So that me and my wife can roll dice I have tried to engineer a more competitive version of two player of street craps - but I just wanted to get some expert advice on the chances / if the game is stacked in favour of one side..?

This is how it goes- (basically the same as usual but with a roll each)

One dice each and one roll each to decide who starts.. highest number starts.

On the first roll - if you hit a 7 or 11 you automatically win.

2, 3 or 12 you automatically loose.

If you hit any other number, thats your point

If you hit a 7 on any roll after that / after your first roll you loose.

You take it in turns to roll until someone hits their number to win or 7 to loose.

I get that the deciding roll is a 1/6 chance for both players- so that’s fair..

After that it’s a 17% chance of hitting the 7 on the first roll- but what does that do to the second rollers chances and how could I effect the following rolls. /does taking turns completely mess the whole thing up?

Obviously its preferable to win the 1/6 roll to get the advantage but if you both roll a point on your first roll - is it just the case that whoever rolls first just has a way better chance?

Apologies if this has been covered somewhere else on the forum too - i did have a look but couldn't get the info

Thanks ever so

Luke

London, UK

The dice have no memory, previous rolls have no affect.Quote:JustLuke27how could I effect the following rolls. /does taking turns completely mess the whole thing up?

I don't get your question here.Quote:Obviously its preferable to win the 1/6 roll to get the advantage but if you both roll a point on your first roll - is it just the case that whoever rolls first just has a way better chance?

Just as a PS, it is player advantage to never be the shooter and then accept as much action as possible in Street Craps.

Do you mean you are alternating shooters after every single roll (not decision)? So, let me see if I understand...Quote:JustLuke27You take it in turns to roll until someone hits their number to win or 7 to loose.

I get that the deciding roll is a 1/6 chance for both players- so that’s fair..

After that it’s a 17% chance of hitting the 7 on the first roll- but what does that do to the second rollers chances and how could I effect the following rolls. /does taking turns completely mess the whole thing up?

After determining the first shooter, let's say it is you, you roll and establish 8 as a point. Then, does Mrs. Luke shoot? If she rolls an 8, she wins, a 7 and you win, any other number she passes the dice back to you? Sounds like a fair game to me.

Now, in this scenario, the first shooter definitely has an advantage since he is more likely to win than to lose on the come out roll, and the second player is more likely to lose than win rolling for the point. However, since the shooting order is determined fairly, the overall game has no edge to either participant.

- The most likely outcome of the first roll is a "point" (26/36 outcomes).

- The most common outcome of the next (and subsequent) roll is a "7",

- If the first roller in each round craps out, the second roller wins without rolling.

However, since the first roller is determined randomly, the game is fair (if this is how is works).

Player B must now roll for the point that Player A had just established, and Player A is the bank. If Player B rolls the point he wins, and if he rolls a 7 Player A wins. If he throws any other number, the dice are passed back to Player A and Player B is now the bank. Lather, rinse, repeat until either the point or 7 is rolled.

Is that correct, Luke?

In this case, I maintain that whoever shoots 1st has a decided advantage, but since the shooting order is determined fairly, the overall game is fair.

EDIT: Aw, man, Looks like Aye & I are on different sides of the fence as to which shooter has the advantage. Now someone has to do the math!

2nd EDIT: After a 2nd read, it looks like perhaps Aye & I differ in our understanding of the rules. Hopefully OP will chime in with a bit of clarification.

So the way we have been running it is as AYE thought

(words taken and adapted from JOEMANs post)

Both participants put up an equal wager, and alternate who is the "bank" after each roll of the dice. After shooting order is determined, the Player A rolls his come out roll, and Player B is the bank. If a 7 or 11 is rolled, Player A wins. If 2, 3, or 12 is rolled, Player B wins. If a point is rolled, the dice are passed to Player B.

Player B now rolls as if its a new game - so aiming to hit the 7, 11 to win or a point. or 2…loose….etc

So If they win or loose on that roll - its done and decided -

If they hit a point - its basically a race for the point, taking it in turns

as opposed to

Player B must now roll for the point that Player A had just established, and Player A is the bank. If Player B rolls the point he wins.

Would it make it fairer to play as JOEMAN suggests with both players aiming for the same number…? for example - on the roll to decide who goes first - those numbers are added together to determine the point (assuming its not 2,3,12,7,11) then its taken in turns?

Re: betting - we have been playing small one pound a play / both in for the same amount - (the benefit of this is those pound coins don’t blow away in the wind haha)

Thanks again for everyones help !

Although, it might be an interesting math exercise to determine which player has the advantage once the order is determined.

Quote:JoemanThanks, Luke. I understand it now. It is a fair game either way you play it by virtue of the fact that the shooting order is determined in a fair way.

Although, it might be an interesting math exercise to determine which player has the advantage once the order is determined.

P1 first roll | P2 first roll | P1 win | P2 win |
---|---|---|---|

7,11 | 2/9 | ||

Craps | 1/9 | ||

Point | 7,11 | 4/27 | |

Point | Craps | 2/27 | |

4,10 | 4,10 | 1/36 x 10/21 | 1/36 x 11/21 |

4,10 | 5,9 | 1/27 x 5/11 | 1/27 x 6/11 |

4,10 | 6,8 | 5/108 x 10/23 | 5/108 x 13/23 |

5,9 | 4,10 | 1/27 x 50/99 | 1/27 x 49/99 |

5,9 | 5,9 | 4/81 x 15/31 | 4/81 x 16/31 |

5,9 | 6,8 | 5/81 x 150/323 | 5/81 x 173/323 |

6,8 | 4,10 | 5/108 x 110/207 | 5/108 x 97/207 |

6,8 | 5,9 | 5/81 x 165/323 | 5/81 x 158/323 |

6,8 | 6,8 | 25/324 x 30/61 | 25/324 x 31/61 |

The first player has a 51.183729% chance of winning.

Quote:odiousgambitall the previous is fine [edit: though I don't get what it is that you changed]

well this was just the 2nd or 3rd post of the thread & i have not read further so my apologies if this has already been pointed out or discussed but one thing said that is changed or different is this:

"You take it in turns to roll until someone hits their number to win or 7 to loose."

in most street (and all casino) craps games if you hit your number, you keep the dice.

Quote:odiousgambitJust as a PS, it is player advantage to never be the shooter and then accept as much action as possible in Street Craps.

correctimundo! -- especially the case in some games:

as a callow yout', the local fire dept would twice a year or so put on (illegal) "stag nights" (later "mixers" when females were finally allowed...lol) in which, among other risky entertainments, there was a very vibrant craps table--indeed sometimes HUGE sums changed hands...back in the '50s - 80s $10k was real money, even for the well-off farmers & grain brokers in the area...it was not uncommon--or so the word was as well as my own witness--someone would walk away with such sums or even more.

the game was the traditional "fade 'em" but unlike casinos, which, sure, may have an advantage but can lose, the fd was at no risk...the "house" would win on a come-out 3! that's right, 3...and drag whatever amount the shooter had out there that had been faded (it was a push for the faders).

needless to say the vast majority of the sums changing hands was therefore in decidedly energetic side-bets...indeed in the later years after i myself had finally learned the math of the game (one of perhaps 5 - 10% who had...lol), virtually all of my own bets were either at an advantage or even...it was so bleeping much fun i could hardly stand it.

the end came with the advent of the native american joints as part of the pact was the authorities could no longer turn their backs on these extralegal parties (just to give you an idea of the level the authorities looked the other way--hell, many participated!--i was in attendance twice while the vice-president of the united states, a local resident, was there [although i cannot say that i actually saw him gamble but like most locals of this tiny town, he knew everybody])...my county and 2 or 3 of the surrounding ones were hotbeds for these exciting nights.

it was a sad day for me when i asked a fireman friend when the next mixer was and he gave me the word.

tom p