Winning is my drug
So if you do achieve winning 8-10 sessions, then you should be confident enough to do this over and over as a winning strategy regardless of the 5-1 payout side bet that you are going to receive or not receive (which I sated will be my 1000 to your 200). Is this sample size too small for anyone to acknowledge that soopoo will be a winner? Does it need to be 80 out of 100 or 800 out of 1000? I dont think so, that is why I kept it at 8 out of 10, plus the fact that I dont have time to do this at a large scale. I admit that my 5-1 prop was probably a bit high, but I needed to start somewhere and the person trying to achieve the goal of winning 26.5% 8-10 sessions is definitely an underdog as most people cant do it 3 -10 . But I will honor my own odds at the 5-1 with my side bet with Soopoo if it ever comes to happen... my 1000 to his 200. Whatever else he wins or loses in his play is all him.
Lets not over analyze the math here.. remember what i said before about the meteorologist! He was so frikin brilliant at determining when it would rain, where it would rain, and how much it would rain... but when the rain came down, he didn't have enough common sense to open his damn umbrella.
OnceDear, if you are ever in the states, please let me know. I would love to play some craps with you! Where are you located? I played in MonteCarlo several times while traveling Europe.
Quote: IbeatyouracesThe trick is, if you start off losing $950 but win $265 after that, you consider that a win. No wonder these guys are consistently welcomed into casinos.
Silly rabbit, trix are for kids! You are not reading the posts correctly, if at all. If he is down 950 (for example) he would actually have to win back the 950 he was down plus another 265 (total 1315) to meet his session goal of coloring up 1265 from 1000 buy in.
Quote: WatchMeWinSilly rabbit, trix are for kids! You are not reading the posts correctly, if at all. If he is down 950 (for example) he would actually have to win back the 950 he was down plus another 265 (total 1315) to meet his session goal of coloring up 1265 from 1000 buy in.
Typo... total of 1215 not 1315
Quote: WatchMeWinSo if you do achieve winning 8-10 sessions, then you should be confident enough to do this over and over as a winning strategy
When are you going to accept.
Being able to win 8 sessons out of 10 is NOT indicative of a Bl006y winning strategy unless some unwise person is daft enough to offer you a juicy 5:1 side bet.
WMW. Go back to the casino. Try to hit and run again today. and tomorrow and the day after. Then come back and report how unwise you have been . Maybe not this week. Scoff this week. But it will be soon enough.
Goodbye.
Quote: OnceDearWhen are you going to accept.
Being able to win 8 sessons out of 10 is NOT indicative of a Bl006y winning strategy
You are absolutely correct. Winning 8 out of 10 sessions is not a winning strategy. It is the result of smart play and discipline. In the end, all that matters is the almighty dollar which hits reality real quick when your W's far exceed your L's over 10 years of extensive play. I don't care how someone plays whether they were considered lucky or not lucky... But if they have consistently brought in W's and brought home significant six-figure dollars which help live a good life style and pay bills, then call it what u want but that mf is a winner!
Quote: OnceDearWhen are you going to accept.
Being able to win 8 sessons out of 10 is NOT indicative of a Bl006y winning strategy unless some unwise person is daft enough to offer you a juicy 5:1 side bet.
WMW. Go back to the casino. Try to hit and run again today. and tomorrow and the day after. Then come back and report how unwise you have been . Maybe not this week. Scoff this week. But it will be soon enough.
Goodbye.
Actually I just got back from a casino about an hour ago and won 50% of my buy in. Yesterday I went in the morning and won 40% on my Buy in and again late night won 200% of my Buy in. Went 8 times last week n did similar. No lossrs to report. Hard to believe.. I know. It will come soon but when I do it will be minuscule. Last month I had a loss but it was only 10% of my Buyin. I was actually up 35% in my session but I got greedy and did not leave so I can understand why it happened. Goodbye and happy New Year and good luck to you all. No sense in continuing talking to the deaf n blind.
Quote: WatchMeWinQuote: OnceDearWhen are you going to accept.
Being able to win 8 sessons out of 10 is NOT indicative of a Bl006y winning strategy unless some unwise person is daft enough to offer you a juicy 5:1 side bet.
WMW. Go back to the casino. Try to hit and run again today. and tomorrow and the day after. Then come back and report how unwise you have been . Maybe not this week. Scoff this week. But it will be soon enough.
