a very interesting logic mistake in bettng bad

today, i saw some were discussing the betting on both banker and player at the same time to get the comps.

it is safe to say, if it is a player/tie, i break even, i earn casino comps. it is a banker, i lose 5%.

if we forget tie, here are some logic way to house edge.
1) banker+player.
2)( banker+player)/2
3) (banker win%-player win%)*5%.

i specially like this 3rd way, it is easier to mind.
banker wins: 45.86% player wins: 44.62%

if i bet 100 times*100USD each on banker and player, i only lose 1.24 hand. for which i am only paid 95%.
so the loss is 1.24*100*0.05=6.2USD.
but by betting so much money, i shall get a free hotel room.

this is so simple that i think it is right. but it is not.

i tried to figure out. after 20 minutes, i found it is just becaus of the way how randomness works, which explains why there are some high true counts instead of 0 1,2, or why there are always new record of streaks.

i would rather leave it not answered. though it is simple to some.

by the way, recently i specially like reading Arnold Snyder,after finished reading all Eliot.

wut.jpg


If you're betting $100 on banker and $100 on player, and if the banker wins 45.86% of the time and player wins 44.62% of the time, then you're going to lose $5 every 45.86% of the hands. Thus, he average loss per round is: $5 * 0.4586 = $2.293



If you're losing $2.29 per round of $200 in action. The percentage loss is 2.29/200 = 1.145%. If you play 100 rounds of $200 in action, that's $20,000 in action. At 1.145% of that $20,000, you expect to lose $229.


In my experience at a casino, and certainly not all casinos are this stupid (but many are), they simply won't rate a player who's betting both sides (craps on pass + don't pass, roulette with red + black, or baccarat with player+banker). They're logic is that they aren't risking anything (dafuq????) and don't have a chance to win, therefore they shouldn't get rated.

TomChina123,

First of all, everything RS said is absolutely right.

With that out of the way, dang, I'd rather two way Craps if I was going to two way anything. With a partner, you might get rated for off-setting odds (at a place that rates for odds) so those have zero house edge which would result in your overall action having a house edge that is lesser than that of this Baccarat scheme. Potentially, much less!

Furthermore, you can get two partners and have them bet the opposite side at Craps for differing amounts, but amounts that equal your amount in total (and then odds that result in winning your off-setting odds, in total, if they win) which would, at least, make what you are doing a little less obvious.

Although, if the goal is just to get free rooms, I would just go on here and create a thread if you are going to Vegas! There are some guys on here that could make two clones of themselves and would still have enough Vegas rooms for themselves, and each of their clones, for every day of the year except certain weekends, and perhaps even those.

The best part of that is, maybe you just buy the rooms off of them at a steep discount. Maybe you sit and play a machine for a couple of hours with their money. Maybe you do something else, I don't know, but the point is you shouldn't play for comps and that is exactly what you are describing doing.

Although, the Craps idea might at least get you good value, if you can pull it off and everyone gets rated for the odds. Better yet, you even have a theoretical possibility of NOT DEFINITELY LOSING MONEY, you just have to duck Midnight on the Come Out. You're not going to duck Banker for 100 bets, I can assure you of that, but you might duck Midnight for 100 Come Out rolls.

Or, you might hit Midnight more than expected, but that's gambling, which is what you are supposed to be doing.

If you would rather buy than gamble, then just buy. Look for discounts online, or again, try to get in touch with someone on here (or wherever you are going) and see if they have any rooms they'd be willing to sell you on the cheap.

There are rare situations in which what you are describing can be done at an advantage, but you're unlikely to encounter them just by randomly picking a place you don't know anything about. The situations are also EXTREMELY rare in the type of conditions that you are describing. Generally, the actual value of whatever you are getting should not exceed your expected loss, it's the job of many in the casino industry to make sure it doesn't, while making you feel like it does.

And that, my friend, is how questions like this get asked in the first place.

This guy recommends roulette for comp hustling:

https://www.888casino.com/blog/how-to-win-roulette-everytime/

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

This guy recommends roulette for comp hustling:

https://www.888casino.com/blog/how-to-win-roulette-everytime/

he also shows a betting system based on baloney

you have to wonder how hard it is for Teliot to zip his lip on this stuff

Quote: odiousgambit

he also shows a betting system based on baloney

you have to wonder how hard it is for Teliot to zip his lip on this stuff

Yeah, I know...

I've seen worse stuff in a casino. All you can do is shake your head.

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

This guy recommends roulette for comp hustling:

https://www.888casino.com/blog/how-to-win-roulette-everytime/

At least I can stop reading almost immediately in his write-up:

Quote:

If you lose $1,000 on while playing, but you receive $1,300 in free rooms, food, alcohol and show tickets you have beaten the casino at their own game. You have gotten more from the casino than you have given them

That's the answer!!! If I can just lose less than the monetary asking price of the comps I receive, (which is a number that the casino decides and is unlikely to represent the fair market value of same anywhere else on Earth) then I have actually won regardless of the actual dollar amount that I have less than when I came in. Brilliant!

Does the fact that those same comps do not have that amount of actual monetary value to me matter? Hell no! Does it matter that I would never open up my wallet and fork over $1,000 in cash just to be given those same comps and save the time it would take me to lose at Roulette? Absolutely not! Does it matter that the alleged $1,300 in comp value doesn't even represent anywhere close to $1,300 in actual costs for the casino to offer me those comps? Of course not, who cares about that?

How much do you figure that $1,300 in (non free play) comps would cost the casino on direct? Other than a sold out weekend,(where you would have actual opportunity cost you are giving up) maybe $200-$300 in actual costs to the casino?

I'm getting the best of it, though, because the casino says all that crap is worth $1,300.

In fairness, aside from the click bait (and false, how does that describe winning?) title and the introduction, the rest of that advice seems somewhat reasonable if one is determined to play for comps. The problem, of course, is that one shouldn't be playing for comps.

He also suggests dropping down to offsetting $25 bets and going about one out of every four spins. First of all, that counts on the pit bosses not to notice the fact that the players are only betting 1/4th what they were when they started, and only betting one in four spins, so effectively only betting 1/16th what they were when they started. I suspect that some pit bosses will notice that and others won't, but the ones that do may well not rate the player at all, and the whole concept of what Mr. Colon is saying relies on the pit boss overrating you.

Granted, my Craps idea might not work, either, but if there is no dollars and cents advantage to be had, I wouldn't write an article advocating playing for comps unless I said, at some point, "BY THE WAY, YOU SHOULD NEVER PLAY FOR COMPS!"

And, my Article sure as Hell wouldn't be called, "How to Win at Craps!"

Oh well, what can you do?

Sorry about the rant, trying to write with integrity and honesty and all that. It's a pain.

Your response is exactly why I posted it. I knew someone would rip it apart and show how stupid the idea of these types of systems are.

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

Your response is exactly why I posted it. I knew someone would rip it apart and show how stupid the idea of these types of systems are.

Thanks for the opportunity, then, and consider it thoroughly ripped.

Actually, I was going to mathematically detail why my Craps idea (assuming the House rates for odds and the ratings are the same for Craps and single-zero Roulette with imprisonment) is still the superior of the two if one is absolutely determined to play for comps, but then I decided it wouldn't be worth the effort.

The short version is that it would call for 10x Odds to be offered, rated and the players would not have to skip rounds or alter their base bets.