« Can You Fool Your Bankroll into THINKING and ACTING Like It Is Bigger? - Part Six | Main | Can You Fool Your Bankroll into THINKING and ACTING Like It Is Bigger? - Part Seven »

Can You Fool Your Bankroll into THINKING and ACTING Like It Is Bigger? - Part Five


I am fortunate to once again be joined by our friend, Chuck D. Bohnes, as we continue our bankroll-doubling and re-doubling Recirculation Factor discussion.

.
.

Following on the heels of Part Four in this series, Deadcat asked the following:



Quote:



I am interested in the whole “How to accelerate your long-term advantage” angle in your Recirculation Factor series especially because it offers a look at the flip side to "Gambler's Ruin.".


I'm a little curious to see
how to compound the "interest" (advantage) at the tables given that bet sizes are at increments that may not sync with advantage and bankroll.


Suppose you figure that you win a few dollars each hand on average. How do you calculate when it is time to increase the bets you make to the next level? 


If you are constantly recirculating original capital and accrued monies, are we talking about inter-session stages of bet size increases, or constant increases intra-session? (Am I betting a $12 6 until my bankroll increases 50% then go to an $18 6 or will I do this after hitting a strike point in session wins?)


Or, will my bets expand outward to include numbers which I have a lower advantage than those which I was using to increase the bankroll? Or, should I seek out and use higher limit Odds to make incremental increases and do that intra or inter session?


I'm
very interested to see where this series goes. I think it is important and has great potential. 






Mad Professor


That’s quite a focused line of related questions, Deadcat; so let’s jump right in and get to work.


The question any dice-influencer who is hoping to turn his skill into profit always has to be asking himself is:


If I don’t have most of my 7-exposure money on my best, highest-advantage, most dominant box-number; then WHY NOT?


Money that is spread too thinly over too many bets, or distributed on a blend of neg-ex and pos-ex wagers cannot possibly achieve your money-making objectives over any reasonable amount of measure.






Chuck D. Bohnes:





Driving in the fast lane.



Employing Recirculation Factors (“RFs”) is simply a matter of driving your bankroll down the fast lane of the craps interstate. Just like the driver seeking to reach his designation as efficiently as possible, the DI strives to have his bankroll reach its destination (next doubling) as efficiently as possible. 



The Recirculation Factor helps you to identify the fast lane so you can get in it. 



If you
AREN’T on your best box number, you have moved into the slow lane. 



Betting inefficient props? 



You’re in the slow lane. 



Spread too wide across too many numbers? 



Yep, the slow lane is where you are going to be.










Mad Professor





Now obviously your D-I earnings-rate doesn’t have to be stuck in the slow lane forever, but it does take a conscious decision on your part to move into a faster mode of growing your bankroll.





Chuck D. Bohnes

Exactly. There are two ways to weave out of the fast lane and swerve dangerously back into the slow lane.




One, you can fail to capture the full power of your best advantage wagers, which is the topic addressed by the Recirculation Factors. 



Two, you can over-accelerate, drive recklessly and invite disaster. You are no longer in the fast lane if you’re pulled over receiving a ticket or in an ambulance on the way to hospital. The DI equivalent of reckless driving is over-betting your advantage. 



Over-betting can be defined mathematically as exceeding full Kelly. 



Betting between 1x and 2x the Kelly Criterion…you’re the tailgater who wants to go faster but is actually slowing himself down with his constant gas-then-brake maneuverings. 



Beyond 2x Kelly, you’re so reckless that a catastrophic collision is imminent.


The vast majority of DIs operate within a risk-comfort zone well below full Kelly so it is the first topic, Recirculation Factors, that commands our attention.







Mad Professor

I think it is important to include another factor in that overbetting/underbetting definition, and that is where a player over-bets his modestly-advantaged prop-wagers…and then under-bets his significantly-advantaged Place-bets. 



The huge disconnect you see there is based on three factors:



~A Prop or Hop has a short-lived
one-roll-to-reach-a-resolution decision-point, while an advantaged Place-bet has a longer-lived 3+ rolls to reach a resolution.



~That same Prop-bet money would have an EV (expected value) utility that is at least three-times its current prop-wager betting-weight were it wagered instead on that dice-influencer’s highest-advantage
Place-bet. 



In other words, that same D-I would derive at least three times more utility from those
Prop-bet dollars if they were used instead on his strongest-edge Place-bets.



Same amount of money...three times the utility.


~In addition, the feast-or-famine volatility that hounds Prop and Hop bets is often the underlying cause of why otherwise sane dice-influencers continue to under-bet their most advantageous wagers while simultaneously over-betting the seemingly ‘cheaper cost’ center-of-the-table wagers...all the while never realizing that having a $1 lower-advantage, higher-volatility prop-bet equates to short-changing their highest-advantage, lower-volatility Place-bet by at least $6 or so on every bet-decision that is reached. 



So, if say you wager
$5 in center-of-the-table prop-bets on each hand that you throw; that same money, when equated on a bet-decision basis, would be equivalent to having about $30 more money than you already have on your highest-advantage Place-bet.

To my mind, I'd rather have the profit that an extra $30 on my best Place-bet will produce on nearly every single hand...versus what my $5 prop-bet might produce once in a while.







Chuck D. Bohnes


So how do you use Recirculation Factors to get you in the fast lane?



The lower your Recirculation Factor, the faster your bankroll travels to its “doubled” destination. 



Since lower Recirculation Factors flow from higher advantages, the conscientious D-I concentrates his wagering on only his highest-edge bets. 



Spreading wider or re-deploying away from those best wagers only drags down his advantage, increases his Recirculation Factor, and lengthens his E.T.A. (estimated time to arrival, measured in number of advantaged hands he’ll have to throw before doubling his bankroll). 



The key concept is that the combination of your skill level, your casino opportunity, and your then-existing preparedness; produces a very specific optimal betting strategy for you at that time.



You either exploit that best opportunity or you drift out of the fast lane. 



Nothing you do can make you go faster than staying with that lowest Recirculation Factor, which identifies your fast lane.








Mad Professor

Ya know, if I hadn’t suffered through my own personal battles with spreading too many bets too widely over too many numbers; I’d be less adamant about this whole subject. 



It took some very serious introspection and soul-searching to realize how severely I was under-utilizing my betting-dollars. That is, even though I had lots of money spread out on the layout, I wasn’t getting anywhere close to the kind of returns that my validated advantage indicated I
should be getting.



Part of the problem of course was that while I did have large amounts of money exposed on the table, most of it wasn’t deployed anywhere close to their optimal highest-advantage target because they were spread way too wide. 



The frustration of knowing that I had a verified edge over the house, and knowing that I had a hefty amount of money deployed on the table; yet realizing how little profit I was making despite what, at the time,
appeared to me a good cover-as-many-numbers-and-collect-as-many-hits-as-possible strategy; was what finally drove me to seek out a more advantageous way to bet my edge.



I knew my shooting was friggin' great, but it just wasn't making me the kind of money I knew it
should have been producing; yet throwing more money at it didn't provide a better solution either.



It wasn't until I started focusing my money on the bets where it would do the
most good in the least amount of time (read that to be: The most profit in as few hands as possible...all the while using the same amount of money that I had been spreading too thinly over too many numbers before), that I started garnering the kinds of profit that I felt my good shooting deserved.






Chuck D. Bohnes

So the answer is definitively “no” to the specific question of whether winnings should be deployed by covering new, lower edge bets.







Mad Professor



If you stick to the wagers where you know you have the edge, your money will serve you well.



If you zig and zag, trying to catch the latest
what-number-did-I-just-roll trend; you’ll sometimes catch a big wave that makes you feel like a Big Kahuna…but most times the majority of your out-on-the-water money will be swamped by wave after wave of roll-to-roll and hand-to-hand variance.



Though it’s tempting to look at a just-played hand where you spread your bets widely and ended up producing a decent profit, and pat yourself on the back for being so brilliant; it’s the other hands where you did the same thing and ended up losing more than you made, which also have to be factored into whether or not your money is being deployed wisely.



If you are really keen on determining whether or not you’d be better off focusing your betting-weight squarely on the shoulders of let’s say, your
top two highest-edge, most dominant box-numbers, or whether you’d make more by spreading that same money more widely over several additional box-numbers…simply count the hits you make on each box-number over several dozen sessions.

Go ahead, count the quantity of hits you roll on each box-number over several dozen sessions. Figure out how much you would make or lose over 30 or 40 session using the spread-‘em wide approach versus the more-optimal focused-on-prosperity top two most dominant box-numbers approach.



In this game, your dice-influenced outcomes determine how much you can make or how much you can lose. 



It is up to you to put your money where your advantage is…and to disregard temptation of lower-advantage wagers.



Think of it this way:


~Putting money on your most dominant, best-advantage wagers puts you in the fast lane to bankroll-doubling.

~Keeping money on lesser-advantaged or dis-advantaged lower-dominance wagers keeps you in the much slower stop-and-go lane...making it much more difficult to reach your bankroll-doubling destination.





It’s your money...it’s your bets...it’s you doing the D-I driving...and how you deploy that money on those bets determine how fast or how slow your current bankroll doubles.





Obviously Chuck D. Bohnes and I have a lot more to say on this subject in general, and in response to Deadcat's excellent set of questions in particular. I hope you’ll join us for
the next three parts of this series.





Until then,




Good Luck and Good Skill at the Tables…and in Life.




The Mad Professor
Copyright © 2008

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 February 9, 2009 5:04 AM.

The previous post in this blog was Can You Fool Your Bankroll into THINKING and ACTING Like It Is Bigger? - Part Six.

The next post in this blog is Can You Fool Your Bankroll into THINKING and ACTING Like It Is Bigger? - Part Seven.

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