buzzpaff
buzzpaff
Joined: Mar 8, 2011
  • Threads: 112
  • Posts: 5328
May 16th, 2012 at 6:13:02 PM permalink
I would normally be glad to help you research this, but I am tied up on my perpetual motion machine at present.
AcesAndEights
AcesAndEights
Joined: Jan 5, 2012
  • Threads: 67
  • Posts: 4299
May 16th, 2012 at 7:40:45 PM permalink
-1 + -1 < 0

End of line.
"So drink gamble eat f***, because one day you will be dust." -ontariodealer
Pavlov146
Pavlov146
Joined: May 16, 2012
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 2
May 16th, 2012 at 8:59:36 PM permalink
Greetings.

This is Mission146, however, I cannot post as Mission146. Vegas is frightened of me and has hacked my account.

I jest.

In reality, this Forum has a feature by which it prevents a Spambot from flooding by only allowing you as many posts as days you have been a member for the first thirty days of membership.

I have no idea why I was allowed to even make eleven posts in two days of membership.

I have PM'ed the Wizard who said that he will contact the webmaster to see if anything can be done. Given the favorable response from Wizard, I would imagine this duplicate account would be tolerated only for the purpose of posting once per day so that I can maintain this thread.

SlackyHacky,

I'm glad to have some support. There are certainly any number of people who know more than I do, so any help from those people is always appreciated.

Buzzpaff,

It's cool, thank you just the same.

RESULTS (Hands 1-99 of 1,000-10,000):







Hands Line Results Profit/Loss
22 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 8, 10, 12, 14, 8, 10, 10, 12, 12, 22, 30, 38 (38, 8, 30 gone with DW on 46 base bet and 22 reduced to 6) DL, L, L, L, S, P, L, W, L, L, P, W, L, W, W, W, L, L, L, DW, W, W Profit: $10
Hands: 22
Pushes: 2 (9.1%)
Losses: 10 (45.5%)
Double-Loss: 1 (4.5%)
Wins: 7 (31.8%)
Double Wins: 1 (4.5%)
Surrenders: 1 (4.5%)
All Losses: 12 (54.5%)
All Wins: 8 (36.4%)
18 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 4, 6, 4, 6, 4, 8, 8, 10, 14, 18 (Split Win-Win knocks out 18 and 4, knocks out 14, reduces 10 to 2) L, L, S, L, S, W, L, W, L, P, W, W, W, L, L, L, SWW, W Profit: $10
Hands: 18
Pushes: 1 (5.6%)
Losses: 8 (44.4%)
Wins: 6 (33.3%)
SplitWW: 1 (5.6%)
Surrenders: 2 (11.1%)
All Losses: 10 (55.6%)
All Wins: 7 (38.9%)
30 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 4, 4, 6, 6, 8, 10, 12, 6, 4, 6, 8, 6, 8, 10, 12, 2 (Natural on 16 base bet eliminates 10 and 6, eliminates 6 and reduces 4 to 2) P, L, W, P, L, P, L, W, L, P, L, L, L, W, S, S, L, L, W, L, W, L, W, L, W, L, W, N, L, W Profit: $10
Hands: 30
Pushes: 4 (13.3%)
Losses: 14 (46.6%)
Wins: 9 (30%)
Naturals: 1 (3.3%)
Surrenders: 2 (6.6%)
All Losses: (53.3%)
All Wins: (33.3%)
20 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 10, 12, 3, 5, 7 (Natural on 10 base bet eliminates 8 and 2 and reduces 6 to 1) L, L, P, L, L, W, L, L, W, W, N, L, L, L, P, W, W, L, W, W Profit: $10
Hands: 20
Pushes: 2 (10%)
Losses: 10 (50%)
Wins: 7 (35%)
Naturals: 1 (5%)
All Losses: (50%)
All Wins: (40%)
9 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 4, 4, 3, 5, 7 (Win on Double Eliminates 5 and 2 as well as 2, 2, 3) L, W, L, S, L, L, W, DW, W Profit: $10
Hands: 9
Losses: 4 (44%)
Surrenders: 1 (11%)
Wins: 3 (33%)
Double Wins: 1 (11%)
All Losses: (55%)
All Wins: (44%)



SESSION STATS
Time: 45 Minutes (Playing)
Hands: 99
Profit: $50
Profit Per Hour: $66.67
Pushes: 9 (9.1%)
Losses: 46 (46.5%)
Wins: 32 (32.3%)
Double-Loss: 1 (1%)
Double Wins: 2 (2%)
Surrenders: 6 (6.1%)
Naturals: 2 (2%)
SplitWW: 1 (1%)

All Wins: 37 (37.4%)
All Losses: 53 (53.5%)

NOTE: Posting tables from Microsoft Word doesn't seem to wok very well. Is there a better way to attempt to do that?
Pavlov146
Pavlov146
Joined: May 16, 2012
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 2
May 16th, 2012 at 9:41:14 PM permalink
Flat Betting w/ Same Hand Results @ $10/bet:

Pushes: 9 ($0)
Losses: 46 (-$460)
Wins: 32 ($320)
Double-Loss: 1 (-$20)
Double Wins: 2 ($40)
Surrenders: 6 ($-30)
Naturals: 2 ($30)
SplitWW: 1 ($20)

Profit/Loss: -$100
Loss Per Hour: -$133.32

Difference: Modified Labouchere +$150, + $200/hour

OBSERVATIONS:

1.) The results are slightly skewed at this point because 89.9% payout rate is such an abyssmal return that I'd find it unacceptable if it came from a slot machine. Anyone can look at the statistics and see that I was confronted with a terrible run of cards, (which were much worse if you were actually sitting there playing them, trust me) so it is very likely that the flat betting will approach something closer to expectations over time and more hands.

2.) The Modified Labouchere did not come anywhere near the $500 bankroll or $200 Table Maximum at any point. I believe the highest single bet was $60-something.

3.) Again, I know that the Modified Labouchere will eventually fail to complete a line. This test is basically one of frequency. Can the Modified Labouchere succeed more than it fails to such an extent as to be a workable long-run betting system?
7craps
7craps
Joined: Jan 23, 2010
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 1977
May 16th, 2012 at 10:31:58 PM permalink
It will be Money well spent.
winsome johnny (not Win some johnny)
7craps
7craps
Joined: Jan 23, 2010
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 1977
May 16th, 2012 at 10:37:33 PM permalink
Quote: Pavlov146


3.) ... Can the Modified Labouchere succeed more than it fails to such an extent as to be a workable long-run betting system?

Of course it can NOT.
So does a Martingale system.

All betting systems can have a very high winning percentage in the short run. Still, many bankrolls lose before winning just one time.
problem is when it fails, as others have pointed out, it easily wipes out many, many and many wins.
And even IF you can get a system to win 99% or 99 out of 100 attempts, that system by the 68th attempt only has a 50.5% chance of winning 68 times in a row.

You will need more than that, more than 68 wins in a row, to offset the large loss that lurks at that level.
winsome johnny (not Win some johnny)
1BB
1BB
Joined: Oct 10, 2011
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 5339
May 17th, 2012 at 7:34:32 AM permalink
Mission146/Pavlov146:

Forum rule#11: Multiple accounts: One account per person. Posting under multiple identities is cause for immediate expulsion. (Added 12/30/2010). Notice that there is no provision for suspension with this rule. It goes straight to expulsion.

So there's no confusion, are you implying that the Wizard has exempted you from this rule? If so, do you plan on creating more identities? Since you're allowed multiple identities I suggest everyone stay on your good side. Your flagging power will soon be double that of anyone else.
Many people, especially ignorant people, want to punish you for speaking the truth. - Mahatma Ghandi
guido111
guido111
Joined: Sep 16, 2010
  • Threads: 10
  • Posts: 707
May 17th, 2012 at 7:51:53 AM permalink
Quote: Mission146


Additionally, the Labouchere System applied to Craps or Roulette does not afford the opportunity, under any circumstances, to win an amount greater than the sum of the line. With the Modified Labouchere System, such a result is not only possible, but thus far, seem to happen about 1/3rd of the time. I am starting a new study, though, because my records from earlier were not specific enough.

