Thread Rating:

RS
RS
Joined: Feb 11, 2014
  • Threads: 51
  • Posts: 5795
July 16th, 2015 at 8:22:30 PM permalink
Betting $1 PL with $100 odds is better than something like $20 PL with $80 odds. We know this is true because of the sum of EV's: PL has 1.41% HE and odds has 0% HE.

However, betting $1 PL with $0 odds is the exact same as betting $1 PL with $100 odds, from an EV standpoint. Placing the odds does not decrease the HE. All the odds wager does is increase the variance, which I agree -- many players like. But, from an EV standpoint, the only thing we are concerned with is the amount of money on the PL.


It's like this -- say I'm at a roulette table. I bet $5 on black every roll. I stand to lose something like 5% of my action. But all of a sudden my friend comes over and is like, "Hey, in between each of the spins, let's make a $1,000 bet with each other. If the coin I flip lands on heads, you win $1K from me. If it lands on tails, you pay me $1K." I still stand to lose 5% of my $5 action on roulette. I don't care [and no one should care] the the % I expect to lose on my $1,005 in action.
00111100101100001011011100110101101100101011001010010000001101111011100110110001101100001011100100010000001101100011010010110110101100001001000000110111101110011011000110110000101110010
Eric721
Eric721
Joined: Jul 15, 2015
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 23
July 16th, 2015 at 8:43:57 PM permalink
Quote: Avincow

Quote: Eric721

There's nothing wrong with it besides the fact that the variance is astronomical.

The point of gambling is not variance, it is action. The thrill of the ride. If all you wanted was variance, you could do any number of other things. Why go to a casino at all when you could just buy scratch-offs at the local gas station. Because it's fun to gamble at a casino. The main attraction of table games is to be there with other people. The main attraction of craps is that it is a social game, where you often get entire tables cheering, clapping, and whistling for a hot shooter. Gambling is not about variance; good gambling tries to minimize variance in the effort of extending bankroll and extending fun. If you want a high return, like odds has, then you are already setting yourself up for many more losses than wins. Why is that fun?



You're a math guy, right?

Take a look at this:

How do you win at the Pass Line? Let me show you a little chart of the possibilities. Note: To keep everything in integer form, I multiply every one of the 36 possible rolls by 55. So instead of going through every possible roll once, it's every possible roll 55 times each.




Roll Ways Ways x55 Ways to Pass Ways to Don't
2 1 55 0 55
3 2 110 0 110
4 3 165 55 110
5 4 220 88 132
6 5 275 125 150
7 6 330 330 0
8 5 275 125 150
9 4 220 88 132
10 3 165 55 110
11 2 110 110 0
12 1 55 0 n/a
Total 36 1980 976 949


The chart shows us that there are 536 ways to win odds. (55+88+125+125+88+55=536) It also shows us that there are 440 ways to win on the comeout. (330+110) This gives a total of 536+440=976 ways to win, which checks out.

When you ignore the comeout, you are ignoring 45%, almost half, of all possible winners. That's why I play without odds. I count on all winners.

Said another way, there are only 536 ways to win odds. That's a paltry 27.07% of possible rolls. (536/1980=.270707...) Not a very promising wager, eh?

I can't stress this enough. 45% of all Pass Line winners happen on the come-out roll. That's just nuts. Why in the world would you want to minimize 45% of your winners by taking odds?



Yes, the point of gambling is action, but it depends on variance to be exciting! If there was no variance you would lose 1.4% of your pass line bet every time you bet. That's no fun. No one would gamble without variance. The fact that you will either win or lose your bet is what is exciting and is due to variance. 100x odds is exciting.



You're missing the forest for the trees. If I walk into a casino with $300, would I be better off playing blackjack at the $100 table or the $10 table? Obviously the latter, despite the former having more variance. For the same reason, you are better off not playing odds at craps.

