Wizard's craps challenge
Here is what I'm proposing to anybody who believes he can influence the dice to roll less than 1 in 6 sevens.
1. Every non-seven you roll, I pay you $10
2. Every seven you roll, you pay me $51
I'm open to other multiples of these numbers, but these I think would keep it fun yet interesting.
To break even, the shooter would need to achieve a rolls to sevens ratio of only 6.1 (where 6.0 is the random expectation). I hear bandied around rolls to sevens ratios of 6.5 to 7.0. At a ratio of 6.5, the shooter would have a 1.21% advantage, and at 7.0 it would be 2.52%.
Either party can quit any time. Only valid rolls count, per the call of the dealers.
Quote: JohnzimboWiz didn't specify two dice....I'll do it with one die :)
Well, he did say:
Quote: WizardOnly valid rolls count, per the call of the dealers.
If you only throw one die, you'll have a heck of a time getting the dealers to declare it a valid roll.
;-)
anybody recording either challenge?
Quote: JohnzimboWiz didn't specify two dice....I'll do it with one die :)
I do believe the dealers would call "no roll" if only one die is rolled.Quote: WizardOnly valid rolls count, per the call of the dealers.
ZCore13
Probably need to post this in the dice thread. I'm sure most "DI's" only troll them.Quote: WizardAs long as we're having the McNuggets Challenge #4 on Monday, let me suggest another challenge that could be done afterward, but I'm open to any time.
Here is what I'm proposing to anybody who believes he can influence the dice to roll less than 1 in 6 sevens.
1. Every non-seven you roll, I pay you $10
2. Every seven you roll, you pay me $51
I'm open to other multiples of these numbers, but these I think would keep it fun yet interesting.
To break even, the shooter would need to achieve a rolls to sevens ratio of only 6.1 (where 6.0 is the random expectation). I hear bandied around rolls to sevens ratios of 6.5 to 7.0. At a ratio of 6.5, the shooter would have a 1.21% advantage, and at 7.0 it would be 2.52%.
Either party can quit any time. Only valid rolls count, per the call of the dealers.
Wiz, what is the "wizard's edge" (house edge ;) ) for the 6.0 expectation?
IOW, how much are you expecting to profit, per dollar wagered in the long run?
I don't think that's the point (to make a bi profit) usually after a challenge since people are already out having fun. Everyone decides to go have some fun possibly dinner and a bit of gambling.Quote: MorgueLove it!
Wiz, what is the "wizard's edge" (house edge ;) ) for the 6.0 expectation?
IOW, how much are you expecting to profit, per dollar wagered in the long run?
Quote: WizardAs long as we're having the McNuggets Challenge #4 on Monday, let me suggest another challenge that could be done afterward, but I'm open to any time.
Here is what I'm proposing to anybody who believes he can influence the dice to roll less than 1 in 6 sevens.
1. Every non-seven you roll, I pay you $10
2. Every seven you roll, you pay me $51
I'm open to other multiples of these numbers, but these I think would keep it fun yet interesting.
To break even, the shooter would need to achieve a rolls to sevens ratio of only 6.1 (where 6.0 is the random expectation). I hear bandied around rolls to sevens ratios of 6.5 to 7.0. At a ratio of 6.5, the shooter would have a 1.21% advantage, and at 7.0 it would be 2.52%.
Either party can quit any time. Only valid rolls count, per the call of the dealers.
Is the $10 paid every roll, or only at the end? My strategy would be to hedge by betting Big Red every third roll, and hoping for good variance. Thirty ways to win and only 6 ways to lose...
Quote: AxelWolfI don't think that's the point (to make a bi profit) usually after a challenge since people are already out having fun. Everyone decides to go have some fun possibly dinner and a bit of gambling.
I understand this. I'm still curious as to know how much of an edge Wizard has. It's obviously very low. If he wanted it higher, he could definitely have increased the payout on the 7. He's definitely not going to offer the wager without an edge.
Quote: MorgueI understand this. I'm still curious as to know how much of an edge Wizard has. It's obviously very low. If he wanted it higher, he could definitely have increased the payout on the 7. He's definitely not going to offer the wager without an edge.
Assuming a random roller, my edge would be 1.67%.
