How should my "friend" bet, considering...?
Quote: MaxSwelleConsidering the following changes in probable outcomes, how would or should a so called DI wager:
Considering the following changes in probable outcomes, how would or should a so called DI wager:
2-2.75%
3-4.96%
4-4.41%
5-11.29%
6-12.95%
7-14.88%
8-17.085%
9-11.575%
10-8.825%
11-6.61%
12-4.68%
I II
2--2.78% 2--2.75%
3--5.56% 3--4.96%
4--8.33% 4--4.41%
5--11.11% 5--11.29%
6--13.89% 6--12.95%
7--16.67% 7--14.88%
8--13.89% 8--17.08%
9--11.11% 9--11.57%
10--8.33% 10--8.82%
11--5.56% 11--6.61%
12--2.78% 12--4.68%
*3600 recorded results using Wincraps
I'm not certain about whether the decreased frequency of the seven makes the Pass Line a better bet. My guess is that it does. I note, for example, that if you roll an 8 on the comeout, you're actually a favorite to win. You could also just place the 8 until the cows come home.
The sharp decrease in the frequency of the 4 means you could lay against the 4 and do very well.
I would recommend that you at least quintuple your sample size before going out into the real world and making any actual bets. You should also seriously consider cover, how and where you will make your bets, and so forth. My feeling is that you probably wouldn't be able to set the dice for very long before being warned not to, so perhaps something basic that would produce a decision on every roll would be best. I think Field bets, as long as the 12 does pay triple, might be pretty good here, given that the increased 8s are just about offset by the decreased 6s and 7s. There are fewer 4s, but almost three times as many 12s more than makes up for that. Someone less lazy than I can no doubt work out the percentages, but I would estimate that you're getting at least a 5% edge betting the Field here.
If your percentages hold up (or, more importantly, continue to show deviations from the norm, whatever those may ultimately be), you'll have a potential money-making opportunity--that will not last very long at all if it is successful. You'll make more money from writing the book about it.
Quote: EaglesnestMy initial reaction is that you should ignore anything else and just bet black on 12. (A confederate, not the shooter.) It'll come up once every 16 rolls and pay 30-to-1 or 30-for-1. No-brainer, and you'll look like nothing more than a lucky idiot.
I'm not certain about whether the decreased frequency of the seven makes the Pass Line a better bet. My guess is that it does. I note, for example, that if you roll an 8 on the comeout, you're actually a favorite to win. You could also just place the 8 until the cows come home.
The sharp decrease in the frequency of the 4 means you could lay against the 4 and do very well.
I would recommend that you at least quintuple your sample size before going out into the real world and making any actual bets. You should also seriously consider cover, how and where you will make your bets, and so forth. My feeling is that you probably wouldn't be able to set the dice for very long before being warned not to, so perhaps something basic that would produce a decision on every roll would be best. I think Field bets, as long as the 12 does pay triple, might be pretty good here, given that the increased 8s are just about offset by the decreased 6s and 7s. There are fewer 4s, but almost three times as many 12s more than makes up for that. Someone less lazy than I can no doubt work out the percentages, but I would estimate that you're getting at least a 5% edge betting the Field here.
If your percentages hold up (or, more importantly, continue to show deviations from the norm, whatever those may ultimately be), you'll have a potential money-making opportunity--that will not last very long at all if it is successful. You'll make more money from writing the book about it.
The actual frequency of 12's is 4.68 NOT 6.68. Also, please elaborate on "seriously consider cover". I'm assuming that you are referring to casino heat.
Quote: MaxSwelleThe actual frequency of 12's is 4.68 NOT 6.68. Also, please elaborate on "seriously consider cover". I'm assuming that you are referring to casino heat.
The 12s are still occurring far more often than they "should," so Field bets may still be worth making. I think this is better than making bets that may take several rolls to decide, as you may not have all that many rolls (both from the fact that you could be backed off or simply told to stop setting the dice and that you are only going to be one of several shooters at the table).
In referring to "cover," I am referencing the fact that casinos don't like winners. If you bet enough to make this whole play worthwhile, you will be doing so ONLY when the dice-setter is shooting--so why, for instance, are you betting $100 on the Field ONLY then? This will raise a red flag very swiftly. In fact, I would expect that you would only be able to do so for one hand. If you bet $100 on the Field only a small portion of the time and the rest of the time, bet only $5 on the Pass Line, this will be an obvious and noticeable pattern--which will in turn attract more attention to the dicesetting shooter.
It goes without saying that the dice setter should make minimum bets, dress like a tourist, and have a drink with him. If the dicesetter is the one making the big bets, he might as well wear a T-shirt that says, "ADVANTAGE PLAYER." This means that the action would have to be coming from a team member. They would have to not associate in any way, at the table or away from it. If all this worked, I would have a policy of NEVER having the same combination of player and shooter appear in the same casino twice in a row. They should not arrive at or leave the table at the same time.
I would never underestimate the ability of casino management to detect an advantage play. Maybe not the play itself, but any of a hundred different mannerisms, gestures, things you say or do not say, etc. can easily distinguish you from the average loser and raise red flags.
Quote: EaglesnestThe 12s are still occurring far more often than they "should," so Field bets may still be worth making. I think this is better than making bets that may take several rolls to decide, as you may not have all that many rolls (both from the fact that you could be backed off or simply told to stop setting the dice and that you are only going to be one of several shooters at the table).
In referring to "cover," I am referencing the fact that casinos don't like winners. If you bet enough to make this whole play worthwhile, you will be doing so ONLY when the dice-setter is shooting--so why, for instance, are you betting $100 on the Field ONLY then? This will raise a red flag very swiftly. In fact, I would expect that you would only be able to do so for one hand. If you bet $100 on the Field only a small portion of the time and the rest of the time, bet only $5 on the Pass Line, this will be an obvious and noticeable pattern--which will in turn attract more attention to the dicesetting shooter.
It goes without saying that the dice setter should make minimum bets, dress like a tourist, and have a drink with him. If the dicesetter is the one making the big bets, he might as well wear a T-shirt that says, "ADVANTAGE PLAYER." This means that the action would have to be coming from a team member. They would have to not associate in any way, at the table or away from it. If all this worked, I would have a policy of NEVER having the same combination of player and shooter appear in the same casino twice in a row. They should not arrive at or leave the table at the same time.
I would never underestimate the ability of casino management to detect an advantage play. Maybe not the play itself, but any of a hundred different mannerisms, gestures, things you say or do not say, etc. can easily distinguish you from the average loser and raise red flags.
Eaglesnest,
I provided my friend with the betting tip that you advised and in the short term it proved to be profitable. After a premature urge to test her results in live play, and with some modification of your advice, the following bets were implemented: *LAY 4($50) *PLACE BET 8($12) *PLACE BET 9($10) HARD 4($5). Her bankroll is $1000 and after four days of play, totaling (11) hours, she is up $422. She was talked into utilizing the Hard 4 bet as a hedge for the LAY 4, regrettably. In live play her teammate documented a total of (16) fours-(3) of which were Hard. Not worth the I. If you're interested I'll keep you posted. I'm leary, but so far so good.
It might be better to bet the field or horn and work in some type of ploppy style pressing pattern, but do it a bit more aggressively when you're shooting.
I'm skeptical about all of this but if someone could do this, why not just make the highest EV bets with nice sized wagers and hop around to different casinos?Quote: DJTeddyBearI'm on my phone so I can't work the numbers right now, but my feeling is that betting just the 12 will cause scrutiny - particularly if he's only doing it for 1 shooter.
It might be better to bet the field or horn and work in some type of ploppy style pressing pattern, but do it a bit more aggressively when you're shooting.
Quote: DJTeddyBearI'm on my phone so I can't work the numbers right now, but my feeling is that betting just the 12 will cause scrutiny - particularly if he's only doing it for 1 shooter.
It might be better to bet the field or horn and work in some type of ploppy style pressing pattern, but do it a bit more aggressively when you're shooting.
Yup, that is precisely why a Boxcar bet wasn't included in the betting strategy. She is considering the axe for the PLACE 9 and only focusing on the LAY 4 plus the PLACE 8. What I find most intriguing is that she formulated a betting strategy based on a perceived deviation from random throws. She intentionally sets and throws the dice a certain way in an attempt to duplicate her throw. She observed a pattern of numbers and based her entire betting strategy solely on this perceived deviation of probabilities; and has shown short term success . I'm a bit surprised by it all. Although her throw isn't fashioned after the stylings of GTC/PARR/Sharpshooter, it is ostensibly repeatable. It's a shot that her brother taught her and he "uses it sparingly in AC and during visits to Las Vegas, with success." I think he's a degenerate gambler and lacks money management abilities, but I digress. I'll forward to her any additional input you that you offer, mathematically or otherwise. For the record, I believe it's coincidence but I'll keep updating her progress...or ruin, should it be the case.
Quote: AxelWolfI'm skeptical about all of this but if someone could do this, why not just make the highest EV bets with nice sized wagers and hop around to different casinos?
IF. I agree with you. "If" is the operative word. She agrees that the conditional "if' is detrimental to her bankroll and more than likely will cause a bust out. Skepticism is what kept her betting the amounts that she did. I'm here for information, expertise, fellowship and perhaps some networking. I'm a smart ass, loyal and fiercely honest. That being said, if I say that something happened or didn't happen; such was the case. I mentioned that just in case your skepticism was directed at my integrity- because her ability to influence dice, in any manner, has been met by my skepticism as well...I'm simply relaying, to this forum, what has happened.
Quote: MaxSwelleSorry guys, I tried posting this from my iPhone and inadvertently submitted it, prematurely. Assuming that the occurrences of numbers thrown are changed from expected probabilities (column 1) to *actual percentages (column 2), how could she capitalize on such a variation.
I II
2--2.78% 2--2.75%
3--5.56% 3--4.96%
4--8.33% 4--4.41%
5--11.11% 5--11.29%
6--13.89% 6--12.95%
7--16.67% 7--14.88%
8--13.89% 8--17.08%
9--11.11% 9--11.57%
10--8.33% 10--8.82%
11--5.56% 11--6.61%
12--2.78% 12--4.68%
*3600 recorded results using Wincraps
Lay the 4 for table max.
Bet the 8 for table max.
Bet the 12 for table max.
I have the bankroll to do it. IF I believed you.
Quote: SOOPOOLay the 4 for table max.
Bet the 8 for table max.
Bet the 12 for table max.
I have the bankroll to do it. IF I believed you.
You don't have the bankroll. I don't believe you.
Quote: MaxSwelleYou don't have the bankroll. I don't believe you.
Wager?
Quote: MaxSwelleWager?
$2500. If I have your attention, let's discuss the terms.
The 4 should appear 1/2 as often as the 7. Your stats show for every 149 7's you only roll 44 4's. For 149 7's you should roll 74 4's. You are THIRTY 4's short. I'll let a better math guy than myself figure out the 'Kelly bankroll' needed to Lay $1000 on the 4 with those ridiculous odds.
The 8 is appearing 15% more frequently than the 7. And being paid 7/6, means you are paid a premium of 17% on your bet. Let someone help me by figuring what bankroll I'd need to bet $1200 on the 8 at those ridiculous probabilities.
You have the 12 appearing 68% more frequently than it should. Same concept...... lets say $200 on the 12..... I really don't know what they let you bet on a one roll 30-1 bet on the typical table.
Quote: MaxSwelle$2500. If I have your attention, let's discuss the terms.
You have my attention. But I have no idea what you want to bet on. My point was that if the roller really could predictably roll such outlandish percentages of defined numbers, it would be simple to bet in a way to drain the house of 'all' of its money, assuming they would keep letting you play.
Quote: SOOPOOThat's fine if you don't believe me.
The 4 should appear 1/2 as often as the 7. Your stats show for every 149 7's you only roll 44 4's. For 149 7's you should roll 74 4's. You are THIRTY 4's short. I'll let a better math guy than myself figure out the 'Kelly bankroll' needed to Lay $1000 on the 4 with those ridiculous odds.
The 8 is appearing 15% more frequently than the 7. And being paid 7/6, means you are paid a premium of 17% on your bet. Let someone help me by figuring what bankroll I'd need to bet $1200 on the 8 at those ridiculous probabilities.
