craps

ChefJJ

ChefJJ

Well-Known Member
callipygian said:
Okay, one last try. No math, this time.

Let's say that I walk up to the table and place a bet on the 6 and 8. You contend the house would expect to make 1.05% off of me.

Let's say that I walk up to the table and place a bet on the 6, and you walk up to the table and place a bet on the 8. You would say that the house would expect to make 1.52% off of each of us.

Let's say that I give you a bet, then we walk up to the table together and I place a bet on the 6 and you place a bet on the 8. What does the house expect to make from us?

How would you explain the difference between these three scenarios?
Click to expand...
Not to shrug your questions off, but I'm not concerned with what the house is making off of the table or any other people playing. It's about my action, and what cut they stand to take. That is what I contend, purely because that's what the calculations say...maybe like quantum physics, it is what it is :joker:

But the beauty of craps lies in the opportunity you get to influence the dice and turn the tables on the house. Kind of like BJ, but even better ;)
 
C

callipygian

Well-Known Member
ChefJJ said:
I'm not concerned with what the house is making off of the table or any other people playing. It's about my action, and what cut they stand to take.
Click to expand...
Then rephrase the question in the other direction - let's say you put a place bet on the 6, and I put a place bet on the 8. We're losing 1.05% combined, but 1.52% individually?

ChefJJ said:
That is what I contend, purely because that's what the calculations say...maybe like quantum physics, it is what it is :joker:
Click to expand...
Quantum physics is a decent analogy. Most people agree the concept of a wavefunction was purely mathematical, and that Bohr (?) simply assumed angular momentum was quantized without any real physical basis for doing so. But the predictions, such as the principal quantum number (n), were entirely testable (Lyman series in the hydrogen spectral lines). The other quantum numbers explained empirical observations (such as Hund's rule) which were thought to be unconnected. In the end, quantum physics is counterintuitive, but accepted because it matches observations more closely than Newtonian mechanics. Newtonian mechanics can't explain Bose-Einstein condensates or semiconductors - quantum mechanics can.

ChefJJ said:
But the beauty of craps lies in the opportunity you get to influence the dice and turn the tables on the house.
Click to expand...
We agree that dice control is an entirely different subject.
 
ChefJJ

ChefJJ

Well-Known Member
callipygian said:
Quantum physics is a decent analogy. Most people agree the concept of a wavefunction was purely mathematical, and that Bohr (?) simply assumed angular momentum was quantized without any real physical basis for doing so. But the predictions, such as the principal quantum number (n), were entirely testable (Lyman series in the hydrogen spectral lines). The other quantum numbers explained empirical observations (such as Hund's rule) which were thought to be unconnected. In the end, quantum physics is counterintuitive, but accepted because it matches observations more closely than Newtonian mechanics. Newtonian mechanics can't explain Bose-Einstein condensates or semiconductors - quantum mechanics can.
Click to expand...
See, it's that easy! :grin:

good luck
 
C

callipygian

Well-Known Member
Covered_in_Bees! said:
Craps is just like quantum physics? I wanna go play some craps right now!
Click to expand...
When the dice hit the far wall, there's a non-zero probability that they'll tunnel through and show up on the other side!
 
Covered_in_Bees!

Covered_in_Bees!

Active Member
Imagine how much that would be if at somewhat frequent intervals the dice just teleported to a random spot out on the floor?

"Come on daddy needs a new pair of shoes! *chucks dice across table* Oh **** they teleported again! Remember, the blackjack table second from the end in this row is good luck and pays some kick ass odds! Oh hell yes! *pumps fist* Each die landed on a separate BJ table for even better pay! This game rules!"

See? Wouldn't that be so much fun?
 
N

nc-tom

Well-Known Member
sagefr0g said:
thanks for the response nc-tom. got a question about where you say "with as much odds as you can afford to take".
question being does that mean that not going for all the odds you can get doesn't have a downside or at least doesn't have a 'significant' downside as far as the gamble is concerned?:confused:
Click to expand...
Sage remember there i no house edge on odds bets.You are being paid true odds rather than house odds. JJ has mentioned dice control whew I think it is possible but man it is hard,hard,hard. The amount of pratice needed is increadable IMHO
 
sagefr0g

sagefr0g

Well-Known Member
nc-tom said:
Sage remember there i no house edge on odds bets.You are being paid true odds rather than house odds. JJ has mentioned dice control whew I think it is possible but man it is hard,hard,hard. The amount of pratice needed is increadable IMHO
Click to expand...
ok, i sort of understand that. :confused: lol.
but now after a bit more experience i'm begining to understand callipygian's cautionary note about taking odds.
shwew, the dice really do seem to have eyes and the swings can be horrendous.:yikes:
 
FLASH1296

FLASH1296

Well-Known Member
If you cannot beat a BJ game flat betting where the house edge is perhaps as low as .18% or as high as .81%, but is probably around .41% -- what makes you think that you can beat a game where the BEST that you can ever see is a HA of 1.39% ?
 
ChefJJ

ChefJJ

Well-Known Member
FLASH1296 said:
what makes you think that you can beat a game where the BEST that you can ever see is a HA of 1.39% ?
Click to expand...
By changing the probabilities of the dice :joker:
 
C

callipygian

Well-Known Member
FLASH1296 said:
If you cannot beat a BJ game flat betting where the house edge is perhaps as low as .18% or as high as .81%, but is probably around .41% -- what makes you think that you can beat a game where the BEST that you can ever see is a HA of 1.39%?
Click to expand...
Because removing one seven from the dice roll is more effective than removing one five from a blackjack deck.

Whether or not you can beat a game or not depends on the size of your AP move divided by the size of the house edge. If you could roll at 7 at will, you could overcome the 16.67% house edge on "Any Seven".
 
creeping panther

creeping panther

Banned
Sage

I think soon you will have a chance to play a $2 craps game with 10X odds and you can do some experimenting:)

I have played alot of craps in my day, maybe I can help you out some;)

CP
 
ChefJJ

ChefJJ

Well-Known Member
creeping panther said:
I think soon you will have a chance to play a $2 craps game with 10X odds and you can do some experimenting:)
Click to expand...
Tables like that are perfect...max out on the odds for minimal cash. Casino Royale on the strip has a $3 game with mucho odds...up to 100x if you have a $5 line bet!

good luck
 
sagefr0g

sagefr0g

Well-Known Member
creeping panther said:
I think soon you will have a chance to play a $2 craps game with 10X odds and you can do some experimenting:)

I have played alot of craps in my day, maybe I can help you out some;)

CP
Click to expand...
that sounds great and i can use all the help i can get. a win, win situation! :)
 
N&B

N&B

Well-Known Member
From memory, I think 10x odds is 0.18% and 100x has to be what, about 0.06%. I know if i bet wrong the HA at 10x was 1/8%. Jeez...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top