Thread Rating:

wrragsdale
wrragsdale
Joined: Mar 7, 2011
  • Threads: 4
  • Posts: 25
January 12th, 2012 at 9:21:50 PM permalink
My last few trips, 9 to be exact, to the tables I have seen something unusual....please help with some numbers that might show me when I should expect to lose...
Using the Anything-But-7 method, waiting for the point to be established, then placing the 5 for $10, the 6&8 for $12 each, and the Field for $5 (Level 1). After the next roll, pull down and wait for the point to be hit OR the 7-out.
IF the point is hit, wait for the next point to be established and start over...
IF the the 7 pops and you lose the 39, Martingale to a $60 5, a $72 6&8 each, and a $40 Field bet (Level 2).
Next roll take all down and begin anew.
IF a 7 pops, then the next Martingale is a $425 5, a $510 6&8 each, and a field bet of $300 (Level 3).
My buy in is for 2,200 and only play once every other week or so, that may not be considered consistent play.
I have been to Level 2 more times than I can count, and Level 3 once a session, Two sessions I hit Level 3 twice.
I only play for 3 hours and I cash out. I guess the tables run 75-100 rolls per hour.
My sessions have netted 224, 238, 189, 259, 315, 203, 231, 238, 133.
I have not busted in these last 9 sessions??? Fascinating this has been. I'll have a month or so before I get by another casino again, but I couldn't wait to ask this question...can't wait till next session
Is it possible for the math guys out there to give some insight into the probability of seeing the 7 pop on that specific roll (immediately following an established point)? When should I expect it to happen three times in a row and bust me?
YoDiceRoll11
YoDiceRoll11
Joined: Jan 9, 2012
  • Threads: 7
  • Posts: 532
January 13th, 2012 at 12:02:53 AM permalink
Quote: wrragsdale


IF the point is hit, wait for the next point to be established and start over...
IF the the 7 pops and you lose the 39, Martingale to a $60 5, a $72 6&8 each, and a $40 Field bet (Level 2).
Next roll take all down and begin anew.
IF a 7 pops, then the next Martingale is a $425 5, a $510 6&8 each, and a field bet of $300 (Level 3).

Is it possible for the math guys out there to give some insight into the probability of seeing the 7 pop on that specific roll (immediately following an established point)? When should I expect it to happen three times in a row and bust me?



That is a pretty complicated and poor strategy against house edges. First off, you start with a $39 bet. Let's say you 7 out, and now "martingale" your next bet on "Level 2" is $244. How did $39 double to $244?? That's question 1. Martingale is supposed to be a double up system. Level 2, according to that, should be Place 5 for $20, Place 6/8 for $24 each, Field for $10. For a total of $78 (39 x 2).

I am not surprised you have been to "level 2 and 3". First off placing the 5 is a poor bet (IMO). True odds for 5/9 is 3 to 2. In most casinos it pays 7 to 5 for an even house edge of 4%. (You will eventually lose $4 for every $100 wagered in the long run). You would be better off buying the 5 for $20 with a $1 vig if it wins, that pays true odds 3 to 2, and lowers the house edge to 2% (a 50% reduction!). The field, while it has a high house edge (5.56%) is still a fun one to play once in awhile.

I would be careful with your stepladder negative progression system (especially since yours looks exponential rather than an actual martingale doubling). But good job on the last few sessions.

As to your direct question, what is the probability of seeing a 7 popup on a specific roll? Following an established point? It doesn't matter, since each roll is an independent event, the probability for a 7 is 6 out of 36 total combinations, or 16.67%.

BTW the system you are using is also called the Iron Cross. If you bet $22 on the Iron Cross ($5 field, $6 place each 6/8, and place 5 for $5) it carries a house edge of 3.87% I think. Which isn't too bad. I would definitely consider getting rid of your martingale progression though.
NowTheSerpent
NowTheSerpent
Joined: Sep 30, 2011
  • Threads: 15
  • Posts: 417
January 13th, 2012 at 3:39:58 AM permalink
Quote: YoDiceRoll11

BTW the system you are using is also called the Iron Cross. If you bet $22 on the Iron Cross ($5 field, $6 place each 6/8, and place 5 for $5) it carries a house edge of 3.87% I think. Which isn't too bad.



This figure is correct assuming that both 2 and 12 pay double to the Field. Now, since more and more casinos are featuring "Triple-Pay 12", the Iron Cross can be improved to just 2.48% lost. Plus, if you find a casino that, in addition, only collects commission from winning Buy bets, you might consider quadrupling your investment ($20, $24, $24, $21), as this would lower the expected loss to about 2.2%, which is about what most "beat Vegas" authors consider ideal.
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 187
  • Posts: 10504
January 13th, 2012 at 4:47:33 AM permalink
Quote: YoDiceRoll11

First off, you start with a $39 bet. Let's say you 7 out, and now "martingale" your next bet on "Level 2" is $244. How did $39 double to $244??

Because there are four bets - and you need each of them to cover the losses of the previous level.

Personally, I think this is a terrible strategy. But anytime you invoke a Martingale, it's gonna be a terrible strategy.

Here's a question for ya: At what level will you exceed the table limits, or exceed your bankroll - preventing you from having the opportunity to "break even"?
I invented a few casino games. Info: http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ 覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧 Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
TIMSPEED
TIMSPEED
Joined: Aug 11, 2010
  • Threads: 89
  • Posts: 1246
January 13th, 2012 at 7:58:23 AM permalink
I know a guy with a similar bet...although throughout the years, he's taken it up...he only does ONE ROLL, win or lose, then walks away. (he does this on average once per day, everyday)
He's up to $1000 now ($250 5, $300 6/8, $150 in the field)
I've often done a one-unit Iron Cross...but it gets boring really, when someone starts to hit a lot of 5/6/8 and all your collecting is like $2...
Gambling calls to me...like this ~> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Nap37mNSmQ
wrragsdale
wrragsdale
Joined: Mar 7, 2011
  • Threads: 4
  • Posts: 25
January 13th, 2012 at 9:14:50 AM permalink
Hey I tried that my last session, as I was leaving I placed the 5 for $200, the 6&8 for $240 each and the Field for $140 (half the win of the 5,6,8) took one win and cashed out.
I keep telling myself that I'm going to do that with Level 3 money for a one-hit and cash out, but that's a ballsy move and haven't convinced myself yet =)
YoDiceRoll11
YoDiceRoll11
Joined: Jan 9, 2012
  • Threads: 7
  • Posts: 532
January 13th, 2012 at 10:05:18 AM permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBear

Because there are four bets - and you need each of them to cover the losses of the previous level.

Personally, I think this is a terrible strategy. But anytime you invoke a Martingale, it's gonna be a terrible strategy.

Here's a question for ya: At what level will you exceed the table limits, or exceed your bankroll - preventing you from having the opportunity to "break even"?



I agree. But just because there are four bets means nothing. The total amount wagered is $39. Martingale calls for doubling that bet. If you want to "cover the losses". If you wanted to do something else, say try to risk enough money to make the theoretical profit that you missed out on, on your previous bet, that is not Martingale. That's just dumb.

Example: $20 bet on the field. (A win pays even money, ok lets assume the roll is not a 2 or 12). The roll is, FIVE no field!. You lose your $20 field bet. Martingale would say, bet $40 on the field to "cover your losses". Next roll is 4, easy four pay the field. You get paid an additional $40. So you were at a net loss of 20 (-20). Now you got forty back, so you are at +20. Why would you need to increase your lost wager by more than 2x?? That is insane. Even more insane than Martingale.
7craps
7craps
Joined: Jan 23, 2010
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 1977
January 13th, 2012 at 2:32:35 PM permalink
Quote: wrragsdale

Is it possible for the math guys out there to give some insight into the probability of seeing the 7 pop on that specific roll (immediately following an established point)?

Sure it is possible.
The math is quite simple.

The probability of establishing a point on any come out roll is 24/36
The probability of rolling a Seven is 6/36
We multiply the 2 values together since we want them both to happen and we arrive at the answer of 1/9.
So, 1 in 9 come out rolls will suffer, on average, the PSO event.
Also 1 in 9 shooters will have only 2 as the length of their hand.
(FYI: My stats also show that ~28% of all shooters will suffer the PSO as the final decision of their hand... not necessarily their only decision)

Back to the math.
Since you fear a run of 3 of these events (PSO) since you only have your wagers working on the roll after a point has been established, for any 3 come out rolls would be 1/9^-3 = 729. or 1 in 729 come out rolls.
Since streaks are a geometric progression, the "average number of come out rolls" for a run of 3 would be 1/9^-3+1/9^-2+1/9^-1 = 819 or 1 in 819 come out rolls.