Quote: WizardAssuming a random roller, my edge would be 1.67%.
Not good enough to take my money, of that I am positive.
Quote: Zcore13This is hilarious. The only issue is someone could roll only a few times, miss the 7 and claim he/she beat the craps challenge. There really should be a minimum amount of rolls.
I agree. There should be a minimum # of rolls required.
Why? Its a per roll bet. no real challenge.Quote: RSI agree. There should be a minimum # of rolls required.
Quote: WizardAssuming a random roller, my edge would be 1.67%.
151 & 30 would still be higher edge than what bets I normally take. 201 and 40 would be a gentle mans bet.
What is the math on that?Quote: Ahigh151 & 30 would still be higher edge than what bets I normally take. 201 and 40 would be a gentle mans bet.
Quote: AxelWolfWhy? Its a per roll bet. no real challenge.
Maybe "challenge" was a bad word. I was just looking to get something going on short notice for Monday. I'm open to all ideas.
Quote: Ahigh151 & 30 would still be higher edge than what bets I normally take. 201 and 40 would be a gentle mans bet.
That would be too thin of an edge for me.
Quote: WizardEither party can quit any time. Only valid rolls count, per the call of the dealers.
Wouldn't that make it a hustle rather than a challenge?
I wish I could get $100 k together, or someone to sponsor for such an amount, and conduct a real, controlled test of DI. But no one else seems to care about it. With $100,000 awarded to anyone who can prove they can influence the dice well past what random chance says the results should be (if I may grossly oversimplify).
is there such thing as 100k pesos?Quote: NareedWouldn't that make it a hustle rather than a challenge?
I wish I could get $100 k together, or someone to sponsor for such an amount, and conduct a real, controlled test of DI. But no one else seems to care about it. With $100,000 awarded to anyone who can prove they can influence the dice well past what random chance says the results should be (if I may grossly oversimplify).
Nareed have you ever written about casinos in mexico? if so link, if not will you?
Quote: AxelWolfis there such thing as 100k pesos?
No. Counting past 99,999.99999999999999999999999999999999999 is forbidden by law.
Quote: WizardMaybe "challenge" was a bad word. I was just looking to get something going on short notice for Monday. I'm open to all ideas.
I think the challenge would be to bet bets on the table and challenge shooters to try to make you lose. Why make it complicated?
I recently put a $360 don't pass on a shooter and laid $750 odds against him on a ten point at Mandalay Bay on Friday afternoon.
This guy was on a long roll and appeared to be a DI and everyone else was winning on his roll up until the point that I made this bet.
Just saying you'd book a bet against someone with a 1.67% edge per roll is hardly any challenge.
Put up some REAL MONEY and lay some max bets on my roll while I'm trying to win $5 on the pass line if you want to make a statement about how I have no game.
That's what *I* am doing already and not even knowing the guy or anyone else watching. Just betting according to my beliefs, for which you are seemingly unwilling to do because of the $5 in vig it would cost to make the play I made.
I would LOVE to have you bet some huge money against my roll and DARE me to try to make you lose while I'm not even betting anything -- just to help me concentrate on doing my best job with no skin in the game.
This guy on Friday had $10 and $10 odds and no other bets.
If I had lost, I would have said, "good job shooter" too.
Quote:I would LOVE to have you bet some huge money against my roll and DARE me to try to make you lose while I'm not even betting anything -- just to help me concentrate on doing my best job with no skin in the game.
What you might "love" is irrelevant.
The Wiz's bet is: "1. Every non-seven you roll, I pay you $10
2. Every seven you roll, you pay me $51"
Take it or leave it.
Quote: AhighI think the challenge would be to bet bets on the table and challenge shooters to try to make you lose. Why make it complicated?
I recently put a $360 don't pass on a shooter and laid $750 odds against him on a ten point at Mandalay Bay on Friday afternoon.
This guy was on a long roll and appeared to be a DI and everyone else was winning on his roll up until the point that I made this bet.
Just saying you'd book a bet against someone with a 1.67% edge per roll is hardly any challenge.
Put up some REAL MONEY and lay some max bets on my roll while I'm trying to win $5 on the pass line if you want to make a statement about how I have no game.
