This is what I found this morning on the Oddhead Blog:
March 18, 2007 at 9:45 am
A Statistical Characterization and Comparison of Selected Craps Money Management and Bet Selection Systems. Ken Elliot Kbeiico. Columbia, MD 21046
As to the ‘max odds’ question: the mathematical answer seems to be that you should never make a line bet on which you are unable or unwilling to take full odds. Now ofcourse this can make the experience short and sweet if you lose that first bet or the first few bets. 100x odds are often publicity promotions with most players sticking to five or ten times odds, yet Casino Royale (LV-strip) offers one dollar line bets and 100 times odds. Best strategy: $606 PutBet. After three hits, take it down and leave the flat bets for the dealers.
“Better” depends upon goals and preferences. Few people actually trek to Vegas to put their entire bankroll on that first bet despite what mathematicians say is optimal strategy. More bets means more entertainment time, more free drinks, etc. The answer would also depend upon bet progression strategies that you intended to employ. If all you are ‘comfortable’ with is a table minimum bet with five times odds, then go for that. A line bet followed by two come bets would be adequate to stay in the game with your bankroll and catch any ‘hot streaks’. Hedge systems don’t make sense. Grinders don’t really do well anyway.
At 5 dollar bets with two times odds, Hoyle’s Press and Oscar would be the two best systems, though Ponzer, in third place, would be preferable overall.
Best thing would be to play at a slower table where there are lots of grinders who will slow things down even more. That maximizes your time at the table more cheaply than switching to a Patrick Right system.
The article is also available in some advanced math texts and I will soon add to this thread a listing of the basic craps systems and their classifications and performance.
Look again at the author. I have never published on craps.Quote: FleaStiff
Been looking a long time: I finally found an article reference I had come across long ago.
Its by Elliot who is a well-respected poster on this forum.
That's not by Dr. Jacobson, it's by Ken Elliott. Here's the paper:
What a cool publication!
Thanks for sharing.