I’m going to make this short…and probably not quite as sweet as some might like.
~An SRR-6 random-roller will toss a 40-roll hand about once every 263 hands.
~An SRR-8 dice-influencer will toss a 40-roll hand about once every 181 hands.
Now obviously the spacing between each 40-roll occurrence will not be exactly 263 hands for a random-roller, just as it won’t be exactly 181 hands between each 40-roll hand for a skilled SRR-8 shooter. Instead, those numbers indicate the rough average number of hands over which those respective players can expect to produce a hand like that.
As such, it is also reasonable to occasionally see a couple of near back-to-back hands of that length…followed by a prolonged absence of them. Overall though, those averages do hold up if viewed with a big-picture perspective.
So what does that tell us?
Well, the first thing it SHOULD tell us is that monster-hands don’t come along very often, and as such, we probably shouldn’t gear our betting as though each hand WILL turn into a monster.
That's a recipe for a pretty steady stream of constant losses, peppered with an intermittent big win or two.
The second thing it should tell us is that it’s probably not a very prudent idea to bank on our ability to unleash a monster-roll in order to bail out our previous losses.
Sure, a 40-roll monster may bail out our losses from a current session and maybe even the session or two prior to this one; but what about all of the other losses incurred over all of the previous sessions before the last two or three. That would have to be one hell of an optimally-bet monster-roll for it to accomplish such a lofty goal.
Think of it in these terms:
~Let’s say we play those 181 hands, and on the final hand we are lucky enough to toss a 40-roll monster.
~Let’s also say that half of our previous sessions (90) were break-even ones, where we neither won nor lost any money.
~Let’s also say that you win one-half of the rest (45), but also lose one-half of that same balance (the remaining 45).
~We’ll also assume for argument sake that your losses generally average about one-third larger than your average wins. So let’s say your average win is $150, but your average loss is $225.
~Over 180 hands then, we’ll assess your overall losses at $3375.
So even though you broke even on about half of them, and even though you made a pretty decent profit on about a quarter of them, your losses on the other quarter of your hands produced an average loss of $18.75 per session.
Is any of this sounding vaguely familiar to any of you…or at least vaguely representative of how your own sessions have been going?
So let’s look at that one 40-roll hand that comes along, on average, once every 181 hands.
~We’ve got a $3375 deficit to overcome even though our average per-session loss up until now has been a not-so-bad-looking $18.75 per session.
Let me ask you this:
~How likely are you to make up that $3375 deficit on your 40-roll hand?
~How quick will you be in clueing in to the fact that it is indeed turning into a monster hand, and how will you adjust your betting to take maximal advantage of it?
~Will the previous losses that you incurred on other hands that you thought MIGHT be turning into a monster but didn’t, affect your bet-sizing decisions on this one?
~To make $3375 on a 40-roll hand, means that each and every toss has to generate an average of just over $84 per outcome.
How would you accomplish that?
Well let’s see:
~If all 40 rolls produced a box-number non-trash outcome (which is highly unlikely); each of your Place-bets would have to be sized in the $60 range to produce an average payout of $84.
~A $10 Passline bet would have to be backed with 5x-Odds in order to produce an average payout of $84 but it takes a minimum of two rolls to accomplish that (one roll to set the PL-Point and another roll to repeat the PL-Point), so you’d have to back your PL-Point with 10x-Odds to produce an average payout of $84 over 20 rolls.
As you can see, we are getting to the point of ridiculousness here.
I’m not saying that you can’t make up a $3375 deficit from a 40-roll hand; what I am saying is that your betting has to be almost perfectly optimized to do so…and how many of us come anywhere close to doing that?!
The point of all this is simply to point out that 40-roll hands don’t come along that often; and if you are counting on a once-every-181-hands monster-roll to bail out all of your previous sub-optimally bet losses; then it’s not likely to do so.
To my mind, it is far better to take full advantage of what your average hand is giving you so as to make most of your profit off of those. That way, when the 40-roll monsters do come along, almost all of its profit can go right to the bottom-line instead of being used to bail out your previous losses.
Good Luck and Good Skill at the Tables…and in Life.
The Mad Professor
Copyright © 2007-2008