How fast to double your money: continuous come (full odds) versus only pass line (full odds)

Recently it was calculated on this forum (by Sally) that it would take on average 425 games to double your money (100 units to 200 units) and you would do this 46.885% of the time taking full 345X odds.

I assume that the success rate would be the same for continuous come (full 345X odds).

My question is how much sooner would you reach your goal with continuous come.

Thanks!

-Lancer

Quote: longtimelancer

Recently it was calculated on this forum (by Sally) that it would take on average 425 games to double your money (100 units to 200 units) and you would do this 46.885% of the time taking full 345X odds.

I have no idea what this means. Average across the times that you don't go broke?

Any strategy that bets more aggressively will make this number smaller, since you aren't counting the times that you bust out.

What I'd like to know is -- why put so much time & work into this? Looks like you're working on making some system. Why?

Because a system is the only way to beat the house edge. If you do not believe me, ask John Patrick, an acknowledged expert in the field of gambling and mathematics.

With a HE on every bet, the more bets you make, the more chances you give the HE to keep you from doubling your money. I see this dramatized in movies where a couple (or whoever) takes, say, $5,000 to Vegas and has to win $20,000 to keep their house (or whatever). He takes half and plays BJ, she takes the other half to the slots.

I think the quickest and most reliable (for lack of a better word) way to (try to) double your money is to bet it all on a 1:1 bet, preferably with the lowest HE. That way, the HE only has one crack at your money.

Quote: longtimelancer

Recently it was calculated on this forum (by Sally) that it would take on average 425 games to double your money (100 units to 200 units) and you would do this 46.885% of the time taking full 345X odds.

that is not the correct conclusion about the number of games (pass line bets) required on average. But it is close enough (instead of thinking maybe 1000 bets are needed on average)
That was from a simulation for either success or ruin
It is about 420 bets calculated (420.4833463)
I would have to split the matrix for the average to success but this is easier just to add in the simulation
about 412 bets for success and 432 for failure
and the median (50%) is about 70% of those values

Quote: longtimelancer

I assume that the success rate would be the same for continuous come (full 345X odds).

My question is how much sooner would you reach your goal with continuous come.

success rate is about equal by simulation
for a calculation using a transition matrix, that could be done in about 1800x1800.
But there are more things to do that are way more fun, unless I get this programmed in code to do it for me.

How much sooner?

How much do you think?
300 bets
200 bets
100 bets
even less than 100


Sally