Wynn Changes Craps from 3/4/5 to 2x on 7/11/15
thank you for the super compliment!Quote: Eric721Maybe it's your quirky sense of humor that's falling short on me,
nice way for me to start my day
thank you for another opinion!Quote: Eric721or your apparent aversion to articulating a well thought-out reply,
but your contention that it is only a matter of opinion about variance shortening your session at tables is perniciously false.
you are so kind, unlike many other internet posters that will remain nameless
simple question and you need notQuote: Eric721Something to sell? What? What the hell are you talking about? Nothing to sell except getting you odds players acquainted with reasoning as to why you're not getting the best of the casino.<snip>
FREAK OUT!
one more time for the Easter Bunny
"do you have a book(s) to sell or a video(s) to view about this game of craps?"
it is polite to answer 1st then wander off about stuff...
yes or no?
i have lots of cash to spend
asking a question is "intimidation"Quote: Eric721So, now that you've attempted to intimidate me psychologically (and failed),
is this like member Ahigh, for example, saying once a pass line bet is made and a point is established the pass line bet magically turns into a put bet
it sounds the same to me
in my opinionQuote: Eric721care to actually discuss the substance of my accusation?
you are only voicing opinions (and lots of them, so far the count is 58)
that i find have no substance
in other words
no
but
thank you for sharing
your words have great entertainment value!
that is a compliment
and no means no
To be intellectually honest, the comparison of pass to place bets should include the return from the highly touted comeout 7 or 11.Quote: Eric721At most strip properties (3-4-5x odds) the difference is negligible (actually, you get paid $1 more when placing the 4 or 10). But consider double odds:
6/8 ($10 on the line, $20 behind it.)
Pass: $30 bet pays $34
Place: $30 bet pays $35 <== $1 better
5/9 ($5 on the line, $10 behind it.)
Pass: $15 bet pays $20
Place: $15 bet pays $21 <== $1 better
4/10 ($5 on the line, $10 behind it.)
Pass: $15 bet pays $25
Place: $15 bet pays $27 <== $2 better
Here we see that place bets pay better than line bets. So why would one ever play line bets? Because the come-out role is what defines the line bets. IMO, playing odds behind the line is really just demoting your excellent line bet into a crappy place bet, and even worse, won't even pay as well as a true place bet.
thank you for that opinionQuote: Eric721Odds serve no purpose whatsoever except to increase your variance.
That has exactly one effect: you reach your loss limit faster.
Odds in no way affect the expectation; they have none.
"has exactly one effect"
now, under what conditions is your opinion a fact?
say "you reach your loss limit faster"
how about this example
(reaching the win limit faster i says)
bank = $1000
$25 flat bets on pass line and no odds
chance to hit $2000 and stop
or
lose $1000 and stop = 24.3904939% (using a well known gambler's ruin formula)
or this method
a = (244/495)^40
b = (1-(244/495))^40
success = a/a+b
ok
now the $5 with $20 odds (4X)
(a smaller average bet ($18 1/3) than the $25 flat/no odds player
so it should take more rolls on average, but time is not a factor here, my rules ands
6X odds would have the same average bet, but let us keep the odds player at the disadvantage)
success = abouts
Win goal was met . . . = 43.556% of the time ( 435561)
this was simulated as the math is more involved the way i do it (a Markov chain)
so
43.5% vs. 24.4%
WOW!
NOT EVEN CLOSE!!!
is this about reaching the loss limit faster?
YES!
how much time to ruin?
i did not look
how much time to ruin
i will look later as i love a winner!
ah not a very good example, JULYbe
maybe only a $300 bankroll? $500?
what other examples would you like to have in a race?
there are many where the $25 flat wins...
pick a few to feel much better i say
more races here in me post
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gaming-business/wynn/22665-wynn-changes-craps-from-3-4-5-to-2x-on-7-11-15/#post471673
thank you for sharing!
entertainment value up 231%
Quote: mustangsallyone more time for the Easter Bunny
"do you have a book(s) to sell or a video(s) to view about this game of craps?"
it is polite to answer 1st then wander off about stuff...
yes or no?
i have lots of cash to spend
Sort of like how you must have used your superior reasoning power to muster that I have an agenda to shill.
Is snarky the new polite?
Quote:asking a question is "intimidation"
is this like member Ahigh, for example, saying once a pass line bet is made and a point is established the pass line bet magically turns into a put bet
it sounds the same to me
Yeah, no, line bets are far better than put bets {surrogate line bets). The problem is that the pass line is strongest on the come-out, so put bets are truly a sucker bet dressed up in sheep's clothing. Note that they most definitely do not allow put bets on the don't, which should be reason enough to view it with suspicion.
Quote:in my opinion
you are only voicing opinions (and lots of them, so far the count is 58)
that i find have no substance
I'll let the scent of the irony sink in on this one for a bit. It will become so thick you could choke on it.
Welcome to the internet forum world, where ~90% of what is discussed is based on opinions. I would most certainly disagree with your assertion that they have no substance, but of course THAT is just my opinion (as well). :)
Quote:thank you for sharing
your words have great entertainment value!
that is a compliment
A compliment dressed in the most lovely form of condescension.
Thank you!
Quote: mustangsallyhow about this example
(reaching the win limit faster i says)
bank = $1000
$25 flat bets on pass line and no odds
chance to hit $2000 and stop
or
lose $1000 and stop = 24.3904939% (using a well known gambler's ruin formula)
or this method
a = (244/495)^40
b = (1-(244/495))^40
success = a/a+b
ok
now the $5 with $20 odds (4X)
(a smaller average bet ($18 1/3) than the $25 flat/no odds player
so it should take more rolls on average, but time is not a factor here, my rules ands
6X odds would have the same average bet, but let us keep the odds player at the disadvantage)
success = abouts
Win goal was met . . . = 43.556% of the time ( 435561)
this was simulated as the math is more involved the way i do it (a Markov chain)
so
43.5% vs. 24.4%
WOW!
NOT EVEN CLOSE!!!
is this about reaching the loss limit faster?
YES!
how much time to ruin?
i did not look
how much time to ruin
i will look later as i love a winner!
Betting $25 on the Pass Line is NOT fiscally equivalent to betting $5 on the Pass Line and $20 on odds. The 5/20 involves wagering far less money so of course it lasts longer. I'm talking about the decision to play 1 unit on the pass line OR 1 unit on the pass line plus odds. This is clearly and obviously what I've been talking about all thread.
Quote: Eric721Betting $25 on the Pass Line is NOT fiscally equivalent to betting $5 on the Pass Line and $20 on odds. The 5/20 involves wagering far less money so of course it lasts longer. I'm talking about the decision to play 1 unit on the pass line OR 1 unit on the pass line plus odds. This is clearly and obviously what I've been talking about all thread.
Then that means you have not been reading the replies but just flying off the handle every time it appears people are not bowing and scraping to your eminence
Go back and start reading. You have missed people posing this exact scenario several times.
Quote: odiousgambitThen that means you have not been reading the replies but just flying off the handle every time it appears people are not bowing and scraping to your eminence
Go back and start reading. You have missed people posing this exact scenario several times.
Not true.
I HAVE posed the question of $1 pass line with $100 odds OR $101 pass line with no odds to which I have defended that the max odds scenario does not give you a greater chance of winning 1 unit (with the "1 unit" in this case obviously meaning $100, NOT $1) despite lowering the house edge dramatically. This doesn't have anything to do with how long you will last, assuming you are employing decent money management.
In a nutshell, my point is this: You are at the casino to experience the fun (rush?) of the gambling experience, and hopefully not lose too much money. Therefore, walking in the door and placing all your money on a single bet is not a smart move, even if it's a bet with a reasonable house edge. That same line of thought leads me to the conclusion that max odds in craps will, in general, elevate your level of variance beyond the point where you can expect a reasonable amount of time at the tables.
For the non-pessimists in the crowd, there is at least one more "effect." You reach your win goal faster.Quote: Eric721Odds serve no purpose whatsoever except to increase your variance. That has exactly one effect: you reach your loss limit faster.
well, this was not in your first 3 postsQuote: Eric721Not true.
I HAVE posed the question of $1 pass line with $100 odds OR $101 pass line with no odds to which I have defended that the max odds scenario does not give you a greater chance of winning 1 unit (with the "1 unit" in this case obviously meaning $100, NOT $1) despite lowering the house edge dramatically. This doesn't have anything to do with how long you will last, assuming you are employing decent money management.
thank you for saving me time in reading all your other opinionated (?) posts
in other words
you show no data to support your opinions
you just show words
AND WE ALL GOT THOSE MAN!!
what is the hurry?
lunch time?
i agree that 101/0 pass
hits the 1 unit target with a greater probability than the 1/100 pass (so?)
for 1 attempt
72% (calculated) vs 66.3% (simulated) (not that great of a difference, imo)
=================================
but what craps expert (and you must be one)
has ever said that the lowest house edge combo bet will always be the best way to win 1 unit with an X unit bankroll?
certainty not Frank Scoblete
hahahahaha
I want the names and the links
I will pay $100 per verified (by me) name
(now try turning a 3 unit bank into a 5 unit bank, not just 4, this IS REAL WORLD CRAPS, BTW)
oh oh
entertainment value now at .0023
baseball tonight
thank you for sharing
I like the fact that Wynn has lowered their Max odds bet
that way they can make more money over a 12 month period, i say
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
added: i just had lunch
and you are so proud of your example ( a poor one too)
101 vs 1/100
duh!
the $101 player has a much larger average bet
so has the greater chance of winning 1 unit
duh!!
the 1/100 only bets $203/3 on average
try that out and see how it feels
thank you for sharing again!
it would be nice to see "you are welcome"
but you are who you are!
Quote: odiousgambitGo back and start reading. You have missed people posing this exact scenario several times.
Quote: Eric721Not true
Do we have to go back and prove that these things have been posted?
Quote: Eric721I HAVE posed the question of $1 pass line with $100 odds OR $101 pass line with no odds to which I have defended that the max odds scenario does not give you a greater chance of winning 1 unit (with the "1 unit" in this case obviously meaning $100, NOT $1) despite lowering the house edge dramatically. This doesn't have anything to do with how long you will last, assuming you are employing decent money management.
How can you claim there is any difference in this scenario posed by you and, say, the 5/20 vs 25/0 scenario? Sir, this is cognitive dissonance.
Quote:In a nutshell, my point is this: You are at the casino to experience the fun (rush?) of the gambling experience, and hopefully not lose too much money. Therefore, walking in the door and placing all your money on a single bet is not a smart move, even if it's a bet with a reasonable house edge. That same line of thought leads me to the conclusion that max odds in craps will, in general, elevate your level of variance beyond the point where you can expect a reasonable amount of time at the tables.
You can limit your exposure to your comfort level. At 10x odds, say, I certainly agree that taking the max odds that player needs a pretty big bankroll compared to 3x4x5x odds, say, and taking the max odds in each case. Offering 10x odds does not mean that the player is forced to do so, however.
Well, let's see how you respond to this post. If cognitive dissonance continues, I discontinue.
That's really never a decision that comes into anyone's head, though. If you buy in for $300, which is a common buy-in at a $10 table, then you're either going to be comfortable with $10 + 3/4/5x odds or you're not. Someone who's comfortable betting 15% of their buy-in per hand (or roll) would probably play $10 + odds. Maybe they'd play $50 elsewhere on the table, but if that's how they want to bet, the choice to bet $10 flat and nothing else is never even a consideration. Of course they *could* bet just the minimum, but that's not likely to happen.Quote: Eric721I'm talking about the decision to play 1 unit on the pass line OR 1 unit on the pass line plus odds. This is clearly and obviously what I've been talking about all thread.
In other words, your comparison isn't really relevant because it's not ever the choice that gamblers make. Someone who can only afford to make $10 bets is ill-advised to make $10+3/4/5x bets instead, but they're be just as ill-advised to make $50 bets instead. Someone who *can* afford to make $10 + 3/4/5x bets is not very likely to make only $10 bets. And if you get closer to the equivalent wager size, something like $10 + 3/4/5x vs. $40 flat, the player is better off playing $10 + odds both from an EV standpoint and an RoR standpoint.
If you're in the habit of making pass + 3 come bets without odds, that's even lower variance than a single pass bet. To tout my own system, I might suggest playing the Four Barrel Shotgun instead of just covering four numbers and doing nothing with them. If you manage to actually establish four different points with your pass/come wagers, take odds on all of them at once. It's a few moments of sheer terror followed (usually) by making at least one of the points. Don't do anything until you make at least three, at which point you're one bet ahead, and then start making more come/odds bets up to the number of odds bets you've already won. You have to count - if you win 6 or more then you just keep refreshing the come bet all the time, taking odds wherever they're absent. Eventually if the hand goes long enough you'll be bases-loaded with full odds and getting paid off-and-on every roll. I had a hand like that at the Aria a few years ago where the bases-loaded stage lasted another 10 rolls or so. I made a lot on that one. Having bases loaded with odds swept away on a 7-out hurts but the stack of chips in your rail makes up for it. Plus, as you've no doubt experienced, the point-seven shooters are a wash for your bankroll because you haven't put out the odds yet.
Quote: mustangsallywell, this was not in your first 3 posts
thank you for saving me time in reading all your other opinionated (?) posts
in other words
you show no data to support your opinions
you just show words
Then you might want to consider (re?)reading my posts again, because there is plenty of data to support my claim. Then again, I'm still not convinced you know the difference between fact and opinion. Maybe (Juneby?) that's a fair assumption?
Quote:i agree that 101/0 pass
hits the 1 unit target with a greater probability than the 1/100 pass (so?)
for 1 attempt
72% (calculated) vs 66.3% (simulated) (not that great of a difference, imo)
(now try turning a 3 unit bank into a 5 unit bank, not just 4, this IS REAL WORLD CRAPS, BTW)
oh oh
Okay, since you wrote this in response to my post, explain to me the mechanics involved in placing a single large wager that will pay at least 1:1 with odds closer to 50% than the Pass or Don't Pass. I'm all ears. How much on the line? How much behind it? Does it depend on the number? Why or why not?
My advice remains unchanged. The best odds you can get for a single large bet is the Don't Pass. As an added bonus, it is psychologically a much stronger position than the Pass Line for the poor schmuck standing there with a stack of $100,000 chips on the table while the dice keep rolling. (The Pass Line better is ready to slit his wrists the moment a point is established, as opposed to the Don't bettor who merely needs to survive the come-out, and from then on has an excellent chance of winning.) It's the next best thing to a 50/50 proposition in the entire casino. Why not try to win "X" number of units this way?
If you play heavy odds behind the lines, you are in for a scary ride. On the Pass Line, you can expect far more losses than wins, and on the Don't each loss is often much more expensive than any win. Casinos love the odds because suckers hear the siren song of "true odds" and trip all over themselves to put as much behind the line as they can. All that does is vastly increase the likelihood that a (remarkably short) cold streak will clean them out.
The only purpose of high variance games (like odds in craps) is to maintain a high turnover rate at the table. $5 bettors would never play at a $25 table, because they know intuitively that the likeliest outcome is an abrupt trip home. But that's exactly what they're doing when they play odds in craps. Is it any wonder that casinos offer a bet that seemingly has no upside for them? The upside is huge. Gamblers make $20 bets that have the feel of $5 bets, meaning they don't have enough cash to weather a short cold streak, and so end up nowhere near the expected value. Instead, they end up walking at their loss limit.
Quote: sally
i have lots of cash to spend
asking a question is "intimidation"
is this like member Ahigh, for example, saying once a pass line bet is made and a point is established the pass line bet magically turns into a put bet.
If you are betting on the dice, I do believe the bet changes depending on the previous outcomes regardless of how you name it. Technically, the pass line "bet" also qualifies as a strategy by the definitions presented on this site as the risks on one roll are dependent on the outcomes of a previous roll on some rolls.
Quote: odiousgambitDo we have to go back and prove that these things have been posted?
How can you claim there is any difference in this scenario posed by you and, say, the 5/20 vs 25/0 scenario? Sir, this is cognitive dissonance.
You can limit your exposure to your comfort level. At 10x odds, say, I certainly agree that taking the max odds that player needs a pretty big bankroll compared to 3x4x5x odds, say, and taking the max odds in each case. Offering 10x odds does not mean that the player is forced to do so, however.
Well, let's see how you respond to this post. If cognitive dissonance continues, I discontinue.
You still aren't getting it.
It is no different than the 25/0 vs. 5/20 scenario, obviously. I never said it was. What you don't appear to understand is how increasing odds behind your "base unit" will eventually cause you to lose your shirt.
Here's a thought: What is your basic unit, win limit, and loss limit?
Debating without those ideas at the forefront is irrelevant and often misleading, since real-world limitations change what is or is not the best strategy.
If the Don't Pass (or Don't Come) bet is "the next best thing" to ice cream, why promote Pass Line bets? Could it be that "merely" surviving the comeout is not such a trivial endeavor?Quote: Eric721The best odds you can get for a single large bet is the Don't Pass. As an added bonus, it is psychologically a much stronger position than the Pass Line for the poor schmuck standing there with a stack of $100,000 chips on the table while the dice keep rolling. (The Pass Line better is ready to slit his wrists the moment a point is established, as opposed to the Don't bettor who merely needs to survive the come-out, and from then on has an excellent chance of winning.) It's the next best thing to a 50/50 proposition in the entire casino. Why not try to win "X" number of units this way?
Quote: SanchoPanzaIf the Don't Pass (or Don't Come) bet is "the next best thing" to ice cream, why promote Pass Line bets? Could it be that "merely" surviving the comeout is not such a trivial endeavor?
Said tongue-in-cheek, obviously.
Thank you for pointing that out. This is exactly the reason the come-out should not be minimized on the lightside.
Quote: Eric721
Here's a thought: What is your basic unit, win limit, and loss limit?
Debating without those ideas at the forefront is irrelevant and often misleading, since real-world limitations change what is or is not the best strategy.
Most players don't set such limits in the real-world. So with that assumption, are you still saying that a line bet in an amount your are comfortable with is a better way to play than a lower line wager with full odds, single, double, triple, ten times?, once the point is established?
Also, just curious, since the come/don't come is the same wager just a roll later, why not a continuous come/don't come?
Relle, thanks so much for the insight. For years I've been a regular at the Wynn, starting out small and often graduating to multiple pass/come bets with full odds. Hugs to you and the other dealers :)
On the Wynn website there's video of SW doing a Ted-style talk to people in Everett, Massachusetts about his conception of guest service. SW tells of one of his bellmen who went the extra mile, driving to Encino and back in the middle of the night to fetch a patron's bag of medicine and how this represents his guest-service ideal. Watching that video, it's hard to believe that SW personally had anything to do with these changes. What's the point of giving your guests wow-em bell service and then making them feel nickled and dimed to death at the tables?
Show me a full-odds player and I'll show you a player who tokes the dealers.
I haven't decided what to do, play-wise. I could do what some have suggested and color up as soon as my 3x odds bet is rejected. I could take my (insignificant to the house) business elsewhere. What I think I'll do is to play 2x odds and take extra place bets. That will get me rated on the place bets, and it ought to slow down the game and drive the crew nuts. $42 place the six, please. Now take me down off the six and place the 9 for $55. Seven on the come-out? Take down all my place bets.
That not how this forum works.Quote: heymikeyEric721, please stop posting in this thread. Likewise for anyone else who doesn't (didn't) actually play craps at Wynn/Encore with full odds.
As for Customer Service, requiring dealers to split their tips with supervisory personnel speaks volumes.
Quote: SanchoPanza
As for Customer Service, requiring dealers to split their tips with supervisory personnel speaks volumes.
I think most casino's do that. What's your point?
Quote: NokTangI think most casino's do that. What's your point?
Really? You think? You are wrong. Try not to comment on something you know nothing of. This has been a major fight in Vegas for a long time.
Quote: heymikeyThat will get me rated on the place bets, and it ought to slow down the game and drive the crew nuts. $42 place the six, please. Now take me down off the six and place the 9 for $55. Seven on the come-out? Take down all my place bets.
First of all, why take this out on the dealers? You want to screw with the dealers and make them work harder because...someone in management decided to change the max odds you could bet?
This is what I think is more likely to happen:
- You won't get rated for the action you think you should be getting rated for. The boxman will likely note your action the first couple minutes, realize you're stroking the dealers, then change your $80 average bet down to $20.
- You'll be stroking the dealers for nickels and dimes, bets that are easy to setup and pay. If you really want to stroke the dealers, you're gonna have to put at least 3 figures [more like 4] on each number, different amount, and do really weird center action. But the dealers are probably much faster than you are at figuring out the payouts, and you'll just get run over.
- Or they'll just tell you you can't keep putting bets up and taking them right back down. Of course, if you're betting big, they'll probably let you do whatever you want. But you can't get away with that kinda sh*t if you're betting near the minimum....especially if other people are betting big.
- Or my very favorite *player trying to make weird bets*...base to stick: "Move the dice". Player says "Take down my six and place the nine for $55". Dealer "No bet, dice are out."
Quote: DeMangoReally? You think? You are wrong. Try not to comment on something you know nothing of. This has been a major fight in Vegas for a long time.
No reason to get all hysterical and attempt to issue personal attacks. I know how it was in the "past" but I've been out of the USA for several years so don't make a fool of myself saying this is how it "is now". I know plenty about it as was in the industry for a few years. I suggest you stick to something more productive than being a troll on the internet. Have a nice day and life.
It must have been at little joints and a long while ago. "While at least two smaller casinos in Nevada had required the sharing of dealers’ tips with supervisors in the past, Wynn’s policy implemented in September 2006 was the first such effort on the Las Vegas Strip." lvsunQuote: NokTangI know plenty about it as was in the industry for a few years.
Quote: Eric721Here's a thought: What is your basic unit, win limit, and loss limit?
Since I live in America, the basic unit is US Dollars.
We could instead look at in terms of income units, which for me is currently around $100 per day before gambling. If gambling can help me increase that to any amount above $100 per day, that's great. If it causes it to decrease, I won't do it anymore
The loss limit for all of us is our entire liquid assets, once that is lost, I cannot make another bet. For myself, the win limit is whenever the interest earned on my assets can cover all of my expenses. Once I have that, I can have the same lifestyle I currently have without every earning another cent in any other way
Those are the only real-world limitations any of us should be concerned with.
When looked at that way, the way most any rational person would, it becomes very clear each bet on the pass line represents a profit of -1.41%, while any bet on the odds represents no profit (and no loss).
Quote: TomGWhen looked at that way, the way most any rational person would, it becomes very clear each bet on the pass line represents a profit of -1.41%, while any bet on the odds represents no profit (and no loss).
Yes, so by that logic, is that same rational person better off staying off the line (Doey/Don't) and just simply playing odds?
That is a subject I would debate.
Again,
Quote: Eric721You're not grasping any possible aspect of betting other than EV
Quote: Eric721Yes, so by that logic, is that same rational person better off staying off the line (Doey/Don't) and just simply playing odds?
Absolutely. To the rational person the odds is gambling. The pass / don't pass is just giving your money away.
Quote:Again,
Quote: Eric721You're not grasping any possible aspect of betting other than EV
The other aspect of betting I take into account nearly equally with Expected Value is Actual Results. It seems you dismiss both of those
If you had the ability to make odds bets without making a line bet, there would be no debate at all. That would be like the casino allowing free buys on every number. There would never be a need to make a pass bet if you had free buys on every number. Free buy on 4 and 10 combined is a 50-50 proposition with no house edge, etc. Other combinations can increase or decrease variance but the edge stays at zero.Quote: Eric721Yes, so by that logic, is that same rational person better off staying off the line (Doey/Don't) and just simply playing odds?
That is a subject I would debate.
Quote: MathExtremistIf you had the ability to make odds bets without making a line bet, there would be no debate at all. That would be like the casino allowing free buys on every number. There would never be a need to make a pass bet if you had free buys on every number. Free buy on 4 and 10 combined is a 50-50 proposition with no house edge, etc. Other combinations can increase or decrease variance but the edge stays at zero.
Correct, which explains why you can't make opposite put bets.
Quote: TomGAbsolutely. To the rational person the odds is gambling. The pass / don't pass is just giving your money away.
The other aspect of betting I take into account nearly equally with Expected Value is Actual Results. It seems you dismiss both of those
Actual Results? Please explain.
I think the rational gambler (oxymoron? I kid.) would enjoy winning more often (i.e. higher frequency) than not. Of course, you have those who don't necessarily care about the "frequency" of the wins, but rather the "amount" won when you do win. They would probably be more likely to play Hardways (even if the casino offered "true odds" on those, such as 10 to 1 on the hard 6 & 8) but you can expect a hell of a lot more losses than wins. Especially when you consider that you won't likely even win 1 out of every 10 bets you make on that prop. You simply won't be at the table long enough for those true odds to be actualized.
I think the best way to experience this "winning more often" would be keeping most of your action on the line bets. Yes, you likely won't win "as much" in any given session at a "*hot table" (though you can still win a considerable amount, sometimes even more than playing heavy odds) but you will likely win "more often."
* this term can be ambiguous. Does a "hot table" mean a lot of points are being hit, or the pass line is winning a lot? The latter isn't always dependent on the former.
Quote: Eric721Actual Results? Please explain.
Take all of the money you have ever won and subtract all the money you have ever lost. For craps is it a positive or negative number? How about for all casino games ever played?
Quote: Eric721I think the rational gambler (oxymoron? I kid.) would enjoy winning more often (i.e. higher frequency) than not
That would be a perfect example of betting irrationally: Being concerned with something other net results
Quote: Eric721Especially when you consider that you won't likely even win 1 out of every 10 bets you make on that prop. You simply won't be at the table long enough for those true odds to be actualized.
Why can't someone spend enough time at the craps table? I know plenty of people who have put in thousands of hours at blackjack, poker, or video poker. What makes craps so special?
Quote: TomGTake all of the money you have ever won and subtract all the money you have ever lost. For craps is it a positive or negative number? How about for all casino games ever played?
That would be a perfect example of betting irrationally: Being concerned with something other net results
Why can't someone spend enough time at the craps table? I know plenty of people who have put in thousands of hours at blackjack, poker, or video poker. What makes craps so special?
No, it is most assuredly not betting "irrationally." I have already tried to explain this.
You're right about true odds being the "best" bet you can make from a mathematical standpoint. The EV is zero. It has a more desirable HE for the player. I'm not arguing that fact. What I am arguing, however, is that you subject yourself to the high variance the true odds undoubtedly fosters when you play that way. House edge per dollar bet is not the only relevant metric. Things like "time to bust" and "expected loss per hour" are important, and perhaps even more more important to a casual craps player.
I won't even argue your last point because it is so off the wall. Now matter how much time you spend at the craps table, it likely won't be "enough" to avoid variance.
That's like saying the Martingale can't lose because you can always double up after the previous loss. In the real world you can't arbitrarily double up your bet, and it is this fact alone, this real world limitation, that makes the Martingale a losing strategy.
If you're going to debate craps in good faith, you are only allowed to use real world conditions. If the "pure math" approach can't be actually played, it is meaningless.
Quote: Eric721You're right about true odds being the "best" bet you can make from a mathematical standpoint.
Not only from a mathematical standpoint, but also from a standpoint of maximizing money won
Quote: Eric721What I am arguing, however, is that you subject yourself to the high variance the true odds undoubtedly fosters when you play that way. House edge per dollar bet is not the only relevant metric. Things like "time to bust" and "expected loss per hour" are important, and perhaps even more more important to a casual craps player.
There are people who have been playing casino games for decades who have yet to "bust," what sort of "time to bust" are you looking at? If you agree expected profit is negative ("expected loss per hour), how can this ever be seen as a good bet? Perhaps we could say "less bad" than slots or keno or the big six wheel. But there are other bets to be made where we expect to see positive results -- or at least break even
But you can make lay bets, right Ms. Sally?Quote: Eric721Correct, which explains why you can't make opposite put bets.
The actual "vig" bet on a buy 4/10 is betterQuote: Eric721You're right about true odds being the "best" bet you can make from a mathematical standpoint.
I think the variance isn't as high as you think it is, and mustangsally already ran some breakeven analyses for you that essentially showed your intuition is off here. It's not at all true that playing odds increases your time to bust in all situations, and playing odds certainly does decrease your expected loss per hour in any situation where you replace some of your line action with odds action.Quote: Eric721You're right about true odds being the "best" bet you can make from a mathematical standpoint. The EV is zero. It has a more desirable HE for the player. I'm not arguing that fact. What I am arguing, however, is that you subject yourself to the high variance the true odds undoubtedly fosters when you play that way. House edge per dollar bet is not the only relevant metric. Things like "time to bust" and "expected loss per hour" are important, and perhaps even more more important to a casual craps player.
You seem to want to argue that playing $10 by itself is a better way to play than $10 + 3/4/5x odds. I'd counter that such a choice is no choice at all for any given bankroll, as it's equivalent to saying playing $10 on blackjack is better than playing $40 on blackjack. What's more important is how a player deploys his or her bankroll over a given session. If you're not already skimming the bottom of the affordability scale -- that is, you can afford to wager more than the bare table minimum with a single bet -- you are better off wagering additional action as odds rather than larger line bets in many scenarios.
Here's an exercise for you: figure out the dollar variance for a $10 + 3/4/5x odds player using a 3-Point Molly (pass + 2 comes), then figure out the average wager for that 3-Point Molly, and finally look at the dollar variance for someone making single pass bets for that average wager amount. I think you'll be surprised at the answer.
Quote: MrVHistorically, Steve Wynn has, by report, kept a close eye on all aspects of his casino operations.
Therefore I'd be amazed to learn that he did not know of and authorize the switch to 2X odds.
Then again he's getting older (73) and his health is not great, so he may have lost a few steps.
I just wonder: what was the impetus for him to authorize the change?
What was he thinking the reaction would be like?
He's been around casinos all his life, he knows the drill.
As a craps player at the wynn since opening and ten trips to the Wynn a year I can tell you I have now set up home elsewhere. I know for a fact SW made the change to 2x. Why? I don't know. Yet! Bad move to say the least for way more reasons than just the 2x odds... Look for a sale in the next three years..
Quote: mdsHaven't had the time to read through all the posts here but I have a question... What about the player who bets the don't and now can back it up with 2x? The difference between 6x and 2x is massive. I say unfair! I happen to take full odds on the don't and the variance has been in my favor due to pure luck for a while now. What do I do? Move on to a MGM property? Ok. Or I can lay for 5% of my win? NOT!
If you're playing the don't then that 2x is the amount you can win not the amount you can bet. I think what the Wynn is doing is actually called full double odds so you can win 2x on 4, 5, 9, or 10 and 2.5x on 6 or 8.
Wizard of Odds on Don't Pass and Lay Odds
So as an example: For a $10 minimum on the don't, you can win $20 maximum on 4,5,9,10. Which means on 4 and 10 you must lay $40, 5 and 9 lay $30.
For 6 or 8, this is the x2.5 odds so you can still lay $30 to win your $25.
See the Wizard's Strategy where he also describes full double odds.
Just below the strategy is the combined house edge for the various odds offerings for don't as well. Although this thread has an extensive discussion about what the odds actually do for the gambler.
From your other post where you say you take 10 trips a year, it sounds like it is worthwhile for you to seek out a 3-4-5x (or better) table.
--helpmespock
Quote: helpmespockIf you're playing the don't then that 2x is the amount you can win not the amount you can bet. I think what the Wynn is doing is actually called full double odds so you can win 2x on 4, 5, 9, or 10 and 2.5x on 6 or 8.
Wizard of Odds on Don't Pass and Lay Odds
So as an example: For a $10 minimum on the don't, you can win $20 maximum on 4,5,9,10. Which means on 4 and 10 you must lay $40, 5 and 9 lay $30.
For 6 or 8, this is the x2.5 odds so you can still lay $30 to win your $25.
See the Wizard's Strategy where he also describes full double odds.
Just below the strategy is the combined house edge for the various odds offerings for don't as well. Although this thread has an extensive discussion about what the odds actually do for the gambler.
From your other post where you say you take 10 trips a year, it sounds like it is worthwhile for you to seek out a 3-4-5x (or better) table.
--helpmespock
Nope I was just there. Unless they explained it wrong which could be. I was told If I put 100 on the don't, I can lay up to 2x in odds not 6x?.
I won both sessions, but not life-changing winnings.
Quote: Vegas123Wynn has changed to double odds in high limit (i.e 6x,8x,10x) on the main casino floor it is still 3x,4x,5x.
Who dat?
Quote: Sabretom2Who dat?
Someone bringing you guys some clarity. And yes the high limit tables as implied are going to have higher minimums than the outter table so must people won't be able to walk in there with at least a $100 minimum and go 10x on a six.
Quote: Vegas123Someone bringing you guys some clarity. And yes the high limit tables as implied are going to have higher minimums than the outter table so must people won't be able to walk in there with at least a $100 minimum and go 10x on a six.
Couple things I don't understand here. Appreciate the report (your first post) but don't understand your need to "bring clarity". Also seems odd that the Wynn went 2x all tables but 1 hiroller at 3-4-5x, and now you're reporting a week later they've changed all that again.
As to the odds themselves, what are they trying to prevent? where you say, " so must people won't be able to walk in there with at least a $100 minimum and go 10x on a six." I'm not saying you're wrong, I just don't know what purpose you think the Wynn is serving, or trying to avoid? Could easily be just me not understanding craps and/or casino economics, but I don't get your point. If someone else does (not just V123), I'd like a clue. I would assume that the Wynn has some hirolling shooters who want bigger odds available and so they offer them to keep those shooters coming in, but the odds don't really change the math; just the size of the minimum must represent enough in absolute dollars to the Wynn they don't care about the even-money add-ons and are willing to let the HE on the PL/DP do the work of paying for the game.
Which, btw, works the same for the 3-4-5x vs. 2x they had gone to last week. If the table mins are high enough, the HE does its work, and the casino is going to be around long enough to benefit from the long run on 50-50 odds behind. They just have to decide how much short-term exposure they want by using table max and odds in combination, I would think.
JMHO.
I verified this myself yesterday.
They also have the eight tables up and running as of yesterday and they also have the high limit craps table at the Encore as well.
The $100 table in the high limit rooms are also smaller. The Encore table is an 8 footer and the Wynn table is a 10 footer I believe. The encore table is VERY short. The shortest non-tub table I've ever seen.
The bounce on both tables was also different than the bounce on the main floor. I have never seen a table like either of the two tables that have been set up in the high limit rooms.
Experts at evaluating the details of a craps table would very likely be interested in the secret sauce (if there is any) behind these brand new tables.
I will keep folks updated if I learn anything.
Quote: RSIs 2x odds only at Wynn? Or is it both?
I know both high limit are 345x and Wynn main floor is "full double" odds. I did not play at the main floor of the Encore, so I don't know. Anybody know?
