Assuming player edge is possible, how important are odds?
It is generally well known by casino staff that in order to get the combined edge really low, a large bankroll is needed.
But let's assume for a moment that I have a player edge of 0.4% per roll after subtracting the house edge of 0.41% on the pass line. If I have a pass line, I have more than doubled the improvement of taking 100x odds on my $5, but more importantly, but if the edge is in the player's favor from the shot alone, there is very little risk in the long run from playing the game for too long.
The Wizard has expressed to me the importance of taking free odds in order to be able to defeat the house advantage. And if the player edge is only 0.25% per roll, I would agree. But I think it may be possible to get a player edge of up to 3% per roll.
My question, though, is for the math guys.
Let's assume five different shooter profiles that each have the ability, in general, to deliver a shot that can create an advantage of 0.5%, 0.75%, 1.0%, 1.5% and 3.0% per roll on the pass line or don't pass line without any odds at all, on average for each and every roll.
If you were wanting to grind out a profit with the least amount of volatility, what is the best way to go about doing that?
Just to be sure, I'd appreciate all the conversations related to "you can't get a player edge" to go to other topics (let's stay on topic). But just going with these assumptions, how should one bet to reduce unnecessary risk due to volatility and just grind an upward trending line with minimal volatility? IE: use your increased bet sizes to reduce volatility rather than to lower the combined edge.
Quote: Ahigh
Let's assume five different shooter profiles that each have the ability, in general, to deliver a shot that can create an advantage of 0.5%, 0.75%, 1.0%, 1.5% and 3.0% per roll on the pass line or don't pass line without any odds at all, on average for each and every roll.
If you were wanting to grind out a profit with the least amount of volatility, what is the best way to go about doing that?
Just to be sure, I'd appreciate all the conversations related to "you can't get a player edge" to go to other topics (let's stay on topic). But just going with these assumptions, how should one bet to reduce unnecessary risk due to volatility and just grind an upward trending line with minimal volatility? IE: use your increased bet sizes to reduce volatility rather than to lower the combined edge.
That kind of edge per roll?
I have a couple of things to say about this, and all of them assume I am understanding what you are asking correctly, if not, let me know:
1.) When you say that the player has this kind of edge, just as a basic assumption, I don't know how much of the edge (on the Do or Don't) is coming from this player's ability to roll Sevens. Thus, if the player has this kind of advantage on the Pass Line, but almost all of it comes from his ability to fire off a Seven more often than expected on the CO, then he wouldn't want to Take Odds as it may even reduce his overall expectation if he reverts to a random toss after the Come Out bet.
2.) If you wanted to grind out a profit with the least amount of volatility, you would find the table with the lowest minimum, bet that, never Take any Odds.
3.) If you wanted to bet optimally pursuant to the advantage, you would use the Kelly Criterion and bet that percentage of your bankroll which reflects your advantage on the Pass Line or Don't Pass Line. If the Odds gave you a greater advantage, you would determine your overall advantage and bet such that your bet + Taking Odds...as a percentage of your bankroll...was in-line with the Kelly Criterion. However, that would not reduce volatility.
-In fact, Half-Kelly is a concept designed to reduce volatility, even when betting at an advantage...which you inherently must be doing in order to even be using the Kelly Criterion.
4.) Finally, I don't understand your, "Increased bet sizes to reduce volatility," statement. You would never increase your bet size if you wanted minimum volatility, you would find the lowest minimum and always bet that. You would win in the long-run for the same reason that a VP player playing a 99% game (assuming no Comps) will lose.
Here's the thing. If you are just knocking off a bit of the HE, which is about all that can be hoped for, then you want to be up against less HE. The free odds now are going to give you that.
That's something to think about. What kind of DI that passes muster [hitting pyramids etc] is going to do more than knock off, say, 0.40% of HE? If that were ever to be done, dubious, at least then with heavy free odds the HE can be defeated. Pass line 1.41% HE is probably insurmountable. This is what the Wizard was talking about when he told you that you have to do free odds to have any chance, I would have to believe.
is and where i can afford to place my bets to offset the house advantage.
If you had $10,000 where would you place that money, in a bank that gave you 1% interest or
one that gives you 3 -4 % interest.
Craps betting is the same.......
say you place a come bet.... you have the advantage on the first roll. then it goes to the
6 for instance... when the come number is set the casino has a 1.41% advantage on the flat
portion of that bet..... it has no advantage on the odds bet.( not exact but close enough)
smart craps says i have an advantage over 3% so lets just use 3%..... on the flat bet ( on six) i have a 1.59%
advantage..... on the odds i have a 3% advantage. .....
if you place a 5 or 9 the casino has a 4% advantage and you are allowing the bank to use your
$10,000 and your paying them 1% to do it.
some places have 10 times odds so you can further add to the interest you are getting.
If you have the ability to repeat numbers with your throw, you can choose the best bank to place
your money in.
Were and how you bet is vital, and plays into the post the other day by Alan
Dicesetter
Quote: MathExtremistWithout more information, the answer is to flat bet. If there were more details about the dice probabilities that yielded those edges, you could perhaps find other bets that could lower your combined variance. But with just the edge figure, there's no way to know.
Indeed. What's the distribution of the dice that causes this edge?