The Field bet in Craps has payouts of 2 to 1 and 3 to 1. Most know this.
And the initial bet in the field does not have to be increased as does the Odds bet or bets in BJ.

WinCraps even has a Field auto-bet already completed.
It does use the chip stack ref#, so a little practice is needed to understand how it works.
Stewart Ethier in his Doctrine of Chances book has a section on 6 popular betting systems, Labouchere is included, and the required bankroll formulas needed to win one unit given a house limit.
See page 296.
Google preview works just fine for this.
Mission146
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 132
  • Posts: 14781
May 17th, 2012 at 2:14:29 PM permalink
IN ORDER:

7Craps,

I understand about the zero house edge bets for Craps. The problem with such bets as applied to my Modified Labouchere System is that, in order to even have a chance to make such a bet, you have to first make a bet that has a worse expectation than Blackjack played by Basic Strategy.

Secondly, the Modified Labouchere has a goal of reducing the necessary winning percentage in order for the system to successfully complete. By reducing the winning percentage, in turn, you will also reduce the number of actual wins necessary to complete the system. The problem with the zero-house edge bet is that, while the expected result is zero (no casino advantage) you're still making a single bet in which you can be expected to lose with a greater frequency than you will with Blackjack hands. Depending on how much you are backing your Edge bet with, you could be faced with an insurmountable Labouchere Line in very short order given unfavorable dice.

In other words, let's imagine you have a starting line in Blackjack or Craps of:

2, 2, 2, 2, 2

Per the above, you would actually have to lose 199 hands in a row of Blackjack before you hit the table limit. However, if you back up your bet 5x with the Edge Bet, every time, your line will go as follows, assuming consecutive losses:

2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 24, 156,

As you can see, after two consecutive losses, you can no longer fully back up your Edge Bet because of the Table Limit.

Simply stated, the Modified Labouchere is going to get smacked around under these circumstances. You should also keep in mind that, while the House Edge is zero and true odds are paid, the expectation of an Edge Bet (if you are playing the right way) is always going to be a loss...in terms of that individual bet. It's more likely not to happen than it is for it to happen.

I will grant you that one win would wipe out your Modified Labouchere Line and then some, but then there's really no point in playing a Modified Labouchere Line. The results would be little different, if at all, than just sitting down and betting. That's short term or long-term.

You are correct that you can cross out all your numbers with one win, however, you would literally do it with EVERY win, which makes it completely without purpose to even play a Modified Labouchere Line, unless of course the Table Max is ridiculously high compared to the Table Minimum.

I am not well-versed in C++ code. I also find it prudent to run a manual simulation of 10,000 hands before paying anyone to do anything.

7Craps(2),

If you are not willing to bet more than $500 in pursuit of any single line, then you would not need to complete 68 lines in a row to survive a big loss.

Specifically, since the minimum profit for which a line can complete is $10, then fifty successful lines, by default, gives you $500. $500 is also the absolute maximum you can lose in pursuit of any individual line. You would not make a bet that would put you over $500, you would also not reduce your bet to an amount that is $500 less your total losses in pursuit of the line. You would not chop your line up because that increases the minimum winning percentage necessary thus defeating the purpose of the system.

Simply put, if you have lost $400 in pursuit of the line, and the next bet demanded by the system is $180, then that's it, you have lost $400. Whip out 5 C-Notes and start a new line.

In short, fifty consecutive successful lines absolutely guarantees that your profits survive a big loss. That's assuming (mathematically incorrect assumption) that you ONLY win $10 per completed line AND that your losses sum up to exactly $500, again, highly unlikely.

