Placing only one number

Hey all, great message board.. i'm enjoying reading all the previous posts and gaining lots of knowledge.

My question is about placing just one number. Most players I see have chips on at least the 6 and the 8 & often more. Does anyone here place only 1 number at a time? How do you get past the awful feeling when you only have the 8 lets say and the 6 keeps hitting and you aren't on it?

Way back in this post from August 2010, I related just such an experience in Mississippi. Here is the relevant part of that long post:

Quote: Doc

The following day, I was back in Harrah's, but the only standard crap table operating stayed completely full, so I wound up losing far too much playing crapless craps. One time when I was shooting, I was already down enough that I was significantly limiting my wagers. After setting a point, I placed the 8 and put $1 on the hard 8, but I didn't bet the 6 at all. During that roll, I never hit an 8 of any kind. I did, however, hit the hard 6 on three consecutive rolls. I was so shocked that I had to ask the player next to me whether I had really done that, and he gave confirmation. The following roll was an easy 6, but the one after that was another hard 6. If I had bet the 6s instead of the 8s and had pressed just a little bit, I might have had a winning session. Coulda, woulda, shoulda....

Does that adequately describe how I was feeling?

If you are going to limit yourself to one number than just make a pass line bet as it will give you better odds. Your last question brings up the essence of craps. To have the patience to sit with only a few numbers bet and watch number after number hit, but not yours, and not punch somebody.

I know some players who will place the "mirror" number of the point. If the point is 5, they will place the 9. If the point is 4, they will place the 10. It's a superstition thing. "Dice controllers" think that they just have to "flip 'em over" to win.

I never regret avoiding -EV bets.

In my mind, bets that carry an edge get composited together into a single bet.

To make things simpler, only consider the edge per roll when considering the edge.

The edge per roll on the place bet on the six and eight in proper units is 0.46%. So if you place the 6 and the 8, and you prepare to take them down whenever you feel like instead of whenever you win or lose, you are then in the driver's seat so to speak.

Let me illustrate a 2-dimensional analogy. Consider the fact that you have ONLY one bet on every single roll assuming that there is no bet that you cannot take down. There are many ties. So if you consider that you only have a single bet with placing the 6 and placing the 8 at the same time, you are making a bet that you roll one of ten outcomes (the ten various outcomes that make up the six or the eight result) and you are also betting that you won't roll one of six outcomes (the six outcomes of the seven). Any other result is a tie, and you get to decide if you want another bet (IE: roll again).

On the 2d plane, consider that on one axis you have the edge per roll, and on the other axis you have your chance of winning.

When you place the 6 and the 8 at the same time, you are only changing your chance to win, and not changing your edge at all.

So the edge is the same (per roll). But you have a greater chance of winning.

But the flip side is that when you lose, you will lose more money.

Some people like to have a greater chance of winning. But there is a point of diminishing returns. If your bet wins a percentage that is lower than the house edge, then you are certainly going to lose and you are no longer technically gambling. This happens easily if you hop too many numbers. A common mistake for new players who like single roll bets. Or to consider in a double zero roulette game if you bet exactly one unit on 35 or more outcomes, you cannot win.

This is why some people prefer to bet on unlikely events with the lowest possible edge (EG: buy the 4 or buy the 10 but not both for $25). You have a very low edge, and you have a low (one third) chance of winning, but when they pay you $49 instead of $50, and you take all $74, you only have to kick back one dollar to get that great pay 1/3rd of the time when you win. It may be counter-intuitive, but the less often you win, the less OFTEN you have to pay to play. So you want to win more money less frequently and pay the smallest fraction to the house in order to maximize your chance of winning on a non-free bet assuming you want to place more than a single bet.

I hope this helps in some way. This is the mental model that I use when playing the game. And it should be familiar to a roulette player, except that you have more ties than in roulette where you usually either win or lose on each and every spin of the ball.

I may do some more work on explaining the game of craps this way if this is helpful, so thanks for the feedback.

Quote: eyerollsixes

Hey all, great message board.. i'm enjoying reading all the previous posts and gaining lots of knowledge.

My question is about placing just one number. Most players I see have chips on at least the 6 and the 8 & often more. Does anyone here place only 1 number at a time? How do you get past the awful feeling when you only have the 8 lets say and the 6 keeps hitting and you aren't on it?

I often place "6 on the 6", just to get a little more interest than my pass line bet alone. I'm not a big bettor, so having two numbers for a small bet out there works for me.

There is nothing wrong with playing one number.

I often will play and bet only 1 come bet on a random thrower on the fourth roll of the hand. Then on roll 5 if it is a box number
i will place single or double odds.

Each bet you make on the table is a seperate contract with the casino. Each and every bet ( except the come out)
carries a house advantage. If you have 4 bets working you have 4 contracts with the casino, all of which carry
a house advantage, the more you bet the more you will lose over time.

BY not putting money at risk, until after roll 5 you will bet on average 57% less than if you started
up on all shooters on roll 1. This will not make you money, but it will save you money.

Its the same for a slot player. If you sit at a machine and press the button one time every 5 seconds, you
play 12 contracts with the casino every minute, 720 every hour, all with a negative expectation. Now if you
count to 15 and push the button, you are playing the same slot machine, experiencing the same affects, yet
you are only entering into 4 negative contracts with the casino per minute and 240 per hour.

My mother does not have much money to spend at a casino, i got her doing that and she now plays
3 hours on the same money she used to play 1 hour.

If a person is bound to lose and gamble you may as well enjoy it as much as you can


dicesitter

Quote: dicesitter

Each and every bet ( except the come out) carries a house advantage.

The come-out has a house advantage too, as if a point is set you are forced to take a bet on a number.

Even more specifically, the house advantage is that when the 12 rolls, the don't pass line is barred while the passline is lost.

If there were no house edge on the pass line, the don't pass line would be paid half of their wagered amount and the passline would lose about half of theirs (instead of all). Normally these bets are equal and opposite polarity. But like red and black on roulette, the polarity breaks on the zero or double zero. In craps it's on the 12.

That is correct, but on that one roll, the player has an advantage, once forced to leave it there until you hit a number
the advantage falls back to the house.

On that one roll you win on a 7 or a 11, and you can lose on a 2,3,12. Ofcourse just to further explain there is 2 ways to make an
11 and 6 ways to make a 7 or 8 ways to win on that one roll, there is 1 way to make a 2, 1 way to make 12 and 2 ways to make a
3 for 4 ways to lose on that one roll.


It is difficult to understand why everything needs to be explained here.. but there it is..


I would also think that most people understand the more you expose your bets to a decision, the more chances
you have to lose. By not betting anything until roll 4 you can cut that down.

There is no way to eliminate all potentail loss, even with the dewey donts, placing a come bet and dont come bet
at the same time on roll 4 you cant eliminate it all, because you still lose on the 12.

But if you have a limited bank roll and still like to play craps, or perhaps if you are just smarter than
the average player, limiting your exposure on the first 4-5 rolls for any random player is a good
decision....

dicesitter

Quote: dicesitter

That is correct, but on that one roll, the player has an advantage, once forced to leave it there until you hit a number
the advantage falls back to the house.

On that one roll you win on a 7 or a 11, and you can lose on a 2,3,12. Ofcourse just to further explain there is 2 ways to make an
11 and 6 ways to make a 7 or 8 ways to win on that one roll, there is 1 way to make a 2, 1 way to make 12 and 2 ways to make a
3 for 4 ways to lose on that one roll.


It is difficult to understand why everything needs to be explained here.. but there it is..


I would also think that most people understand the more you expose your bets to a decision, the more chances
you have to lose. By not betting anything until roll 4 you can cut that down.

There is no way to eliminate all potentail loss, even with the dewey donts, placing a come bet and dont come bet
at the same time on roll 4 you cant eliminate it all, because you still lose on the 12.

But if you have a limited bank roll and still like to play craps, or perhaps if you are just smarter than
the average player, limiting your exposure on the first 4-5 rolls for any random player is a good
decision....

dicesitter

You're wrong. You don't have an advantage on the comeout because you can't take the passline bet after you lose your edge to the house on that bet (IE: your chance declines from nearly 50/50 to much worse but the pay for the bet does not go up accordingly).

You are confusing advantage with chance of winning a natural.

If you could take down the passline bet, you would be right, however.

The house advantage after a box number is rolled is either 33.33%, 20.00% or 9.09% depending on which box number is rolled.

So if you bet $120 passline and you roll a four, you already lost $40! There is no way to guarantee to get back $120.

If you want to get your remaining $80 without betting, you can add 1/3rd to $120 and lay the four for $160. The vig is $4, so you basically have to pay $4 just to take your $80 bet down, meaning that you really only have $76 if you want it back. So you lost 33% + 4/120 = 33.33% + 3.33% = 36.66% after vig.

That more than makes up for any likelihood of winning on the comeout.

IE: there is no advantage during the comeout roll. Merely a better chance of getting a natural winner than a natural loser.

Quote: dicesitter

It is difficult to understand why everything needs to be explained here.. but there it is..

You are part of the problem, not the solution. Your spelling errors aren't the only ones you are making. In fact just thinking you are right about stuff is just one more mistake in the list of things for you friend. Your hard-headed nature in refusing to acknowledge that you are wrong is another.

GOOD LUCK TO YOU GAMBLER!

Quote: dicesitter

... or perhaps if you are just smarter than
the average player, limiting your exposure on the first 4-5 rolls for any random player is a good
decision....

dicesitter

If the average roll is ~ 8 throws, and we wait on every shooter for their 5th throw, aren't we going to lose more money by virtue of the fact we are not getting paid as often on the shooters who did make the first 4 numbers?
Sure, it is easy to see how I save money by not having bet $64 across on a PSO shooter, but if I wait for 4 throws, then bet $64 across, and the shooter 7 outs on the next roll, I am down more money than if I had bet $64 across right from the start.

Quote: RaleighCraps

If the average roll is ~ 8 throws, and we wait on every shooter for their 5th throw, aren't we going to lose more money by virtue of the fact we are not getting paid as often on the shooters who did make the first 4 numbers?
Sure, it is easy to see how I save money by not having bet $64 across on a PSO shooter, but if I wait for 4 throws, then bet $64 across, and the shooter 7 outs on the next roll, I am down more money than if I had bet $64 across right from the start.

Any counting scheme like the 5-count is only going to work to identify good shooters; and even that is only theory. It will incorrectly identify random shooters who are lucky as being "good."

A better scheme would be to only bet on shooters who have proven themselves over thousands of rolls to be able to roll fewer sevens than average AND are making an effort at the time that you bet.

I love nothing more than to do something unexpected when money is bet on my roll that I don't care about! Player conflicts are easily addressed by lack of interest from me. "Pass the dice" is my favorite response because it's very explicit. I don't have to shoot. Make me! How does a five count work when you put down a bet and I pass the dice?

Raleigh, I suspect that you don't really believe what you're posting and are just teasing some of the other folks. Just out of curiosity, if a player has already rolled four times and is ready to roll again, how many more times should you expect him to roll (on average) before a 7-out happens? (Yes, I suppose the answer is different depending upon whether roll #5 is a come out roll or not.)

I've not done any digging into the 5-count, but it would be interesting to put 5-count strategies into my Monte Carlo simulator to see what the results are.

I would expect that they last longer by not betting as often. I use this technique, but I just don't count and I start back up when it suits me.

That's about it.

But yeah, if you're 5-counting a good shooter, you're missing out on good rolls in theory. Hopefully you don't 5-count him every time, but I have no idea how that stuff works.

Quote: dicesitter

That is correct, but on that one roll, the player has an advantage, once forced to leave it there until you hit a number
the advantage falls back to the house.

A non-bankable advantage is no advantage at all.

Quote:

It is difficult to understand why everything needs to be explained here.. but there it is..

That's okay, you don't need to explain the math to me, I understand how on the come out roll I am more likely to straight up win than lose, but I am even more likely to end up with a bet I have a disadvantage at.

But there is no -real- advantage on the come out roll. It's a 1.41% loser, which ain't too bad at all, considering.

Quote: Doc

Raleigh, I suspect that you don't really believe what you're posting and are just teasing some of the other folks. Just out of curiosity, if a player has already rolled four times and is ready to roll again, how many more times should you expect him to roll (on average) before a 7-out happens? (Yes, I suppose the answer is different depending upon whether roll #5 is a come out roll or not.)

Actually Doc, in this thread I am not being facetious (I admit I had to look it up).

I do believe I would lose less money per hour if I waited for every shooter to throw 5 numbers before I bet. It would not be because I have lowered the house edge though. I would lose less money because my total money bet would be much less. AND, the money I will have been paid on winning rolls will be much less too. In fact, my total action will just be less, while my total time watching will have gone up.

To answer your question, if I waited for him to roll 5 numbers, and then I bet, I would expect him to roll on average 2 more numbers and then 7 out, since the average roll is ~8. I do not believe that someone who gets to 5 is a better shooter. I believe I just missed a chance to get paid 4 times.

Quote: Ahigh

I've not done any digging into the 5-count, but it would be interesting to put 5-count strategies into my Monte Carlo simulator to see what the results are.

I would expect that they last longer by not betting as often. I use this technique, but I just don't count and I start back up when it suits me.

That's about it.

But yeah, if you're 5-counting a good shooter, you're missing out on good rolls in theory. Hopefully you don't 5-count him every time, but I have no idea how that stuff works.

http://catlin.casinocitytimes.com/article/the-five-count-11842

"During the period of play the 5-count shooter lost about 57% less than the "Bet All" player."
Don continues
"Could someone come up with a different counting system and get similar results? Sure."

I personally like the 6 count. I show even better results over the 5 count.
Shhhh....

Quote: RaleighCraps

To answer your question, if I waited for him to roll 5 numbers, and then I bet, I would expect him to roll on average 2 more numbers and then 7 out, since the average roll is ~8. I do not believe that someone who gets to 5 is a better shooter. I believe I just missed a chance to get paid 4 times.

The 5 count is not just 5 numbers but qualifying numbers.
WinCraps site has 5count.bet

' This system delays betting until the shooter has rolled 5 qualifying rolls.
' To qualify, the 5 count must begin and end on a roll of 4,5,6,8,9,or 10.
' Counts 2 thru 4 can be any number, however a 7-out stops the count
' and resets the system.

added:
http://www.goldentouchcraps.com/skinny0006.shtml
Shows the 7 count (any rolls)

Another system to test with your current system of play
Good Luck

Quote: RaleighCraps

To answer your question, if I waited for him to roll 5 numbers, and then I bet, I would expect him to roll on average 2 more numbers and then 7 out, since the average roll is ~8. I do not believe that someone who gets to 5 is a better shooter. I believe I just missed a chance to get paid 4 times.

I agree that betting on fewer rolls is likely to result in less money lost overall. It likely would also result in less entertainment -- I don't get much of a thrill standing around in a casino watching others play, but if I didn't bet on any of the rolls, I wouldn't lose any money at all.

As for my question about expected number of future rolls after waiting for a few before betting, I was not suggesting anything at all about whether the shooter was "good" or "bad". I just don't think the number of past rolls has much to do with how many future rolls there will be before a 7-out. It's that old thing of the dice not having much of a memory. If the next roll is a come out roll, then I think we should expect that shooter to have those same ~8 more rolls in the future that we would expect if this were the shooter's very first roll.

Now if there is a point already set, then it is possible to 7-out in just one roll, which can't happen on a come out roll, which is the key reason I said that the answer depends. Also, it would depend a bit on just which point is already set. But given five past rolls, I wouldn't expect just two more before the 7-out on average.

To be blunt, I put no stock in what a player has rolled this time, to ascertain whether or not I should bet on him/her.

If you ask some of the players who have been on my table when I could not make 3 throws without a 7 out, they will all tell you I am one of the worst shooters ever.
Other players have seen me go on many a good back to back roll, and those people will all tell you to bet on my rolls. Which camp is right?

My first roll playing with teddys was a very very good roll. I don't recall if I had a PSO playing with him or not. It might be fun to ask teddys how he would rate me as a shooter (say what you feel teddys, you can't offend me since it is all opinion anyway).
I will admit I have skipped betting on some players who I feel have shown to be terrible shooters, and I will also admit that I have watched some great rolls with no action on the table because of THAT STUPID DECISION TO NOT PLAY THAT ROLL.
It's all random noise in a random universe. [/Thread derail]