Smart Scraps (tm)
DiceSitter (tm)
DiceSetter (tm)
Quote: Ahigh[snip: picture of baby on toilet]
It's difficult to imagine that you're being serious, after specifically asking a question "for the math guys," when you reply to responses with a picture of a baby sitting on a toilet. I get the sense that you would rather trade barbs with those who don't understand gaming mathematics than actually converse with those who do.
Quote: MathExtremistQuote: Ahigh[snip: picture of baby on toilet]
It's difficult to imagine that you're being serious, after specifically asking a question "for the math guys," when you reply to responses with a picture of a baby sitting on a toilet. I get the sense that you would rather trade barbs with those who don't understand gaming mathematics than actually converse with those who do.
I apologize, ME. I do like to have fun. If you want to create an account on GoodShooter.com I would love to have you participate with improving my software.
DiceSitter does not have an account there and he won't be interfering with the discussions.
But don't hold me solely responsible for interacting with folks that, in my opinion, don't even have any business posting on this topic that was intended for folks who do have math skills.
My post is intended to make fun of dicesitter/dicesetter for his embracing of inconsistency in everything that he does while simultaneously presenting himself as being someone that he is not. Making fun of his ridiculously inaccurate information in his posts is just a way to cope with him.
Quote: BozNot a math guy but just joining to ask again how you believe at ANY time you have a 3% advantage at Craps unless you are assuming a rebate or comps. Otherwise it is not possible, unless again you CONTROL THE OUTCOME OF THE DICE. Which you have admitted you cannot prove and you have wasted far too much time on it. Then again you are a "researcher".
I think you failed to understand the original post. We aren't discussing the belief of having an edge. We are having the discussion under the assumption that an edge can be obtained. You have to understand you're asking questions outside the domain of this topic by asking about "how can you believe?"
Where did I admit that it cannot be proven that a player edge is possible? I don't remember that. I did say that it has not been proven to the best of my knowledge. I did say that I have not been able to prove it thus far. I didn't "admit that I cannot prove it." There are folks who claim to have "proven it to themselves." I am not in that group of people, if that's what you mean. With many things, I operate based on theory. I have a theory that my wife really loves me, but I have no proof for that either. So is my marriage a waste of time? Many things are operable based on theory that is unproven.
As far as my wasting my time, I have wasted much more time responding to folks like yourself than anything else related to the game of craps. Most of what I do I enjoy, and enjoying myself is not a waste. I'm not enjoying typing this response to you, though, as it sure seems like you got some kind of agenda with so many loaded questions and accusations about how poorly I have chosen to use my time and resources.
Why don't you just duck out of the conversation if you have nothing positive to contribute to it?
Quote: thecesspitIndeed. What's the distribution of the dice that causes this edge?
Out of the 36 outcomes, let's just assume that the player is using a 4242 set, and is getting w% fewer aces and twelves, x% fewer sevens, and y% more hard eights and z% more ace-deuces.
We can start out looking at
w, x, y, and z values from my roll data. All other data being flat.
I can solve for w, x, y, and z later this evening if someone else hasn't already done it.
Quote: AhighOut of the 36 outcomes, let's just assume that the player is using a 4242 set, and is getting w% fewer aces and twelves, x% fewer sevens, and y% more hard eights and z% more ace-deuces.
We can start out looking at
w, x, y, and z values from my roll data. All other data being flat.
I can solve for w, x, y, and z later this evening if someone else hasn't already done it.
Look at individual face probabilities on each die. Your w,x,y,z are derived statistics, not direct measures. Start with first principles: you're throwing two dice. The face distribution of the first and second dice either is or isn't uniform, and it either is or isn't correlated with the other die. Don't jump to conclusions, justify them.
Quote: MathExtremistLook at individual face probabilities on each die. Your w,x,y,z are derived statistics, not direct measures. Start with first principles: you're throwing two dice. The face distribution of the first and second dice either is or isn't uniform, and it either is or isn't correlated with the other die. Don't jump to conclusions, justify them.
Alright. I will think about it some more. As far as jumping to conclusions, this isn't about whether I can exert influence. This is about assume we have a distribution like this, how do you milk the lack of randomness as efficiently as possible.
Maybe another thread about looking at the conclusion that a player edge is possible?
Quote: AhighSo many discussions about obtaining a player edge in the game of craps center around true or false can a player edge be obtained. But let's move a bit further given an assumption that a player edge is possible and talk about varying levels of player edges and play strategies.
I'd rather assume that the stories of this young beautiful starlet who wanders around Vegas offering herself to men and leaving money on their pillow in the morning are true. Player edge? Vegas: the town built by players who had an edge against the casinos! Sure.
Quote: AhighAlright. I will think about it some more. As far as jumping to conclusions, this isn't about whether I can exert influence. This is about assume we have a distribution like this, how do you milk the lack of randomness as efficiently as possible.
Except your description of the distribution isn't sufficient. A description of a distribution might look like
p(1) = 1, p(2 through 6) = 0
if you were always successful at sliding a single die with 1 face-up. Or
p(1) = p(6) = 0.1; p(2 through 5) = 0.2
if you were a very effective but not perfect on-axis roller.
From those distributions, you can compute the two-dice total distribution and subsequently the house edge for each bet. But you shouldn't start with a given two-dice distribution until you know it's plausible. In your example, you had w% fewer 1,1 outcomes and z% more 1,2 outcomes, but that's not what would happen if you were keeping the dice on-axis with the 1 and 6 faces on the side. w and z are directly correlated in that scenario, not inversely correlated. That's what I mean by "start with first principles."
Quote: 24BingoIf you believe any part of your edge comes from setting to avoid 7-outs, then the odds bets are enormously in your favor. Play max odds, or you're giving up massive edge.
IF you bank roll can support it.
Quote: thecesspitIF you bank roll can support it.
That's the meat of the discussion. Because I listed those theoretical player edges per roll for a reason.
If you want to simplify the description of the player edge of the throw, let's just say the RSR is 6.4 instead of 6.0. And in addition to that the chance of aces or twelve goes from 2.78% per roll down to 2.60%.
Right now, my bankroll is not what it was back in May. The "advantage" I am giving up by using less odds is fractions of pennies per roll and the exposure to negative variance is much larger than what I am giving up on the edge. There are weights on both sides of the scales from my view!
I'm not the guy saying to bet the five because the fives keep coming, I'll be the first to say "change your set dumbass." But on odds versus no-odds, there are bankroll requirements.
That's why I posed the question. It's as much about being pragmatic as it is a math question.
Quote: AhighThe "advantage" I am giving up by using less odds is fractions of pennies per roll and the exposure to negative variance is much larger than what I am giving up on the edge.
When you've perfected the tools to correctly analyze altered-distribution expectations, you'll discover this is entirely wrong. But you have to jettison your RSR and your independently-variable chances of rolling aces or twelves first.
Quote:
aHigh
Right now, my bankroll is not what it was back in May. The "advantage" I am giving up by using less odds is fractions of pennies per roll and the exposure to negative variance is much larger than what I am giving up on the edge. There are weights on both sides of the scales from my view!
I'm not the guy saying to bet the five because the fives keep coming, I'll be the first to say "change your set dumbass." But on odds versus no-odds, there are bankroll requirements.
aHigh you should go back and look at what you just wrote, in the first sentence, your saying you are losing, and the second sentence your calling everybody a dumbass, for not changing their dice set. Did it ever occur to you that you should be betting on the five, instead of changing your set!!!!!
When you are shooting, the only thing that should be going through your mind about any dice set is, that its avoiding the sevens! If the set you are using is accomplishing that,.. you should never chance your set, if that is happening!!!!
Your always writing about your advantage you have on craps, but you never take advantage of what you are doing, you tell everybody about all those hard ways you hit, but you don't bet on them, I think you have more fun, as you put it,... losing your money, then winning!!!!
You are always forgetting what any forum is all about, and that is helping others understand the game of craps, that we are writing about, instead of posting childish photos and tying to cut someone down you should work on your people skills, you have positively,...None at All!!!!
Lets see if you can act like an adult, and just respond to the post instead of attacking everybody that questions what you are doing!!!!
Let this be a test of your people skills, and see if you can pass it!!!!
Note, all my post start with this is just my opinion...!
You do good brada ..!
superrick
Winning comes from knowledge and skill when your betting and not reading fiction!
...
Quote: MathExtremistWhen you've perfected the tools to correctly analyze altered-distribution expectations, you'll discover this is entirely wrong. But you have to jettison your RSR and your independently-variable chances of rolling aces or twelves first.
Yeah, I said the wrong thing. Qualified, the difference in the results of betting $100 pass line versus betting $10 pass line with $90 odds is a tiny percentage if you have just as much edge per roll of the initial pass line roll as you do after trying to hit a point. It's a difference of 0.42% or $0.42 per roll per $100 on the pass line.
If your player edge is 1%-0.42% = 0.58% it's a bigger deal to save the $0.40 per roll to get $0.98 profit per roll instead of just $0.58 per roll. But if you walk up to a 20x table, and you bet $100 odds on a four point, and miss, then the ten point, and miss, then another four and miss, there is a psychological blow to dealing with negative variance. Especially when the negatively directed variance is more common than the positive variance (as it is with odds bets).
I tip dealers and I generally tip FAR much more than I could save by betting odds. So if I am going to get serious, pulling my tips is probably a more relevant place to start. But using that analogy, I want to win with enough consistency that I can both tip and not feel like I gotta bet odds.
If the math says this is just a stupid way to approach things, that may be something useful to hear. But I think considering the fact that I can bet $5 on the line and $20 odds when it's a six or an eight point, or bet $25 on the come and try to roll a seven when the point gets set to four and start over when I roll a seven is often a smarter way to manage my risk than just saying "I gotta take the $100 odds bet on the four because it saves me $5 if I get paid compared to a buy bet that I can take any time I want."
If I hit a four 10% more often than random with a specific set, I don't care about the $5 cost to get paid.
Similarly, if I don't want a free bet that only pays 1/3 of the time, maybe the math says I should be betting the DC and laying max odds instead to manage my risk a little more.
These are all just questions, though. I welcome feedback from folks qualified to answer.
Again, a high SRR means nothing if you aren't betting on the numbers you are throwing. If you have a high SRR and you are hitting horn numbers, then you must be betting the horns and avoid betting on the inside numbers that you are not hitting.
This is the biggest mistake so-called DIs make. They believe they have a high SRR, they bet the 6 and 8 because of their low HE yet they roll 4s and 10s. What good are those bets on 6 and 8 doing you?
If you think you have an advantage, if you think you influence the dice, then bet "your numbers" not the numbers that have a lower HE. Perhaps you do throw a lot of inside numbers -- 6 and 8 -- with your set and throw and in that case you have the best of both worlds.
Quote: AhighYeah, I said the wrong thing. Qualified, the difference in the results of betting $100 pass line versus betting $10 pass line with $90 odds is a tiny percentage if you have just as much edge per roll of the initial pass line roll as you do after trying to hit a point.
If you think that condition holds, your tools are wrong. When you fix your math, and your underlying assumptions, you'll realize just how far off you are.
Quote: superrickaHigh you should go back and look at what you just wrote, in the first sentence, your saying you are losing
No I didn't. You said that.
Quote: superrick, and the second sentence your calling everybody a dumbass, for not changing their dice set.
No I said that if you want to hit one of four outcomes before a seven with a place bet, don't do it on the 5 or the 9. Hey I hit $100 odds on a nine last night. I got no problems hitting a nine. I'm just talking about 1.11% edge per roll compared to 0.46% or 0.33% or 0.39%. You can keep the 1.11%!!! I will set the dice and place a different number or shoot for that number when I have an odds bet or a come bet that traveled myself.
I also think an 11.11% edge on a crap check is a contradiction that you know anything about playing with an edge.
And I also think if you're betting horn high ace deuce instead of four dollar crap check and a dollar yo, you need need to learn to tip the dealers instead of the casino the extra buck on the hi-lo.
Quote: superrickDid it ever occur to you that you should be betting on the five, instead of changing your set!!!!!
You will never catch me placing a 5 or a 9 unless I want to lock a profit to meet a win target to leave and I have a big honking DC bet that travelled to the 5 or 9. I had a $200 DC travel to the 9 at the Wynn the other night, and I placed the 9 for $165. I'll make an exception to stop gambling. But never would I gamble on a place bet on the 5 or the 9 without it being a hedge for a DC bet. That's just me though. I will take high edge bets only to lock in a profit before I walk. That's the ONLY exception for me, and it's more about saving time and meeting goals than it is about long term cost of playing.
Quote: superrickWhen you are shooting, the only thing that should be going through your mind about any dice set is, that its avoiding the sevens! If the set you are using is accomplishing that,.. you should never chance your set, if that is happening!!!!
That's ridiculous. I hit what's on top of my set more frequently than 1 in 28 for my 3500 recorded rolls. Avoiding sevens isn't my only theoretical advantage. I feel sorry for folks who only have seven avoidance as their singular theoretical trick!
Quote: superrickYour always writing about your advantage you have on craps, but you never take advantage of what you are doing, you tell everybody about all those hard ways you hit, but you don't bet on them, I think you have more fun, as you put it,... losing your money, then winning!!!!
I write about the theory of advantage. To me it's still just a game. I am not playing the game currently for income potential. I am playing it because I enjoy the game. I am a gamer. If I were a lifetime winner and I had $100 average wins per day over the last three years instead I would look at it as managing income. But instead, I look at it as a game that I want to win as often as possible. I win a very high percentage of my play sessions, and I like that.
Quote: superrickYou are always forgetting what any forum is all about, and that is helping others understand the game of craps, that we are writing about, instead of posting childish photos and tying to cut someone down you should work on your people skills, you have positively,...None at All!!!!
Forums are for communicating with other folks with similar interest from my view. I don't describe to you your personality defects, but I assure you that you have some! If anything, helping people (when they don't want help) is an area you could improve on yourself.
Quote: superrick
Lets see if you can act like an adult, and just respond to the post instead of attacking everybody that questions what you are doing!!!!
Not a goal of mine to "act like an adult."
Quote: superrick
Let this be a test of your people skills, and see if you can pass it!!!!
I'd rather pass gas.
Quote: MathExtremistQuote: AhighYeah, I said the wrong thing. Qualified, the difference in the results of betting $100 pass line versus betting $10 pass line with $90 odds is a tiny percentage if you have just as much edge per roll of the initial pass line roll as you do after trying to hit a point.
If you think that condition holds, your tools are wrong. When you fix your math, and your underlying assumptions, you'll realize just how far off you are.
Are you trying to be subtle? If you really want to be helpful, you would learn more about what I am doing because what you're saying isn't very clear to me.
Why not create an account on goodshooter.com and look at the analysis of roll data that I'm doing and make a more specific comment than "if you think X, your tools are wrong." That's quite a leap going from what I think to my tools being, as you describe, "wrong."
Quote: AhighQuote: MathExtremistQuote: AhighYeah, I said the wrong thing. Qualified, the difference in the results of betting $100 pass line versus betting $10 pass line with $90 odds is a tiny percentage if you have just as much edge per roll of the initial pass line roll as you do after trying to hit a point.
If you think that condition holds, your tools are wrong. When you fix your math, and your underlying assumptions, you'll realize just how far off you are.
Are you trying to be subtle? If you really want to be helpful, you would learn more about what I am doing because what you're saying isn't very clear to me.
Why not create an account on goodshooter.com and look at the analysis of roll data that I'm doing and make a more specific comment than "if you think X, your tools are wrong." That's quite a leap going from what I think to my tools being, as you describe, "wrong."
I'm not intentionally trying to be subtle, so if I came across as somehow evasive that wasn't my intent. Let me be clear: your assumption (highlighted above) is incorrect based on every non-uniform die-face distribution, so I can only conclude that your tools are not, in fact, using die-face distributions as the starting point but rather are based (improperly) on some derived statistics. You've said as much in your prior posts, concluding that it would be possible, for example, to have simultaneously less 1,1 but more 1,2 results than normal, but that's impossible with two-die on-axis shooting (which is how you throw). That evidence leads me to believe that your math is incorrect. If you aren't willing to develop the proper analysis tools yourself, I recommend WinCraps. It has a feature that allows you to enter new dice probabilities and see the impacts on the house edge for each bet.
I have no desire to perform free statistical analyses of your roll data, however.
Quote: MathExtremistQuote: AhighQuote: MathExtremistQuote: AhighYeah, I said the wrong thing. Qualified, the difference in the results of betting $100 pass line versus betting $10 pass line with $90 odds is a tiny percentage if you have just as much edge per roll of the initial pass line roll as you do after trying to hit a point.
If you think that condition holds, your tools are wrong. When you fix your math, and your underlying assumptions, you'll realize just how far off you are.
Are you trying to be subtle? If you really want to be helpful, you would learn more about what I am doing because what you're saying isn't very clear to me.
Why not create an account on goodshooter.com and look at the analysis of roll data that I'm doing and make a more specific comment than "if you think X, your tools are wrong." That's quite a leap going from what I think to my tools being, as you describe, "wrong."
I'm not intentionally trying to be subtle, so if I came across as somehow evasive that wasn't my intent. Let me be clear: your assumption (highlighted above) is incorrect based on every non-uniform die-face distribution.
The assumption is only being made for the purpose of discussion about how to bet to reduce variance. This isn't intended to be a discussion about how to obtain the edge. I intended to discuss under the assumption that a fixed edge on a per roll basis is attainable no matter what the state of the pass line bet, weigh the pros and cons of adding on an odds bet for the real-world purposes of attempting to exploit theoretically advantaged play.
The discussion about whether or not you can actually attain a fixed player edge per roll independent of the seven states of the pass line bet is an assumption because I want it to be a assumption so we don't have to talk about all that stuff. It doesn't matter how the 36 outcomes are weighted if you just say "I get a fixed edge per roll on average no matter what the state of the pass line bet is" .. and talk from there.
If you don't want to talk about my roll data, this should be a feature, not a problem.
There are seven states you have to contend with, and for each of those seven states, there are tons of distributions that can give you a fixed player edge per roll. And that makes the discussion hard to nail down in terms of combining bets.
But that's where I am curious about a math person's perspective on things. Because I am thinking that hedging the pass line bet with a come bet and reducing variance given that I have an edge for those combination of bets can work to my advantage.
If you don't see this as an opportunity, maybe it's possible that you see more clearly than I do and I am missing something.
But if I bet $100 on the pass line and roll a four, I might not want to bet $1,000 odds on the four. Maybe I want to bet $120 on the come bet and shoot for a seven and start over because I figure I just lost $33.33 and I want to make $53.33 on the next roll instead of $100 on the first as a goal. If I miss that, I might lower my sites a little further until I can make some progress, and hopefully reduce exposure and start over.
I'm not afraid of bigger bets when I proof of an edge (which I don't have yet, but this is the plan if possible!) I would like bigger bets. But I don't want to be motivated to make big bets based on pennies. I want to be motivated by dollars.
Quote:
aHigh
I'd rather pass gas.
Everything you do is just a game, it doesn't mather to you if you win or lose, as long as your playing the game. How can anybody take you seriously?
Now we all know what you are trying to do, and that is just play a game , where your the center of attention!!!!
Quote: AhighThe assumption is only being made for the purpose of discussion about how to bet to reduce variance. This isn't intended to be a discussion about how to obtain the edge. I intended to discuss under the assumption that a fixed edge on a per roll basis is attainable no matter what the state of the pass line bet, weigh the pros and cons of adding on an odds bet for the real-world purposes of attempting to exploit theoretically advantaged play.
But if you know the assumption is incorrect, there's no point in positing conclusions therefrom because those will be irrelevant.
There's no point in discussing what kind of shovels to use when digging for truffles in Red Rock Canyon because truffles don't grow in Red Rock Canyon. It doesn't really matter if you arrive at a conclusion as to what kind of shovel one should use in digging up truffles from iron-rich sand.
Similarly, it doesn't matter if you arrive at a conclusion as to how to bet based on a condition at the dice table that can never hold, because you'll never actually be able to make a bet under that condition. The only valid conclusion you can make regarding how to bet under a given passline advantage is if you know how that advantage was obtained. It doesn't matter whether you, personally, could obtain that advantage (that's what you're working toward, presumably). But it *does* matter whether the advantage could theoretically be obtained at all under some technique, disregarding casino intervention. On-axis rolling is one technique. So is the slide shot. So is "walking to the end of the table and placing the dice face-up according to the number I want." In all three of those cases, one can model the impact of the technique on the resultant die-face distribution and thereby derive the edge for not only the passline but all the other bets on the table. Only then can you accurately answer your question as to how (else) to bet.
