thecesspit
thecesspit
Joined: Apr 19, 2010
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 5936
February 14th, 2011 at 5:26:42 PM permalink
Quote: discflicker


The independent booking of the 2 –EV bets is what makes this hedging work… it’s unique to DJs bet (and to the FireBet, but on a much more limited scale).

With the FireBet, I have yet to see a house allow me to book it without REQUIRENING line action on the first come-out roll. In Greektown Casino downtown, they allow players to book $1 props and hard ways bets but don’t allow a FireBet to be made without the line bet. Could they have recognized something here? Requiring a line bet prevents players from sitting on $1 FireBets and then cherry-picking what numbers to bet on what it starts hitting. It makes the booking of these 2 –EV bets non-independent from each other.

To prevent “cherry picking”, by requiring, say, an equivalent minimum bet on the Roulette table when a PFR side-bet is made would serve to eliminate cherry-picking, and it’s again something for DJ to consider.

As far being able to make +EV from the PFR bet, I still think there can be situations in this particular bet, and this all should be investigated.



I'd suggest you create this bet or a similar model example (maybe using the 3 Dice system you have) to see that you can't hedge multiple -EV bets into a positive overall. Or at least give a concrete set of bets that could do what you describe. I think your surmising a result that won't play out if you run the numbers.

This isn't an example of Parrondo's Paradox (which is rather odd as it relates the odds of winning to the size of the bank roll on one of the bets, not the case here as far as I can tell).

Or if it is, that's worth something to DJ.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
discflicker
discflicker 
Joined: Jan 1, 2011
  • Threads: 30
  • Posts: 452
February 14th, 2011 at 8:47:50 PM permalink
DJ, my appologies, first off, before your reply I thought a wild could be applied to a pair. I also missed that matching bet requirement in the rules... without it the two bets are independent. Now I'm thinking about ways to just match the minimum to establish the first bet then sit on the PFR the next 2 or 3 spins, and optionally cherry pick then. I'll let you know if and when I can actually demonstrate any winning strategies.

Math and cess, thanks for your input.
The difference between zero and the smallest possible number? It doesn't matter; once you cross that edge, it might as well be the difference between zero and 1. The difference between infinity and reality? They are mutually exclusive.
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 178
  • Posts: 10201
February 15th, 2011 at 6:28:52 AM permalink
Quote: discflicker

DJ, my appologies...

Don't worry about it. Although I think you're wrong, I enjoyed sparring with you, and also enjoyed the mental exersice it's given me.

---

Regarding the FireBet: I have NEVER been required to place a pass line bet before placing the FireBet. The casino that requires it is foolish, since there are many players like me who willingly place that high HA bet, but do not make pass line bets at all - or at least not unless they are shooting. Of course they allow it since we make plenty of place bets and some prop bets.

---

For what it's worth, I originally decided to put in the rule requiring a table minimum to play the side bet, not to thwart any hedge opportunities, but simple economics. There's limited seating. Just like side bets at any other game, they won't let you play the side bet if you're not playing the main game.

On the flip side, I considered that the PFR bet might be popular all by itself. As such, I envision having a kiosk where a patron can place the bet for a specific number of successive games, and return later to see the results. Kinda like a self-service keno or lottery machine. I wrote about it in the Casino Advice - Side Action section.

Mind you, I'm not spending two cents on developing that idea until after the PFR gets installed, proves successful, and makes me money.

But, if that day ever comes, I assume that you're gonna then say that a player could use the kiosk in much same the manner you're describing, to then cherry pick their moment to get into the game.

OK. I've been rattling it around.

The odds of a $35 or higher payout are only 1 in 1,529. I'll have to run the numbers to see the odds of having hand to draw to a $35 winner after only four spins.

For the sake of argument, let's say the odds of the $35 drawing hand are 1 in 500. For every $500 bet at the kiosk, you will by accident, win about $415. So you're really only risking $85. To get your one chance to hedge.

Hell, let's say the odds of having a $35 drawing hand after 4 spins is only 1 in 100. You bet $100 and win about $83, so you lose $17, to get your one chance to hedge.

In my example on the prior page, the hedge turned a potential $75 into a guaranteed $8-$11. At one hedge per hundred, that guaranteed $8-$11 cost $6-$9.

