Heavy's Axis Power Craps Forum

scout wrote:Ha! Correct.
And that's where the discussion of math becomes fuzzy.
I don't believe the intend of stratocasterman's post discounts your ..."Nope. AFTER"... comment. I read it as the math behind making consecutive passes from the initial ..."Before making ANY pass"...
Much like the math behind hand lengths - % of making a 10 roll hand, 20, 30, 40, etc. There is always a 1/6 change of tossing a seven.
I guess it's all perspective.
The question I ask, Is the math of one calculation, 16% vs 40%, more exact than the other one?

Best regards,
scout

My understanding was that my original posted figures were cumulative probability of randies...is that incorrect?

To quote Irish: Die thread, die!

House of Orange wrote:To quote Irish: Die thread, die!

Thanks a lot...

Yeah. What ever happened to showing your work. How can we ever expect to learn?

heavy wrote:Oh, the humanity . . . somebody buy that Casino Math book I keep recommending. Come on. You can do it.

Which one would you recommend? Is the newer edition worth it?

Is this one any good?

Any seven, pays 4/1. Worst bet on the felt.

Well, as previously stated, 5/1 is break even at random so profitable in long run if skill/DI is exhibited. 6/1 is a great money maker on any old randie. You'd bet that all day.

Not sure what you fully mean by resolution rate here and its effect, but I'll take a stab on you having to be properly bankrolled as given you are betting something that only happens 1 in 6 times, there are going to be some eye watering losing runs. Therefore discipline, proper staking, money management are all going to be key to realising the true profit potential of such a good bet long term.

London Shooter wrote:Any seven, pays 4/1. Worst bet on the felt.

Actually LS I once saw a worser bet on the table. It was at the 4 Queens years ago and one of the dealers had "invented" a new bet that was actually on the layout. Basically, it was a hi/lo bet. You bet whether the shooter would throw greater than seven or less than seven.
So, the odds on that bet was 15/21 = 71% chance of a loss. It was gone the next time I was at the Queens a couple of months later. (I do not remember if the dealer was gone or not)

Makes me want to go find a Chuck-a-Luck game.
Or maybe even some Sic Bo:

irish wrote:

Which one would you recommend? Is the newer edition worth it?

The first.

Thanks. Found and ordered one for $40 (not bad).