Lol. Don't encourage RL's financial death wish.Quote: Ayecarumba
You mention that you have a win goal. Perhaps abiding by this goal, and stopping play when you reach it, is keeping you from maximizing your winning sessions? Just as you have bad losing streaks, you could also have epic winning streaks, but if you walk away after reaching an arbitrary number, you may be cutting yourself off from the whole "right tail" of the bell curve.
RL, If you knew what Aye's tagline meant, you would know to ignore his advice on probability :o)
Wow, if you're putting that kind of action through, you absolutely need to get a host at a new chain. There's plenty of people on here that could recommend a host, but simply go to VIP services and tell them how much action you put through (like here) and tell them you need a host because you're fed up that your current casino you've been loyal to for so long won't do CRAP for you even being down over $100k. Drop that $100k in there somewhere and watch for their eyes to lite up =P.Quote: rottenluck
Thanks Romes, a very well thought and intelligent reply. I am here for my final day in Vegas. I've decided to give this another try, that is, the benefit of the doubt. I'll keep playing progressives today and I swear if I get wiped out again today, that's gonna be pretty damning. Theoretically, I should be able to win 439 attempts in a row. Eight in a row is hard to do but I am not seeing that in my first 248 attempts.
We are definitely watching the dealers. We just started doing this and in the last 49 attempts we've caught the dealers 'accidentally' calling our win a tie once and another time our tie was called a loss.
As for the comps, I haven't even mentioned my sports play. I'm down $83k this year in sports, all with the casino I've been loyal to, on four plays that went 0-4. This host put me in a suite that retails for $99 a night. My wife and I wouldn't even buy a room this shifty if we were on a vacay to a non-gambling destination. I even once tipped my host a $100 about four years ago, which seemed to have zero effect.
The wife and I have decided to text the host next time we come to town with a polite ultimatum, give me the big suite at the top with the ice maker in it, and if you aren't able to, no biggie, we'll just stay elsewhere.
At that level of play would it behoove him to contact a private host like Steve Cyr?Quote: Romes
Wow, if you're putting that kind of action through, you absolutely need to get a host at a new chain. There's plenty of people on here that could recommend a host, but simply go to VIP services and tell them how much action you put through (like here) and tell them you need a host because you're fed up that your current casino you've been loyal to for so long won't do CRAP for you even being down over $100k. Drop that $100k in there somewhere and watch for their eyes to lite up =P.
We played progressive craps for a starting unit of $25. We ended up with 18 attempts and no wipe outs. But we were forced to make the $400 bet 3 times in 18 attempts, that is, we started the attempt with four losers in a row ($25, $50, $100 & $200 all lost). Statistically speaking, we should see 4 losers in a row to start an attempt 6.6% of the time, or 1 in 15.13 attempts. Theoretical says we were supposed to see the 0-4 start 1.19 times yesterday, but, as luck would have it, we saw it 3 times, which is 252% ahead of theoretical.
We sat at a baccarat table and played $25 units for a while, ensuring that our play was evenly balanced between player and bank. We ended up winning 67 times and only saw 4 losers in a row occur twice. We never saw 5 losers in a row. It's kind of strange, that, as soon as we take the progression out of the equation, we see 5 losers in a row at a rate of 0 in 67. Like I said earlier, we track all of our progressive play in a spreadsheet, and in 266 attempts, we have seen 8 losers in a row occur 13 times, or roughly 1 in 20. But as soon as we eliminate progression, we go 0-67. Weird.
As if that wasn't enough to make me paranoid, we bought in at our last craps table with $1,000. We won 3 bets for $25 each and cashed out to go see our show. Immediately after the show, we went back to the same table. I pulled the chips out of my pocket and all I had was a $500 chip and 3 $25 chips. WTF. I figured I dropped a $500 chip on accident. We talked to security, we went back and forth, talked to the pit boss and about 45 minutes later the pit boss did admit that they had "accidentally" underpaid us by $500. My wife and I both thought we saw guilty body language from the box man when we were introduced to the pit boss by security.
All told, since we've really become paranoid of a dishonest game and really started watching carefully, we have caught the dealers making 3 mistakes in the last 43 attempts, all in the casinos favor, worth a total of $650. When I trusted them, I never watched them. That will never happen again.
So, yeah, you could call me paranoid but seriously, the casino is the one getting paranoid if we rub the dice on the pyramid backing before we roll. Yes, I'm definitely a little paranoid at this point.
Statistically speaking, we should see 4 losers in a row to start an attempt 6.6% of the time, or 1 in 15.13 attempts. Theoretical says we were supposed to see the 0-4 start 1.19 times yesterday, but, as luck would have it, we saw it 3 times, which is 252% ahead of theoretical.
You should see four losers 6.6% of the time every time you roll, not every time you follow a win as you seem to think. You definitely rolled more than 18 times. The spreadsheet doesn't lie. The person trying to interpret it does. Or at least doesn't know what it's saying. You've made that error multiple times here.
If anything, you lost more rolls than you won, yet still came out ahead. That's really cool. It's the times when you win more than you lose, yet still get crushed that really sucks about betting like that.
You should see four losers 6.6% of the time every time you roll, not every time you follow a win as you seem to think.
Either way, it's the same. It's a 6.6% probability of occurring, whether you start counting after the win or not. It can't include the win, so by default, it always starts after the last win.
Bottom line, a guy walks up to a craps table and loses 4 Pass Line or Don't Pass wagers in a row, any combination... it's a 6.6% probability. Doesn't matter if he's been standing there for hours or if he just got there and loses his first 4 bets. The likelihood of losing 4 in a row is 6.6%.
So now I am playing progressive craps, starting with $25. I've done the math, I lose 50.7% of the time. I should lose 8 in a row 1 out of every 229 attempts. We have played at a lot of different casinos starting on Aug 29th of this year and we've recorded every bet. We won 93 attempts and got wiped out. Then we won 76 attempts and got wiped out. Then we won exactly another 76 attempts and got wiped out yet again. Total record: 245 wins, 3 wipe outs. Total loss: $12,925. Theoretical loss is $722.16. Statistically speaking, we are 280.47% above target for wipe outs and actual loss exceeds theoretical loss by 1,789%. We're both convinced, if you buy in for $7K cash and play progressives, there is no way in hell you can possibly win even as few as 100 bets in a row without getting wiped out. In order to make things "normal", we should be able to win 439 bets in a row without a wipe out. There's no way in hell that could possibly happen. No way.
Since you recorded every bet, don't tell us the number of "attempts" won, tell us the total number of rolls. It will provide a far different story and show exactly how your math is all sorts of screwed up
It cuts both ways: Once a dealer seemed to be making errors in my favor ("seemed to" only because he was dealing so fast I was having a hard time both counting and adding up the card totals fast enough before they were swept away). I suspect those "mistakes" were intentional, with him hoping I'd reward him by tipping more. This was during a very brief time where the casino in question let the dealers keep their own tips rather than pooling them. That experiment lasted maybe a week or two, probably because it was leading to corruption. To wit: That same dealer kept encouraging me to *bet my entire stack*. His logic was probably that if I won big, he'd get a big tip, and if I lost, well, it wasn't *his* money. He kept saying, "Bet it all, put it all out there, man, bet it all!" The one and only time that happened was when the dealers kept their own tips.
Getting back on topic, I remember a case a few years back where a Strip casino was caught rigging a drawing so a favored customer would win. You read books by casino insiders, they're filled with stories of corruption. So it's not a stretch at all to imagine that a player could be cheated, especially in places that are loosely regulated or have a history of corruption.
He found the aces marked in a single deck.
I asked whether another player might have done it, and he said "No, it was the dealer."