« You Can't Shine a Cow-Patty...or CAN You (Part 1) | Main | You Can't Shine a Cow-Patty... or CAN You (Part 3) »

You Can't Shine a Cow-Patty... or CAN You (Part 2)

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

Part Two 

For some players, it takes a paradigm shift to go from what they thought they knew about the game back when they were random-rollers, to what they know now as advantage-play Precision-Shooters.

I'll give you an example.

      Most every craps book on the market paints the Field-bet as a bad wager.

      For random-rollers, the house holds a 5.56% advantage over them. Even in casinos where the Field-12 gets paid at 3:1, the house-edge is still 2.78%.

      Though the Field covers seven numbers (2, 3, 4, 9, 10, 11 and 12), and there are 16-out-of-36 random-outcomes which cover them; it is the other non-Field numbers (5, 6, 7, and 8) with their 20-out-of-36 random-occurrences that validates that bad bet designation for random shooters.

However, knowledgeable Precision-Shooters have long understood that profitable dice-influencing is all about overcoming the house-edge and actually turning it into a players advantage.

So the question becomes, Can it be done on the Field, and if so, how good of a shooter do you have to be to make the Field-bet profitable? 

The answer is, Yes, it can be done, and it only takes very modest dice-influencing skills to do it.

The X-6 Set / Field-Bet Combination

For most intermediate-skilled X-6 set shooters, the biggest frustration is dealing with all the non-paying trash numbers that the Crossed-Sixes set throws off during a hand.

For me, I see that X-6 set frustration more as a superb profit-making opportunity.

      What if you could use the Field-bet as your MAIN wager and your MAIN dice-influencing income source?

      What if you could use the non-Field 5, 6, and 8 outcomes simply as supporting cast members who prop up the use and utility of your Field income without unduly diluting it?

If you knew the Field-bet could produce outstanding returns even at a low on-axis percentage, would you consider using it?

Defining Your Advantage 

Suppose for a moment that you were able to generally keep the X-6 dice-set on-axis about 55% of the time.

Is that good enough to justify going up against such a high-vig bet like the Field?

Lets have a look:

[Image of X6 Graph]

I want to thank ACDOC and Maddog for graciously providing the graphs you see here.

The left-most bars on this graph represent a random-roller. The first thing you'll see is that no matter what bet he makes, the expectation remains on the negative-side of the earnings line.

The first real glimmer of hope is when either a worse-than-random or better-than-random axial-maintenance starts to take hold.

Not surprisingly, the first bet that even starts to make sense for the X-6 user is the Field-bet.  

You'll notice too that the Field-bet is the ONLY right-side bet in that group which makes sense for the X-6 user until he reaches the 55% on-axis level of consistency. Up until that point, all of the other traditional bets like the Pass-Line, Come-wagering and Place-betting, ALL remain in negative-expectation territory.

      Now the first thing that comes to my mind is, If your on-axis percentage ISN'T 55% or better; then why the heck are you still using the X-6 dice-set? 

      However, the second thing that comes to my mind when I look at this chart is, Why the heck is everyone in the dice-influencing community so down on the Field-bet especially in light of the fact that so many people blindly follow the X-6 set use, but they dont capitalize on its very strengths? 

Its only after I am able to compose myself at the seeming incredulity of the situation that I get to my third thought about the X-6 users who have achieved around the 55% O/A threshold, and that is:

      There are incredible amounts of money to be made DIRECTLY off of the Field and any other bets (with the exception of straight up Prop-bets on the 2 and 12) are merely supporting cast members or bankroll-sucking leaches that actually reduce your profit-rate. 

Now, let's see if my rant was worth all that trouble

[Image of X6 exp. wins]

The first thing that should jump right out at you is the fact that at a low axial-maintenance (even as low as 30%); the Field-bet is the only wager in that bunch that is STILL profitable even if you never ever get past the 55% on-axis proficiency mark.

If a 55% O/A X-6 shooter can steadily benefit from the Field; can the other 45% of his OFF-axis outcomes also contribute anything useful?

Let's find out

Outcome-Distribution Dictates Bet-Decisions

To decide where and how much of your wagering-weight should be placed on any bets, your distribution of outcomes should be the sole dictator in that process.

That is:

YOUR dice-set distribution-results (as opposed to random-expectancy) dictates where YOUR money should be bet.< /p>

      Let's assume for a moment that you are able to keep your dice on-axis about 55% of the time. Though that means that they'll be going OFF-axis the other 45% of the time; it does not mean that they are wasted rolls.

      Instead, we know that you'll still have some off-axis Signature Outcomes simply because, even though the dice sometimes do go off-axis, the two dice often still remain in correlation. For a full discussion on correlation, please see Shooting Bible #11.

      Correlated Signature Outcomes is why you'll often see the same roll-results even when one of your die does go off-axis.

      In the end though, those same irritating off-axis toss-defects, can still enable and permit even more tangible profit to be derived from what appears to be a dice-influencing shortcoming.

Let me give you an assumptive example with the Crossed-Sixes (X-6) set:

On-Axis Outcomes: 55%

which are comprised of 

Primary-hits: 16%

Double-Pitches: 7%

Single-Pitches in either direction: 32%

Off-Axis Outcomes: 45%

which are comprised of 

One-die off-axis 34%

Both Dice off-axis 11%

      The first thing I can tell you about this, is that it achieves a Sevens-to-Rolls Ratio of over 1:8 DESPITE the fact that the dice are only kept on-axis 55% of the time.

      The second thing I can tell you, is that with modestly-influenced roll-stats like these, the Field-bet becomes a no-brainer champion by racking up a stunning 11.25% advantage over the house.

Take a look at the numbers that correspond with those above-noted axial-outcome percentages, and then well discuss how to really put a shine on this lowly-regarded Field-bet cow-patty:

Outcome 

Number of combinations 

Random Probability 

X-6 set 55% O/A 

2

1

2.78%

4.00%

3

2

5.56%

6.13%

4

3

8.33%

8.25%

5

4

11.11%

12.88%

6

5

13.89%

12.75%

7

6

16.67%

12.00%

8

5

13.89%

12.75%

9

4

11.11%

12.88%

10

3

8.33%

8.25%

11

2

5.56%

6.13%

12

1

2.78%

4.00%

Total

36

100%

100%

A random-roller can expect to see a Field-number about 44.44% of the time, while non-Field outcomes account for the other 55.56% of random appearances.

By subtly affecting the dice-distribution expectancy through dice-influencing, our 55% on-axis X-6 shooter achieves a significantly better set of outcomes where hell see a Field-number about 49.62% of the time and a non-Field outcome about 50.38% of the time.

At first glance, those are not huge differences in expected outcomes. However the fact is, you don't have to be a perfect-thrower to derive an exploitable edge over the house; but you DO have to bet your advantage correctly, otherwise your skills are almost entirely wasted.

The Bottom Line 

When you combine those on-axis outcomes with the off-axis ones, you start to get a more complete picture of where your strongest and most compelling betting-opportunities are found, and frankly, where the preponderance of your betting-weight should be placed.

So what does all this mean in terms of this players advantage over the house?

Have a look for yourself:

Type Of Bet 

Player Advantage

Edge per roll on Place 6 or 8

2.88%

Edge per roll on Place 5 or 9

6.03%

Edge per roll on buy 4 or 10

4.09%

Edge per roll on Field bets, triple on 12

11.25%

Edge per roll on 2 or 12

20.00%

Edge per roll on 3 or 11

-8.13%

      At the top of the advantage-play heap stands the 2 and 12. Now normally, this Prop-wager has a house-edge of 13.889%, but for the X-6 shooter who has reached an easily achievable 55% O-A skill-level; he not only overcomes that nearly 14% house-edgebut he actually puts his own shooting into the drivers seat with a positive 20% advantage over each of those traditionally disparaged 2 and 12 Crazy Crapper bets. That's a 35% change in course from the hands of a decidedly moderately skilled shooter.

      In descending order, the Field-bet comes in as his next strongest bet. Again, this wager is traditionally frowned upon because of its 5.56% house-edgebut thats for random-rollers. For dice-influencers with the modest skill-set that we've been discussing, that house-edge is pared right down to nothing and comes out on the positive side for the player to the tune of an 11.25% advantage on a downtown-odds table.

      Keep in mind that advantage-blackjack players start to wet their panties if the edge climbs anywhere close to 2% or 3%, so an 11.25% player-edge would make them downright wacky, but many craps veterans still can't get over the psychological hump of making an advantage-bet that their tablemate-friends might frown upon. Well-intentioned peer-pressure often keeps many skilled players from earning their rightfully deserved profit.

      In this scenario, even the normal 4% house-edge on the 5 and 9 Place-bets gets reversed into a player-advantage of over 6%, while the normal 4.76% cost of buying the 4 or 10 turns into the players favor to the tune of 4%.

      Keep in mind that we are not discussing perfect-world scenarios here. We are talking about an unexceptional on-axis proficiency of 55%, and an even more modest 16% primary-face hit-rate.

      Each of those negative-to-positive expectancy reversals are so significant that a savvy player cannot ignore them or eschew them simply because a couple of writers who don't know preferred-stock from livestock and don't understand how a dice-influencer can maximize his profit without following gambling dogma that is a hold over from the Dark Ages, said that the Field-bet is a bad thing.

      It IS a bad thing for random-rollers, but in the unassuming hands of an intermediately-skilled dice-influencer, the Field-bet can be downright lucrative.

      Instead of blindly following worn-out gambling decrees and age-old doctrine that was designed for the world of randomly-thrown outcomes; the astute dice-influencer has to look at his current abilities and honestly ask himself if he is extracting the maximum possible profit from each of the bets that he is making. I am talking about using exactly THE SAME bet-levels that you are comfortable with now, but simply redeploying that same money on bets that will serve your current skill-level most equitably.

      Many players are shocked to discover that they have been unfairly retarding their D-I earnings simply because some wagers like the Field are saddled with a ladies bet label or an inner-city-bettors-only stigma.

Grow up, get real, and put your money where it will serve your current skills the best.

Oh, and one other thing. Those on-axis and off-axis stats that we just reviewed, well you may be surprised to learn that they give that 55% O/A X-6-set shooter an SRR of 8.33. Not too shabby for a modestly-skilled player who is off-axis about 45% of the time.

So, Can You Shine THIS Field-Bet Cow-Patty? 

Yer darn tootin you can! 

I hope you'll join me for Part Three of this series when we take this little filly for a hard ride around the casinos Field-bet meadow. You may be surprised at how quickly she can gallop to a full and sustained profit.

Until then,

Good Luck & Good Skill at the tablesand in Life 

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 23, 2007 7:19 PM.

The previous post in this blog was You Can't Shine a Cow-Patty...or CAN You (Part 1).

The next post in this blog is You Can't Shine a Cow-Patty... or CAN You (Part 3).

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