or a dealer can do the reverse of what I intended. Then it's bad mojo to change :)
At some point, instead of pressing, I'd put $5 each on the 4/10 and put them to work for me.
And if I felt the shooter was really hot, I might press in pairs. (I.E. If 6 hits, press both the 6 and 8.)
I also tend to sit tight for a few hits when they reach 35/42. There's something downright sexy about dropping a white and picking up two greens. Of course, the one time I ever got to 70/84, it seemed MORE than doubly sexy to drop two whites and pick up a black, so when that happens I'd tend to hang out there even longer...
I also tend to press every hit once I pass the 35/42 level. But I'm still pressing only the miinimum.
For what it's worth, when I tried this system this weekend, no shooter got me to either the 35 or 42 level. And yet I still won $135 in about 45 minutes. Of course, I never saw a dreaded two roll shooter...
On a side note, does anyone know of a WinCraps type program for Macintosh? I searched but couldn't find one, not even one that isn't free...
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
June 2nd, 2010 at 11:54:00 AM
permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBearOn a side note, does anyone know of a WinCraps type program for Macintosh? I searched but couldn't find one, not even one that isn't free...
Please, NO! The Windows-only aspect of WinCraps is the only thing that has saved me from the compulsion to buy it! Don't let something be available for my Mac. :-o
June 2nd, 2010 at 12:25:34 PM
permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBear
My pressure approach, even before I came up with this system, was to alternate taking a win with pressing it the minimum. And I would *try* to track each number individually so I can correctly press/not press.
Of course several things can happen: I can forget whether a hit for a number should be taken or pressed, or a dealer can do the reverse of what I intended. Then it's bad mojo to change :)
I used to play the way you have described. That forgetting part always hurt, so I started carrying a pen and notepad. It really helps to keep your eyes focused and your own play. And when some smart*ss would throw in his few cents about me writing down my bets, me being older than most players, I would say I only get so much social security money to play with so I have to keep a good budget, that would make me look cool to the other players, not a bad thing for us seniors.
Years ago I made an excel chart that showed you make more money going up one unit each time for I think 6 times before a full press and pull style. Im sure that can be programmed into wincraps also. IF I can find my old worksheet I will post the tables.
Remember there is nothing wrong about making place bets and locking up a profit before you change your bets.
7 winner chicken dinner!
June 2nd, 2010 at 1:36:15 PM
permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBearWhen I hit the quote button, I saw you had code-like formatting. To preserve formatting and make programs easier to read, put [code] tags around this sort of stuff:
for each shooter
when point first established AND bankroll sufficient
bet 35 42 42 35 on 5, 6, 8, 9
end when
if any bet wins
regress to 10 12 12 10
if any of those bets win
press
endif
else
lose the $154
endif
end for
Right. I know that, but... I'm 64.
Quote: DJTeddyBearNo. Sorry if that's the impression I gave above.
My pressure approach, even before I came up with this system, was to alternate taking a win with pressing it the minimum. And I would *try* to track each number individually so I can correctly press/not press.
I also tend to sit tight for a few hits when they reach 35/42. There's something downright sexy about dropping a white and picking up two greens. Of course, the one time I ever got to 70/84, it seemed MORE than doubly sexy to drop two whites and pick up a black, so when that happens I'd tend to hang out there even longer...
I also tend to press every hit once I pass the 35/42 level. But I'm still pressing only the miinimum.
Well, I can't program "tend", and of course no program can really "decide" what to do based on your feelings at the time. So I will "tweak" the autobet file in some reasonable way and post the results.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Cheers,
Alan Shank
"How's that for a squabble, Pugh?" Peter Boyle as Mister Moon in "Yellowbeard"
June 2nd, 2010 at 1:56:06 PM
permalink
I understand the difficulty in programming it.
If pressing every other hit is too difficult, how about pressing half a unit every time? It wouldn't be the same, but closer.
Also if possible, instead of "tend to sit tight", can you say to not press for 2 hits, whenever it's at a multiple of 35/42?
Just a thought....
If pressing every other hit is too difficult, how about pressing half a unit every time? It wouldn't be the same, but closer.
Also if possible, instead of "tend to sit tight", can you say to not press for 2 hits, whenever it's at a multiple of 35/42?
Just a thought....
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
June 2nd, 2010 at 3:29:21 PM
permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBearI understand the difficulty in programming it.
Bear you are so right.
Wincraps is a great software but advanced programming bet files makes my head spin, Im afraid it will fall off.
Sure be nice if goatcabin had a site and he could program stuff for us. He seems to have this programming stuff down. Im sure the Wizard does not want to waste his time doing things like programming betting systems.
Im sure Alan could do it faster and with less mistakes than we can by ourselves!
I see we can not email each other in this forum. I hope Im not out of line here.
But there is tremendous value in running sims on your computer to see where you can better your game.
7 winner chicken dinner!
June 2nd, 2010 at 3:52:05 PM
permalink
I wouldn't expect or even want the Wiz to simulate a system. Suffice to say, I know the first thing he'll probably say is the first thing I said. Basically that systems will fail.
I'm also kinda glad that Alan is programming it. But to be honest, if I had a Mac version of WinCraps, I would have simulated it before I started this thread.
---
No private messaging ... yet. It's a promised future feature.
I'm also kinda glad that Alan is programming it. But to be honest, if I had a Mac version of WinCraps, I would have simulated it before I started this thread.
---
No private messaging ... yet. It's a promised future feature.
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
June 2nd, 2010 at 4:05:07 PM
permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBearI wouldn't expect or even want the Wiz to simulate a system. Suffice to say, I know the first thing he'll probably say is the first thing I said. Basically that systems will fail.
I'm also kinda glad that Alan is programming it. But to be honest, if I had a Mac version of WinCraps, I would have simulated it before I started this thread.
---
No private messaging ... yet. It's a promised future feature.
Thanks for the update.
Yes all systems Do FAIL, they can never win 100% of the time nor do they lose 100% of the time either.
But betting strategies at least give a player some control over how they play, and variance allows anyone, system or not, to win, and there lies the value of running sims. to see what works better in different situations. Alan has me hooked on sims now, and I must agree it is for the better!
7 winner chicken dinner!
June 2nd, 2010 at 7:59:43 PM
permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBearI understand the difficulty in programming it.
If pressing every other hit is too difficult, how about pressing half a unit every time? It wouldn't be the same, but closer.
Also if possible, instead of "tend to sit tight", can you say to not press for 2 hits, whenever it's at a multiple of 35/42?
Just a thought....
Any regular rule is programmable; what I was referring to are situations where you may change your pattern on a whim, or because of the way your bankroll is changing. IOW, "I tend to do this" is not programmable.
I will try pressing every other hit; you can just use flags for each place bet.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Cheers,
Alan Shank
"How's that for a squabble, Pugh?" Peter Boyle as Mister Moon in "Yellowbeard"
June 2nd, 2010 at 9:15:06 PM
permalink
Quote: goatcabinAny regular rule is programmable; what I was referring to are situations where you may change your pattern on a whim, or because of the way your bankroll is changing. IOW, "I tend to do this" is not programmable.
I will try pressing every other hit; you can just use flags for each place bet.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
I modified my WinCraps autobet program to simulate this "system", but pressing only every other win after regressing down:
for each shooter
when point first established AND bankroll sufficient
bet 35 42 42 35 on 5, 6, 8, 9
end when
if any bet wins
regress to 10 12 12 10
if any of those bets win
press 1st, 3rd, 5th, etc.
endif
else
lose the $154
endif
end for
I started each session with $1000 and stopped when:
1) bankroll less than $154
2) 200 rolls reached, in which case bets pulled
I ran 10,000 sessions.
The results:
| parameter | |
|---|---|
| mean num. rolls | 182 |
| mean num. bets | 149 |
| mean bet handle | $3171 |
| mean net result | -$79 |
| median net result | -$65 |
| mode of net result | -$750 to -$718 |
| standard deviation of net | $483 |
| mean house advantage | 2.49% |
| winning sessions | 4518 |
| breakeven sessions | 7 |
| losing sessions | 5475 |
| number of busts | 6 |
| lost more than $700 | 1973 |
| lost more than $500 | 2454 |
| won more than $100 | 3767 |
| won more than $500 | 1272 |
| won more than $1000 | 126 |
| biggest win | $2615 |
So, fewer large losses, more small wins up to $500, not as big a peak, smaller SD. It all figures.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Cheers,
Alan Shank
"How's that for a squabble, Pugh?" Peter Boyle as Mister Moon in "Yellowbeard"