A quick WinCraps sim (I already had an auto-bet file for the Iron Cross) shows that 31% of players (edit: 100,000 total players, almost 31,000 ended with a profit) with a $2200 bankroll ended with a net profit after playing your system and stopping once they experienced the 3 PSO in a row.
One lucky player even ended with a $15,888 bankroll... and comps!
Maybe that will be you.

(There are many other stats I could bring up, but really not worth the time. You can learn how to do this yourself in WinCraps. It is quite easy with a small learning curve, IMO and $20.)

Reality: (sim stats)
16.11% won $1100 or more. Yahoo!
8.7% won $2200 or more. Yahoo!!
2.39% won $4400 or more. Yahoo!!!

69% lost some of their bankroll
57.75% lost more than $1100
1.84% lost more than $2000.
.53% busted $2028... never won a freakin' bet.
Ouch.
Remember this was only playing until a run of 3 PSO happened.

Quote: wrragsdale

When should I expect it to happen three times in a row and bust me?


The 3 in a row will not neccessarily "bust you" as stats from my sim have shown.
Of course the more times you play the greater chance of busting out a starting bankroll of $2200.
Probability that a 3run PSO will already have happened at least 1 time:
by 568 come out rolls: 50.004994%
by 819 come out rolls: 63.234582%
by 5643 come out rolls: 99.900015%

It could also happen more than 1 time in 568 attempts.
~15% chance that it happens at least 2 times.

Number of trials568
Run Length (X or more)3
trial Probability1/9
EventRun Probability1 in
0 runs of 3 0.4999500572.00
at least 1 run of length 3 or more0.5000499426811552.00
at least 2 runs of length 3 or more0.1519736995496166.58
at least 3 runs of length 3 or more0.03230142776150830.96
at least 4 runs of length 3 or more0.005213743022634191.80
at least 5 runs of length 3 or more0.0006731752545941,485.50


My Final thoughts... you would not be called a "Craps God" by most that would attempt this style of play. But it is your money at risk. You are already in a winning streak. Ride it out!
The first time you hit that 3 in a row PSO, I would stop playing that system.
Spend your winnings!
Good Luck
winsome johnny (not Win some johnny)
YoDiceRoll11
YoDiceRoll11
Joined: Jan 9, 2012
  • Threads: 7
  • Posts: 532
January 13th, 2012 at 5:09:35 PM permalink
7craps, does your auto bet file for the Iron Cross also show the cumulative odds with the higher than Martingale betting progression? I think it would show slightly less winners and slightly more losers.
wrragsdale
wrragsdale
Joined: Mar 7, 2011
  • Threads: 4
  • Posts: 25
January 13th, 2012 at 6:25:05 PM permalink
Fascinating...the numbers to me are truly dazzling to see you break them down like that.
Now, I know that before I can even look to see a profit, I should win a minimum of my buy-in of 2,200.
Please keep in mind that the 2,200 is just play money so Level 3 is never given a second thought (I think you have to play that way OR don't play at all).

"Since you fear a run of 3 of these events (PSO) since you only have your wagers working on the roll after a point has been established, for any 3 come out rolls would be 1/9^-3 = 729. or 1 in 729 come out rolls.
Since streaks are a geometric progression, the "average number of come out rolls" for a run of 3 would be 1/9^-3+1/9^-2+1/9^-1 = 819 or 1 in 819 come out rolls."

Given your numbers, and I do respect them, does only playing for three hours ( I DO NOT exceed three) eliminate this number being met??? Could I play 5 or 6 hours????
Another question I had was that given your reality...was those that lost 69%, 57.75%, 1.84%, and .53 use the same method of exponentialing that I have been using???

"Reality: (sim stats)
16.11% won $1100 or more. Yahoo!
8.7% won $2200 or more. Yahoo!!
2.39% won $4400 or more. Yahoo!!!

69% lost some of their bankroll
57.75% lost more than $1100
1.84% lost more than $2000.
.53% busted $2028... never won a freakin' bet.
Ouch.
Remember this was only playing until a run of 3 PSO happened."

For you specifically, is the fact that I'm only working through 225-300 rolls a factor in it's working? Why nine in a row? I am 68.00 over where I started so I'm up 68 bucks?!?!
It just fascinates me that I keep standing there 3 hours at a time and keep cashing out more than what I bought in for which is always a plus...am I setting myself up for a bust soon???

  • Jump to: