Pass Line Side Bet is + EV?
Poll
 | 4 votes (23.52%) | ||
| No votes (0%) | |||
| | 12 votes (70.58%) | ||
| | 1 vote (5.88%) | ||
| No votes (0%) |
17 members have voted
August 1st, 2011 at 11:17:21 AM
permalink
Scenario: you make a private bet with someone that at your session at the craps table, you will 'break even or better'. In other words, your bankroll in no case will decrease but at least stay the same as you started with. The guy who accepts your bet says you have to make at least X no. of bets, figuring he will win the bet in the long run if nothing else.
You bet only the pass line with no free odds or other bets.
Who has made the best bet? Indicate by your vote and comments. Positive EV vote means you made the best bet.
[I think I know but am not real confident.]
You bet only the pass line with no free odds or other bets.
Who has made the best bet? Indicate by your vote and comments. Positive EV vote means you made the best bet.
[I think I know but am not real confident.]
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell! She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
August 1st, 2011 at 11:25:20 AM
permalink
I voted negative EV, as the passline bet is a long term loser. However, it depends on the terms of the bet. If you are getting two-to-one, or 3-to-2, you are doing well.
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo da Vinci
August 1st, 2011 at 11:34:34 AM
permalink
Quote: odiousgambitScenario: you make a private bet with someone that at your session at the craps table, you will 'break even or better'. In other words, your bankroll in no case will decrease but at least stay the same as you started with.
Are you talking about the total bankroll at the end of a session, or at any given point in the play?
For example, if the play comes 3-7-7-7-7-7, do you lose because you were down 1 unit after the 3, or do you win because you're up 4 units after the 6th and final roll?
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
August 1st, 2011 at 11:36:07 AM
permalink
It depends on the size of the side bet. I'm pretty sure you could use the free odds to manipulate your session outcome distribution so that you had >50% chance of being ahead, at the cost of large potential losses (think Martingale).
Thus, the side bet would be +EV, but your action would be -EV. If the side bet was large enough, you could have a +EV situation.
Thus, the side bet would be +EV, but your action would be -EV. If the side bet was large enough, you could have a +EV situation.
Wisdom is the quality that keeps you out of situations where you would otherwise need it
August 1st, 2011 at 12:04:34 PM
permalink
no free odds is stipulated. Also, just consider the side bet, do not consider whether overall you are + EV
I think this is classic counter-intuitive, because it can still be true that you win or break even more than half the time... but also *lose or break even* more than half the time. Both statements can be true.
Honestly, I have moments when I am confused myself.
I think this is classic counter-intuitive, because it can still be true that you win or break even more than half the time... but also *lose or break even* more than half the time. Both statements can be true.
Honestly, I have moments when I am confused myself.
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell! She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
August 1st, 2011 at 12:34:54 PM
permalink
Quote: odiousgambitHonestly, I have moments when I am confused myself.
You've made a fair beginning at confusing everyone else :)
I can see you can have mroe winning than losing sessions, yet wind up way down. that's easy. I can't quite understand your other claim.
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
August 1st, 2011 at 12:44:56 PM
permalink
Just Martingale. You have a good chance of finishing break even or better in a short-to-medium length session. Easy to win the bet.
"Dice, verily, are armed with goads and driving-hooks, deceiving and tormenting, causing grievous woe." -Rig Veda 10.34.4
August 1st, 2011 at 12:55:36 PM
permalink
Assuming 1 unit minimum bet and 1024 units max, you have roughly 0.1% chance of losing a martingale sequence.
The side bet will be +EV as long as you play less than 420 sequences. Overall, it looks like, under this conditions, you are in the positive territory as long as the number of bets you are required to make is less than, say, 1000 (the exact number is somewhat greater, but 1000 is nice and round, and fairly safe).
The side bet will be +EV as long as you play less than 420 sequences. Overall, it looks like, under this conditions, you are in the positive territory as long as the number of bets you are required to make is less than, say, 1000 (the exact number is somewhat greater, but 1000 is nice and round, and fairly safe).
"When two people always agree one of them is unnecessary"
August 1st, 2011 at 12:59:14 PM
permalink
Without Martingaling, would it be a + EV side bet?
Stay tuned, let's get more results, and I will let you in on what might cause the confusion ... my confusion as well
Stay tuned, let's get more results, and I will let you in on what might cause the confusion ... my confusion as well
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell! She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
August 1st, 2011 at 2:13:15 PM
permalink
To end the suspense, 7-out's table here indicates that at least for 30 passline bets "54.14%(slightly more than half) or more outcomes will be to break even or be ahead." [see the highlighted ]
So
*Is his chart correct [I really would like to be sure!]
*I get it that when you lose, you lose more than when you win, on average.
*for a set of 30 bets, it would seem the above side bet would + EV, or what am I missing?
*It bothers me to know that for 100,000 bets, say, you would almost surely have no real chance of still being even. But is that pertinent?
*something simple eludes me here
So
*Is his chart correct [I really would like to be sure!]
*I get it that when you lose, you lose more than when you win, on average.
*for a set of 30 bets, it would seem the above side bet would + EV, or what am I missing?
*It bothers me to know that for 100,000 bets, say, you would almost surely have no real chance of still being even. But is that pertinent?
*something simple eludes me here
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell! She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
August 1st, 2011 at 2:47:26 PM
permalink
I knee-jerk voted for negative EV. Yeah, it's seemed so obvious and intuitive. That should have been the first clue to pause...
Then I looked at the table you referenced. Hmmm...
Since there is a sizable (14.4%) chance that will result in a zero win/loss, and fairly even chance of win vs loss (39% / 45%), you might actually be onto something.
Of course, the original question remains: Are we talking about no loss at the end of 30 PL bets, or never dipping into the red?
Then I looked at the table you referenced. Hmmm...
Since there is a sizable (14.4%) chance that will result in a zero win/loss, and fairly even chance of win vs loss (39% / 45%), you might actually be onto something.
Of course, the original question remains: Are we talking about no loss at the end of 30 PL bets, or never dipping into the red?
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
August 1st, 2011 at 3:19:33 PM
permalink
Quote: rdw4potusAre you talking about the total bankroll at the end of a session, or at any given point in the play?
For example, if the play comes 3-7-7-7-7-7, do you lose because you were down 1 unit after the 3, or do you win because you're up 4 units after the 6th and final roll?
I missed your question before. It would be your bankroll at the end of the X no. of bets agreed to. You would not be able to make more bets or stop when you were ahead.
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell! She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
August 1st, 2011 at 3:22:13 PM
permalink
If no profit is a "win", instead of a push, then, yes, you could be "ahead" by employing a Martingale. However, if you are flat betting (as in the referenced table), you are still operating in a negative EV situation, as you will have to win at least once for every loss to get back to even. Unfortunately, your odds of losing will always exceed your odds of winning by 1.4%, whether on one roll or 30. Therefore: Negative EV.
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo da Vinci
August 1st, 2011 at 3:52:41 PM
permalink
The answer to the OPs question ends up being pretty simple. For a small # of trials, there is a fair chance of breaking even in a -EV game by flat betting. If you win the side bet by finishing even or ahead, then the side bet is +EV. Your advantage comes from the chance of breaking even.
As the # of trials increases, the chance of breaking even decreases, and eventually your chance of finishing even or ahead drops below 50%.
Consult table below, which shows the probability of finishing even or up after N trials on the pass line (f=244/495). Your bet is +EV up to 70 pass lines.
20 0.563020692
22 0.557764082
24 0.553065187
26 0.548820611
28 0.544952395
30 0.541400455
32 0.538117601
34 0.535066167
36 0.53221565
38 0.529541038
40 0.527021588
42 0.524639929
44 0.522381376
46 0.520233417
48 0.518185311
50 0.516227772
52 0.514352726
54 0.512553111
56 0.510822715
58 0.509156051
60 0.507548246
62 0.505994959
64 0.504492303
66 0.503036786
68 0.501625262
70 0.500254886
72 0.498923075
74 0.497627482
76 0.496365965
78 0.495136565
80 0.493937485
As the # of trials increases, the chance of breaking even decreases, and eventually your chance of finishing even or ahead drops below 50%.
Consult table below, which shows the probability of finishing even or up after N trials on the pass line (f=244/495). Your bet is +EV up to 70 pass lines.
20 0.563020692
22 0.557764082
24 0.553065187
26 0.548820611
28 0.544952395
30 0.541400455
32 0.538117601
34 0.535066167
36 0.53221565
38 0.529541038
40 0.527021588
42 0.524639929
44 0.522381376
46 0.520233417
48 0.518185311
50 0.516227772
52 0.514352726
54 0.512553111
56 0.510822715
58 0.509156051
60 0.507548246
62 0.505994959
64 0.504492303
66 0.503036786
68 0.501625262
70 0.500254886
72 0.498923075
74 0.497627482
76 0.496365965
78 0.495136565
80 0.493937485
Wisdom is the quality that keeps you out of situations where you would otherwise need it
August 1st, 2011 at 3:54:37 PM
permalink
Quote: odiousgambitTo end the suspense, 7-out's table here indicates that at least for 30 passline bets "54.14%(slightly more than half) or more outcomes will be to break even or be ahead." [see the highlighted ]
So
*Is his chart correct [I really would like to be sure!]
*I get it that when you lose, you lose more than when you win, on average.
*for a set of 30 bets, it would seem the above side bet would + EV, or what am I missing?
*It bothers me to know that for 100,000 bets, say, you would almost surely have no real chance of still being even. But is that pertinent?
*something simple eludes me here
The side bet was "break even or win", not just "win". The chances of breaking even with flat bets are relatively high if X is even and not large. The answer to the question depends entirely on what X is. If X is odd, you always have the worst of it flat betting because p(break even) = 0. If X is even, you have the best of it unless you play for long enough.
ObFollowUpQuestion: If X is even and you're flat betting, at what value of X does p(break even or better) < 50%?
Edit: dwheatley posted the answer while I was writing up the question. See above.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice."
-- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
August 1st, 2011 at 4:01:25 PM
permalink
What would be the odds if you lost the first trial? In other words, could the early performance give you an indication of how likely you would be to come out even or ahead after 69 trials, if you started $5 down?
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo da Vinci
August 1st, 2011 at 4:07:21 PM
permalink
Quote: AyecarumbaIf no profit is a "win", instead of a push, then, yes, you could be "ahead" by employing a Martingale. However, if you are flat betting (as in the referenced table), you are still operating in a negative EV situation, as you will have to win at least once for every loss to get back to even. Unfortunately, your odds of losing will always exceed your odds of winning by 1.4%, whether on one roll or 30. Therefore: Negative EV.
but the bet isnt that you would win, but 'win or break even.' [math extremist posted this reply at the same time]
Quote: dwheatleyThe answer to the OPs question ends up being pretty simple. For a small # of trials, there is a fair chance of breaking even in a -EV game by flat betting. If you win the side bet by finishing even or ahead, then the side bet is +EV. Your advantage comes from the chance of breaking even.
As the # of trials increases, the chance of breaking even decreases, and eventually your chance of finishing even or ahead drops below 50%.
Thanks very much! you get the same answer as Mister 7-out for 30 trials, which is reassuring.
wow! if you bet 20 trials you would have killer + EV on an even bet. Even 30. And we can see intuition would fail many folks.
The parameters IMO should be:
Flat betting, no free odds, no martingale [to make it fair], must finish on exactly X bets, can't stop when even or ahead, and can't make more bets. Any bet [of course you'd be a fool to do other than pass or DP. ] I could see someone taking a guy up on this, but you'd want to stay away from welchers.
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell! She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
August 1st, 2011 at 5:49:49 PM
permalink
If x is an even number the likelihood of being up OR even exceeds being down for small numbers x. If x is 2 it is clear that you are up or even around 73% of the time. If x is an odd number you will never be 'up or even' more than down, because there is no 'even'.
August 2nd, 2011 at 3:30:59 AM
permalink
Quote: SOOPOOIf x is an odd number you will never be 'up or even' more than down, because there is no 'even'.
well, you could still be up more than down. Odd how this is such a factor though.
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell! She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
August 2nd, 2011 at 6:13:43 AM
permalink
You can scenario this, Jack: If anyone speaks to me at a craps game who isn't a casino employee they had better be a young, half-naked female playing black chips or better. My usual response otherwise is: "I'm terribly sorry but I don't speak a word of English". I don't make bets with other players and they don't make bets with me. Positive expectation? I don't care if you are a hulking football player, if you keep yacking at me while I'm playing craps your positive expectation is going to involve security guards picking you up off the floor and asking you if you are okay as they hustle me off to the office. The casino books all bets. I don't book your action at all. And I don't want you yapping at me.Quote: odiousgambitScenario: you make a private bet with someone that at your session at the craps table, you will ...
August 2nd, 2011 at 6:56:35 AM
permalink
Quote: FleaStiffIf anyone speaks to me at a craps game who isn't a casino employee they had better be a young, half-naked female
Point taken. No, I don't think you want to hustle this at the table. A bet with someone you know prior to going is what I am thinking. Someone who has established he can appreciate a good hustle, and has done likewise.
Another thing would be to shut up someone who is bugging *you*, by betting him you can break even or better on the next 20 bets.
Quote: FleaStiffThe casino books all bets.
Would a casino pitboss ever book a bet they were unfamiliar with?
Would he try to ban private bets between players?
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell! She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
August 2nd, 2011 at 7:44:33 AM
permalink
>Would a casino pitboss ever book a bet they were unfamiliar with?
Never!
>Would he try to ban private bets between players?
Only if some jerk was being obnoxious about it. Otherwise they focus on the dice and the chips on the layout.
Now if some guy's girlfriend bets that he will get some tonight if the next roll is 12 even the box man may crack a smile but he won't do anything about it unless she tries to make good on her bet right there in the casino.
By "the casino books all bets" I was referring to the fact that the game is Bank Craps. The casino books all bets, both Right and Wrong. Its not back alley craps where much of the action is between the players and the game operator only pays PassLine bets because there is no DontPass line on the layout. That is why this myth of Don't Bettors are betting against the Right Bettors is nonsense. The casino is booking the action on both sides. And they don't really care who wins.
Never!
>Would he try to ban private bets between players?
Only if some jerk was being obnoxious about it. Otherwise they focus on the dice and the chips on the layout.
Now if some guy's girlfriend bets that he will get some tonight if the next roll is 12 even the box man may crack a smile but he won't do anything about it unless she tries to make good on her bet right there in the casino.
By "the casino books all bets" I was referring to the fact that the game is Bank Craps. The casino books all bets, both Right and Wrong. Its not back alley craps where much of the action is between the players and the game operator only pays PassLine bets because there is no DontPass line on the layout. That is why this myth of Don't Bettors are betting against the Right Bettors is nonsense. The casino is booking the action on both sides. And they don't really care who wins.
August 2nd, 2011 at 7:55:28 AM
permalink
Quote: odiousgambitScenario: you make a private bet with someone that at your session at the craps table, you will 'break even or better'. In other words, your bankroll in no case will decrease but at least stay the same as you started with. The guy who accepts your bet says you have to make at least X no. of bets, figuring he will win the bet in the long run if nothing else.
It's funny -- I was in almost this exact situation at a craps table few months ago. I could have taken a hundred dollars off the guy, but I ended up refusing to collect from him after I'd won the prop bet because he seemed too drunk to really be sure what he'd done. (Which, incidentally, may have made it a questionable bet on his part by virtue of his apparent intoxication alone.)
August 2nd, 2011 at 10:15:42 AM
permalink
Quote: heatherIt's funny -- I was in almost this exact situation at a craps table few months ago. I could have taken a hundred dollars off the guy, but I ended up refusing to collect from him after I'd won the prop bet because he seemed too drunk to really be sure what he'd done. (Which, incidentally, may have made it a questionable bet on his part by virtue of his apparent intoxication alone.)
But what if the prop didn't go your way? Would you have paid the drunk?
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo da Vinci
August 2nd, 2011 at 12:46:31 PM
permalink
Quote: AyecarumbaBut what if the prop didn't go your way? Would you have paid the drunk?
Absolutely; I fully intended to when I agreed (before realizing that he'd had a few). I like the idea of placing bets on your bankroll.
August 2nd, 2011 at 1:48:34 PM
permalink
Quote: heatherAbsolutely; I fully intended to when I agreed (before realizing that he'd had a few). I like the idea of placing bets on your bankroll.
Then I would have no problem with you collecting. It runs both ways.
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo da Vinci