You have the 12 appearing 68% more frequently than it should. Same concept...... lets say $200 on the 12..... I really don't know what they let you bet on a one roll 30-1 bet on the typical table.
I'll make it simple since you love nutting up on this subject--360 rolls of dice will produce fewer than (29) fours. $2500.
Quote: MaxSwelleI'll make it simple since you love nutting up on this subject--360 rolls of dice will produce fewer than (29) fours. $2500.
Hmmmm... you post she can do 4.41% That is what I was responding to. So 360 x .0441= 15.876, or around 16...... Hell.... I'll give you a cushion of 2 more.... Let's see if she can do 18 or fewer...... You posted she can do 4.41%..... 18 is a whopping 5%.
The expected number is of course 30..... probably a random luck shooter hits 28 or fewer 40% of the time.
Quote: DJTeddyBearI'm on my phone so I can't work the numbers right now, but my feeling is that betting just the 12 will cause scrutiny - particularly if he's only doing it for 1 shooter.
It might be better to bet the field or horn and work in some type of ploppy style pressing pattern, but do it a bit more aggressively when you're shooting.
Well, I'm home now and worked out the numbers. Assuming standard Caesars payouts (15/30 horn), a $4 horn normally returns an average of $3.34, but with your numbers. it pays $3.15. On the other hand, a $5 horn high 12 normally pays $4.17 but with you it pays $4.56. Still a loss, but not as bad.
A field where 2 & 12 both pay 2, you lose 1/2¢ less per $1 bet. If the 12 pays 3, normally lose 2.8¢, your method loses less than half a cent per $1. If you go to Santa Anna with their zero edge 2/12 paying 3, your shooting earns an average of 2.5¢ per $1 bet.
OK, it's not great. So ignore what I've been saying about horn and field.... unless my numbers are wrong.
Quote: AxelWolfI'm skeptical about all of this but if someone could do this, why not just make the highest EV bets with nice sized wagers and hop around to different casinos?
Well, I was hoping the numbers would be better. If they were, it would attract a lot less attention than just betting the 12.
Quote: SOOPOOHmmmm... you post she can do 4.41% That is what I was responding to. So 360 x .0441= 15.876, or around 16...... Hell.... I'll give you a cushion of 2 more.... Let's see if she can do 18 or fewer...... You posted she can do 4.41%..... 18 is a whopping 5%.
The expected number is of course 30..... probably a random luck shooter hits 28 or fewer 40% of the time.
That being said, you also responded to the increased number of eights thrown. So, lets make it a two tier wager. Over on the (8) at 51 appearances and under on the (4) at 29. She must complete both for a win-a failure to complete one or both legs is a loss. $2500. I'm not sure if you live near Vegas, but if we increase the wager to $3k we can split your airfare (up to $250).
What casino?Quote: MaxSwelleThat being said, you also responded to the increased number of eights thrown. So, lets make it a two tier wager. Over on the (8) at 51 appearances and under on the (4) at 29. She must complete both for a win-a failure to complete one or both legs is a loss. $2500. I'm not sure if you live near Vegas, but if we increase the wager to $3k we can split your airfare (up to $250).
Quote: AxelWolfWhat casino?
We could not comfortably throw 360 rolls in a casino, but I have a regulation 14ft Paulson in my game room. None will doubt its authenticity upon inspection.
Quote: MaxSwelleThat being said, you also responded to the increased number of eights thrown. So, lets make it a two tier wager. Over on the (8) at 51 appearances and under on the (4) at 29. She must complete both for a win-a failure to complete one or both legs is a loss. $2500. I'm not sure if you live near Vegas, but if we increase the wager to $3k we can split your airfare (up to $250).
Thank you for the kind offer to pay some of my airfare. That won't be necessary. I will be in Vegas October 15-19. But your offer still does not jive with your original claim. A random roller will roll 50 8's in 360 rolls. You claimed she can do 17% which is 61. But you now offer 51...... So can she do 61...... 47 out of 100 will do 51!
Either you come up with a wager near what you claimed to be able to do, or stop wasting my time.
Imagine it this way.... I claim I can hit 90 foul shots out of 100. You doubt me.... I propose a bet..... If I make 74, I win.... That Is basically what you are doing...
Quote: SOOPOOThank you for the kind offer to pay some of my airfare. That won't be necessary. I will be in Vegas October 15-19. But your offer still does not jive with your original claim. A random roller will roll 50 8's in 360 rolls. You claimed she can do 17% which is 61. But you now offer 51...... So can she do 61...... 47 out of 100 will do 51!
Either you come up with a wager near what you claimed to be able to do, or stop wasting my time.
Imagine it this way.... I claim I can hit 90 foul shots out of 100. You doubt me.... I propose a bet..... If I make 74, I win.... That Is basically what you are doing...
As expected. Small time. Small bank roll. Big mouth.
Quote: SOOPOOThank you for the kind offer to pay some of my airfare. That won't be necessary. I will be in Vegas October 15-19. But your offer still does not jive with your original claim. A random roller will roll 50 8's in 360 rolls. You claimed she can do 17% which is 61. But you now offer 51...... So can she do 61...... 47 out of 100 will do 51!
Either you come up with a wager near what you claimed to be able to do, or stop wasting my time.
Imagine it this way.... I claim I can hit 90 foul shots out of 100. You doubt me.... I propose a bet..... If I make 74, I win.... That Is basically what you are doing...
We will come to terms, Mr. Poo. By the time you are in town I'm sure we'll have something worked out.
Quote: MaxSwelleAs expected. Small time. Small bank roll. Big mouth.
Anything but. You made outlandish claims, not me. I called you on your outlandish claims, and you backpedalled a few miles. YOU claimed she could do 4.41% '4s', which is 15.87 for 360 rolls. I'll bet you $10,000 she can't do fewer than 18 in 360 rolls.
Not so fast with MR POO. Lets work out the details NOW I'm willing to put up half the money,if not all of it.Quote: MaxSwelleWe will come to terms, Mr. Poo. By the time you are in town I'm sure we'll have something worked out.
Quote: SOOPOOThank you for the kind offer to pay some of my airfare. That won't be necessary. I will be in Vegas October 15-19. But your offer still does not jive with your original claim. A random roller will roll 50 8's in 360 rolls. You claimed she can do 17% which is 61. But you now offer 51...... So can she do 61...... 47 out of 100 will do 51!
Either you come up with a wager near what you claimed to be able to do, or stop wasting my time.
Imagine it this way.... I claim I can hit 90 foul shots out of 100. You doubt me.... I propose a bet..... If I make 74, I win.... That Is basically what you are doing...
How many out of 100 will both do under 29 and over 51, fours and eights respectively? Certainly you have an edge with this being a straight up wager. Don't pass up on this profitable opportunity to silence and quell the gurgled claims of idiots.
Quote: SOOPOOAnything but. You made outlandish claims, not me. I called you on your outlandish claims, and you backpedalled a few miles. YOU claimed she could do 4.41% '4s', which is 15.87 for 360 rolls. I'll bet you $10,000 she can't do fewer than 18 in 360 rolls.
Yeah ok pal, now you're just trying to untuck your package. My terms have been set. Take 'em or talk about 'em.
Quote: AxelWolfPersonally I think you MAX are bluffing and you will never let a bet happen you will keep BACKPEDALING or changing crap. The bet will never happen because you will make it impossible to fit your terms somehow.
Nailed it. This bet won't happen you and Mr. Poo (lol) will be getting jerked around until the cows come home.
Quote: AxelWolfPersonally I think you MAX are bluffing and you will never let a bet happen you will keep BACKPEDALING or changing crap. The bet will never happen because you will make it impossible to fit your terms somehow.
Please tell me the odds of both tiers.
Quote: MaxSwelleHow many out of 100 will both do under 29 and over 51, fours and eights respectively? Certainly you have an edge with this being a straight up wager. Don't pass up on this profitable opportunity to silence and quell the gurgled claims of idiots.
Around 1 in 5 would do both randomly. If I could convince my friend Ahigh, to host such an event, would that be acceptable to you? In the past he has provided his table, and his new dice as well. He also can film the event for posterity.
This happened in the past when Nickolay claimed to be able to produce fewer 7's than would be expected. Nickolay failed.
how many are you saying in 360 rolls?Quote: MaxSwelleYeah ok pal, now you're just trying to untuck your package. My terms have been set. Take 'em or talk about 'em.
Quote: SOOPOOAround 1 in 5 would do both randomly. If I could convince my friend Ahigh, to host such an event, would that be acceptable to you? In the past he has provided his table, and his new dice as well. He also can film the event for posterity.
This happened in the past when Nickolay claimed to be able to produce fewer 7's than would be expected. Nickolay failed.
Any regulation table is fine. Absolutely no video recording--non negotiable.
Dam quit trying to talk him out of it. Come up with a number and an amount and go from there.Quote: SOOPOOAround 1 in 5 would do both randomly. If I could convince my friend Ahigh, to host such an event, would that be acceptable to you? In the past he has provided his table, and his new dice as well. He also can film the event for posterity.
This happened in the past when Nickolay claimed to be able to produce fewer 7's than would be expected. Nickolay failed.
Quote: MaxSwelleHow many out of 100 will both do under 29 and over 51, fours and eights respectively? Certainly you have an edge with this being a straight up wager. Don't pass up on this profitable opportunity to silence and quell the gurgled claims of idiots.
So we have a deal? $2500 put up by you, $2500 put up by me. She must roll 360 times. Standard Las Vegas craps rules. She must toss the dice from one hand, they must travel in the air and hit the back wall. She can stand where a normal dice thrower can stand. If she rolls BOTH 28 or fewer 4's, AND 52 or more 8's, you win. If she fails on either number, I win.
Once you respond affirmatively I'll speak with Ahigh.
No cameras is fine with me. too.
Quote: SOOPOOSo we have a deal? $2500 put up by you, $2500 put up by me. She must roll 360 times. Standard Las Vegas craps rules. She must toss the dice from one hand, they must travel in the air and hit the back wall. She can stand where a normal dice thrower can stand. If she rolls BOTH 28 or fewer 4's, AND 52 or more 8's, you win. If she fails on either number, I win.
Once you respond affirmatively I'll speak with Ahigh.
No cameras is fine with me. too.
PM me with the details once you talk to him. Additionally, there will need to be a few breaks--15/20 minutes after each 72 rolls. Otherwise, we have a deal.
Quote: MaxSwelleAs expected. Small time. Small bank roll. Big mouth.
Max. Personal insults: not tolerated. Take a break. See you in 3 days; you can firm up the bet then.
FWIW, I will vouch that SooPoo, in fact, does have the bankroll and the willingness to bet it. As does AxelWolf. You don't know them. Yet.
Quote: MaxSwellePM me with the details once you talk to him. Additionally, there will need to be a few breaks--15/20 minutes after each 72 rolls. Otherwise, we have a deal.
Will do. Breaks are fine.
Where was the personal insult?Quote: beachbumbabsMax. Personal insults: not tolerated. Take a break. See you in 3 days; you can firm up the bet then.
FWIW, I will vouch that SooPoo, in fact, does have the bankroll and the willingness to bet it. As does AxelWolf. You don't know them. Yet.
BBB got trigger happy. I assume we will get a 100 word essay why it was correct. I don't know, seems crazy to me. I have seen a lot worst get by.Quote: rainmanWhat? just happened
Quote: AxelWolfWhere was the personal insult?
Max called SooPoo small time and big mouth, strongly implied he was a liar with "as expected". Possibly all the chatter was meant in the schoolyard "double dog dare" vein. Didn't read that way.
If Max has an interest in going forward, he'll be back. If he doesn't return, it'll be an easy excuse for him to get out of the bet, just like you claim he will, and we'll all know it's a nonsense claim.
Those weren't insults those were negotiations.
Tell you what. We disagree. So I'm going to forward this up to the Wizard and let him overrule me if, in bet-setting parlay, this is normal "rudeness" parameters, like trash-talking, and somehow acceptable. It'll be a learning experience for me if it is.
