All betting systems are worthless.

Yes. Thats why people are always trying to sell someone a betting system rather than using it themselves.

The only betting system that seems to work reliably over time is: own the casino.

The only betting system that seems to work in the short run is: get lucky!!

Quote: FleaStiff

The only betting system that seems to work in the short run is: get lucky!!

Partially correct. Get lucky and get the hell outta there before the bad luck returns and you end up losing more money than you came in with.

Quote: RiverRock

get the hell outta there before ... losing more money than you came in with.

Yes, that is often my problem. The theorists all tell us that walking into the casino and puting your entire bankroll on the line is best, but its fun only if it wins.

I'd prefer to spend a few hours shooting craps than just one roll. Yet that house-edge grinds relentlessly the longer I stay there! It takes courage to walk away from the table and far more courage to walk away a winner than a loser.

The just-one-more-roll-and-my-luck-will-return thinking is the casino's major advantage.

I also face the effects of various distractions and lose track of my bets from time to time. Not good!

Since you quoted what theorists say, allow me to chime in here. The best way to approach any gambling situation is to make wagers of optimal size, using Kelly betting, based on your bankroll when you have an edge, and to not make any wagers when the house has an edge.

Quote: teliot

make wagers when you have an edge and not make any wagers when the house has an edge.

Marvelous. I'd love to be an Advantage Player and have an edge against the house. So would we all, I guess. Its just I can't count cards at Blackjack, I can't play poker and I sure don't want to be seen playing Bingo!
So I think that if I'm going to gamble it has to be against a house edge. I just look for the lower house edges: baccarat, craps, occasional blackjack.

For the gambler, optimal play is whatever gives you the most pleasure at the least financial risk.

To be more accurate, let P be pleasure and R be risk. Then you want P to be large and R to be small. Hence you want the fraction (P/R) to be as great as possible. If a large increase in risk doesn't correlate to an even larger increase in pleasure, then don't take the risk. If a decrease in pleasure correlates to a significant decrease in risk, the you'll should forgo the pleasure. Of course, "0" risk (no gambling) maximizes P/R (it is infinte).

This is actually meaningful, because for kelly betting you consider the standard deviation S and the edge E, and you want E to get as large as possible and S to get as small as possible, so you want to maximize (E/S) -- in a very techincal kind of way.

So, maximizing P/R is the gamblers road to the greatest fun with the least risk.

Enjoy your journey!

Quote: teliot

Since you quoted what theorists say, allow me to chime in here. The best way to approach any gambling situation is to make wagers of optimal size, using Kelly betting, based on your bankroll when you have an edge, and to not make any wagers when the house has an edge.

What is Kelly betting, or where can I learn more?

In most games, my betting method is to increase my bet when I win, and return to a base bet when I lose. It seems to really limit my losses while allowing me to capture and make some great gains if I ever get on a roll.

For example, in blackjack I start at $25, and if I win I progress as follows: 35, 50, 75, 110, 165, 250, 375, 550, 800, 1200, etc.

However, if/when I lose 3 times in a row (sometimes 4), I leave. Because obviously luck isn't on your side if you lose 3 in a row.

In other games, I might just increase one unit each time. I don't really have a system for craps.

Quote: Phosphorous

What is Kelly betting, or where can I learn more?
I don't really have a system for craps.

Kelly criterion: http://wizardofodds.com/kelly
I don't really have a system either, I tend to increase bets whimsically which is probably wrong or atleast not optimal.

Quote: teliot

For the gambler, optimal play is whatever gives you the most pleasure at the least financial risk.

To be more accurate, let P be pleasure and R be risk. Then you want P to be large and R to be small. Hence you want the fraction (P/R) to be as great as possible. If a large increase in risk doesn't correlate to an even larger increase in pleasure, then don't take the risk. If a decrease in pleasure correlates to a significant decrease in risk, the you'll should forgo the pleasure. Of course, "0" risk (no gambling) maximizes P/R (it is infinte).

This is actually meaningful, because for kelly betting you consider the standard deviation S and the edge E, and you want E to get as large as possible and S to get as small as possible, so you want to maximize (E/S) -- in a very techincal kind of way.

So, maximizing P/R is the gamblers road to the greatest fun with the least risk.

Enjoy your journey!

That is an awesome formula and the perfect path for every gambler to follow, no matter what their motivation. Wow, I've really got to think about this for a while and apply it to my own situation, which is:

Multi-strike 25c Jacks or Better is the best game available at my home casino and I adore the game. P is significantly increased along with a .25% increase in return. But, the E/S is not kind and the bankroll requirements are really higher than I can afford. Hmmm, so I have to decide exactly what my P/R is. Once I do that, I'll feel a lot more comfortable with the risk I decide to take (or to discontinue).

Thanks so much. What a helpful post!

In Macau when I was playing Pai Gow, a guy told me that if you just keep making min bets, the house edge will eventually grind you down, but if you make just a few bets that are much larger than your average bet, you give yourself a chance to win.

I think this concept is similar to the idea of making just one large bet instead of a lot of small ones, but you get the added enjoyment of actually playing for a while. Of course, from an EV perspective, it is still more negative than the alternatives of 1) not playing when the casino has the edge, 2) making one large bet only, or 3) making only min bets, but at least for me it offers the greatest pleasure. Individual results may vary.

Note: While I like this for games like Pai Gow, I don't think it is necessary in a game like craps where the variance is so high that you can legitimately play for a lifetime and actually win (I've run several simulations of 10,000 rolls of craps where I ended up well ahead--though many more where I lost. The point is high variance of outcomes over a large number of trials).