There are other hedge opportunities that guarantee bigger payoffs, but they will be more rare. How long will the person sit around waiting for them?

According to Ask The Wizard # 136, with 3 players, there is an average of 60 spins per hour. At one chance in 100, your opportunity comes along, more-or-less, every hour and a half. Even if there was only one player, at 112 spins per hour, it's still a long, slow wait for your opportunity.
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁 Note that the same could be said for Religion. I.E. Religion is nothing more than organized superstition. 🤗
discflicker
discflicker 
Joined: Jan 1, 2011
  • Threads: 30
  • Posts: 452
February 17th, 2011 at 8:06:29 PM permalink
How different is that kiosk from some of the stuff I've described? What you're considering doing is what I'm trying to get patented, and that is mapping the outcome of randomizations of disparate live games into other games, and make wagering available across all of them.

I'm repeating myself here, but you are crossing over into the future, all because of the "all bets down" signaling that synchs the manual act with the gaming computer.

I'm more than interested in these developments.
The difference between zero and the smallest possible number? It doesn't matter; once you cross that edge, it might as well be the difference between zero and 1. The difference between infinity and reality? They are mutually exclusive.
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 178
  • Posts: 10201
February 18th, 2011 at 5:00:50 AM permalink
I'll assume for the moment that your idea will fit perfectly into my kiosk idea.

Moving forward with my kiosk idea is something I am not going to think about until my game gets installed, and starts making me money.

If all goes well, that might be in about five years.
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁 Note that the same could be said for Religion. I.E. Religion is nothing more than organized superstition. 🤗
discflicker
discflicker 
Joined: Jan 1, 2011
  • Threads: 30
  • Posts: 452
February 21st, 2011 at 5:06:32 PM permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBear

I'll assume for the moment that your idea will fit perfectly into my kiosk idea.

Moving forward with my kiosk idea is something I am not going to think about until my game gets installed, and starts making me money.

If all goes well, that might be in about five years.



DJ, I started writing a response to this, but it grew to the point of another thread hijack. So instead, I started a new thread to discuss the issues of electronic signaliing in live gaming. Please check it out, it really written for you.

Thanks!
The difference between zero and the smallest possible number? It doesn't matter; once you cross that edge, it might as well be the difference between zero and 1. The difference between infinity and reality? They are mutually exclusive.
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 178
  • Posts: 10201
February 23rd, 2011 at 9:30:52 AM permalink
Quote: thecesspit

Ah, no worries, I missed that when flicking through the rules earlier when trying to decipher the issue being raised by discflicker. I had imagined that 0/00 was always a wild, but didn't peruse the rules in detail. I'd suggest that assumption I made, while my error, may be an issue to clean up. I know it's on the pay table page (I just re-read it). It's entirely possible I'm the only one ever to make that mistake. I'd wait to see if anyone else does before worrying about it, naturally.

Actually, reference to the greens being wild only for straights and four- and five-of-a-kind is in several places: Twice on the Misc page, once each on the Math and Payouts page, and once each on the brochure and old versions page - both of which are linked from my Casino Advice page.

But with so many opportunities to see it, and you still missed it, suggests to me that, when the time comes, I'll put it on the table felt printing as well.
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁 Note that the same could be said for Religion. I.E. Religion is nothing more than organized superstition. 🤗
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 178
  • Posts: 10201
February 23rd, 2011 at 9:47:07 AM permalink
From my post on page 9:
Quote: DJTeddyBear

I ran three separate trials of 500 million spins. That was actually the easy part. It took a little more work to get analysis in Excel.

I'll probably publish my data and Excel document in a couple days, but here's a preview of my results...


A bunch of stuff:

A few days later, I edited that post (but not the chart), to include a comment that I discovered I had used an old pay table for the chart. The actual house edge is not about 19%, but about 16-17%.

I finally created a Simulations Page on my website to show the results of the three 500 million spin simulations. It has a lot more detail than the litlle chart in that post.

As a result of that analysis, and conversations I've had with Dan, as well as various posts I've read in various areas of WoV, I created 8 additional pay tables, with house edges ranging from 23% to 33%. Although mentioned on the website, none of these are detailed in any way.

I originally had the jackpot re-seed only when the 100% prize was awarded. I believed that the partial payouts would not affect the prize pool too severly, but would be enough to keep the pool from skyrocketting too much. Quite the opposite happened. The prize pool sometimes dipped to levels as low as $1! So I added a Top-Off function so that the pool re-loads anytime it dips below the seed point. As a result, the prizes were higher, but still never skyrocketted much beyond triple the seed amount.

Since every Wild Straight that uses three wilds is automatically also a Wild Four Of A Kind, I'm toying with eliminating the payline for the Wild Straights WITH Wild Four Of A Kind combo. This increases the house edge between 1/2% and 1%, depending on the difference between the wild combo payout and the wild straight payout.

I'm toying with the idea of creating separate paylines for each wild straight and wild quad, based upon the number of wilds used - similar to the way the wild five-of-a-kind has separate paylines. Doing so would require me to re-do my original math analysis, as well as to repeat the 500 million spin simulations, but, so be it.

I'm toying with making the Excel document and data public.
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁 Note that the same could be said for Religion. I.E. Religion is nothing more than organized superstition. 🤗
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 178
  • Posts: 10201
February 24th, 2011 at 5:46:28 AM permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBear

Since every Wild Straight that uses three wilds is automatically also a Wild Four Of A Kind, I'm toying with eliminating the payline for the Wild Straights WITH Wild Four Of A Kind combo. This increases the house edge between 1/2% and 1%, depending on the difference between the wild combo payout and the wild straight payout.

I'm toying with the idea of creating separate paylines for each wild straight and wild quad, based upon the number of wilds used - similar to the way the wild five-of-a-kind has separate paylines. Doing so would require me to re-do my original math analysis, as well as to repeat the 500 million spin simulations, but, so be it.


I redid my math analysis last night. No need to redo my 500 million spin simulations. The numbers don't support breaking out separate lines for the number of wilds in Quads and Straights the way it does for Five of a Kinds.
79,235,168 Combinations1 Wild Green2 Wild Greens3 Wild Greens4 Wild Greens
Four of a Kind
50,400
151,200
79,360
-
Straight
31,920
46,980
20,540
-
Five of a Kind
360
1,440
2,880
2,880

It took a while for me to wrap my head around those numbers. That there are more ways to make Quads with 3 wilds than 1 makes sense. But more straights with 1 wild rather than three? And considerably more of each with 2 wilds? It was the same type of thing that originally had me confused that there are the same number of Five of a Kinds with three wilds as with four wilds.

Similarly, the 20,540 Straights with 3 wilds, are also Wild Quads, but aren't significantly small enough to keep the combo payout line, so it's gone.
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁 Note that the same could be said for Religion. I.E. Religion is nothing more than organized superstition. 🤗
MathExtremist
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 6526
February 24th, 2011 at 9:12:03 AM permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBear

As a result of that analysis, and conversations I've had with Dan, as well as various posts I've read in various areas of WoV, I created 8 additional pay tables, with house edges ranging from 23% to 33%. Although mentioned on the website, none of these are detailed in any way.

I originally had the jackpot re-seed only when the 100% prize was awarded. I believed that the partial payouts would not affect the prize pool too severly, but would be enough to keep the pool from skyrocketting too much. Quite the opposite happened. The prize pool sometimes dipped to levels as low as $1! So I added a Top-Off function so that the pool re-loads anytime it dips below the seed point. As a result, the prizes were higher, but still never skyrocketted much beyond triple the seed amount.



A couple of things:

1) 33% is way too tight. 25% is the maximum edge in NV anyway - it's illegal to go higher. New Jersey is only 17%.

2) In most cases, you won't have to worry about jackpot implementation, accrual rates, or whatever. Whatever system you hook into should have the ability to handle partial and total jackpot meter pays based on whatever award(s) trigger the payouts. It's just a question of taking some % of coin-in and putting it into the meter. How that gets distributed is tweakable by the system. This is basically what I was telling discflicker before -- you (the inventor) don't need to do the fine-tuning of the jackpot parameters. That's done in consultation between the vendor and the casino operator. It's almost always going to be different from property to property anyway, and operators are used to dialing in progressive games to suit their own targets (meter growth rate, hit %, etc.) That's been going on in slots for a long time.
"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

  • Jump to: