Casinoinvestor
Casinoinvestor
Joined: Jul 28, 2023
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 5
July 28th, 2023 at 11:42:15 PM permalink
In 100 rolls of the dice how many times will any 2 field numbers be rolled consecutively ( 2 times in a row ).
ChumpChange
ChumpChange
Joined: Jun 15, 2018
  • Threads: 96
  • Posts: 4271
July 29th, 2023 at 1:14:16 AM permalink
About 20? Well, there's a 19.75% chance it will happen, but I'm not sure how it stacks up against 100 rolls. (16/36)^2
Casinoinvestor
Casinoinvestor
Joined: Jul 28, 2023
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 5
July 29th, 2023 at 3:27:43 AM permalink
Just checking my math. So, 16/36=0.44 so divide that by 2 or multiply by 2?
odiousgambit
odiousgambit
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
  • Threads: 325
  • Posts: 9309
Thanks for this post from:
Casinoinvestor
July 29th, 2023 at 6:35:10 AM permalink
the chances you would have two in a row is easy math. Assuming 16/36 is correct, and I didn't check that, It's .044 * 0.44 = 0.1936 , or about 1 chance in 5 ... the solution is to multiply 'times each event', not 'times 2'

the chances of "how many times will any 2 field numbers be rolled consecutively" in 100 is much harder math
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: ďThanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!Ē   She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
Mental
Mental
Joined: Dec 10, 2018
  • Threads: 10
  • Posts: 819
July 29th, 2023 at 7:06:13 AM permalink
Quote: Casinoinvestor

In 100 rolls of the dice how many times will any 2 field numbers be rolled consecutively ( 2 times in a row ).
link to original post

That is a weird way of asking the question. It happens 19.56 times out of 100 rolls. However, it only happens 1.78 times out of 10 rolls. It happens It happens 0.198 times out of 2 rolls. It happens It happens zero times out of 1 roll.

The ratio is different for every number of rolls because the last roll cannot be part of two consecutive rolls. For a large number of rolls, the ratio converges on 0.19753 consecutives per roll because this end effect becomes insignificant.

EDIT: odiousgambit explains it correctly. He gets a different answer for the long run due to rounding.
It does sucks to have EB infiltrate every thread with his grandiose claims.
ThatDonGuy
ThatDonGuy
Joined: Jun 22, 2011
  • Threads: 116
  • Posts: 5856
July 29th, 2023 at 7:31:24 AM permalink
Quote: Casinoinvestor

In 100 rolls of the dice how many times will any 2 field numbers be rolled consecutively ( 2 times in a row ).
link to original post


Questions:
If your first three rolls are all field numbers, does this count as 1 time, or two (rolls 1 & 2, and rolls 3 & 4)?

What about if your first four rolls are all field numbers?
ChumpChange
ChumpChange
Joined: Jun 15, 2018
  • Threads: 96
  • Posts: 4271
July 29th, 2023 at 9:17:22 AM permalink
If he was betting a progression and needed to hit the first two in a row to break even with flat betting, then he continued on with the progression until he lost. That would cut down a bit on the 2 in a row he's looking for because they would be swallowed up by ongoing progressions. Example, on a progression of $10, $15, $15, $20 and onwards, you need the first two in a row to not lose $5 on the progression.
I find the HA on the field bet to be far too much for this type of progression (same for roulette). I'd try this progression on the PL or the DC or the PB 6 or 8 separately ($12, $18, $18, $24 and onwards).

I'd use a $15, $20, $25 and onwards progression on BJ (and the PB 5 or 9 in craps) because it's harder to put together 2 wins in a row and sometimes the double downs, & splits can come back to bite you if you're betting too high.
Last edited by: ChumpChange on Jul 29, 2023
ThatDonGuy
ThatDonGuy
Joined: Jun 22, 2011
  • Threads: 116
  • Posts: 5856
July 29th, 2023 at 9:25:42 AM permalink
Simulating gets this:

If you don't count three consecutive field numbers as 2 separate sets of consecutive rolls: 21.97 times
If you do: 43.44 times (this includes 4 in a row as 3 sets of consecutive rolls, 5 in a row as 4 consecutive sets, and so on)
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 119
  • Posts: 10154
July 29th, 2023 at 10:40:20 AM permalink
Quote: Casinoinvestor

In 100 rolls of the dice how many times will any 2 field numbers be rolled consecutively ( 2 times in a row ).
link to original post



If I roll 6 in a row, do you count that as 5 separate instances of rolling two in a row? Or would you count that as 3 instances?

If you do it the first way, itís around 19-20 times in 100 rolls.
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 119
  • Posts: 10154
July 29th, 2023 at 10:45:52 AM permalink
Quote: Casinoinvestor

Just checking my math. So, 16/36=0.44 so divide that by 2 or multiply by 2?
link to original post



Multiply .44 x .44.
MDawg
MDawg
Joined: Sep 27, 2018
  • Threads: 36
  • Posts: 6412
July 29th, 2023 at 10:52:17 AM permalink
I watched this guy bet as follows: bought the 6 and 8, pass line bet only (nothing behind), and field bet every time. He was actually doing quite well during the time I watched, he had two very long rolls. But it made me cringe to see no odds and that field bet every time.
Last edited by: MDawg on Jul 29, 2023
I tell you itís wonderful to be here, man. I donít give a damn who wins or loses. Itís just wonderful to be here with you people. https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/33908-the-adventures-of-mdawg/
Mental
Mental
Joined: Dec 10, 2018
  • Threads: 10
  • Posts: 819
July 29th, 2023 at 11:32:55 AM permalink
Quote: ThatDonGuy

Simulating gets this:

If you don't count three consecutive field numbers as 2 separate sets of consecutive rolls: 21.97 times
If you do: 43.44 times (this includes 4 in a row as 3 sets of consecutive rolls, 5 in a row as 4 consecutive sets, and so on)
link to original post

The answer has to be less than 100*(16/36)^2. Both these number are too high.
It does sucks to have EB infiltrate every thread with his grandiose claims.
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 119
  • Posts: 10154
July 29th, 2023 at 11:34:28 AM permalink
Quote: Mental

Quote: ThatDonGuy

Simulating gets this:

If you don't count three consecutive field numbers as 2 separate sets of consecutive rolls: 21.97 times
If you do: 43.44 times (this includes 4 in a row as 3 sets of consecutive rolls, 5 in a row as 4 consecutive sets, and so on)
link to original post

The answer has to be less than 100*(16/36)^2. Both these number are too high.
link to original post



Correct. Change the 100 to 99.
ThatDonGuy
ThatDonGuy
Joined: Jun 22, 2011
  • Threads: 116
  • Posts: 5856
Thanks for this post from:
Mental
July 29th, 2023 at 11:42:48 AM permalink
Quote: Mental

Quote: ThatDonGuy

Simulating gets this:

If you don't count three consecutive field numbers as 2 separate sets of consecutive rolls: 21.97 times
If you do: 43.44 times (this includes 4 in a row as 3 sets of consecutive rolls, 5 in a row as 4 consecutive sets, and so on)
link to original post

The answer has to be less than 100*(16/36)^2. Both these number are too high.
link to original post


Say, here's a crazy idea: how about if I remember to set the "number of times in a row" back to zero when I roll a non-point number?

Now, it's:
If you reset after each pair: 13.58
If you count 3 in a row as 2, 4 in a row as 3, and so on: 19.555

The 13.58 one is confirmed by spreadsheet:
Let P(n, 0) be the probability of the "zero in a row" state after n rolls
P(n, 1) be the probability of the "one in a row" state after n rolls
E(n) be the expected number of pairs after n rolls
P(n,0) = 1; P(n,1) = E(n) = 0
P(n+1, 1) = P(n, 0) x 4/9
P(n+1, 0) = P(n, 0) x 5/9 + P(n,1)
E(n+1) = E(n) + P(n, 1) x 4/9

Note that, after n = 25, P(n,0) stabilizes at about 0.6923, so each E(n) value increases by about 0.13675 over the previous one.

It turns out that, for the second one, the expected number of pairs is 16 / 81 x the number of rolls.
Last edited by: ThatDonGuy on Jul 29, 2023
ThatDonGuy
ThatDonGuy
Joined: Jun 22, 2011
  • Threads: 116
  • Posts: 5856
Thanks for this post from:
MentalCasinoinvestor
July 30th, 2023 at 1:09:41 PM permalink
For an "exact" solution to the problem where 3 consecutive is treated as just 1, you'll just have to trust me on this one - it is:

p^2 ((N - 1) + p (1 - (-p)^(N-1)) / (1 + p)) / (1 + p)

where p is the probability of rolling a field number, which is 4/9, and N is the total number of rolls, which is 100.

The solution is 16/117 * (99 + 4/13 * (1-(-(4/9))^99)), or about 13.58054.

  • Jump to: