Comparative Strategy Analysis

Setting and influencing the dice roll is just part of the picture. To beat the dice you have to know how to bet the dice. Whether you call it a "system," a "strategy," or just a way to play - this is the place to discuss it.

Moderators: 220Inside, DarthNater

User avatar
Maddog
Posts: 456
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 1:10 pm

Re: Comparative Strategy Analysis

Post by Maddog » Mon Sep 10, 2012 4:22 pm

You have skirted my point:

But what if the probability of rolling a 5 before a seven is not 4/10? Is the HA still -4.00%? Can it be more? Can it be less?

How many extra fives does it take before a Place 5 becomes a low (or positive) edge bet?

If a shooter is altering the probabilities, then all the HA calculations are off because they are based on an alternate probability. The notion of what is High or Low HA is off.

Of course if one's profile is such that they toss a significant amount of 5's & 9's, they can transpose the set to find one that produces a significant amount of 6's & 8's (or 4's and 10's, or whatever). I did the BT transpose, what, 7 years ago? I understand the transpose concept. But again that was not the point. The point is to not get hung up on 4% vig vs a 1.3% vs 1.5%. Don't get too stuck on that because tossing a few extra numbers makes a large swing in the percentage. (Unless you want to play the random game.. then absolutely play to the lowest vig to preserve your bankroll as long as possible).

Now don't get me wrong, I am not proposing that one should ignore the vig altogether. Nor am I saying that anyone's primary betting scheme should incorporate the 5 & 9. I'm just saying that depending on the shooter/situation you may be forgoing a positive situation simply because of "5 & 9 are bad" type thinking.

User avatar
Maddog
Posts: 456
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 1:10 pm

Re: Comparative Strategy Analysis

Post by Maddog » Mon Sep 10, 2012 4:26 pm

And, again, what I was getting at in my previous post was that as you code your model, leave room for the ability to control the probability of certain numbers. Just like what you did with the seven. That way you will have a model robust enough to handle both a random game AND a DI's pattern of influence as part of the Monte Carlo.

Ahigh
Posts: 266
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 11:49 pm

Re: Comparative Strategy Analysis

Post by Ahigh » Mon Sep 10, 2012 9:37 pm

Yeah, you have to mind the vig, and all I am saying is COMPARTMENTALIZE. I believe the trick of the game is to match a strategy to a shooter.

But if you goal is to make money as fast as possible, and you're building on top of the 6.8 SRR, you should add in the $12 horn, high-ace-deuce-yo and look for $50 to $58 from adding more to the across and $12 to the horn.

All analysis should be made on edge per roll * amount on that bet.

$8 in easy hops at 11.11% and $4 in hard hops at 13.89% adds .8888 + .5555 to your per roll costs. And while it doubles the cost per roll, it only increased the edge per roll by 40%.

62 - 12 = 50 hi/lo
64 - 12 = 52 ace-deuce/yo
68 - 12 = 56 four/ten
63 - 12 = 53 five/nine
63 - 12 = 53 six/eight
=========
4 * 13.89 = .5555
8 * 11.11 = .8888
70 * 0.476 = .3333
90 * 1.11 = .9999
108 * 0.46 = .4968
===========
total cost = $3.27

Average win:
( 50 * 2 + 52 * 4 + 56 * 6 + 53 * 8 + 53 * 10 ) /30 = 53.26

Total edge for bet:
3.27 / ( 280 + 53.26 + 3.27 ) = 3.27 / 336.53 = 0.97% per roll

So the edge per roll is high, but it resolves in a single roll. And 5 out of 6 times, it wins you an average of $53.26.

If you are banking on an SRR of 6.8 to begin with, you can just do this every single roll and have a reverse sawtooth waveform on the chart.

Please understand that I'm not advocating this strategy, but as far a bold-play single roll bets go, this has a low edge even with the horn bets in there!

So it seems to me you should go in one of two ways .. minimize the time of resolution or minimize the edge.

If you say you have a 1 in 6.88 chance of hitting the red on average, this bet will pay you 53.26 * 5.88 = 313.17 for every seven that you roll. That will net you $33 for every 6.88 rolls or get you $4.82 per roll for a shooter with a 6.88 SRR.

The break even point for this bet would be an SRR of 1 + ( 280 / 53.26 ) or 6.257. This is the same as the break-even point I found from my simulator with the MPP strategy, except this method yields 5 times as much money per roll for an able DI. The cost per roll for a perfectly random shooter is ( 280 - 53.26 * 5 ) / 6 = $2.28 per roll.

Let me know if I did the math wrong, though. But if you're going to throw in the high house edge bets like the 5 and 9 for big money, and have that exposure up for a little while, why not go for the gusto and get paid or ante up the $280 on every single roll?

Ahigh
Posts: 266
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 11:49 pm

Re: Comparative Strategy Analysis

Post by Ahigh » Mon Sep 10, 2012 10:06 pm

Just call it the AH280 .. LOL. "Or, one-roll lay the red for 280".

$2 LO
$4 ACE-DEUCE
$35 4
$45 5
$54 6
$54 8
$45 9
$35 10
$4 YO
$2 MIDNIGHT

2 + 4 + 35 + 45 + 54 + 54 + 45 + 35 + 4 + 2 = 280

Ahigh
Posts: 266
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 11:49 pm

Re: Comparative Strategy Analysis

Post by Ahigh » Tue Sep 11, 2012 12:02 am

Here's the plot of AH280 versus MP204 for a SRR of 6.8

Image

acpa
Posts: 594
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 10:45 am

Re: Comparative Strategy Analysis

Post by acpa » Tue Sep 11, 2012 12:14 am

Ahigh, is the $280 the same bet on every roll then.

Noah

Ahigh
Posts: 266
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 11:49 pm

Re: Comparative Strategy Analysis

Post by Ahigh » Tue Sep 11, 2012 12:17 am

Working every single roll!

Ahigh
Posts: 266
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 11:49 pm

Re: Comparative Strategy Analysis

Post by Ahigh » Tue Sep 11, 2012 12:22 am

One of the more powerful proof methodologies when all others fail.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum

acpa
Posts: 594
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 10:45 am

Re: Comparative Strategy Analysis

Post by acpa » Tue Sep 11, 2012 12:46 am

are you running the MP240 as a flat bet also then?

Noah

Ahigh
Posts: 266
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 11:49 pm

Re: Comparative Strategy Analysis

Post by Ahigh » Tue Sep 11, 2012 12:50 am

The lower edge strategy still beats them both with less risk to the red than AH280 on a 6.8 SRR.

Both the MP204 and the buy410,s100,l500 are off on the comeout for all bets. This aids in longevity, but not profits.

Image

Ahigh
Posts: 266
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 11:49 pm

Re: Comparative Strategy Analysis

Post by Ahigh » Tue Sep 11, 2012 12:53 am

And please understand that what I'm demonstrating is that if you are given an SRR of 6.8, lower edge strategies than MP204 still benefit from their lower edges. In the case of AH280, my intent is to demonstrate that the flaw is in the underlying assumptions. This strategy loses as much on random rolls as it is shown to gain on this chart with an SRR of 6.8.

acpa
Posts: 594
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 10:45 am

Re: Comparative Strategy Analysis

Post by acpa » Tue Sep 11, 2012 1:29 am

Ahigh,

I haven't tried to run any numbers, but wonder if the difference is some way tied to the fact that you are betting $40 more money and you have a positive advantage on your money.

If 7 people bet the $240 and 6 people bet the $280, the total amount at risk for each approach would be the same.

Which group of bettors have the most money?

Thanks,

Noah

Mad Professor
Posts: 1830
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:15 pm

Re: Comparative Strategy Analysis

Post by Mad Professor » Tue Sep 11, 2012 7:56 am

And not to put too fine of a point on what ACPA was saying, but Ahigh's 4/10 strategy 100/1500 appears to use up to 7.8-times more money than the MP-$204, which might go some distance to explaining why it out-earns a lesser-valued wager.

Similarly, the AH-$280 wager engages 37% more money on each and every roll than the MP-$204...and by having it in play WOTCO (WorkingOnTheComeOut); it gets exposed to something like 29% more rolls.

Let's see...~37% more money in action on ~29% more rolls; yeah, I can see the out-distancing earning-leverage that would create. :o

Well at least we just learned that wagering more MONEY on a greater number of advantaged ROLLS earns more overall revenue. ;)

I wonder if there's any kind of financial formula where you can measure dollars-exposed versus dollars-earned? Anyone know?? If it hasn't been invented, I want dibs on naming it. I'm toying with something snazzy like Return-on-Investment', or 'Return-on-Equity', or even "MP's Time-Money Exposure Return". Nah, that last one is too weighty. Let's stick with something like per-roll ROI.


