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

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

Let me start with this timeless advantage-play vérité:

When you are shooting with an advantage, the best choice is to always put the most money where your strongest advantage is.

.
Let’s say we are modestly skilled at this whole dice-influencing thing, so we start off with a $64-Across wager in a situation where, let's say the 6 and 8 are our two best strongest-edged bets, but the other four box-numbers of the All-Across wager aren’t nearly as strong.

By covering all of the box-numbers, we are under-betting our advantage on the 6 and 8, while over-betting the other lesser-advantaged (or non-advantaged) numbers.

What that does is twofold:

~One, it diverts our money from our optimal bets, and thus it delays (and perhaps even eliminates) our chances of producing net-profit that is reflective of our current shooting skills.

~Second, it puts most of our 7-exposure money onto wagers where our edge is lower (or non-existent); thereby eroding (and perhaps completely eliminating) our overall positive-expectation advantage.

Here’s why:

~A $64-Across wager takes 4.26 hits to fully pay for itself.

~A $30 Place-bet on each the 6 and 8 takes 1.71 hits to fully pay for itself.

By focusing the majority (or preferably all) of your per-hand 7-exposure money on the bets where you have the highest edge, allows you to get to the net-profit point in your hand the quickest.

By doing so, it also allows your dice-influencing skills to do what they do best or at least what they are designed to do…and that is to make you money.

Multiple-hits do not necessarily lead to multiple profits.

If you require too many hits just to break through to profitability; then most of your throwing time is wasted in covering (paying for) the 7-exposure that is out there on the table.

By focusing your wagers on the few bets where you have the highest edge, it allows to you break-through to a net-profit sooner…more often…and with a greater percentage of your D-I skills contributing to your overall net-profit instead of being used just to most pay for the multiple bets that are on the layout.





How Do I Bet?




~I like the idea of starting off with wagering as much 7-exposure money on my top two best-advantaged bets as possible.

~That 7-exposure amount of course should be bankroll-dependant; and to my mind, it should be slightly above our current bet-comfort level. Doing so has the effect of s-l-o-w-l-y desensitizing us to wagering larger and larger amounts of money on our best wagers without putting us so far out of our comfort-zone that it throws off the mental side of our game.

~I am certainly not averse to pressing any already-advantaged bets; in fact I do it quite very often. However, the important thing is that we start out with big enough wagers that are bankroll-reflective of our validated edge, and not based on the faulty "I'll-under-bet-and-try-to-turn-a-matchstick-into-a-lumberyard" approach, which rarely produces the kind of profit your skills deserve.







Chuck D. Bohnes

When I run numbers I tend to work with everything on a per toss basis. I know you like to present numbers per hand because it better reflects how most dice influencers in our community think.

It is important to note that the Recirculation Factor concepts can be employed (with some quick recalculations of the absolute numbers) regardless of whether a DI tracks his performance per toss, per PL decision, per hand or even per session.





Mad Professor

Yeah, for me, the idea of looking at what a skilled player will generally produce on a per-hand basis is a little easier to relate to for most shooters who came to dice-influencing after they got comfortable with craps as random gamblers.

As such, if they set up their bets based on what happens, on average during one of their typical de-randomized hands; then they are virtually assured of making a profit on a session-to-session basis.

In fact, I like to discount the longest duration hands from the average-roll equation altogether. That is, if you eliminate anything over let’s say, 40-rolls, your remaining roll-duration average will be not only more actionable; but players will be able to arrange their bets in a much more orderly, much more efficient, and obviously much more profitable way.

Now it should go without saying that betting that way does not guarantee that a skilled player will make a profit on every hand that he throws; but it pretty much ensures that he’ll walk away from nearly every three or four-hand session with a profit.






Chuck D. Bohnes


One earmark of a professional is that he plans, executes, evaluates, repeats.

That reality is as true for a serious advantage player as it is for the world's largest multi-national corporations.

The Recirculation Factor provides an excellent indicator to warn a DI to re-evaluate his play if he fails to double "on schedule." The DI can then explore whether his bankroll-doubling is behind schedule due to performance or natural variance. After all, you cannot win the game, if you fail to stay in the game.





Mad Professor



Chuck, I like your idea about a D-I re-evaluating his play if he fails to double "on schedule."

Unfortunately, making that transition is very difficult for players who want to collect from virtually every roll of the dice and who have traded overall net-profitability for a higher but less profitable hit-frequency.

Like I said, I was once one of them.

Fortunately though, by strictly focusing on the strongest DiceTool-indicated bets, I saw how much quicker my overall per-hand net-income was rising even though I was getting paid on fewer actual hits. That was because the ones that were hitting were my strongest-edge bets and that is where I had put the lion's share of my geared-to-bankroll and geared-to-edge money.

By eliminating the dilution of less-advantageous wagers and the drag of negative-expectation bets from my routine; each hand is able to produce more PURE, undiminished profit with less risk and less volatility.



The lesson here?




As an advantage-player in a casino, you want most of your wagering-weight to be placed on your strongest bets. The amount of money that you bet and the number of wagers that you cover with that money, is all reasonably dictated by your total gaming bankroll (not just your session buy-in) and your per-roll advantage on the bets on you are making.


DiceTool shows you what those bets are, and how much of your bankroll
can be safely wagered on them.


I believe that most aspiring dice-influencer's are plagued with chronic ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder). They don't pay attention to the things that matter the most, and they are too intent on getting their gambing dollars out there on pretty much any wager that catches their momentary fancy or hunch.

When you look at the hundreds upon hundreds of viably-skilled dice-influencers who have come and gone from these m-boards even over just the last seven or eight years; the numbers are truly staggering.

The ratio of viably-skilled shooters who are able to translate their D-I abilities into an overall, going-forward, net-profit is so disappointingly low despite the fact that they could very EASILY do so; is absolutely dismal.

The reason?

They simply gorge their gambling-appetite on disadvantaged wagers where most of their money shouldn't be...and they starve the few highly-advantaged wagers where the majority of their money should be.

Unfortunately though, most players just don't have the fortitude, courage, or discipline to make the gambler-to-advantage-player transformation that would successfully bridge the gap between their current skill to their deserved profit.

Now, to shield themselves from having to self-admit that shortcoming, they'll say stuff like, "Well, I don't want to become a professional craps player or anything like that. I don't want to have to be serious about all of this like some of you guys are; I just want to lose less".



However when you scratch just a little below the surface, and get down to translating what they are really saying; you find that they don't want to change much of anything at all about the way they are currently betting...they just want to lose less in the process of doing the same old thing.

Will they continue to lose?

Of course they will.



Will most of those who come along and
try dice-influencing, continue to just fade away from the m-boards (and the craps tables that we used to see them at) despite the fact that they developed a fairly decent de-randomized toss?

Yep, they sure will.



So here's something to ask yourself.




When you do develop a consistently exploitable grip and toss (and frankly anything over
SRR 6.5 is extremely exploitable); then what the hell are you going to do with it?



If you aren't ready or willing or able to compellingly bet on the
advantage that you've created for yourself; then your losses are going to continue; and chances are, you too will join the ranks of those who came...learned just enough to create an edge...but didn't properly focus enough of your betting-dollars to turn your skill into a sustainable profit.





For example, an SRR-6.5 shooter can double and then continuously re-double a $1000 starting bankroll…with virtually no risk-of-ruin…but almost every skilled dice-influencers won’t do it because to their mind, ‘playing’ at craps is much more exciting than winning at craps.

They’ll tell you that they want to win, but frankly, they prove time and time again that they really would rather play than win.

Their words tell you one thing, but their actions at the table prove something completely different.



For example, if you are a shooter with an SRR of around 6.5, you can Same-Bet Your Edge to Success.

When I say ‘same-bet’, I’m merely talking about making wagers of the same-value all of the time.

The only time you increase your bet is when your gaming bankroll doubles…and in that case, you double the bet-size value of that same set of wagers.

Now understandably, that idea is controversial because it flies in the face of conventional gambling wisdom that says you should always increase your bets when winning and always decrease your bets when losing.

It is also controversial because the whole idea of flat-betting (neither increasing nor decreasing your wagers during a given hand) has always been thought of as producing an overall zero-sum game (by having your wins cancel out your losses and vice versa).

However, for dice-influencers who play with at least a bit of an edge over the house, that outmoded fallacy couldn’t be further from the truth.

However, when a dice-influencer plays with an edge over the house, that advice doesn’t always make sense.

Let’s look at a prime example of why my Same-Bet Your Edge to Success idea makes so much financial sense.



~Let’s say you have a very modest bankroll of $1000 to go along with your modest shooting-skills and you aren’t prepared to put out more than let’s say an average of [i]$50 or so on your own validated skills at any one time.

~Let’s also say that you are one of the many players who have a hard time disconnecting your anxiety from the amount of money that you sometimes have on the layout when you’ve pressed things up.

~That is, during a nice hand where you’ve pressed-up your winning-bets like conventional wisdom says you should; the added stress of seeing that much of your own money on the table starts to mess with your shooting-concentration…and you subsequently 7-Out shortly thereafter due almost entirely to distracted focus.



Taking all of that
When should I press, when should I regress, when should I turn everything off?” stress out of the equation lets you focus on your de-randomized shooting…all the while your bankroll keeps growing at a very steady and predictable rate.




I am also saying that even with a very modest $1000 bankroll, you can double it...and keep on re-doubling it through simple PL w/Odds same-bet wagers.




~Let’s say you have a total bankroll of about $1000 and you normally play at $10 tables.

~With an SRR of 6.5 at a casino that allows 10x-Odds, you will have about a 5% advantage over the house.

~If you play in a 3x/4x/5x-Odds casino, your PL w/Odds wager will have about a 3.7% edge over the house.

~That 3.7% advantage is comprised of a 1.75% edge when the PL-Point is a 4 or 10, a 3.2% edge when your Point is a 5 or 9, and a 6.2% advantage when your PL-Point is a 6 or 8.



~
In practical terms, let’s say that you play in the 3x/4x/5x-Odds casino; so when the dice are in your hands, your average bet will be $10 on the Passline and an average of $40 in Odds.

~That is $30 in Odds when the PL-Point is a 4 or 10, $40 in Odds when the Point is a 5 or 9, and $50 in Odds when your PL-Point is a 6 or 8.

Now granted, an average wager of $50 in total 7-exposure bets on a $1000 bankroll is a little high when strictly viewed from a Kelly Criterion point of view; but since we aren’t exposing our money to the higher-volatility/higher-erosion of wagers where the house has an even bigger advantage, we’ll actually endure less of the whipsaw unpredictability that those other wagers saddle us with.

Admittedly though, there will still be small amount of win-some lose-some volatility even with such a mundane wager like a simple PL w/Odds bet, and this is where most neophyte shooters as well as an unexpectedly large number of veteran players misunderstand the math of the game as well as the mechanics of how modest D-I skills can produce consistent profits.

Let me explain:

~A 1.75% advantage over a PL-Point of 4 or 10, means the SRR-6.5 shooter will generally fail to repeat his PL-Point about 63% of the time.

~Now on the face of it, a 37% win-percentage when the PL-Point is 4 or 10 looks terrible. However, even with such a dismal-looking 37%-to-63% win/loss ratio, that modestly skilled dice-influencer still has an advantage over the house.

Here’s how:

~Let’s say you make one-hundred PL w/Odds wagers when the Point is a 4 or 10.

~Your $10 Passline wager with its $30 in Odds will win about 37% of the time and produce a $70 payout every time it does. That means it will produce revenue of $2590.

~As discussed, with an SRR-rate of 6.5, that same bet may well lose 63% of the time and produce a $40 loss every time it does. That means it will cost you around $2520.



~
Overall that will produce a rather anemic looking 1.75% return on the total money wagered on this bet. I'll quickly add that most advantage-play blackjack counters would kill to have a steady 1.75% edge over the house, but most craps players find an edge like that way too easy to dismiss out of hand...which explains why most A-P craps players can't produce an overall profit even though their validated shooting indicates ungodly edges over the house. 



I’ll also add that if you make that
same play with 10x-Odds, your edge over the house jumps to 7.63%.



Granted, most players who endure a 63% failure-rate when their PL-Point is a 4 or 10 may not
feel like they are playing a net-positive game, but that is exactly what they are playing, and if they have a very modest bankroll; then my Same-Bet Your Edge to Success method is the best way to double their current bankroll and to keep on doubling it even if their shooting never improves beyond the SRR-6.5 range.

Let’s take the PL-Point of 5 or 9 to illustrate this a little further:



~
A random-roller will likely repeat his PL-Point of 5 or 9 about 40% of the time.



~
Let’s say that our shooter hits it about 43% of the time. That means he’ll be 7’ing-Out before repeating it, about 57% of the time.



~
Again though, even with that 43%-to-57% imbalance between winning PL-Points and losing PL-Points on a 3x/4x/5x-Odds table, he’ll still produce a 3.2% return on his total PL w/Odds investment. 



If he steps it up to 10x-Odds at a higher-Odds house; his edge climbs to
11.55%.



Take a similar look when the PL-Point is a 6 or 8:


~A random-roller will likely repeat it about 45.5% of the time.

~Let’s say that our shooter hits it about 49% of the time. That means he’ll be 7’ing-Out before repeating it, about 51% of the time.

~Even with the 49%/51% imbalance between repeating and not repeating his PL-Points on a 3x/4x/5x-Odds table, he’ll produce a 6.2% return on his total PL w/Odds investment.

If he brings those exact same shooting skills to a 10x-Odds casino; his edge climbs to 6.91%.

Another way to look at all of this is that a 63% failure-rate on the 4 and 10, a 57% failure-rate on the 5 and 9, and a 51% failure-rate on the 6 and 8, would actually be a winning percentage and produce net-positive results.

Like I said though, most neophyte shooters as well as an unexpectedly large number of veteran players misunderstand the math of the game as well as the mechanics of how modest D-I skills can produce consistent profits…so they put their insufficiently financed wagers on what appear to be easier higher-risk/higher-reward pickings…only to find that when they look at their overall winnings…their bankroll is STILL firmly entrenched in negative territory.

Simply stated, when using my Same-Bet Your Edge to Success method, a shooter with an SRR-rate of 6.5 may still see a fair bit of win-some/lose-some variance from hand to hand and even session to session; so it means that he needs steel-nerved discipline in order to stay the course...but it also means that if he does stay the course, he can continue to use his modest skills to keep doubling and re-doubling his bankroll...with virtually no risk-of-ruin.








Chuck D. Bohnes


Another benefit to managing the growth of one's bankroll is that it allows a DI to move-up to higher minimum tables sooner. On the "expensive" lay-outs, the DI enjoys fewer crowds and more frequent shooting opportunities. The move-up benefit allows the DI to more efficiently deploy his skill, while saving expenses in the form of fewer "waiting bets" on Randy.

I would like to discuss this in much further detail in Part Nine of this series if we could.





Mad Professor

Absolutely Chuck, I'll look forward to it.



Until then remember,




If your dice-influenced bets aren’t feasting at the advantage-play table; then your disadvantaged bankroll is on the casino’s menu…and it’s ALWAYS feeding time.



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 10, 2009 8:00 AM.

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

The next post in this blog is Conquering Ultra Bouncy Tables - Part Six.

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