Flat betting is better than pressing?
January 4th, 2013 at 7:12:14 PM
permalink
3/4/5x odds, playing only Dont Pass.
(darkside odds=6x for all #'s)
I ran a spreadsheet on doing a Fibonacci press.
Here's the usual progression of a Fib press: 1,2,3,5,8,13
See the pattern? the 3rd bet is the combination of your 1st 2 wins. if you lose, $0 profit. 4th bet amount = 2nd + 3rd wins. if you lose, you're up 1 unit.
In playing dark, it doesnt go up linearly since the payout on a win is less than what you bet.
Here's the progression for the flat bet: $15,15,20,25,30,40,50,etc (i rounded to multiples of 5.)
Avg Win for the 1st and 2nd bet = $75+75 = 150.
3rd bet is 20 + 120 odds = $140. so if you lose on the 3rd bet, you basically broke even.
now if you just stick with $15 + 90 odds instead of pressing, you come out ahead until the $50 mark.
With the Fibonacci press, you're up $375 if you win 6 in a row and lose on the 7th, which is at the $50 bet.
With a constant $15 bet, you're up $345 if you lose on the 7th bet.
wow.. what an eye opener!
What are the odds of winning 6 in a row?
and more importantly, is it worth the risk for a measly $30 additional profit? (i think not.)
Yes, you win alot more if the win streak keeps going. But what are the odds of winning 8+ straight?
How much less did you win vs constant betting to get to that magical 8+ win streak?
What's your opinion?
(darkside odds=6x for all #'s)
I ran a spreadsheet on doing a Fibonacci press.
Here's the usual progression of a Fib press: 1,2,3,5,8,13
See the pattern? the 3rd bet is the combination of your 1st 2 wins. if you lose, $0 profit. 4th bet amount = 2nd + 3rd wins. if you lose, you're up 1 unit.
In playing dark, it doesnt go up linearly since the payout on a win is less than what you bet.
Here's the progression for the flat bet: $15,15,20,25,30,40,50,etc (i rounded to multiples of 5.)
Avg Win for the 1st and 2nd bet = $75+75 = 150.
3rd bet is 20 + 120 odds = $140. so if you lose on the 3rd bet, you basically broke even.
now if you just stick with $15 + 90 odds instead of pressing, you come out ahead until the $50 mark.
With the Fibonacci press, you're up $375 if you win 6 in a row and lose on the 7th, which is at the $50 bet.
With a constant $15 bet, you're up $345 if you lose on the 7th bet.
wow.. what an eye opener!
What are the odds of winning 6 in a row?
and more importantly, is it worth the risk for a measly $30 additional profit? (i think not.)
Yes, you win alot more if the win streak keeps going. But what are the odds of winning 8+ straight?
How much less did you win vs constant betting to get to that magical 8+ win streak?
What's your opinion?
Craps is paradise (Pair of dice).
Lets hear it for the SpeedCount Mathletes :)
January 4th, 2013 at 7:17:12 PM
permalink
If you're going to press, it seems lie betting pass would make more sense.
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
January 4th, 2013 at 7:19:19 PM
permalink
Quote: 24BingoIf you're going to press, it seems lie betting pass would make more sense.
Why?
Craps is paradise (Pair of dice).
Lets hear it for the SpeedCount Mathletes :)
January 4th, 2013 at 8:18:02 PM
permalink
IF you bet, you are up against a certain House Edge.
IF you do NOT press... its just relentless House Edge. Either Get Lucky or Get Wise to what is going to happen.
If you do PRESS... AND you get lucky... its socking away some money.
Constant flat betting is simply what men get used to doing... waiting for Lady Luck to get ready.
IF you do NOT press... its just relentless House Edge. Either Get Lucky or Get Wise to what is going to happen.
If you do PRESS... AND you get lucky... its socking away some money.
Constant flat betting is simply what men get used to doing... waiting for Lady Luck to get ready.
January 4th, 2013 at 8:39:22 PM
permalink
Not counting pushes,Quote: 100xOdds3/4/5x odds, playing only Dont Pass.
(darkside odds=6x for all #'s)
What are the odds of winning 6 in a row?
The very next 6 trials (949/1925)^6 or about 1 in 70 sets of 6 bets
Playing until a streak is hit:
The average number of trials to see 6 in a row is about 136
The median is 95
Not counting pushes,Quote: 100xOdds... But what are the odds of winning 8+ straight?
The very next 8 trials (949/1925)^8 or about 1 in 287 sets of 8 bets
Playing until a streak is hit:
The average number of trials to see 8+ in a row is about 566
The median is 393
source
WinStats by Peanut Software
(its free)
RIP Rick Parris
winsome johnny (not Win some johnny)
January 5th, 2013 at 6:24:59 AM
permalink
Quote: 100xOddsWhy?
Because you're not staking more than you've won, at least not as often.
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
January 5th, 2013 at 7:43:41 AM
permalink
Systems intrinsically leverage larger bankrolls and/or bet amounts in order to accomplish a goal.
The goal of leveraging the larger bet for a smaller win has, as a foundation, an equally likely outcome for all 36 possible outcomes of the dice (in other words, you are assuming truly random outcomes on the dice).
Given that foundation, the larger bet accomplishes the goal of making the system more likely to work in the short term, requiring you to employ the system for a shorter number of rolls in order to be effective on average.
That's the advantage of betting more than you will win: leveraging your bankroll to increase the chance of winning. A martingale accomplishes this in the time-domain (increasing the bet size on a loss). A lay-odds bet accomplishes this in the chance-of-winning domain. But both are based on the fact that, in the martingale, you lose two events in a row 1/4 the time and therefore only lose both bets one after another one in four times, where lay odds on the four you only lose 1/3 of the time for the single bet event. The difference is that with zero edge, the 1/3 opportunity is a better opportunity than martingale with an edge assuming you have already taken the necessary DC travel bet.
In general, ALL systems do this (leveraging a bankroll to increase your chances of winning).
Craps just has a mechanism to allow you to do this without employing any house edge (using lay odds).
If you contemplate the notion that every roll you have action, you could come up with a name for a single bet that is a composite of all the bets on the table and think in terms of always having a single bet on the felt per roll, you can translate the combination of all the bets to an expected win or loss for each of the 36 outcomes and a combined total edge.
If you do this and compare betting against zero, double zero, and one number on roulette, you can make more direct analogies to craps systems and more obvious roulette systems with edges that are many multiples higher and much more likely to fail quickly.
The trick is in the translation as, with this model, there is an infinite number of combined craps bets that are possible.
I hope this helps.
The goal of leveraging the larger bet for a smaller win has, as a foundation, an equally likely outcome for all 36 possible outcomes of the dice (in other words, you are assuming truly random outcomes on the dice).
Given that foundation, the larger bet accomplishes the goal of making the system more likely to work in the short term, requiring you to employ the system for a shorter number of rolls in order to be effective on average.
That's the advantage of betting more than you will win: leveraging your bankroll to increase the chance of winning. A martingale accomplishes this in the time-domain (increasing the bet size on a loss). A lay-odds bet accomplishes this in the chance-of-winning domain. But both are based on the fact that, in the martingale, you lose two events in a row 1/4 the time and therefore only lose both bets one after another one in four times, where lay odds on the four you only lose 1/3 of the time for the single bet event. The difference is that with zero edge, the 1/3 opportunity is a better opportunity than martingale with an edge assuming you have already taken the necessary DC travel bet.
In general, ALL systems do this (leveraging a bankroll to increase your chances of winning).
Craps just has a mechanism to allow you to do this without employing any house edge (using lay odds).
If you contemplate the notion that every roll you have action, you could come up with a name for a single bet that is a composite of all the bets on the table and think in terms of always having a single bet on the felt per roll, you can translate the combination of all the bets to an expected win or loss for each of the 36 outcomes and a combined total edge.
If you do this and compare betting against zero, double zero, and one number on roulette, you can make more direct analogies to craps systems and more obvious roulette systems with edges that are many multiples higher and much more likely to fail quickly.
The trick is in the translation as, with this model, there is an infinite number of combined craps bets that are possible.
I hope this helps.
aahigh.com
January 5th, 2013 at 2:46:22 PM
permalink
IMO this question comes up a lot and there is no right answer.
Is pressing better than flat-betting? It depends on your goals.
Pressing loses more in the long term. This isn't because of any progression magic; it's because you lose the house edge multiplied by the total amount bet. If you press, you bet more than if you flat bet, so you lose more in the end. When you press when you are winning, you are making it less likely that you have a winning session, but more likely that you have a LARGE win. In other words, you are trading many small wins for the occasional big win.
So, again, what is your goal?
If your goal is to play for as long as possible while losing as little as possible, flat-bet the minimum.
If your goal is to have a small chance at a monster win (and lose almost all your sessions), press aggressively.
If your goal is to make money, either learn a game where you can have an advantage, or leave the casino and go to work instead.
Is pressing better than flat-betting? It depends on your goals.
Pressing loses more in the long term. This isn't because of any progression magic; it's because you lose the house edge multiplied by the total amount bet. If you press, you bet more than if you flat bet, so you lose more in the end. When you press when you are winning, you are making it less likely that you have a winning session, but more likely that you have a LARGE win. In other words, you are trading many small wins for the occasional big win.
So, again, what is your goal?
If your goal is to play for as long as possible while losing as little as possible, flat-bet the minimum.
If your goal is to have a small chance at a monster win (and lose almost all your sessions), press aggressively.
If your goal is to make money, either learn a game where you can have an advantage, or leave the casino and go to work instead.
January 5th, 2013 at 2:56:49 PM
permalink
deleted
DUHHIIIIIIIII HEARD THAT!
January 5th, 2013 at 4:22:04 PM
permalink
I always flat bet and just hope for long rolls. Let's face it, the more you put on the table the higher your expected loss. If you are rolling well you will win regardless, and I have seen too many people get a lot of money out on the felt during a long roll but then end up with little on their rack when the 7 inevitably comes up.
January 14th, 2013 at 3:34:39 PM
permalink
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceIMO this question comes up a lot and there is no right answer.
Is pressing better than flat-betting? It depends on your goals.
Pressing loses less in the long term.
Of course you mean MORE, not less, as you say later.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceThis isn't because of any progression magic; it's because you lose the house edge multiplied by the total amount bet. If you press, you bet more than if you flat bet, so you lose more in the end. When you press when you are winning, you are making it less likely that you have a winning session, but more likely that you have a LARGE win. In other words, you are trading many small wins for the occasional big win.
So, again, what is your goal?
If your goal is to play for as long as possible while losing as little as possible, flat-bet the minimum.
If your goal is to have a small chance at a monster win (and lose almost all your sessions), press aggressively.
If your goal is to make money, either learn a game where you can have an advantage, or leave the casino and go to work instead.
I agree.
Here https://wizardofvegas.com/member/goatcabin/blog/#post38 is a blog I wrote a couple of years ago comparing different strategies.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Cheers,
Alan Shank
"How's that for a squabble, Pugh?" Peter Boyle as Mister Moon in "Yellowbeard"
January 14th, 2013 at 4:13:26 PM
permalink
Quote: goatcabinOf course you mean MORE, not less, as you say later.
Good point, sorry. I will edit my post accordingly. Thanks!
January 19th, 2013 at 2:28:51 PM
permalink
Quote: FleaStiffIF you bet, you are up against a certain House Edge.
IF you do NOT press... its just relentless House Edge. Either Get Lucky or Get Wise to what is going to happen.
If you do PRESS... AND you get lucky... its socking away some money.
Constant flat betting is simply what men get used to doing... waiting for Lady Luck to get ready.
finally found the post about same betting is better than pressing, according to math:
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/craps/10933-betting-all-profit-till-i-hit-my-win-goal/#post171575
Playing 'Dont Pass' on 3/4/5x table.
start with $2000. Leave the table at +$750/-$1000.
$25flat/150odds
each win = $125 (on avg) thus 6 wins = $750
Pressing progression: $25/25/35/60 (all max odds)
so same bet the 2nd time, press 3rd and 4th times. After the 4th win, i'm up ~$750.
Math says:
same bet = 54.69% of hitting my $750 goal
pressing = 47.4% chance of hitting my goal
so same bet is better even though I have to win 2 more times. (6 wins vs 4)
WOW!
Craps is paradise (Pair of dice).
Lets hear it for the SpeedCount Mathletes :)