Here's a concrete example. Suppose you have a 12.5% edge on the passline. How else should you bet? That's your question, yes? A 12.5% edge on the passline can theoretically come in many ways. Here are two: (a) you have perfect on-axis rolling and zero die correlation and you use the 2-V set; and (b) you can execute a single-die slide with 49.8% probability while the other die tumbles freely, and you kill the 5 on your slides. Both yield +12.5% EV on the passline, but the former also yields a +40% EV on the place 4 bet and +20% EV on the place 5 bet, while the latter yields -43.8% EV on the place 4 and -39.8% on the place 5. Whether you make the place 4 or 5 bets in addition to the pass bet depends on how you're achieving the edge on the pass bet.
But, as I stated at the outset, without that additional information, all you have is a single number for the passline and you should flat bet.
Quote: superrickEverything you do is just a game
Meaning that at this time, I want to play to win, but I'm not winning to pay my bills. Yes.
Quote: superrickit doesn't mather to you if you win or lose
So when you play games, you don't care if you win or lose, then. That's how I interpret your conclusion. I play to win. That's the purpose of a game: to try to win.
Quote: superrickas long as your playing the game. How can anybody take you seriously?
rick, I can kick your ass throwing dice. All over the place. How's that for serious. Your dice throwing skills are marginal at best.
Quote: superrickNow we all know what you are trying to do, and that is just play a game , where your the center of attention!!!!
Mad Professor is the center of your attention. I would never take his place.
your people skills are a form of passing gas. When some one questions
you or dares to disagree with you, we can feel the wind in Wisconsin.
dicesetter
For someone that has so many pieces of paper hanging on your wall, you don't have a clue!!!!!!!!
Quote: AhighMeaning that at this time," I want to play to win," but I'm not winning to pay my bills. Yes.
Win what? You admittedly are not winning money. And you aren't winning many friends. In fact you run them away rapidly, do you ever wonder why that is?
So when you play games, you don't care if you win or lose, then. That's how I interpret your conclusion. I play to win. [ That's the purpose of a game: to try to win.]
I disagree, the purpose of a game is entertainment.
[rick, I can kick your ass throwing dice. All over the place. How's that for serious. Your dice throwing skills are marginal at best.]
All though according to the rules or those that don't know, we know this was intended as an insult. Do you know why you do this to people? Rick has reached out to help you before, and this is the acknowledgement you give anyone? Why do you have to try and belittle people? It's distasteful to decent people. This seems to be what your game is. Try to blow someone's candle out to make yours burn brighter. It's not funny, it's disgusting. This is how you treat people and in the next thread you are demanding apologies from Alan or someone who you think disrespected you?
Shame on you.
Mad Professor is the center of your attention. I would never take his place.
You want to make the claim that I am not playing to win because I keep track of my wins and losses and report that I am a lifetime loser? That's fine by me, but just leave the conversation about money, not being a better shooter.
Any random shooter can win far more money than a skilled shooter by luck and luck alone and we both know it.
So for you to suggest that I don't have money as my motivator in the game is disingenuous. If you want to step up to the plate and say you're a better shooter that I am, then come on my show without a mask and show us your absolute best shot that you have and go under the microscope that I have already gone under! That is: disclose to the public what a good shooter you are on a live broadcast. PUT ME IN MY PLACE IF YOU DARE! Otherwise your accusations that I am not playing to win are cowardly! I am playing to win, and frankly I don't need the money. I have a great job that I love. Even a big short term win would be more dangerous than helpful to me. I am very conservative with my money! VERY.
There is nobody who has performed a better result on my show than I have. And until they do, I'm the best shooter that has ever shot on my show.
Anyone can make up lies about winning. But if you come on a live show and you demonstrate your shooting skills and exclaim to the world who you really are, you are welcome to take the title of best shooter on the Ahigh show. We could even record into three slots: both dice hit the back wall, one hits, and both hits. I generally don't practice shorties.
But until then, the truth is that I am the best shooter that has ever been on my own show. And I simply don't know of any other way to demonstrate a shot than a live broadcast on a real craps table with fair dice.
So don't point your finger at me and say that I am failing because I don't bet the five and nine when the five and nines are showing up. That whole idea is based on gambler's fallacy! It's in the past home boy! If you're rolling 5's and 9's change the set not the bet! And even then, you better be rolling more 5's and 9's for more than a couple thousand rolls to make any serious note of it. Not 4 to 10 rolls like what I think you're talking about.
If you want to step up and say I'm a loser, don't be surprised when I say I am a better shooter than you are. Because you're talking trash about my desire to win money and I'm going to come back and tell you I have a better shot than you do until you prove otherwise! I'm not sure, but I might have more money too!
And that goes for anybody else as well.
You can call me what you want, but I've got the best shot that is proven with a live internet broadcast. If you want to compete with a contest for who can tell the biggest tall tales, and point out who you think is lying and who is telling the truth, who the fiction writers are and who the real shooters are, go right ahead. I couldn't care less about folks who make claims that seem like "fiction writing." Not my cup of tea.
I invested in live internet broadcasting setup for a reason: to demonstrate that most of the craps experts are unwilling to come out of hiding. The excuse that they don't want to be well known is, to me, just that: an excuse. My face is plastered all over the internet, and I just shot and won money even at SouthPoint after they banned me because nobody there who deals watches stupid craps videos online. They watch football. They have no clue who I am when I don't use a card.
I'm just saying I have a vehicle to demonstrate if you're any good, and what I see is that you're hiding your identity conveniently enough that it's quite possible you would rather be known as someone good than to risk your reputation for an inability to perform.
I play all over Vegas and probably just like you, the dealers know you and they know you try to shoot with a controlled shot. Just like you, I have had dealers report on having seen you in multiple different casinos. You are on film every time you go into a casino. You get talked about when you do anything unusual that catches the attention of anyone at the casino. That film that you never see can be and is shared all over the place! Don't pretend that you tube is what is going to keep you from winning. It's a total joke to me!
It's not a goal of mine to be a people person when it comes to kissing up to ANYBODY who thinks they are ANYBODY in this game. I couldn't care less. Nobody is teaching me how to throw. Nobody is teaching me how to bet. Nobody is teaching me anything and the only help that I need from anybody is to just stop spreading lies that make folks who attempt a controlled shot to look like a dummy. Lies like "the trend is your friend" or "the 5 and 9 are great bets when they are hitting" or "the math of the game doesn't matter."
It's meaningless in the short run what you win. Advantage play, if it exists, is as boring as watching paint dry! You make it sound like stupid bets that win quickly are smart bets when they win. Why not say, "COME ON DICE!!! HUH!!! <SNAP FINGERS>!!!!" for the full package?!
It is not a goal of mine to educate folks about playing craps. I want to demonstrate, not educate. If your goal is to help people for free, that's admirable. My goal is to show how it's done, not hold hands. If you can keep up, learn. If you can't, step aside!!!
Quote: Ahigh
There is nobody who has performed a better result on my show than I have. And until they do, I'm the best shooter that has ever shot on my show.
I do not doubt this.
Quote: AlanMendelsonI do not doubt this.
Even though I'm pretty sure your comment was intended to be a criticism, it's a possible starting place for some common ground!
That live show is no cakewalk. My last show had you in the list of people talking trash about my performance as I remember. If you're on there, expect to get trash talked by every person who thinks that they are any good.
You want to come on my show and show us your shot?! That would be plenty enough for me to rolling out the red carpet with apologies all around.
Generally speaking, most people are too intimidated to show their face giving their best effort on camera. Everybody knows what you look like already, so there are no worries there!
And I will tell you something else, even though I've lost some money, I am very confident about my shot that I am delivering these days. I'm pretty sure I haven't gotten any worse!
I would ABSOLUTELY LOVE someone to demonstrate a good shot. But even if your shot sucks, most people have never seen their own shot with slow motion and all the technology to pick it apart. It can be very educational to watch what you thought was a good shot in slow motion replay only to say, "WOW THAT REALLY SUCKED!!"
We have seen your shot, we know what it looks like, you yourself have said
on your website many times your just a random thrower... so you gave up
trying to improve your throw and are now trying to find some constant in
a random throw you can make money on.
Now that is a fact based on your own words.
The only reason you want anyone to come on your show is to slow down their
toss to make it look as bad as yours.
"It can be very educational to watch what you thought was a good shot in slow motion replay only to say, "WOW THAT REALLY SUCKED!!"
There is nothing you do that helps anyone, everything you do is to encourage people to work with you to
help "you" do what ever it is you do..... you dont give a crap about anyone else..
You try to give people sets based on your flawed analysis so they can go play craps and win, and what do you
do???? throw 6,8,6 and then pass the dice... you dont even have enough confidence in your ability to get to
roll 4.......
or even worse.... you state your roll is random.... yet you bet $100 odds on a 4 or 10 when your data shows you
have zero advantage to get them.... a complete over playing of your bankroll, it that what you want others to do???
You think there is something wrong with the poeple that charge for a class of one kind or another where they
teach craps ideas that will help players... and while at the same time you give people the very worst advice for
free.
I made $30 in three throws this morning at Silverton. Comeout hard six, eight, hard six win.
I passed the dice after that and laid a $5 come bet that travelled to the six for $6.
Thats why i dont buy your snake oil.....
Imagine the new dice class offered..... the average roll is about 6, so in my class since i am
the best dicer thrower i have ever seen, certainly the best to ever appear on camera, i am going
to teach you to have confidence in your sets and throw 3 times....
I would not ban you from my casino, i would beg you to come and play.
Dicesetter
Quote: dicesitteraHIGH
We have seen your shot, we know what it looks like, you yourself have said
on your website many times your just a random thrower... so you gave up
trying to improve your throw and are now trying to find some constant in
a random throw you can make money on.
Now that is a fact based on your own words.
The only reason you want anyone to come on your show is to slow down their
toss to make it look as bad as yours.
"It can be very educational to watch what you thought was a good shot in slow motion replay only to say, "WOW THAT REALLY SUCKED!!"
There is nothing you do that helps anyone, everything you do is to encourage people to work with you to
help "you" do what ever it is you do..... you dont give a crap about anyone else..
You try to give people sets based on your flawed analysis so they can go play craps and win, and what do you
do???? throw 6,8,6 and then pass the dice... you dont even have enough confidence in your ability to get to
roll 4.......
or even worse.... you state your roll is random.... yet you bet $100 odds on a 4 or 10 when your data shows you
have zero advantage to get them.... a complete over playing of your bankroll, it that what you want others to do???
