Betting all profit till I hit my win goal?

Playing Darkside at 3/4/5x odds which makes all odds bets 6x your flat bet.

start with $2000. Leave the table at +$750/-$1000.

Only bet the Dont Pass: $25 Dont, $150 odds
For simplicity, lets say the point is always 5/9 so the payoff is $125.

so 6 wins in a row would get me to the $750 goal.

But lets say I press all my profit:
1st win: +125, 125 total, same bet
2nd win: +125, 250 total, press to 35/210 odds
3rd win: +175, 425 total, press to 60/360 odds
4th win: +300, 725 total (Close enough to $750)

so 4 wins in a row vs needing 6.

if i fall below $2000, then i keep the bet at $25/150 odds till i'm above $2000 then start my progression again.

So what do you think? Too aggressive/risky?
better chances of reaching the $750 mark by just keeping the bet the same?

Quote: 100xOdds

then start my progression again.

You see, this is the problem.

Play one single session, after that stop playing for the entire life - one could create a betting system maximizing the probability of hitting a specific target.

Play one session, after that repeat: You need a +EV bet for that feat.

Quote: MangoJ

You see, this is the problem.

Play one single session, after that stop playing for the entire life - one could create a betting system maximizing the probability of hitting a specific target.

Play one session, after that repeat: You need a +EV bet for that feat.

I think everyone "gets" that gambling for a lifetime session on any game that has a -EV will most likely result in a loss over the course of the session.

Reality is that many of us go to the casino and try to use some limits for what you might call a "portion" of our "lifetime" session. We tend to call that a "session" and consider it one of many "sessions" regardless of the whole "lifetime session" concept. I don't really give a crap about the whole "lifetime session" thing--I know it is true, I know it is there, i know the expectation is a loss on a -EV game--I just try to enjoy each trip to the casino.

Part of enjoying the trip for me is attempting to not lose too much while not limiting the potential win. I will do a number of "sessions" with $100 or $200 loss limits but will move my "bottom" number up (from a $200 loss to a $100 loss to no loss, etc.) as I win. Once the table turns, it is time to stop for a while. Sometimes one session with a $1000 win will negate all of the $100 losses; other times I just plain lose.

What the OP is looking for is neither of our thoughts on sessions, he is looking for an answer about how whether or not his method of play is too aggressive. On that issue, his plan seems a little aggressive for my style of play. I like to press aggressively when I am up but most of the time it is a slow grind until something really good happens.

Quote: 100xOdds

better chances of reaching the $750 mark by just keeping the bet the same?

If you want the highest probability (better chances) of hitting your win goal of $750 without any time factor

#1) Your progression suggestion gets you there about 47.4% of the time (by sim)

#2) Same flat bet of $25 Lay 345X odds always
about 54.69% (by sim)

#3) Bold Play - The least number of bets needed
Betting all $750 on first hand, no odds, and what ever it takes on the following hands
Betting the max on every round until you hit your goal.
[1] 56.22715% (by calculation)


But if you want to play for a minimum of about 2 hours AND hit your win goal of $750
at an Avg. No. games played = 57.03
Stick with the $25 bet with laying 345X odds.

Quote: 100xOdds

then start my progression again.

Bad idea

Now with a 54.69% chance of hitting your win goal then starting over, that lowers your bankroll units,
you have a 54.69%*54.69% = 29.9% chance of success two times in a row to hit $1500 win goal.

Just keep playing once you start and hitting a $1500 win goal ($25 flat and 345X lay odds)
37.853%

So you are screwing yourself by starting over.
A larger bankroll, from your winnings, gives you the better chance of hitting win goals

Quote: 7craps

If you want the highest probability (better chances) of hitting your win goal of $750 without any time factor

#1) Your progression suggestion gets you there about 47.4% of the time (by sim)

#2) Same flat bet of $25 Lay 345X odds always
about 54.69% (by sim)

#3) Bold Play - The least number of bets needed
Betting all $750 on first hand, no odds, and what ever it takes on the following hands
Betting the max on every round until you hit your goal.
[1] 56.22715% (by calculation)


But if you want to play for a minimum of about 2 hours AND hit your win goal of $750
at an Avg. No. games played = 57.03
Stick with the $25 bet with laying 345X odds.

how about a compromise progression:
But lets say I press all my profit:
1st win: +125, 125 total, same bet
2nd win: +125, 250 total, press to 35/210 odds
3rd win: +175, 425 total, same bet
4th win: +175, 600 total, same bet
5th win: +175, 775 total

how's the compromise progression compare to same bet of $25/150 odds?

Quote: 7craps

Bad idea

Now with a 54.69% chance of hitting your win goal then starting over, that lowers your bankroll units,
you have a 54.69%*54.69% = 29.9% chance of success two times in a row to hit $1500 win goal.

Just keep playing once you start and hitting a $1500 win goal ($25 flat and 345X lay odds)
37.853%

So you are screwing yourself by starting over.
A larger bankroll, from your winnings, gives you the better chance of hitting win goals

ahh.. so pressing is never a good idea in craps? just keep using the same bet? (so ignore my last post about compromise progression.)

and what do you mean by "A larger bankroll, from your winnings"?

Quote: 100xOdds

ahh.. so pressing is never a good idea in craps? just keep using the same bet? (so ignore my last post about compromise progression.)

It works well if you are using a Bold Play style of betting while behind trying to hit a win goal.

Pressing bets, without increasing one's bankroll, adds both variance (that is good) and -EV (that is bad)
and the positive effect of variance is way less than the negative effect which is higher bust rates (higher risk of ruin)

from http://krigman.casinocitytimes.com/article/ever-have-one-of-those-days-when-you-never-get-ahead-59920
Alan says it better than I
"Sophisticated players may be aware that the volatility of their action goes up when they vary the sizes of their bets.

And raising the volatility lowers the probability of never being ahead.

The question may therefore follow as to whether they’d be wise to press their bets when they’re behind.
Not only does the math suggest that the higher volatility improves their prospects for recovery, but intuition intimates that they’ll need fewer lucky hits to get over the top.

The fallacy here is not only that bigger bets can lose as well as win, but pumping wagers reduces the bankroll-to-bet ratio, the negative effect of which is stronger than the positive impact of higher volatility.
So this approach may succeed in any particular situation but wouldn’t be a sensible general rule."

Quote: 100xOdds

and what do you mean by "A larger bankroll, from your winnings"?

Instead of $2K stake playing until $750/-$1000 and doing it 2 times in a row
do
$2k stake with $1500/-$1000

as you approach your WG of $1500, your bankroll is increasing,
so as your Bankroll units increase, you increase your chances of hitting any win goal.

7Craps, i'm trying to wrap my head around this.

1) pressing my bets = bad because it adds variance and -EV. The -EV outweighs the variance.
thus same bet is better in reaching my win goal.

but using Bold Play and betting $750 of my $2000 bankroll = best chance of hitting my win goal?!
This increases the variance by a HUGE factor but doesnt increase the -EV??

1b) How is bold Play not considered pressing my bet?


2) you said Pressing bets without increasing one's bankroll is bad.
but if i'm up then my bankroll is increased?

edit:
Nevermind about #2.
i can only press a VERY small amount to keep the same bankroll to bet ratio.
ie: if i'm up $500, i could press $35 total and still be good?

at bankroll= $2000, my Dont Pass is $25/150 odds = $175 total. 2000/175 = 11.43 ratio
at bankroll= $2500, my Dont Pass is $30/180 = $210 total. 2500/210= 11.9 ratio

With Pressing sooooo little, I might as well stay at same bet and save the trouble of calculating how much to press to keep the same Ratio.


3) you also said "It works well if you are using a Bold Play style of betting while behind trying to hit a win goal."
What's 'it'? Pressing the bets while behind, or same bet while behind?

" 3) you also said "It works well if you are using a Bold Play style of betting while behind trying to hit a win goal."
What's 'it'? Pressing the bets while behind, or same bet while behind? "

Actually the preferred method is to NOT be behind.

What do you do if your profit is less than yor standard bet?

Double your bet.

Quote: 7craps

If you want the highest probability (better chances) of hitting your win goal of $750 without any time factor

#1) Your progression suggestion gets you there about 47.4% of the time (by sim)

#2) Same flat bet of $25 Lay 345X odds always
about 54.69% (by sim)

#3) Bold Play - The least number of bets needed
Betting all $750 on first hand, no odds, and what ever it takes on the following hands
Betting the max on every round until you hit your goal.
[1] 56.22715% (by calculation)


But if you want to play for a minimum of about 2 hours AND hit your win goal of $750
at an Avg. No. games played = 57.03
Stick with the $25 bet with laying 345X odds.

Quote: 7craps

Bad idea [of having to start the progression over again]

Now with a 54.69% chance of hitting your win goal then starting over, that lowers your bankroll units,
you have a 54.69%*54.69% = 29.9% chance of success two times in a row to hit $1500 win goal.

Just keep playing once you start and hitting a $1500 win goal ($25 flat and 345X lay odds)
37.853%

So you are screwing yourself by starting over.
A larger bankroll, from your winnings, gives you the better chance of hitting win goals

it's slowly sinking in.. so slow and steady wins the race. no pressing.
ie: stay at $25/max odds till i hit my win goal

I'd say this isn't aggressive enough. There's no difference between your profit and your starting bankroll (other than the bottom thousand). If you can, bet enough to cross the finish; if you can't, bet it all (or I suppose in your case, enough to hit your stoploss if you lose). "Slow and steady" will just see the edge slowly grow as you most likely drop to your stoploss.

Quote: 24Bingo

I'd say this isn't aggressive enough. There's no difference between your profit and your starting bankroll (other than the bottom thousand). If you can, bet enough to cross the finish; if you can't, bet it all (or I suppose in your case, enough to hit your stoploss if you lose). "Slow and steady" will just see the edge slowly grow as you most likely drop to your stoploss.

well, i still dont understand why it's better to bet all $1000 on Dont pass/no odds (1.4% HE) instead of 140/840odds (.28% HE). at 140/840odds, i'll get close enough to my goal to quit. so in both instances it's one win and i'm out.

I'm not going to do Bold Play until I understand why 1.4% HE is better than .28% for this strategy.

Quote: 100xOdds

well, i still dont understand why it's better to bet all $1000 on Dont pass/no odds (1.4% HE) instead of 140/840odds (.28% HE). at 140/840odds, i'll get close enough to my goal to quit. so in both instances it's one win and i'm out.

I'm not going to do Bold Play until I understand why 1.4% HE is better than .28% for this strategy.

Bold Play minimizes the number of trials needed to hit a win goal.

In your example, you want to double a $1k by betting DPass,
what happens when you bet $140 and the first roll is either a 2 or a 3.
One trial, One win, but you did not hit your goal.

Betting it all would have hit the goal.

The advantage to hitting win goals with odds (pass or don't) is when you are up against a house limit on how much you can bet.
That is the only place where I can see any extra advantage.
Say you still want to win $1000 but max bet is $250
There are actually a few different Bold Play methods that are optimal depending on how many odds you can take.
The higher the odds the less you place on the flat bet.
Now the odds helps out, just a little bit more, but they do help out.

In reality, what is the difference if you have a 49.3% chance of doubling a bankroll or a
49.6% chance? Unless you do this many many times, not much.

Bold Play or close to it is way better than Timid play, where one bets the minimum at each coup.
This is where it now takes many trials to hit a win goal and the house edge has a longer time to work against you.

But, Timid play is good for those that just want to play for a long time and do not really care if they win or lose,
most still want to win.
I do not think any gambler actually uses Bold Play in their daily gambling.

Come in, look around, pick your spot, make one bet and leave.
For most, no fun, no matter how much you win.

Most want to play for awhile and have a chance to win.
That is the most fun to many gamblers.

" I do not think any gambler actually uses Bold Play in their daily gambling. "

Ever heard the term ON TILT ?

Quote: 100xOdds

well, i still dont understand why it's better to bet all $1000 on Dont pass/no odds (1.4% HE) instead of 140/840odds (.28% HE). at 140/840odds, i'll get close enough to my goal to quit. so in both instances it's one win and i'm out.

I'm not going to do Bold Play until I understand why 1.4% HE is better than .28% for this strategy.

You misunderstand - by all means take full odds. $140 with $840 odds is a good bet if you're determined not to lose more than $1000. But you should always, if you can, bet enough to walk away if you win after taking odds - that is, if you're always betting the darkside, a quarter the remaining distance on the line unless that's greater than 1/7 your bankroll, in which case 1/7 your bankroll. (By "bankroll" I mean the amount you're willing to lose - the fact you have another $1000 in your pocket is completely irrelevant. Or if $1000 is just your stoploss, and you are willing to dip below, I'd recommend you bet $190 on the line, so that if a point comes up you walk either way.)

The reason for "bold play" is - well, let me put it this way. You can have a thousand dollars if a coin comes up heads in one flip, or ten dollars for every time it comes up heads in a hundred flips. Say you just want to make some money - obviously you take the second. But if you'd rather walk away with nothing at all than anything less than $700, which would you take? Likewise, if you're going to play until you hit one of two limits, and time isn't a factor, you should absolutely be bold; slow and steady will lose the race, just like that coin is probably not going to reach $700.

Remember this, too: if you bet exactly what you brought to the table, the theoretical loss is the house edge. If you bet it in small increments compared to your bankroll, you're probably going to wind up with fairly close to the amount of money you started out with after one run-through, so if you then bet it again, you'll probably wind up again with about what you started with, so the theoretical loss doubles. The more you bet, the more the theoretical loss increases, and betting small increments, you're probably not going to stray too far from your initial buy-in less that amount, not to the tune of $750; not to the tune of $1000, either, but sooner or later, the theoretical loss will be low enough that you won't have that far to go. And sure, your expected distance out will increase as well, but far more slowly (the square root if you're flat betting; it's more complicated if you're not, but always slower). A few huge bets, and the expected distance out, which you want to maximize, will be huge, just like one coin flip is never going to give you close to its EV, but double or nothing. So be bold.

The reason most gamblers don't do this is that they don't have the same goal you do, or if they do, they're not too serious about it, or are superstitious, or just haven't thought it through. But I like to think most of them, especially at a craps table, are just there for a good time, and betting most of their bankroll at once will make it quite a short time.

If you are just going to do a one time bet, stay home and have somebody else place the bet. LOL

Quote: 7craps

Bad idea

Now with a 54.69% chance of hitting your win goal then starting over, that lowers your bankroll units,
you have a 54.69%*54.69% = 29.9% chance of success two times in a row to hit $1500 win goal.

Just keep playing once you start and hitting a $1500 win goal ($25 flat and 345X lay odds)
37.853%

So you are screwing yourself by starting over.
A larger bankroll, from your winnings, gives you the better chance of hitting win goals

I don't think the OP ever said he would repeat his progression after he hit his win goal. I believe he said he would just bet $25 with max odds if he was down, but he would use the progression again if he got back to even.

Quote: 24Bingo

Remember this, too: if you bet exactly what you brought to the table, the theoretical loss is the house edge. If you bet it in small increments compared to your bankroll, you're probably going to wind up with fairly close to the amount of money you started out with after one run-through, so if you then bet it again, you'll probably wind up again with about what you started with, so the theoretical loss doubles.

I think is is a great explanation why bold strategy is best for a fixed target.

The expected loss on any strategy is the house edge times the expected *total* amount you are going to bet. If you can't do much about the house edge, you can try to minimize the total amount by your betting strategy. You would wan't to reach your target (i.e. either winlimit or losslimit) with big bets in the fewest possible number.

If you bet small most of the fluctuations (the "ups and downs") cancel each other, and you have a hard time reaching your target. In a ficticious zero house edge game, you would need to bet through your bankroll many many times before you finally hit your target. Now "turn on" the house edge, and for every single run through your bankroll you lose part of your bankroll to the house. Thus with small bet size you're losing much more money to the house compared to betting big.