somebody started an earlier thread on the same subject and realized, I think, he was being fooled by the return of the bet. I'd only guess that in fact they are wrong about this one because players would figure it out so quickly and you'd have " all the seats were taken" as part of this story

Quote:ChallengedMillyTalking to a friend that was at his local casino and he said the machine was bugged and paying DP/DC bets on the 12 instead of pushing. How much of an advantage, if any, would this make towards pushing the house edge for those bets? 2 and 3 were still paying as normal, so it wasn't a case of the casino flipping the 2 BAR and 12 BAR, like some rare tables do.

link to original post

DP limits? $10? $100? More? Same with DC? How many spins an hour on this machine?

Quote:odiousgambitit goes from approx 1.4% HE to approx 1.4% Player's edge. You'd go from using free odds bets to not [you don't want extra variance], actually eliminating all other bets than DP/DC . You'd play like there's no tomorrow , because probably there isn't one

somebody started an earlier thread on the same subject and realized, I think, he was being fooled by the return of the bet. I'd only guess that in fact they are wrong about this one because players would figure it out so quickly and you'd have " all the seats were taken" as part of this story

link to original post

Yes.

With the rule change of 12's winning on don't pass, the bet becomes exactly the opposite of the pass bet. Since the player's EV on pass is -1.4141...%, the player's EV on this DP bet becomes exactly +1.4141...%.

Quote:ChesterDogQuote:odiousgambitit goes from approx 1.4% HE to approx 1.4% Player's edge. You'd go from using free odds bets to not [you don't want extra variance], actually eliminating all other bets than DP/DC . You'd play like there's no tomorrow , because probably there isn't one

somebody started an earlier thread on the same subject and realized, I think, he was being fooled by the return of the bet. I'd only guess that in fact they are wrong about this one because players would figure it out so quickly and you'd have " all the seats were taken" as part of this story

link to original post

Yes.

With the rule change of 12's winning on don't pass, the bet becomes exactly the opposite of the pass bet. Since the player's EV on pass is -1.4141...%, the player's EV on this DP bet becomes exactly +1.4141...%.

link to original post

So correct me if I am wrong but correct strategy would be to play DP only and Lay full odds on 4 or 10 while taking down your DP bet on all others? Or some variation of that?

Or perhaps just take down all DP bets. Free odds means no edge. Wager the edge on DP and ignore everything else. No point in exposing money to even the free odds.

Every eCraps game that I have played gives points/comps for odds bets, so I would lay full odds on every point.Quote:darkozQuote:ChesterDogQuote:odiousgambitit goes from approx 1.4% HE to approx 1.4% Player's edge. You'd go from using free odds bets to not [you don't want extra variance], actually eliminating all other bets than DP/DC . You'd play like there's no tomorrow , because probably there isn't one

somebody started an earlier thread on the same subject and realized, I think, he was being fooled by the return of the bet. I'd only guess that in fact they are wrong about this one because players would figure it out so quickly and you'd have " all the seats were taken" as part of this story

link to original post

Yes.

With the rule change of 12's winning on don't pass, the bet becomes exactly the opposite of the pass bet. Since the player's EV on pass is -1.4141...%, the player's EV on this DP bet becomes exactly +1.4141...%.

link to original post

So correct me if I am wrong but correct strategy would be to play DP only and Lay full odds on 4 or 10 while taking down your DP bet on all others? Or some variation of that?

Or perhaps just take down all DP bets. Free odds means no edge. Wager the edge on DP and ignore everything else. No point in exposing money to even the free odds.

link to original post

Also, the reason that the casino locks pass/come bets but not DP/DC bets is that the player loses EV when they take down the latter bets. Just leave the bets up and lay odds on everything.

Quote:odiousgambitit goes from approx 1.4% HE to approx 1.4% Player's edge.

link to original post

I agree. It exactly flips the 1.41% house edge on the pass to a 1.41% player edge on the don't pass.

I heard that 3 nearby Indian casinos had individual bubble craps for a few weeks but they were taken out when a fervent bubble craps player from my local casino went there and cashed out over $10K after figuring out patterns to the dice. Makes me think they'll remove all the BJ tables if I win $10K in one night now. They must be so used to people going bust on Match the Dealer side bets that they'll never expect someone beating the game without playing side bets.

a 1.4% edge and you can, say, bet $25 max, and can follow up a DP bet with a DC bet whenever available, I'm thinking you can get in 150 bets an hour or so. $3750*1.4% is $52.50 per hour with low variance; 8 hrs over $400Quote:Ace2Play the DP line eight hours per day everyday. After three months you have a reasonable chance of a profit. But nowhere even close to a guaranteed profit. Some days/weeks you’ll lose a ton of money. That’s what 1.4% advantage gets you

link to original post

I don't think you'd have a day where you lost money if you played 8 hours. I think you are undervaluing how low the variance is on the DP

No idea what you’re talking about.Quote:odiousgambita 1.4% edge and you can, say, bet $25 max, and can follow up a DP bet with a DC bet whenever available, I'm thinking you can get in 150 bets an hour or so. $3750*1.4% is $52.50 per hour with low variance; 8 hrs over $400Quote:Ace2Play the DP line eight hours per day everyday. After three months you have a reasonable chance of a profit. But nowhere even close to a guaranteed profit. Some days/weeks you’ll lose a ton of money. That’s what 1.4% advantage gets you

link to original post

I don't think you'd have a day where you lost money if you played 8 hours. I think you are undervaluing how low the variance is on the DP

link to original post

The variance for DP is very close to 1 just like the pass line. Both sides are essentially a coin flip

If you play always coming then you’ll get about 100 bets resolved per hour assuming 30 line decisions per hour. You will have lots of losing days and even losing weeks. The math is easy

That’s before considering that your per-bet variance increases with DC bets because their results are correlated. They all win when a seven is rolled

Quote:ChumpChangeI heard that 3 nearby Indian casinos had individual bubble craps for a few weeks but they were taken out when a fervent bubble craps player from my local casino went there and cashed out over $10K after figuring out patterns to the dice.

link to original post

Patterns to the dice? I'll politely say I'm skeptical the dice have any pattern.

Were the player’s initials E.B.?Quote:WizardQuote:ChumpChangeI heard that 3 nearby Indian casinos had individual bubble craps for a few weeks but they were taken out when a fervent bubble craps player from my local casino went there and cashed out over $10K after figuring out patterns to the dice.

link to original post

Patterns to the dice? I'll politely say I'm skeptical the dice have any pattern.

link to original post

yeah math is easyQuote:Ace2No idea what you’re talking about.Quote:odiousgambita 1.4% edge and you can, say, bet $25 max, and can follow up a DP bet with a DC bet whenever available, I'm thinking you can get in 150 bets an hour or so. $3750*1.4% is $52.50 per hour with low variance; 8 hrs over $400Quote:Ace2Play the DP line eight hours per day everyday. After three months you have a reasonable chance of a profit. But nowhere even close to a guaranteed profit. Some days/weeks you’ll lose a ton of money. That’s what 1.4% advantage gets you

link to original post

I don't think you'd have a day where you lost money if you played 8 hours. I think you are undervaluing how low the variance is on the DP

link to original post

The variance for DP is very close to 1 just like the pass line. Almost identical to a coin flip (exactly 1)

If you play always coming then you’ll get about 100 bets resolved per hour assuming 30 line decisions per hour. You will have lots of losing days and losing weeks. The math is easy

That’s before considering that your per-variance increases with DC bets because their results are correlated

link to original post

let's say it's 8 hours and 1225 bets , square root of which is 35

"The standard deviation of the final result over n bets is the product of the standard deviation for one bet and the square root of the number of initial bets made in the session. This assumes that all bets made are of equal size." ... Wizard in https://wizardofodds.com/gambling/house-edge/

standard deviation is "1" for the DP/DC

so one standard deviation is 35 units. 3 would be 105 units

the EV for $25 bets would be 30,625 * 1.4% = $428.75. The possible downside for 3 standard deviations would be 105*25=$2625 so subtracting that you *could* lose $2200, extremely unlucky but it wouldn't make the news. However, if extremely lucky you could win the sum of those and walk with $3000 or so in winnings

two SDs is generally as good or bad as it gets except on rare occasion and that would add or subtract to your EV $1750, range about +$2180 to -1321 in expectations with deviation

so I have to take it back that 8 hours would about guarantee success.

However, 428/[35*25] is 0.49 so the EV is about half of one SD and that I will take every time when it is +EV. And I maintain that the low variance is sweet and that you have to take it back too about the 3 months business

math mistakes possible

It’s normal variance for a casino game

Maybe it is normal variance for the lowest-variance bets on a table game. Quite a few table game bets have much higher variance. Most video poker and slot variance figure range from 15 to 50. Yet, I rarely have a losing quarter on slots.Quote:Ace2How is it low variance ? DP variance is comparable to PL, baccarat, even-money roulette, blackjack ….

It’s normal variance for a casino game

link to original post

Quote:odiousgambityeah math is easyQuote:Ace2No idea what you’re talking about.Quote:odiousgambitQuote:Ace2

link to original post

I don't think you'd have a day where you lost money if you played 8 hours. I think you are undervaluing how low the variance is on the DP

link to original post

The variance for DP is very close to 1 just like the pass line. Almost identical to a coin flip (exactly 1)

If you play always coming then you’ll get about 100 bets resolved per hour assuming 30 line decisions per hour. You will have lots of losing days and losing weeks. The math is easy

That’s before considering that your per-variance increases with DC bets because their results are correlated

link to original post

let's say it's 8 hours and 1225 bets , square root of which is 35

"The standard deviation of the final result over n bets is the product of the standard deviation for one bet and the square root of the number of initial bets made in the session. This assumes that all bets made are of equal size." ... Wizard in https://wizardofodds.com/gambling/house-edge/

standard deviation is "1" for the DP/DC

so one standard deviation is 35 units. 3 would be 105 units

the EV for $25 bets would be 30,625 * 1.4% = $428.75. The possible downside for 3 standard deviations would be 105*25=$2625 so subtracting that you *could* lose $2200, extremely unlucky but it wouldn't make the news. However, if extremely lucky you could win the sum of those and walk with $3000 or so in winnings

two SDs is generally as good or bad as it gets except on rare occasion and that would add or subtract to your EV $1750, range about +$2180 to -1321 in expectations with deviation

so I have to take it back that 8 hours would about guarantee success.

However, 428/[35*25] is 0.49 so the EV is about half of one SD and that I will take every time when it is +EV. And I maintain that the low variance is sweet and that you have to take it back too about the 3 months business

math mistakes possible

link to original post

You should add full odds. It lowers your variance on the dark side.

ETA: you are failing to account for the correlation between DP and DC.

Quote:WizardQuote:ChumpChangeI heard that 3 nearby Indian casinos had individual bubble craps for a few weeks but they were taken out when a fervent bubble craps player from my local casino went there and cashed out over $10K after figuring out patterns to the dice.

link to original post

Patterns to the dice? I'll politely say I'm skeptical the dice have any pattern.

link to original post

Wizard,

Each die has a distinct pattern: the 1 is opposite the 6, the 2 is opposite the 5, and the 3 is opposite the 4.

;-)

Dog Hand

Interesting. I'll have to investigate that , counterintuitive to me.Quote:unJonYou should add full odds. It lowers your variance on the dark side.

I don't get what you are saying. ETA?Quote:ETA: you are failing to account for the correlation between DP and DC.

link to original post

Being limited, I’ll have to do trial and error.

at 2500 bets the sqrt is 50, 2500 *1.4%=35 [units] getting closer

at 3600 bets, sqrt 60, 3600 * edge = 50.4 almost

at 4900 bets, it’s 70, 4900*edge = 68.6 mighty, mighty close

at 5184, sqrt 72, 5184 * 1.4% = 72.576 zipped past it a bit

lets put in $25 as the bet just to do it on that last bit,

$129,600 total action, EV $1814

72 is one SD, $1800

So the point is, at one SD of deviation to the wrong side, you break about even

5184 bets at 150 bets an hour is 34.6 hours ; 4.3 sets of 8 hours

a modestly unlucky person would break even in however many days it would take to do 5200 or so bets, maybe 4 days.

Yes it could be 2,3,4 or more standard deviations and you never get to the point of a guaranteed win. You may wish to avoid such risk but as for me, I’m quite ready for it, even just 8 hours

Since the odds bet is even more correlated to the DP/DC bet than subsequent DP/DC bets, this also seems wrong to me. Are you accounting for the large bet size? If you change the unit size, then the variance changes by the ratio squared. If you use constant units of variance such as $^2, then I am fairly certain that the variance increase by adding odds bets.Quote:odiousgambitInteresting. I'll have to investigate that , counterintuitive to me.Quote:unJonYou should add full odds. It lowers your variance on the dark side.

I don't get what you are saying. ETA?Quote:ETA: you are failing to account for the correlation between DP and DC.

link to original post

The correlation of the DP/DC stream is a real effect that is easily handled by a Monte Carlo simulation. You get higher variance betting with a two simultaneous DP/DC bets on the same roll versus two identical bets on two different tables at the same time. I can't be bothered to do the sim now.

Quote:MentalSince the odds bet is even more correlated to the DP/DC bet than subsequent DP/DC bets, this also seems wrong to me. Are you accounting for the large bet size? If you change the unit size, then the variance changes by the ratio squared. If you use constant units of variance such as $^2, then I am fairly certain that the variance increase by adding odds bets.Quote:odiousgambitInteresting. I'll have to investigate that , counterintuitive to me.Quote:unJonYou should add full odds. It lowers your variance on the dark side.

I don't get what you are saying. ETA?Quote:ETA: you are failing to account for the correlation between DP and DC.

link to original post

The correlation of the DP/DC stream is a real effect that is easily handled by a Monte Carlo simulation. I can't be bothered to do the sim now.

link to original post

Good point on odds correlation. Yes that makes sense.

Quote:odiousgambitWe can also look at when EV equals one SD to ponder how likely we are to profit from betting at 1.4% AP.

Being limited, I’ll have to do trial and error.

at 2500 bets the sqrt is 50, 2500 *1.4%=35 [units] getting closer

at 3600 bets, sqrt 60, 3600 * edge = 50.4 almost

at 4900 bets, it’s 70, 4900*edge = 68.6 mighty, mighty close

at 5184, sqrt 72, 5184 * 1.4% = 72.576 zipped past it a bit

lets put in $25 as the bet just to do it on that last bit,

$129,600 total action, EV $1814

72 is one SD, $1800

So the point is, at one SD of deviation to the wrong side, you break about even

5184 bets at 150 bets an hour is 34.6 hours ; 4.3 sets of 8 hours

a modestly unlucky person would break even in however many days it would take to do 5200 or so bets, maybe 4 days.

Yes it could be 2,3,4 or more standard deviations and you never get to the point of a guaranteed win. You may wish to avoid such risk but as for me, I’m quite ready for it, even just 8 hours

link to original post

I'm more like 400 bets and try to cash out 35 units ahead, but it may take only 150 bets for an early cash out or it may take 900 bets or even 1600 bets to get there. So there's 12, 20, 30 and 40 on the square root side. On the EV side it'd be minus 2.1 units (150 bets), 5.6 units (400 bets), 12.6 units (900 bets), or 22.4 units (1600 bets). My starting session money is 25 units. If I get past 400 bets and I'm nowhere near 35 units ahead, I'll just try to cash out at 10, 15 or 20 units ahead or something like that. I try to get past 400 bets so the square root function has time to mature.

Quote:ChumpChangeQuote:odiousgambitWe can also look at when EV equals one SD to ponder how likely we are to profit from betting at 1.4% AP.

Being limited, I’ll have to do trial and error.

at 2500 bets the sqrt is 50, 2500 *1.4%=35 [units] getting closer

at 3600 bets, sqrt 60, 3600 * edge = 50.4 almost

at 4900 bets, it’s 70, 4900*edge = 68.6 mighty, mighty close

at 5184, sqrt 72, 5184 * 1.4% = 72.576 zipped past it a bit

lets put in $25 as the bet just to do it on that last bit,

$129,600 total action, EV $1814

72 is one SD, $1800

So the point is, at one SD of deviation to the wrong side, you break about even

5184 bets at 150 bets an hour is 34.6 hours ; 4.3 sets of 8 hours

a modestly unlucky person would break even in however many days it would take to do 5200 or so bets, maybe 4 days.

Yes it could be 2,3,4 or more standard deviations and you never get to the point of a guaranteed win. You may wish to avoid such risk but as for me, I’m quite ready for it, even just 8 hours

link to original post

I'm more like 400 bets and try to cash out 35 units ahead, but it may take only 150 bets for an early cash out or it may take 900 bets or even 1600 bets to get there. So there's 12, 20, 30 and 40 on the square root side. On the EV side it'd be minus 2.1 units (150 bets), 5.6 units (400 bets), 12.6 units (900 bets), or 22.4 units (1600 bets). My starting session money is 25 units. If I get past 400 bets and I'm nowhere near 35 units ahead, I'll just try to cash out at 10, 15 or 20 units ahead or something like that. I try to get past 400 bets so the square root function has time to mature.

link to original post

I quoted this just so I have proof someone actually posted ‘the square root function has time to mature’.

Assuming you had no actual knowledge of when the glitch would be found out and corrected, you should use Kelly to decide on your bet size.

If both points are made for the two Don't bets, then a seven causes correlation of results. However, for any pair of wagers where the first roll is a point and the second is a seven, the results are always a win and a loss. The seven on the second roll cause anticorrelation of the results. Without sims or detailed combinatorics, it is hard to intuit whether there is net correlation or not.

I did two sets of sims. One where the second wager was made at the same table and another sim where the second wager was made at a separate uncorrelated table. This table is for 10M trials. Since rolling a 12 on the come out is a winner in this sim, there are no pushes. The only possible results for the pair of wagers are -2 units, a push, or +2 units.

-2 | 0 | +2 |
---|---|---|

24.1375% | 50.3207% | 25.5418% |

24.2941% | 50.0119% | 25.6940% |

The results are essentially the same whether the wagers are correlated or not.

I believe that odiousgambit's approach of using the std dev for a stream of uncorrelated bets is good enough even when you are placing a new Don't bet on every roll.

I would think the anti correlation of the come bet losing on a 7 to be substantially diluted by the higher expected number of DC bets that have traveled to a number.

Yes, I expect correlation would make more difference the longer the sequences become. I can never have more than two made points at a time in my sim.Quote:unJonInteresting Mental. If it wouldn’t be too hard to do, I would be interested in seeing if the correlation builds up with a strategy (method?) of continually having a live don’t come after the first roll. Thats how you would maximize EV per unit of time.

I would think the anti correlation of the come bet losing on a 7 to be substantially diluted by the higher expected number of DC bets that have traveled to a number.

link to original post

However, the average number of made points per roll is probably less than three in a situation where you are always making a new Don't bet each roll. I don't see this having a big effect on variance.

Is it a big problem that shooters 7 or 11 on the come out on a bubble game?

If I play DP, nobody else is at the machine and I can skip throwing 7-11's on the come-out and establish a point, then set up a DC point, then roll the 7-out, or spend 20 rolls trying. These dice are like a bad game of Folf and waiting for the right combinations to bubble up takes a lot of patience. I only get a split second to hit the button during a 15 second countdown though.

Hopefully if there is something of concern, it is reliable enough to find advantage playing the other side.

I am happy for you that you found a system that isn't ever affected by shooters rolling the wrong number. When I play at a casino, I don't mind being exposed to chance. I just play the bet with the better EV. If you are afraid of a seven on the come out roll, why don't you just bet Any Seven?Quote:ChumpChangeI don't like playing the DP because I'll get blindsided by players who throw a bunch of 7-11's on the come-out. But if I did I'd have at least 3X odds on the point. I typically wait for the point to get established and count that as roll #1 and make a bet on roll #4 on the DC, then another DC bet on roll #9, and another DC bet on roll #14. I reset the count if the shooter makes his point and establishes another point. During that come-out the shooter has the chance to win me my DC bets that are up with a 7-winner. I'm starting from $10 on a $10 table and when I get further ahead I increase my bets so eventually I'll get to a $45 DC bet which I could just make into a $15 DC + $30 odds and all higher bets have multiples of $30 odds.

link to original post

Have you ever considered that maybe you have a limited bankroll because your strategies are ruled superstition rather than math?Quote:ChumpChangeI had a point of 4 to roll and I must have rolled craps numbers like half a dozen times in a row twice. There was another player ramping up his bets on the horn numbers. Yeah, there's times like that where it would pay to have my horn bet progressions in mind and ready. But for now with my limited bankroll I'll save it for later.

link to original post

Quote:ChumpChangeMy limited bankroll comes from not winning enough to create one. The table minimums have gone up 500% and left me alone with a bubble craps machine during a pandemic that did shut down the casinos almost permanently.

link to original post

Have you considered not gambling? Seriously!

Quote:ChumpChangeIt would only take a few lucky sessions to put me on the road to riches, but where are those lucky sessions?

link to original post

Those lucky sessions would just be a detour on the road to rags.

Quote:ChumpChangeIt would only take a few lucky sessions to put me on the road to riches, but where are those lucky sessions?

link to original post

This reminded me of a commercial that was on TV about 30 years ago. I can't remember what the commercial was for. It was probably for an investment firm.

The married couple arrive by plane in Las Vegas. They were getting off the plane and the husband says to his wife "Come on Honey, I only have three days to win a bundle."

The wife replies "Even if you win a bundle, You will still be down four bundles."

Quote:ChumpChange

link to original post

I play the single-player machines often..

Screenshot from yesterday: 7,7,7,7,8,3,2,4,9,4,5,3,11,9,11,11,11,6,6,6,12,11,5,8,5,5,8,7

Quote:MentalYes, I expect correlation would make more difference the longer the sequences become. I can never have more than two made points at a time in my sim.Quote:unJonInteresting Mental. If it wouldn’t be too hard to do, I would be interested in seeing if the correlation builds up with a strategy (method?) of continually having a live don’t come after the first roll. Thats how you would maximize EV per unit of time.

I would think the anti correlation of the come bet losing on a 7 to be substantially diluted by the higher expected number of DC bets that have traveled to a number.

link to original post

However, the average number of made points per roll is probably less than three in a situation where you are always making a new Don't bet each roll. I don't see this having a big effect on variance.

link to original post

I wrote a new program to look into the issue of correlation in the results of a stream of Don't bets. I stand by my claim that the average number of Don't bets riding at any time is less than three. My program calculates the exact probability of all possible sequences of roll. I calculates the average number of Don't bets that are not resolved after the end of each round. As a sanity check, there should be 24/36 don't bets after one round of Don't bets since there are (3+4+5+5+4+3) ways of rolling a point.

Rounds | Ave # Dont |
---|---|

1 | 0.666667 |

2 | 1.145062 |

3 | 1.488683 |

4 | 1.735737 |

5 | 1.913534 |

6 | 2.041613 |

7 | 2.133968 |

8 | 2.200626 |

9 | 2.248786 |

10 | 2.283614 |

11 | 2.308825 |

12 | 2.327093 |

These are exact calculations, not Monte Carlo simulations. Therefore, it is not possible to evaluate a much larger number of rounds. (There are 3 trillion possible sequences just for 12 rolls.) It looks like this series levels off at an average of 2.375 Don't bets riding at any one time. While you may get a rare occurrence of six Don't bets active at one time, 80% of the time you will hit a point before a seven out gives you the maximum win.

I do not believe the variance of making 1000 consecutive Don't bets is much different than the variance of making 1000 independent Don't bets. I may do a few more studies to see if I can quantify the increased variance.

EDIT: I see that Mike has a Q&A on his Craps page saying that the average number of unresolved points will be approach 3/9 + 4/10 + 5/11 + 5/11 + 4/10 + 3/9 = 2.37576 in the long term.

This probably arises due to the anti-correlation of the seven out. If there is one Don't bet riding, the seven out results in a push. Two independent bets have a total variance of around 2 bets^2. This push has almost zero variance.

Since there are 2.375 Don't bets riding when a seven hits, the seven is usually a small win. However, the net effect is a reduction in variance due to anti-correlation.

Quote:ChumpChangeWell, I'm trying to win to 35 DC bets ahead before I get to 25 DC bets behind.

link to original post

You might have better luck betting the Do side. I ran 5,155 rolls from those machines through Wincraps.

DP and one DC with 2X odds lost 96 units.

Pass Line and one Come bet with 2X odds won 31 units. Wins 76 units with zero odds and the 5 and 9.