You think there is something wrong with the poeple that charge for a class of one kind or another where they
teach craps ideas that will help players... and while at the same time you give people the very worst advice for
free.
I made $30 in three throws this morning at Silverton. Comeout hard six, eight, hard six win.
I passed the dice after that and laid a $5 come bet that travelled to the six for $6.
Thats why i dont buy your snake oil.....
Imagine the new dice class offered..... the average roll is about 6, so in my class since i am
the best dicer thrower i have ever seen, certainly the best to ever appear on camera, i am going
to teach you to have confidence in your sets and throw 3 times....
I would not ban you from my casino, i would beg you to come and play.
Dicesetter
All of your posts look so much like garbage, I'm not even reading it. I got to the point where you're talking trash about my shot.
At least my posts don't look like yours. I would curl up like a little ball in bed every night if I couldn't construct a post better than you.
Quote: Dicenor33"Rolex" , "Detroit diesel" are legendary mechanisms. It takes many years of experience to recognize that a new product can become another reliable piece of technology. Craps players are no different and only years of play can make you a better player. "You got to bring money to the table", pros say to you, and when tiny little details point you toward the mighty roll, you gotta bet. Craps is about big win. Top "engineers" win more than others, they bet a lot when a "mechanism " they "work" on tells'em it might become another "Rolex".
I am not talking trash about your shot, you are, you said you are random.....remember
and a random shot is not a good shot... so what i said was 100% accurate.You want others
on your show to show they are no better than you are.
the comments about 6/8/6 and pass the dice and betting $100 in odds with no
advanatage is right on the money.
Is that what you want to teach others.......
So why not confront the problem in what you are offering to others.
Your just upset because i see right through you, and you can complain about sentence
structure, spelling, my age and what ever else you can think of, but i think your only goal
is to have others feed your ego... and deep inside you know i am right.
Dicesetter
Quote: dicesitteroops
I am not talking trash about your shot, you are, you said you are random.....remember
and a random shot is not a good shot... so what i said was 100% accurate.You want others
on your show to show they are no better than you are.
the comments about 6/8/6 and pass the dice and betting $100 in odds with no
advanatage is right on the money.
Is that what you want to teach others.......
So why not confront the problem in what you are offering to others.
Your just upset because i see right through you, and you can complain about sentence
structure, spelling, my age and what ever else you can think of, but i think your only goal
is to have others feed your ego... and deep inside you know i am right.
Dicesetter
DS: to me it's very simple. My posts are clean and intelligent. Your posts are rambling and rife with problems. I get things right in my posts in general. You get things wrong in your posts in general. That's why I generally don't give you much credibility. It's because the content of your posts are generally garbage.
I would discuss the things that you got wrong if you had any hope of writing higher quality posts. But alas, you, in fact, have demonstrated very little hope in being able to improve the quality of the content that you write. You will continue to write garbage.
Your posts are on par with dicenor. It's not a coincidence that both of you no longer are welcome on goodshooter.com because post quality is something that I am concerned about and nobody uses the block feature over there.
Quote: dicesitterI made $30 in three throws this morning at Silverton. Comeout hard six, eight, hard six win.
That would have paid 80-1 on the Hard Pass bet. Where's PaiGowDan when you need him?
Quote: dicesitteraHIGH
We have seen your shot, we know what it looks like, you yourself have said
on your website many times your just a random thrower... so you gave up
trying to improve your throw and are now trying to find some constant in
a random throw you can make money on.
Now that is a fact based on your own words.
The only reason you want anyone to come on your show is to slow down their
toss to make it look as bad as yours.
"It can be very educational to watch what you thought was a good shot in slow motion replay only to say, "WOW THAT REALLY SUCKED!!"
There is nothing you do that helps anyone, everything you do is to encourage people to work with you to
help "you" do what ever it is you do..... you dont give a crap about anyone else..
You try to give people sets based on your flawed analysis so they can go play craps and win, and what do you
do???? throw 6,8,6 and then pass the dice... you dont even have enough confidence in your ability to get to
roll 4.......
or even worse.... you state your roll is random.... yet you bet $100 odds on a 4 or 10 when your data shows you
have zero advantage to get them.... a complete over playing of your bankroll, it that what you want others to do???
You think there is something wrong with the poeple that charge for a class of one kind or another where they
teach craps ideas that will help players... and while at the same time you give people the very worst advice for
free.
I made $30 in three throws this morning at Silverton. Comeout hard six, eight, hard six win.
I passed the dice after that and laid a $5 come bet that travelled to the six for $6.
Thats why i dont buy your snake oil.....
Imagine the new dice class offered..... the average roll is about 6, so in my class since i am
the best dicer thrower i have ever seen, certainly the best to ever appear on camera, i am going
to teach you to have confidence in your sets and throw 3 times....
I would not ban you from my casino, i would beg you to come and play.
Dicesetter
Your entire post here is mostly just a personally attack on ahigh. The rest is a swing and a miss. I have learned quite a bit from him that I believe is useful. And I've been playing this game for a LONG time. I've also had zero problems communicating with ahigh. But that's because I tend to approach things with an open mind, regardless of my knowledge on a subject. So perhaps the issue is with you and how you choose to communicate.
