mustangsally
Joined: Mar 29, 2011
• Posts: 2463
May 9th, 2014 at 6:01:27 PM permalink
Quote: AxiomOfChoice

So, why should craps be treated differently than any other game ever analyzed? Pushes count in house edge calculations for everything else.. To not count them for craps makes absolutely no sense, and it only serves to confuse people (as if craps players aren't confused enough), since you're using a different definition of the term "house edge" than is used in any other situation.

Do Read Steen's example in WinCraps Help
it is free to have
he might get mad at me if I post all of it

he explains things way better than I do here

"Bill likes to play the Field with a triple payoff on the 12, but his buddy Jeff tells him the Place 5 is better because on average it loses less money. Jeff explains that a \$5 Field bet loses 13.89 cents per roll whereas a \$5 Place 5 bet loses only 5.6 cents per roll. Bill disagrees, so they agree to a contest. "

Sally
I Heart Vi Hart
AxiomOfChoice
Joined: Sep 12, 2012
• Posts: 5761
May 9th, 2014 at 6:03:31 PM permalink
mustangsally
Joined: Mar 29, 2011
• Posts: 2463
May 9th, 2014 at 6:07:21 PM permalink
Quote: AxiomOfChoice

Expected Value

Expected value (EV) represents the theoretical average outcome of a wager. It's calculated by summing all possible outcomes each weighted by their probability of occurring. When negated and expressed as a percentage of the amount wagered it becomes the house advantage and establishes a baseline from which to evaluate and compare bets. It's actually a very handy figure and allows us to answer an important question: Which bets give the best average return per dollar wagered? To learn how to calculate the expected value, see Calculating the House Advantage / Expected Value.

If all bets had the same probabilties of winning and losing, it would be a simple matter to compare their payoffs to decide which on average returned more to the bettor. By the same token, if they all had the same payoffs then it would be a simple matter to compare their probabilities. Unfortunately, they don't all resolve at the same time or pay at the same rate, so we use expected value to reconcile the differences. However, even this seemingly simple average can be misunderstood and misused. It's important to understand that expected value can be expressed in different ways and what those expressions mean.

Since the roll is the veritable heart beat of craps and wagers are tendered in some form of currency such as dollars, it would seem natural to express the EV as a dollar amount gained or lost per roll. Although there's nothing wrong with doing so, if we intend to compare different bets it can be misleading. For instance, a \$5 Place 5 bet loses an average of 5.56 cents per roll whereas a \$10 Place 5 bet loses an average of 11.1 cents per roll. Therefore the \$5 bet is better, right? Well, if better means losing fewer dollars per roll then, yes, but does this, "bet less - lose less" lesson come as any revelation to you? What we really need to know is proportionally how effective each bet is at returning our money. In other words, how much does each bet lose per dollar wagered. If we divide each of these results by the amount wagered, we see that both the \$5 and \$10 Place 5 bets lose 1.11% per roll (that's \$0.056/\$5 and \$0.111/\$10 respectively). Ok, now it makes more sense - since both bets are on Place 5 they're naturally, equally effective. So now the EV is in a form that accounts for the difference in bet amounts, but what about the difference in probabilities? Certainly the probability of winning and losing each wager is accounted for when you compute the average loss, but what about the probability of even having a win or loss? Have we accounted for those times when some bets don't resolve? In other words, what about the action? An illustration is in order:

Bill likes to play the Field with a triple payoff on the 12, but his buddy Jeff tells him the Place 5 is better because on average it loses less money. Jeff explains that a \$5 Field bet loses 13.89 cents per roll whereas a \$5 Place 5 bet loses only 5.6 cents per roll. Bill disagrees, so they agree to a contest. Each has a \$180 bankroll. They decide to wager \$5 each for 36 rolls with Bill on the Field and Jeff on the Place 5. In order to compare the output of their wagers they agree that each time a bet wins, they'll pull the bet plus the winnings off the table and set it off to the side while drawing the next bet from their unused bankroll. If a bet loses they'll also replace it from their unused bankroll.

At the end of 36 rolls, Bill has made 36 wagers and exhausted his entire bankroll. He has \$175 in side money and therefore netted a \$5 loss for an average loss of 13.89 cents per roll - just what he expected. Jeff on the other hand has made only 10 bets and still has \$130 of unused bankroll. He has \$48 in side money and therefore netted just a \$2 loss for an average loss of 5.6 cents per roll - also just what he expected.

"See?" says Jeff. "I lost less overall and less per roll so the Place 5 is better."

"Wait a minute," Bill replies. "I've gone through my entire bankroll. I've had \$180 worth of action and I now know what effect the Field had on all my money, but you still have \$130 that's not been played yet. You've had less action. How do you know what effect the Place 5 will have on the rest of your money? Let's see what kind of results you get after you've had an equal amount of action."

