« Best of Las Vegas - LV Review Journal Poll | Main | You Can't Shine a Cow-Patty... or CAN You (Part 2) »

You Can't Shine a Cow-Patty...or CAN You (Part 1)

You Can't Shine a Cow-Patty or CAN You?

When President Lyndon Johnson used to say "You Can't Shine a Cow Patty" it was LBJ's inimitable way of saying that if something was a piece of crap you could dress it up all you wanted to, and package it all fancy like, but at the end of the day it would still be a piece of crap.

Today we are talking about the Iron Cross betting-method.

It's often been said that if used on an every player, every situation basis; then this play is one total piece of crap, and no matter how you try to shine it up; it still looks like crap, smells like crap and basically remains a piece of crap no matter what you do with it. The crap part being that if used in that every random-roller, every table, every trend situation; it is a stone-cold loser.

Under those all-encompassing conditions, I have to agree with that brutal assessment. On an every player, every situation basis, the Iron Cross IS a piece of crap! Period!

Many people think the Iron Cross (also known as the Umbrella or Anything-but-7 Method) is a cow patty that you are wasting your time on if you try to shine it up into something it's not.

That's where I disagree.

In fact, for a semi-talented Precision-Shooter, the Iron Cross can be one heck of a strong and powerful play.

Let's find out if I'm on the right track, and if we can indeed put a high shine on this meadow mine of betting-methods.

If You Need a Primer

I'll assume that you already know how the Anything But 7, Iron Cross is supposed to work, and why it looks so good on paper when you compare the 30:6 ratio of hits-to-losses. I'll also assume that you understand why it is generally regarded as a piece of fly covered crap when applied to random rollers on a wholesale basis.

If not, I will point you in the direction of Irishsetters Betting Strategies page, where you'll find an excellent little primer on what the Iron Cross/Anything but 7 (aka Umbrella Method) is.

The Validity of the Iron Cross

If we agree that the Iron Cross when used on every random-roller, and in every table-trend situation; is a stone-cold loser; can we also agree that in the hands of an accomplished dicesetter, the I-C holds tremendous profit-potential?

Let me make a statement, then I'll back it up with proof:

If used by a skilled Precision-Shooter with a verified, but still modest advantage, the Iron-Cross can be an OUTSTANDING money-maker.

Here's why:

If a moderately-skilled and bankrolled player has an SRR of 8:1 while using the X-6 (crossed-six set) during his Point-cycle; a modified Iron Cross (as set out below) should generate about $8 per roll.

That's not $8 per hand, that's $8 per ROLL.

Can I make myself any clearer; that's $8 on average every time the dice leave his hand, and that's with a very modest SRR of 8:1 (with the X-6 set) and an equally modest starting bankroll. 

If all of this sounds vaguely familiar, it's because we discussed this in one of my recent articles. To refresh your memory, here's a cut and paste section out of my The When, Where, Why, What and How of Signature Numbers - Part Four article which explains how to capitalize on that advantage in a little more detail:

      We'll assume you are at a $5 table allowing 3x, 4x, 5x, Odds.

      If your Pass Line bet is one of your Top Four Signature-Numbers, you'll back it up with max-Odds; otherwise you'll only wager 1x-Odds (if any at all).

      Given that Crossed-Six (X-6) set; the Inside-Numbers (5, 6, 8 & 9) constitute 50% of your on-axis probabilities, while Field Numbers (2, 3, 4, 9, 10, 11 & 12) also constitute 50% of the on-axis probabilities. There is an overlap/overlay on the 9 which holds a place of honor in both categories. The 7 makes up for that overlap with its own 2-out-of-16 (1:8) probability.

      In that case, a strong argument could be made for the following bet:

o       $25 Place-bet on the 5.

o       $30 each Place-bet on the 6 & 8.

o       $30 bet on the Field.

      With an SRR of 8:1, this yields an expected ~$8.12 profit per roll.


Based on that set and a modest SRR of 8:1, you can expect that each roll of the dice (that YOU make) will, on average, bring in just over eight bucks.

You'll notice that there is nothing fancy, exotic or unduly risky about those bets that I just mentioned. You'll notice that they don't require quadruple parlays or power-presses. In fact, all it requires is nice, steady tossing on your part, and enough turns with the dice to make it worth your while on an hourly basis (depending on how often you get your hands on the cubes). 