Edited to add: I actually LIKE the AH-$280 for it's all-encompassing/near-equal payout approach; especially as it could be applied to the large number of skilled-DI's who specifically target C-O Horns.

In fact, I like it to the point where I am going to war-game it with practice-chips at home to see how it plays out in terms of proper chip-deployment bet-ordering in the casino. I'll let you know how that goes.


MP
Last edited by Mad Professor on Tue Sep 11, 2012 8:20 am, edited 2 times in total.

Ahigh
Posts: 266
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 11:49 pm

Re: Comparative Strategy Analysis

Post by Ahigh » Tue Sep 11, 2012 8:16 am

The winner of all of them is still the buy 4/10 .. which does not work the come out roll, and exposes no more than $200 initially, and has the mild press schedule

@buy_press_schedule1 = ( 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 40, 80, 100, 150, 250, 300, 350, 400, 450, 500 );

The edge per roll is 1.67 / 4 = 0.416%

Ahigh
Posts: 266
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 11:49 pm

Re: Comparative Strategy Analysis

Post by Ahigh » Tue Sep 11, 2012 8:28 am

Here's all the strategies with 100% random data. This is the sanity check for what happens to those who get exactly the 6.0 SRR that randomness would lead you to expect in the long run without any influence over the outcome.

Mind you, these are the charts the reflect the strategy's merits sans DI.

Image

Mad Professor
Posts: 1830
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:15 pm

Re: Comparative Strategy Analysis

Post by Mad Professor » Tue Sep 11, 2012 8:33 am

Hi Ahigh,

On your AH-$280, are you Buying the 5 and 9 for $45 each, or are you Placing them for that amount?

Thanks,

MP

Ahigh
Posts: 266
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 11:49 pm

Re: Comparative Strategy Analysis

Post by Ahigh » Tue Sep 11, 2012 8:54 am

They are place bets. Here in Vegas, there are very few places that allow a buy on the 5 and 9 with vigorish on the win. If you buy it with vig on the bet, there's no advantage to the edge. Some places "allow" this .. which means they go through extra motions to give you the same deal.

Mad Professor
Posts: 1830
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:15 pm

Re: Comparative Strategy Analysis

Post by Mad Professor » Tue Sep 11, 2012 9:10 am

In bet-ordering the AH WOTCO $280-Everything, a player would want to make his wagering instructions as clear and concise (and as easy to understand for English-as-a-second-language dealers) as possible.

To that end, I'd probably book it as follows:

"$268-Across...ALWAYS Working" while using both hands in 'six-shooter' configuration to point at each 'set' of bets, while saying, "$35 each...$45 each...and $54 each...and again, they ALWAYS work."

I would then turn to the stick-person, while putting $12 on the table near him, and simply say "$2 each 2 & 12…and $4 each 3 & YO...and that's going to be an ALL-DAY bet on every roll until I say otherwise...no press, no down...same Props every roll."

I think that would probably communicate those multiple wagers quite effectively. Any other suggestions that would avoid dealer confusion and ensure accurate bet-placement?


MP

Ahigh
Posts: 266
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 11:49 pm

Re: Comparative Strategy Analysis

Post by Ahigh » Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:48 am

Inside bets would be $10 Horn High Yo, and a $2 ACE-DEUCE. This works easier with two reds chips and two dollar chips.

If you ask for 268 across, they're going to extrapolate a $4 cap on the 6 and 8 and probably figure out $54 each instead of $24.

But as far as what to do with 268 - 108 or 160, they'll probably ask if you want $40 each, and you'll have to tell them $35 on the 4 and 10 and $45 on the 5 and 9.

So yeah, probably best to say "268 across, with $35 on the four and ten."

That is pretty concise without too much confusion. $35, $45, $54 is pretty easy to rattle off too. $54 is $45 transposed, FWIW, and they are all about ten bucks apart.

One good thing is that you won't waste much time with this strategy. It's a true litmus test of your SRR!!! You will get schooled QUICKLY if your SRR is 3 to 5 on your first few rolls! Conversely, if you throw 20 times with no red, just go ahead and take your grand and take it down and go home.

Ahigh
Posts: 266
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 11:49 pm

Re: Comparative Strategy Analysis

Post by Ahigh » Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:56 am

Here's a chart of my august rolls. I'm calling ah280 this strategy, and the same thing with no horn is the ah268, and the same thing with just even numbers is the ah178.

Image

Post Reply