Thread Rating:
i play Dark so odds are always 6x my flat bet.
ie: $50 flat/$300 odds
if the point was a 5, i win $250 when a 7 rolls.
The problem are 7's and 11's on the Passline roll. I lose 20% (50/250) when each time.
I had a combination of Six 7's and 11's before the point was established. Basically I just lost an entire bet and then some.
Now i'm thinking of playing $50 Passline instead.
Math says there's neglible difference in the HE.
But why am i thinking it's harder to win this way? and/or requires a bigger bankroll? Agree/disagree? WHY?
(Dark = 5x what I put on the table. $25/150odds = $875 bankroll)
Also EV (expected value) and standard deviation.Quote: 100xOddsMath says there's neglible difference in the HE.
From your empirical data.Quote: 100xOddsBut why am i thinking it's harder to win this way?
Stop thinking and just play.
The bigger bankroll is really only for small bankrolls and larger average bets.(Less Bankroll units)Quote: 100xOddsand/or requires a bigger bankroll?
Agree/disagree?
WHY?
(Dark = 5x what I put on the table. $25/150odds = $875 bankroll)
I think this thread has some on it.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/tables/4661-bankroll-for-dont-pass-vs-passline/
But for hitting win goals (say double over a session or lifetime),
the bankroll units is what really matters.
Take your $875 Bankroll with $25 flat bets
That is a 35 unit bankroll
$1 million sessions simulated
All bets are a single unit
added:(Play until Bankroll is Doubled or Bust out trying)
Player-Pass 345X odds
Avg. Unit bet with Odds = 3.78
Avg. Total amount bet . = 56.89
Avg. amount bet on Odds = 149.04
Bankroll was busted . . = 52.697% of the time ( 526974)
Win goal was met . . . = 47.303% of the time ( 473026)
Avg (mean) end bankroll = 34.17 (change of -0.83)
Std-dev ending bankroll = 36.10
Play until Bankroll is Tripled or Bust out trying
Bankroll was busted . . = 68.639% of the time ( 686390)
Win goal was met . . . = 31.361% of the time ( 313610)
Player-Don't Pass 345X odds
Avg. Unit bet with Odds = 5.00
Avg. Total amount bet . = 58.51
Avg. amount bet on Odds = 211.31
Bankroll was busted . . = 52.352% of the time ( 523521)
Win goal was met . . . = 47.648% of the time ( 476479)
Avg (mean) end bankroll = 34.19 (change of -0.81)
Std-dev ending bankroll = 35.85
Play until Bankroll is Tripled or Bust out trying
Bankroll was busted . . = 68.773% of the time ( 687734)
Win goal was met . . . = 31.227% of the time ( 312266)
The only real difference is how much is bet on the odds,
and we know the Don't player in order to lay max odds must risk more.
End result, about the same.
Summary: with the same starting bankroll and win goals,
the results (from betting Pass or Don't Pass with odds)
are just about the same
unless you do not think they are
Where the difference lies is in the "skew." The don't odds have a negative skew, whereas the pass odds have a positive one (+/- .4115 cubic units; the line bet's is a negligible I-can't-be-arsed-but-it's-close-to-the-EV's-value in both cases), which means that since your losses are bigger on the don't, the cumulative probability of a loss approaches the normal from below, whereas that of a win approaches from above, so after the first few trials, you're more likely to be ahead from don't pass odds than pass odds (not counting the line).
EDIT: ZZZZ...
So you can easily change one set of frustrations for another ... which is not to say either side can't be exhilarating when things go right!
With the light side, you can lose four points in a row then get back to even after three wins.
This is a sample size of one kind of situation, you need to remember the big picture and the way you like to play. We all have bad sessions and bad nights, just remember what happened when you win a couple thousand the next.
Quote: odiousgambitthe irritation going right bettor becomes all those losing streaks trying to make your point. Losing streaks are likely to be longer, more demoralizing losing streaks than playing the Don't. They are to me anyway, I seem to be able to tune out the fact that darkside you get paid less than even money.
So you can easily change one set of frustrations for another ... which is not to say either side can't be exhilarating when things go right!
ahh.. longer losing streaks.
For the rightSide you must hope that specific number rolls again. whereas the darkSide all you need the is the most numberous #, the 7.
in the long run, based on 7craps calcs, it's the same. but in the shortrun, i can see how it can be demoralizing when you walk out of the casino losing your whole bankroll multiple times w/o a winning session.
i can see enjoying myself more at small wins at Darkside and w/less chances of losing bankroll vs huge sessions (4x bankroll) but more consistantly walk out w/o my bankroll.
For me, i dont think the feeling of Huge sessions wins will make up for the greater frequency of walking out broke.
it's all about the enjoyment/entertainment value i guess.
Quote: ahiromuMy biggest issue with the dark side is if you hit a serious bad round of variance (4-5 points in a row) it's a really difficult and long journey to get back to even.
With the light side, you can lose four points in a row then get back to even after three wins.
This is a sample size of one kind of situation, you need to remember the big picture and the way you like to play. We all have bad sessions and bad nights, just remember what happened when you win a couple thousand the next.
rightSide: 2 wins makes up for 3 losses
Dark: 4wins needed to make up for 3 losses
I do think the dark side probably has the best chance of coming out ahead each session. Especially if one was to play, EGADS, a progressive bet size on the DP line. I just don't have the discipline to sit there and wait for the 7, with no other real action in play.
The one problem with the dark side, is when the table does have a 3 or 4 point roll, everyone is whooping it up, except for the DP players, who just took a beating. It puts you out of synch socially with the majority of the other players.
Quote: RaleighCrapsI have never been able to play the dark side for more than a few rolls. Typically happens on tables where no one has been able to make a point, or more than one point, for a while.
I do think the dark side probably has the best chance of coming out ahead each session. Especially if one was to play, EGADS, a progressive bet size on the DP line. I just don't have the discipline to sit there and wait for the 7, with no other real action in play.
The one problem with the dark side, is when the table does have a 3 or 4 point roll, everyone is whooping it up, except for the DP players, who just took a beating. It puts you out of synch socially with the majority of the other players.
more info on egads betting system pls
Quote: sodawaterWhen I have played from the don't I've also use continual DC bets to get more money in play... Best feeling in the world when you have 4 or 5 points with max odds and the 7 hits and you just stack and stack and stack winnings.
I will go with $25 DP , and then put 2 $25 DC bets out, rarely with odds. But my timing is never that good. I always seem to lose a DC to the 7 out roll.
Part of my problem with the dark side is I am all over the map with my bets. If I would stick to a certain bet pattern, like I mostly do from the Right side, I would probably do better from the Dark. My heart is just not into the Dark side, I guess.
Quote: 7craps
Take your $875 Bankroll with $25 flat bets
That is a 35 unit bankroll
$1 million sessions simulated
All bets are a single unit
Player-Pass 345X odds
Avg. Unit bet with Odds = 3.78
Avg. Total amount bet . = 56.89
Avg. amount bet on Odds = 149.04
Bankroll was busted . . = 52.697% of the time ( 526974)
Win goal was met . . . = 47.303% of the time ( 473026)
Avg (mean) end bankroll = 34.17 (change of -0.83)
Std-dev ending bankroll = 36.10
Play until Bankroll is Tripled or Bust out trying
Bankroll was busted . . = 68.639% of the time ( 686390)
Win goal was met . . . = 31.361% of the time ( 313610)
Player-Don't Pass 345X odds
Avg. Unit bet with Odds = 5.00
Avg. Total amount bet . = 58.51
Avg. amount bet on Odds = 211.31
Bankroll was busted . . = 52.352% of the time ( 523521)
Win goal was met . . . = 47.648% of the time ( 476479)
Avg (mean) end bankroll = 34.19 (change of -0.81)
Std-dev ending bankroll = 35.85
Play until Bankroll is Tripled or Bust out trying
Bankroll was busted . . = 68.773% of the time ( 687734)
Win goal was met . . . = 31.227% of the time ( 312266)
The only real difference is how much is bet on the odds,
and we know the Don't player in order to lay max odds must risk more.
End result, about the same.
I am very interested in these simulation results but do not fully understand them. For example, how can the average "total amount bet" be greater than the average "amount bet on odds"? Does the "total amount bet" refer only to Pass and Don't Pass bets made on come out rolls? If so, then the Pass player saw an average of 56.89 come-out rolls per session and the Don't Pass player saw an average of 58.51 come-out rolls per session? Since you show two different "bankroll was busted" percentages for each strategy, it appears you simulated two different kinds of sessions. Was the first session type defined as "Play until bankroll is doubled or bust out trying?"
I would have been interested in comparing the Pass and Don't Pass players' simulated results for sessions defined by a fixed number of dice rolls rather than a win goal. Suppose a Pass bettor and a Don't Pass bettor start playing at the same 345x odds craps table at the same time and both plan to quit in 6 hours (or when they bust out). Both players start with $1000 and make a $10 Pass Line or Don't Pass bet on come out rolls and then take/lay maximum odds without making any other bets. Do the simulation results indicate that these two players will have nearly the same risk of ruin?
Nice questionsQuote: PensiveGerbilI am very interested in these simulation results but do not fully understand them. For example, how can the average "total amount bet" be greater than the average "amount bet on odds"?
If the total bet amount includes the flat bet and odds. For the data shown, you are correct, it does not.
Yes, YesQuote: PensiveGerbilDoes the "total amount bet" refer only to Pass and Don't Pass bets made on come out rolls?
If so, then the Pass player saw an average of 56.89 come-out rolls per session and the Don't Pass player saw an average of 58.51 come-out rolls per session?
Yes. That was corrected.Quote: PensiveGerbilSince you show two different "bankroll was busted" percentages for each strategy, it appears you simulated two different kinds of sessions. Was the first session type defined as "Play until bankroll is doubled or bust out trying?"
The OP likes to double his starting bankroll or bust trying.
Of course and per hour and a fixed number of dice rolls are two different things. Per hour dice rolls is a variable.Quote: PensiveGerbilI would have been interested in comparing the Pass and Don't Pass players' simulated results for sessions defined by a fixed number of dice rolls rather than a win goal.
Here you go.
Same results.
Quote: PensiveGerbilSuppose a Pass bettor and a Don't Pass bettor start playing at the same 345x odds craps table at the same time and both plan to quit in 6 hours (or when they bust out).
Both players start with $1000 and make a $10 Pass Line or Don't Pass bet on come out rolls and then take/lay maximum odds without making any other bets.
Do the simulation results indicate that these two players will have nearly the same risk of ruin?
Yep.
Not much difference between a win goal and a time goal.
No. Sessions simulated = 1,000,000
Max. No. rolls to quit = 360 (6 hours @ 60 rolls per hour)
Odds Multiplier . . . . = 3x, 4x, 5x
Simulation of Craps Pass Line Wagers
Bankroll was busted . . = 4.398% of the time ( 43976)
Bankroll decreased . . = 51.019% of the time
Bankroll increased . . = 48.181% of the time
Simulation of Craps Don't Pass Wagers
Bankroll was busted . . = 4.325% of the time ( 43249)
Bankroll decreased . . = 50.523% of the time
Bankroll increased . . = 48.690% of the time
Max. No. rolls to quit = 600 (6 hours @ 100 rolls per hour)
Odds Multiplier . . . . = 3x, 4x, 5x
Simulation of Craps Pass Line Wagers
Bankroll was busted . . = 12.676% of the time ( 126756)
Bankroll decreased . . = 51.508% of the time
Bankroll increased . . = 47.889% of the time
Simulation of Craps Don't Pass Wagers
Bankroll was busted . . = 12.353% of the time ( 123528)
Bankroll decreased . . = 51.136% of the time
Bankroll increased . . = 48.260% of the time
The question that was answered was:
Does a Don't Player betting odds need a higher bankroll than the Pass player betting odds?
OP:(But why am i thinking it's harder to win this way? and/or requires a bigger bankroll? Agree/disagree? WHY?)
Many say yes because of the higher average bet made by the Don't player.
Simulation results say there is no difference that can be seen by the average player.
The myth of higher bankrolls needed for these Don't Craps players
vs. the Pass line players is busted.
(this does not include cherry picked dice roll sequences or any distribution of rolls made by a DI)
Quote: 7craps
The myth of higher bankrolls needed for these Don't Craps players
vs. the Pass line players is busted.
THANK YOU!!!!!!!!
I also read that the darkside strategy required a larger bankroll, and this seemed to conflict with my perception playing around with the simulated craps game on this website. I expected the darskide strategy to have the lower variance, but I think my perception was biased by the frequency of wining/losing the larger odds bets, failing to appreciate the impact of more frequently losing the relatively small dark side line bet on come-out rolls.
Nevertheless, the consistency of your simulation results seem to prove that the darkside strategy has a slightly lower standard deviation and risk of ruin. For those seeking to make a certain quantity of bets to earn comps, the darkside strategy also has the benefits of having a larger average bet size and a smaller house edge (for the same total sum of bets).
It seems to me that the variance difference between the right way and wrong way strategies may be magnified when the Pass player starts making Come bets and the Don't Pass player starts making Don't Come bets. When these players have odds on several numbers, the right way player will lose all his outstanding bets at once when a 7 rolls while the wrong way player loses one bet at a time. What do you think? Can you simulate right way and wrong way strategies that include making Come/Don't Come bets until two or three numbers are covered (with maximum odds)?
My ultimate interest is to compare the variance of a Don't Pass/Don't Come strategy with that of a a mixed strategy involving making Come bets while laying odds on a Don't Pass bet (or visa versa) so that you can make opposing odds bets (but not on the same number). This is the real subject of my "Reduced Variance Craps Strategy" thread.
What program do you use for these simulations?
Depends on how you play?
This is how I play either side:
$10min, 3/4/5x
1) passline + continuous come
avg bet is $50 ($10 flat + 40 odds). 6 #'s thus 6x50 = $300 max on the table.
i bring 5x what i put on the table thus $1500 bankroll.
2) Darkside- Single large 'Don't pass' bet
Given $1500 bankroll:
$43 dont + 258 odds = $301 on the table
Now if you do Dont pass + continuous Dont come:
$10 + 60odds = 70. 70 x 6 = $420 on table
420 x 5 = $2100 bankroll
So what you're saying 7Craps is the math says 'dont pass + continuous dont come' and Pass + continuous Come on a $1500 bankroll is the same? thus for Darkside, i only need 3.6x what i put on the table to have the same math?
So when I bring $2100 playing Dark and bust out, variance was REALLY against me? yes, this happened :(
Gerbil, Thx for reminding me about the size option :)
Quote: 100xOdds"The myth of higher bankrolls needed for these Don't Craps players vs. the Pass line players is busted."
Depends on how you play?
Not really.
How many odds you Lay/Take is more important.
The variance factor.
You should know that $50 is not the average bet.Quote: 100xOddsThis is how I play either side:
$10min, 3/4/5x
1) passline + continuous come
avg bet is $50 ($10 flat + 40 odds). 6 #'s thus 6x50 = $300 max on the table.
i bring 5x what i put on the table thus $1500 bankroll.
I see why you use it that way and no harm no foul.
1/3 of the time the $10 bet is resolved and 2/3 the odds come into play.
If you actually calculate the average bet,
then you can project that over X number of bets/rolls and get the standard deviation and
then one can see what a session may produce, even Risk of Ruin. But that is for another thread.
When one compares the Don't Pass to the Pass line there are no come/dcome bets to consider.Quote: 100xOdds2) Darkside- Single large 'Don't pass' bet
Given $1500 bankroll:
$43 dont + 258 odds = $301 on the table
Now if you do Dont pass + continuous Dont come:
$10 + 60odds = 70. 70 x 6 = $420 on table
420 x 5 = $2100 bankroll
So what you're saying 7Craps is the math says 'dont pass + continuous dont come' and Pass + continuous Come on a $1500 bankroll is the same? thus for Darkside, i only need 3.6x what i put on the table to have the same math?
But since you brought it up.
The higher the odds factor on the don't side while making don't come bets every roll,
the higher the total average bet and the higher the bankroll needs to be
to be even with the pass/come betting method.
But not that much higher.
Because there is an average of 2.375 come/dcome bets resolved per line bet resolved,
the variance is way more of a challenge to calculate because of the many different odds outcomes.
Sims do this easily. The variance part would be for another thread.
Double Bankroll or bust trying
Odds Multiplier . . . . = 3x, 4x, 5x
Starting Bankroll: $1500
$10 Line bets / come bets every roll
Simulation of Craps Pass Line / Come Bet Wagers
Come odds ALWAYS working on come out roll (yes, most do not play this way)
Bankroll was busted . . = 52.9% of the time
Avg # of Rolls: 507.39
Simulation of Craps Pass Line / Come Bet Wagers
Come odds NOT working on come out roll (the default method of play)
Bankroll was busted . . = 52.6% of the time
Avg # of Rolls: 581.61
$10 Line bets / don't come bets every roll
Simulation of Craps Don't Pass / Don't Come Wagers
Bankroll was busted . . = 53.9% of the time
Avg # of Rolls: 534.90
1 in 100 more session busts with the same bankroll.
Very close.
At 10X odds the difference is even more.
Maybe in another thread.
Not much excitement here.
Also, same results if played for a time factor.