Quote:ChiguSorry to revive an old thread here, but I really disagree. The 'short game' is the only way to consistently win (and yes you can consistently win). Let's look at the math, there is more ways to roll a 7 then ANY other number, so when comparing one place bet number vs the 7 that would then be a losing proposition. However if there is a 6/36 chance of rolling a 7, there is a 24/36 chance of rolling either a 4,5,6,8,9 or 10 (6 ways to roll the 1,2,11,12). Therefore you have a 66% chance of hitting those numbers instead of the 7. Also mathematically (and in real life) the 7 will show up on average once every 6 rolls. You can consistently win by taking 2 hits and then turning your bets off (or pulling down).

Also any house edge can be reduced by doing a bit of progressive betting and setting a stop/loss. For example if you place 32 across, you have a 66% chance of hitting a score number instead of the 7 and non-score numbers (1,2,11,12). Take 2 hits and then pull the bet down. If the shooter 7's out on the first throw after the point, it would take almost 5 throws (therefore 2.5 players) to get your money back. What you can do is increase the next bet to $64 across and that way you can get your loss back in less than 3 rolls (and make a bit of profit). You can definitely win consistently if you do the following

1) be disciplined with the 2 hits and out

2) not be afraid to increase bet after not making it to 2 hits

3) Set a stop loss

Yes the sample size is small,

You may win consistently, for awhile, but it will end. The martingale also wins often, until it doesn't and then it REALLY doesn't. I'd recommend keeping data in a spreadsheet. Let us know where you're at after 100, 500 and 1,000 sessions. Could be educational.

I will keep a log of wins and losses and let you know what happens.

Quote:ChiguWow a lot of animosity in this thread. First off there is no way to actually have a mathematical edge in any casino game. There is no arbitrage opportunity. I understand that. I go to the casino to have some fun, make a bit of money is my goal and I only take what I am willing to lose. The biggest enemies of the gambler are usually time and chasing the big win. I am just trying to remove that from my game.

I will keep a log of wins and losses and let you know what happens.

Your second sentence (claim) is provably false.

Quote:FinsRuleNo, the biggest enemy of the gambler is the house edge.

House edge is a given, but I would argue that the biggest enemy is the lack of bankroll of many players based on how much they are betting. I think most recreational gamblers bring far too less of a bankroll based on their average bet to ride through the swings and they bust out before hitting positive variance. Even with the house edge (as long as a player doesn't hit super negative variance from the start, middle, and finish), he or she "should" see some positive variance making them up for a short time. If they chose to stop the session while they are up a small unit is their choice. Most don't stop and continue playing unless a big win happens or if they go broke.

Hi and welcome to the forum. If you have found some fun ways to get value out of your wagering, then don't worry about any apparent animosity.Quote:ChiguWow a lot of animosity in this thread. ...

I will keep a log of wins and losses and let you know what happens.

The maths savvy regulars here don't have much time or support for any concept of beating games with negative expectation. We KNOW that 'systems' and 'strategies' and ideas like stop losses and 'hit and run' have no monetary value. Some would say 'no value' but I'll concede the fun. Same goes with dice influence.

Quote:ChiguJust to keep things on the up and up. THERE IS NO BETTING STRATEGY/SYSTEM to guarantee a win in ANY Casino game. However there are ways to increase your chances of consistently winning.

However, all of the ones I am aware of end up costing you more when you lose than what you earn when you win. That's what we are trying to explain.

Take a "10-step Martingale" on the pass line (e.g. start with a $5 pass bet; if you lose, make it $10; keep doubling when you lose until either you win, in which case you are ahead $5 since your last win (or when you started, if it is your first win), so either start over or walk away since you are ahead, or you lose 10 in a row and are behind $5115, but it is assumed you cannot bet $5120. If you stop after one win, you will have a winning session about 889 times out of every 890 - but those 889 wins combined make you $4445, while the one loss cost you $5115.

Another example, again with the pass line:

If your strategy is to bet 1 each time and stop when you are ahead 2 or behind 10, you will end up ahead about 4 out of every 5 sessions.

One thing is true: the larger your loss stop point to profit stop point is, the more likely you are to end up ahead.

Quote:ThatDonGuyHowever, all of the ones I am aware of end up costing you more when you lose than what you earn when you win. That's what we are trying to explain.

Take a "10-step Martingale" on the pass line (e.g. start with a $5 pass bet; if you lose, make it $10; keep doubling when you lose until either you win, in which case you are ahead $5 since your last win (or when you started, if it is your first win), so either start over or walk away since you are ahead, or you lose 10 in a row and are behind $5115, but it is assumed you cannot bet $5120. If you stop after one win, you will have a winning session about 889 times out of every 890 - but those 889 wins combined make you $4445, while the one loss cost you $5115.

Another example, again with the pass line:

If your strategy is to bet 1 each time and stop when you are ahead 2 or behind 10, you will end up ahead about 4 out of every 5 sessions.

One thing is true: the larger your loss stop point to profit stop point is, the more likely you are to end up ahead.

Yes I agree. Martingale system is crap, one loss can wipe out a bunch of wins and it would take you forever to get that back. Also bankroll has to be huge.

Because I am trying to build up my bankroll. I stop at $50 profit and leave if I hit my stop loss at $100. I will up that eventually. This morning I cashed in with $100 and walked away with $151 ($51 profit). Add that to my last nights win and I have covered my stop loss whenever it does come next.

Quote:ChiguBecause I am trying to build up my bankroll. I stop at $50 profit and leave if I hit my stop loss at $100. I will up that eventually. This morning I cashed in with $100 and walked away with $151 ($51 profit). Add that to my last nights win and I have covered my stop loss whenever it does come next.

But you can't cover two stop losses, even with a win between them. If you play long enough, a string of losses that wipes out your winnings "should" happen. I will admit, this is like saying, if you play VP long enough, you "should" get a Royal Flush; like you said, your sample size is way too small to credit your results to anything more than "good luck up to this point."

Can you describe your system in a little more detail? I assume "32 across" is placing/buying the 6 point numbers, but how are the bets spread out?

That way, I can get a better idea of what the probability is that you will end up ahead after 2 wins before losing your entire $100.

Quote:ThatDonGuyBut you can't cover two stop losses, even with a win between them. If you play long enough, a string of losses that wipes out your winnings "should" happen. I will admit, this is like saying, if you play VP long enough, you "should" get a Royal Flush; like you said, your sample size is way too small to credit your results to anything more than "good luck up to this point."

Can you describe your system in a little more detail? I assume "32 across" is placing/buying the 6 point numbers, but how are the bets spread out?

That way, I can get a better idea of what the probability is that you will end up ahead after 2 wins before losing your entire $100.

See my post above, and factor in $50/100 loss into wincraps.