Dont pass + Come bet.
It starts by betting $5 on the don't pass, then when the point is established lay odds on the DP and make a come bet. At this point of a seven is rolled you win both bets, if another number is rolled that becomes your point and take odds on it. What we just did was to move the bad number from the seven to any other number.
For example :
$5 in the DP, 10 is rolled. Lay $20 odds.
Make $5 come bet, 8 is rolled.Take, $10 odds.
At this point you can expect the next results:
If an 8 is rolled you win $17.
If a 10 is rolled you lose $25.
If a 7 is rolled you break even and start over.
So basically instead of you losing with the 7 (six combinations) you now only lose with the 10 (3 combinations) and win with five.
It may be kind of "hedging", but on the post i read about it it stated you would get the same variance as if you were playing PL + one come bet.
I know you are not going to get rich with this but seems interesting and different. What are your opinions?
EDIT: Forgot to add that if you win your come bet, then you place another one, and repeat. If the seven shows at this point you would win both the DP + odds and your come bet.
If you decompose the game into a resolved bet every roll instead of every time you resolve a bet denoted by a chip, it can often be helpful.
I know this isn't much of an answer, but maybe it will turn on some light bulbs.
"Thou shalt not hedge" is the rule that applies here if you're trying to keep open a chance to win at the expense of also having a chance to lose.
Betting the DC after the point is established or betting the come after betting the don't pass on the initial roll is less of a hedge for that particular roll.
You've got to take into consideration that you achieve that position only after you have overcome the formidable 1-to-2 odds against you on the comeout.Quote: Martin1024Instead of you losing with the 7 (six combinations) you now only lose with the 10 (3 combinations) and win with five.
If a player puts a PL and a DP bet out for the same roll, that is an obvious hedge. Those 2 bets will both resolve (or push) with the next number rolled, and they will resolve opposite from each other, ie. one will win, the other will lose (barring 12 of course). After a point is established, either the point rolled, or a 7 out, will cause both bets to resolve at the same time.
However, if a player makes a PL bet on this roll, and then makes a DC bet on the next roll, those are independent bets. They have some correlation, but after one roll, will resolve differently. And, more importantly, the player could, in fact, win both bets at different times during the roll. This is not a hedge. Every CB or DC bet is a new game starting up for that player. The fact that the player is flopping between rooting for the next point, or rooting against the next point does not make it a hedge. Again, the player can in fact, win all of his bets, giving the right sequence of rolls. That would not be possible with a hedge.
Quote: RaleighCrapsLet's discuss the use of the word hedge.
If a player puts a PL and a DP bet out for the same roll, that is an obvious hedge. Those 2 bets will both resolve (or push) with the next number rolled, and they will resolve opposite from each other, ie. one will win, the other will lose (barring 12 of course). After a point is established, either the point rolled, or a 7 out, will cause both bets to resolve at the same time.
However, if a player makes a PL bet on this roll, and then makes a DC bet on the next roll, those are independent bets. They have some correlation, but after one roll, will resolve differently. And, more importantly, the player could, in fact, win both bets at different times during the roll. This is not a hedge. Every CB or DC bet is a new game starting up for that player. The fact that the player is flopping between rooting for the next point, or rooting against the next point does not make it a hedge. Again, the player can in fact, win all of his bets, giving the right sequence of rolls. That would not be possible with a hedge.
succinctly put, thanks. I was wondering about it.
Quote: RaleighCrapsLet's discuss the use of the word hedge.
If a player puts a PL and a DP bet out for the same roll, that is an obvious hedge. Those 2 bets will both resolve (or push) with the next number rolled, and they will resolve opposite from each other, ie. one will win, the other will lose (barring 12 of course). After a point is established, either the point rolled, or a 7 out, will cause both bets to resolve at the same time.
However, if a player makes a PL bet on this roll, and then makes a DC bet on the next roll, those are independent bets. They have some correlation, but after one roll, will resolve differently. And, more importantly, the player could, in fact, win both bets at different times during the roll. This is not a hedge. Every CB or DC bet is a new game starting up for that player. The fact that the player is flopping between rooting for the next point, or rooting against the next point does not make it a hedge. Again, the player can in fact, win all of his bets, giving the right sequence of rolls. That would not be possible with a hedge.
Totally agree, thats why i added that on this particular example after you won your come bet, if a seven is rolled you also win the come bet and dont pass. I wasnt really sure if it would be considered hedging, thanks for clarifying.
Quote: RaleighCrapsHowever, if a player makes a PL bet on this roll, and then makes a DC bet on the next roll, those are independent bets.
If you consider a chip on the felt to be a bet, you're right.