That's what *I* am doing already and not even knowing the guy or anyone else watching. Just betting according to my beliefs, for which you are seemingly unwilling to do because of the $5 in vig it would cost to make the play I made.
I would LOVE to have you bet some huge money against my roll and DARE me to try to make you lose while I'm not even betting anything -- just to help me concentrate on doing my best job with no skin in the game.
This guy on Friday had $10 and $10 odds and no other bets.
If I had lost, I would have said, "good job shooter" too.
I thought you quit playing craps?
Quote: mickeycrimmI thought you quit playing craps?
He did. For like 3 days, I think.
The thing I don't like about the Wiz's challenge, is, I could (theoretically) get on a hot roll (like the one I had earlier tonight), hell, even 10 no-7's, not difficult by any means (randomness, that is) and be able to claim you succeeded in the challenge. That's like me having a challenge, "I bet you can't flip a coin to land on heads 3 times in a row!" Surely, someone's going to win, but just because they win, doesn't mean they accomplished what was supposed to be accomplished (control or influence of an object).
Quote: AhighI think the challenge would be to bet bets on the table and challenge shooters to try to make you lose
You expect the Wizard to drop what he figures is positive expectation for negative expectation? Likewise perhaps the shooter* [if he thinks he is a DI?] 1.67% isn't much of an edge, but excellent compared what I have been led to believe can be expected with card counting.
*if I was there I'd take the challenge, just for the fun of playing with the Wizard, but not because I think I am a DI.
Quote: AxelWolfNareed have you ever written about casinos in mexico? if so link, if not will you?
No one ever reads the articles(*):
https://wizardofvegas.com/articles/gambling-in-mexico/
(*) Yes, that's what I'm thinking about.
Quote: DJTeddyBearI think an important clause was omitted: Come-Out rolls are excluded.
I know how to bet the don't and place the point.
Did you also arrive at 1.67% edge?Quote: odiousgambitLikewise perhaps the shooter* [if he thinks he is a DI?] 1.67% isn't much of an edge, but excellent compared what I have been led to believe can be expected with card counting.
For me I see
5/6 chance to win $10 (50/6) and a 1/6 chance to lose $51 (51/6)
(I take the Wizards challenge)
Member Morgue asked what the edge was for this 10/51 bet
how about any male. maybe odiousgambit, stepping up
and showing Morgue, and other readers that will follow later,
one method of how this (edge) is actually calculated
so
he (anyone) can also do these extremely difficult and time consuming
calculations at will (his, I do not think he is a she from his many posts on the internet - but never say never) in the future.
he or she should not matter
but it does (s)
Quote: mustangsallyhow about any male. maybe odiousgambit, ... I do not think he is a she from his many posts ... he or she should not matter but it does (s)
my thoughts on your post:
*your math is always excellent, and you seem to enjoy doing it
*your comments often puzzle me
*I am getting to be pretty sure you have it in for men,
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/craps/18877-buy-the-4-and-10-while-on-the-dont-pass/4/#post378760
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/craps/18877-buy-the-4-and-10-while-on-the-dont-pass/4/#post378835
and this last post too, see what I quote
judging by one comment you made, hinting at sexual orientation, you seem to like women, your own sex hinted at with "sally" but unspecified in your profile. That you like women [if so] does not nail down your sex.
*I have been confident for some 60+ years about my masculinity, but now that I have health insurance that covers pregnancy I'm not sure [g]
*I am pretty sure I could crunch the numbers on one side of the bet after reviewing how to do so at WoO, but I'd probably screw up having to calculate the simultaneous conditions of "less 4s, more 8's" [IIRC]. All this takes a lot of time and alas I have reached the point where I have probably forgotten most of what I learned last excursion into gambling math and would have to nearly start all over again. Were it not for this I would happily undertake your request.
PS [never mind the PS]
Just looking to see if the Wizard has a 1.67% edge what would be my edge be?Quote: odiousgambitmy thoughts on your post:
*your math is always excellent, and you seem to enjoy doing it
*your comments often puzzle me
*I am getting to be pretty sure you have it in for men,
as in I take his challenge for fun and money.
the he verses she comes from this
Quote: WizardHere is what I'm proposing to anybody who believes he can influence the dice to roll less than 1 in 6 sevens.
1. Every non-seven you roll, I pay you $10
2. Every seven you roll, you pay me $51
OK, as you have it, no females allowed to bet, since the horribly sexist Michael did not use "they, he/she", or somesuch.
Let's see how bad I can screw up the math,
1. Every non-seven you roll, I pay you $10
2. Every seven you roll, you pay me $51
well, the weighted probability times the wagers gets me -0.1666666666666667 but that must be expected value
Quote: mustangsallyDid you also arrive at 1.67% edge?
For me I see
5/6 chance to win $10 (50/6) and a 1/6 chance to lose $51 (51/6)
((1/6)*51 + (5/6)*-10)/10=1.67%.
why be sorry?Quote: odiousgambitI got the two bets confused, Wizard's and Soopoo's, sorry
under edit
I always get two bets confused until I stop thinking too much.
If the Wizard truly has a 1.67% edge (yes, he did show his work)
and even Ahigh does not want to bet this (edge is too high?)
when it looks to me if I took the challenge, and I am not a he BTW,
my edge (still unknown) would be EV/Bet (comes from ev = Bet * edge)
or
-1/6 * 1/51 = -1/306
I still like dice games over silly
Sally
math
no way.Quote: odiousgambitare you disagreeing with Michael about his edge? it would seem so
Why would you say that such a thing?
I actually agree on his math
what is My edge
when I roll the dice and he pays me $10 for every non 7 I roll and I pay him $51 for every 7 I roll?
in other words, I bet $51 every roll and am paid $10 for every non 7 rolled and I only lose that $51 when I roll a 7
is it just -1.67%?
Where are you proposing that the challenge take place? Will you do $10 and $49 and let the shooter try to hit a seven? Will you be present for the rolls if I accept the challenge? Is there a minimum and maximum number of rolls or a minimum and maximum multiple for the offer amount, or are the amounts pre-defined?
Quote: mustangsallywhy be sorry?
I always get two bets confused until I stop thinking too much.
If the Wizard truly has a 1.67% edge (yes, he did show his work)
and even Ahigh does not want to bet this (edge is too high?)
when it looks to me if I took the challenge, and I am not a he BTW,
my edge (still unknown) would be EV/Bet (comes from ev = Bet * edge)
orI might be wrong here
-1/6 * 1/51 = -1/306
I still like dice games over silly
Sally
math
hehe... don't forget "*10*51"
Quote: mustangsallyis it just -1.67%?
I have to admit I assumed so
ev= bet * edge
that is easy to remember, maybe I will remember now. I came up with an EV, was it correct?
if so,
edge = ev/bet = 0.1667/10 = .01667 = 1.667% seems to agree with the Wizard, the "house" edge
edge = ev/bet = -0.1667/51 = -0.0032686274509804 = -0.327% , the player "edge " , a negative number.
your method, -1/6 * 1/51 = -1/306 = -0.0032686274509804 = -0.327% again
Shows I am not used to the opposite view of bets that are not even money? Sort of odd though, if Michael had said anybody up against him in the bet would have a -0.327% edge, that would make it seem like more of a fair bet. Then again, maybe there is something wrong here.
"Either party can quit any time" so it has been writtenQuote: AhighIs there a minimum and maximum number of rolls or a minimum and maximum multiple for the offer amount, or are the amounts pre-defined?
I would do this for 49 rolls myself
no more and no less
that gives a sweet 56.75% chance of showing a net profit
That would make the challenge for me way more fun
Advantage
Sally
except being over 280 miles from Vegas takes my advantage to a disadvantage
if I travel there by any other means other than Greyhound Bus
I can stay at the Plaza for free, just got to get there as I am a fat chick.
someone did ask him what HIS edge was but not those that took the other side.Quote: odiousgambitSort of odd though, if Michael had said anybody up against him in the bet would have a -0.327% edge, that would make it seem like more of a fair bet. Then again, maybe there is something wrong here.
Even Ahigh looked to me to at first to chicken out on the original bet offered
I did not blame him at first buts knew maybe hes (not she) must be wrong when he said he makes bets that are lower than that.
hehe
But Second Chance Craps has me doing some fun math
so I did Silly Sally math
just for fun
