Yeah, no, his post explains my argument for not taking odds. You may want to reread it a few more times.
Yeah, we have. Everybody here understands everybody else. If you think anybody is still confused, you need to read the thread again.
I see that this is the quote to which Ellis refers. If playing “longer” is your goal, then yes, don’t play the odds. But if and only if you continue to play the absolute minimum amount that the casino allows. As a True Beginner, that probably is the most sound advice. But if you want to increase your total wager amount at some point (which most gamblers DO, right Ellis?), then you should place as many of those incremental dollars on the ODDS as the casino will allow you to.
If not, then you are both:
A) Failing to Minimize the House Edge per Dollar bet
AND
B) Accelerating your “Time to Bust.”
I won’t criticize you if you tell me you don’t want to avoid A & B; I can only argue that they are illogical. I sometimes stay on 16 against a dealer’s 7 in blackjack, and I know “the book” says to hit, to which I may answer: “The book says to stay out of casinos.” So you can take that approach, and I won’t argue the point. But I will argue forever that taking the odds is an absolute must if you want to at least “hold your own” in craps.
I fully agree with JAS09’s “real point,” i.e., that there are no strategies that will ensure that you’ll Win on Craps, which is why I used the word “strategy” in quotes when addressing Ellis’ points. If someone tells me they have a Craps “Strategy” or a Roullette “Strategy,” I laugh a little inside. I have to add that while betting odds will not ensure that you win at craps, they will at least move you in the direction of a level playing field, which you should be interested in doing. For example, if a bookie gave you an offer to reduce his “vig” on losing bets to 2% instead of 10%, wouldn’t you accept that offer? This is effectively what the casino is doing.
Re: Variance, as I stated in my earlier post, increasing it is not such a horrible sin. Without any Variance, every single gambler would lose the house percentage take on every $ bet.
Re: Aesthetics, I’m not sure how more bets made (on odds or other bets) either enhances or reduces “Aesthetics,” but I guess those are in the eye of the beholder.
I agree with JAS09’s “Fun/Dollar” comment. Fun per dollar lost is a great metric. Some people seem to have a lot of fun playing “FIELD” which is a horrible bet, or playing the lotter for that matter, an even more horrible bet. I don’t want anybody to have less fun.
Yeah, “aesthetics” was probably the wrong word for that - I really just meant “fun”.
What I meant was this: let’s say I only want $20 out there per roll, on a $10 minimum table. The best house edge would be $10 pass + $10 odds (or come+odds, or the don’ts). However, with this pattern all of my “action” is on the initial roll. After that I just stand around and drink my drink while other folks throw chips around and win (or lose). Finally, I either make the point or 7 out. Quite frankly, I’d almost rather bet the single $10 pass and play for twice as long.
An alternative of a $10 Pass followed by a $10 Come increases my expected losses, but gives me more to follow, do, and cheer about, during a hand. If I’m just playing for fun (knowing there is no way to reliably win money), this is an important factor.
Anyways, I’m glad we’re all in agreement at last. And it’s off to Vegas in 5 hours for me… 
Anyways, I’m glad we’re all in agreement at last. And it’s off to Vegas in 5 hours for me…
[/QUOTE]
COOL. I wish I was going; just got thru cleaning 16 inches of ice/snow off my car. Good Luck Out there!!
No, no taking odds is most assuredly not “illogical.” You are arguing very absolute positions that have some shaky ground beneath them. Interestingly, my argument for not taking odds is because they accelerate your time to bust, which you illogically list as reason B to take them.
Did you not understand my Martingale example? Mathematically it is guaranteed to win you one unit every single series, no matter what. All you do is double up the previous bet after a loss. No matter how many bets you have to double up, once it wins, you net a grand total of 1 unit. Lather, rinse, repeat. The only limit is how long you feel like standing there.
This is exactly like your absolutist arguments about odds always being the smartest bet and how not taking max odds is illogical. You’re not grasping any possible aspect of betting other than EV.
Earlier in the thread I asked if people were given a choice to bet on a coin flip, which would they take:
- Win $95, lose $105
- Win $10,000, lose $10,000
Most of us in the real world would take bet 1) every time because we can’t afford to lose ten grand. There’s just too much variance there. If you came along and scolded us that our choice was illogical due to the EV, we’d rightly laugh in your face.
Dude, you’re advocating a strategy. Namely, playing the line and taking max odds. Unless you just randomly put money down on random bets, you’re using a strategy. Laugh a little inside at yourself.
Ellis, not insulted at all. Just trying to learn! 
The author of the book makes it seem like if you bet on the “darkside” you will be subjected to humilation, ridicule and social shunning at the craps table, and only reccomends doing so if you are experienced.
It almost makes one think betting against the shooter might possibly result in a mob beatdown! Based on what you are telling me, however, the worst that could happen is some good natured ball breaking by the other bettors.
Im kinda of on your side: if the house advantage is diminished by betting on the Don’t Pass bar, then fuck 'em.
Pretty much, yeah. As long as you aren’t cheering for the shooter to seven out, you’re good to go.
Reminds me of one time at Mohegan Sun there was a dealer who was a little too cheerful and enthusiastic calling each “OOOOOUT SEVEN!” hehheh. After several minutes one of her fellow dealers busted her stones a bit and she toned it down. I was cracking up.
Being a dealer or stickman does not look like an easy job.
I was at the Tropicana in AC about 3 weeks back and there was a sweet Asian girl who was obviously a trainee as the stickman and dealer, and the boxman was all over her for every mistake, I actually thought she was going to storm out in tears.
But its so important to get it right, it really is a skill learning to run a craps table. I can only imagine the shenanigans people try to pull because its such a chaotic game . . .
You are one thick-skulled character, LSD. I have mathematically understood all of your comments. We all know that a doubling strategy is tremendously flawed, so please read through my posts and cite where I’ve recommended one. In fact, your assertion that “the only limit is how long you feel like standing there” is WAY OFF. Have you heard of table limits? Not to mention wealth limits.
How could it not be obvious to yout that the EV of the two positions is the reason why if you are betting $20 on pass line and I am betting $5 on the pass line and $15 on the odds, AND THAT"S ALL WE DO, you will be faster to bust than me. Please run some simulations or something, then get back to me.
Regarding your coin flip, please let’s get together some time and gamble a little. I will offer you #1, and hopefully you will keep playing. I can’t believe I’m arguing someone who is advocating laying $105 to $95 on a coin flip!
Betting $20 on the Pass Line is NOT fiscally equivalent to betting $5 on the Pass Line and $15 on odds. The 5/15 involves wagering far less money so of course it lasts longer. I’m talking about the decision to play 1 unit on the pass line OR 1 unit on the pass line plus odds. This is clearly and obviously what I’ve been talking about all thread. (Note how we’re all talking about table minimums of $10, since $5 tables are few and far between and crowded as fuck, and your pipe dream of $1 or $0.05 table minimums don’t exist for the vast majority of us.)
You clearly don’t understand the choice between 95/105 and 10k/10k, or what the choice is meant to convey. Here’s a hint: the question isn’t what you would choose to offer to somebody else. You have to take one of them yourself.
And finally, I never said you suggested the Martingale. The point of the Martingale is that mathematical EV is limited by real world conditions. Thank you for finally grasping that table conditions (in the form of table limits) trump EV. That’s exactly the point I’m making. Specifically, table conditions in the form of your session bankroll mean if you bet odds, you’ll be more likely to bust quicker because putting that much additional money on the table adds nothing (mathematically, from an EV perspective) but variance.
“Lasts longer” AND has a better EV (!), so it sounds like a WIN/WIN to me, so guess what, I will keep taking maximum odds; I’m glad you finally came around to accepting the superiority of the Max odds bet vs. the No odds bet. Thanks.
Moderator’s Note: Emphasis mine. This is not acceptable. Disagree as vehemently as you like, but you will refrain from personal insults in the Game Room. If you have a problem with Ellis Dee that requires insults then take it to the Pit.
No Warning issued.
- Gukumatz,
Game Room Moderator
How did the trip go?
Learning to Play Craps from a Part time Dice Pros is one of the books I read. Quite helpful. On Kindle.
I only play no pass or no come full 5 or 6 x odds on every bet including 6 and 8. When you play the no pass you can bet full odds 5 or 6 times on every point. It does mean laying down 100 dollars against the 4 and 10 to win 50 dollars. Dont play unless you have at least 400 dollars in hand. The house has almost no edge if you play this way. Good luck.
This is a 2 year old thread. I doubt the OP is checking in. Please check the dates before replying, as this is at least the 2nd time you’ve done this.
As for your strategy, you aren’t correct that the house has “almost no edge”. Playing the Don’t Pass and Laying full odds is only fractionally better than playing the Pass line and Taking full odds.
In both cases, the odds are an even money bet. But the odds on the come out roll are slightly different. You get a roughly 0.01% advantage (not 1% but 0.01%) by playing the Don’t Pass line. And the house edge is still just over 1% in either case. For a full discussion of the probabilities, the Wizard of Odds site is pretty good.
As AntiBob said the odds on the Pass are only slightly inferior to the Don’t Pass. I assume you are referring to the comment I made about laying the 4 and ten. The term “lay” is used to describe taking the odds on a don’t come or don’t pass and also to make a bet where you buy behind a number. Thus laying the four and ten can mean either taking the odds or making a buy bet behind the number. The fact remains that the reason that these bets can hurt you so badly is because of the fact that you are putting so much money on the table at one time. One “hot” shooter can kill you. However much has changed since Nick the Greek was paying 5% vigorish on his lay bets. Now at some casinos you can buy behind a four or ten for $50 and only pay a dollar vig (and that is only when it wins.) This is about 2%. Still not as good as the 1.4% on the do or don’t. If you are playing on a $10 minimum table and take 5 times odds, that means you are laying $100 behind the four and ten. That is a large part of your bankroll bet on one number. Good Luck.
I realize this comes too late, if OP needed an answer fast, but it is true that odds are best, and that Do Not pays slightly better than Do, yet may not be worth it – it causes extra consternation.
The opinion that playing Odds is bad because it increases “variance” has some validity, but is phrased in a misleading way. Your expectation is non-negative, but it isn’t positive either, and thus may not work toward prolonging your ruin, which may be the goal, playing for fun.
Some players do have positive expectation allegedly. (Mods, please delete that link if it seems to promote criminal activity.)
My life has been rather tame, but I think even I have encountered some counterexamples. 
OK my story.
I always play against the dice because of one major difference. Playing with the dice you win one number at a time and lose all of your numbers at once while playing against the dice is the exact opposite. One shooter covered all but one of the numbers on successive rolls with no duplicates so the numbers 4, 5, 6, 8, 10 are in play. Of course being a hot table everyone is taking their odds and since no one has won anything yet (remember no duplicates) there is a ton of money on the table. I’m playing Don’t Pass and Don’t Come and laying the full odds so I have a bunch of money out there too.
Next roll was a 7.
All of the money is scooped off the table except that they are counting out my money. All the other players know is they lost big and I have an assload of chips headed my way. Many of them are staring as in WTF?!
As long as you remember that over 50% of that assload is your own money. You could have achieved the same or better result simply by putting all of that money on the don’t pass with far less risk.