If you consider that each roll you have various outcomes based on the resolution of the dice, you're wrong. No matter how much you put on the felt, in that case, you have one bet and one bet only on each independent roll of the dice.
You can play the game one roll at a time. For the roll where you have a $5 pass and a $5 come with no other bets, ON THAT ROLL, you are hedging to some extent against rolling a seven which would cause the pass line to lose. Subsequent rolls you may not be hedging.
It really makes a difference if you consider the game as being a game where you bet on the resolution of the dice versus betting on the resolution of a chip on the felt.
Quote: AhighIf you consider a chip on the felt to be a bet, you're right.
If you consider that each roll you have various outcomes based on the resolution of the dice, you're wrong. No matter how much you put on the felt, in that case, you have one bet and one bet only on each independent roll of the dice.
You can play the game one roll at a time. For the roll where you have a $5 pass and a $5 come with no other bets, ON THAT ROLL, you are hedging to some extent against rolling a seven which would cause the pass line to lose. Subsequent rolls you may not be hedging.
It really makes a difference if you consider the game as being a game where you bet on the resolution of the dice versus betting on the resolution of a chip on the felt.
Ahigh,
I think we are pretty much in agreement, and at this point, are probably discussing semantics more than anything.
However, I don't necessarily agree with your statements, "If you consider that each roll you have various outcomes based on the resolution of the dice, you're wrong. No matter how much you put on the felt, in that case, you have one bet and one bet only on each independent roll of the dice."
You are ignoring the fact that I am making a contract bet with the casino, and therefore I have no choice but to follow the rules of the contract bet. If I want to have a Pass bet, and then I want to have another point (via the Come bet), the only way I am allowed to do that is by making a Come bet. (Yes, I could do a Put bet in many casinos, but we all know that is a much worse bet, unless you are roughly playing >10x odds).
Now if a player is making a Come bet with the sole intent of winning some money in the event a 7 rolls, then I absolutely agree his intent is to hedge. When teddys is doing continual CBs, he certainly is not trying to hedge for a 7 (where he would win one $5 and lose 2 to 5 other $5 bets + odds.)
But you are correct, if I had a $5 PL bet, and put up a $5 CB, and a 7 rolls, I will have opposite results of 2 bets with one roll of the dice, on a per roll resolution of the dice.
But now, doesn't that mean that you have to look at ALL of your bets that are on the felt, to determine what the HE is going to be for that next resolution?
After all, if you have a $5 PL bet up (no odds), and you put out a $5 CB, you will end up with a different net result, then if you only had a $5 CB with no $5 PL bet.
After rereading your post, perhaps that is the point you were trying to make. Are you saying that ALL of your bets on the table need to be considered as one single bet, and for each roll, the appropriate HE needs to be determined for the aggregate bet total?
If that is your point, how do you propose to handle the contract bets?
If I make a CB, I have a 2:1 win to loss expectation on the next roll. That would make that an exceptional one roll resolution bet. But if I don't win, or lose, now my bet is a total underdog,and I can't take it down.So now my per roll resolution on that bet is not so good.
To carry this forward, I think that could mean that a $5 CB that is put out there would have different per roll resolution HE, depending on how many CB have already been made prior. In other words, the per roll resolution would be dependent on whether I have 0,1,2,3,4,or 5 other CB already on the felt.
Quote: RaleighCrapsAfter rereading your post, perhaps that is the point you were trying to make. Are you saying that ALL of your bets on the table need to be considered as one single bet, and for each roll, the appropriate HE needs to be determined for the aggregate bet total?
If that is your point, how do you propose to handle the contract bets?
Yes.
You can pay to take your bets down by laying come bets or placing the point/number for don't pass/come bets (just make sure you work the comeout). It just increases the cost of playing the game to do this (the percentage can be more easily stomached as you are laying to win $24/$25), but sometimes it makes sense when you're happy with your current state and just want to leave without gambling any further.
Quote: RaleighCrapsIf I make a CB, I have a 2:1 win to loss expectation on the next roll. That would make that an exceptional one roll resolution bet. But if I don't win, or lose, now my bet is a total underdog,and I can't take it down.So now my per roll resolution on that bet is not so good.
To carry this forward, I think that could mean that a $5 CB that is put out there would have different per roll resolution HE, depending on how many CB have already been made prior. In other words, the per roll resolution would be dependent on whether I have 0,1,2,3,4,or 5 other CB already on the felt.
You generally do understand my suggestion, it seems. You have to consider rolling a box number on a CB a loss equivalent to -33.33% EV -20.00% EV or -9.09% EV to play this way. Each roll is a resolved bet (including the pushes), and understanding that you lose EV on the contract bets is what keeps most people from understanding this way of evaluating the game.
