reference to a post

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: DarthNater, 22Inside

memo
Posts: 775
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2011 4:47 pm

reference to a post

Post by memo » Mon Jun 22, 2020 8:21 am

I saw something that Irish posted in 22I's betting evolution that got my attention..Regrettably I may have gotten side tracked with my attitude, and stymied a very good thread....Which I hope continues. I do not know how to move the post over, so I will just copy and paste..
********
Re: 22Inside's Betting Evolution
Post by irish » Wed Jun 17, 2020 7:50 am

All betting strategies are a compromise of edge versus action. Going from $110 inside to $130 across is a trade off of higher edge for more action on the table. The converse is true as well. Staying at $110 inside versus $130 across is a trade off of lower edge for less action on the table.
Either way, that's a lot of edge to overcome, every hand (granted, there's a PL bet somewhere in there). In my opinion, insurmountable on a regular basis, regardless of shooting skill. On those days that you're doing well, it's likely that it's due to good variance and much less due to good skill because it's equally unlikely that your edge over the house is that high. On a day where you're demonstrating skill (edge is manifesting), but getting no assistance from variance, then you'll still end up down. You're simply taking a little bite from an elephant. Those days when you're experiencing negative variance, well, you know what happens.

You've developed a strategy that can't be supported by your shooting skill, it's more reliant on luck than skill, which is no bueno if you've got skill.

Once you've done your homework on BT, roll out your strategy on wincraps using the roll your own function. It'll tell you whether you've really got an edge on all of those inside numbers.

The scrapheap of DI's is built on FOMO, not on lack of skill.
**********
I am interested in how one can devise an adequate betting strategy that is so narrow as to overcome the HA when there are so many variables at play...

I have rarely seen a DI that can take specific data from the practice rig to the casinos and perform the same. DOSA comes to mind. The stuff he is posting from the past is true and was witnessed at the time. Under the right conditions and time, he will once again only need to bet on the 6,8, where his advantage is... an exception to the rule...(BTW..He is OK that I write these things)...

Additionally, one of the best shooters that I have witnessed...One who continually produced consistent medium to long hands over time, had no edge over certain numbers. (None that we knew) His talent was in suppressing the number 7, so, all the box numbers increased when he touched the dice. Back then we knew who the shooters were and when they were in position, we passed the dice to them. When he got the dice, the majority of times we had profitable hands, mostly due to increased box number occurrence..

So...We have a guy that consistently suppresses the seven (rare)...Note: I said 'consistently'.
And we have one that gains an edge on the 6,8 at home and can bring it to the casino (probably, rarer)
How can one really expect to take information gleaned at home and expect the same results at the casino with vastly different playing conditions? After all, we are at best, influencing, not controlling.

I know that, home, on my table with controlled conditions...One book of rolls will have possibly two dominant numbers and the next will have different, but related numbers that dominate....ie
In one book, 6,9..In the next 8,5. When I am really tuned in, with the 3V, all the numbers form an inverted V, with 6,8 dominant followed by the 5,9, etc. (But that is usually short lived and difficult to maintain ) I am seeing, trends in my results, however, not continual specific numbers from book to book.

What I see is a preponderance of one number...Say, the 8, and the 6 falls off. Same with the 5,9. However, when one of those numbers start repeating, they continue to appear and do not stop (short term trend). This can be explained through variance, it is true...I think much of it is me doing the same thing over and over.
Same can be said of trash numbers. I see, 1,1 and 6,6 I know my right die is off and just a hair breath away from a 1,6.
2,1 and 5,6..Similar story..Trends due to a variety of issues, and hard to correct. Hence, Heavy's 'See a Horn, bet a Horn'.

So, in essence, I look at trends. A bunch of trash on the come out, I have a grip or pitch issue. Dominant 5,9, single pitch or one off issue. 6,8, well that is great.

So, what is this all about..?
I do not have the ability to consistently toss the same numbers day in and day out, even on my home table (I see few who do...And I work at it)..
How can one devise a betting strategy that is more defined than inside bet...or an even numbers bet? While knowing that it is all subject to short term variance. Say,I have an edge on the 6,9 over two books of rolls while at home . What makes me think I will produce winning hands at the Flamingo while betting on only those numbers? And then...Carry that to the Bellagio...Or where ever?

My feeling is that the suppression of the seven (or visa versa) is the essence of what we do and the preponderance of box numbers that ensues, is related to trends that have to do with all the table conditions, our metabolic condition, mental conditions, preparedness, confidence, and how hard Heavy puffs on his cigar. I did not forget to mention positive and negative variance....It just seems to pervade everything and more.

I think Big O asked..(excuse me if I am wrong)
If the HA is so impossible to over come, then why do we do this?

How can one have a strategy with small enough HA that can be overcome with talent and trust that variance and all the above will not overturn it in these short trips to the tables? I never did buy into the Mad Professor saying that he only had to bet on two numbers.

Memo

User avatar
Big O
Posts: 850
Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2017 11:11 pm

Re: reference to a post

Post by Big O » Mon Jun 22, 2020 9:48 am

His talent was in suppressing the number 7
.

I almost posed this question on the other thread.

Is it possible to hold an edge with 7 avoidance without displaying a noticeable edge on one or two specific numbers.

I often run streaks for sessions, sometimes even for days of one or two dominant numbers only to have a different number be dominant next week. The constant between practices is length of hands (numbers tossed before the 7). The set i use X6s has the ability to produce all the numbers. Its one of the reasons i use it. Example, i tossed 5 8s in a row one day last week all 5-3s. Something with my grip or toss was causing me to toss the same faces. I . know variance is a big factor but when the same faces keep repeating i cant help but believe we are having some cause and effect. This non dominant number idea also continues to reinforce my across betting (on myself) even though over the years i have come to believe it might not be the best strategy.

I guess if i hadnt got lazy and always entered every toss in bone tracker it might answer my question. Why cloud the fantasy with cold hard facts.
I think Big O asked..(excuse me if I am wrong)
If the HA is so impossible to over come, then why do we do this?
I dont recall posting that exact ? Maybe you were just reading my mind because i could have. It is essentially what i was asking in the other thread. When i was asking about successful strategies.
"if it was easy anyone could do it"

memo
Posts: 775
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2011 4:47 pm

Re: reference to a post

Post by memo » Mon Jun 22, 2020 10:16 am

Big O
This is what I was referencing...Guess I was paraphrasing.
I have a hard cross quoting one thread to another.

****
by Big O » Wed Jun 17, 2020 12:03 pm

"In my opinion, insurmountable on a regular basis, regardless of shooting skill"
.

This sentence sounds ominous, makes me almost afraid to play.
*******

I kinda agree with you!

Memo

22Inside
Posts: 2627
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2015 11:26 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Re: reference to a post

Post by 22Inside » Mon Jun 22, 2020 11:37 am

Big O wrote:
Mon Jun 22, 2020 9:48 am
His talent was in suppressing the number 7
.

I almost posed this question on the other thread.

Is it possible to hold an edge with 7 avoidance without displaying a noticeable edge on one or two specific numbers.

I often run streaks for sessions, sometimes even for days of one or two dominant numbers only to have a different number be dominant next week. The constant between practices is length of hands (numbers tossed before the 7). The set i use X6s has the ability to produce all the numbers. Its one of the reasons i use it. Example, i tossed 5 8s in a row one day last week all 5-3s. Something with my grip or toss was causing me to toss the same faces. I . know variance is a big factor but when the same faces keep repeating i cant help but believe we are having some cause and effect. This non dominant number idea also continues to reinforce my across betting (on myself) even though over the years i have come to believe it might not be the best strategy.

I guess if i hadn't got lazy and always entered every toss in bone tracker it might answer my question. Why cloud the fantasy with cold hard facts.
This is an excellent point, O. The only variance we ever seem to discuss is the randomness in short term results. However, I think you are correct here in that we experience variances in our own tosses that causes short term runs on different number sets. I'll toss hands where I'll crush the 6's and 8's, then the next hand or session might be loaded with 5's and 9's. Those variances in one's toss shift the edge and you need to be aware of it in order to take advantage of it.

Buy The Four
Posts: 263
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 5:46 pm

Re: reference to a post

Post by Buy The Four » Mon Jun 22, 2020 1:47 pm

This sentence sounds ominous, makes me almost afraid to play.
*******

I thought this was a gambling forum? There’s a reason why we all have day jobs and don’t live in casinos shooting dice lol.

User avatar
skasower
Posts: 408
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2013 6:57 pm

Re: reference to a post

Post by skasower » Mon Jun 22, 2020 4:50 pm

If a shooter is really reducing the appearance of the seven, with great regularity (ie: demonstrating skill), it's unlikely that their compensated results are off axis.
This is really the goal of DI. Axis Power Craps basically restates this truth. However we set dice, the more "on axis" tosses in a book should show repetition reflective of our selected dice set. So, the holy grail of practice is to get somehow closer to that Valhalla. Clearly, even the great Sandy Koufax (mentioned in another post herein), did not consistently pitch a shut out. And he had 1. Talent, 2. Focus, and 3. Motivation to practice.

My approach is to stick with one set during practice and monitor (with the help of Bonetracker) the on-axis tosses against total tosses. Progress as I am sure Irish would say here, results from a large sample of those practice tosses, like 1,000s of them or else we are falling prey to variance and this plays on our human weakness to confirm our biases, aka "confirmation bias."

Thank you all for a very informative and interesting series of posts on this topic.

Skasower
Profe$$or Ka$hFi$h

memo
Posts: 775
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2011 4:47 pm

Re: reference to a post

Post by memo » Tue Jun 23, 2020 2:40 pm

OK, so it sounds like we are in agreement that DI is primarily decreasing the appearance of the number 7. Or modifying its occurrence, which will increase the numbers we want to see.... Good to hear since I was beginning to feel ...'unworthy'.

The dominant numbers may vary over time according to 'variance'.
Not sure that is best word since in DI context, I believe it is expanded from the way Irish discusses it because I believe he uses a purely statistical basis. (correct me if I am wrong)
I would expand it to include the influences described above, such as table conditions, crap between ears, ability, Heavy smoking, etc..May be wrong word, since we do have impact...Good or bad. After all, that is our goal.

This brings me back to the original question...
If our talent is not enough to overcome the HA of an inside bet, how should one bet, considering, most of the numbers I toss will be inside, and the dominant numbers can and will vary....?

Memo

DoSA
Posts: 224
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 8:27 pm

Re: reference to a post

Post by DoSA » Tue Jun 23, 2020 4:33 pm

I still trust the good ole ISR :)

memo
Posts: 775
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2011 4:47 pm

Re: reference to a post

Post by memo » Wed Jun 24, 2020 9:16 am

irish wrote:
Wed Jun 24, 2020 7:47 am
This brings me back to the original question...
If our talent is not enough to overcome the HA of an inside bet, how should one bet, considering, most of the numbers I toss will be inside, and the dominant numbers can and will vary....?
Before we continue, I want to reiterate what I said in the previous thread about not being able to overcome the HA of an inside bet. irish said, In my opinion, insurmountable on a regular basis, regardless of shooting skill.

Ok, now to your question. So, what are the things that factor into your betting decision, in addition to your skill level, demonstrated edge, and HA?

How do the following impact the answer?
Frequency of play
Average session length
Bankroll / Risk aversion
Confidence in talent

Any others you can think of? How do these impact the answer to your question? Is camaraderie important to you? Are you willing to alter when you play to take best advantage of your skill level/demonstrated edge? Obviously, we enjoy playing the game. How important is having fun? At some point, following "rules" and playing in very structured way would take some of the fun out of the game.
I still trust the good ole ISR
Dave still trusts the ISR. That's fine. Whether that's a good decision or not is based on the factors above. Which factor(s) make that decision ok? Why? Which one(s) would make the ISR a poor decision?
The good ole ISR, I believe you rolled up into the inside bet, asking how many times does it take to recover from a PSO or PSSO. Something that must be considered anytime attempting ISR and risk aversion and bet comfort level has to be taken into account. One should also have a pretty strong confidence of talent. Ask me how I know.

Average length of session is usually one hour plus or minus...Of course the time at PH, betting 204 ISR and having three PSO's in a row on a table by myself, a session can be as short as 7 minutes (or less). And be devastating on confidence, bankroll, risk aversion, and frequency of play...No matter who you are.
This happened about four years ago, and it changed my confidence levels and betting.

Hence my interest in understanding the premis this thread is based on.

Memo

DoSA
Posts: 224
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 8:27 pm

Re: reference to a post

Post by DoSA » Wed Jun 24, 2020 9:37 am

Memo

Maybe in our next practice session we actually make bets while tossing.

I am a firm believer in "play like you practice". I told Nate that I had hes table dialed in and that I need to find a table like his. We did find in at GN. :) I practice on hard surfaces so I need a hard table. During the June Jam: I simple saw WAY to much "playing craps". Not playing to advantages. You can ask the peeps that played with us on Monday. I sat on the side-lines and read my kindle while they played on a "short 16 footer" with the first 2 shooting positions blocked out. WAY to far for me to toss from. This wasn't the only place I sat out. Now when we got to GN, I bellied up to SL1 and waited until the table opened (we all did). I knew the tables at GN were to my liking and I'd seen Heavy have more than one great hand there as well.

Playing your advantages helps - big time. Plus we'd eat'n prior so, no hunger issues and I hadn't played so I wasn't tired. My back did give out after standing at the table for so long, but this is an issue I have to learn yield to.

Very interesting thread.

DoSA

House of Orange
Posts: 1124
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 11:09 am

Re: reference to a post

Post by House of Orange » Wed Jun 24, 2020 10:38 am

I agree Dave. With only two spots open per open table, opportunities to play have greatly diminished in this New Normal. So essential to only visit a market with multiple open casinos to walk/short ride to.

DoSA
Posts: 224
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 8:27 pm

Re: reference to a post

Post by DoSA » Wed Jun 24, 2020 11:09 am

HoO,

I have always enjoyed the group "thing" but looks like more and more Lone Wolf activity in the future.

User avatar
Big O
Posts: 850
Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2017 11:11 pm

Re: reference to a post

Post by Big O » Wed Jun 24, 2020 11:50 am

Risk aversion is probably still the strongest factor in my betting but is improving as I learn more about the game. Length of session affects me some. I usually start out conservative maybe too conservative and bet more as I get comfortable. Confidence in my skill level is good but confidence in my ability on a particular table is more of a factor.
"if it was easy anyone could do it"

memo
Posts: 775
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2011 4:47 pm

Re: reference to a post

Post by memo » Thu Jun 25, 2020 7:58 am

This is some great information!
Some of these shades of grey, I have not really given much thought to..
It was always there, but in an abstract background info.

Memo

Buy The Four
Posts: 263
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 5:46 pm

Re: reference to a post

Post by Buy The Four » Thu Jun 25, 2020 10:04 am

Irish,

Is there a way to gather data on live tables to determine whether or not we have an edge?

In other words. Do card counters start off at $5 minimums under live conditions to determine whether their edge is present or not?

Do poker players log countless hours online or at 1-2 NLH tables to determine their edge?

The problem with DI is that your practice results do not necessarily transfer over to casino tables. Is it best to play at the same table over and over again at the casino?

The kicker is...if we do not have an edge over craps, would we then stop playing? I think 99% of the forum would continue to play craps even if they did not demonstrate any edge whatsoever.

User avatar
Big O
Posts: 850
Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2017 11:11 pm

Re: reference to a post

Post by Big O » Sun Jun 28, 2020 12:16 pm

To do this well, money should be a tool, not a psychological burden.
After a couple of my first trips playing with some more experienced players and talking to them over a meal or two after sessions this is the first thing i picked up on. When i came home i told my wife. "its like they aren't playing with money. Their money to them is like a hammer to a carpenter." I can say im completely there yet but i am getting there.

You have to HAVE money to properly risk money.
That this is why i buy in for more money than i would ever lose in one session. If i were to buy in for 300 and look down and it was half gone im afraid how it would affect my play and my betting. Plus i hate re buys.
"if it was easy anyone could do it"

DoSA
Posts: 224
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 8:27 pm

Re: reference to a post

Post by DoSA » Sun Jun 28, 2020 3:29 pm

Lost limits and win goals. You do not see me at a table for hours on end - not happening. I am sure some at the June Jam thought I was stuck-up or something. But you will never see a report of me at a table at all hours of the night.

Money - Irish is 1000% right - is a tool. A great description. If you can't afford to lose it - what the hell are you doing in a casino!!!?? If you are having money issues this is just another item effecting the mental part of your game. Trust me at the table we have enough to worry about - setting the dice tossing the dice,the flight of the dice, the landing spot and not to mention the results.

If money is your focus - kiss it good bye.

DoSA

User avatar
skasower
Posts: 408
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2013 6:57 pm

Re: reference to a post

Post by skasower » Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:05 pm

Irish,
In reference to risk adversity and risk loving, I am thinking that such perspectives are entirely personal. Essentially, how I live my life may appear to you as entirely too risky, whereas I might think that I am not taking extraordinary risks. In such a case I am neither risk adverse nor risk loving. Now, should I come to experience personal losses associated with people in my life who have met their demise crossing streets, I might come out of my relatively self defined risk neutral life and decide that crossing streets is too risky for me. I have become risk adverse to crossing streets. You may not feel that crossing streets is riskier than other normal human activities (that all have a modicum of risk associated with them) and you now would not see my behavior as risk adverse. The conclusion here is that risk assessment is relative to the perspective of the risk assessor.

Now let's turn our focus to betting strategies that are riskier or less risky that could lead one to being risk adverse or risk loving. The first case is based on the relative probabilities of each betting strategy. That is the probability of one set of bets relative to another set of bets. If I made my bets based on the strict relative probabilities of each then I would be risk adverse if I made the bets that had less probability of occurring given random dice tosses.

All this is premised on my being a random dice tosser. If I am a DI expert, then I would gauge risk assessment on my anticipated toss performance over the long term. Knowing myself and my tossing would again lead me to have a personal risk assessment not one easily calculated by others who are not familiar with my tossing capabilities.

The last point I want to make about risk assessment is more basic to the house overhead vig of different betting strategies. If I am a random dice tosser, and I expect to grow my bankroll (is this an oxymoron?), then I would be risk adverse if I bet strategies that had higher vigs than other available bet strategies. This is akin to purchasing mutual funds that have high administrative fees. No matter what the return, those fund taking higher fees will return less for a given portfolio than firms whose fees are lower. Same goes for bet strategies that generate higher vigs with similar lower vig strategies with equivalent or similar probabilities of payoff.

If I am overthinking this Irish, you have my word that I will not growl if you bark at me.

skasower
Profe$$or Ka$hFi$h

memo
Posts: 775
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2011 4:47 pm

Re: reference to a post

Post by memo » Wed Jul 01, 2020 7:44 am

Skasower....

Did you have fun writing that post?

Memo

mainframe
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 10:07 am

Re: reference to a post

Post by mainframe » Wed Jul 01, 2020 3:33 pm

So regarding Bankroll and Risk and gambling goals/objectives, I have a few comments:

I know there are a few professional gamblers out there who sort of eek out a living/existence with gambling as their primary source of income. I am not sure how many of them actually live off the gambling winnings as opposed to writing books or teaching seminars, but I assume that 90% of the professional gamblers that succeed are poker/holdem players. Blackjack card counting can be done but its not a big mathematical edge, Not sure about Baccarat or Craps.

That said, I dont think most people should quit their day jobs, even master dice influencers. I heard that at $25 hand, a BJ card counter may be able to net something like $15/hour in profit. I dont know where I heard that. I can make alot more than $15 doing my day job.

I dont think I gamble because I think I am going to make a living do so. I do it for the thrill of potentially winning a few bucks, but its never going to be a life-changing win (at least not at a table game), and I am sure I will lose more over the course of my lifetime of casino gambling than I win.

Post Reply