WinCraps

moderator: if this topic is not appropriate, feel free to remove it, but please wait until I have an answer to my question. ;-)

Having been introduced to the power of WinCraps by a couple of members in this forum, I purchased the software. I have managed to create an auto-bet file which waits for a point to be established, and then puts up FO, a buy 5, place 6 & 8, and a field bet (yes, the dreaded Iron Cross). When the point is decided, I revert to a single PL bet, with no other bets in play, until the point is established again.

I want the following action:
-- I don't care how many rolls it takes to establish the point, but once established, I want to count 4 rolls, and then set my buy, place,and Field bets to 0.
-- When the shooter decides a point (either way), I want to repeat the previous action.

I can get it to work for the first time the shooter establishes the point, but after that it won't work until I get a new shooter. I cannot see any way to reset the roll count.

Is it possible to store the roll count when the point is established, and then count +4 from that point?
Or is there an easier way to do this that I am overlooking?
Any help/pointers greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Gordy

Quote: RaleighCraps

moderator: if this topic is not appropriate, feel free to remove it, but please wait until I have an answer to my question. ;-)

Having been introduced to the power of WinCraps by a couple of members in this forum, I purchased the software. I have managed to create an auto-bet file which waits for a point to be established, and then puts up FO, a buy 5, place 6 & 8, and a field bet (yes, the dreaded Iron Cross). When the point is decided, I revert to a single PL bet, with no other bets in play, until the point is established again.

I want the following action:
-- I don't care how many rolls it takes to establish the point, but once established, I want to count 4 rolls, and then set my buy, place,and Field bets to 0.
-- When the shooter decides a point (either way), I want to repeat the previous action.

I can get it to work for the first time the shooter establishes the point, but after that it won't work until I get a new shooter. I cannot see any way to reset the roll count.

Is it possible to store the roll count when the point is established, and then count +4 from that point?
Or is there an easier way to do this that I am overlooking?
Any help/pointers greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Gordy

I created an auto-bet file like that, which I used to get those results I posted. If you send me your e-mail, I will send you my auto-bet file. The secret to keeping track of stuff in WinCraps is to use chip stacks. There are 100 chip stacks available! Not only that, but you can also use one chip stack to "point" to another. BTW, read the Help; it is like a craps text book, as well as a primer on how to use WinCraps. BTW, to use my auto-bet file correctly, you have to set "Same bet - take winnings" on in the auto-play screen.

Also, on the Website there are quite a few auto-bet files that you can download for free.

Learn about the auto-play function, the bet results and game log screens (check out the histograms); the program is really a treasure!
Cheers,
Alan Shank

Quote: goatcabin

I created an auto-bet file like that, which I used to get those results I posted. If you send me your e-mail, I will send you my auto-bet file. The secret to keeping track of stuff in WinCraps is to use chip stacks. There are 100 chip stacks available! Not only that, but you can also use one chip stack to "point" to another. BTW, read the Help; it is like a craps text book, as well as a primer on how to use WinCraps. BTW, to use my auto-bet file correctly, you have to set "Same bet - take winnings" on in the auto-play screen.

Also, on the Website there are quite a few auto-bet files that you can download for free.

Learn about the auto-play function, the bet results and game log screens (check out the histograms); the program is really a treasure!
Cheers,
Alan Shank

Alan,
| removed email address.................
| I got it working by using chip stack 1 to count how many rolls since point was established.

I spent some time in the help file, but I admit I did not spend a lot of time there. This program is so powerful though that I guess I had better take the time. Most programs I can just pick up as I go along, but this one may be different.
I did go through all the sample files, so I suspected the stacks might be able to be used like variables.
I completely missed the Bet+Roll Files link. I have grabbed those to study as well.

OK, I sent you the file.
Cheers,
Alan Shank

Alan,
I just ran a 10,000 game autobet, using your 200 rolls per game, or bankroll below $120 as a game ender. I am struggling to read the data, but I got the following:

I WON 51.3% of the games
I LOST 48.6% of the games
My $ WIN/LOST median was a -24.99
% Won or Lost (HA) was +1.52

My average ending bankroll was $975

I started with $1000 bankroll and this was the strategy:
After Come out roll
Bet $30 on Buy4,5,9,10 pay vig on win only
Bet $30 on Place 6/8
Take Bets DOWN after 1 win, Do not replace on loss.
Wait for next Come Out Roll.

To me this looks like exceptional results. Putting $180 into play, and losing $25 after 2 hours play. Am I reading this right?

Quote: RaleighCraps

Alan,
I just ran a 10,000 game autobet, using your 200 rolls per game, or bankroll below $120 as a game ender. I am struggling to read the data, but I got the following:

I WON 51.3% of the games
I LOST 48.6% of the games
My $ WIN/LOST median was a -24.99
% Won or Lost (HA) was +1.52

My average ending bankroll was $975

I started with $1000 bankroll and this was the strategy:
After Come out roll
Bet $30 on Buy4,5,9,10 pay vig on win only
Bet $30 on Place 6/8
Take Bets DOWN after 1 win, Do not replace on loss.
Wait for next Come Out Roll.

To me this looks like exceptional results. Putting $180 into play, and losing $25 after 2 hours play. Am I reading this right?

That doesn't sound right at all. Send me your auto-bet file.
Cheers,
Alan Shank

Quote: goatcabin

That doesn't sound right at all. Send me your auto-bet file.
Cheers,
Alan Shank

Oh, and, do you remember the seed you used, or did you just let the program seed itself?
Also, send me the .glg file; you saved it, didn't you? >:-) Always save the .glg file if you have questions about it.
Cheers,
Alan

Quote: goatcabin

Quote: RaleighCraps

Alan,
I just ran a 10,000 game autobet, using your 200 rolls per game, or bankroll below $120 as a game ender. I am struggling to read the data, but I got the following:

I WON 51.3% of the games
I LOST 48.6% of the games
My $ WIN/LOST median was a -24.99
% Won or Lost (HA) was +1.52

My average ending bankroll was $975

I started with $1000 bankroll and this was the strategy:
After Come out roll
Bet $30 on Buy4,5,9,10 pay vig on win only
Bet $30 on Place 6/8
Take Bets DOWN after 1 win, Do not replace on loss.
Wait for next Come Out Roll.

To me this looks like exceptional results. Putting $180 into play, and losing $25 after 2 hours play. Am I reading this right?

That doesn't sound right at all. Send me your auto-bet file.
Cheers,
Alan Shank

OK, Raleigh sent me the auto-bet file and a results file. The one he sent had a $2000 initial bankroll. The MEAN net result was -$24, the median was +$2 and the mode was the "bucket" -$162 to -$195. BTW, the mean is the arithmetical average of all the net outcomes, the median is the figure where half the outcomes are better and half worse and the mode is the most frequently occurring outcome; for the mode, the program uses "buckets" (ranges) of outcomes rather than specific numbers. In this results file, there were 5010 winning sessions, 19 breakeven and 4972 losing sessions.

I ran my own set of 10,000 sessions, and got similar results, mean net of -$26, median of +$3, 5016 winning, 8 breakeven and 4976 losing sessions.

I see why there are more winning than losing sessions (barely). The basic bet looks like this:

bet payoff ways
30 59 6
30 44 8
30 35 10
180 -180 6

So, the ev is -$24, the standard deviation is $89.20 and the skew is -1.47. A large negative skew means that the bet is more likely to be won, but pays off less. By themselves, buy bets have a positive skew, because you are more likely to lose it than win, but it pays off at greater than even money.

Generally, when you take a bet with substantial skew and repeat it many times, the skew more-or-less disappears, as the W-L probability and the payoff drag the results toward the expectation. However, in your case, you take the bets down after one of them wins, which vastly reduces the number of bets resolved in a session, so the skew is preserved to some extent. In my games log, the skew of the net $ is -0.35. Taking all the bets down after one win is the "ultimate regression", and regression has a negative skew. When you progress bets, you get a positive skew, which means fewer winning sessions but larger wins.

It is quite possible, using a conservative win goal or a Martingale-like progression, to come up with a strategy that results in many more winning than losing sessions; however, the losing sessions will be much greater in magnitude, the mean results ALWAYS being edge * action. The attraction of those methods is that the big loss is relatively unlikely and a player might not experience it. That's called "variance"! >:-)
Cheers,
Alan Shank

Quote: goatcabin

OK, Raleigh sent me the auto-bet file and a results file. The one he sent had a $2000 initial bankroll. The MEAN net result was -$24, the median was +$2 and the mode was the "bucket" -$162 to -$195. BTW, the mean is the arithmetical average of all the net outcomes, the median is the figure where half the outcomes are better and half worse and the mode is the most frequently occurring outcome; for the mode, the program uses "buckets" (ranges) of outcomes rather than specific numbers. In this results file, there were 5010 winning sessions, 19 breakeven and 4972 losing sessions.
Cheers,
Alan Shank

Thanks Alan for keeping the facts straight on the bankroll.
I did need to raise it to 2,000. Too many sessions end with a 1,000 loss with only a 1K bankroll.
This scheme can have some wild swings, making it easy to come back from 1000 down, but if you tapped out at 1000, you lock in a losing session.

Based on the data presented, I am modifying the scheme to have one bet, out of every 4, be $360 across. The other 3 will be $180 across.
I am guessing the only thing this will accomplish is add to the expected loss by some small amount, but it should add more variance to the scheme.