On a somewhat related note, if you do not care about rapid fluctuations in your bankroll, which would you choose? $1 pass line with $100 odds, or $101 on the pass line with no odds? In either case you have plenty of action to keep things "exciting," but which one are you better off doing?
Eric721
Eric721
Joined: Jul 15, 2015
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 23
July 16th, 2015 at 8:54:14 PM permalink
Quote: RS

Betting $1 PL with $100 odds is better than something like $20 PL with $80 odds. We know this is true because of the sum of EV's: PL has 1.41% HE and odds has 0% HE.

However, betting $1 PL with $0 odds is the exact same as betting $1 PL with $100 odds, from an EV standpoint. Placing the odds does not decrease the HE. All the odds wager does is increase the variance, which I agree -- many players like. But, from an EV standpoint, the only thing we are concerned with is the amount of money on the PL.


It's like this -- say I'm at a roulette table. I bet $5 on black every roll. I stand to lose something like 5% of my action. But all of a sudden my friend comes over and is like, "Hey, in between each of the spins, let's make a $1,000 bet with each other. If the coin I flip lands on heads, you win $1K from me. If it lands on tails, you pay me $1K." I still stand to lose 5% of my $5 action on roulette. I don't care [and no one should care] the the % I expect to lose on my $1,005 in action.



That's the heart of the issue. Let's assume a $10 table that allows double odds. Most people tend to feel more like they are playing for $10 stakes than $30 stakes, thus giving them a false sense of security with regards to their bankroll. This puts their session limit in jeopardy, as you can be out $90 in a matter of minutes.

The odds bets aren't bad in and of themselves. But they do increase variance. Basic casino strategy, IMO, should be to enter with enough money to float three different sessions, each lasting at least an hour or two, taking breaks in between. I would recommend $1000 trip bankroll, with three $300 sessions. That gives you plenty of money to play at a $5 or $10 table for two hours, unless you are taking odds.

Here's the thing. Odds have true payouts. But no matter what you do, the casino will realize its advantage eventually. What usually happens when you play max odds is that you run into a buzz saw that eats away hundreds of dollars quite quickly. It doesn't take many bad shooters to do this, especially if you also play the come. Conversely, you also can get on a hot streak, sometimes doubling your money or more. However, both scenarios will typically actualize rather quickly, usually in less than an hour.

And that's the problem. Gamblers aren't there to buy stocks; they are there to day trade; the action is the point of it. So even if you double your money in a half hour, who can be satisfied with a mere half hour of action? So you stay for a little longer to have more fun, and then all of a sudden the huge variance has sapped away all your winnings plus your original buy-in in a ten minute span half an hour later. Then you scratch your head, repeat to yourself that you played the smartest bets, and just chalk it up to bad luck. But if you had come in with significantly more money to begin with, then the variance wouldn't have been able to eat through your entire session limit in such a short amount of time. You have to be able to withstand the variance.
odiousgambit
odiousgambit
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
  • Threads: 277
  • Posts: 7428
July 17th, 2015 at 3:21:31 AM permalink
It's absolutely astonishing to me that this whole subject is debatable, even to the mathematicians.

There is a certain type who looks at the line bet they want to make and, realizing that free odds can't change the EV, just stops. No further argument will be even taken into consideration by that player. This person might be very intelligent.

There are even negative expectation players who don't want increased variance [a lot of ploppies are like this] . A very intelligent person might decide that. A ploppy just wants to lose their money slowly. The intelligent person who doesn't want variance just realizes that in the long run it likely won't matter and just stops.

Yet the difference in Craps to me just goes back to the $55 bettor at the $5 minimum table. I just don't see how it can be argued that it doesnt matter if the player plunks down that $55 on the line every time, or if he instead makes the $5 line bet and adds $50 in odds every time. Yet this thread is proving again that when presented with this argument the former player goes back to his argument about EV and the latter player goes back to his argument about unneeded variance. It's hard for me to picture either as liking to play Craps.
"Baccarat is a game whereby the croupier gathers in money with a flexible sculling oar, then rakes it home. If I could have borrowed his oar I would have stayed." .......... Mark Twain
Relle
Relle
Joined: Jul 17, 2015
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 1
July 17th, 2015 at 3:52:23 AM permalink
as a craps dealer at the Wynn, i can say first and foremost that we're not happy with the change. we were given 1 hour notice that effective at 4 am, we were going to double odds... there was no memo, there was no meeting or discussion.

as to all you number crunchers, i give you credit. you are correct but your numbers factor over 3-5 million rolls, not the 3-4 hour session most gamblers might experience. I've seen 12 roll 4 times in a row and then not again for another hour. True odds are just that, the odds over 4 million rolls... some will come more often, some not so much but the average will work itself out. my best guess that working a 40 work week, 1 roll every 45 seconds or so i see maybe 850k rolls per year, give or take. I'm content to you work out that math. :)

the odds are an important factor in our game, more importantly to our brand. we, as dealers were shocked when we implemented 6:5 blackjack, we never thought it would come to our property. it's shameful, it's embarrassing and it most certainly isn't what a top tier casino should offer... no one consulted us though. it's a decision made by a bean counter who looks at numbers on a spread sheet and has never spent a day living in the trenches of what our business model is or should be.

i believe Steve Wynn has a full plate between Macau and Boston among others, i doubt very seriously that his latest concern lies in what odds his dice pit offers. i am sure that if he knew the damage that was being done to his name, that he'd stop it.

i wholly expect to come into work in the next day or two to find a head on a spike outside of our break room. i believe that an MBA who knows all about "business and spreadsheets" will fall on his sacrificial sword. because when all is said and done, Steve Wynn understands how a casino works and he isn't afraid of anyone's action.

or at least we can hope.
NokTang
NokTang
Joined: Aug 15, 2011
  • Threads: 54
  • Posts: 1165
July 17th, 2015 at 4:41:32 AM permalink
Quote: Relle


i believe Steve Wynn has a full plate between Macau and Boston among others, i doubt very seriously that his latest concern lies in what odds his dice pit offers. i am sure that if he knew the damage that was being done to his name, that he'd stop it.



Thanks for your post. I'm curious.....is it your impression at least that Mr. Wynn would not have been consulted and approved the change to 2X odds? as well as I guess the 6/5 BJ rules? Sure, Macau and Boston developments and financing are part of his day, but not too long ago there was a story about him going to play craps at the "Grand"s grand opening downtown as well as giving eulogy's at several high profile funerals.

It just seems to me, a nobody, that he would have the few moments in his day/night to consider a move to 2X odds. Perhaps there is a longer term plan where they will go to 100X in the near future...sort of Coke Classic after New Coke.
beachbumbabs
Administrator
beachbumbabs
Joined: May 21, 2013
  • Threads: 78
  • Posts: 9462
July 17th, 2015 at 5:24:44 AM permalink
Quote: Relle

as a craps dealer at the Wynn, i can say first and foremost that we're not happy with the change. we were given 1 hour notice that effective at 4 am, we were going to double odds... there was no memo, there was no meeting or discussion.

as to all you number crunchers, i give you credit. you are correct but your numbers factor over 3-5 million rolls, not the 3-4 hour session most gamblers might experience. I've seen 12 roll 4 times in a row and then not again for another hour. True odds are just that, the odds over 4 million rolls... some will come more often, some not so much but the average will work itself out. my best guess that working a 40 work week, 1 roll every 45 seconds or so i see maybe 850k rolls per year, give or take. I'm content to you work out that math. :)

the odds are an important factor in our game, more importantly to our brand. we, as dealers were shocked when we implemented 6:5 blackjack, we never thought it would come to our property. it's shameful, it's embarrassing and it most certainly isn't what a top tier casino should offer... no one consulted us though. it's a decision made by a bean counter who looks at numbers on a spread sheet and has never spent a day living in the trenches of what our business model is or should be.

i believe Steve Wynn has a full plate between Macau and Boston among others, i doubt very seriously that his latest concern lies in what odds his dice pit offers. i am sure that if he knew the damage that was being done to his name, that he'd stop it.

i wholly expect to come into work in the next day or two to find a head on a spike outside of our break room. i believe that an MBA who knows all about "business and spreadsheets" will fall on his sacrificial sword. because when all is said and done, Steve Wynn understands how a casino works and he isn't afraid of anyone's action.

or at least we can hope.



Welcome to the forum, Relle, and thanks very much for the post. I think you're absolutely right about Steve Wynn. I was talking about this in another post, and realized as I was writing it that most of the best gambling houses over the last 30 years had one thing in common; they were run by Steve Wynn at the time (Golden Nugget, Mirage, Bellagio, and Wynn) that they had the best paytables and actions, and he trusted the HE and volume, as well as the size of the action from big players looking for a good game, to make the money. I hope someone does call this 6:5 and 2xodds (along with any other sub-optimal paytables) to his attention exactly as you suggest and it changes back in a hurry.

Link to my other post here if you want to follow (and add to; I think it would be valuable) that discussion about what makes a good gaming experience.
"If the house lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game."
odiousgambit
odiousgambit
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
  • Threads: 277
  • Posts: 7428
July 17th, 2015 at 5:35:45 AM permalink
Quote: Relle

i wholly expect to come into work in the next day or two to find a head on a spike outside of our break room. i believe that an MBA who knows all about "business and spreadsheets" will fall on his sacrificial sword. because when all is said and done, Steve Wynn understands how a casino works and he isn't afraid of anyone's action.



Bean counters have a secret weapon though. Pretending that all other factors have stasis, that employee morale means nothing, that consumer loyalty means nothing, that eliminating services has no effects, etc., [edits] they just point to "the bottom line" and claim that is the head honcho's money there. They say "you see that guy over there drinking your coffee? That came off the bottom line. You are paying for that coffee". This has magical effects.

Quote: link

WorldCom...CEO [and multi-billion-dollar crook]...Ebbers famously decided to eliminate free coffee at WorldCom offices...and had security guards fill watercoolers with tap water.



http://www.forbes.com/2005/03/15/cx_da_0315ebbersguilty.html
"Baccarat is a game whereby the croupier gathers in money with a flexible sculling oar, then rakes it home. If I could have borrowed his oar I would have stayed." .......... Mark Twain
helpmespock
helpmespock
Joined: Mar 6, 2010
  • Threads: 47
  • Posts: 265
July 17th, 2015 at 6:49:36 AM permalink
Quote: Relle

as a craps dealer at the Wynn, i can say first and foremost that we're not happy with the change. we were given 1 hour notice that effective at 4 am, we were going to double odds... there was no memo, there was no meeting or discussion.



Welcome Relle and as a person who has stayed at the Wynn every year since 2009 thank you for your service.

You and I can both hope that someone higher up will look at the situation and reverse course. I would love to see 9/6 Jacks or better at the 25 cent level again at the Wynn. 8-)

However in these types of situations it often seems that the management-types follow the crowd. 6:5 blackjack is spreading everywhere and it looks like the same pressure to increase overall house edge has hit the craps pit. When one location makes a change like this and the patrons don't vote with their dollars then it spreads to other casinos.

Do moves like this hurt in the long run? I certainly remember the video poker areas being a lot more busy when they offered lower minimums. However management-types are judged not in years, but in the daily wiggles of the stock price and the next quarterly results.

--helpmespock
Ahigh
Ahigh
Joined: May 19, 2010
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 5050
July 17th, 2015 at 7:14:04 AM permalink
For anyone unhappy at the Wynn, the SLS has basically copied the Wynn's formula and gone to 10x odds instead of double odds. ($2,000 flat line max 10x, or $5,000 flat line max w/345x per placard displayed at table)

I haven't yet seen any $20,000 odds bets on $2,000 flat over there, yet, but if I do I will report on it. I have seen 345x on $5,000 flat, there, though.

I have seen $5,000 continuous come and 345x odds over there (I don't know the player, but I watched him give $200,000-$250,000+ to the SLS in just 15 minutes .. and he didn't look like he had more ammo -- it appeared to my trained eye that he gave it all away).

I imagine folks will be taking shots on odds overages not paid as place bets as long as they are giving refunds without explanations on overages (as they are right now).

  • Jump to: