## Poll

1 vote (12.5%) | |||

1 vote (12.5%) | |||

No votes (0%) | |||

No votes (0%) | |||

6 votes (75%) | |||

3 votes (37.5%) | |||

2 votes (25%) | |||

3 votes (37.5%) | |||

No votes (0%) | |||

2 votes (25%) |

**8 members have voted**

- Make $5 place bet on the 4.
- If step 1 wins, then take $14 win* plus $1 from your stack and make $15 place bet on the 5.
- If step 2 wins, then make $36 place bet on the 6.
- If step 3 wins, then make $78 place bet on the 8.
- If step 4 wins, then bet $169 win plus $1 from your stack on the 9.
- If step 5 wins, then you will have $408. Take $12 from your stack to pay the $20 commission on a $400 buy bet on the 10.
- If step 6 wins, then take down the $1200.
- If any bet loses, then you're done.

*: By "win" I include the original bet amount.

The part about adding $12 from your stack after a win on the 9 is an assumption of mine. I can't find any source that makes it clear what to do.

Here is my analysis.

Event | Pays | Probability | Expectected win |
---|---|---|---|

Immediate loss | -5 | 0.666667 | -3.333333 |

Loss before 5 | -6 | 0.200000 | -1.200000 |

Loss before 6 | -6 | 0.072727 | -0.436364 |

Loss before 8 | -6 | 0.033058 | -0.198347 |

Loss before 9 | -7 | 0.016529 | -0.115702 |

Loss before 10 | -19 | 0.007346 | -0.139578 |

Win on 10 | 1181 | 0.003673 | 4.337925 |

Total | 1.000000 | -1.085399 |

I show the expected bet amount to be $5.49. Dividing the expected loss of $1.09 by the expected bet of $5.49 gives a house edge of 19.76%.

If the commission is paid only after a win on the 10, then I would pocket $8 after a win on the 9. A win on the 10 would have a return of $1180. Here is my analysis under if commission is paid on wins only on the 10.

Event | Pays | Probability | Expectected win |
---|---|---|---|

Immediate loss | -5 | 0.666667 | -3.333333 |

Loss before 5 | -6 | 0.200000 | -1.200000 |

Loss before 6 | -6 | 0.072727 | -0.436364 |

Loss before 8 | -6 | 0.033058 | -0.198347 |

Loss before 9 | -7 | 0.016529 | -0.115702 |

Loss before 10 | 1 | 0.007346 | 0.007346 |

Win on 10 | 1188 | 0.003673 | 4.363636 |

Total | 1.000000 | -0.912764 |

The lower right cell shows an expected loss of $0.91.

Expected bet is $5.36 for a house edge of 17.03%.

The question for the poll is would you play the Marching Soldier? Multiple votes allowed.

Normally I would say then that analysis is a waste of time, however, you decided to do so. I know you didn't think it would be +EV , so what caught your interest here?

Quote:Wizard

The lower right cell shows an expected loss of $0.91.

Expected bet is $5.36 for a house edge of 17.03%.

The question for the poll is would you play the Marching Soldier? Multiple votes allowed.

link to original post

(Quote truncated)

I just want to point out that the marching soldier combines a bunch of bets with a house edge far less than 17.03% and you end up with a Wiz calculation of a combined house edge of 17.03%. Makes sense to me as this is like a paroli.

But, many on this board denigrates ThomasK for stating that a martingale combines bets of a certain HE and leads to a combined bet with a lower HE.

Theres a contradiction in these positions.

Quote:unJonI just want to point out that the marching soldier combines a bunch of bets with a house edge far less than 17.03% and you end up with a Wiz calculation of a combined house edge of 17.03%. Makes sense to me as this is like a paroli.

But, many on this board denigrates ThomasK for stating that a martingale combines bets of a certain HE and leads to a combined bet with a lower HE.

Theres a contradiction in these positions.

link to original post

It depends how you define the house edge involving parlays. I generally only count the original wager as money bet. The reason the house edge is so high is the same money is often bet multiple times.

Quote:WizardI was asked on my last live stream about the Marching Soldier craps strategy. Here is my interpretation of how it works on a table where you must pay the commission on the 10 in advance.

- Make $5 place bet on the 4.
- If step 1 wins, then take $14 win* plus $1 from your stack and make $15 place bet on the 5.
- If step 2 wins, then make $36 place bet on the 6.
- If step 3 wins, then make $78 place bet on the 8.
- If step 4 wins, then bet $169 win plus $1 from your stack on the 9.
- If step 5 wins, then you will have $408. Take $12 from your stack to pay the $20 commission on a $400 buy bet on the 10.
- If step 6 wins, then take down the $1200.
- If any bet loses, then you're done.

*: By "win" I include the original bet amount.

The part about adding $12 from your stack after a win on the 9 is an assumption of mine. I can't find any source that makes it clear what to do.

Here is my analysis.

Event Pays Probability Expectected win Immediate loss -5 0.666667 -3.333333 Loss before 5 -6 0.200000 -1.200000 Loss before 6 -6 0.072727 -0.436364 Loss before 8 -6 0.033058 -0.198347 Loss before 9 -7 0.016529 -0.115702 Loss before 10 -19 0.007346 -0.139578 Win on 10 1181 0.003673 4.337925 Total 1.000000 -1.085399

I show the expected bet amount to be $5.49. Dividing the expected loss of $1.09 by the expected bet of $5.49 gives a house edge of 19.76%.

If the commission is paid only after a win on the 10, then I would pocket $8 after a win on the 9. A win on the 10 would have a return of $1180. Here is my analysis under if commission is paid on wins only on the 10.

Event Pays Probability Expectected win Immediate loss -5 0.666667 -3.333333 Loss before 5 -6 0.200000 -1.200000 Loss before 6 -6 0.072727 -0.436364 Loss before 8 -6 0.033058 -0.198347 Loss before 9 -7 0.016529 -0.115702 Loss before 10 1 0.007346 0.007346 Win on 10 1188 0.003673 4.363636 Total 1.000000 -0.912764

The lower right cell shows an expected loss of $0.91.

Expected bet is $5.36 for a house edge of 17.03%.

The question for the poll is would you play the Marching Soldier? Multiple votes allowed.

link to original post

IMO this strategy is totally mis-leading. It does NOT take into account the number of rolls within the hand to complete the ultimate objective. Since the 7 appears on average every six rolls, the likelihood of the ultimate win is more remote than shown. While this calculation might have some merit, the reality of table play would not bear out these HE numbers.

tuttigym

I'm pretty sure the Wizard took that into account.Quote:tuttigymIMO this strategy is totally mis-leading. It does NOT take into account the number of rolls within the hand to complete the ultimate objective. Since the 7 appears on average every six rolls, the likelihood of the ultimate win is more remote than shown. While this calculation might have some merit, the reality of table play would not bear out these HE numbers.

link to original post

Also, the probability of a win is 0.003673 on the chart. What does that convert to in term of 1 out of tries? More generally, whats the formula for converting that?

If I had to brute force figure it out, Im guessing I could do something like 1/3 x 2/3 x 5/6 x 5/6 x 2/3 x 1/3 and then reduce the fraction to 1 / something?

But now that I'm thinking about it...

I typically place bets on 4 numbers, doing this either instead or at the same time, would get me nuts, so I pass,

But if I WERE to do this, I wouldn't ADD to my bets. Gotta take small wins along the way. And somewhere, take slightly larger wins so the numbers make the math easier. Be a friend to the dealers.

On a $5 table:

Number | Bet | Win | Total | Keep | Kept | Net if Lost |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Four | 5 | 9 | 14 | 4 | 4 | -5 |

Five | 10 | 14 | 24 | 0 | 4 | -1 |

Six | 24 | 28 | 52 | 4 | 8 | -1 |

Eight | 48 | 56 | 104 | 4 | 12 | 3 |

Nine | 100 | 140 | 240 | 20 | 32 | 7 |

Ten | 220 | 440 | 660 | 660 | 692 | 27 |

Number | Bet | Win | Total | Keep | Kept | Net if Lost |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Four | 10 | 18 | 28 | 3 | 3 | -10 |

Five | 25 | 35 | 60 | 6 | 9 | -7 |

Six | 54 | 63 | 117 | 3 | 12 | -1 |

Eight | 114 | 133 | 247 | 22 | 34 | 2 |

Nine | 225 | 315 | 540 | 40 | 74 | 24 |

Ten | 500 | 1000 | 1500 | 1500 | 1574 | 64 |

Number | Bet | Win | Total | Keep | Kept | Net if Lost |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Four | 15 | 27 | 42 | 7 | 7 | -15 |

Five | 35 | 49 | 84 | 6 | 13 | -8 |

Six | 78 | 91 | 169 | 19 | 32 | -2 |

Eight | 150 | 175 | 325 | 25 | 57 | 17 |

Nine | 300 | 420 | 720 | 70 | 127 | 42 |

Ten | 650 | 1300 | 1950 | 1950 | 2077 | 112 |

Number | Bet | Win | Total | Keep | Kept | Net if Lost |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Four | 25 | 50 | 75 | 10 | 10 | -25 |

Five | 65 | 91 | 156 | 6 | 16 | -15 |

Six | 150 | 175 | 325 | 25 | 41 | -9 |

Eight | 300 | 350 | 650 | 25 | 66 | 22 |

Nine | 625 | 875 | 1500 | 200 | 266 | 78 |

Ten | 1300 | 2600 | 3900 | 3900 | 4166 | 334 |

The number in bold is what you end up with if you take it down after all six hit.

Note that I didn't figure in the vig on the ten, (or four at the $25 table).

Basic math: Reciprical.Quote:TinManAlso, the probability of a win is 0.003673 on the chart. What does that convert to in term of 1 out of tries?

link to original post

1 / 0.003673 = 272.257

Quote:TinManIve never been a sidebet person at craps but this does seem more fun than a $1 fire bet for a similar or lower house edge. Plus maybe you get credit for a bigger average bet on those occasions when you do get up to a $400 10.

Also, the probability of a win is 0.003673 on the chart. What does that convert to in term of 1 out of tries? More generally, whats the formula for converting that?

If I had to brute force figure it out, Im guessing I could do something like 1/3 x 2/3 x 5/6 x 5/6 x 2/3 x 1/3 and then reduce the fraction to 1 / something?

link to original post

I agree with you, this seems like a silly fun "accomplish once" kind of thing if you plan on playing craps for years/decades. Just like hitting the ATS/firebet once and never betting it again. @Wiz my understanding of Marching Soldiers is you just parlay the wins along the board, you don't have to power press / half press at all. Just make the bets proper on 6 and 8.

Overall thought I don't think I'd ever play this at an actual table. This would be a purely min-bet Roll to Win table, or Bubble craps game kind of thing. I can't imagine ever making serious money off of this compared to just about any other weird craps strategy.

I'd like to nominate this strategy for being one of the worst craps strats to exist, however it's better than the "All-in field" "all-in Hardways" and "all-in bet the 7" type strategies. Its also worse than just split the sisters.

Quote:DJTeddyBearI'm pretty sure the Wizard took that into account.Quote:tuttigymIMO this strategy is totally mis-leading. It does NOT take into account the number of rolls within the hand to complete the ultimate objective. Since the 7 appears on average every six rolls, the likelihood of the ultimate win is more remote than shown. While this calculation might have some merit, the reality of table play would not bear out these HE numbers.

link to original post

link to original post

Perhaps, but talk about guessing, there is no way to possibly quantify the rolls or 7's in the REALITY of play. One could do the simulation thing for billions of rolls and still not be nearly accurate.

One other thing for the truly "lucky," the feat could actually be accomplished in as few as six consecutive rolls. So, I am saying it is not impossible. Go for it.

What does a 17.03% HE mean exactly? Can the player only lose 17.03% of the time or 17.03% of his bankroll? What?

tuttigym

Just like any other game. If you play it a billion times, you should end up with 17.03% less money.Quote:tuttigymWhat does a 17.03% HE mean exactly? Can the player only lose 17.03% of the time or 17.03% of his bankroll? What?

tuttigym

link to original post

Quote:DJTeddyBearJust like any other game. If you play it a billion times, you should end up with 17.03% less money.Quote:tuttigymWhat does a 17.03% HE mean exactly? Can the player only lose 17.03% of the time or 17.03% of his bankroll? What?

tuttigym

link to original post

link to original post

tuttigym rejects the central limit theorem. Its not worth engaging.