1BB

I did not mean to imply any such thing. I directly stated that I was assuming the Wizard would be fine with the duplicate account pro hac vice (Latin: On this one occasion) because I was doing it to circumvent a Forum setting that he was in the process of having changed, at my request.

This Forum setting has been changed. I have no intention of having more than two identities, nor do I have any intention of using Pavlov146 again. I would ask, however, that Pavlov146 not be deleted as it contains my results. I suppose I should Quote/Post that.

I do not know what Flagging is, thus, I am not concerned about it.

Guido111

The negative expectation of Craps (in general), and specifically, the Field Bet overcomes the Labouchere System (and any other method of betting) with a greater frequency than Blackjack. Depending on the rules, your negative expectation is a house edge of 2.78%-5.56%.

Simply put, the necessary winning percentage in Blackjack will be lower than that needed in Craps, generally speaking, to complete a Labouchere line.

I have extensively studied the Labouchere System and have done independent research on the System. I have not found, in my experience, any writings that tend to apply the Labouchere System to Blackjack in the manner in which I am doing. If you do have any evidence of this experiment already being conducted in the manner in which I propose, and failing, that would certainly save me much time and I would have the utmost appreciation for you providing me with same.

NOTES:

1.) I will admit that I failed to consider the zero house-advantage Edge bet in Craps, but I easily dispatched of any argument pertaining to that with respect to the Modified Labouchere application. Simply put, there would be no point in applying the Modified Labouchere to that with exception to, maybe, an Extreme disparity between the Table Mins. and Maxes.

I did not mean to imply that there was absolutely NO bet that could cancel out a line completely, or that you could NEVER win in excess of the sum of the line. I said, "The Labouchere System applied," which is meant to imply that there BE a reason to apply the Labouchere System to begin with.

For example, I can plunk down $4.00 on Yo, Straight-Up, with the 2, 2, 2, 2, 2 Labouchere Line and one win would cancel the line and then some, (17:1 payout), but it would be without purpose to even attempt a Labouchere Line with that because the House Edge is 11.11%. The necessary winning percentage would also be extremely difficult to meet on a consistent basis given the Past-Result-Independent nature of the bet. The same is true of the Field, just to a lesser extent.

Once again, when you back the Come with an Edge Bet, the amount you lose is simply too great to employ the system in any meaningful way. The expectation of a single play is also a loss, in terms of probability, which is why the House-Edge is zero even though you are getting paid more than 1:1.

The Labouchere is about winning percentages. As you saw above, if you won 0% in a sample size of 2 your line has failed.

I'm not saying that's a bad bet, any zero edge bet is a GOOD bet, it's just not applicable.

2.) Once again, the name of the game is necessary winning percentage.

I have played 39 hands so far today in a half-hour sample (which I will post later) and intend to do another sample if I have time today. Given yesterday's results, however, they are illustrative of what I mean when I talk about necessary winning percentage.

I had a more favorable run of cards earlier today, but as you can see by last night's sample, I would have gotten absolutely brutalized playing flat betting. The timing was fantastic for demonstrating my point, but I honestly think I have never seen a worse run of cards in my life.

The Fourth Line was the only one where Wins + Pushes equaled 50% or greater...and they equaled exactly 50%. The fifth line was the only one that would have been profitable in a flat-betting scenario, and it would have won $5 compared to the $10 that was won.

3.) I will post today's results later, but you will see that they show the flip side of the Modified Labouchere coin. Specifically, I profited $84 with Modified Labouchere and flat-betting would have put me up $125.

Overall, the Modified Labouchere has me $134 ahead where flat betting would have me ahead $25.

This was a sample of 39 hands with a combine Win/Push rate of 59% inclusive of only one Push. In other words, I won a better than expected 56.4% of hands.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
Mission146
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 132
  • Posts: 14781
May 17th, 2012 at 2:17:13 PM permalink
Quote: Pavlov146

Greetings.

This is Mission146, however, I cannot post as Mission146. Vegas is frightened of me and has hacked my account.

I jest.

In reality, this Forum has a feature by which it prevents a Spambot from flooding by only allowing you as many posts as days you have been a member for the first thirty days of membership.

I have no idea why I was allowed to even make eleven posts in two days of membership.

I have PM'ed the Wizard who said that he will contact the webmaster to see if anything can be done. Given the favorable response from Wizard, I would imagine this duplicate account would be tolerated only for the purpose of posting once per day so that I can maintain this thread.

SlackyHacky,

I'm glad to have some support. There are certainly any number of people who know more than I do, so any help from those people is always appreciated.

Buzzpaff,

It's cool, thank you just the same.

RESULTS (Hands 1-99 of 1,000-10,000):







Hands Line Results Profit/Loss
22 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 8, 10, 12, 14, 8, 10, 10, 12, 12, 22, 30, 38 (38, 8, 30 gone with DW on 46 base bet and 22 reduced to 6) DL, L, L, L, S, P, L, W, L, L, P, W, L, W, W, W, L, L, L, DW, W, W Profit: $10
Hands: 22
Pushes: 2 (9.1%)
Losses: 10 (45.5%)
Double-Loss: 1 (4.5%)
Wins: 7 (31.8%)
Double Wins: 1 (4.5%)
Surrenders: 1 (4.5%)
All Losses: 12 (54.5%)
All Wins: 8 (36.4%)
18 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 4, 6, 4, 6, 4, 8, 8, 10, 14, 18 (Split Win-Win knocks out 18 and 4, knocks out 14, reduces 10 to 2) L, L, S, L, S, W, L, W, L, P, W, W, W, L, L, L, SWW, W Profit: $10
Hands: 18
Pushes: 1 (5.6%)
Losses: 8 (44.4%)
Wins: 6 (33.3%)
SplitWW: 1 (5.6%)
Surrenders: 2 (11.1%)
All Losses: 10 (55.6%)
All Wins: 7 (38.9%)
30 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 4, 4, 6, 6, 8, 10, 12, 6, 4, 6, 8, 6, 8, 10, 12, 2 (Natural on 16 base bet eliminates 10 and 6, eliminates 6 and reduces 4 to 2) P, L, W, P, L, P, L, W, L, P, L, L, L, W, S, S, L, L, W, L, W, L, W, L, W, L, W, N, L, W Profit: $10
Hands: 30
Pushes: 4 (13.3%)
Losses: 14 (46.6%)
Wins: 9 (30%)
Naturals: 1 (3.3%)
Surrenders: 2 (6.6%)
All Losses: (53.3%)
All Wins: (33.3%)
20 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 10, 12, 3, 5, 7 (Natural on 10 base bet eliminates 8 and 2 and reduces 6 to 1) L, L, P, L, L, W, L, L, W, W, N, L, L, L, P, W, W, L, W, W Profit: $10
Hands: 20
Pushes: 2 (10%)
Losses: 10 (50%)
Wins: 7 (35%)
Naturals: 1 (5%)
All Losses: (50%)
All Wins: (40%)
9 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 4, 4, 3, 5, 7 (Win on Double Eliminates 5 and 2 as well as 2, 2, 3) L, W, L, S, L, L, W, DW, W Profit: $10
Hands: 9
Losses: 4 (44%)
Surrenders: 1 (11%)
Wins: 3 (33%)
Double Wins: 1 (11%)
All Losses: (55%)
All Wins: (44%)



SESSION STATS
Time: 45 Minutes (Playing)
Hands: 99
Profit: $50
Profit Per Hour: $66.67
Pushes: 9 (9.1%)
Losses: 46 (46.5%)
Wins: 32 (32.3%)
Double-Loss: 1 (1%)
Double Wins: 2 (2%)
Surrenders: 6 (6.1%)
Naturals: 2 (2%)
SplitWW: 1 (1%)

All Wins: 37 (37.4%)
All Losses: 53 (53.5%)

NOTE: Posting tables from Microsoft Word doesn't seem to wok very well. Is there a better way to attempt to do that?

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219

  • Jump to: