playing tough, what are your lifetime chances?

-----------------------------------------------------

Preface: betting on one million rolls in live, casino craps over the course of a lifetime is far from impossible...i have done it myself over more than 42 years at the rail and have good reason to think that many others have as well...i know <sic> this to be true based upon scrupulously accurate and conservative records that i have kept...i do not give a rat's ass whether you believe that or not but it is true...i bring it up only to indicate that the questions/request in this post are not just rhetorical

-----------------------------------------------------

a highly respected and very competent math guy on the old rgc group --- dang! i wish i could remember his handle --- once posted that 12% -- twelve percent! -- of pass line bettors taking double odds are expected to be AHEAD after one million rolls!.

i certainly know that it is possible....i am personally still ahead at "non-local" places $600 since 2001, when i first started accurate tracking...further my first million (1,000,051) wincraps rolls---rolled out one-at-a-time, btw, with great fun---showed a positive result of +$21,181....and, believe me, this play entailed much more action than one pass line bet, most usually trying to, or more accurately limiting myself to 3 additional come bets/odds....so, yes, i have come to find out that probability mathematics virtually guarantees that someone betting on a million rolls will be ahead IF betting tough enough...

but 12% seemed awfully high to me...a million rolls is a lot to still be ahead...much later in private messages with goatcabin, who many of you know and, as i do, likely lament his lengthy absence, i consulted with him on this subject...we both agreed that 12% seemed surprisingly high...while goatcabin is himself no slouch at probability mathematics, his main bag is (was? where are you, goatcabin?) wincraps simulations...present him with a craps scenario and he would go to wincraps & bring back the results for you...with 10,000 trials i believe it was his efforts showed the percentage was closer to 9%...still pretty damn high we thought...

now i didn't ask him to but he did it and what might be of great interest to some of you is the fact that he ran the same simulation using only the hard 8 and his sims showed 0% -- ZERO out of 10,000 -- were ahead after one million rolls...IIRC something like 3% were ahead placing the 6 or 8...imo you really do need to play tough to be a lifetime winner (having said that, "lifetime winner" is not the only measure....in the real world the "utility of money" or one's goals at any given, individual session trumps that...to hell with my "it's all one big session...and then you die" aphorism...lol)...

so here's my question: is it possible to dope out these expected percentages using probability mathematics? if so, would someone take a stab at it and share the results? if in fact it is simulations that is needed, then i will just go with what goatcabin has already generously provided...and we're good...

thanks for any help,
tom p

betwthelines


I don't think it is possible to be ahead for 1 million rolls using only a pass line bet with double odds. Nope.
And 12% ahead is completely unreasonable.

Lets just say the HA on the pass line is 1.41% (.42% per roll) times 1 million rolls..... with a $25 flat with double odds.. that is
.3150 loss per shot for 1 million shots.... Total bet is $75,000,000 and loss roughly speaking is over 300,000.
There is no other way to calculate this. The HA is a constant, and you know the number of rolls which is
then also a constant. the only variable is the size of the bet., which will determine your expected loss.

dicesetter

Quote: betwthelines

a highly respected and very competent math guy on the old rgc group --- dang! i wish i could remember his handle --- once posted that 12% -- twelve percent! -- of pass line bettors taking double odds are expected to be AHEAD after one million rolls!.

Is it "Tom 'homeruns are often boring' P"?

You can access rec.gambling.craps through Google Groups. Also keep in mind that rec.gambling was once just one newsgroup that covered all aspects of gambling.

As for 12% of double odds players being ahead after one million rolls, I ran a simulation, and got a result of being ahead about once in every 300 tries.

I assume 1/300 is more like it, but even if 12% is right, that's 88% on the other end

it's like Dirty Harry holding a gun to your head

Quote: dicesitter

betwthelines


I don't think it is possible to be ahead for 1 million rolls using only a pass line bet with double odds. Nope.
And 12% ahead is completely unreasonable.

Lets just say the HA on the pass line is 1.41% (.42% per roll) times 1 million rolls..... with a $25 flat with double odds.. that is
.3150 loss per shot for 1 million shots.... Total bet is $75,000,000 and loss roughly speaking is over 300,000.
There is no other way to calculate this. The HA is a constant, and you know the number of rolls which is
then also a constant. the only variable is the size of the bet., which will determine your expected loss.

dicesetter

you are wrong, dice.

you are talking about expected loss. but there is this pesky little thing called "variance" that you are failing to consider...also the dollar amounts are irrelevant although for a "trial" it would, i suppose, be best--or at least easiest-- if they remained constant..

IFYOU PLAY TOUGH ENOUGH probability mathematics virtually guarantees that there will be winners after a million rolls...yes, you have expected loss but then there is "luck" involved too

goatcabin ran 10,000 trials of a million rolls each on wincraps with 1 pass and double odds and close to 9% were AHEAD after one million rolls (ergo 91% were losers)...he did the same using only place bets on the 6 & 8 and something like 3% were ahead (i can't remember exactly but, for sure, some were ahead using these "relatively" low HE bets)...he ran the same 10,000 trials using only the hard 8 (or 6, i can't remember) and 0% ZERO were ahead after a million rolls...so, yes, you DO have to play tough enough to be ahead after a mil...

i myself with my first wincraps experience, rolled out one-atta-time by sheer luck, coincidence or happenstance came out ahead after 1,000,051 rolls by + $21,181...but in this case there were many more bets than just one pass with odds & the bets (odds) ranged from $5 to $2,500 (yes, the Tough Craps player employs a relentless progression strategy!)...also the odds "averaged" a bit more than 2x...but <sigh>as would be expected 700,862 into my second million the results are not so sanguine! lol...also keeping conservative (ie carefully not "in my favor") and accurate track of my own "non-local", live casino play since 2001 i am still ahead after an estimated 90,000 rolls (also a conservative estimate extrapolated from "local" tracking where time-at-the-table has been accurately tracked)

no, the question in my mind is not whether some will be ahead after a million rolls---with low enough HE betting that is a certainty---but whether a precise EXPECTED percentage of those ahead can be arrived at mathematically or if, in fact, statistical analysis is the only means to arrive atta number and therefore requires actual dice trials, realistically meaning simulations...

yes, the 12% figure did seem too high to both goatcabin and me...this number was put forth by "steve", a really good math guy on the old rgc site and i at least assumed that he had arrived at it mathematically but perhaps not...in any case his throwing it out prompted the discussion that i am now resurrecting...i would opine however that at 10x odds the figure very well might approach 12%

tom p

You still playing the "tough craps" method, and if so, have you had a really big win with it yet?

Quote: ThatDonGuy

Is it "Tom 'homeruns are often boring' P"?

yep! donguy, one an' the same!...i dropped the epithet forra while, but then resurrected it when i was being confused with another guy onna nother forum, but have since dropped it again...

its meaning, from what we now know as the "steroid era" but didn't know it at the time, is now lost on most anyway...with the absurd number of what turned out to be cheap home runs even knowledgeable sports scribes, who should have known better, were hailing mcgwire, sosa, bonds et al as the "saviors of baseball" when in fact mankind's closest brush with perfection: 90ft between bases was being dimished...anyway as things settled down and the fraud revealed the sobriquet changed from flat-out "homeruns are boring" to adding the "often" you cited and eventually attenuated to "sometimes" to now being dropped completely...as it turned out my mocking of the ridiculous & obscene number of homers was prescient and spot-on.

Quote: ThatDonGuy

You can access rec.gambling.craps through Google Groups...

yep. thanks. i have tried that with some but really little success at finding what i might be looking for...though there are a couple-a guys on another site that are pretty good at it...maybe i will give it another try or ask the skulker to see if he can find the discussion in question here...

Quote: ThatDonGuy

As for 12% of double odds players being ahead after one million rolls, I ran a simulation, and got a result of being ahead about once in every 300 tries.

yes, prior to steve throwing out his 12%, 1% might-a been closer to my own raw guess and .33% plausible too BUT goatcabin ran 10,000 trials and i myself was ahead after ONE trial & have the records to prove it..

keep in mind that i am going from memory here...i think the gist of what i am saying is accurate but i may be off on the details...if goatcabin ever returns, he can probably set us all straight or, if as i said above we can locate the old rgc thread(s)....

tom p

Quote: MrV

You still playing the "tough craps" method, and if so, have you had a really big win with it yet?

hello, mrv...
biggest win is $13.8k...had one of over $9k, at least 3 over $7k and a handful over $5k...
these are all with a starting stake (i like that term better than "bankroll", which can be ambiguous) of $500...
none of these wins fully satisfy the Tough Craps player's objective of winning HUGE

overall results are very bad---in fact still too embarrassed/ashamed to divulge my "local" results after 8,388 hours of play...however in "non local" results, tracked since 2001, i am still ahead + $600 in approximately 750 hours of play & roughly 90,000 rolls (conservative extrapolations from the local records where time-at-the-table, as manifested above, has been tracked)

there is now only one known Tough Craps player in the world that plays tough exclusively...used to be 2 but the other is likely deceased--he was quite elderly when i met him over 10 years ago--but in any case is no longer "known"...in over 15 years of making this claim on public craps forums, it has yet to be disputed...

see my other recent posts above for more results respecting wincraps...

tom p

What follows is a cut and paste of a post tom p did on another board some time ago; I previously mentioned it, and provide a link to it, and am putting it up verbatim because it is just so damne interesting.

Well done, tom, well done!

"i say next time try tough craps.

with $2,000 you have 2 bankrolls. put $1000 in your room safe. unless
you play more than 25-30 hours, you "probably" wont need to touch the
2nd g playing tough. (my bust rate is 10-11% with approx that many
rolls average).

the tough craps object is to win large, $50 grand or more. there
really is no win limit. an important secondary objective is to
conserve bankroll, to stretch your $thousand to last for all the time
you care to play. a third goal, often sacrificed on the altar of the
second, is to get plenty of action.

initially (try to) come out on 4 numbers: the pass line & 3 come bets.
the line bet should ALWAYS be the minimum required to get your odds
bet. TOUGH CRAPS IS CONCERNED ONLY WITH THE NUMBERS, the free odds
bet. the line bet is ignored for any strategic purpose & is
restored/dragged to its original amount whenever craps/naturals are
rolled.

YOU ALWAYS, WITHOUT EXCEPTION (ok 2 exceptions),EVERY F*****G TIME
PROGRESS YOUR (ODDS) BET ON A WIN!! (the first exception-"the tough
craps fantasy"-is not really an exception because it is INVOLUNTARY:
you have reached the table limit of every house in town and no one
will book your bet [benny binion being dead, this could now possibly
even happen in vegas]. the other exception is 'semi-voluntary': you
just flat run out of time & have to catch a flight or etc)

any previous attempt to explain tough craps has resulted in logorrhea
so i will try to be brief. i do have an e-mailing list where from time
to time i demonstrate how tough craps is bet by showing real,
contemporaneous rolls (a tough craps bet file or preprogram is
problematical if not impossible) and how the tough craps player would
actually bet with a $1,000 bankroll and a set time limit. if you would
like to be on that list, drop me an email or etc. i believe i have
mailed out 8 or 9 examples of "trips" ranging from about 1000 to 7or
8000 rolls or so...

your initial bet(from now on when we say "bet" we mean the odds bet)
is $10. the tough craps bet progression is $10 -> 30 -> 30 -> 50 ->
75/80 -> 100 -> 150 -> 250 -> 400 -> 500 -> 750 -> 1000 -> 1500 ->
2500 -> 4000 -> 5000 & so on.

when playing tough, what to bet ON is NEVER <sic> in question: pass or
come with maximum affordable odds; HOW MUCH to bet depends upon the
answers to 2 questions: did i win the last bet? (see answer above) and
'what is the status of my bankroll?'

when losing, which is most of the time, the tough craps bet amount is
fairly cut-and-dried: when you are $1 to $99 behind (-$1 to -$99)-in
other words usually after the first hand! - your bet is CUT IN HALF
immediately: $5 -> 15/16 -> 15/16 -> 25/26 -> 40 -> 50 -> 75/76 -> 100
-> 150 & so on as above. you are still (trying to) come out on 4
numbers. when you are -$100 to -$299 your bet is the same but you
(try to) come out on only 3 points. when -$300 to -$499 try to
come out on 2 points. and at -$500 to -$1000 bet pass line only
(additionally if in vegas or elsewhere & you reach -$850->-$900 or so
& it is still early in your trip you might try to find a quarter of 50
cent table and further reduce your bet amount in an effort to
conserve bankroll even more. do not despair! at this point you could
still win $10,000, $15,000 or more-there is no win limit in tough
craps).

the tough craps "bankroll" is JUST THAT: the amount you would PUT OUT
THERE, the amount you can afford to lose. if you cannot afford to lose
it, you are not playing tough, you are playing stupid. when you lose
your limit you walk.
get out of town...

...unless you are our fortunate friend QuiGon: then you go to your
room safe, grab your thou and START OVER: that's right! your next bet
is $10 and you (try to) come out on 4 points...


ironically it is when you are winning that the tough craps bet amount
becomes, well, "problematical" is not the right word , but it becomes
more serendipitous, more context dependent,more thoughtful, more
idiosyncratic, less cut and dried. it is certainly more pleasant. the
bet progression RULE--every time, no exceptions--applies to the "hand"
as well. that is, if your bankroll is larger at the end of a hand than
at the beginning, then you MUST progress your bet per the tough craps
bet progression chart (see below). the object is to win huge!

if you get (ONLY)$100 ahead, your bet DOUBLES: $20 -> 60 -> 60 -> 100
->150 then so on as above.

get only $300 ahead and the tough craps bet goes to the extremely
agressive $30 -> 100 -> 100 -> 150 -> 250 and so on. one hand can
easily put you back down to the $10 bet level...you immediately
retreat...or...

get $1000 ahead. you have now doubled your bankroll. this is a
traditional & imho a very rational MINIMUM win goal. if you can afford
to lose x amount , where x is your bankroll that you are really,
really willing to put out there, then, really have you changed your
life much, had all that much fun by winning LESS than that?? well, i
know. maybe. sure. yes. that's fine. near the end of the trip you
would want to conserve & perhaps drag back for less; you've come too
far to walk away a loser now etc. but still...

if your hand ends and you are +$1000, your next bet is $50 -> 150 ->
150 -> 250 -> 400 & so on as above. Get (only) +$1500 and your
bet goes to $100 -> 300 -> 300 -> 500 -> 750 -> 1000 -> 1500 etc.
At +$2500 go to $150 -> 500 -> 500 -> 750 etc. Get $6000 up: $250
-> 750 -> 750 -> 1250 -> 2000 -> 2500 -> 4000 etc.

THE TOUGH CRAPS BET PROGRESSION CHART goes up to +$1,181,000
(hyperbole anyone?) and is available upon request.

if you just continued progressing,or even just slavishly followed the
chart you would always lose, of course. so at some point-again usually
not until winnings equal at least the initial bankroll-you need to
"drag" winnings. this is the tough craps equivalent of "quitting while
you are ahead".

or course you dont really quit until the trip is over. you dont really
quit until you die.

this can be a sophisticated and nuanced process so we cant go into too
much detail but one example: say at the end of any hand you have not
yet reached your win goal of $1000(you might have been there in the
"middle" of a hand but that is irrelevent) but now you end a winning
hand at, let's say, +$1217. your next bet MUST BE $50-150 etc per the
tough craps bet progression. but say you lose that hand now and end at
$1066. NOW you have choices. you can drag and "pretend" 1000 = zero,
say. you're thus at +$66 and bet 10-30 etc. maybe you reach $1100
again so you go to $20-60 etc. more likely you drop below $1000 and
your bet is $5-15 just as if you are really losing; drop below $900 &
now you're out on only 3 etc.

IOW just like our pal QuiGon STARTING OVER after losing $1000, on the
winning side we might START OVER also. thus is tough craps "organized"
around $1000 increments. it is a very dynamic decision making process
very much influenced by how much time you have left and playing time
available. if i had a half hour a day to play i would adapt to that
and still play tough AT ALL TIMES.


tom "home runs are often boring p "

well like said


I don't think you can win with only the pass line bet and double
odds for a million rolls. I agree that there I variance, but not over
1 million rolls.

dicesetter

How many trips to a casino would it take to reach a million rolls?
At some point, don't you have to factor in expenses?

Quote: dicesitter

well like said


I don't think you can win with only the pass line bet and double
odds for a million rolls. I agree that there I variance, but not over
1 million rolls.

dicesetter

well, again, you are plain and simply WRONG!

simulations have proven it...goatcabin ran 10,000 million roll trials and about 5% were ahead (this is from memory...i wish goatcabin was still around to straighten me out...after thinking on it i do believe the 5% is closer to it than my earlier posts saying 9%)

i myself rolled out a million playing Tough Craps...the odds averaged a little more than 2x and there were many more bets than just the pass but in ONE trial i was over $21k ahead...

you are just WRONG, dice

tom p

Quote: betwthelines

well, again, you are plain and simply WRONG!

you are just WRONG, dice

Not the first time either!

Quote: billryan

How many trips to a casino would it take to reach a million rolls?
At some point, don't you have to factor in expenses?

No, billryan.

we are not talking about making a PROFIT here...no one is making a living playing craps...factor in expenses and likely EVERYONE is behind...we are talking about wins and losses at the craps table...it is ENTERTAINMENT.

i don't know how many "trips" it takes to reach a million rolls but i have been accurately tracking results since 2001, including time at the table with the "local joint" statistics that go back to nov 2003...non local play had been tracked separately



since nov 2003 at the local joint --i really should be ashamed and embarrassed to admit this and in fact i am a bit-- i have been at the rail for 8,388 hours...i have reason to believe that my number of rolls per hour is much greater than the commonly cited "average" of 120 rolls per hour (eg a lot of the play was in the wee hours alone or maybe with 1 or 2 others playing), but even at 120 rolls per hour THIS LOCAL PLAY ALONE ADDS UP TO MORE THAN A MILLION ROLLS...

extrapolating from the local stats the 109 non-local trips since 2001 adds another approximately 750 to 800 hours or maybe 90,000 rolls...

but this is just since i starting keeping track!! i have been playing bank craps since 1974...of course in the earlier years when the only game was in nevada play was much less frequent than it has been the last 15 years.

There Is No Doubt I Have Bet On Substantially More Than One Million Live, Casino Bank Craps Rolls...

tom p

Quote: dicesitter

I agree that there is variance, but not over 1 million rolls.

Said one Die to the Other: We are getting close to one million, better start smoothing things out to the exact mean, after all the young lady's arm is probably getting as tired as we are.

Quote: betwthelines

simulations have proven it...goatcabin ran 10,000 million roll trials and about 5% were ahead (this is from memory...

5% (1 in 20) is for 375,000 dice rolls, not 1 million

I ran 100,000 million roll trials to verify this (C below stuff)

but the math is so simple for pass/2x odds (any odds actually)
ev/sd and using normsdist() in Excel

Quote: betwthelines

i wish goatcabin was still around to straighten me out...

he is around but last look
is a singer and musician (plays a little mandolin)
not a chiropractor (I could be wrong on that one only)

Quote: betwthelines

after thinking on it i do believe the 5% is closer to it than my earlier posts saying 9%)

for 1 million rolls the ev/sd = -2.693166856
normsdist = 0.003538842 or
1 in 282.58

Simulation of Craps Pass Line Wagers
Odds Multiplier . . . . = 2
Max. No. rolls to quit = 1000000
No. Sessions simulated = 100000
------------------------------------
Simulation Results per Session
------------------------------------
Avg. No. games played . = 296229.64
Avg. No. games won . . = 146020.59
Avg. No. games lost . . = 150209.05
Avg. No. dice rolls . . = 1000002.53
Avg. Total amount bet . = 296229.64
Avg. amount bet on Odds = 394971.95
Bankroll decreased . . = 99.644% of the time
Bankroll increased . . = 0.356% of the time <<<<< C - check IT out

go Hillary! (where?)
Oh, stop spending so much $$$$ on your hair/color
you looked so much better as a Bru in the younger days

Sally

Angles OVER +

Quote: betwthelines

a highly respected and very competent math guy on the old rgc group --- dang! i wish i could remember his handle --- once posted that 12% -- twelve percent! -- of pass line bettors taking double odds are expected to be AHEAD after one million rolls!.

sorry, that is absolutely not correct.
not even close

in other words... wrong!

here is my Excel in Google Docs
https://goo.gl/Ro7jwc

it shows what I posted B4
1 in 282 abouts of
NOT showing a net loss over 1M rolls. that means one could be even, hahahah
not even (odd) on the odds part (hahaha-hehe2)

here is a photo for those that want it (sure)


yep yep
the odds do wonders for winning over many many bets resolved
yep (even at shoot-to-win Craps)

knowing the ev and sd for any # of bets is what is required. most do not care
1M/ (557/165) = avg # of pass line bets made.

I also used units in the spreadsheet to confuse everyone
as I still am Queen.

Quote: betwthelines

so here's my question: is it possible to dope out these expected percentages using probability mathematics?

yes

Quote: betwthelines

if so, would someone take a stab at it and share the results?

sure have.
now(s)
the math 4 pass and multiple come bets is way more challenging. never been done correctly actually!
so one may resort to simulations at a Resort 2
for fun of course

Sally

Quote: dicesitter

I don't think it is possible to be ahead for 1 million rolls using only a pass line bet with double odds. Nope.

you think not right.
but U R over 50 so it is no crime, U spend NO time in jail except for your life.

Quote: dicesitter

And 12% ahead is completely unreasonable.

completely

Quote: dicesitter

Lets just say the HA on the pass line is 1.41% (.42% per roll) times 1 million rolls..... with a $25 flat with double odds.. that is
.3150 loss per shot for 1 million shots.... Total bet is $75,000,000 and loss roughly speaking is over 300,000.

hahaha
good one
U R aftur the laughs as Ur results are far far from the truth.
ev=1M*$25*.0042 or abouts $105,000

so Ur super 300,000 is not in the same universe.
total bet including the odds = 17,280,071.81
trials aboutts 296,230 of them
avg bet $58.33

ask the Craps God
She knows

Quote: dicesitter

There is no other way to calculate this.

yes there is.
any correct way would work just swell.

U used a wrong way to end up up wrong and lost, imo
Sally

Piling on today are we?

Sally


I don't care how you do it...... you cant project a winning
record with a pass line bet and double odds over 1
million rolls.

dicesetter.

Quote: dicesitter

I don't care how you do it...... you cant project a winning
record with a pass line bet and double odds over 1
million rolls.

Hey Two Dice; She just posted a picture. Deal with it!

for a flat $1 pass bet (no odds) over 1,000,000 rolls:

one standard deviation for one decision = .999900
number of decisions for 1,000,000 rolls = ~296,230 (1,000,000 rolls divided by (1671/495 rolls per decision))
therefore one standard deviation for 296,230 decisions = .999900 * sqrt(296,230) * (average bet of $1) = ~$545
ev for the flat $1 bet over 1,000,000 rolls = -7 / 495 * number of decisions = -.01414141 * 296,230 = a mean (average) loss of ~4,189 dollars
starting with a bankroll of $296,230 and rolling the dice 1,000,000 times

so after 1,000,000 rolls for a $1 flat pass bet (no odds) = The probability of a positive outcome is 0.000000000000007772

on the other hand, for a flat $1 pass bet and fixed 2X odds over 1,000,000 rolls:

one standard deviation for one decision = 2.857880
number of decisions for 1,000,000 rolls = ~296,230 (1,000,000 rolls divided by (1671/495 rolls per decision))
therefore one standard deviation for 296,230 decisions = 2.857880 * sqrt(296,230) * (average bet of $2.333333) = ~$3634
ev for the flat $1 bet over 1,000,000 rolls = -7 / 495 * number of decisions = -.01414141 * 296,230 = a mean (average) loss of ~4,189 dollars
(note that since the odds portion of the average bet has no house advantage, only the flat bet contributes statistically to the average loss over all rolls)
starting with a bankroll of $691,204 (296,230 * 2.3333333) and rolling the dice 1,000,000 times

so after 1,000,000 rolls for a $1 flat pass bet (taking simple 2X odds) = The probability of a positive outcome is 0.1244

so the original statistical analysis was right... by risking about $700,000 dollars you end up with an ~12% chance of being ahead after 1,000,000 rolls!

(of course, you might only be a dollar ahead, but hey...)

Quote: mustangsally

Quote: betwthelines

a highly respected and very competent math guy on the old rgc group --- dang! i wish i could remember his handle --- once posted that 12% -- twelve percent! -- of pass line bettors taking double odds are expected to be AHEAD after one million rolls!.

sorry, that is absolutely not correct.
not even close

in other words... wrong!

exactly. we all agreed that 12% was way too high & the reason goatcabin ran his simulations in the first place...read the rest of my posts on that issue

Quote: mustangsally

here is my Excel in Google Docs
https://goo.gl/Ro7jwc

thank you!
translation please in english: WHAT PERCENTAGE are ahead after a million rolls with one pass line bet and double odds? also it is still unclear to me whether or not such a percentage can be precisely ascertained using probability mathematics or if in fact simulations (with thus varying results) are required...please pardon my ignorance regarding your chart and the actual math...

once again 10,000 trials indicated about 5%...my own personal wingcraps trial of one, rolled out one-atta-time and which was much more volatile than one double odds pass line bet, usually up to 4 pass/comes with odds that "averaged" perhaps 3x - 4x odds (a guess tho not a particularly wild one) revealed100% ahead after 1,000,0051 rolls + $21,181 AHEAD

this is not a trick question...what does the math say as to the PERCENTAGE of tough players with the pass/double odds parameter given will be ahead after a million rolls?...this is now a question, however, of simple curiosity since the simulation information that i have is quite satisfactory

and i will repeat this is NOT PURELY an academic question: i have personally been at the craps rail betting on well over a million rolls....further NO ONE COULD EVER CONVINCE ME THAT YOU CANNOT BE AHEAD AFTER A MIL..one must, however, play tough enough...10,000 sims of the hard 8 only revealed ZERO percent ahead after a mil...

tom p

Quote: dicesitter

Sally


I don't care how you do it...... you cant project a winning
record with a pass line bet and double odds over 1
million rolls.

dicesetter.

well, dice, like i just said in my post above, i still have that same question---can it be "projected" mathematically or in fact is it statistical analysis (ie as a practical matter simulations) ONLY where we can arrive at an answer...put another way is it in the realm of probability mathematics or is it in the realm of statistics or both where we need to be?...

now some on here have indicated that sally has in fact DONE IT mathematically...it is simply ALL ON ME AND MY IGNORANCE of being able to read it correctly in answer to my straightforward, non-trick question: what PERCENTAGE are expected (math) to be ahead and/or will be ahead (statistics) after a million rolls with one pass and double odds bets....

sally, you've dpne the work: can you shoot me a bleepin, bleepin' PERCENTAGE or not? it requires a one word or one number answer...i very much appreciate your time and effort...

tom p

IMHO, there's not a chance for the player...unless he catches REALLY good hands ( 30 minutes +) on an impossible regularity, thus managing to occasionally book HUGE wins it's impossible to maintain an advantage over the house's %. Of course there are those who claim that with their DI talent, the poor old House hasn't a snowball's chance in Hell...my experience says these types of players are deluded...

Quote: rudeboy99

IMHO, there's not a chance for the player...unless he catches REALLY good hands ( 30 minutes +) on an impossible regularity, thus managing to occasionally book HUGE wins it's impossible to maintain an advantage over the house

You are of course talking positive progressions, otherwise really good hands mean nothing. But that is not being talked about here, just boring flat bets, with odds, right?

Then I think somebody on this thread has fucked up his math OR had a run of luck that was exactly inverse to a 100 year storm.

Quote: rudeboy99

Then I think somebody on this thread has fucked up his math OR had a run of luck that was exactly inverse to a 100 year storm.

and you would be wrong, plain and simple...play tough enough and some --very very few--- MUST win...the math says so...the sims have ratified it...

i have one million roll wincraps trial (no DI lol) ONE and in that one trial 100% are ahead (over $21k) playing tough craps

read my lips: you cannot EXPECT to win but the idea that you CANNOT win, even after a million rolls is WRONG, plain and simple...but, true, one must play tough enough (10k trials of a mil using the hard 8 only revealed ZERO percent ahead)

and ------further--------to another of the points made here it matters not one whit whether (tough enough) bets are progressed, flat, regressed,varied, whatever; with a million rolls that all comes out in the wash...the one trial referred to was Tough Craps with considerably more bets than simply one pass line with double odds, thus much more volatile, and therefore making it even more amazing to your skeptical mind, i suppose (otoh odds "averaged" of a bit better than 2x, so the HA was in fact slightly less than simple double odds)...the play was the TC player's RELENTLESS <sic>progression of both the bets and the bankroll so, yes, over the course of a million rolls, there were the expected monsters mixed in with mostly the sometimes days on end of LOSING virtually every f**king hand...

disbelief in the math is as delusional as DI...NO CASINO GAME IS AS COUNTERINTUITIVE AS BANK CRAPS...you are simply wrong in this, rude...but aren't we all sometimes

no worries

tom p

"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away"...How To Build A Universe That Doesn't Fall Apart Two Days Later ...philip k. dick, 1978

You misunderstood my point...or else my meaning was unclear...You can profit with good "hands" , no doubt about it. As far as disbelieving the math, you couldn't be more off base. I believe that the probability factors are the engine that make the game possible. When I'm dealing with beginning players, I advise them to get to know what the %'s are for and against every roll. And while it's fairly easy to book a winner in a short run, it gets exponentially more difficult the longer you stay in the game. By the way, how much are you talking, timewize to run this million roll simulation?

Quote: rudeboy99

You misunderstood my point...or else my meaning was unclear...You can profit with good "hands" , no doubt about it. As far as disbelieving the math, you couldn't be more off base. I believe that the probability factors are the engine that make the game possible. When I'm dealing with beginning players, I advise them to get to know what the %'s are for and against every roll. And while it's fairly easy to book a winner in a short run, it gets exponentially more difficult the longer you stay in the game. By the way, how much are you talking, timewize to run this million roll simulation?

the simulations began in 1974 or about 42 years ago.

the first approximately 90,000 or so were rolled out, using casino dice (some from the 4 queens, some from the union plaza iirc) into a felt-lined box (a few subsequent ones too were so rolled when my computer was out of commission! lol)...great care was consciously taken to insure randomness, usually by shaking them up vigorously...with the advent of PCs and wingcraps the play migrated to there with of course the geometrically speed-ed up results--2500 rolls or even more per hour are not uncommon...

live casino play, which also began in 1974, was idiotically not tracked--i still kick myself for not doing so--until 2001 when bank craps had become a little more widespread nationally...nevada had been just a 1 to 5 (& that but once) times/year experience...a little over 2 years later in november 2003 a bank craps table opened up in turtle lake sisconsin, 1 hour 2 minutes and 42 seconds away by car...it is then in november 2003 that play became shamefully and embarrassingly obsessive...things have been tempered a bit with the fixed-income welt of retirement (hell jun 21-2 months ago-was my last play there) but the early and mid-years were craps-hectic indeed...

for some reason i decided to track this "local joint" play separately from the 2+ years of stats i already had from play elsewhere...it also occurred to me to track "time at the table" in the local stats...this figure has now reached 8,388 hours of play (yes, virginia, it IS embarrassing and shameful)...at the commonly cited "average" of 120 rolls/hour this play ALONE adds up to more than a million rolls...further i have real good reason to think that the average is a bit higher than 120 rolls/hour with a good percentage of the play in the wee hours with me the only player and with a crew so familiar with my play that the dice are swept up and delivered in a circle so uninterrupted that 400 to 500 rolls/hour is not really an exaggeration...

extrapolating from these time at the table stats, "non local" play probably adds another 90,000 or so rolls...and keep in mind this is just since 2001...i have been playing bank craps since 1974...so, YES, i have bet upon more than a million, live, casino, bank craps rolls...my "million roll" schtick here, while largely so i will admit, is not PURELY academic...

rude, you might be interested to know too that for my "non-local" stats i am still ahead after 13 years and approximately 90,000 rolls by, yes, a tiny +$600 but ahead nonetheless...i admit too that it is quite disingenuous to bring that up since i am so far behind at the local joint that i continue to be too ashamed and embarrassed to cop to the loss amount publicly!

good luck to all,

tom p