So they start the contest over and each man agrees to make \$5 wagers until his entire \$180 bankroll has played out. Furthermore, realizing that their outcomes can vary, they decide to repeat the contest a number times and compare average outcomes. Some time later they tally up. Bill finds that he finished each contest in 36 rolls and lost an average of \$5 per contest. Jeff, finds that he finished each contest in an average of 129.6 rolls and lost an average of \$7.20 per contest.

"Hey, I was right!" says Bill. "The Field bet loses less money for a given amount of bankroll which is to say it loses less per dollar of action."

"I don't understand." says Jeff. "I still lost less per roll than you."

"That's true," says Bill, "but it took so many more rolls for you to match my action that you ended up losing more money overall. You were so focused on the lower loss per roll that you didn't think about the lower action per roll."

"I think I see your point," says Jeff, "but I value playing time too, so the fact that the Place 5 took longer to play through my bankroll has got to be worth something."

"Come on now," laughs Bill, "adjusting my action to match your playing time is very simple. All I have to do is slow down my action to match your action and I'll last just as long. On average your Place 5 bet resolved only 10 times every 36 rolls (that's an average of four 5's and six 7's per 36 rolls), so I could just similarly bet the Field 10 times every 36 rolls and I'm there. My Field bet will still have the same average loss per dollar of action, so it doesn't matter how fast or slow I play it. As a matter of fact, if I wanted to bet every roll instead of picking 10 rolls out of 36, I could figure out what your average action is per roll and just bet that."

"What do you mean?" asks Jeff.

"Well," says Bill, "since your \$5 Place 5 bet resolves an average of once every 3.6 rolls (that's equivalent to 10 resolutions in 36 rolls), your average action per roll is \$5/3.6 = approx. \$1.39, so if I bet \$1.39 every roll on the Field I'll average the same amount of action as you and last just as long as you. Actually I'll probably last longer because I won't lose as much of my bankroll as you. With these equivalent amounts at risk, you can see now that my \$1.39 Field bet loses an average of 3.86 cents per roll compared to your \$5 Place 5 bet which loses an average of 5.56 cents per roll. Of course, they're probably not going to let me bet this odd amount unless I'm playing penny craps so I'll either have to figure out some pattern of alternating \$1 and \$2 bets or we'll have to up the stakes. For instance, if you bet \$90 on the Place 5 and I bet \$25 on the Field we'll average the same amount of action per roll."

"I see," says Jeff, "but it sure seems strange ... I look at the table and see that I have \$5 at risk while you only have \$1.39 at risk."

"That's why it's good to learn this stuff ahead of time." say Bill. "Things like this are not always obvious. Sure you have \$5 at risk and you could win or lose on the next roll just the same as me, but I highly doubt you'll see nothing but 5's and 7's roll every time you play. The truth is you're probably going to see other numbers that don't resolve the Place 5 bet, so your \$5 is not really as much at risk as you thought. It may be at risk of winning or losing when the dice roll, but it's also at risk of just sitting there unresolved. My Field bet on the other hand resolves every roll; It has no risk of just sitting there. It's these differences in action that we need to reconcile before we can fairly compare bets."

Earlier, when comparing bets, we discovered that there are times when it's not enough to express EV as a loss per roll. Because bet amounts can vary, we sometimes need to express EV as a loss per dollar wagered. Now we know that there are also times when it's not enough to express EV as a loss per dollar wagered because amounts wagered can resolve at different rates. However, there are two things we can do to remedy the situation:

1) We can compare bets with commensurate risk.

This means we can compare bet amounts that will produce on average the same amount of action per unit of measurement. For instance, if we're using rolls as the unit of measurement then we would compare bet amounts that produce the same average amount of action per roll. The story above nicely illustrates this concept. There we saw that \$1.39 bet on the Field represents commensurate risk with \$5 bet on Place 5 because they both produce an average of \$1.39 action per roll. Had the two players been measuring their outcomes per decision instead of per roll, then commensurate risk would be equal amounts on each bet. For instance, both a \$5 Field bet and a \$5 Place 5 bet produce an average of \$5 action per decision.

I play scared too BTW
Sally
I Heart Vi Hart
AxiomOfChoice
Joined: Sep 12, 2012
• Posts: 5761
May 9th, 2014 at 6:13:25 PM permalink
Quote: mustangsally

1. I don't play craps.
2. I don't have a computer that runs windows.

mustangsally
Joined: Mar 29, 2011
• Posts: 2463
May 9th, 2014 at 6:18:44 PM permalink
Quote: AxiomOfChoice

1. I don't play craps.

not necessary to read a help file or is it??
Quote: AxiomOfChoice

2. I don't have a computer that runs windows.

That must be your choice, not mine

Quote: AxiomOfChoice

I have a friend that does not have a Windows computer but he runs windows programs on it.
I do not call that being stupid.

just my opinion
Sally
I Heart Vi Hart
AxiomOfChoice
Joined: Sep 12, 2012
• Posts: 5761
May 9th, 2014 at 6:20:45 PM permalink
Quote: mustangsally

That must be your choice, not mine

Of course. Why would it be your choice? What a strange thing to say.

Quote:

I have a friend that does not have a Windows computer but he runs windows programs on it.
I do not call that being stupid.

Ok then.
mustangsally
Joined: Mar 29, 2011
• Posts: 2463
May 9th, 2014 at 7:00:43 PM permalink
Quote: AxiomOfChoice

Of course. Why would it be your choice? What a strange thing to say.

Exactly.

statement AAA: The Place 5 is a better bet than a 3X Field bet

What a strange thing to say

let those that believe The Place 5 is a better bet than a 3X Field bet
show their proof (opinion)
This is only fair.

I can not do better at what Steen showed in his WinCraps help file.
I am willing to bet he could even do better than that example.
Some flowers and a song maybe?

I like that "commensurate risk"

Sally

no no
I did think of another unfair comparison
2 Craps Players
player a = The pass line odds bet only
This is in another thread so I may link to it once Ahigh gets his video and simulation completed.

player a (we will call him A)
\$10 pass line and NO odds EVER. Says they do not change the EV.
So a lower house edge counting the odds bet is ridiculous and just completely useless and misleading.
Makes 4,950 bets in one day (At Sally's Casino playing Turbo Craps)
Total action = 49,500.00
and showed a loss of exactly \$700 (This did not factor in the free Buffet that was given out)

player b (we will call her A-gaga)
\$10 pass line and 100X odds ALWAYS.
Makes same 4,950 bets in one day (yep yep At Sally's Casino playing Turbo Craps)
Total action = 3,349,500
and showed a loss of exactly \$700 (This also did not factor in the free Buffet that was given out)

player b only needed one more win to pull out a net win over all these bets risking way more than player a
3,349,500 VS. only 49,500.00

how many more wins did player a need to pull out a win.
Thought so

but most all say this is a fair comparison because the math says both have the same expected loss.

A-gaga laughs it off
just an opinion
and everyone has one.
I was in it only for the Buffet.

Sally says
I Heart Vi Hart
dicesitter
Joined: Jan 17, 2013
• Posts: 1157
May 9th, 2014 at 8:26:06 PM permalink
MrV

I have said that, many times.

As i have indicated you only have a couple of opportunities to over-come
that advantage. Get lucky, get real lucky, or have some control over your
toss where luck comes to you more often that it does to others.

You can talk tell your blue in the face.... but that is it....

So you have A choice, do nothing and hope to get lucky, or do what you
can and hope to get lucky more often. No one really cares what choice
you make. Surely all the guys on here that tell you the game is unbeatable
dont care, the guys that do well dont care.... we can sit here all day and try to find a
way to lose....less. that has never been my way...

I am pretty happy with my craps play.

Dicesetter
mustangsally
Joined: Mar 29, 2011
• Posts: 2463
May 9th, 2014 at 8:40:17 PM permalink
Quote: dicesitter

No one really cares what choice
you make. Surely all the guys on here that tell you the game is unbeatable
dont care,

exactly. they voice their opinion
I at times also do that. so many opinions here and there.
Quote: dicesitter

the guys that do well dont care....

right. and they too voice their opinions all the time.
Hard keeping them quiet or not offering unsolicited advice and opinions.
Quote: dicesitter

we can sit here all day and try to find a way to lose....less.

and I also have an opinion that many craps players make all sorts of bets that you think are crazy and pull out tremendous wins and have great fun doing it.

those that say they know how to play craps,
the Craps experts(?)
all laugh them off as fools who do not know how to play craps - but they are winners.
they too do not care at all what any one says, it is their money to gamble with and they do as they please.

cool huh?
Sally

almost 666
I Heart Vi Hart
mustangsally
Joined: Mar 29, 2011
• Posts: 2463
May 9th, 2014 at 11:00:03 PM permalink
Quote: mustangsally

Did not Paigowdan once call Stephen How over at discountgambling.net a "hack"

Quote: AxiomOfChoice

I hope not. That is crazy. Stephen is no hack.

Why you hope not?
words are just words, right?

Makes one want to sing and dance.

I am certain it was just an opinion by Paigowdan
he appears to me to have many opinions

http://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/tables/7028-card-counting-the-panda-8-side-bet-in-ez-baccarat/#post101250

"...some hack at "discountgambling.net" came up with..."

page 2 has more opinions by a few others
and to me looks like Paigowdan has more opinions

He that is not with me is against me
bottom line
I Heart Vi Hart