Now here is my question for you:

How much solo-shooting or frequent-shooting should you be seeking out, versus the time and money that you spend betting on random-rollers in your pursuit of profit?

That being the case;

If your current SRR is at or near 8:1, yet your average net-profit per roll isn't in line with those numbers (or isn't in proportion with the size of your current average bets); then it ISN'T your shooting that is holding you back, IT IS YOUR BETTING.

Okay, since there's been a lot of recent interest in the Iron Cross (in the hands of a skilled shooter), it deserves a closer examination.

A Behind The Scenes Look at This Money-Maker

To show you WHY this method (as SPECIFICALLY set out above) works so profitably for a Precision-Shooter with a modest SRR of 8:1 while using the X-6 set for his Point-cycle roll; we have to take a look at HOW the money is actually made:

Let's ignore for a moment that you will be adding max-Odds if your Passline-Point is one of your Top Four Signature Numbers (with the X-6 set), and consider only the math behind the expected outcomes.

Of the 16 on-axis possibilities with the X-6 set:

       The 2 shows up once, but we'll get a 2x-payoff for a net-profit of $60 (based on the above-noted $30 Field-bet).

       The 12 also shows up once, but we'll get a 3x-payoff for a net-profit of $90 on a 3x-table and $60 on a 2x-table.

       The 3 and 11 show up once each, so they spin off a $60 net-profit of on-axis revenue for every 16 on-axis Point-cycle rolls.

       The 4 and 10 also appear once each, so they too throw of a $60 net-profit from the Field for this SRR 8:1 shooter.

       The 5 shows up twice in those 16 rolls so the $25 Place-bet pays $35 each time, but when you replace the lost $30 Field-bet, the 5 only generates a $5-net, so you only receive a $10 net-profit from those two results.

       The 6 and 8 also show up twice each, so their $30 Place-bet also throws off a $35 payout, but again it only generates a $5-net with each outcome, so you only receive a $20 net-profit from those four dice-calls.

       The 9 shows up twice out of sixteen on-axis conclusions, and as a result this Field-bet produces a $60 net-profit.

       Of course the 7-Out shows up on-axis twice for a skilled SRR 8:1 player, so it wipes out the entire $115 Place-bet/Field-bet Iron Cross combo-method two times.

Let's do the math:

       $60-net from the 2, $90-net from the 12, $60-net for the 3 &11, another $60-net for the 4 & 10, plus $10-net from the 5, $20-net from the 6 & 8, and $60-net from the 9.

       That comes to $360 in net-generation from all of those on-axis winning outcomes. However, we still must subtract the two huge $115 whacks that we have to endure when the 7-Out shows up. In this case, we can expect it to wipe out all those wagers twice, so the resulting $230 deduction leaves the SRR 8:1 player with a net-profit of $130 for every 16 Point-cycle tosses of the X-6 dice.

       That means that each and every on-axis throw using the X-6 set (including the two 7-outs) will generate a NET-PROFIT of $8.125 per toss of the dice.

       I'm happy to round it off to $8/toss of the dice.

       That's a steady rate of return of ~7% on each and every toss of the dice. Im not talking about an annualized percentage-rate, I'm talking about a per-roll percentage rate. It makes for a compelling argument that the Iron Cross may indeed hold vast potential for the X-6 SRR 8:1 (or better) Precision-Shooter. Obviously your mileage may vary.

       If you play this method in a casino that only pays double on the 12 instead of triple; then your profit is reduce to $6.25 per-roll; still an adequate rate of money-production.

See Heavy's well laid out Dice-Set Distribution page if you need a defined chart of the expectancy for each on-axis dice-set.

Knowledge Is NOT Implementation

Now that we know the HOW and WHY of the Iron Cross, we come to the SHOULD WE? part of the discussion.

Let's go back to why it was we took up dicesetting in the first place.

We wanted to reduce our losses and increase our chances of winning.

In the casino-context, that's a significant challenge, but if you've proven the validity of Precision-Shooting to your own satisfaction; then you know that the whole basis for it is to keep the dice on-axis as much as possible. A Sevens-to-Rolls ratio of 1-in-8 is not all that ambitious for the person who has dedicated themselves to steady practice and continual refinement of their skills.

So let's get some caveats, cautions and concerns out of the way.

       The X-6 set is not the ultimate and only set to use, nor am I saying that it's the most perfect and ideal money-making set out there. It is good, but it's what YOU do with it, and how YOU bet with it; that determines YOUR ultimate profitability or failing.

       For the sake of this study, we've looked at only on-axis results. Obviously some of your tosses will be OFF-axis, but we have to start somewhere as a reasonable base of comparison. We'll be looking at this whole on-axis/off-axis ratio and percentage situation from a technical standpoint in an upcoming Shooting Bible article, but for now let's agree that on-axis is good and off-axis aint as good.

       Let's also agree that a double-pitch 7-Out is the nemesis of almost any Point-cycle base-set, and the X-6 is no exception. These numbers take all of that into consideration as well. With an SRR of 8:1, you can expect an on-axis, double-pitch 7-out, to occur twice (on average) within the Crossed-Sixes 16 on-axis possibilities; that's just the nature of the beast, especially if you aren't able to control rotational variance to any discernable degree.

       The $8.125 profit-per-roll figure is based on the AVERAGE of what this X-6 set can do for the SRR 8:1 roller (using the above-noted betting-method). It does not mean that someone whose Signature Numbers of 6 and 8 (with this set) won't dilute their winnings somewhat because of all the Field-bet replacements that they have to make. Likewise, it doesn't mean that someone who throws more Extreme Outside 2's, 3's, 4's, 10's, 11's and 12's won't make more than the eight-buck/roll average that it projects out to.

       Likewise, I'm not suggesting that a player who throws lots of those same Extreme Outside Numbers wouldn't be better served by concurrently Place-betting the 4 and 10, and considering a MILD (and I DO MEAN M-I-L-D progression on the Horn-bet when it is frequently recurring). Instead, what this little exercise does is to illustrate a betting-method that is at once, extremely simple; yet INCREDIBLY profitable when compared to the total dollars wagered and when considered as part of a moderately-skilled Precision-Shooters overall game-plan.

       It also means that you don't have to resort to all sorts of exotic Press/Parlay/Progression/Regression-style bets to make steady money from this game (and from your talents, even if they remain modest). Please understand that I LOVE using an initial Steep-Regression, especially when combined with subsequent aggressive pressing and collecting. However, I want you to see that all the Power-presses and Parlays, and exotic Prop-bets aren't an absolute necessity to generate steady profits with relatively humble on-axis performance. Let me quickly add that the profits from using this I-C approach piles up and multiplies INCREDIBLY quickly.

How quickly?

       Well, on average, with no Pressing and just the steady collection of bets and the replacement of your Field-bets when necessary; this method spins out a golden profit of $56 during each Point-cycle hand. That means that if your Point-cycle SRR is 8:1; then you can expect that on average, your bankroll will increase by approximately $56 every time the dice come around to your table position. With an average of $115 in wagers on the layout; that equates to a 48.7% return-on-investment PER HAND.

We've seen the basics of how you can make the Iron Cross steadily profitable for your own Precision-Shooting, and it's a pretty good way, but is there an even better way?

I guess I'm actually asking:

Can You REALLY Shine This Cow-Patty?

I think you can. Lets take a look

Tailoring Your Bets to Your Current Skill

I spend a lot of time talking about the importance of matching your current Precision-Shooting skills to bets that are equally appropriate.

The reason for this is that as a savvy casino-player, you cant afford to be inefficient with your wagers. That is, even an accomplished dicesetter has to make the most of the limited number of non-7 rolls that he throws.

To do so, he has to consider what numbers his current skill-set (and obviously, his Point-cycle dice-set) will generate, and then design a betting-approach specifically suited to that. His practice sessions together with his real-world outcomes, will tell him where and how much of his wagering-weight should be positioned on certain numbers. To a similar degree, his practice/real-world results should also indicate which bets he should specifically avoid.

Let me give you an actual real-life situation where I took the basic X-6/Iron-Cross idea and custom-tailored it to suit the shooting-style, personality-profile and dicesetting talents of a particular player; and turned the I-C into something quite spectacular (and extremely shiny to boot).

Ms. MP's Modified Full-Spread Iron Cross Method

Mad Professor, I read in one of your articles a while back (The Lady Is a Pro) that your girlfriend threw a lot of trash numbers (2, 3, 11 & 12). You said something to the effect of "I showed her how to take advantage of that", but you didn't specify how. I seem to throw a lot of those same numbers and I wondered if I should just play the Field or is there something else?

Yes, Ms. MP does tend to throw a lot of trash or Horn-numbers, due to her preferred use of the X-6 (Crossed-Sixes) set during her Point-cycle rolls. That led us to a betting-method that I tailored to suit her particular disposition, comfort-level and shooting-skill

The Modified Full-Spread Iron Cross

To take advantage of her talents, Ms. MP uses a Modified Full-Spread Iron Cross.

The Place-Bet Component

We start with a sort of pyramid arrangement on the value of her across-the-board Place-bets:

       $5 each on the 4 and 10

       $10 each on the 5 and 9

       $18 each on the 6 and 8

       All of the Box-numbers are covered, and the bets semi-reflect the fact that the X-6s on-axis 4 and 10 are expected once each, while the 5, 6, 8, and 9 are expected twice each. We'll discuss the reasoning behind the ramped over-weight on the Inside-Numbers in a moment.

The Pass-line and Odds

Obviously she won't have any Place-bets on her Pass-line Point (unless this is her second, third, or fourth, etc. PL-Point), and instead will have single, double or triple Odds to reflect the pyramids initial (starting) value:

       1X-Odds on the 4 or 10

       2X-Odds on the 5 or 9

       3X-Odds on the 6 or 8

The Basic Field Bet

She will also have a $5 bet on the Field at ALL times during her Point-cycle, but as you'll see; very rarely does she have the need to press her Field-bet.

On the Come-Out rolls, all of her Place-bets are Off, and therefore she does not have a Field-bet in action during the C-O either. Like me, she uses the Come-Out portion of the hand as a separate and distinct profit-center (part of my Game Within a Game concept). Therefore, those C-O bets stand alone, and do not carry over or affect any of her point-cycle bets. For this discussion, we're just looking at the Modified Full-Spread Iron-Cross, and not her C-O action. Obviously, when the PL-Point is established, she once again starts to re-wager her base $5 bet on the Field.

Partially Reinvesting Some Place-bet Revenue

Once the PL-Point has been established (or re-established if this is her second, third, or fourth, etc. PL-Point) the first hit of any NON-Place-bet Field-number (2, 3, 11 or 12), shell rack the full payment.

On the first hit of ANY Place-bet number (4, 5, 6, 8, 9, or 10), shell also rack that full payout too, but from there, she's fairly aggressive in her pressing.

If any of her Place-bets re-roll for a second time, she'll press it by one unit ($5 or $6), and she'll keep on pressing it by one-unit whenever it comes in again. She'll do that for ALL of her Place-bet action whenever one of them comes in. Yes she does this each and every time they recur. That way, she locks up her first hit, and then uses a portion of her winnings to make subsequent single-unit presses every time they come in again. All of her presses are for single units ($5 increase on the 4, 5, 9 and 10 anytime they hit, after the first one; and $6-presses on the 6 and 8, again, only after first collecting in-full on the first appearance of any one of them).

If she successfully repeats her first PL-Point and the second PL-Point is different from the first, she will Place-bet that number for the base-amount that is called for in her original betting regimen ($5 on the 4 & 10, $10 on the 5 & 9, $18 on the 6 & 8).

If one of her Place-bets has been hitting with a good frequency, and therefore has been pressed-up to a decent size, and it subsequently becomes her next PL-Point during the same hand; then shell remove a portion of the Place-bet money from that number, and use it for maximum-Odds on that corresponding new PL-Point. Concurrently, she'll leave the unused balance of the pressed-up Place-bet on that same number. Yes, we both realize that this overlay approach to betting may not appear to be the mathematically-best tactic or best utilization of wagering monies, but it pays extraordinary dividends which sustain (and redoubles) the rationale behind it.

An Example

Let's look at just one Place-bet number to see how this works.

       The 5 starts out with a $10 Place-bet on it.

       When it hits the first time, it pays $14 but only nets $9 because the $5 Field-bet has to be replaced. The Field-bet is replaced each and every time during her Point-cycle throwing that it falls. Net-profit: $9

       When the 5 hits again, there is another $9-net payout (after replacing the Field-bet once again), but she'll use $5 of that money to press her Place-bet 5 by $5. Net profit: $4, Cumulative profit: $13

       When the 5 comes in again, her (now) $15 Place-bet spins off $21 but $5 of that goes to replace her Field-bet, and another $5 is dedicated to pressing her Place-bet 5 again for another $5. Net profit: $11, Cumulative profit: $24

       On the next appearance of the 5, her $20 Place-bet generates $28, but again $5 is earmarked for a Field replacement, while another $5 is used as a one-unit press on the 5. Net profit: $18, Cumulative profit: $42

       When the 5 rolls in again, the $25 Place-bet pays $35, but as usual with every roll during her Point-cycle, $5 goes to a single-unit press, and another $5 replaces the Field. Net profit: $25, Cumulative profit: $67

At first glance, this appears to be a very INEFFICIENT way to make money, what with the constant replacement of the Field-bet; but in fact, I wanted to show you the worst aspect of this method first.

In the event that the 5 becomes her new PL-Point during the same hand, she'll take some of the Place-bet money off of the 5 so that she can wager full-Odds behind the Pass-line. The unused balance of the Place-bet money will remain in action directly on the number as a now-reduced Place-bet.

Inefficiency versus Frequency

Though the 6-out-of-16 on-axis outcomes that the 5, 6, & 8 make with the X-6 set does appear to make it look like this is an unproductive approach; the fact that the Field represents another 8-out-of-those-possible-16 outcomes (50%) begins to show why that is not the case at all.

However we have to take it two steps further to explain why it works so well for her.

By fully spreading her Place-bet action to all the Box-numbers, she is able to collect double, in quinella-type fashion, on the 4, 9, and 10, along with the normal double pays when the 2 or 12 appear (and trebly on the 12 at a downtown odds 3x-pays casino).

By starting out with more money on the non-Field 5, 6, and 8 (along with her other X-6 Top Four S-N of 9), the dilution-factor of the Field is minimized, but not entirely offset or eliminated. Where she further makes up for that shortcoming is with the hoping-to-repeat Horn-numbers.

In simple terms, we recognize that the profit that the 5, 6 and 8 gives us is partially offset by having to replace the $5 Field-bet each time one of those three (the 5, 6 or 8) show up. However we are prepared to live with that because of the positive added profit effect that occurs when a Field 3 or 11 shows up, and doubly pleased when the 2, 4, 9, or 10 show up, and trebly happy when the 12 appears.

In other words, this Anything But Seven approach is bet-weighted in such a way that it takes full advantage of the distribution of outcomes that we can expect with the X-6 set.

Distribution Dictates Decisions

To decide where your wagering-weight should be placed, your On-Axis Distribution of numbers should be what dictates where your money should be bet.

That is:

YOUR dice-set distribution-results dictate where YOUR bets should be.

Now there are a couple of ways of looking at the X-6 on-axis distribution of Place-number outcomes. You could reason that because the 4 and 10 pays so well (9:5 as a Place-wager, and 2:1 on a bought-bet at the $20+ level), a person might be tempted to put the preponderant weight of their wagers on the 4 and 10 simply because of the higher-ratio payout.

Of course, the other way of looking at the lower-ratio (7:6) payout that you get from the 6 and 8, might lead you to think that it needs more money to be wagered on it to get an equivalent bang for the buck. You further reason that since you'll be continually replacing the lost $5 Field-wager, it makes sense to start off with more money on the non-Field 5, 6, and 8 in anticipation of that constantly required Field-replacement offset.

In Ms. MP's case, the latter approach works quite a bit better than the former.

By starting off with an $18 6 and 8, the profit racks up much faster and the dilution of the replaced $5 Field-bets has less and less significance as her hand progresses. Likewise, she is double collecting when the 4, 9, and 10 hit because both the Place-bet and her Field-bet is paid at the same time. This allows her to rack more profit, yet still ratchet up her Outside Place-bets (in fact, ALL of her Place-bets) at an accelerated rate.

Yes, this is a VERY aggressive way to play; but for a skilled Precision-Shooter with a validated edge over the house; it is one way to get aggressive with your wagers, yet still restrict losses on the occasional short-lived hands.

You have to be mindful that once you reach a certain point in your dicesetting development, you no longer look at losing the way you once did; and instead, you start looking at each and every hand, and each and every roll for that matter, as a probable money-maker (instead of just a possible earner).

In those situations, you have to look at some of the more aggressive betting approaches that are out there in order to maximize each opportunity you get with the dice. In Ms. MP's case, she looks at each hand as a potential money-maker from the outset, and she understands that a relatively small amount of money at the start of betting can become mountainous if the hand turns into something special (but that even the relatively short ones will still be moderately profitable).

Though this and other aggressive pressing-methods do leave a lot of cash on the table when the inevitable 7-out shows up; it also rakes a greater and greater amount of money off of each and every subsequent across-the-board (scaled-up by single-unit Pressing) Place-bet hit.

It's that glass half-full or half-empty perspective that you have to comes to terms with BEFORE you consider implementing any assertive betting-method like this.

Let's turn to how she handles those other numbers that also have a tendency to show up when a skilled player uses the X-6 set.

Handling The Horn

I'll be the first to tell you that betting on the Horn (2, 3, 11 & 12) during a random-rollers hand is an awfully bad wager (to the hideously insane tune of 12.5%). Yes the house-edge is THAT high on the Horn-bet.

However, for the skillful player who throws a preponderance of Horn-numbers; then the Horn-bet CAN make sense if used CAREFULLY and RESPONSIBLY, and is specifically geared to reflect your VERIFIED and STEADFAST session-to-session-to-session advantage over the house.

I cannot over-emphasize the importance of validating whether or not you truly do have a REAL advantage over high-vig bets of this type, or whether its merely a perceived and wishful HOPE that you do.

For a very revealing look at just HOW GOOD you have to be to take advantage of this by way of a steady stream of Prop-bets; I would strongly urge another look at my How To GET It, and How To KEEP It Part Six article. It may open your eyes, and save you a heck of a lot of money in the process.

Strangely enough however, Heavys See a Horn, Bet a Horn method can be applicable to a skilled and proficient X-6 shooter. Let me show you how.

As far as Ms. MP's Trash/Horn numbers are concerned:

       If a 2, 3, 11 or 12 rolls, then she'll take $4 from her Field-bet revenue that just came in, and make a $4 Horn-bet. Her $5 Field-bet also remains in action.

       If one of those numbers repeats again, she'll make additional $4 presses on the Horn on each subsequent appearance.

       That means if a Horn-number immediately shows up after betting on it, she'll raise her Horn-action to $8. If another one shows up right away again, she'll throw another $4 press at it, and so on.

       If a non-Horn number appears; then her Horn-betting is finished until another 2, 3, 11, or 12 shows up during her roll, and then the process starts all over again.

       Though the Horn-numbers represents 25% of the possible on-axis outcomes for the X-6 set, she tends to throw them in clumps of two, three, or four in a row; so there is even more efficacy in using Heavy's approach.

From a revenue standpoint, the See a Horn, Bet a Horn approach accounts for roughly 32% of her overall net-profit while using the Modified Full-Spread Iron Cross.

The balance of her net-profit comes from repeated PL-winners and pressed-up Place-bets, which admittedly can rise extremely quickly. Just a few hits on the 6 or 8 sees them rise from their starting point of $18 to $24, then $30, then $36 and $42, etc. For a shooter who throws numbers right across the Place-bet spectrum, this approach uses only a portion of the payout to pump up the volume of the number that just hit and to replace the Field-bet that just fell. The rest of the payout is racked as retained-profit.

As the non-Field Place-bets (5, 6 & 8) escalate in size, the significance of the replaced $5 Field-bet decreases (as a percentage of the diluted Place-bet gross-payout). Where the strength of continuous pressing of the Place-bets show their best face, is when a double-covered Field/Place-bet (4, 9, & 10) comes in. 

Double-Covered Field/Place-bets

The 4, 9 and 10 are what we can call double-covered Field/Place-bets. That is, we have action on them in the Field as well as in the Box-number Place-bets. When one of them rolls, we collect twice; once from the Place-bet and again on the Field-bet.

We treat these Field-number Place-bets the same as we treat the non-Field Place-bets. That is, every time a Place-bet comes in (after its first appearance where we rack the entire Place-bet and Field-bet payoff), we increase the Place-bet by one-unit, and we keep on pressing it by one unit each and every time it shows its face again. The base $5 Field-bet stays at that same level throughout all of her Point-cycle play.

Again, this is very aggressive pressing that we are talking about here, and we are admittedly using a fair bit of our initial payoffs to fuel even bigger bets; but for the Precision-Shooter who wants to take absolute full advantage of the average-length medium-to-long rolls; then this line of attack is one of the best ways.

Obviously there are more aggressive and more conservative methods that a player can use to take advantage of their skillful dice-throwing, but I wanted to give you a real-world example of how Ms. MP's betting is tailored to reflect her shooting skills (and her moderate-to-low bet-comfort level) while using the X-6 Point-cycle set.

Why the Full-Spread IC Works For Ms. MP

       By pressing all of her Place-bets (including those that are double-covered in the Field) only when they hit, her Place-bets grow in proportion to the number of times they are repeating, yet the dilution of the Field-bet is minimized as the hand progresses.

       That means that the more the non-Field Place-bets (5, 6, and 8) show up, and the further they are pressed (by one-unit each on every subsequent appearance); the less intense that dilution effect (of having to continually replace the $5 Field-bet) will be. And since they start out larger ($10 on the 5, and $18 on the 6 and 8), they have a leg-up on that whole dilution issue right from the beginning anyway.

       When a string of trash/Horn numbers do show up, shes there to take advantage of it, yet she's not constantly chasing the Horn in HOPES that each roll will be THE one. That way, she takes what her roll is giving her, yet she presses the Horn in a way that gives her maximum growth potential if she gets back-to-back-to-back outcomes as she sometimes does. Conservative pressing of subsequent Horn-wins reflects the fact that those double, triple and quadruple repeats do not happen often enough to justify a more aggressive bet-stance.

Proof Is In the Pudding or At Least In The PROFIT

I'll keep this part short and sweet.

Using this method, Ms. MP makes on average just over $100 ($112 to be precise) every time the dice come around to her.

       Yes, that includes all the times when she goes Point-then-7-Out.

       Yes, that includes all the times when she throws a couple of paying hits, but still doesn't make any NET-profit.

       Yes, it includes all the times when she breaks through the net-profit threshold, but doesn't make much beyond that.

       Yes, it obviously includes her average rolls where she is able to build up her Place-bet wagers and Horn-bet repeats to a point where her profit hits well beyond that $100+/hand average.

       And yes, of course it includes her hands where the Place-bets are assembled to such a high peak where it is hard to remember that they started out at such lowly amounts.

All in all, it is a good and consistently profitable approach that is tailored to her X-6 dice-outcomes, but moreover to her temperament and bet-comfort-level as a player. At $100+ per hand, you can see once again WHY it is important for the skilled Precision-Shooter to seek out empty or sparsely-populated tables, and not waste a lot of time or money on random-rollers.

Is The Iron Cross Practical For YOU?

Okay, we know that the Anything-But-7 Iron-Cross Method is not an every shooter, every table, every trend, every casino betting-method. Which that brings us back to the seminal question:

Can you shine this cow-patty?

Well let's have a look:

       If you prefer to use the X-6 set or one of its permutations, and,

       If your average Point-cycle shooting often results in mid-to-long length rolls (10 to 30 rolls) on a consistent basis, and,

       If you are getting an even-distribution of Box-numbers across the spectrum, along with a large amount of Field numbers (both Box and Horn numbers), and,

       If your Horn-numbers show up in clusters, instead of singularly;

       Then the Iron Cross, and specifically Ms. MP's Modified Full-Spread Iron Cross might be profitably applicable to your game-plan.

If your shooting-skill validates it; then I say you can put quite a shine on this particular cow patty.

A Word of Thanks and Gratitude

As a side-note to this whole article, an on-going illness has kept Ms. MP away from the tables for quite a while now. I want to thank all of you who have kept her in your prayers. I decided to share her method with you as a bit of a dedication for the incredible amount of latitude, patience, freedom, understanding, consideration and most of all for her ongoing love and support that she has shown to me over our years together.

Sincerely,

The Mad Professor

copyright 2006

Do you have questions or comments about the articles and subjects discussed here at the Dice Institute? Sign up for our member's forum and share them with us!

About

This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on April 22, 2007 5:17 PM.

The previous post in this blog was Best of Las Vegas - LV Review Journal Poll.

The next post in this blog is You Can't Shine a Cow-Patty... or CAN You (Part 2).

Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Powered by
Movable Type 3.34