Goodbye.
Actually I just got back from a casino about an hour ago and won 50% of my buy in. Yesterday I went in the morning and won 40% on my Buy in and again late night won 200% of my Buy in. Went 8 times last week n did similar. No lossrs to report. Hard to believe.. I know. It will come soon but when I do it will be minuscule. Last month I had a loss but it was only 10% of my Buyin. I was actually up 35% in my session but I got greedy and did not leave so I can understand why it happened. Goodbye and happy New Year and good luck to you all. No sense in continuing talking to the deaf n blind.
That does not sound like Win 26.5% and quit or lose 100% of buyin.
Are you violating your system?
Do you have a system to get the W's or are you just spewing nonsense?
Now I am confused.
Quote: MaxPenQuote: WatchMeWinQuote: OnceDearWhen are you going to accept.
Being able to win 8 sessons out of 10 is NOT indicative of a Bl006y winning strategy unless some unwise person is daft enough to offer you a juicy 5:1 side bet.
WMW. Go back to the casino. Try to hit and run again today. and tomorrow and the day after. Then come back and report how unwise you have been . Maybe not this week. Scoff this week. But it will be soon enough.
Goodbye.
Actually I just got back from a casino about an hour ago and won 50% of my buy in. Yesterday I went in the morning and won 40% on my Buy in and again late night won 200% of my Buy in. Went 8 times last week n did similar. No lossrs to report. Hard to believe.. I know. It will come soon but when I do it will be minuscule. Last month I had a loss but it was only 10% of my Buyin. I was actually up 35% in my session but I got greedy and did not leave so I can understand why it happened. Goodbye and happy New Year and good luck to you all. No sense in continuing talking to the deaf n blind.
That does not sound like Win 26.5% and quit or lose 100% of buyin.
Are you violating your system?
Do you have a system to get the W's or are you just spewing nonsense?
Now I am confused.
That 26.5% number was just for purposes of the event. Silly rabbit.
Quote: OnceDearWhen are you going to accept.
Being able to win 8 sessons out of 10 is NOT indicative of a Bl006y winning strategy unless some unwise person is daft enough to offer you a juicy 5:1 side bet.
WMW. Go back to the casino. Try to hit and run again today. and tomorrow and the day after. Then come back and report how unwise you have been . Maybe not this week. Scoff this week. But it will be soon enough.
Goodbye.
It's not worth the rise in blood pressure.
Quote: WatchMeWinQuote: OnceDearWhen are you going to accept.
Being able to win 8 sessons out of 10 is NOT indicative of a Bl006y winning strategy unless some unwise person is daft enough to offer you a juicy 5:1 side bet.
WMW. Go back to the casino. Try to hit and run again today. and tomorrow and the day after. Then come back and report how unwise you have been . Maybe not this week. Scoff this week. But it will be soon enough.
Goodbye.
Actually I just got back from a casino about an hour ago and won 50% of my buy in. Yesterday I went in the morning and won 40% on my Buy in and again late night won 200% of my Buy in. Went 8 times last week n did similar. No lossrs to report. Hard to believe.. I know. It will come soon but when I do it will be minuscule. Last month I had a loss but it was only 10% of my Buyin. I was actually up 35% in my session but I got greedy and did not leave so I can understand why it happened. Goodbye and happy New Year and good luck to you all. No sense in continuing talking to the deaf n blind.
Funniest post of 2018 award winner! Lol. You lost one session last month. You've had one losing session in the last how many? 30? 40? This gets better and better.
ZCore13
Quote: WatchMeWinSilly rabbit, trix are for kids
from time to time you have posted your sports betting picks
are you very talented at handicapping too?
if you are would you be kind enough to give us say, 25 picks on a different thread? just as a teaser. any sport you like
never mind parlays, just the straight up picks on the moneyline or against the spread
thanks in advance if you are willing to help us out with this.
as you might know I recently finished up a post with 34 Bball picks
I went 16-8-1 against the spread or over/under and 6-3 on the moneyline
returning a profit of 19% of all the money wagered
think you can beat that if you give us 34 picks?
PLEASE - strut your stuff for us
Systems (and I'm not exactly sure what his system is) can be fun
And he is obviously having lots of fun.
As long as you accept the fact that you cannot overcome the house edge with them on house games other than blackjack
I can amuse myself playing systems for a long time on the free games offered by the Wizard
And I sometimes would do it for small stakes inside a casino just for fun
I would, however, make no claims about it making me a lifetime winner
But again, they can be fun. That, to me, is absolutely true.
You can also use a system as cover if you are getting heat due to counting at a bj table
On the first hand of the next shoe announce to the whole table that you're going to do a martingale on this shoe. Tell everybody you're going to double up until you get ahead.
then just do a small 3 stager - 1 unit - 2 units - 4 units until you have lost 4 units which might take a long time and you might possibly even get ahead.
then, when you eventually do lose the 4 unit bet, whether you are ahead from it or down just leave the casino
accept the very small expected dollar loss as a tax for providing you cover
it might buy you time
Quote: WatchMeWinWhat bet? You want to bet on SooPoo or you want to play craps yourself and bet you can win?Quote: TomGI will take this bet. Let me know whenever you are in Las Vegas
The bet that you offered: win a small amount at craps on eight out of 10 trials laying $200 to to win $1000. Whenever you're in Las Vegas this February or March let me know and we will make it happen.
The University of Alabama has a football program which wins consistently but not always. In contrast, systems are designed to be reliable and invariant mathematical entities which can be mindlessly duplicated. Just as WatchMeWin makes adjustments based upon many factors during the course of play, so does Coach Saban at Alabama. Many of those factors and adjustments are not quantifiable and cannot be incorporated into a mathematical model. They emerge from an understanding that includes mathematics and much else in addition.
Just as Coach Saban has been able to help his coordinators learn to coach and thereafter to depart for head coaching positions elsewhere, WatchMeWin can help others who are holistic gamblers rather than math geeks.
Consistently successful programs are wonderful phenomena which should be celebrated rather than disparaged. Best Wishes to WatchMeWin, and I hope that he collects his challenge bets from any brave naysayers.
Quote: pwcrabbWatchMeWin is not proffering a system. He does not play a system. What he is describing, and what he plays, is a program. There is a distinction.
The University of Alabama has a football program which wins consistently but not always. In contrast, systems are designed to be reliable and invariant mathematical entities which can be mindlessly duplicated. Just as WatchMeWin makes adjustments based upon many factors during the course of play, so does Coach Saban at Alabama. Many of those factors and adjustments are not quantifiable and cannot be incorporated into a mathematical model. They emerge from an understanding that includes mathematics and much else in addition.
Just as Coach Saban has been able to help his coordinators learn to coach and thereafter to depart for head coaching positions elsewhere, WatchMeWin can help others who are holistic gamblers rather than math geeks.
Consistently successful programs are wonderful phenomena which should be celebrated rather than disparaged. Best Wishes to WatchMeWin, and I hope that he collects his challenge bets from any brave naysayers.
Smartest guy in the room. Cheers pw!
Quote: TomGThe bet that you offered: win a small amount at craps on eight out of 10 trials laying $200 to to win $1000. Whenever you're in Las Vegas this February or March let me know and we will make it happen.
Ill let you know next time Im in Vegas. We will go over the rules so we are clear on everything based upon what my initial proposal entailed. Start with 1000 buy in on each session and you must win at least 265 by the end of session, which means you will need to color up at least 1265 at end of session when you announce closed session. You will do this 8 out of 10 sessions to be successful and win the event. I will lay 1000 to your 200.
I will ask you the same question as soopoo.... If you can do this, then why arent you playing this way all of the time? What is your betting strategy? Are you only doing this for the 5-1 odds.
I'd guess it's because he knows it's a damned stupid way to play, that can be shown to have massive negative expectation.Quote: WatchMeWinI will ask you the same question as soopoo.... If you can do this, then why arent you playing this way all of the time?
Again, I would guess it's because he knows that, though he's likely to lose a few dollars to the casino, some [insert offensive term of your choosing] is offering 5-1 odds on a proposition that he has better than an even money chance to win.Quote:What is your betting strategy? Are you only doing this for the 5-1 odds.
I really wish I could get in on the action on this. Such massively profitable wagers are rare.
Maybe WMW would challenge me do do the same massive 8/10 win trick at my favourite online blackjack, under the supervision of a live streamed video feed.
But none of this will happen. I'm not allowed to use the adjectives that I'd like to.
Quote: OnceDearI'd guess it's because he knows it's a damned stupid way to play, that can be shown to have massive negative expectation.Again, I would guess it's because he knows that, though he's likely to lose a few dollars to the casino, some [insert offensive term of your choosing] is offering 5-1 odds on a proposition that he has better than an even money chance to win.
I really wish I could get in on the action on this. Such massively profitable wagers are rare.
Maybe WMW would challenge me do do the same massive 8/10 win trick at my favourite online blackjack, under the supervision of a live streamed video feed.
But none of this will happen. I'm not allowed to use the adjectives that I'd like to.
Tom is a big boy, Im sure he can answer for himself.
Regarding your ridiculous request to offer same contest playing at your favorite online bj..... of course NOT! First of all it is not craps, secondly it is online, thirdly I would need to be present.... fourthly, well its just a plain old stupid request.. I expect more intelligent comments from you.. trix are for kids OD.
Again, you are furthering my case that certain smart people can win consistently if applying proper intelligence and discipline to the game. Why do you need a 5-1 prop bet to ensue you apply discipline to you play in order to achieve consistent Ws while limiting any losses to a fixed minimum per session? You should be doing it regularly.
Quote: WatchMeWin
I will ask you the same question as soopoo.... If you can do this, then why arent you playing this way all of the time? What is your betting strategy? Are you only doing this for the 5-1 odds.
I am a man of math and science. I would be doing it for the 5-1 odds, because I think I can win 265 starting with 1000 8 times out of 10 at craps more than half the time.
The times I play craps I bet pass line, some amount of odds depending on my perception of my bankroll for the day, and continuous come bets with odds as well. I sometimes also place the 6 and/or 8. Pretty much that's it.
Quote: WatchMeWinI will ask you the same question as soopoo.... If you can do this, then why arent you playing this way all of the time? What is your betting strategy? Are you only doing this for the 5-1 odds.
I only play casino games when I have concluded I have an advantage. Often using the simple formula of probability of winning x payout > amount risked to decide if the dice are worth throwing or not. As you know, this advantages comes up rarely at craps and for very low stakes compared to other games. Otherwise after 25 years of you would be buying in for $10,000 or $100,000 and winning either $2,650 or $26,500 more than 80% of the time. But like most everyone else, we're both stuck at winning low stakes
Quote: TomGI only play casino games when I have concluded I have an advantage. Often using the simple formula of probability of winning x payout > amount risked to decide if the dice are worth throwing or not. As you know, this advantages comes up rarely at craps and for very low stakes compared to other games. Otherwise after 25 years of you would be buying in for $10,000 or $100,000 and winning either $2,650 or $26,500 more than 80% of the time. But like most everyone else, we're both stuck at winning low stakes
Tom- WMW is saying he IS doing that! He says he buys in for X and wins .265X consistently. Any gambler that has an advantage has to know NOT to bet too much to have the casino ban you. A guy winning 265 at a time consistently might not draw attention, a guy winning 26,500 daily probably is banned even if doing nothing illegal.
Quote: SOOPOOTom- a guy winning 26,500 daily probably is banned even if doing nothing illegal.
say what? you are saying a casino is going to ban a high roller from a negative expectancy house game and they don't believe he is cheating? I doubt that has ever happened. and there are quite a few high rollers who have played various house games with a disadvantage and have won huge amounts. millions at the baccarat tables where the Asian kingfish get comfortable. And when they have to explain to their bosses or to the Nevada Gaming Control Board if he makes a complaint as to why they banned him what are they going to say? That he is just too lucky? I believe you are mistaken.
Quote: WatchMeWinIts always better to be UDR.
Yeah, because nobody would notice you winning $270 multiple times a day all year long.
ZCore13
Quote: lilredroostersay what? you are saying a casino is going to ban a high roller from a negative expectancy house game and they don't believe he is cheating? I doubt that has ever happened. and there are quite a few high rollers who have played various house games with a disadvantage and have won huge amounts. millions at the baccarat tables where the Asian kingfish get comfortable. And when they have to explain to their bosses or to the Nevada Gaming Control Board if he makes a complaint as to why they banned him what are they going to say? That he is just too lucky? I believe you are mistaken.
I am not the expert, but there have been posts on WOV describing exactly what I'm saying. And yes, if a player has won 26.5k daily for 60 straight days on what is supposed to be a negative EV game I would expect the player to be banned. I'm not saying it is smart, or fair, but I would expect it to happen. Zcore works in the business, and although I thought 265 wouldn't be noticed, he implied it would be. Just seems to small to notice.... Someone doing a Mattingale variety with a big enough bankroll could win 265 for quite a while before the big crash.
Quote: Zcore13Yeah, because nobody would notice you winning $270 multiple times a day all year long.
ZCore13
Where do you work and what is your position title?
Quote: WatchMeWinWhere do you work and what is your position title?
Lol. Did you just sat that in your best Arnold Schwarzenegger voice?
What is you name and who is your daddy?
ZCore13
Quote: Zcore13Lol. Did you just sat that in your best Arnold Schwarzenegger voice?
What is you name and who is your daddy?
ZCore13
Well... Care to answer? Now get to the Chopper!
Quote: WatchMeWinWell... Care to answer? Now get to the Chopper!
I've been a Dealer, Pit Boss, Shift Manager, Table Games Director and been a panelist at two National Conventions on Table Games. Ive also consulted on a handful of new table games and for a dealer school.
ZCore13
Quote: Zcore13I've been a Dealer, Pit Boss, Shift Manager, Table Games Director and been a panelist at two National Conventions on Table Games. Ive also consulted on a handful of new table games and for a dealer school.
ZCore13
Thanks for the info. Credible n much respect. What city are you located in? I may need some of your help down the road.
As I understand it, the question is what is the probability of success of turning $1,000 into $1,265, with the alternative being losing the full $1,000. If we can ignore the thin house edge by making only don't bets and laying full odds, the probability of success per session is 1000/1265 = 79.05%.
I'm told there is a question of the probability of 8 or more successes if this experiment is repeated 10 times. Again, ignoring the house edge, the following table answers that question.
| Wins | Probability | Cummulative |
|---|---|---|
| 10 | 0.095300 | 0.095300 |
| 9 | 0.252546 | 0.347846 |
| 8 | 0.301161 | 0.649008 |
| 7 | 0.212821 | 0.861828 |
| 6 | 0.098696 | 0.960524 |
| 5 | 0.031385 | 0.991909 |
| 4 | 0.006931 | 0.998840 |
| 3 | 0.001050 | 0.999889 |
| 2 | 0.000104 | 0.999994 |
| 1 | 0.000006 | 1.000000 |
| 0 | 0.000000 | 1.000000 |
| Total | 1.000000 |
The cumulative column shows the probability of 8 to 10 successes is 64.90%. Of course, it will be a little less due to the house edge. I'd have to run simulation to determine that answer, which is going beyond the call of duty of what I'll do for free. However, if forced, with a very careful strategy to minimize total action, I'd put it at about 60%.
I hope this information is helpful.
I want somebody to show me a news story where that has happened.
Just one. Please
Quote: WizardI've been asked to join this thread. Forgive me if I don't read every post. Betting system threads tend to not be of much interest to me.
As I understand it, the question is what is the probability of success of turning $1,000 into $1,265, with the alternative being losing the full $1,000. If we can ignore the thin house edge by making only don't bets and laying full odds, the probability of success per session is 1000/1265 = 79.05%.
I'm told there is a question of the probability of 8 or more successes if this experiment is repeated 10 times. Again, ignoring the house edge, the following table answers that question.
Wins Probability Cummulative 10 0.095300 0.095300 9 0.252546 0.347846 8 0.301161 0.649008 7 0.212821 0.861828 6 0.098696 0.960524 5 0.031385 0.991909 4 0.006931 0.998840 3 0.001050 0.999889 2 0.000104 0.999994 1 0.000006 1.000000 0 0.000000 1.000000 Total 1.000000
The cumulative column shows the probability of 8 to 10 successes is 64.90%. Of course, it will be a little less due to the house edge. I'd have to run simulation to determine that answer, which is going beyond the call of duty of what I'll do for free. However, if forced, with a very careful strategy to minimize total action, I'd put it at about 60%.
I hope this information is helpful.
Thank you for your input, Wizard. So, what odds would you give to someone trying to achieve this task?
Quote: WizardI've been asked to join this thread. Forgive me if I don't read every post. Betting system threads tend to not be of much interest to me.
As I understand it, the question is what is the probability of success of turning $1,000 into $1,265, with the alternative being losing the full $1,000. If we can ignore the thin house edge by making only don't bets and laying full odds, the probability of success per session is 1000/1265 = 79.05%.
I'm told there is a question of the probability of 8 or more successes if this experiment is repeated 10 times. Again, ignoring the house edge, the following table answers that question.
Wins Probability Cummulative 10 0.095300 0.095300 9 0.252546 0.347846 8 0.301161 0.649008 7 0.212821 0.861828 6 0.098696 0.960524 5 0.031385 0.991909 4 0.006931 0.998840 3 0.001050 0.999889 2 0.000104 0.999994 1 0.000006 1.000000 0 0.000000 1.000000 Total 1.000000
The cumulative column shows the probability of 8 to 10 successes is 64.90%. Of course, it will be a little less due to the house edge. I'd have to run simulation to determine that answer, which is going beyond the call of duty of what I'll do for free. However, if forced, with a very careful strategy to minimize total action, I'd put it at about 60%.
I hope this information is helpful.
Thanks Wizard, I already showed the same. We concur pretty much exactly.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/craps/29954-winning-is-my-drug/2/#post620340
~64% probability of hitting the '8 or more' goal.
WMW asking for odds on the wager is absurd.
If, however he's willing to offer 5 to 1 that someone else could not do it, he's a bigger [insert appropriate derogatory description] than I ever imagined.
Quote: OnceDearQuote: WizardI've been asked to join this thread. Forgive me if I don't read every post. Betting system threads tend to not be of much interest to me.
As I understand it, the question is what is the probability of success of turning $1,000 into $1,265, with the alternative being losing the full $1,000. If we can ignore the thin house edge by making only don't bets and laying full odds, the probability of success per session is 1000/1265 = 79.05%.
I'm told there is a question of the probability of 8 or more successes if this experiment is repeated 10 times. Again, ignoring the house edge, the following table answers that question.
Wins Probability Cummulative 10 0.095300 0.095300 9 0.252546 0.347846 8 0.301161 0.649008 7 0.212821 0.861828 6 0.098696 0.960524 5 0.031385 0.991909 4 0.006931 0.998840 3 0.001050 0.999889 2 0.000104 0.999994 1 0.000006 1.000000 0 0.000000 1.000000 Total 1.000000
The cumulative column shows the probability of 8 to 10 successes is 64.90%. Of course, it will be a little less due to the house edge. I'd have to run simulation to determine that answer, which is going beyond the call of duty of what I'll do for free. However, if forced, with a very careful strategy to minimize total action, I'd put it at about 60%.
I hope this information is helpful.
Thanks Wizard, I already showed the same. We concur pretty much exactly.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/craps/29954-winning-is-my-drug/2/#post620340
~64% probability of hitting the '8 or more' goal.
WMW asking for odds on the wager is absurd.
If, however he's willing to offer 5 to 1 that someone else could not do it, he's a bigger [insert appropriate derogatory description] than I ever imagined.
You are the smartest guy in the room apparently.. good for you matey! Actually, I offered it out of honoring my initial odds. Obviously I believed it could be achieved and that is why I said I could do it. You are the one that said it is impossible to consistently win this amount 80% of the time. I think if someone is skilled enough with intelligence , management, and discipline, they can achieve it. I have no problem watching someone do it... if they can. If you feel it cannot be achieve, but the 5-1 makes it worth trying , then that is your choice. If I have helped some people finally understanding that you must manage and stop once you have locked up a reasonable W (which can get one to achieve this feat) then I am delighted to have help. Do I think you can do it? Well, you seem to have an ego and short temper, so I doubt you could. Come to the states and lets have a challenge!
You should bet so as to minimize house edge and ensure that you cannot overshoot the profit goal. Personally, I'd go with a capped martingale approach or 1,2,3,3,3 progressive where '1' is about 5% of session bankroll. Until that would make bets have chance of busting target at which time I'd cap them lower.Quote: DeMangoHave we determined how much we bet to achieve this? What system or flat bet?
Quote: WatchMeWinYou are the smartest guy in the room apparently.. good for you matey! Actually, I offered it out of honoring my initial odds. Obviously I believed it could be achieved and that is why I said I could do it. You are the one that said it is impossible to consistently win this amount 80% of the time. I think if someone is skilled enough with intelligence , management, and discipline, they can achieve it. I have no problem watching someone do it... if they can. If you feel it cannot be achieve, but the 5-1 makes it worth trying , then that is your choice. If I have helped some people finally understanding that you must manage and stop once you have locked up a reasonable W (which can get one to achieve this feat) then I am delighted to have help. Do I think you can do it? Well, you seem to have an ego and short temper, so I doubt you could. Come to the states and lets have a challenge!
You could do it with ~64% probability, so could I. That doesn't make it a lock, and I wouldn't want to spend a couple of days of my life and some considerable expense to fly out to you just so I could make a wager with 36% chance me of losing, even if you were offering 5 to 1.
I'm the one asserted all along that your hit and run approach is actually quite likely to result in great almost consistent win record. Where you and I disagree is the wisdom of doing so. Your 'winning technique' has a massively negative expectation in even the medium term.
Anyhow, for what it's worth, I don't believe you practice what you preach. In the real world, your 25 year winning streak would be absurdly unlikely. or you would be to rich to grace us with your presence. Oh, I forgot, you have far less than 25 years of craps playing. Far far less.
Quote: Zcore13Winning at craps happens. Winning all the time in craps, doesn't. Winning over the long term in craps, nope. Thinking short sessions does anything for you, wrong. Thinking you are doing something thousands and thousands of others have done and having a different outcome than everyone else because of your "special" style, insane.
But have fun. If it's fun for you, that's all that matters. It's the silly stories nobody hear appreciates.
ZCore13
Actually, over the appreciable long term, craps is winnable.
At a fully played 345x table, the standard deviation is 4.91532 with an average bet of 3.78 units (assuming full odds) with a expected value of -.01414 units / PL.
After 40,095 trials or 135,351 rolls (3.375758 rolls per PL), your odds of being ahead is 10.08%. This represents 2,256 hours of playing at 60 rolls/hour. I consider this long term. Most craps players will consider 8 hours of play a week (2 sessions at 4 hours a week) over 5 years long term.
Even what you would consider a very long term player (132,660 trials, 447,828 rolls, 7,463 hours of play) has a 1% chance or being ahead over the very long term.
This allows idiots to claim a winning system, have the win/loss to back them up, but they are in fact statistically lucky. People can use their confirmation bias to back them up, but in fact they are just lucky.
Quote: boymimboActually, over the appreciable long term, craps is winnable.
At a fully played 345x table, the standard deviation is 4.91532 with an average bet of 3.78 units (assuming full odds) with a expected value of -.01414 units / PL.
After 40,095 trials or 135,351 rolls (3.375758 rolls per PL), your odds of being ahead is 10.08%. This represents 2,256 hours of playing at 60 rolls/hour. I consider this long term. Most craps players will consider 8 hours of play a week (2 sessions at 4 hours a week) over 5 years long term.
Even what you would consider a very long term player (132,660 trials, 447,828 rolls, 7,463 hours of play) has a 1% chance or being ahead over the very long term.
This allows idiots to claim a winning system, have the win/loss to back them up, but they are in fact statistically lucky. People can use their confirmation bias to back them up, but in fact they are just lucky.
Megabucks, Mega-Millions, and Powerball are "winnable" too.
LOL. Yeah, someone sure proved that... and no shared tickets either. Very winnable. For the lucky and the lightning bolt.Quote: IbeatyouracesMegabucks, Mega-Millions, and Powerball are "winnable" too.
Quote: FleaStiffLOL. Yeah, someone sure proved that... and no shared tickets either. Very winnable. For the lucky and the lightning bolt.
Yeah. Unfortunately, some people don't understand the difference between "winnable" and "beatable."
Quote: IbeatyouracesMegabucks, Mega-Millions, and Powerball are "winnable" too.
My point is that with the variance and the house edge, one can easily establish that they have a winning system because it can and does work for them over an appreciable sample size.
For example, if one plays craps for 400 hours in a year (which is fairly regular, 2x / week, 4 hour sessions) over a year, one can use a betting system and have a pretty good shot (>25%) of being ahead. This allows them to come on to a forum like this and claim to have a winning system, and in fact, for them, it might be a winning system, until the variance turns.
I wasn't saying that craps is winnable over infinite time. The fact is that we play over very finite periods of time, and "long term" at a casino represents a sample size where the casino can be beaten with "your" system that happens to work for you because you are experiencing a positive variance.
Craps is nothing like the three lotteries/slot machines you mentioned.
